I think that these abilities would be in the opposite order.

Done

So why add that last clause? It seems like it makes things too easy.

@Link: Is the problem that the card asks you to build a deck around it, then denies you that opportunity? Because I can see how that would bug a number of Johnnies.

Perhaps this card would be better served if it said "Equipped creature gets +X/+0, where X is equal to its toughness" and was priced accordingly. That would still give you a chance to build around it, but not make the card useless if you put it on a creature with higher power than toughness.

Among other things, "+X/+0 where X is its toughness" won't take things like +1/+1 counters into account, which plays poorly.

The simple solution is to make it optional: "You may have equipped creature assign combat damage equal to its toughness instead of its power." Then you'll simply choose to take advantage of that option when it makes more sense--which almost always overlaps with what this is trying to say.

this is a very interesting card. it interacts more with non green or red, is all. eg. Shrink doesnt really shrink it. eg. can be equipped on 0/1. eg. defenders are usually white or blue and they usually have higher toughness than power. eg. morphling -like creatures could be very deadly, as if they weren't tough to kill already.

It's just Doran, the Siege Tower: The Equipment.
I liked the simplicity of your original version better, Angel.

Yeah, I think I'll have it be a "Build around me" type card.