Probably something like:

“When The Embalmed is Summoned for the first time, remove a non-Epic living creature from any discard pile. Obliterate that creature. For the remainder of the game The Embalmed gains the life, armor, attacks, traits, abilities, and subtypes of the obliterated creature.”

The key would be to demonstrate that the initial summoning is materially different from any re-summoning that may occur (from, for example, the Eternal Servant power), and indicate clearly that once a creature form is taken, that it is permanent.

We both at least seem to agree that the card’s actual wording is sloppy and imprecise. So that’s something!

I've just watched the card reveal video (good job, guys! Everyone else, go watch it!) and was about to post about this card as well.

I've reached a different conclusion, keejchen.

My reading is that if this creature (The Embalmed) is made into an Eternal Servant, then it is the vanilla 'The Embalmed' card that is reanimated following destruction, and each time it is so reanimated it needs to take a fresh discarded creature to copy. That is, the first copied creature is not a permanent form. 

I base this conclusion on the interaction of the following three excerpts of rules:

1) The 'The Embalmed' card says: "When Summoning The Embalmed, remove a non-Epic living creature from any discard pile from the game. This creature [The Embalmed] becomes a copy of the removed creature, gaining The Embalmed's traits and subtypes." 

2) Eternal Servant says "should the servant be destroyed, the Necromancer may Reanimate it"

3) Reanimate says: "at the end of the round the creature is Summoned into play."

So if Reanimate Summons a creature into play, and if the 'The Embalmed' has to copy a discarded creature each time it is Summoned, then each Eternal Servant use has to utilise a fresh body from a discard pile, and the Necromancer needs to pay 2+the casting cost of the dead creature as the casting cost of the Eternal Servant.

To use keejchen's example:

The 'The Embalmed' comes into play. The Necromancer chooses to have it copy a dead Feral Bobcat, spending (2+5=) 7 mana to do so, and makes it his Eternal Servant. Later in the game the 'The Embalmed' is destroyed. The Necromancer chooses to bring his Eternal Servant back, reanimating 'The Embalmed'. At the end of the round the 'The Embalmed' is Summoned back to the arena. Part of this Summoning process requires the removal from the game of a discarded living creature, so the Necromancer looks through his opponent's discard pile and finds a Timber Wolf he killed earlier. He decides that his newly Summoned 'The Embalmed' will take the form of that Timber Wolf, so he pays the casting cost of the 'The Embalmed', which in this case is (2+9=) 11 mana. His Eternal Servant now functions as a Timber Wolf with Undead and Mummy traits.   

Confused?

If so, perhaps it might be appropriate to think of 'The Embalmed' as some form of spirit that animates corpses, rather than as a physically chemically treated corpse.   

TL/DR: Each time an Eternal Servant is brought back into play it is a fresh Summoning, and every time the The Embalmed is Summoned, it needs to take the form of a dead creature from a discard pile. It cannot be the same creature it copied in its initial summons, since that creature is removed from the game and is no longer in a discard pile.

I have had mixed luck against Druids (mostly bad) so take this with all relevant caveats, but...

If I have a mage-only or mage-buddy build, I go after the Druid and her tree. If I go after the plants I will inevitably get outgunned and overwhelmed, so time is against me.

If I have an army of my own, then I will go after the plants, since if I win that war then the druid will have nowhere to go.

originally it was also supposed to be a quick cast creature as well.

That makes sense.

Actually, Turn to Stone might be another spell that would work well with dissipate rather than upkeep.

I won a game with a new deck last week that would give this a great run for its money, I think. Would be happy to test you on octgn.

Hi Folks

Playing around with a concept of a stronghold warlord that utilises a hill and the various zone enchantments to build a castle. I need an interceptor to catch those incoming fireballs. I cannot decide which to go with of the three obvious choices.

Guardian Angel. Pros: Aegis, a defence, pretty good hit points and the self healing is awesome. Cons: high SBP cost and no synergy with the warlord's soldier commands.

Dwarf Panzergarde. Pros: loads of hit points, great defence chance, soldier. Cons: lightning vulnerability, no healing.

Noble Vanguard. Pros: Vigilant! Soldier. Cons: fairly high SBP cost, low hit points, no healing.

I am leaning towards the Panzergarde at the moment, but am worried I might have to carry a bit more healing/regen to keep him up.   

Would appreciate any thoughts/opinions.

You may want to consider a Steep Hill to give you more of a boost on your Range Attacks. Position it in the center of the Arena and you should have good coverage of the battle field.

The OP has gone heavy on the range 0-1 attacks. With short range spells there is a need to keep mobile, and Steep Hill fixes your position. I would suggest replacing some of those range 1s with range 2s, just in case.

I do wonder at the choice of Golems as bodyguards. If the warlord needs to move to fire his spells off, then the Slow of the Golems would get in the way. IF guarding is their primary purpose, then for an extra couple of mana you'd get Sir Corazin, or for less cost you could have Panzergardes with their intercept or (at more SBP) a Temple High Guard. 

But hey, if the book is working for you, then don't worry about what we are saying.