I'd rather use my Owl's Eye; dealing 5 damage is much greater than Sniper (dealing 3 damage), but I think the cost (3 
, as well as sacrificing weapon's damage) is even higher than that (2 
for Sniper).
Im trying to keep it from getting op. considering the 3 can be used to attack your opponent. technically you can deal 5 damage to your opponent each turn that ignores most shelds. you cant use sniper to attack your opponent. so in certain situations (like facing a mono aether) this weapon would give you ability to deal 5 damage each turn, while owl eye wouldnt be able to attack through shields.
but if you think i need to differentiate it from owl eye, ive toyed with the idea of making it ethereal. what do you think?
Regarding this card as a provider of reusable Lightning, the 3
cost is acceptable I think. (compared to Eternity or Pulverizer)
Yes, the problem is that the role of this card seems similar to that of Owl's Eye; not every card suggested can be totally original, however. My opinion is that if a card idea is less innovative, then it had better be preciser upon suggestion. It seemed to me that this card is underpowered compared to Owl's Eye so that I made the previous reply. Granting untargetability may be one way to resolve this (and to differentiate it from Owl's Eye as you said), but adjusting some values (ATK, card cost, ability cost, etc.) can also help refine the idea so that it seems more 'attractive', at least for me.
