Mark summarized his argument this way:
Let me take each of these and explain why I think they fall short of the goal:
Newer players have to learn the word "target" to play the game, so forcing them to encounter it slightly more often is good for them. Multiplayer play is an important and growing part of Magic. Templating cards to make them multiplayer friendly is crucial to evolving the game to where it wants to be played. To help Magic crystallize with newer players, it is key that we build into the game the hooks needed for them to emotionally bond. Evidence points to the fact that newer players have no problem figuring out what targeted draw does and having good complexity hidden in the game out of their sight makes Magic a better overall game.
Newer players have to learn the word "target" to play the game, so forcing them to encounter it slightly more often is good for them.This is true, as far as it goes, but it doesn't mean that we need to apply it to card draw. There are already several game effects that are targeted, such as damage, healing, power/toughness modifiers, and direct destruction (see Doom Blade and Naturalize). These things are targeted, for the most part, because they need to be so. In order to create a card like Shock, that only deals damage to one creature or player, choosing which one to affect is ably dealt with by the rules for targeting.
Card draw, as a general rule (and that is what we are dealing with when deciding the default setting for a card) does not need to be targeted. It is simple enough to say "You draw two cards", and players will understand that. To try to accomplish the same thing for many other cards, look at the Portal version of Alluring Scent. This makes it harder to understand, not easier. Just because many cards need to be targeted does not mean that every card that can be targeted should be.
Multiplayer play is an important and growing part of Magic. Templating cards to make them multiplayer friendly is crucial to evolving the game to where it wants to be played.
The need to make friendlier cards for multiplayer play is there, and designers need to make sure that such cards are present as each new set comes out. But Zac missed the boat when he compared the targeted draw to a card that reads, "Choose one—Draw two cards, or lose the game. If your opponent has two or fewer cards in his or her library, and does not have hexproof, instead you win the game." First, the analogy fails to capture the functionality of allowing a teammate or opponent to draw in multiplayer in order to get a card that helps your position. Second, even in a duel, there were decks such as Turbo Zvi (see http://www.wizards.com/magic/magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtgcom/daily/bd172 for decklist) that won by repeated application of a small targeted card draw. Thus, the analogy fails to hold, as it doesn't take into account these potential scenarios.
Back to our discussion about targeted draws as a default. Targeted drawing at the same cost as non-targeted drawing is strictly better. Thus, we should impose a cost on it, whether it comes increased mana cost, restricting it to sorceries (and allowing non-targeted card drawing to be instant), or restricting targeted card drawing from common. Making the non-targeted draw the default is a means of costing similar to this last option. If the targeted draw is needed for a set, there is nothing stopping designers from adding it. Doing so, however, should be seen as the complexity increase it is.
One other thing to note about multiplayer is that most forms of it are Constructed, not Limited. This means that getting good multiplayer cards into sets is less of a priority at common. Blue Sun's Zenith does its job at creating targeted draws for multiplayer, even though it is rare. It's only in formats like Two-Headed Giant Limited that non-targeted draw as a default limits how much of it is present, but if a set needs targeted draw, it can be added.
To help Magic crystallize with newer players, it is key that we build into the game the hooks needed for them to emotionally bond.
This is a great point, but a bit shortsighted. It's great to have moments where players realize strategy is more complex than they imagined, but the defaults should be the minimum complexity the card needs to function. There are already such moments once a targeted card draw is added to a set, and once that moment is reached, it's good. But there are other ways to make such moments: blocking strategy, triggering fateful hour by striking yourself with a red damage spell, etc. and these are all from the most basic versions of the cards.
Everyone acknowledges that the non-default targeted card draw version can be made if needed. And when such a card is printed, the person who gets it can use it just as Mark suggested. The chances of getting it are lower, and so the realization may take longer, but it is still there.
Evidence points to the fact that newer players have no problem figuring out what targeted draw does and having good complexity hidden in the game out of their sight makes Magic a better overall game.Every card creates an experience. Default cards are more prevalent than others, and once players recognize the default settings, they become the standard by which future cards are judged. If the default is the simplest card of its type, the new cards with the option are seen as "upgrades" and are favorably judged by the public for it. If the default is the "better" version, the non-default version is seen as a "downgrade" and the public gets upset at being screwed.
We have seen this before. Shock was a lightning rod for criticism until it had been around for a few years, as it was a downgrade of Lightning Bolt. Then Shock became the default, so the two years of Lightning Bolt's return (in Magic 2010 and 2011) were seen as a positive for Red. The same howling happened with Counterspell vs. Cancel. But there has been no such emnity over cards like Ashcoat Bear and Ajani's Pridemate, which are better than the default Runeclaw Bear and Silvercoat Lion.
The final analysis is this: Players may have to learn how to target, but that doesn't mean that everything that can target should. Multiplayer cards need to be made, but they don't have to clutter up the defaults to do it. The game needs emotional hooks, but making everything an emotional hook is not the answer.and while people may figure out what the targeted card draw does, making them the default sets the public up for disappointment when the non-targeted versions are printed out of necessity. So while Mark Rosewater may have made the more compelling arguments, they were not enough to win this heart to his position.
