Now draws even if target becomes illegal, no costing change needed.

--CF

Is that because of your hypothetical change to rule 608.2b? In this particular case I would just have it be:

> Up to one target creature gains double strike UEOT.
> Draw a card.

Really, the "up to one" should replace "may" in many cases as well and become the norm for the fact of how much more intuitive it is in function.

Yeah, put a note on cards most affected by lack of fizzling. "Up to one" gives it pseudo-cycling, but I'm not sure it's worth the extra words and complexity.

--CF

Cycling for is hardly scary even when added to the functionality already here.

"Up to one" might have a couple of words more, but I would argue that in how it plays out it's less complex. It's also worth of note that planeswalkers (for obvious reasons) already use this wording commonly so it's not so obscure.

Planeswalkers are mythics. I think the up to one wording would cause confusion on a common for fairly small gain, though we'll be thinking the trade off over.

--CF

Yes, but starting to use "up to" commonly would make those walkers easier to parse as well. While I don't know what are the cards that bring most new players in (ie. inspire them - if there are any specific group of cards), I could imagine Planeswalkers being those cards, especially as they are the highest profile cards there are. As such, using "up to" as a standard convention seems preferably from both perspective - be it the perspective of the commons that use "up to" or that of the planeswalkers.