Idea I had for a multiplayer mechanic for a grouphug deck. Similar to other collective spells (Collective Voyage, Minds Aglow).

The reminder text is heavily simplified, which is a big issue. Basically it'd apply Selvala, Explorer Returned-esque sequencing to the casting of the spell.

>Step 1. You announce you are casting this spell.

>Step 2. Starting from your left, each opponent says how much mana they'll pay. This process stops if the amount committed is equal to the card's cost. (For example, if opponent A says they'll pay 4 mana, and opponent B says they'll pay 1 mana, opponent C won't get the chance to pay.)

>Step 3. If you have enough mana committed to cast the spell, you all pay costs at the same time. Otherwise, it goes back into your hand.

Open for ideas on how to streamline the mana payment process or wording. Other options include "When you cast this, each opponent may choose to reduce its cost by . Each opponent that does becomes your patron until end of turn." and Patronage (As this spell resolves, each opponent may choose to untap X lands/add X mana to your mana pool. Each opponent that does becomes your patron until end of turn.)

Where in the sequence are you? Can you preempt all potential patrons or do you have to give them a chance? This should be readily apparent from the reminder text.

Wording confusion aside, I think this is a super cool mechanic and card.

@SecretInfiltrator That's something I haven't thought about. If you were the first in the sequence, you could set it up so that the person to the right of you had no chance to pay at all (by paying and asking every other player to pay ) every time you cast it. But if you were the last one in sequence, you could be getting three cards for free if other people helped out by paying for it. I'm not too satisfied with it always starting at the person to your left either, but there's really no other way to word it which wouldn't make it a wordsoup keyword ability or a clusterfuck when trying to resolve it.

I think as it's worded, the player on your left will start the cycle. I'll try altering the wording so that it's a little clearer.

Ooh, this is interesting. I love the flavour, and the other cards designed with it.

I think the implementation needs to be streamlined a bit, but I'm not sure how. It seems too varied if the player to your left can often grab sole-beneficiary status. But also too annoying if many people can pledge just 1. And it's maybe too weird that you can try to cast it before you could pay for it, and not be clear if you might succeed. (Can you try again if you think you've persuaded someone to change their mind? How many times?)

But I'm not sure what alternative might be better while maintaining its strengths. Ideally I'd like to keep the idea of people competing for patronage; for the possibility of many players adding to patronage; for you to have a bonus casting the spell. But maybe I should look to see which one(s) is most interesting and focus on that one?