Contract Diplomacy

[Cheddarific]

I just completed a contract negotiation class and think it would be exciting, educational, and fun to play a game of Diplomacy where players are encouraged to make one-page contracts with each other. A neutral moderator (preferred) or arbitration panel defined by the contract (think United Nations; certainly a twist on the game!) could privately enforce contracts if there are disputes. I think this would be interesting because contract negotiation would be key. Players would have to be careful with their promises and wording, and scrutinize the language of their opponents. This game would probably have 7-day turns in the beginning, but I think the contracting process would quickly speed up the game in the second half.

Firstly, is anyone interested in playing a game like this?

Secondly, what feedback/comments do you have? Does this sound like a good idea? How would you improve the idea while still focusing the game on contract negotiation?

Thanks all!

Chet
Cheddar3210

[Alman]

Interesting thought. What would you see as the enforcement mechanism in this scenario?

[PrinceofParma]

I would be interested in being involved. You most likely need a certified GM type to organize things etc., but I would definitely be interested in it.

Seven days seems a bit excessive, but I like the general idea.

It would be interesting to see all the lawyering of the different parties, but like Alman said, enforcement will be important? Also it would be interesting if the "U.N." was represented as a separate person from the GM. Would breed all sorts of interesting situations.

[locksmithvic]

sounds awesome

[Nanook]

This would be a good game for the lawyers among us...not my cup of tea (fine print and lies of omission are some of my least favorite aspects of the game)...but it's not a bad idea. It would be very, very hard to enforce. You'd probably have to play it anonymously through the forum, with all messages going to the GM (or GM and Assistant GM, for a workload like this), and being forwarded to the appropriate players.

An alternative could be that both parties would have to submit a contract after they agree to terms, with the contract being null if either or both parties fail to submit (a likely part of that would be only the GM knowing whether the contract is valid or not--each party would only know whether they themselves submitted it).

It's not a bad idea, and might have some potential.


Side note: this probably belongs in the Games in Development section of the PbF forum.

[Nanook]

An idea for enforcement...if Party B fails to live up to a valid contract in the eyes of Party A, Party A can bring it to the GM...if in the GM's judgment Party B didn't follow the terms of a valid contract, then Party A would have the right to, essentially, arbitration. Both sides would present an argument to the GM for what a fair punishment would be (transfer of control of one unit for a year, transfer of control of an SC, loss of a unit, as examples), and the GM would make a ruling. You could either limit the GM to choosing one of the two presented options, or you could give the GM leeway to make amendments.

[Hindu Warrior]

Can you share any piece of sample contract which players have to write . I am interested but need to know what it entails ?

[Kra]

Badger1991 is busy with PDEC Gold but in our recent game, his proposals felt like detailed contract terms, so it fits some players styles. Of course, it might have been just that one game.
On other hand, I agree with nanook, reading that fine print and language choice is not always the most fun but in Badgers case and our game, the fine print and absent terms actually provided clues of intended behavior, since certainly otherwise honored agreements if not the perceived intent.
Too many other aspects of communications and agreements for this to appeal to me though
But I bet you can find others willing.

[Alman]

I find this idea really intriguing. I agree with Nanook that it would really need to be run on the Forum side. In the next little while (days) I will open a development thread over on the PbF Board and we can talk about this some more. I've been turning some ideas on how the mechanics of this could work and would be willing to GM it in the Test Bed if we get some ideas ready to try.

[Nanook]

I find this idea really intriguing. I agree with Nanook that it would really need to be run on the Forum side. In the next little while (days) I will open a development thread over on the PbF Board and we can talk about this some more. I've been turning some ideas on how the mechanics of this could work and would be willing to GM it in the Test Bed if we get some ideas ready to try.

I think I had first dibs

Kidding. I'm unlikely to play this (not my cup of tea), but it has potential and I'm happy to contribute ideas to it, if/when I think of anything useful.