I once played a (somewhat crazy) game of Monopoly where there were too many players, so not enough properties to go around. I ended up with close to zero property but lots of cash. So I made an "investment" in another player. She had great properties (the dark greens) but very little cash; I gave her a couple thousand dollars to build with the agreement that I would get a certain percentage of all income from those properties (I believe it was a 50/50 split) and I would not need to pay if I landed on one of the properties in question. Is this a legal deal? We considered it a form of trading -- I gave her money and in return I would get money in the future.
- Anybody can ask a question
- Anybody can answer
- The best answers are voted up and rise to the top
From the Official Monopoly Rules by Hasbro (my emphasis):
Any exchange of money for future considerations is a form of loan, so by the official monopoly rules your actions are illegal. One is always allowed to invent a new game based on an existing one, through the use of common agreement on house rules, but one cannot then meaningfully call it by the name Monopoly.
While you are technically allowed to make such a deal, due to the fact that trading allows you to give another player money; there is nothing in the rules that would enforce your opponent to keep her end of the deal. If you later landed on the property in question, she would be fully within her rights within the rules to ask you to pay, and you would have to pay according to the rules. Similarly, if she makes money from someone else on that property, there is no rule that requires her to give you part of that money.
So as long as you fully trust her to do what she says in the future, you would be allowed within the rules to do this.
I found this answer to be almost perfect for your question. I have copied it below for easy reference.
Pretty much, it says you CAN invest in people, but there are certain rules that still have to be followed. Additionally, there is nothing binding them to you or vice versa. Unless you specify everything in your own set of house rules, it's a risky way to play.
Going by the official rules, you don't have a choice whether to collect rent or not:
This doesn't give the property owner any choice in the matter, they simply do collect rent.
However, you could offer immunity as follows:
To do this, you'll have to be able to give money to another player. There is a rule forbidding loans between players:
but a gift is not the same as a loan. Another way to give money to another player is to sell them an unimproved property for $0, then buy it back for the amount you wish to give them. This is allowed by a different rule:
All of this comes with a caveat: You can't do anything to force someone to grant you immunity, it's entirely up to them choosing to act in good faith.
I have played this way before by either
There is nothing written in the rule book about investment. so i assume that if it doesn't say "you can't" then it is allowed.
The following issues arise: