Board & Card Games Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people who like playing board games, designing board games or modifying the rules of existing board games. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

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.

share|improve this question
I'm curious, how did the other players react to your deal? – SQB Jan 22 '14 at 11:41
They made other kinds of deals... they weren't happy about players "teaming up" essentially (and considering the nature of Monopoly that's understandable) but they got over it and we had a great time. – Jason Jan 22 '14 at 12:00
That is a really interesting idea - although could result in a bit of a slow ending if it pays off. As you both eliminate players and share the properties (how do you determine who gets what as some may be more beneficial to one or the other?) those original properties won't be able to end the game quicker. – Ian Jan 22 '14 at 12:30
Try playing Imperial 2030 where investing in other states/companies is part of standard play. – Alex In Paris Jan 22 '14 at 14:34

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.

share|improve this answer

From the Official Monopoly Rules by Hasbro (my emphasis):

Money can be loaned to a player only by the Bank and then only by mortgaging property. No player may borrow from or lend money to another player

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.

share|improve this answer
OK, what if the "investment" also included an exchange of property, e.g. the investor gives cash (intended for use to build on a monopoly) and in return gets a single property (probably one not worth very much), so that it's the sale of property, in addition to the future returns. – Jason Jan 23 '14 at 5:50
The only financial instrument recognized under the rules is the Mortgage, and it's only valid payee is the Bank. Your game may be fun to play, and well defined, but it is not Monopoly. – Pieter Geerkens Jan 23 '14 at 12:05
Buying properties from each other for cash is not the same as a loan. It's completely permissible. – thumbtackthief May 23 '14 at 19:00

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.