Hi there everyone - just wanted to see if my interpretation of making a deal in Cosmic Encounter when both players play a Negotiate card in an Encounter is correct.

Here's the rule as I've recompiled it from with the FAQ - the parts in italics I've inferred from reading around the forum and previous editions of the rules.

Situation C. If Both Players Reveal Negotiate Cards

An attempt is made to reach a deal. Attacks have been put aside in favor of diplomacy. All allies on both sides return their ships to any of their colonies. They get nothing. The main players have one minute to make a deal. At this point, they can negotiate a mutually agreeable deal or play hardball and try to negotiate a sweet deal their opponent can’t refuse. The negotiating players should be careful, however, since failing to make a deal sends three of their ships to the warp each.

In a deal, a player may:

1. Trade cards and/or allow her opponent to establish one colony on any one planet where the player already has a colony. In this way each main player may gain a new colony and/or new cards. Any of a player’s ships that are not in the warp can be used to establish this colony. In addition, deals can include promises to perform any action that a player can normally perform. These promises are not binding; you can refuse to perform the action. The only binding parts of a deal are: the establishment of a colony, the number of cards to be traded, the type of cards to be traded, and, if specified, a specific card.

In all deals, at least one player must receive a colony and/or a card beyond the promise to perform an action for the deal to be successful. The deal need not be equitable; one player could gain nothing. Any ships remaining in the hyperspace gate after the deal is made return to any of the offense’s colonies. Allies are never included in a deal. If a player is unable to deliver on the binding terms of a deal then the deal fails. Any ships lost due to a deal failing must first come from any colonies that were established during the deal. Any ships remaining on colonies established during a failed deal are then returned to any of that players' remaining colonies.

EXAMPLE 1

The Anti-Matter and the Clone are the main players in an encounter. Both play negotiate cards facedown. When they are revealed, the players now have one minute to reach a deal. The Clone wants a colony (she is behind in colonies) and agrees to give the Anti-Matter her three lowest attack cards in return for a colony (the Anti-Matter likes low cards due to his alien power). The Anti-Matter agrees to this and the deal is done. The Clone gains a colony and places two ships on it. The Clone then gives Anti-Matter her three highest attack cards. As players can not show each other their hands, there is no way for Anti-Matter player to know that she has received Clones three highest attack cards. Also, the promise of highest is not binding, only that Clone must give Anti-Matter three attack cards is binding.

EXAMPLE 2

The Warrior and the Fido are the main players in an encounter. Both play negotiate cards facedown. When they are revealed, the players now have one minute to reach a deal. The Warrior offers the Fido a Negotiate and Attack 40 in exchange for a colony. The Fido player agrees and the Warrior establishes a colony with four ships. The Warrior then gives the Fido two Negotiate cards. This breaks the deal as cards received by the Fido were not those specified by the Warrior. Both the Warrior and the Fido lose three ships from their colonies to the Warp, however for the Warrior the ships lost must first come from the colony she tried to establish in the deal and then from her other colonies. If there are any ships remaining in the colony the Warrior tried to establish during the deal, they are returned to any of her remaining colonies. Also, the Warrior would then gain two tokens for failing to make a deal.

EXAMPLE 3

The Macron and the Zombie are the main players in an encounter. Both play negotiate cards facedown. When they are revealed, the players now have one minute to reach a deal. The Zombie offers to free all the Macron ships from the warp in exchange for the Zombie flare card that she knows the Macron is holding (the Macron having used it in a previous turn). The Macron, running low on ships, quickly agrees to the Zombies terms and gives the Zombie flare to the Zombie. The Zombie then decides to not free any of the Macron ships from the warp, seemingly breaking the deal. However because the promise of freeing the Macron ships is not binding, the deal is still successful (and backstabingly one-sided).

Ex1: I disagree with this assessment, and I'm sure many others would. It's generally accepted that players must be honest in a deal - yes, you can say "I'll give you an N" when you don't have one, and when the other guy agrees, you say you don't have any and the deal fails. Giving your high cards when you "promised" low cards would break the deal.

Ex2: I don't see why Warrior would try this (it seems stupid; all it does is tells the others that he has two Ns). But it seems like it would happen like that.

Ex3: Wrong. As stated in the FAQ, colonies granted, cards given, and special use of power are enforcable in a deal. All other conditions (such as "I won't play my high next time I face you) are allowable, but players do not have to keep their word on such things, and a deal must include an enforceable action.

Example 1: I agree that it isn't fair that the Clone player to do that, but there is nothing in the rules about how to enforce 'highest' and 'lowest' therefore I think they aren't bindable conditions of a deal.

Example 2: I to agree that this example doesn't really make sense for any race, but I needed an example of the situation and I picked two races at random from my flavor cards. Nice to hear that I got this one right.

Example 3: Oops! Forgot that from the FAQ. OK scratch that example. Better one would be the one player agreeing not to ally against the other player for two turns. Totally not enforceable under the rules I've read.

OK - given your response it seems that the only binding parts of a deal are: the establishment of a colony, the number of cards to be traded, the type of cards to be traded, the use of an alien power and, if specified, a specific card.

strongbow25 said:

Ex1: I disagree that this isn't enforceable - you are specifying cards in that they are of specific values - the highest cards in their hand. Players are not allowed to offer cards they don't have, or do not intend to give. The example given in the book (on p10) is practically identical to this example, and does not suggest at all that the card-giving player may give anything other than what he promised.

Ex2: If the Warrior does not intend to send the cards agreed upon, why bother doing different? Fail the deal by saying, "I'm failing the deal."

If the deal CANNOT be carried out in full, NONE of it happens. No colonies get awarded, no cards change hands. There is nothing in the rules that permits agreeing to something and then doing something different. You either do what is agreed, or you fail to deal.

Big Head Zach said:

Ex1: How does the Anti-matter player protest that he hasn't received the lowest cards the Clone has? The rules specifically say you can not SHOW your cards to anyone and the FAQ says that you can "make any ludicrous claims about your hand that you wish". Therefore: the AM can say "Are these really your lowest?" and the Clone can reply "Yes." The deal is still successful because cards and colonies were exchanged. I specifically ripped the example out of the rules and changed it to highlight this exact situation. I agree that if you specifically name a card in a deal ("Attack 10", "Negotiate", "Mobius Tubes", etc.) and then don't hand it over that the deal breaks - but terms like "lowest" and "highest" are vague in description and can, as highlighted in my example, be abused. Obviously you can make up a house rule stating that highest and lowest are bindable parts of a deal but, again, how do you enforce it?

Ex2: I know this example doesn't make sense in game-terms, but I've got some rather devious friends and they would try something like this. Promise cards and then, seeing the other player is distracted (say talking to another player), try to pass off two different cards hoping the other player doesn't notice. Yes, I know this is technically cheating, but without an example to explain why it's cheating to them they'd just keep trying to do it.

strongbow25 said:

I guess the FAQ needs to make another distinction - is the offer of cards based on a comparison that cannot be proven still binding? Does the example in the book describe this binding?

I think you're right about the FAQ needing to distinguish the situation in Ex1. Until then I think I'm going to go ahead with my interpretation of it because, really, I've got no tools to enforce it. :I

Thanks for the responses!

No way to enforce it at the time, true. Also no way to prevent someone from looking at someone else's hand while that person is in the bathroom. The rules state that that condition of the deal is binding, doing otherwise is outright cheating and the person should be banned from the table. In the next challenge when that player has drawn no additional cards yet but plays a lower attack card and everyone sees that s/he is not willing to abide by the rules as written that should be it.

In Hearts I don't say that you don't have to follow suit just because we can't prove you were or weren't able to. In Cosmic or any other game I don't say it's ok to cheat just because we can't prove it... unless you're playing Illuminatus! or some similar game that has an explicit rule that you can cheat if you aren't caught.

strongbow25 said:

I agree with you, definitely. The deal is in acting, not really in talking. If you say I give you a N card and give away a A, there is a mistake. But if you say "I give you my highest A cards" and give away a 5, stating that it IS your highest, you're in you're right. You wouldn't if you had said you would give a 20 and then had given a 10, but being vague in a deal is the key to win it ! That is what we call diplomacy and sales... Checking the cards of a guy when he s having his pee, now THAT is something you should ban. You don't have to show your cards, and the best way to win is to play fair but crafty. People who disagree are people who don't play poker, indeed. So I fully agree with you, Strongbow, and I'll keep on playing that way as you do. Cheers !