overcoming the "bad Deal"
don't let a bad deal stop your game.
A frustration for many players committed to the game is the possibility that a deal will be made that is unfair not only to the player on the short end of the deal, but is also unfair to the other players as a whole. It might be unfair to the other players, for example, when the likely outcome of the game is affected so completely that strategy and negotiating skill become unimportant.
For a game to truly determine who is the best player, players who perceive the possibility a "bad deal" is occurring must offer other deals that are more beneficial to the player offering such a deal. Players might also argue that an alternate deal, apart from the benefit it may provide to the player considering the game-destroying deal, will be better for the integrity of the game.
A common game-destroying deal occurs when a player becomes so frustrated with the game that he or she offers to sell all their property to another player for an absurdly small amount, in anticipation of quitting the game. The quitting player hopefully does not realize how insulting such a move is to all of the other players, and can be convinced there are more fair ways to leave the game, such as auctioning off their property or merely returning it to the Bank. The actual process should be agreed upon by all the players, hopefully, if such a move seems possible, prior to beginning the game.
If the players considering a game-destroying deal execute their deal despite the efforts of the other players, the remaining players should probably consider at least two options: 1) quitting the game themselves (and perhaps starting a new game without the offending players), and 2) never including either of the deal's participants in future Monopoly™ games.
