Inviolate NAP, First Draft

[sector24]

Your theoretical situation is not the same as mine though. In yours, the player is intentionally trying to screw over Niefelheim with sneaky diplomacy. In my example, they playing honorably and it just turns out that Niefelheim and Ermor put them in an impossible situation through no fault of your own.

I'm not saying you have to do anything, but there is a severe loophole in #17 that you have filled with an undocumented assumption. I came to a completely different conclusion than you did concerning the facts, so if the goal of the NAP template is to be inviolate and comprehensive it fails in that regard. Besides, what's the difference between 25 and 26 talking points?

[LoloMo]

Originally Posted by sector24

Your theoretical situation is not the same as mine though. In yours, the player is intentionally trying to screw over Niefelheim with sneaky diplomacy. In my example, they playing honorably and it just turns out that Niefelheim and Ermor put them in an impossible situation through no fault of your own.

I'm not saying you have to do anything, but there is a severe loophole in #17 that you have filled with an undocumented assumption. I came to a completely different conclusion than you did concerning the facts, so if the goal of the NAP template is to be inviolate and comprehensive it fails in that regard. Besides, what's the difference between 25 and 26 talking points?

Right, haha. If there is a second draft, I may change that clause to read that the NAP has priority over Mutual Defense Treaties.