[johnarryn]

Thanks, Evilhomer, for bringing up something I had meant to point out... I never promised not to attack Ermor... in fact, I never even said I wouldn't attack him in the next turn. What I said was that "We have no interest in conflict at this time." Boom. That is all.

To respond to RicoRico, perhaps it would be ok to have a game where explicit pacts were binding. Personally, when I make an explicit pact, I follow it - I have never violated a pact that was specific for a number of turns, etc. I think what is important is that players not assume that a pact exists unless it is explicitly said. I also think diplmacy (and deception) is a part of what makes games like Dominions3, Risk, or even Diplomacy the game fun... its why I like playing MP.

And, if we want to get into the nitty-gritty of roleplaying Marignon, my justification is that in terms of the Dom3 world, Marignon has a very good reason to kill Ermor, regardless of if they have to lie to do it...

Cue in-character:
"Ermor is a nation of evil heritics that must be purified by flame. The Grand Masters will do whatever is necessary to purge the world of Ermor's taint, before it spreads and leads to our downfall."