[SciencePro]

yes, NAP's are a complicated issue and there is plenty of disagreement about what is and isn't okay. I am happy with whatever rules the admin decides on - just please put them in the first post and explain exactly what you mean.

Something like this (change around as you please but please be specific so we won't have arguments later):
Non aggression pact / alliance agreements are binding. When you enter one, you should specify a number of turns of warning such as a NAP-3 or NAP-5.

You are not allowed to make any direct attacks against that player until the warning is given by PM or forum and the warning period is passed. Direct attacks include:
1. An move-attack with units carrying your flag
2. A assassination by a unit carrying your flag
3. A global enchantment with a harmful effects
4. A ritual attack spell that informs the victim of who sent it

These are not considered direct attacks:
1. Anonymous spells or anonymous actions like inciting unrest
2. Non-harmful global (such as gem generators, gift of health, etc...)
3. Dominion-related actions such as preaching, stealth-preaching, or blood sacrificing
4. Moving stealthy units through an allies' territory
5. "Attacks" that have been agreed up on in advance as territory trading or unit suicide.

If one member of the NAP feels that the other is behind indirect attacks then they always break the NAP, but the appropriate warning must still be given.