<p>No, this is not legal as written. This is really a series of three separate trades (one of them being with the bank), and two of them are giving a resource for free, which is forbidden by the rules. </p>

<p>The problem is that a trade can only involve 2 people, so a "triangular trade" must be done as separate trades. From <a href="http://www.catan.com/faqs/93?page=4" rel="noreferrer">the FAQ</a>:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Trade - Is a “triangular trade” permitted? On player A’s turn, are player B and player C allowed to trade with each other if afterwards one of them uses the obtained resource for trading with player A?</p>
  
  <blockquote>
    <p>No. Not only is a triangular trade forbidden, it is also unnecessary, because player B and player C each trades individually with player A and, thus, may trade whatever resource he has – provided that it meets the requirements of player A.</p>
  </blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p>And:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Trade - May I give away resources or buy services with them, for example, to avoid being bothered by the robber?</p>
  
  <blockquote>
    <p>No. On Catan, a trade always involves giving and taking resources. Consequently, Catan’s trade law does not contain a “trade” of something for nothing or for immaterial goods such as services.</p>
  </blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p>If they really want to do this, and they trust each other, they can do the following trades:</p>

<ol>
<li>A gives 3 wheat and gets 1 ore</li>
<li>B gives 4 wheat and gets 1 ore</li>
<li>A trades 4 wheat to the bank for 1 brick</li>
<li>A gives 1 brick and gets 1 ore</li>
</ol>

<p>Those are 4 separate, legal trades that have the same result. But there's nothing stopping either player from choosing to stop after any given step; though doing so will hurt their chances of being trusted in future trades and even future games. </p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-04-23T19:40:03.977Z
Thanks! This is what I suspected after I read the "triangular trade" entry in the FAQ. However, I was only 99% sure. I guess I would be more confident if the FAQ would include an explicit sentence saying "Same applies to trading with the bank."
wrygiel
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-04-23T20:26:43.347Z
@wrygiel Good point. But to the best of my knowledge, there is no rules differentiation between trading with the bank and trading with another player; any rules that apply to trading apply to both. The bank just acts as a player who is always willing to make a specific kind of trade.
GendoIkari
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-04-23T14:09:11.090Z
2017-04-23T14:17:36.507Z
2017-04-23T14:17:36.507Z
GendoIkari
<p>Consider the following Catan scenario:</p>

<ul>
<li>Player A has <strong>3 wheat</strong>. Wants <strong>ore</strong>.</li>
<li>Player B has <strong>1 wheat + 1 ore</strong>. Wants <strong>brick</strong>.</li>
</ul>

<p><strong>Question: Is there any official rule which would explicitly explain if the following trade is legal or not?</strong></p>

<ul>
<li>Player B agrees to give 1 wheat + 1 ore, if he gets 1 brick in return.</li>
<li>Player A <strong>doesn't have brick yet</strong>, but he gets his fourth wheat from player B. Immediately exchanges 4 wheat to 1 brick in bank. Gives brick to B.</li>
</ul>

<p>Note, that this is not equivalent to:</p>

<ul>
<li>Player A gives 3 wheat for 1 ore.</li>
</ul>

<p>...because, in this case, player B ends up with 4 wheat, not 1 ore. (He may still exchange wheat for ore in his turn, but until such time, he has more resources.)</p>

<catan><trading>
Combined Catan player+player+bank transactions
wrygiel
# Combined Catan player+player+bank transactions

(Asked by: username_0 on 2017-04-23)

Consider the following Catan scenario:

* Player A has **3 wheat**. Wants **ore**.
* Player B has **1 wheat + 1 ore**. Wants **brick**.

**Question: Is there any official rule which would explicitly explain if the following trade is legal or not?**

* Player B agrees to give 1 wheat + 1 ore, if he gets 1 brick in return.
* Player A **doesn't have brick yet**, but he gets his fourth wheat from player B. Immediately exchanges 4 wheat to 1 brick in bank. Gives brick to B.

Note, that this is not equivalent to:

* Player A gives 3 wheat for 1 ore.

...because, in this case, player B ends up with 4 wheat, not 1 ore. (He may still exchange wheat for ore in his turn, but until such time, he has more resources.)

**Tags:** catan, trading


---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2017-04-23. Score: 19 | Accepted answer

No, this is not legal as written. This is really a series of three separate trades (one of them being with the bank), and two of them are giving a resource for free, which is forbidden by the rules.

The problem is that a trade can only involve 2 people, so a "triangular trade" must be done as separate trades. From [the FAQ](http://www.catan.com/faqs/93?page=4):

> Trade - Is a “triangular trade” permitted? On player A’s turn, are player B and player C allowed to trade with each other if afterwards one of them uses the obtained resource for trading with player A?
>
> > No. Not only is a triangular trade forbidden, it is also unnecessary, because player B and player C each trades individually with player A and, thus, may trade whatever resource he has – provided that it meets the requirements of player A.

And:

> Trade - May I give away resources or buy services with them, for example, to avoid being bothered by the robber?
>
> > No. On Catan, a trade always involves giving and taking resources. Consequently, Catan’s trade law does not contain a “trade” of something for nothing or for immaterial goods such as services.

If they really want to do this, and they trust each other, they can do the following trades:

1. A gives 3 wheat and gets 1 ore
2. B gives 4 wheat and gets 1 ore
3. A trades 4 wheat to the bank for 1 brick
4. A gives 1 brick and gets 1 ore

Those are 4 separate, legal trades that have the same result. But there's nothing stopping either player from choosing to stop after any given step; though doing so will hurt their chances of being trusted in future trades and even future games.

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: Thanks! This is what I suspected after I read the "triangular trade" entry in the FAQ. However, I was only 99% sure. I guess I would be more confident if the FAQ would include an explicit sentence saying "Same applies to trading with the bank."  
> **username_1**: @username_0 Good point. But to the best of my knowledge, there is no rules differentiation between trading with the bank and trading with another player; any rules that apply to trading apply to both. The bank just acts as a player who is always willing to make a specific kind of trade.  

---

