Forum > Spellen > Paying to pass - maharadja

queequeg	03 Jul 2013 om 20.08
	If I have a house in a town, and an opponent also has a house in a town, do I have to pay my opponent to pass through that town? It seems like I am getting charged for passing through the town where I already have a house. Is that the rule?

MPloeger	03 Jul 2013 om 20:10
	no, you only pay when you don't have a house in that town.
MPloeger	03 Jul 2013 om 20:11
	wait, maybe I misunderstood you. Did you mean you both have a house in the same town, or that you each have a house in two consecutive towns? In the latter case you have to pay for crossing his town. In the former case, you can pass freely
F1	03 Jul 2013 om 20:53
	I'm in the same game... To pass to the city you're in now, you passed a town with a red and black house and a town with a yellow (you) and black house. For the first town you have to pay both black and red, because you're not in the town. For the second town you don't have to pay anything, cause you're in this town.
queequeg	03 Jul 2013 om 22:35
	Gotcha. It just seemed like 2 rupees were deducted in the second town for some reason. Sorry that I messed up the game with the miscalculation. Use the extra 2 rupees wisely.
Vuurduivel	04 Jul 2013 om 07:24
	That doesn't matter. It can happen to everyone.
fanty	14 Jan 2014 om 11:20
	so, for my slow mind: - no house in town: no way to pass - 1 house in town, not my own: i pay 1 rupee to house owner - 2 house in town, not my own: i pay 2 rupee to house owner(s) - 2 house in town, 1 my own, i pay nothing - 1 house in town, my own, passer pays me 1 - 2 house in town, both my own, passer pays me 2 is this all correct?
Elenitza	14 Jan 2014 om 11:35
	Yes correct.
Piet	23 May 2014 om 13:43
	Didn't remember it was possible that 1 player could occupy both spots in 1 town.
F1	26 May 2014 om 02:56
	Yep, it is possible