Neutrality is defined, and seven game mechanics are described and placed on a scale called the impartiality spectrum. For example, a capture and control mechanic in a multiplayer territory game is placed at the very indifferent end of the scale, since a piece of territory makes no distinction between players. A safety mechanic appears at both ends of the scale. A safety mechanic that deliberately starts new players in safe zones, so they are not in immediate conflict with experienced players, is of low impartiality. By contrast, a safety mechanic that provides safe zones equally to all players is highly impartial. Figure 2 illustrates that the seven game mechanics are split into two groups on the scale and that the potential exists to fill in the gap between these two groups and create new styles of gameplay.

Medler proposes four design recommendations to fill in the gap. A morality mechanic could provide proper rewards for neutral players. A neutral profession could be a recognized class of player. Alternative victory conditions could be established for a player who chooses a neutral role. Finally, games could incorporate organizations along the lines of the United Nations; suggestions are made for a diplomacy mechanic that could work along the entire impartiality spectrum, and incorporate the mechanics of existing mediation games into other game genres.

This paper stimulates new ideas for gameplay in entertainment and serious games; I strongly recommend it to the academic and commercial gaming sector.