[1]: 1–8 Each turn, players may take a single action for the family, such as sending members to work in India, buying shares in the Company, purchasing luxuries, or setting up their own factories and shipyards.

Players also gain victory points for achievements such as passing laws or conquering Indian kingdoms, and for having the most power, which takes different forms and may be manipulated throughout the game.

[1]: 43–46 In the rulebook, Wehrle describes the game as "a frank portrait of an institution that was as dysfunctional as it was influential", discussing imperialism, globalization, and how these affected Britain.

[1]: 1  He also states that it "attempts to tell on small part of the origin story of the British Empire" and show how "decent people can do some truly evil things to advance their own prospects".

[2] Other influences on the game design included John Keay's The Honourable Company, Sashi Tharoor's Inglorious Empire, and The Anarchy by William Dalrymple, as well as history books by Barbara Harlow, Mia Carter, Margot Finn, Kate Smith, Jean Sutton, Kirti N. Chaudhuri, Christopher Bayly, Philip J. Stern, and Lucy Sutherland.

Wehrle also cites the theoretical works Benedict Anderson's Imagined Communities, Saree Makdisi's Making England Western, and Edward Said's Culture and Imperialism in the rulebook.

Players may hire Indians to assist them; these include Sikhs, the Jagat Seth family, Awadh, Arcot, Orissa, the Nizam of Hyderabad, and a Rajput prince.

If passed, the game card simulates this by reducing Company profits and allowing players to buy extra workshops while rewarding those who already have them; it also has support in Parliament, which reflects how MPs represented local economies dependent on textiles, while the rents of many Lords were connected to the wool industry.

[6] The Writer Privileges law, on the other hand, has less support in Parliament, but allows the players to gain extra money from trading in India, and makes future votes to deregulate the Company easier; a historical note on the card explains that reducing restrictions led to cheaper prices for Indian goods in Britain, which led to more support for deregulation.

Players may also debate whether to recruit sepoys (Indian soldiers), extend the franchise (reducing the value of rotten boroughs and making it more expensive to buy votes), or provide relief for famines in India.

The rulebook is illustrated with cartoons, including two by James Gillray commenting on the impeachment trial of Warren Hastings in the House of Commons for his actions while governor of Bengal.

The card text notes that although the cartoon criticizes Disraeli's ambitions, it also shows how racism was present throughout Victorian society, even in anti-imperialist contexts.

[9] The art on the inside of the box lid shows the signing of an alliance between the EIC and Madhavrao II, peshwa of the Maratha Empire, against the Tipu Sultan.

[1]: 48  In addition, the spouses are all drawn from 19th century British literature, similar to the inclusion of the Harry Flashman card in Pax Pamir.

They include Mr Rochester of Jane Eyre, Becky Sharp and Joseph Sedley of Vanity Fair, Lady Newcome of The Newcomes, Esther Summerson of Bleak House, Lady Glencora and Violet Effingham of the Palliser novels by Anthony Trollope, John Thorpe of Northanger Abbey, and Mr Collins of Pride and Prejudice.

After finishing the second edition of Pax Pamir, Wehrle and his brother Drew began revising it for re-release by their own company, Wehrlegig Games.

[1]: 48 EJ Insight described the second edition as "not an easy game to understand or play" and stated that the rulebook could have been better written, but also called it "unique", "exciting", and "highly educational".

[14] Dan Thurot noted that the emphasis on negotiation makes the Company's dealings harder to ignore and discussed how the excitement of dice throwing helps players understand the game's darker themes.

He also compared it to what Robert Southey called oikophobia, a drive to expand, and contrasted John Company's examination of the past with Roger Scruton's distaste for self-examination and cultural critique.

[17] Smithsonian magazine named it one of their best games of 2022, describing it as not for "beginners—or anyone uncomfortable with mixing play with dark historical themes", but "beautifully crafted".