Diplomacy World #103 - Fall 2008 Issue

interactive fiction to the entirely-interactive board game
easier for those who're struggling to separate the two.
Perhaps the best way of doing this is by positing that the
board game represents an alternate reality, wherein the
starting conditions are roughly the same as those in the
book/film/series/opera in question, and where the
players each get a chance to run their assigned empire
in a new and interesting way, to see if they could have
done it better (which is, of course, the premise of all
history-based gaming, applied to a fictional history). If it
helps, players can also assume that the established
alliances and wars are already in place at the start of the
game, with the option to change sides whenever they're
ready for it. However, that's a poor compromise, and the
players (especially new players) should be weaned off of
it as soon as possible, or they'll just be forever trapped in
the same inflexible re-enactments, which will almost
certainly make the game very dull.
From the variant designer's point of view, there is
another way of handling the incorporation of established
relationships in fiction-based variants: Build them into
the underlying design of your variant. The Middle Earth
series of variants accomplished this by adding a variety
of new rules to force changes in the balance of power,
by changing the importance of fleets, the value of home
defence, control over specific resources/units and a
string of other changes. The Babylon 5 variant by Theo
Kermanidis solves the problem more subtly, with a well
thought-out map that will tend to encourage the players
to do similar things to the events seen in the series on
which the variant is based*. But, and this is important,
Diplomacy World #103 - Page 16
the design of the map never explicitly forces anyone to
do anything that normal 1901 European Diplomacy
wouldn't, however much it may encourage it. I'm much
more in favour of that subtle map-design method of
variant design, because it accomplishes more or less the
same goal, without messing with the basic Diplomacy
rules too much (which are already pretty damn good).
And that's important, because special rules and anything
else that directly and explicitly forces the players into a
particular diplomatic arrangement are likely to spoil the
players' enjoyment of the game. Not only do special
rules make it trickier to balance a variant properly, but
they also make it one notch harder for players to
suspend their disbelief, and that's no fun.
There are many fine science fiction and fantasy settings
to base Diplomacy variants on, and some of these do
include some pretty realistic political and diplomatic
arrangements. But for the most part, fictional settings are
not quite as diplomatically flexible as we need them to
be for our game, and whether you agree with my
particular solutions to that problem or not, it is something
important to bear in mind when playing or designing a
variant based on your favourite speculative fiction.
*To be completely fair, the Babylon 5 variant does include
some optional special rules, involving the Babylon 5 Station
region. But this variant stands up primarily on its map design,
and not on this one optional special region rule.
Quick question: True or False – Chris Sham is a Star
Trek fan?
DipCon in Maine: What Happened
By Rick Desper
Last year in Vancouver, two bids were presented for the
right/duty to host DipCon in 2008. With most of the wellknown
major cons begging off, and many of the most
well-known tournament directors looking for a year or
two off, the only bids were HuskyCon, hosted by the
Woodrings at their house on Long Island, and
BangorCon (what is this called?). David Webster
presented the bid for the latter con.
There were some concerns at the time about the Bangor
bid. For starters, nobody at WDC had ever attended.
And several voters thought it was odd that a con with
“five boards per round” could be held in Maine without
anybody having heard of it. But David made a good
presentation, complete with PowerPoint and promising
photos of the venue. It was to be held at the University
of Maine in Orono. From my perspective, the Maine bid
was offering the type of venue I was comfortable with,
that could presumably host 100 or more people if
necessary. I didn’t feel HuskyCon could, and voted
accordingly.
After the bid was awarded, MaineCon disappeared off
the map for well over a half year. Typically a tournament
director will make appearances and other cons,
advertising his con, trying to drum up interest. David
Webster did not do this. Indeed, there were complaints
about his lack of communication early in the year, with
gamers trying to get information about dates and
accommodations.
Anyway, in spite of my waning interest in playing
Diplomacy competitively, I felt an obligation to go to
DipCon in Maine. I made my plans to fly up and visit
friends in Waldo County and then go up to the Con after.
I did not feel like playing four days of Diplomacy, so I
planned to show up Friday and play Friday-Sunday. I
showed during the second round and discovered to my
surprise that there were only going to be four rounds
counting for DipCon, with a fifth “team round” on
Sunday. But that was a minor problem compared to the