To Win at ëDiplomacyí Requires Cunning, Treachery and Betrayal by Alan B. Nichols Itís the afternoon of a multi-day "conference." There is much cordiality on the surface. The seven "diplomats" are gathered to discuss plans and ambitions of great consequences for their respective countries. Periodically, two or three huddle in the corner, comparing notes and, in some instances, forming alliances. Each one eyes the other intensely, taking in subtle nuances of word and gesture. The aim, one discloses, is to know more about them than they will discover about you. Here, where knowledge is everything, the most crucial information is often the least overt. With the negotiations concluded, the diplomats prepare their written orders and soon return to the conference table, upon which is a map of pre-World War I Europe. In unison, the orders are revealed and the board is altered by the movement of pieces. A quiet period of reflection follows, as the participants ponder their next moves and the degree to which they accurately assessed the authentic intentions of their opponents. Trust is either validated or undercut by false statements, otherwise known as lies. Betrayal prompts plans of retribution. Now, the real game is on. Does th is sound like a high-level international treaty negotiation? Yes and no. The above scenario broadly outlines the beginning of a game of Diplomacy, a board game that emphasizes interpersonal relations, being able to read intentions and motives, knowing whom to trust, playing calculated hunches, taking educated risks, and looking out for oneís own best interests. These skills are often required in real diplomacy but thereafter the board game departs radically from its real counterpart. Created in 1959 by Allan B. Calhamer of Chicago, who designed the game while attending Harvard Law School, Diplomacy is the rage of a very small but dedicated group of game enthusiasts. Not designed for the impatient, a typical face-to-face game can take anywhere from six to 12 hours, depending on the rules adopted by each set of players. There are also mail and Internet versions that can last up to a year or even longer. The game is quite popular in selected regions of the United States and in Europe, Australia, New Zealand, Brazil and South Africa. In addition to the many informal games, hobbyists often form informal societies that promote information exchanges among members and sponsor tournaments. The Potomac Tea & Knife Society, a 50-member group based in the Washington area, sponsors an annual local tournament and will be the host of this yearís World Diplomacy championship, to be held in Washington, D.C., in July. What fascinates these enthusiasts? The Web site of the manufacturers (a Hasbro subsidiary) touts its attractions this way: "Trust and treachery are the entertaining ingredients in this Game of International IntrigueÖ. Cunning, deceit and betrayal [are] just a few of the charming qualities you will need to succeed at Diplomacy." It explains hyperbolically that "Diplomacy is rightly recognized as one of the great board games of all time. Each player represents one of the great European powers before World War I, a time when the continent was a complex cauldron of political stratagems and maneuvers. Your armies and fleets can dominate Europe, but only with the cooperation of your neighbors. Never forget, they are all trying to expand their territory, tooóand you could be the target!" Unlike many other board games, "Luck plays no part in Diplomacy. Cunning and cleverness, honesty and perfectly timed betrayal are the tools needed to outwit your fellow players. The most skillful negotiator will climb to victory over the backs of both enemies and friends." The game in fact requires this type of deviousness. "The key of Diplomacy is to betray your friends before they betray you, but only after youíve gotten what you need from them." In a game where the interpersonal dynamics can get dicey and complicated, the mechanics are fairly simple. The boardóa map of pre-1914 Europeóhas 75 spaces and each countryís pieces may only move one space at a time. Seven players represent the seven major powers of that era: England, Russia, France, Germany, Austro-Hungary, Italy and Turkey. Each of the major powers has three supply centers (cities located in some of the 75 spaces) while Russia has four. The lesser countries have empty centers making up a total of 34. Controlling a supply center at the end of a year entitles a player to one army or fleet during the next year, and the object of the game is to capture 18 or more centers using these military units. No power is strong enough to achieve this by itself, so the game becomes a balance between cooperation and conflict. All moves are made simultaneously, a rule that offers players the opportunity to say one thing and do another. This differentiates Diplomacy from almost every other board game on the market. David Cohen, an attorney in New York and a game devotee since 1980, underscores the delicate balance of trust and caution that is required to win. "You have to make alliances to survive. A good player will try to make it appear that what he wants is also in the interest of his potential allies, but a player doesnít want to suggest something that is unrealistically rosy. Chances are thatís a tip-off of dishonesty." Cohen differentiates between the two major competencies demanded of a successful player: tactics and negotiation skills. "You can be the best tactician in the world, but if your neighbors [neighboring countries] donít like you, you will be gone in short order." "The object in negotiations is to learn as much as possible from the other players as to their motives while revealing as little as possible of your own," explained Andy Marshall, an information technology (IT) project management consultant who has recently started his own business designing game software. "If Iím Italy, and I have talked to both England and France, I may tell England something France told me, but it may or may not be true, and England may or may not believe me. There is a lot of guesswork, but also being able to read people is key and the real charm of the game. "I play because my best friends also play," Marshall explained. "Some players have a hard time letting go of the game once itís over, particularly if they have been betrayed and lost. It helps a lot to have thick skinóthose [are the people] who donít usually leave the hobby. For the most avid players, the game tends to form close friendships." The game is an excellent lab for interpersonal relations and to that extent it is similar to real diplomacy, although real diplomacy involves representing the best interests of entire nations and here political consequences donít factor in, according to Burrard Eddy, a Seattle-based certified public accountant who was introduced to Diplomacy when it first came out. Because the game emphasizes the ability to influence and persuade others, Eddy said the majority of enthusiasts come from professions where such abilities are celebrated: law and sales. Because the successful player is also one who can think somewhat algorithmically with respect to the literally thousands of move options, the game also attracts engineers and IT specialists, such as Marshall. Blake Eskin, who authored a piece on Diplomacy that appeared in the Nov. 14, 2004, Washington Post Magazine, said, "Diplomacy is an iterative game. It involves deals, dissembling, craft, and to some extent it applies to real diplomacy because it involves following long-range interests and tolerating short-term frustrations. While not exactly a replica of real life, the skills needed to play the game are pertinent to real life: balancing a lot of information under a tight time frame, juggling competing interests, tempering short-term objectives with long-term goals, and strategic and social thinking under extreme pressure." The transferability of game competencies to real diplomacy is strong enough to persuade a few university professors to use Diplomacy as a teaching device. However, some diplomats who do enjoy the game prefer to play anonymously because of the stark differences in goals and style between the game and the real thing. A Swedish diplomat stationed in Western Europe has one or two Internet games going continuously, and although he will reveal his real name to players before a game, he tends not to divulge his profession so as not to hand them a good argument to gang up on him. "Real life," he said, comparing the game to his job, "is a non-zero-sum game. You negotiate to obtain an objective that all sides benefit from. In Diplomacy, at the end of the day, itís a zero-sum game. "Serious players play to win in whatever Machiavellian style that works," he said. "Real life diplomacy is not about tricking other people and countries into doing only what you want. Itís about cooperation." After a moment of reflection, he ad ded, "Maybe my greatest weakness as a player is that I bring too much of my real-life diplomacy values with me into the game and trust others a little too much. Then again my trust and my patience serve me well when I come across players who misunderstand the object of the game to be to lie and betray as much as possible. Their neighbors inevitably become my friends, and without friends you have no future in the game." Alan B. Nichols is a contributing writer for The Washington Diplomat.