Diplomacy is a game of conversation. There is a board and there are pieces to move around but all of the action takes place through conversation. It is unusual in that regard and so worth of consideration from an ontological perspective.
Set around the time of World War I, players assume the identity of a major European country. Each country is divided into regions some of which contain cities which can produce army or navy units. Players write down the moves their existing units will make during the next turn and these are then “resolved” against the moves of other players using the rules of the game. For example, I might order my fleet stationed in Liverpool out to the North Sea. Resolving a move means determining what happens if two players try to occupy the same place. Normally this is a stand-off and neither moves from where they are but in certain situations one player may have the “support” of another. Basically two against one wins. How one player gets the support of another is where Diplomacy gets interesting.
Before submitting any orders (all written to avoid people changing their minds) players spend 15-20 minutes “diploming”. France might say to Germany, “I’m going to attack London with my army in Picardy but I need your fleet stationed in The English Channel to ferry me across” and in response Germany might say “ok”. Then France goes to England and says “The German fleet will be stationing a unit in The English Channel. Now is our chance to attack”. It can get quite complex to keep in your head who promised what, especially when moves are planned turns in advance. Whatever happens France is free to submit the orders it wants. There is a strategy to the game but so much of it is built on trust.
When deciding upon your moves you must make assessments of the other player’s:
- Sincerity — are they going to support me as they said they would;
- Competence — are they capable in game terms of writing down their orders correctly (incorrect orders are nullified);
- Reliability — have they been trustworthy to date; and
- Involvement - do they really support me in what I’m trying to achieve or are they out for their own (more likely towards the end of the game)
Diplomacy is so interesting because it contains most of the language constructs present in the Basic linguistic acts with:
- Requests and Offers for assistance in attacking or defending;
- Promises to that effect;
- All elements of Trust (listed above)
- Assertions about current unit positions;
- Assessments about what other players may do (congruent with what is said or otherwise
- Declarations of action.