Allan B. Calhamer, inventor of the game Diplomacy has died

Gamescience box

Word is seeping through the Internet gaming community that Allan B. Calhamer, the inventor and designer of the board game Diplomacy, died Monday at the age of 81.

Gamesicence Map

While Diplomacy didn't bring Mr. Calhamer a fortune, and perhaps not widespread fame, it has, I believe, earned him immortality. Diplomacy is among that select few games that has earned the title of a "timeless classic."

In the adventure gaming hobby's earliest days, Diplomacy was considered of the the three legs of the hobby triad -- which was comprised, back in the 1960s, of board wargaming, miniatures wargaming and Diplomacy.

Allan B. Calhamer

The hobby evolved over time and role-playing games, collectible games and euros all far outgrew those original trio, but Diplomacy was never truly eclipsed in the genre of game that it spawned. While it's seen many variants and imitators over the years, Diplomacy has still retained its status as the premier game of cutthroat diplomatic competition. It's so cutthroat that friendships have been ended and marriages thrown on the rocks due to game events. It takes a certain kind of gamer to play and enjoy Diplomacy and it's certainly noit for everyone.

Large deluxe Hasbro box version

By today's standards it violates a lot of accepted rules for good game design -- it takes a long time to play and it has player elimination for example. While it's gone through a whole host of editions over the last half century through various publishers and languages, in the end the components are extremely simple -- a map of 1900 Europe divided into land and sea areas, a set of markers divided into armies and fleets for each of the seven nations and the rules -- the basic nature of which can be listed on a single page.

My first exposure to the game was actually from a home-brewed variant while I was in high school. My best friend's older brother had gone off to Yale and been exposed to the game. He didn't have his own copy, but the was able to create a facsimile edition when he got home for the summer and we spent the summer break playing out Yale variant game and having a blast. Naturally, having done the game from memory, our version had some changes from the original, (and not improvements) but before long we got a copy of the actual game -- (this was the Gamescience edition) and kept playing.

Current Hasbro edition

Myself, I had too eclectic tatstes to settle on playing Diplomacy only -- but many people did and still do. I did take part in some postal Diplomacy for a number of years -- a very popular way to play. Diplomacy was exceptionally well-suited for postal play and later, Internet play.

When Avalon Hill bought the rights the game got access to widepread distribution that increased its popularity and Diplomacy is one of just two of classic Avalon Hill titles that Hasbro has kept in print since it took over AH (The other being the equally classic game Acquire).

AH wooden block version

I've always been partial to the wooden-block Avalon Hill edition, but the first Hasbro version with its metal cannon and battleships is also quite nice and I like that version as well. The current edition is a very cut-rate edition with die-cut cardboard counters (although the map is nice) but Diplomacy is remarkably independent of the components used to play it. In that way it reminds me more of old abstracts like Go or Chess than most modern games. It's possible to have a really nice, physical game to play on -- but you can still play quite nicely with bare-bones, even hand-made, components as well.

Mr. Calhamer never really followed up with anything nearly as successful. He wasn't a brilliant game designer in the way of his contemporary Sid Sackson or today's Reiner Knizia. But he did design a brilliant game.There may be those inclined to dismiss him as a one-hit wonder, but I think that's a mistake. A one-hit wonder, after all, does have a hit -- which is something the vast majority of artists never have at all. And game design is, at heart, a form of art. Mr. Calhamer designed a game that, I am quite sure, will still be bringing enjoyment to players not yet born.  That's success.

Chicago Magazine feature on the inventor of Diplomacy

A good read: http://www.chicagomag.com/Chicago-Magazine/May-2009/All-in-the-Game/index.php?cparticle=1&siarticle=0#artanc

One irony of Avalon Hill's "50th" anniversary

Hasbro selected three games for "Anniversary" editions to mark the 50th anniversary of Avalon Hill's founding.

While all three games are worthy classics (Acquire, Axis & Allies, and Diplomacy), none of them are original Avalon Hill games. Acquire was published by 3M and brought into the AH line when it took over the 3M line. Diplomacy, of course, is just as old as AH, but was first published by Gamescience before being bought and published by AH. Axis & Allies was never in the old Baltimore-based Avalon Hill's lineup at all.

It would have been nice to see a real Avalon Hill classic republished, but there are few candidates that might match Hasbro's market. Perhaps the most likely candidate would be an updated edition of Football strategy that reflected the way the NFL is played today.

Among the wargames I think there are few games that could make the transition. Most of the better games are in the hands of MMP or being republished elsewhere. Maybe, just maybe, a heavily revised Midway with plastic Axis & Allies style ships could catch the eye of the modern bit-oriented gamer. Of the classic hex-and-counter games Afrika Korps has probably held up the best, but I don't see it appealing to Wal-Mart shoppers.

No, it's easy to see w hy Acquire, Dip and A&A made the cut.

The first rush of the New Avalon Hill

For more than 40 years the premier adult gaming company was Avalon Hill. While most famous for its wargames, the Baltimore-based AH was always more than that. Perhaps ahead of its time, it always realized that games were not just for kids. Right from its start under Charles Roberts, AH always had a balanced line, with at least as many family and adult games as wargames. This continued throughout the Dott ownership.

When the Dotts finally tired of the game business and sold the Avalon Hill name and line to Hasbro, gamers everywhere lost quite a bit. But change is inevitable, after all, and we all have to just get on with it. Gamers wondered what Hasbro had in mind for AH, and it doesn't appear that Hasbro had any deeply thought-out strategy. Hasbro has been making it a policy to buy up adventure game outfits of late, most notably the Wizards of the Coast, and some, at least, thought it was merely a ploy to win more shelf space.

So it was with considerable interest that gamers watched the relaunch of the Avalon Hill brand by Hasbro in 2000. The first seven games of the new line ran the gamut of genres, titles, and age, but they all had one notable thing in common - not a single one was a "real" Avalon Hill game, in the sense of a game designed and marketed by the Baltimore crowd.

The First Seven were:

Star Wars: The Queen's Gambit -- An original design taking advantage of Hasbro's Star Wars licensing. A light wargame featuring 160 plastic pieces, it's a title that would never have appeared in the old AH line.

Cosmic Encounter -- Previously published by several different companies -- but not AH -- this was a reissue returning the game to its simpler roots with nicer components.

Battle Cry -- An original wargame, although a very stripped down and simple one. I've seen accounts that suggested the old AH was planning to publish the game before it went out of business. I'm not sure what that would have looked like, but I doubt it would have involved plastic figures or wooden blocks.

Stratego Legends -- A fantasy-themed version of the long-time Milton Bradley (also now owned by Hasbro) game Stratego. Obviously this would never have been in the old AH line.

Axis & Allies: Europe -- A refocused version of the Axis & Allies wargame published by Milton Bradley. Obviously not a candidate for the old AH line, it would have been too "light" for their customers.

Diplomacy -- A new, very nice edition of the classic diplomatic game that has been published by many companies, and was a prominent part of the old Avalon Hill line, although designed elsewhere. As a matter of fact, Allan Calhamer and Charles Roberts were working on their games around the same time.

Acquire -- Also a new edition of a timeless classic game, in this case designed by Sid Sackson. Originally a part of the 3M game line, it was bought by AH and a favorite part of their lineup until the end.

So, while the initial offering of the new AH resembled its predecessor with a balance of wargames and non-wargames and even included a few familiar titles, overall it was a much lighter group than the old Avalon Hill line. It did provide a good indication of where Hasbro was going with the Avalon Hill line, however. The rights for real hard-core wargames were mostly transferred to Multi-Man Publishing if AH-owned. Many of the other games, whose designers had retained rights, have reappeared with different publishers.

The more recent AH/Hasbro offerings have resembled the first batch, with most of the wargames also bearing the Axis & Allies brand in addition to AH. Except for Diplomacy and Acquire, which are being reissued again in new versions, the only New AH game that is a re-issue of a prior AH title is Monsters Menace America.

It seems evident that there will be no resurrecting of the hard-core historical Avalon Hill wargame under Hasbro. Only games light enough to merit the Axis & Allies label will show up, although some of those such as the A&A miniatures line and A&A:Bulge are definitely real wargames.

New version of Diplomacy and Acquire planned

It appears that Hasbro will be coming out with new editions of both these classic games this year. This is a good thing, of course, because it's nice to see good games stay available for new players to discover.
And both mew editions seem to be geared to appeal to new players, which has prompted a little grumbling among hobbyists. The new edition of Diplomacy will apparently have cardboard counters instead of the metal tokens of the previous edition. The new edition of Acquire will only be $30, so it seems likely to be a step down from the snazzy 1999 edition. It also returns to the classic "hotel" theme of the earlier editions.
At first blush I reacted a little negatively to the news, because who likes a drop in quality? But quality comes at a price and both of the first Hasbro editions were "deluxe" versions of the respective game. They were nice, but perhaps a little too nice and expensive to draw in new blood.
It looks like the new editions will be cheap enough to appeal to the more casual sort of customer who might buy Monopoly, Scrabble or Clue, rather than "gamers."

I already have two copies each of Acquire and Diplomacy. I have a 3M Acquire and the nice Hasbro version.

I have a wooden-block Avalon Hill copy of Diplomacy as well as the Hasbro metal-token edition. I'm not the target demographic for these editions.

Featured Game: Diplomacy

Diplomacy may be the rare game that's better played by mail or email than in-person, although it truly is a classic game no matter which way it's played.
Still, the nature of Diplomacy creates some problems for face-to-face play that are avoided when played remotely, while remote play also brings advantages over playing on the table top.

First among those is that it's far easier to organize a game via remote media than face-to-face play. A satisfying game of Diplomacy really requires that all seven powers be played by competitors with reasonably comparable skill and knowledge. It's hard to get seven players together for face-to-face play, let alone seven strong players. Outside of conventions or perhaps game clubs in major metro areas, the only place I've seen it happen fairly often is on college campuses, which provide a sufficiently large pool of intelligent, educated folks with a fair amount of time on their hands. In face-to-face play it's generally easy to spot any players who are newbies and take advantage of them. Remote play, whether by snail mail (rare these days) or email allows a game organizer to quickly match seven interested players and the normally anonymous nature of player identity can mask the presence of weaker or newer players long enough that they have a chance to learn without necessarily being picked on.

A second advantage of remote play over face-to-face play is time. Diplomacy can be a long game, even with just 15 minutes allocated for negotiating sessions. Adjudicating moves can take a considerable amount of time in complicated situations. Face-to-face play hinders negotiations because it's hard to hide who is talking to who. Remote play generally means a lot more time is available for negotiations and it's possible for an energetic player to keep up a steady stream of correspondence with everybody. Overall game length is less of a problem because it can be spread in very small packets of time over weeks or months instead of taking up a whole day.

A third advantage of remote play is that it solves the player-elimination problem. Not by preventing players from being eliminated, of course, but by mitigating its effect. In a face-to-face game it's not uncommon for one or more players to get knocked out of the game early. When this happens there's now the problem of what they're to do while the game continues without them. If two players happen to get eliminated about the same time they might play something else, but if not then someone will probably be going home early. With remote play this isn't a problem because eliminated players can merely join another game, if they'd like, and get right back into things, perhaps a little wiser.

A fourth advantage of remote play is a better quality of play. With more time to think, there's less of a chance for mistakes in order writing or bad play. Most remote play has some sort of adjudication protocol or software that will ensure that complicated adjudications are done in accordance with the rules. Even play-by-mail unusually uses a gamemaster who can figure it all out. A site like Bounced will even flag illegal orders before they're sent. In contrast, face-to-face play is often marred by poorly written orders and mistakes.

About the only way in which face-to-face Diplomacy is better is the opportunity it provides for social banter and personal interaction. Games that allow press or other forms of public communication between players can mitigate this a bit, but I think it's fair to say that it's still hard to beat face-to-face play for the personal touch. With two-player wargames this can be a decisive advantage, but I think for Diplomacy the previously mentioned factors shift the advantage to the side of remote-style play.