ECONOMIC IV (Fred C. Davis Jnr)

(1) Robert Sacks in Lord of Hosts 3, February 1975.

Take a standard Davis map (almost); to each province assign a simple (1-4) revenue value; each fleet requires five points to maintain each year, each army four (except the first four Turkish armies which require only three points per year); allow loads, allow accumulation, and allow accumulated treasuries to be captured. The emphasis is on major power conflict, as there is less wealth in the minor powers than in the standard game. As every province has some value the game is substantially altered --- no longer will any power meekly accept the presence of any enemy unit anywhere on its soil, and any unit dislodged hurts. Also, the build up of forces should be faster as each power except Turkey can afford to build two units in Winter 1901 even if it doesn't take a single province. Stabs should be a lot blunter, and massive. Stalemate considerations should be very important. Interesting.

ELIMINATION (Doug Ronson)

Rules originally published in Paroxysm 5.

(1) Robert Sacks in Lord of Hosts 5, June 1975.

The first player to be completely eliminated *or* to obtain 18 centers wins. A highly amusing concept, but it could easily be drawn!

ET VOUS, COMMENT CA VA? (unknown) (??/07)

(1) MIGUEL LAMBOTTE in SOL 2 (October 1990)

The Mediterranean basin in 500AD. With dangerous navigation and the presence of sanctuaries where priests can call on the Gods who have powers to intervene in combat.

EXCALIBUR (Kenneth Clark)

(1) JAMES NELSON in SPRINGY 45 (February 1991).

This is set in Britain around 500AD. Three of the players take the natives of Britain, whilst the remaining four represent invading Germanic tribes. A novel idea is that the invaders start on the outside of the map and work inwards, whilst the natives must do the opposite. There are a few special rules concerning the Germanic tribes, but basically just a map-change variant.

EXCOMMUNICATION! (Greg Costikyan)

Rules originally published in Urf Durfal 1.

(1) Robert Sacks in Lord of Hosts 7, September 1975.

A game for nine military players (Moors, Egypt, Turks, Byzantine Empire, Russia, England, France, Leon, Holy Roman Empire), four religious players (two Moslem, one Orthodox and one Christian `heretic') and one who is both (Rome). Religious players have missions supported by religious supply centers, and win when they have converted half the land spaces (religious supply centers by occupation by missions; any other spaces by a convert order by any unit); in addition religious leaders may excommunicate a civil leader under him, putting that player into temporary civil disorder --- however each player not under excommunication chooses which religious player he is subject to (without changing between Christian and Moslem); players subject to Rome cannot attack Roman units. One of the best concept amongst variants I have seen.

EXTENDED (Peter Scriber)

Rules originally Published in Cimmeria 23.

(1) Robert Sacks in Lord of Hosts 8, December 1975.

A simple map extension including Africa and the Middle East; any player eliminated from the original 34 centers goes into civil disorder; Italy, Russia and Turkey get an additional home center; Britain gets two colonial centers. And Austria, France and Germany get one each --- units may be built in colonial centers only for captured supply centers within three land provinces. Interesting concepts.

FALL OF EMPIRE (Steve Doubleday)

(1) STEVE AGAR in Spring Offensive 8 (January 1993)

A five player variant, this is one of the more complex historical variants, set in the period after the death of Alexander the Great and covers the breakup of the Macedonian Empire. Interesting features include taxation, looting, influence point, marriages, revolts and schisms.

FAR EAST DIPLOMACY (Vern Schaller, amended by Fred C. Davis Jnr)

(1) ANDREW ENGLAND in Affairs of State (1988).

This variant is set in the Australasian region extending on up to Mongolia and Japan. The rules follow the standard game with the only real change being in the nature of Ocean Spaces. Basically they can hold an unlimited number of fleets thus allowing for several offensive possibilities. The game is set in future (1990's) in a world where the power of the Soviets and Americans has been broken. The five major powers involved are Australia, Indonesia, Vietnam, China and Japan. The new map should make for a good change from the European theatre and the number of islands in the region covered by the variant will bring navel operations to the fore.

FEUDAL DIPLOMACY (By Lewis Pulsipher)

(1) ANDREW ENGLAND in Affairs of State (1988)

There are rule changes in this variant which make it unique, the major one being that there are units in the game which move independently of any of the players. These represent the Vikings, Moslems and nomadic Asian tribes. There are no set powers in Feudal Diplomacy. Rather players chose the location of their centres at the start of the game with the number so chosen depending upon the number of players involved. The map has no sea provinces but instead has link routes between various provinces. Thus there are no fleets, the only units in the game being the standard army and knights which are worth two armies. Each game year has three movement seasons and at the end of the year all units are sent into "winter quarters" to be rebuilt for the coming year. At the beginning all players are given a castle which is an immovable stronghold with the combat value of one army. Players must protect these jealously for once they are destroyed they can not be rebuilt. These rules form a lack of historical accuracy. The Viking tribes, Moslems and Byzantines were all important forces in the medieval world yet their influence is not fully brought through in the game. Currently there is one game in progress in The Envoy.

CRAZY MARKIE SAYS: This variant was used by Andrew for the basis of his own Medieval Diplomacy (qv).

FEUDAL DIPLOMACY II (Dave Russell) cb36

(1) REVIEW: John Cudmore in Moonlighting 8, April 1990.

Originally called `Feudal' until the Variant Bank Custodian pointed out that Lew Pulsipher had designed an earlier game with a similar name. Dave's design bears little resemblance and is unrelated to the former. Feudal Dip II tries to simulate a European conflict around the 15th century but on the standard Diplomacy board, except for some minor changes in and around the area of Turkey. It concentrates on two aspects, the economic side where supply centers and territories generate GOLD to finance your armies and fleets and the use of one-shot mercenary units to argument the strength of armies and fortifications to offer some resistance to the above. It is very interesting to try and judge the mix of armies and mercenaries and also whether to sack a hard-to-hold province for a quick gain, or perhaps to finance your armies when you are on the retreat. Ultimately, Europe is turned into a wasteland with no rules to regenerate sacked centres, and the game starts to slip away. Dave mentions that he will produce another version using suggestions from the playtesters, but unfortunately it has not materialized yet. Never the less, this is a very good variant which simulates the genre very well.

FINAL CONFLICT (Tom Swider)

Variant published in DW 37

(1) BOB OLSEN in MOD

This is a seven-player game played on a world-map with a larger number of provinces and supply centers. New units include the airplane (used in support of other units only) and the nuke (used to blow things to smithereens). Builds can be taken in any owned center so the game is very fluid and stalemate lines are impossible.

FIVE ITALIES (Mike Lee) ug12/05

(1) MARK NELSON (1/8/92)

A variant for either those that enjoy playing Italy, or believe that Italy gets a raw deal in the regular game. A symmetrical/total balance game which has five Italies placed around a central Switzerland. All starting positions are equivalent. Ran postal in the British zines U-Bend and Smodnoc.

FLINTLOCK II (John Leeder)

Rules Originally Published in Runestone 77.

(1) Robert Sacks in Lord of Hosts 5, June 1975.

A rather interesting concept of the Anglo-French-Indian wars in North America on a rather `stylized' map of southern-eastern Canada and North-eastern America. There are six players: France, England and four Indian powers which bear some historical resemblance to the Indian Powers of the time. Victory is a majority of the fighting strength on the board (with European Double armies counting double); joint victory between the larger European power and the Indian, or `native', power with the majority of the `Native' strength is permitted. The native powers may use any land space as supply centers, and build in any they own; their units are amphibious, except that they may not winter on water, nor move into the North or Mid Atlantic.

The European powers have Double armies, in addition to single units, which require two centers for support and buildable only in home centers; other units may be built in any settled area (occupied for a year, not `non-arable', not ravaged by native units) and no unit may winter in an unsettled unfortified area (there are `build fort' and `destroy fort' orders); Fleets may move along certain navigable water routes, but they may not winter in the Great Lakes. Water going units may cross between Ontario and the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, and between the Upper and Lower Peninsulas of Michigan directly (these aren't the names used on the map). Armies and fleets along the Great Lakes have the option of converting to one another. Finally there is a `smallpox factor' which each European power carries around which are nice for indiscriminately destroying the native unit that is unfortunate enough to fight the particular DA when the factor is active. It shows promise of interesting play.

THE FOUNDATION GAME (Fritz Mulhauser) sa01/03-07

Diplomania ??? (pre April 1973)

(1) STEVE AGAR in ??? circa September 1990

This game is based on Asimov's Foundation Trilogy, and includes all the expected powers from the books -- Empire Colonies, First Empire, First Foundation, The Mule, Second Foundation, Tazenda and Association of Independent Traders. The board is completely abstract and at first sight abysmally complicated -- the whole thing is a mass of lines with sectors at the intersection of the lines. The Second Foundation player is anonymous and is supposed to devote all his energies in predicting moves in order to help the First Foundation gain bonus fleets -- on top of that he has virtually no chance of winning. Why the two Foundation players were not combined into one player is beyond me. Hyperspace links are possible, which messes the board about even further. First UK publication was in Don Turnbull's ALBION/COURIER (2/4/73).

(2) Steve Agar and James Nelson in Spring Offensive 19 (January 1994).

This is a seven player game based loosely on the Asimov Foundation series, five players being separate players (Tazenda, First Empire, Empire Colonies, Union of Worlds (The Mule) and the Association of Independent Traders). The other two players play as a team, one representing the First Foundation and the other being the Second Foundation (the latter of which is off the board). The board itself needs to be seen to be believed --- it consists of two icosahedrons with centre points (the Trantorian Module), a hollow icosahedron (the Kalganian Module) and a dodecahedron (the Peripheral Module), and if you can visualise that you're a better man than I. To begin with movement is confined to within the same module on the map, but after three years inter-module movement is permitted. The Second Foundation does not have units, that player tries to predict the moves of the five individual players and every move he correctly predicts more than 50% of the moves, the First Foundation receives an additional unit. Overall the rules are not too complicated, it is only the design of the map which is off-putting.

THE GAME OF THE CLANS II (Wayne Hoheisel and Stephen Agar) pe10/09

(1) GORDON McDONALD in AC-MONG 39 (June 1991)

There is some confusion as to how many versions of the game there are. This variant uses a map of Scotland and northern England with eight powers: England, Campbell, Frazer, Gordon, Graham, Keith, McDonald? (rather than MacDonald) and McLeod? (rather than MacLeod).

In the first version England was too strong, however apparently there was a nine-player version which contained the addition of clan Stewart but it isn't clear as to whether this was a playtest. I've set up the game and I get the impression that Game of the Clans II is indeed the 9-player version but somehow clan Stewart was left off the rules. On the map home supply centres are marked with an asterisk whilst neutral centres are denoted by a small circle. The areas of Blair, Buchanan, Morton, Crookstron, Stirling and Blanerne have all got an asterisk, yet aren't listed against any of the clans. So whereas all the other clans have 5 home centres there must be a Stewart clan with 6 home centres.

Anyway, in the game the clan territory is fairly intermixed and it seems that clans having their centres closer together have a slight advantage over the others.

Other factors include the army/fleet rule for England with the Clans making do with `boat-bunches'. This interesting variant starts in Spring 1491, before Flodden and when Scotland was still a power, perhaps explaining why the Royal House of Stewart has six centres? 69 centres on the map with a win achieved by having 36 or 35 units on the board after a winner season, making it look like a long game. England is eliminated once it loses all its original home centres. As to historical accuracy I'm not sure, I wouldn't have thought that the clans Frazer, Keith and MacLeod would have compared with the others in strength and power. Maybe I'm wrong!

GAIN (Mike Benyon) ??/07

Don't Shoot Me! 8 (September 1982)

(1) MARK NELSON (6-6-92)

A simple rule-change variant using the regular board. At the start of the game each player is randomly allocated a power and starts with $x cash where x is four if you have Russia and 3 for everyone else. At the end of each year you gain $1 for each sc gained and lose $1 for each sc lost. You are then allocated another power. $18 to win the game and you are eliminated if your credit goes down to zero.

GEOPHYSICAL DIPLOMACY

(1) STEVE AGAR in Spring Offensive 8 (January 1993)

A slightly silly rule change variant by Jeremy Maiden and refined by Keith Black, this variant allows players to alter the physical characteristics of the regular board as the game progresses. Turn Moscow into a huge lake, raise the English Channel above sea level and invade England etc. etc.

GESTA DANORUM I (John Leeder)

Rules originally published in Runestone 72.

(1) REVIEW: Robert Sacks in Lord of Hosts 5, June 1975.

A game for between four and eight players, vaguely reminiscent of Excalibur. Two players, the Norse and the Danes, begin with three off-board centers which disappear at the rate of one per year and may build either off-board or in any on-board center they own. Fleets may change to armies whenever they are in a coastal province. The Temes (Thames) is navigable one province in, so that there are two provinces which border by water but not by land. In the four and five player versions, the Northern and Southern Angles stand in CD, supporting each other. There is the Great Army which wanders around the board randomly; it starts as a Triple Army but loses one factor of strength every time it is dislodged, spends a Winter in a non-center province or the same center as the previous Winter; it only temporarily controls a center and the previous owner of the center (to whom it reverts) may bribe it to winter in some other player's center the following year by foregoing an additional center. I heartily endorse someone play(test)ing this game.

(2) STEVE AGAR in V&U 4 (September 1980).

A historical variant set in England in 865AD, it has eight powers: Norse, Danes, Picts, Northumbria, Mercia, East Anglia and Wessex. As in Excalibur (qv), the Norse and Danes invade from the edge of the map. An interesting idea is "The Great Army", this is a 3A which is not controlled by anyone; it moves around England raising any supply centres that get in the way. 7, 6, 5, and 4 player versions are included in the rules.

GESTA DANORUM II (unknown)

(1) REVIEW: Iain Murray in Ac Mong 31, June 1990.

I believe that in this game the centre powers (Mercia and East English) have no real chance and the same may prove to be true of Northumbria. The Great Army only adds to this problem. Even Wessex may go under if attacked by a Danish-Norse alliance; the same could be true of the Picts, to a lesser extent. There also appears to be too much of a bottleneck around Hadrian's Wall, leading to problems for Pictish expansion. To give themselves any chances the four English powers would have to sew up a very tight alliance, dividing up the spare mainland supply centres, and building fleets early on, so driving the Norse and Danes from the sea, causing them to be `dissuaded', and then fight it out amongst themselves and the Picts, who I think, would profit heavily from the seas being free of Vikings. Even if this were to be done, the Mercians and East English would find that opportunities for expansion were far fewer for them than for the Northumbrians and West Saxons. All in all, the map (especially the distribution of supply centres) needs a serious re-think in the light of a couple of playtest games.

(2) COMMENT: Gordon McDonald in Ac Mong 31, June 1990.

The bottleneck problem with the area around Hadrian's Wall applied to 1066 I and most likely to Excalibur as well. The problem is the shape of the British Isles. However, direct passage across places such as the Solway Firth and the Bristol Channel is something that could be looked at in the future. After all this idea is quite common in Diplomacy and Diplomacy variants, indeed Hadrian's Wall didn't end at the edge of the Solway Firth, but continued to on to Bowness, some way along it with a number of towers along the Cumberland coast which suggests passage across the Firth was quite common. Although there is probable a need for more provinces in this area as well. As regards Mercia; an extra unit like Russia has in regular Dip? Indeed, there are many options.

GIGATON BOMB (Leonard Miyata)

(1) Robert Sacks in Lord of Hosts 1, November 1974.

Each power starts with as many bombs as home supply centers, and each bomb may be used to destroy units, centers and provinces and disrupt bodies of water. There is little sense in a game where you can erect impassable dead-zones across the board or set fire to the map-board or your opponents (perhaps it was designed as a social comment?).

THE GREAT YEARS (Kedge Neuman) ??/06

Chimaera ??? (1976)

(1) STEVE AGAR in ??? circa September 1990

A Lord of The Rings variant for six players (Mordor, Gondor, Rohan, Elves, Dwarves and Men & Hobbits). There are also personalities which can inspire their units to greater things -- while Aragorn and Gandalf move by player vote and can inspire anyone. Unlike other LoTR variants which have a hidden ring piece all players know the location of the ring -- in the Shire. The fleet problem that dogs the essentially land-locked map of Middle Earth is overcome in this variant by the use of boat-bunches (as in Game of the Clans). A postal game was run in Richard Bartle's SAUCE of the NILE.

GUNBOAT

(1) BOB OLSEN in MOD

This is exactly like regular Diplomacy, except that the identity of the players is known only to the GM. Thus there is no negotiation. For this reason, a Gunboat game can offer a break from the letter-in-letter-out grind of correspondence and can also give a chance to sharpen your tactical ability without confusing you with a lot of lies from the other players. Generally, Gunboat games still carry press so it is often possible to figure out who's in the game if you're familiar with the press-styles of various people. But if you keep your mouth shut, who's to know? This is probably the most common type of variant offered.

(2) JAMES NELSON in SPRINGY 45 (February 1991)

This has several different versions, but in all versions the players are anonymous. Some versions allow diplomacy via the press, but even then there can be differences! For example, in one versions there is `black press', where anyone can write press for any country! Try working out who is saying what in that version!! This variant has been very popular in recent years because the players have to do no work except mailing orders to the GM.

GUSHER DIPLOMACY (Fred C. Davis Jnr)

(1) Fred C. Davis Jnr in DIPLOMACY WORLD 66 (Spring 1992)

This variant is based on a characteristic of an old board game called "Gusher", in which players bid for the right to drill for oil on certain properties. Highest bidder got to buy the property. He would then set up a device called a "drill" on a hole on the property (the hole was already on the board, of course), and plunge a built-in plunger down. There were jigsaw-type pieces of wood inside the gameboard, which were scattered about by shaking the board before the game began. If the plunger hit one of these pieces, he had a dry hole. If the plunger went all the way to the bottom, he had a gusher. Each producing well paid, I think, $50,000 each turn. The more producing wells you had, the more money you could afford to pay for future pieces of property. Eventually, the big guys drove the little guys into bankruptcy.

Instead of a drill, Gusher Diplomacy uses either a deck of cards or a special number system to determine the value of each supply center. Instead of an "all or nothing" system, I've devised a way of allowing a center to be worth from 0 to 3 supply sources. These have names from Zero Centers (Z) to Triple Centers (T). Whenever a player occupies any supply center other than a Great Power capital, he will never know how much it is going to be worth until the GM performs certain card draws or calculations. This will add an element of chance to a Diplomacy game which, if nothing else, ought to make things quite interesting. No two games will be the game.

Back to the Introduction
Back to the previous file variants C-D
On to the next file variants H-M
or jump to a specific letter [ A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z | 1]