Just join in. Stabbing a student is part of the fun.

Possibly. Maybe I could play as Italy and help Austria out of its poor position?

Play; just play as Italy and play rather poorly. In particular, don't stab anybody, but don't tell them that you won't.

Have them read a bit of Kissinger first and make sure 'balance of powers' is in their minds

That's a good idea Ben, kind of what I was thinking.

You should play. Teach them to trust no one.

And I was just doing balance of power theory today, actually. Critique: Doesn't explain bandwagoning, unrealistic alliances due to ideology.

Well the game is set in pre-war Europe, when Ideology isn't quite a thing (Kissinger discusses this in chapter 2)

also full disclosure I'm a sophomore studying political science, so don't take what I say too seriously

Play, don't be afraid to stab anyone. But make them form the alliance with you. I think doing it anonymous would eliminate any problems. You could possible take a moment to discuss the moves at the end of the year. Or, rather than discuss, maybe they could make some notes after each year. They can see if they can identify alliances etc.

I wouldn't play. You probably understand the map topology, including issues like stalemate lines and alliance theory, better than any of your students will.

When I first played Diplomacy, I drew Germany, opened to Bohemia, and took Vienna in 1901. I didn't understand what a terrible strategy that was. When one of my friends played her first game, she sent her armies to Ukraine and Livonia, then convoyed Livonia to Sweden (again, quite weak). We also saw a fleet going to Picardy. In another first game, Austria-Hungary submitted no orders for three years and was not attacked.

These are the sorts of moves beginners make. Don't turn your students against you when you show that you know a thing or two about the board.

What would be lesson learned? It'd be great if there was some modified version of diplomacy that integrated concepts like the Offense-Defense balance and such. I don't think it really teaches realpolitik very well though.

I mean, the whole point about realism is that uncertainty or miscalculation about relative power leads to war. But in diplomacy everybody knows exactly how much power their opponents have. Diplomacy as a game just teaches people to never trust your friends.

Not just relative power, but resolve and intent. In an age of ever-expanding information, public society knows more and more about the capabilities of state militaries. But your point is taken.

"Not just relative power, but resolve and intent."

In my experience, people these days are not good at seeing things from other people's perspective. They see something happen and can't understand why anyone would do such a thing.

The key to diplomacy for myself has always been looking at the board from everyone else's perspective. I do the same thing in my work and find it very valuable. I think, if stressed properly, this game can be used to teach your students this skill. Certainly seems useful for "international relations". But maybe your students are already well versed in this already based on the course selection.

i wouldn't play
if there is no player then you could
as many games on the old board start with 6 & italy nuetral
or play Italy diceman style
write down possible orders for units and roll a dice,


or run Italy as a UN run nation have a secret ballot amongst students to decide moves
for Italian pieces
find some way to have an active, if erratic Italy

keep yourself out of the game
that way you can resolve disputed moves, give short critiques of moves etc
& offer advice to any who ask or none
keep your independent position, that way reduces "conflict of interests" or the perception of them by students

another thing i would suggest is you look up the old rulebook variants for three four or five players, some of those are based on 1870's alliances in Europe

have them play reasonably quickly paced starter games play 6 to 8 moves,
stop the game, get students to discuss it & possible out comes,

then start a new game & repeat

as beginners they will make mistakes so go a quick 3 maybe 4 yrs
then give them restarts

The Diplomacy game is well suited to be a learning tool
so I encourage you to use it

you could run Italy "open UN style"
write out order options on a white board, have a quick hands up vote of students

but my advice is, if you want to use the game to teach,
have them play the game & you be "moderator" of disputes etc,

"Maybe I could play as Italy and help Austria out of its poor position?"

Don't play fixed alliances. Just play the game as it should be played. Austria may do well of his own accord and extra help, pre-conceived, could unbalance the game. Each player should just try to their best, which may or may not mean an alliance with Austria.

"I don't think it really teaches realpolitik very well though."

Really? Take a look at the history of Europe from 1500 to now. No one power has ever succeeded in dominating the continent because all the other powers play "stop the leader". Look at how many times has England changed alliances on the continent.
I think the game could help students put themselves in the shoes of the various European rulers throughout he centuries. Of course it is just a crude illustration, but I think the game captures some core principles beautifully.

The game teaches communication in the sense of negotiating skilfully so that you get yourself out of trouble or you get others to do what you want them to, etc. And the point is that communication, esp negotiations, is a vital component in international relations ~

Try to focus more on the messages part instead of the moves I would say.

Don't play. The power dynamic exists, even if nobody feels it does. Most students won't stab their teacher, and all will likely ally with you - on the first game.

Bring in a 7th.

Thanks for the advice, everyone. I probably won't play. I do like a few of the ideas presented here though.

Also, what would be the best way to introduce them to the rules? I'm thinking about having them watch this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g844EvintEc (a bit hokey, but not a bad introduction) and then go over the rules in class. Any other suggestions?

"No one power has ever succeeded in dominating the continent because all the other powers play "stop the leader". Look at how many times has England changed alliances on the continent.
I think the game could help students put themselves in the shoes of the various European rulers throughout he centuries. Of course it is just a crude illustration, but I think the game captures some core principles beautifully."

Well,changing alliances occur between wars, not during them. You never see countries being 'stabbed' midway through an agreed attack on a third party. Maybe Churchill's attack on the French fleet counts, but I don't know.

I'm not arguing that balance of power logic doesn't inform historical patterns of alliances.