Better way to play chess

Page 1 of 2 [ 17 posts ] Go to page 1, 2 Next

Roman
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Mar 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,298

26 Jun 2005, 11:55 am

I would like chess better if you were to make few changes to it

1)You have to actually EAT a king of your opponent in order to win.

2)You are allowed to leave your kind under the threat and hope that your opponent won't notice it in which case the game will continue since your king haven't actually been eaten.

3)Stalemate is NOT a draw. Quite the opposite, unless your opponent not notice it, he is about to eat your king and you are about to lose the game.

What do you think? May be we should try this form of chess on aspie chess place.

SOK
Raven
Raven

Joined: 26 Jun 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 124
Location: England

27 Jun 2005, 4:06 pm

That would be a rather odd game of chess.

TheBladeRoden
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,208
Location: Wisconsin

27 Jun 2005, 4:26 pm

Would this king be made of food, or the regular chess piece material?

Roman
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Mar 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,298

27 Jun 2005, 6:58 pm

SOK wrote:

That would be a rather odd game of chess.

No it won't be odd. On the contrary it would be MORE LOGICAL. If the purpose of the game is to eat a king (which is what I WANT the game to be)... thats simple enough. But if the point is to simply put a king in a certain position... it becomes less logical... and when in some other position, equally lethal, it is actually a DRAW, it getts plain odd.

Roman
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Mar 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,298

27 Jun 2005, 8:13 pm

TheBladeRoden wrote:

Would this king be made of food, or the regular chess piece material?

In the context of chess, the word "eat" is used in a way that it means "beat". When the figure A "eats" figure B it is when figure A steps on the square where figure B used to stay, while figure B is being taken off the desc.

Tim_p
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 511
Location: Alberta, Canada.

27 Jun 2005, 8:41 pm

In chess a checkmate means that there is no escape for the king, if the players were allowed another turn the king would be captured.

Roman
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Mar 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,298

27 Jun 2005, 8:46 pm

Tim_p wrote:

In chess a checkmate means that there is no escape for the king, if the players were allowed another turn the king would be captured.

1)If there is no escape for a queen, she isn't captured UNLESS the other person acutally notices. I want to be consistant and say that king isn't captured either unless the other person notices it. So if the to-be-loser is lucky enough for his opponent to be asleep, then he can have a check mate and still the game will continue

2)Even if no one is asleep, I would still find it more logical to actually play this one more turn and actually caputure the king. Mathematically rigurous definition of "no escape" would take a page. On the other hand mathematically rigurous definition of "captured" only takes one sentence. So the game would be more BEAUTIFUL if we are to wait for a king to be captured.

TheWhale
Sea Gull

Joined: 28 Feb 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 204

30 Jun 2005, 6:48 am

How about a seven by seven board with no kings? This is the brand of chess we invented in DENSA, the low IQ society. It was to make fun of the pretentious fools in Mensa.

Jerry Newport

Freyawolf
Tufted Titmouse

Joined: 2 Jul 2005
Gender: Female
Posts: 28
Location: The forest

03 Jul 2005, 7:58 pm

I am so confused @_@

alex
Developer

Joined: 13 Jun 2004
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,216
Location: Beverly Hills, CA

03 Jul 2005, 8:04 pm

TheWhale wrote:

How about a seven by seven board with no kings? This is the brand of chess we invented in DENSA, the low IQ society. It was to make fun of the pretentious fools in Mensa.

Jerry Newport

Haha, thats hilarious.

_________________
I'm Alex Plank, the founder of Wrong Planet. Follow me (Alex Plank) on Blue Sky: https://bsky.app/profile/alexplank.bsky.social

Dissenter
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker

Joined: 23 Jun 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 65
Location: UK

03 Jul 2005, 8:07 pm

Roman wrote:

1)You have to actually EAT a king of your opponent in order to win.

Swallow it? Weird.

Edit: read what Roman said a little down the thread. I thought it was some strange test of endurance or something, it would certainly liven chess up.

Roman
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Mar 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,298

03 Jul 2005, 9:29 pm

Freyawolf wrote:

I am so confused @_@

What are you confused about? All I am trying to do is make chess more natural. In chess as we know it, you are to do a check mate. In my chess, you are to actually eat a king. In chess as we know it stalemate is a draw. In my chess stalemate only leads to the next move when one of the kings is eaten and one party wins, the other loses.

Astarael
Veteran
Veteran