We still haven't decided what board to use or where to place the witch. How about starting position below (mentioned previously but not sure if you agree).
I like your witch idea and her moving ability. She is very agile! (Moves like Q + N + jumps orthogonally and diagonally 2 squares). So I gave her a broom.
The diagram below is an example of the moving ability of the witch (green is white witch, blue is black witch) just to make sure we understand the same.
Is all this OK?
Alright, great! I started a new thread for the game (here). The witches are on opposite files (b and I) so I also changed the position of black K and Q so they are on opposite files too (queen faces king, king faces queen). This is a slight adjustment compared to normal chess. I'll see you at the other thread.
@BattleChessGN18, I thought I should provide a few examples to clarify:
"Two pieces that move like rooks, but when and as long as those two pieces ‘see’ each other as rook they also have the knight’s move."
For example, if the rooks in this position would have this property, Rhxc3 would give check to the black king. Qxc3 would then undo the check but at the cost of the queen.
"Two pieces that move like knights, but as soon as only one of them is captured the other will also get the queen’s move on top of that."
For example, if the knights in this position would have this property, the black king would already be mated. Since Bxf7 would put the black king in check from the remaining knight.
That's a nice and productive clarification, EvertB. Thank you.
Something like that does sound rather cool. Incrementing powers due to special conditions as capture or specific positions is something I haven't quite used yet, so there's quite some originality there.
Now, I already know you're talking about an alternative variant with Vickalan, but regarding these two pieces which you and I are conversing about, when, where and how would they appear on the board? Are there certain conditions for their appearance? Do they start at the beginning of the game? Where would they, and what is the dimension of the board? etc.
I haven't worked out any other details, but I certainly would give such pairs of pieces their own names and shapes.
Ah! We have another super-pawn in the class of superpawns; one that is, in fact, more complicated but no less intriguing than mine. =)
Very interesting piece. It does look like something I would like to try.
Also, the board itself looks very interesting. May I ask what goes on the 1st and 8th rank?
This topic is reserved for ideas going beyond this-piece-moves-like-this-and-captures-like-this rules. Position-dependencies, side-effects and so on. So reviewing Musketeercrap here would be off-topic. Just kindly mentioning it.
This topic is reserved for ideas going beyond this-piece-moves-like-this-and-captures-like-this rules. Position-dependencies, side-effects and so on. So reviewing Musketeercrap here would be off-topic. Just kindly mentioning it.
What made you think this is "crap"? This thread's very purpose is to brainstorm ideas for some intriguing pieces. Maybe this is something you yourself would like to use for your variant, seeing that you haven't fully come up with the details for it yet. =)
I think MusketeerChess gets picked on enough in this forum by multiple members. I feel we should make him with his innovations feel more welcomed.
Oh shoot! I'm just saying. We're going to clash!
I made a very similar design for the Wizard piece (Chess variant: Omega Chess, invented by Dan McDonald). It's a planet head with rings at a tilted angle.
O.o
Did you want to see it?
Also, who crafted your piece?
This topic is reserved for ideas going beyond this-piece-moves-like-this-and-captures-like-this rules. Position-dependencies, side-effects and so on. So reviewing Musketeercrap here would be off-topic. Just kindly mentioning it.
What made you think this is "crap"? This thread's very purpose is to brainstorm ideas for some intriguing pieces. Maybe this is something you yourself would like to use for your variant, seeing that you haven't fully come up with the details for it yet. =)
I think MusketeerChess gets picked on enough in this forum by multiple members. I feel we should make him with his innovations feel more welcomed.
On the other hand, I do realize that Musketeer does have a very bad habbit of not keeping his own innovations and materials to his own threads: he has had a history of irritating members by going to their threads and spreading off-topic content on his own variant.
Great as his stuff is, it would be nice if he didn't go into every chess variant topic just to talk about musketeer chess. In his attempt to promote his variant (which does have some potential), he's actually turning people away from wanting to know about it.
That's what you said before.
Indeed, I called it 'crap' because of that aspect, not because I really had any particular opinion about his stuff.
Anyone tried the "pao"(or cannon) in Chinese Chess yet? It moves like a rook and captures by jumping over another piece like in checkers but like a checkers rook(if there was one)
That's what you said before.
https://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess960-chess-variants/new-variants-using-common-pieces-amongst-them?page=3
Indeed, I called it 'crap' because of that aspect, not because I really had any particular opinion about his stuff.
Point-taken.
And yes, this thread!... Again.
Gosh, just thinking about Ace569er and his long wall of posts full of nonsense that no one actually cares to read is enough to fill my nightly entertainment away from the TV. And then, look at his 100+ pieces, which he put very little thought into; and just threw onto a large board.
Where is he with all of his pieces and variants now, I wonder. Seriously, did he decide to just throw them away, looking for a fight elsewhere?
~~~~
At any rate, how exactly did you find this thread and my replies to it in the tall endless pile of threads that I've responded to? And just happened to know there was something contained within to support your point?
Anyone tried the "pao"(or cannon) in Chinese Chess yet? It moves like a rook and captures by jumping over another piece like in checkers but like a checkers rook(if there was one)
I know the 炮/砲 anywhere.
On the other hand, this thread was meant for the invention of new pieces; sadly, this one was already done hundreds of years ago.
The builder.
Alle friendly pieces adjacent to the same friendly builder inherit each other's movement/capture capabilities, without special functions. From the position above, the knight and rook now both have R+N movement capabilities, until one of them is no longer adjacent to that builder.
Town idiot! We should play another game with a builder and a town idiot. If we can manage.
Town idiot! We should play another game with a builder and a town idiot. If we can manage.
OK, good idea (Builder and Town Idiot). We can play that next, or some version of it.
I don't want him (town idiot) to change positions on every move. I'd like him to remain in place for awhile so that he can be used sometimes as a predictable shield. Maybe he doesn't move when a pawn moves, and maybe he only moves orthogonally (when possible). I'll try to make sure some rules are devised before our next game.
The third would make a great witch, I'm ready if you are.