DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
The Chess Variant Forum
HTML https://chessvariantforum.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Variant Theory
*****************************************************
#Post#: 667--------------------------------------------------
What Defines a Chess Variant?
By: ubersketch Date: March 27, 2018, 7:31 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
So I've been asking this question for a long time now. What
defines a chess variant?
I've put down two basic rules:
1. Gridded game
2. Capturing and/or movement
However, I feel this is either too exclusive or too inclusive.
What do you people think?
#Post#: 670--------------------------------------------------
Re: What Defines a Chess Variant?
By: HGMuller Date: March 28, 2018, 2:19 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Defining characteristics of a chess variant are usually
considered to be:
[list type=decimal]
[li]A 'board' with a regular pattern of discrete 'cells', which
each can be occupied by a 'piece'.[/li]
[li]There is no hidden information[/li]
[li]Many different piece types.[/li]
[li]During a 'turn' one piece can be moved from one cell to
another.[/li]
[li]The players can decide freely on their moves, i.e. without
any input from factors determined by chance (such as cards or
dice).[/li]
[li]Each piece type has its own characteristic set of moves,
independent of its location on the board.[/li]
[li]Pieces can be captured by 'replacement', i.e. by moving to
the square they were on, and taking their place.[/li]
[li]One of the pieces is 'royal', meaning that its capture ends
the game.[/li]
[/list]
There can be slight violations of any of these rules without
immediately disqualifying a game as a chess variant, (e.g.
castling violates the one-piece-per-turn rule, and e.p. capture
the replacement capture rule, even in orthodox Chess, and the
confinement of certain pieces to certain zones violates move
uniformity in Xiangqi). But there should not be too many
violations, and the more there are, the closer it has to be to a
very popular 'standard' variant in other respects. For instance,
Checkers, Ultima, Arimaa, Einstein Würfelt Nicht or Clobber
cannot be considered Chess variants.
#Post#: 674--------------------------------------------------
Re: What Defines a Chess Variant?
By: John_Lewis Date: March 28, 2018, 12:10 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
My definition of Chess Variant is a game where a working
knowledge of Chess gives you the majority of the rules required
to play the game.
In other words, you can describe the game as "Chess, except..."
The percentage of rules that get over written or changes will
vary and the number of additional rules will also vary. However
the casual observer of the game state might assume the players
are playing chess or at least recognize chess elements. In this
case just having an 8x8 board isn't enough to be a Chess
Variant, IMO.
I'd have to ponder a bit longer than I have time for now to
figure out what percentage of rules in modern Chess would need
to be replaced before the resulting game was no longer, IMO, a
Chess variant. There are certainly games where the only apparent
similarity is a board with spaces and pieces, which the goal
being the capture of a "royal" piece...
#Post#: 678--------------------------------------------------
Re: What Defines a Chess Variant?
By: Asher Hurowitz Date: March 29, 2018, 4:09 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
That's a really interesting and difficult question. What even is
our hobby? :)
I heard somewhere that the Knight move defines a chess variant,
but that isn't my personal opinion, just thought I would share
that (at the very least I would add the royal piece rule).
#Post#: 685--------------------------------------------------
Re: What Defines a Chess Variant?
By: John_Lewis Date: March 30, 2018, 2:04 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Asher Hurowitz link=topic=102.msg678#msg678
date=1522357775]
That's a really interesting and difficult question. What even is
our hobby? :)
I heard somewhere that the Knight move defines a chess variant,
but that isn't my persona opinion, just thought I would share
that (at the very least I would add the royal piece rule).
[/quote]
Knightless Chess: A chess variant made just to prove a point.
• All the rules of normal chess apply, but you replace all the
Knights with Bishops (so you will start with four Bishops for
each player).
• Obviously you can't promote to a Knight, because the Knight
piece is now a Bishop.
fin.
#Post#: 686--------------------------------------------------
Re: What Defines a Chess Variant?
By: HGMuller Date: March 30, 2018, 2:33 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Chu Shogi doesn't have any Knights.
#Post#: 692--------------------------------------------------
Re: What Defines a Chess Variant?
By: ubersketch Date: March 30, 2018, 7:15 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=HGMuller link=topic=102.msg670#msg670
date=1522221586]
Defining characteristics of a chess variant are usually
considered to be:
[list type=decimal]
[li]A 'board' with a regular pattern of discrete 'cells', which
each can be occupied by a 'piece'.[/li]
[li]There is no hidden information[/li]
[li]Many different piece types.[/li]
[li]During a 'turn' one piece can be moved from one cell to
another.[/li]
[li]The players can decide freely on their moves, i.e. without
any input from factors determined by chance (such as cards or
dice).[/li]
[li]Each piece type has its own characteristic set of moves,
independent of its location on the board.[/li]
[li]Pieces can be captured by 'replacement', i.e. by moving to
the square they were on, and taking their place.[/li]
[li]One of the pieces is 'royal', meaning that its capture ends
the game.[/li]
[/list]
There can be slight violations of any of these rules without
immediately disqualifying a game as a chess variant, (e.g.
castling violates the one-piece-per-turn rule, and e.p. capture
the replacement capture rule, even in orthodox Chess, and the
confinement of certain pieces to certain zones violates move
uniformity in Xiangqi). But there should not be too many
violations, and the more there are, the closer it has to be to a
very popular 'standard' variant in other respects. For instance,
Checkers, Ultima, Arimaa, Einstein Würfelt Nicht or Clobber
cannot be considered Chess variants.
[/quote]
I do not allow slight violations because what is slight and what
is not is subjective.
"A 'board' with a regular pattern of discrete 'cells', which
each can be occupied by a 'piece'." This is a perfectly normal
rule.
"There is no hidden information." Kriegspiel is a Chess Variant.
"Many different piece types." This is entirely subjective unless
you mean there has to be more than one piece type. Also, I
should mention, this rule seems too inelegant and too
unmathematical.
"During a 'turn' one piece can be moved from one cell to
another." Immobilization Chess - Chess but every time a Queen is
moved, the other player cannot move for the next turn.
"The players can decide freely on their moves, i.e. without any
input from factors determined by chance (such as cards or
dice)." Chaturanga (and maybe some other early variants) is
played with dice.
"Each piece type has its own characteristic set of moves,
independent of its location on the board." The Querquisite is a
piece which violates this rule.
"Pieces can be captured by 'replacement', i.e. by moving to the
square they were on, and taking their place." Igui, burning, and
general moves in shogi variants violate this rule.
"One of the pieces is 'royal', meaning that its capture ends the
game." Bombalot violates this rule.
I like inclusivity so I will allow even the most unchesslike of
variants like Checkers and Clobber.
#Post#: 699--------------------------------------------------
Re: What Defines a Chess Variant?
By: Martin0 Date: March 31, 2018, 1:28 am
---------------------------------------------------------
From wikipedia:
A chess variant (or unorthodox chess) is a game "related to,
derived from, or inspired by chess".[2] The difference from
chess might include one or more of the following:
different rules for capture, move order, game objective, etc.;
addition, substitution, or removal of pieces in standard chess
(non-standard pieces are known as fairy pieces);
different chessboard (larger or smaller, non-square board shape,
or different intra-board cell shapes such as hexagons).
References:
Pritchard, D. B.
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Pritchard_(chess_player)<br
/>(1994). The Encyclopedia of Chess Variants. Games & Puzzles
Publications. ISBN
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Standard_Book_Number<br
/>0-9524142-0-1
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/978-0-9555168-0-1.
2: Pritchard (1994)
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_chess_variants#CITEREFPritchard1994,<br
/>p. vii
#Post#: 700--------------------------------------------------
Re: What Defines a Chess Variant?
By: Martin0 Date: March 31, 2018, 1:49 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=HGMuller link=topic=102.msg670#msg670
date=1522221586]
Defining characteristics of a chess variant are usually
considered to be:
[list type=decimal]
[li]A 'board' with a regular pattern of discrete 'cells', which
each can be occupied by a 'piece'.[/li]
[li]There is no hidden information[/li]
[li]Many different piece types.[/li]
[li]During a 'turn' one piece can be moved from one cell to
another.[/li]
[li]The players can decide freely on their moves, i.e. without
any input from factors determined by chance (such as cards or
dice).[/li]
[li]Each piece type has its own characteristic set of moves,
independent of its location on the board.[/li]
[li]Pieces can be captured by 'replacement', i.e. by moving to
the square they were on, and taking their place.[/li]
[li]One of the pieces is 'royal', meaning that its capture ends
the game.[/li]
[/list]
There can be slight violations of any of these rules without
immediately disqualifying a game as a chess variant, (e.g.
castling violates the one-piece-per-turn rule, and e.p. capture
the replacement capture rule, even in orthodox Chess, and the
confinement of certain pieces to certain zones violates move
uniformity in Xiangqi). But there should not be too many
violations, and the more there are, the closer it has to be to a
very popular 'standard' variant in other respects. For instance,
Checkers, Ultima, Arimaa, Einstein Würfelt Nicht or Clobber
cannot be considered Chess variants.
[/quote]
Just for fun, let's look at how my event chess variant holds up
to these requirements. I know you said they were not strict, but
still. My event chess variant is based on starting a normal game
and then a player can start an event. The event is chosen
randomly from over 100 events and will make some rule changes
(and some will break these things).
1: There is an event that allows pieces to stand on
intersections between squares. Pieces can still stand on squares
though, so I think I passed
2: Some events have hidden information.
3: Passed!
4: Some events allow several moves in a turn
5: Which event is started is pure chance by dice roll, although
when a player chooses to start an event is optional. That is the
only violation to this though.
6: Location of a piece sometimes matters to how they move
7: Captures are sometimes made in a different way
8: Some events makes no piece royal.
Well, I passed 2/8 and I still consider it a chess variant :)
I'm not overly interested if people think my variant passes what
others consider necessary to be a chess variant or not. I can
still have equally fun playing it.
#Post#: 701--------------------------------------------------
Re: What Defines a Chess Variant?
By: HGMuller Date: March 31, 2018, 6:22 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=ubersketch link=topic=102.msg692#msg692
date=1522455347]I do not allow slight violations because what is
slight and what is not is subjective.
...
I like inclusivity so I will allow even the most unchesslike of
variants like Checkers and Clobber.
[/quote]
The problem of that approach is that it will require you to
consider almost every game a chess variant to avoid excluding
some games that obviously are chess variants, so that the
concept becomes completely useless. There is no demand for a new
synonym for 'game'.
What kind of violations are acceptable and which not indeed is
subjective, but I think this is unavoidable when you are dealing
with a continuous spectrum of possibilities. Any exact bound
would be arbitrary, which IMO is just as bad as being
subjective. It would be far more useful to acknowledge that
'chessiness' is a continuous measure, and not an all-or-nothing
quantity. IMO games like Checkers or Clobber do not have a
chessiness of more than 5%, and it would not be very useful to
consider games with such a low resemblance to Chess as chess
variants.
*****************************************************
DIR Next Page