The Priest. It moves like a bishop, but it can only capture pawns (doesn't matter which team, pawns from his own team are fair game for the Priest). The US is weird, they call it "the republican".
I'd go with a more recent classic from Age of Empires, the monk and its "wololo" ability to convert enemies to become your unit. To keep it balanced, maybe it should only be able to convert certain pieces and taking more than 2 turns to complete its conversion as to give the opponent a chance to counter its special move.
::: spoiler EDIT: Totally off topic,but..
I just found out that if you put an evoker in minecraft next to a blue sheep, it'll do the wololo sound and convert it to a red sheep.
:::
The Schemer, moves like a King, but attacks like a Queen. That way it only moves around the board slowly, until it can strike. Escape is tricky as it can't move fast when not attacking, so it needs to enlist the support of other pieces to cover it's moves.
It should start in place of the King's bishop, whispering intreague in his ear.
That's the idea. Powerwise I figure it falls below the queen, but still has the potential to suddenly attack across the board. The downside being, it's then potentially quite vulnerable as it can only move one square at a time to get away, unless it can attack again.
The Landlord: any square it touches becomes blocked and can no longer be used in the match. It can start from any square and then move to any square adjacent to any square in its domain.
Bureaucrat special move: Red Tape (translates to En Passan't) - When an adjacent piece captures another adjacent piece, there are forms to fill out and reports to write. The capturing piece cannot move next turn.
I get what you mean, but I think bureaucracy is an inherently negative term.
I'd say policy and legislation can be good. Bureaucracy is policy that overcomplicates things.
Of course, what people call bureaucracy entirely depends on their incentives. For a CEO anything that makes it harder for him to increase profits (like privacy laws) would be bureaucracy.
Not always. If you really need to keep track of several things, then it's a necessity. The real question is whether some things actually need to be tracked.
The thing is that a lot of bureaucracy feels like it's been weaponized in order to piss off people - I nearly didn't get my current job because of that, I was asked for my PIS/PASEP number (Brazilian thing), but the bank didn't have the means to print a whole ass official document stating that my number was whatever, I was literally given a photo of the manager's screen checking their system, showing my data and said number. When I went to give my documents to my new employer, they looked at the number without any "official" paper and were like "no, this is invalid".
Nope. Bureaucracy is how you keep a society functioning. There’s nothing inherent in it that makes it bad or inflexible. That’s just poorly implemented bureaucracy.
I want bureaucracy enforcement by smart contract sitting on a public ledger hosted by each individual that verify each other through critical mass making changes only possible by votes.
I wish there was a system for democracy that isn’t relying on human representatives but instead runs automatically through a network that everyone can participate in. In this system, rules and laws wouldn’t be enforced by politicians or government officials—they would be enforced by computer programs called smart contracts. These programs automatically make sure that everyone follows the rules and that nothing can be changed without the proper approval.
Every person in the network would have their own copy of the system running on their device. These copies constantly check each other to make sure no one is cheating or trying to change the rules secretly. If someone tries to break the rules, the network immediately notices and prevents it.
When it comes to changing the rules, nothing happens unless a majority of the people in the network vote in favor. This means that every citizen has a direct say in decisions, instead of relying on representatives who might have their own interests. Every vote and decision is permanently recorded in a transparent, public ledger, so there is no way to tamper with the results.
Applied to an entire democracy, this system could replace elections, legislation, and even enforcement. Policies, budgets, and laws could be proposed, debated, and voted on directly by the people. The system would enforce the outcomes automatically, ensuring fairness, transparency, and accountability at every step. In essence, it would create a digital democracy where power truly belongs to the citizens, not to politicians or bureaucrats.
Would Vogons even like Chess, or any game that didn't involve smashing something to bits and eating it?
I imagine to get a Vogon to play Chess, you would have to get a specially requested form signed in triplicate across 12 different divisions of the Chess Department (A sub-department of the Entertainment and Leisure Department, a department that only one middle manager knows about, and he's on Annual Leave today), one for each type of piece for the game, and again for each colour. After a period of 18 months they will maybe approve your request for the forms you need to fill in to request a game of Chess with one specific Vogon, who will then be asked to fill in another form (also signed in triplicate) to accept the challenge.
By the time you get to actually sitting down to start the chess match, you realise you didn't mention on the form who was going to go first, so you have to pack everything up and start the process all over again!
While still standing, can force any non-pawn, non-oligarch piece on the opposite side to preform one move on their choice per turn.
The Landlord
Can claim any spot on the board as their own displacing the existing piece there and forcing it to move. If the piece has no viable move, they are just culled.
Both of these are waaaaaay to strong. Landlord just "culls" the Queen first turn. Or why not just the king?
Oligarch may also may just end in repeated moves. White uses oligarch to move black piece to bad position. Black moves same piece to good position again. One round wasted without any change to board.
Also, chess is based on the premise that you have to move a piece every turn and if you can't, the game is a draw. Both of your pieces work by not moving.
Make board 10x10 add two pawns, and add a prince and princess.
Cross between king/knight/pawn and queen/pawn.
Prince moves like knight but only into an unoccupied square, takes like a king, but only moves forward like a pawn, can move back one square when taking.
Princess moves like a queen but only forward, like a pawn.
I like this idea, think if we can already have the king switch with the rook, maybe a similar mechanic with the princess sort of summoning the queen to blast everyone or vice versa
Because they do have power over you if you are beholden to them and it's such a pain in the ass to sue to get what should be lawfully given to you, like benefits, unemployment etc. that a lot of the time they get away with doing a terrible job leaving vulnerable people stranded. Add to this that a lot of the poor, foreigners or simply overworked don't know how to sue or don't have the capacity to on top of all the other things they have going on at the same time to deal with all the bullshit bureaucrat throw their way and yeah I get why a lot of them are hated.
Once again, they are paid to implement policy put in place by their political masters. They don't any have room to maneuver.
Don't like the policy, sure, go after the people who arranged it. It's like blowing up at a checkout chick at Walmart because management stopped sticking your favourite buttplug.
They have plenty of room to maneuver, like actually. My wife had her disability benefits slashed by one idiot so we had to sue otherwise we would have had really big financial trouble. Turns out she wasn't even getting all that was her due before the slashing. It's all interpretation of law, that's needlessly complex to give that wiggle room since bureaucrats aren't lawyers some will interpret it this way, some another way and most people aren't going to sue over 50 bucks a month extra when there is so much other stuff you need to keep track of. Because maybe you aren't even sure if you are correct assuming that's your right, because bureaucrats are notoriously dismissive, belittling and condescending and because going to court is a daunting task and maybe you don't even have the resources to do that because it costs money, it costs time, it costs energy that has to come out of some other aspects of the claimants life. And if you don't have enough of any one of the three they get away with it. Not to mention most of the time people don't even know their rights, so a right wing bureaucrat can in reality do quite some harm because they're not getting sued. Also if they are, it's not them personally but the department and they can just claim to have misunderstood some law or directive or whatever and carry on with their work (albeit more stealthily). This happens so often, especially with foreigners, that one can safely assume that almost every non-native speaker had their rights violated by some bureaucrat at some point and did nothing about it. ACAB includes bureaucrats. ACAB includes every representative of a bourgeois state.
I hear what you are saying, but why is the legalisation so restrictive that the bureaucracy has the ability to do this? It's unnecessary, but it's also deliberate.
Change the party that institutionalizes this kind of cruality and the bureaucracy will change with it. How come we don't attack the people who allow that kind of dehumanising behaviour?
Also, not every Civil Servant is like that, so drop the board brush.
The spy. It takes the form of one of your pawns but only you know which pawn is the spy.
If the spy kills a piece the way a regular pawn does, it ceases being a spy and reverts to bring a regular pawn.
If you position the spy on one side of an enemy piece with another of your pawns on the other side of it, you can recruit the piece as a pawn on your side (regardless of what class it was)
Kings and Queens are immune to spies.
When a spy is killed, any pieces it recruited are reverted to enemy pawns.
Actually a great modernization of the game, the two sides want to wage war or battle over the crown but politics prevents it unless they deal with politicians first.
Emergency teleporter.
Once, when the king is in check and hasn't moved from its initial square, the Emergency teleporter may swap positions with the king. Cannot otherwise move.
(Unclear what starting position it should have. Maybe b or e 2/7? Maybe players pick in secret before game starts?)
Why? Is it because you were forced to use a teleporter? How many times do we have to tell you that the original Steve Dice's absence gives your life meaning? Why we can barely even remember how his eyes were just a little brighter than yours.
Oh it's from a game or something isn't it. Never mind.
A Freaky Friday piece that can swap with a non-king or pawn piece of the same color still on the board, as long as neither can be captured or can take another piece before or immediately following the swap. Moves and captures like a king.
I think the "neither can take another piece following the swap" is to restrictive. After the swap it is not your turn anymore anyway and it would basically make it impossible to swap with a queen or rook/bishop. They can capture something for most parts of the game. Just usually a protected piece.
Yeah, I also thinks it helps as a training piece because it forces players to think past the next move. There's virtually no move of opportunity that you can make with it. If you're going to use it all, you need to think a minimum of two moves ahead.
My take: Just add time and different scenery.
Some pieces couldn't move at night. Some could only move on grass land, some other only within woods or rocky mountains. And then there is a catapult where you can shoot pieces randomly back on the board.
Has anyone ever made something like a uh, sort of stamina/mana system for chess?
Like what I mean is, both players start with say 10 move/logistics points.
Different pieces cost different amounts of move/logistics points to move, and then uh, your move point pool replenishes by some amount on your next turn, maybe by some calculation of getting back more points the less units you have on the board.
You could also make that more nuts by allowing multiple units to be move in one player turn, with some kind of climbing cost penalty for each move after the first.
So you could blitz, but then basically be stunlocked for your next turn.
Why a stamina pool? Why not individual unit stamina? If a 6/6-stamina bishop flies 6 tiles across the board in a single turn, then it can't move until the next turn; it gradually regains its own energy by +2 spaces/turn, back up to 6.
You could certainly do that digitally no prob, but for an actual tabletop game... i dunno, feels too sacreligious to me to just straight up turn chess into a tactics combat game, lol.
I like the idea of a simple rule set that is easy enough to keep track of, but also allows a wide variety of possible strategies within it.
I think keeping the ... stamina pool or whatever, shared and common to the player, well it simplifies an ongoing irl game's tabulation as compared to keeping track of all units, and its also more like...
You are the commander, and you are managing the logistics of a whole army.
This is why I couldn't settle on the terminology... maybe 'command points' would be a better way to phrase it.
Edit: for those who don't want to click youtube, the person designs a chess board to play real-time chess. each piece has a movement cooldown enforced by the board which uses magnets to restrict you from moving pieces while they are on cooldown.
Maybe the Capablanca's idea could be a good solucion to avoid draws in classical chess, a piece caoabke to make a checkmate by itself, I mean, it only make sense for high level games, fortunately with chess 960 (ramdom chess) the opportunity of innovation and emotion is there.
I swear I once read about a variant called The Jack with a new piece called a Jack. Can't find anything online about it and don't remember what it did.
If in any direction it has no more than one allied piece directly in front of it (cover), then at least (two? three?) unoccupied spaces between that ally and an enemy piece, it can take aim at an enemy piece.
The next turn, if those conditions are still true, it can fire, capturing the target piece.
An enemy piece adjacent to the target piece that could move into the line of fire can be sacrificed to take the bullet instead, though.
98 Comments
yakko@feddit.uk · 75 pts · 297d
I want a piece that can push other pieces, friendly or not
Telodzrum@lemmy.world · 28 pts · 297d
Flagstaff@programming.dev · 9 pts · 297d
Unending has a bunch of piece-pushing (and you must get enemies to push each other for you to survive)!
sniggleboots@europe.pub · 55 pts · 297d
duck chess
_Bit@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 297d
yep
Ziglin@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 296d
The duck is shared and can be moved every turn. The beaurocrat sounds like it exists on a side and requires a turn to move.
ByteJunk@lemmy.world · 40 pts · 297d
The Priest. It moves like a bishop, but it can only capture pawns (doesn't matter which team, pawns from his own team are fair game for the Priest). The US is weird, they call it "the republican".
Mycatiskai@lemmy.ca · 7 pts · 296d
Call it the Pedo not the Priest. Same function though.
ouRKaoS@lemmy.today · 15 pts · 296d
ZoteTheMighty@lemmy.zip · 4 pts · 296d
Can it perform an il vaticano with a normal bishop?
i_love_FFT@jlai.lu · 4 pts · 296d
Yes, and normal bishops don't consider it an ennemy when it eats pawns of the same color
RedSnt@feddit.dk · 28 pts · 297d
I'd go with a more recent classic from Age of Empires, the monk and its "wololo" ability to convert enemies to become your unit. To keep it balanced, maybe it should only be able to convert certain pieces and taking more than 2 turns to complete its conversion as to give the opponent a chance to counter its special move.
::: spoiler EDIT: Totally off topic,but..
I just found out that if you put an evoker in minecraft next to a blue sheep, it'll do the wololo sound and convert it to a red sheep. :::
Artisian@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 297d
Smiling at the bonus content in this post.
notabot@piefed.social · 28 pts · 297d
The Schemer, moves like a King, but attacks like a Queen. That way it only moves around the board slowly, until it can strike. Escape is tricky as it can't move fast when not attacking, so it needs to enlist the support of other pieces to cover it's moves.
It should start in place of the King's bishop, whispering intreague in his ear.
RedFrank24@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 296d
So for example: A Knight is 5 spaces away. The Schemer can move 5 spaces to take it, but if it doesn't, it can only move 1 space?
notabot@piefed.social · 4 pts · 296d
That's the idea. Powerwise I figure it falls below the queen, but still has the potential to suddenly attack across the board. The downside being, it's then potentially quite vulnerable as it can only move one square at a time to get away, unless it can attack again.
sem@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 2 pts · 296d
A glass cannon for sure. I love it!
qevlarr@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 297d
laserm@lemmy.world · 22 pts · 297d
Isn't that just the duck mode on chess.com?
Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 297d
Yup.
DoomProphet@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 2 pts · 296d
Which is fun but it needs more player.
Mac@mander.xyz · 21 pts · 297d
The Landlord: any square it touches becomes blocked and can no longer be used in the match. It can start from any square and then move to any square adjacent to any square in its domain.
mrgoosmoos@lemmy.ca · 17 pts · 297d
it starts out only being able to move every x turns, but as it gains squares, it speeds up
Mac@mander.xyz · 6 pts · 297d
Exponentially!
undergroundoverground@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 296d
"No, you're doing it wrong"
i_love_FFT@jlai.lu · 2 pts · 296d
The toilet's always leaking, but it's because you're not flushing correctly.
djsoren19@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 18 pts · 297d
There was a chess roguelike I can't remember the name of that actually had a piece like this, except it was a big duck. It was very, very powerful.
OneWomanCreamTeam@sh.itjust.works · 10 pts · 297d
Duck chess is honestly a pretty fun variant.
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 297d
oh damn i forgot about that chess balatro knockoff.
SmackemWittadic@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 297d
Comparison is the thief of joy my dude! It's best to let people be creative and have similar concepts without calling their work knockoffs
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 297d
that's not how that saying works
Spankerton@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 297d
Passant?
neidu3@sh.itjust.works · 15 pts · 297d
Bureaucrat special move: Red Tape (translates to En Passan't) - When an adjacent piece captures another adjacent piece, there are forms to fill out and reports to write. The capturing piece cannot move next turn.
nathanjent@programming.dev · 4 pts · 297d
Add an executive piece to cut through the red tape and then you can call it, "Rook Paper Scissors" chess
chiliedogg@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 297d
And the counter can be "legislative action" that changes the beaurocrat's authority in future moves at the cost of a pawn.
buttnugget@lemmy.world · 13 pts · 296d
Bureaucracy is good and this is stupid.
anon@lemmy.sdf.org · 7 pts · 296d
I get what you mean, but I think bureaucracy is an inherently negative term.
I'd say policy and legislation can be good. Bureaucracy is policy that overcomplicates things.
Of course, what people call bureaucracy entirely depends on their incentives. For a CEO anything that makes it harder for him to increase profits (like privacy laws) would be bureaucracy.
ICastFist@programming.dev · 3 pts · 296d
Not always. If you really need to keep track of several things, then it's a necessity. The real question is whether some things actually need to be tracked.
The thing is that a lot of bureaucracy feels like it's been weaponized in order to piss off people - I nearly didn't get my current job because of that, I was asked for my PIS/PASEP number (Brazilian thing), but the bank didn't have the means to print a whole ass official document stating that my number was whatever, I was literally given a photo of the manager's screen checking their system, showing my data and said number. When I went to give my documents to my new employer, they looked at the number without any "official" paper and were like "no, this is invalid".
cooligula@sh.itjust.works · -7 pts · 296d
Hi, excuse me, but it looks like you dropped this: /s
buttnugget@lemmy.world · 13 pts · 296d
Nope. Bureaucracy is how you keep a society functioning. There’s nothing inherent in it that makes it bad or inflexible. That’s just poorly implemented bureaucracy.
Petter1@discuss.tchncs.de · 1 pts · 293d
I want bureaucracy enforcement by smart contract sitting on a public ledger hosted by each individual that verify each other through critical mass making changes only possible by votes.
Petter1@discuss.tchncs.de · 1 pts · 293d
Reworded using AI:
I wish there was a system for democracy that isn’t relying on human representatives but instead runs automatically through a network that everyone can participate in. In this system, rules and laws wouldn’t be enforced by politicians or government officials—they would be enforced by computer programs called smart contracts. These programs automatically make sure that everyone follows the rules and that nothing can be changed without the proper approval.
Every person in the network would have their own copy of the system running on their device. These copies constantly check each other to make sure no one is cheating or trying to change the rules secretly. If someone tries to break the rules, the network immediately notices and prevents it.
When it comes to changing the rules, nothing happens unless a majority of the people in the network vote in favor. This means that every citizen has a direct say in decisions, instead of relying on representatives who might have their own interests. Every vote and decision is permanently recorded in a transparent, public ledger, so there is no way to tamper with the results.
Applied to an entire democracy, this system could replace elections, legislation, and even enforcement. Policies, budgets, and laws could be proposed, debated, and voted on directly by the people. The system would enforce the outcomes automatically, ensuring fairness, transparency, and accountability at every step. In essence, it would create a digital democracy where power truly belongs to the citizens, not to politicians or bureaucrats.
invertedspear@lemmy.zip · 12 pts · 297d
As written the bureaucrat would be useful in preventing stalemate, which isn’t accurate since bureaucrats cause stalemates.
Smeagol666@crazypeople.online · 12 pts · 297d
You can call it Vogon Chess.
Kolanaki@pawb.social · 7 pts · 297d
Oh freddled gruntbuggly,
Thy micturations are to me,
As plurdled gabbleblotchits. On a lurgid bee,
That mordiously hath blurted out,
Its earted jurtles, grumbling
Into a rancid festering confectious organ squealer.
Now the jurpling slayjid agrocrustles,
Are slurping hagrilly up the axlegrurts,
And living glupules frart and stipulate,
Like jowling meated liverslime,
Groop, I implore thee, my foonting turlingdromes,
And hooptiously drangle me,
With crinkly bindlewurdles.
Or else I shall rend thee in the gobberwarts with my blurglecruncheon,
See if I don't!
EffortlessEffluvium@lemmy.zip · 1 pts · 296d
My ears! My eyes!
Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 296d
Grab your towel.
RedFrank24@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 296d
Would Vogons even like Chess, or any game that didn't involve smashing something to bits and eating it?
I imagine to get a Vogon to play Chess, you would have to get a specially requested form signed in triplicate across 12 different divisions of the Chess Department (A sub-department of the Entertainment and Leisure Department, a department that only one middle manager knows about, and he's on Annual Leave today), one for each type of piece for the game, and again for each colour. After a period of 18 months they will maybe approve your request for the forms you need to fill in to request a game of Chess with one specific Vogon, who will then be asked to fill in another form (also signed in triplicate) to accept the challenge.
By the time you get to actually sitting down to start the chess match, you realise you didn't mention on the form who was going to go first, so you have to pack everything up and start the process all over again!
FordBeeblebrox@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 296d
You’d have a faster and livelier time playing 6 hour session of Monopoly with humans from this backwater planet
rumba@lemmy.zip · 11 pts · 297d
The Oligarch
While still standing, can force any non-pawn, non-oligarch piece on the opposite side to preform one move on their choice per turn.
The Landlord
Can claim any spot on the board as their own displacing the existing piece there and forcing it to move. If the piece has no viable move, they are just culled.
groet@feddit.org · 3 pts · 296d
Both of these are waaaaaay to strong. Landlord just "culls" the Queen first turn. Or why not just the king?
Oligarch may also may just end in repeated moves. White uses oligarch to move black piece to bad position. Black moves same piece to good position again. One round wasted without any change to board.
Also, chess is based on the premise that you have to move a piece every turn and if you can't, the game is a draw. Both of your pieces work by not moving.
ouRKaoS@lemmy.today · 10 pts · 296d
The Heir. Moves like a queen, but only captures as a Knight. Takes the place of the bishop of your choice at the beginning of the game.
absGeekNZ@lemmy.nz · 10 pts · 296d
If we are modding chess.
Make board 10x10 add two pawns, and add a prince and princess.
Cross between king/knight/pawn and queen/pawn.
Prince moves like knight but only into an unoccupied square, takes like a king, but only moves forward like a pawn, can move back one square when taking.
Princess moves like a queen but only forward, like a pawn.
FordBeeblebrox@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 296d
So..forward or diagonal but not sideways or backward? Interesting, does she take a crown at the end?
absGeekNZ@lemmy.nz · 5 pts · 296d
I think side ways is OK. No backwards.
Haven't thought it through too much, promotion would have to be play tested.
FordBeeblebrox@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 296d
I like this idea, think if we can already have the king switch with the rook, maybe a similar mechanic with the princess sort of summoning the queen to blast everyone or vice versa
slickgoat@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 296d
I never understood the hate on the civil service.
Their job is to implement policy that they never themselves enacted and even their political masters point at them and say, "huh, what can ya do?".
mathemachristian@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 5 pts · 296d
Because they do have power over you if you are beholden to them and it's such a pain in the ass to sue to get what should be lawfully given to you, like benefits, unemployment etc. that a lot of the time they get away with doing a terrible job leaving vulnerable people stranded. Add to this that a lot of the poor, foreigners or simply overworked don't know how to sue or don't have the capacity to on top of all the other things they have going on at the same time to deal with all the bullshit bureaucrat throw their way and yeah I get why a lot of them are hated.
Corridor8031@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 296d
mathemachristian@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 1 pts · 294d
They do harm. See my comment here: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/comment/17647887
Corridor8031@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 294d
slickgoat@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 294d
Once again, they are paid to implement policy put in place by their political masters. They don't any have room to maneuver.
Don't like the policy, sure, go after the people who arranged it. It's like blowing up at a checkout chick at Walmart because management stopped sticking your favourite buttplug.
mathemachristian@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 1 pts · 294d
They have plenty of room to maneuver, like actually. My wife had her disability benefits slashed by one idiot so we had to sue otherwise we would have had really big financial trouble. Turns out she wasn't even getting all that was her due before the slashing. It's all interpretation of law, that's needlessly complex to give that wiggle room since bureaucrats aren't lawyers some will interpret it this way, some another way and most people aren't going to sue over 50 bucks a month extra when there is so much other stuff you need to keep track of. Because maybe you aren't even sure if you are correct assuming that's your right, because bureaucrats are notoriously dismissive, belittling and condescending and because going to court is a daunting task and maybe you don't even have the resources to do that because it costs money, it costs time, it costs energy that has to come out of some other aspects of the claimants life. And if you don't have enough of any one of the three they get away with it. Not to mention most of the time people don't even know their rights, so a right wing bureaucrat can in reality do quite some harm because they're not getting sued. Also if they are, it's not them personally but the department and they can just claim to have misunderstood some law or directive or whatever and carry on with their work (albeit more stealthily). This happens so often, especially with foreigners, that one can safely assume that almost every non-native speaker had their rights violated by some bureaucrat at some point and did nothing about it. ACAB includes bureaucrats. ACAB includes every representative of a bourgeois state.
slickgoat@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 294d
I hear what you are saying, but why is the legalisation so restrictive that the bureaucracy has the ability to do this? It's unnecessary, but it's also deliberate.
Change the party that institutionalizes this kind of cruality and the bureaucracy will change with it. How come we don't attack the people who allow that kind of dehumanising behaviour?
Also, not every Civil Servant is like that, so drop the board brush.
jaaake@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 297d
Does it get in the way and slow things down, or does it offer protection to allies while they batttle the opposition?
Comrade_Spood@quokk.au · 8 pts · 297d
No but it can sacrifice 4 pawns to replace the king
Agent641@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 296d
The spy. It takes the form of one of your pawns but only you know which pawn is the spy.
If the spy kills a piece the way a regular pawn does, it ceases being a spy and reverts to bring a regular pawn.
If you position the spy on one side of an enemy piece with another of your pawns on the other side of it, you can recruit the piece as a pawn on your side (regardless of what class it was)
Kings and Queens are immune to spies.
When a spy is killed, any pieces it recruited are reverted to enemy pawns.
Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 296d
A similar variation is hidden queens
Valmond@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 297d
A Checker one, can only capture by jumping straight over another piece, yours included, cannot move otherwise.
Flagstaff@programming.dev · 5 pts · 297d
Why prevent it from moving without capturing? Why not just have exact checker rules, king-ing and all?
Valmond@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 297d
So you can sac your own pieces to get the thing "going".
finitebanjo@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 296d
Actually a great modernization of the game, the two sides want to wage war or battle over the crown but politics prevents it unless they deal with politicians first.
Also incredibly boring, though.
atopi@piefed.blahaj.zone · 6 pts · 297d
A piece that can capture pieces as if they have not moved a turn ago
Artisian@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 297d
Emergency teleporter. Once, when the king is in check and hasn't moved from its initial square, the Emergency teleporter may swap positions with the king. Cannot otherwise move. (Unclear what starting position it should have. Maybe b or e 2/7? Maybe players pick in secret before game starts?)
stevedice@sh.itjust.works · 3 pts · 297d
This gives me PTSD.
moakley@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 297d
Why? Is it because you were forced to use a teleporter? How many times do we have to tell you that the original Steve Dice's absence gives your life meaning? Why we can barely even remember how his eyes were just a little brighter than yours.
Oh it's from a game or something isn't it. Never mind.
stevedice@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 297d
Nah, because I played YuGiOh during ~2008.
sem@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 1 pts · 296d
Context: https://yugipedia.com/wiki/Emergency_Teleport
Neverclear@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 5 pts · 296d
The Trebuchet...
non-attacking movement is limited to one square,
it cannot attack for one turn after moving or attacking,
it can attack any piece that is exactly 5 squares away,
it returns to the square it attacks from
spinning_disk_engineer@lemmy.ca · 6 pts · 296d
Does it count as 5 squares away if its 4 in one direction and 3 perpendicular to that?
Valmond@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 296d
So it must be almost in a corner, because the distance of 5 is only x +/-5 or y +/-5
Or is it Manhattan distance?
jaaake@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 297d
A Freaky Friday piece that can swap with a non-king or pawn piece of the same color still on the board, as long as neither can be captured or can take another piece before or immediately following the swap. Moves and captures like a king.
groet@feddit.org · 2 pts · 296d
I think the "neither can take another piece following the swap" is to restrictive. After the swap it is not your turn anymore anyway and it would basically make it impossible to swap with a queen or rook/bishop. They can capture something for most parts of the game. Just usually a protected piece.
Flagstaff@programming.dev · 2 pts · 297d
Interesting... This would be a great way to train newbies to look for weak points.
jaaake@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 297d
Yeah, I also thinks it helps as a training piece because it forces players to think past the next move. There's virtually no move of opportunity that you can make with it. If you're going to use it all, you need to think a minimum of two moves ahead.
Sibbo@sopuli.xyz · 4 pts · 297d
Can it be captured?
9point6@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 297d
Yes, but the capturing piece is out of use for 5 turns whilst the terms of capture are fleshed out
DarkCloud@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 297d
Yes, the usage would be to block pieces in a way that won't get it caught.
hakunawazo@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 296d
My take: Just add time and different scenery.
Some pieces couldn't move at night. Some could only move on grass land, some other only within woods or rocky mountains. And then there is a catapult where you can shoot pieces randomly back on the board.
sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 3 pts · 297d
Has anyone ever made something like a uh, sort of stamina/mana system for chess?
Like what I mean is, both players start with say 10 move/logistics points.
Different pieces cost different amounts of move/logistics points to move, and then uh, your move point pool replenishes by some amount on your next turn, maybe by some calculation of getting back more points the less units you have on the board.
You could also make that more nuts by allowing multiple units to be move in one player turn, with some kind of climbing cost penalty for each move after the first.
So you could blitz, but then basically be stunlocked for your next turn.
Flagstaff@programming.dev · 4 pts · 297d
Why a stamina pool? Why not individual unit stamina? If a 6/6-stamina bishop flies 6 tiles across the board in a single turn, then it can't move until the next turn; it gradually regains its own energy by +2 spaces/turn, back up to 6.
sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 2 pts · 297d
You could certainly do that digitally no prob, but for an actual tabletop game... i dunno, feels too sacreligious to me to just straight up turn chess into a tactics combat game, lol.
I like the idea of a simple rule set that is easy enough to keep track of, but also allows a wide variety of possible strategies within it.
I think keeping the ... stamina pool or whatever, shared and common to the player, well it simplifies an ongoing irl game's tabulation as compared to keeping track of all units, and its also more like...
You are the commander, and you are managing the logistics of a whole army.
This is why I couldn't settle on the terminology... maybe 'command points' would be a better way to phrase it.
Flagstaff@programming.dev · 2 pts · 296d
Oh, okay, yeah, that makes sense! And yeah, I was thinking that would make it closer to a computer game...
niartenyaw@midwest.social · 2 pts · 297d
this feels pretty similar to what you're describing https://youtu.be/y7VtSK23_Jg
Edit: for those who don't want to click youtube, the person designs a chess board to play real-time chess. each piece has a movement cooldown enforced by the board which uses magnets to restrict you from moving pieces while they are on cooldown.
sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 2 pts · 297d
Well thats fucking neat on an engineering level alone, damn!
_stranger_@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 296d
The Tank
Replaces a knight
moves like a rook, captures like a pawn.
can't be captured except by a knight or a tank.
Corridor8031@lemmy.ml · 3 pts · 296d
j_0t@discuss.tchncs.de · 2 pts · 296d
Maybe the Capablanca's idea could be a good solucion to avoid draws in classical chess, a piece caoabke to make a checkmate by itself, I mean, it only make sense for high level games, fortunately with chess 960 (ramdom chess) the opportunity of innovation and emotion is there.
someguy3@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 297d
I swear I once read about a variant called The Jack with a new piece called a Jack. Can't find anything online about it and don't remember what it did.
helix@feddit.org · 2 pts · 285d
Maybe it starts out on e4 and the current player can decide to either move one of their pieces or the singular beaurocrat.
subignition@fedia.io · 2 pts · 297d
The sniper.
Flagstaff@programming.dev · 6 pts · 297d
Intriguing, but does it have to have a meat shield?
subignition@fedia.io · 2 pts · 296d
It could probably either have to have a meat shield or have to take one turn to aim before firing but not both
esc27@piefed.social · 1 pts · 297d