Enter Your Reply

Allow me to confess my sins. ;-)

I approach Chess from the background of abstract game design. I look upon
it simply as a form of wargame. Over the centuries it has gravitated
toward particular elements which many confuse as absolute parameters for
this potential wargame. But are there limitations, or are they only what
we impose ourselves?

Many of my creations have a theme. This is primarily people are attracted
to games which exhibit an atmosphere of fantasy. It appeals to their
imagination.

Of course, there are those which are merely humorous. These are just for
fun. Not meant to be taken seriously. But they often do show some signs of
tactical and strategic play.

I also like the games of Asia. This being possibly the birthplace of
Chess, and it is interesting to see their approach to the wargame. Thus
several of my creations have had an oriental flavor, though a few could
just as easily been rendered in the western mode. But that goes back to
theme.

I like interesting playing pieces, but I don't start with simply the
creation of such and attempt to make it fit a game. I start with the game
as a concept, and work the various elements until they 'fit'. Sometimes
this results in new pieces, and sometimes even different conditions of
play.

I often like to ask the question, 'What is Chess?'  And I can receive
just as many answers as there are people. Though, unfortunately, many
westerners have been heavily indoctrinated by the Mad Queen variant
believing it represents the entire world of Chess.

But permit me to answer that question. 'What is Chess?' Simple, 'Chess
is War.' And war can take many forms. Thus the wargame of Chess can have
many forms.

Particularly if we let it.