Check out Omega Chess, our featured variant for September, 2024.

Enter Your Reply

The Comment You're Replying To
Bob Greenwade wrote on Sun, Sep 17, 2023 04:12 AM UTC in reply to Ben Reiniger from 01:55 AM:

Can I assume the corner cells are deleted so you don't have to work out what to do with the diagonals there?

Yes, you can, and correctly so -- especially with the leapers! (I've seen others try to manage that mess, and those were just cubical boards. On a tesseract? No, thank you!)

If a pawn or spear find themselves on an Open face, there are two (or all four, on faces 6 and 19!) directions that are "toward" the enemy Home face; how do they move then?

That would be based on where on the face they are. If they're at the midpoint, it's player's choice (I probably should include that in the text).

Playing on the 2d surface has the nicety of rook lines still actually restricting the enemy king into one side or the other. What does mating material look like here?

I'm not sure I understand the question.

I tried to work out (but without paper) how many squares a rook attacks on an empty board. There are 12 faces that it reaches in each direction, but those overlap, I think four faces in common? So it should be 5*12*2-4-1=115 (that last being the rook's current cell)? What about the bishop, or nightrider?... Oh, I guess bishops aren't colorbound?

That math/geometry is a bit wild, and it's a bit late right now (for me).

But yes, the Bishops are not colorbound, strictly speaking. It's not possible, on a cube's corner (much less a tesseract's), to have a colorbound check pattern. I didn't realize that when I put four on each side, but then I decided that it wasn't that big of a deal; switching is a trick that requires rounding a corner.

Is there a reasonable way to flatten this for displaying on a table/screen? (I suspect not, because of the forking of paths.)

You're correct, and that's only one reason; the nature of a tesseract makes it hard in general to lay it out in two dimensions. Someone could probably do a diagram showing the Home Faces and how they connect to the Territory Faces, and the latter to each other, for each side; how to extend that to the entire tesseract is another question entirely.

That said, I have seen people program 4D and even 5D Rubik's cubes, so it's probably possible.

Does the setup section's use of "clockwise" actually make sense?

Clockwise as seen by the player on the 2D board.

Now that I consider it, I probably should set up some kind of system where two corners are blacked-out and two are whited-out, to keep track of which corners are connected. That won't always be obvious.

Why alternate ordinary and berolina pawns? Doesn't that hurt pawn structures? (Does it just not matter on this wacky board?)

They should only run into each other in their early moves, and even then only if they make single moves at the start instead of double moves.

Personally, I think it doesn't so much hurt "pawn structures" as just make for different ones that would have to be worked out in play. That said, I don't think I'd do it that way on a board without this structure's unique flavors.


Edit Form

Comment on the page Chess on a Tesseract

Conduct Guidelines
This is a Chess variants website, not a general forum.
Please limit your comments to Chess variants or the operation of this site.
Keep this website a safe space for Chess variant hobbyists of all stripes.
Because we want people to feel comfortable here no matter what their political or religious beliefs might be, we ask you to avoid discussing politics, religion, or other controversial subjects here. No matter how passionately you feel about any of these subjects, just take it someplace else.
Avoid Inflammatory Comments
If you are feeling anger, keep it to yourself until you calm down. Avoid insulting, blaming, or attacking someone you are angry with. Focus criticisms on ideas rather than people, and understand that criticisms of your ideas are not personal attacks and do not justify an inflammatory response.
Quick Markdown Guide

By default, new comments may be entered as Markdown, simple markup syntax designed to be readable and not look like markup. Comments stored as Markdown will be converted to HTML by Parsedown before displaying them. This follows the Github Flavored Markdown Spec with support for Markdown Extra. For a good overview of Markdown in general, check out the Markdown Guide. Here is a quick comparison of some commonly used Markdown with the rendered result:

Top level header: <H1>

Block quote

Second paragraph in block quote

First Paragraph of response. Italics, bold, and bold italics.

Second Paragraph after blank line. Here is some HTML code mixed in with the Markdown, and here is the same <U>HTML code</U> enclosed by backticks.

Secondary Header: <H2>

  • Unordered list item
  • Second unordered list item
  • New unordered list
    • Nested list item

Third Level header <H3>

  1. An ordered list item.
  2. A second ordered list item with the same number.
  3. A third ordered list item.
Here is some preformatted text.
  This line begins with some indentation.
    This begins with even more indentation.
And this line has no indentation.

Alt text for a graphic image

A definition list
A list of terms, each with one or more definitions following it.
An HTML construct using the tags <DL>, <DT> and <DD>.
A term
Its definition after a colon.
A second definition.
A third definition.
Another term following a blank line
The definition of that term.