Comments/Ratings for a Single Item

202. Tressym. Back in August, I featured a pair of pieces I'd called Owl and Pussycat, a rotary pair from my Fifth Circle group. But what would happen if these two were combined?

By sheer coincidence, in the Forgotten Realms TTRPG (or, more accurately, the Forgotten Realms setting for Dungeons & Dragons), there actually is a creature called a tressym, which is basically a cat with owl's wings.

As a refresher, the Owl can move one space orthogonally, or leap to any of the four spaces diagonally from that space, while the Pussycat can move one space diagonally, or leap to any of the four spaces orthogonally from that space. The Tressym does both. (KNCZNYFXZYNX)

This is similar to a certain compound bent slider whose name escapes me at the moment (though I'm sure someone will come up with it within the hour); but while its distance is limited, it makes up for that by leaping instead of sliding. That makes it quite formidable -- on the 12x12 board shown here, it can reach more than half the spaces. I'd only use it on a board of 16x16 or larger.

As for the model, I'm pretty happy with it, except that maybe the wings could be smaller.

I'm sure someone will come up with it within the hour

Hardly on time, but the Griffin+Rhino is Gilman's Gorgon, also used under that name by Daniil Frolov

203. Humbug. One of my early entries in Piece of the Day was the Gerfod; my recent work on Unnecessarily Complicated Chess led me to wonder what its rotary counterpart would be. The Rook part of the Gerfod (R) would obviously become a Bishop (B), and the Tripper part (G) would become a Threeleaper (H). As for the Forward Dabbaba (fD), that would turn into a Backward Alfil (bA). A bit of shuffling around, and an XBetza code came up that suggested the name Humbug. (BbAH)

The hard part was coming up with a physical model. In the context well known from A Christmas Carol, the word means nonsense or drivel*; but it also refers to a certain kind of peppermint-flavored candy, pictures of which whoed only oblong striped lozenges. I decided to lean into that, adding a nod to Scrooge via a top hat.

It probably doesn't read anything like the intent, but at least it's recognizable once you know what it is.

*Irrelevant trivium: The word is also used in The Wonderful Wizard of Oz, under another meaning of a willfully false, insincere, or deceptive person.

204. Warrior Priest. This is a simple compound of two not-quite-so-simple pieces that I featured at the end of last year, the Morningstar and Faith Healer. It move follows a path that starts with a single step in any direction, then a 45° turn for one more space, and then another 45° in the same direction before sliding off in a direction perpendicular to the first step. ([W?fF?qfR][F?fW?qfB])

This is another piece best suited for larger boards.

I found a much simpler solution to the Wide Receiver problem requiring no recoding: precede the actual move with pmfW-bW-. This forces q and z into a relationship with whatever turn it makes after the bW: q directs it forward, while z directs it backward. That makes the piece's full XBetza: fRbBsW[pmfW-bW-sW?qfF?qfR]. (The sW is to allow the sideways step if the Wide Receiver is at the edge of the board.)

I'm proud enough of this that I think it's almost worth a paragraph in the Case Studies Appendix. ;)

Addendum: The newer XBetza is a tad longer than the old one, but it's also a bit more elegant (IMHO).

205. Heart. I actually thought that I'd already featured this, and arguably I should've waited until next Wednesday... but now does seem like the time for this. Invented by Jeremy Good as part of his Cupid Chess 3 (where he calls it the Bottom Heart*), the Heart has a four-step move that vaguely traces out half the shape of a heart. It moves one or two steps diagonally; then, after the second, it may turn 90° to move one more step; then it may turn 90° again in the same direction to move one final step. ([F?fF?sF?qF])

This is a colorbound short-range piece, probably about as strong as a half-Bishop (B4) or a little less. (The Playtest Applet rates it as 332 vs. the B4's 320.)

*The article also gives a Bottom Heart, which has a nearly identical move path but starts at the other end; I find that piece much less useful and interesting than this one. Both pieces have appeared in many other games, and not just my own.

206. Tiger. I've been waiting to post this one until I could come up with (or find, or remember) a good, unique name for its rotary counterpart. I'm giving in now, thinking that surely someone can help me out with that (and then I can hopefully post that piece Monday).

The Tiger makes a (2,3) leap like a Zebra, and from the landing point may slide outward diagonally like a Bishop. ([Z?B])

The counterpart, of course, would be [Z?R]. I'm sure it's appeared somewhere by now.

Not that it really matters much, but the angled stripes on this piece were especially fun to do.

You plan to do a weekend pair? Catch a pair which I made some time ago but did not know how to realize it.

Bumper (BmpR) aka Trick Biker and Repmub (RpmB) aka Stunt Master. Correlate with my Modern Republican Chess’ pieces, but themselves aren’t.

UPD: new name for Stewardess — Bicyclist (rotary counterpart for Motorcyclist)?

Trick Biker and Stunt Master are an interesting pair.

As for the Stewardess, I'm happy with that name; I could use a better name for the Counterstewardess, though, like the Steward has a Guardian. (I briefly considered "Guardienne," but I figured that'd trigger our French-speaking fellows....)

@Bob: yeah, "Guardienne" is weird to my eyes because it is an ugly mix between English and French. "Gardienne" would be French, "guardian" is English.

Well, we have pieces with Persian names (Rook) and Arabic names (Alfil). And many people insist on calling a non-royal King a Mann (German). So why would a French name be a problem?

Well, we have pieces with Persian names (Rook) and Arabic names (Alfil). And many people insist on calling a non-royal King a Mann (German). So why would a French name be a problem?

I'll take Jean-Louis's spelling; what I'd posted would go over about as well as "Manns" did a while ago.

207. Moose and 208. Squirrel. The Moose is something that I only recently learned about, and while I'm not generally excited about Grasshopper-type pieces I do find this one surprisingly interesting. Like the Grasshopper, the Moose slides like a Queen, then reaches an obstacle and jumps over it to land on the first square beyond. In the Moose's case, on the space where the obstacle sits the Moose takes a 45° turn. (pyafsQ)

The diagram shows how the Moose could move relative to the three Pawns; it cannot move except to the six spaces marked by dots.

For the piece model, I decided to go with something that was very basic but easily recognizable.

The Squirrel is a much more familiar piece, able to jump to any space exactly two squares away. (NS)*

And for some reason, it just seems natural that the two pieces should be paired together like this.

*Traditionally, it's been DNA (or whatever ordering of those three letters is preferred at the moment), but H.G.'s recent addition of S as shorthand for D + A means that NS (or SN) will do the same thing.

209. Tapir. This is an entirely experimental piece; I really have no take on how useful it would be, except that it'd really only be useful on a very large board (if then). Its original inspiration came from the animal itself, an ungulate that's born with stripes but loses them by adulthood.

For its adulthood, I thought to have the piece leap like an Antelope (3,4) or Bharal (2,5) (the latter being an at-the-time recent invention of my own). Since it only has its stripes when it's young, I thought that coule be represented by an intial Zebra's (2,3) leap. (NYAXiZ)

Even if it's not of much interest in itself, perhaps having it here can inspire others to devise pieces that similarly have special moves representing their young.

I actually would've posted the piece long before now, but I was trying to figure out a good 3D model for it. I came up with this instead.

210. Dumbbell (Strongman). This is yet another potential piece for my Clue mashup variant. As I've said, I intend to include eight weapons in that game, including the six classics, the Poison (since it appears in the most Clue variants), and one other. This is one of the candidates for that last.

The Dumbbell simply moves one space orthogonally, like a Wazir. If there's an enemy piece there, that piece is pushed back one space. If this pushes the piece off the board or into a piece on the Dumbbell's own side, then the enemy piece is captured. If it pushes the piece into a piece on its own side, then the far piece is captured. (mW[dD-bucW][cD-ubcW])*

In a game with more than two players (as Clue Chess will be), if the pushed piece goes into a piece owned by neither the Dumbbell's player nor the player of the pushed piece, then that third piece is also pushed back, and the process begins anew.

Since the form is fairly simple and self-explanatory, the model fore the piece came out unusually well.

*I am very unsure that I got this XBetza right, especially the last bit. @H.G., help me out here... also, I'm somewhat sure that your "checking for the edge of the board" isn't yet implemented, so I'm presuming that that part of the move just has to be omitted.

Hi Bob

Long ago I thought I might be able to make a Clue-related CV, but could not think of how. Not only that, but I wondered if there was a possible copyright issue. Thus, I soon rejected making an attempt.

Later I thought of making a Frog and Princess-related CV, but that time, besides lacking many ideas for how (other than using Frog and Archbishop fairy piece types), I was inhibited by notions of political correctness (namely princess kissing a frog). Not that I believe in political correctness, but many do these days. Later someone took a stab at an unrelated kind of Frog & Princess CV idea.

I, too, was initially hesitant at making a Clue mashup, but then I noticed that there were at least a half-dozen other games on here that took on one or another mashup with works still under copyright. I'll certainly want to be careful when it comes to the cards (yes, I'll be using cards just like in the board game, though with 8 characters and 8 weapons), but as long as I don't quite duplicate what Parker Brothers/Hasbro has, I'm pretty sure I'll be clear; after all, I intend to do the game in such a way that it serves as free advertising (which it deserves, even if it doesn't especially need what little I have to offer) more than it sits as a knockoff.

211. Iron Pawn. I honestly haven't seen this type of Pawn used much, if at all, in any chess variants, and I think it'd make for an interesting twist. The Iron Pawn's move is very simple: it simply moves or captures to any of the three spaces in front of it. However, because it's "iron," it cannot be captured; the main defense against its success in reaching the far side and promoting is to keep the opponent busy with other concerns. (fhK)

In an Interactive Diagram, to make a piece iron just include a line that states "iron=N" (where N is the number of the piece type -- in this case, whatever position the Iron Pawn is on the list).

As for the model, it should be easy enough to tell at a glance exactly what it is.

Does it mean that on a regular board the game ends when Pawns finish blocking each other? 

You can still allow them to be captured from the side or back. This is just a suggestion. 

A game should not have all Pawns as Iron Pawns.

Even if it does, a player should be ready to move other pieces in between, or leap them over, to make for a real game.

And in the astronomically unlikely (albeit mathematically possible) even that the players simply advance the Iron Pawns such that neither can pass the other's line, that would most likely result in a draw.

212. Spider. There are many takes on the Spider name, most based on the Griffin, Manticore, Reaper, Harvester, or some similar piece. Musketeer takes a different approach with theirs: it steps one or two spaces diagonally, or leaps two spaces orthogonally or (1,2) like a Knight. (F2ND)

My sculpture is nowhere near as effective as theirs, and it probably needs a little work, but at least you can tell what it is.

213. Slip Queen. 214. Slip Bishop. and 215. Slip Rook. This is something I don't think I've done so far with Piece of the Day, and I'm not excited to be doing it now: I'm putting up a set of "filler" pieces, which don't present anything new -- not the model design, not the move, not really anything significant. I have a busy weekend*, and I had a hard time figuring out a good set of three to post for Friday/Saturday/Sunday.

The "Slip" designation is for sliders that (unless I've gotten things mixed up again) move an odd number of spaces. The Slip Bishop does so diagonally ([F?nAA] or FyyafnF), the Slip Rook does it orthogonally ([W?nDD] or WyyafnW) and the Slip Queen does both ([K?nSS] or KyyafnK).

While I haven't actually used this idea (yet), this could be extended to compounds like Archbishop, Chancellor, Amazon, Caliph, Stewardess, and so forth.

The "Slip" factor could even be applied to Riders, whereby they make an odd number of leaps. (This only just now occurred to me, so maybe this wasn't purely "filler" after all....)

*For the curious, I'm attending C3 Game Con here in my home town of Corvallis.

I don't think the Slip sliders are lame. The page where this term was defined said that their partners, the Skip sliders, where the same as riders. (E.g. Slip Rook = Panda = Dabbabarider.) So the conventional Slip sliders would be [F?AA], [W?DD] and [K?SS]. (Hurrah for the new Alibaba symbol!)

So the conventional Slip sliders would be [F?AA], [W?DD] and [K?SS].

OK, I'll go take out the n's.

(Hurrah for the new Alibaba symbol!)

Agreed, and for more than just this! :) But still, the [K?SS] makes me want to rock and roll all nite... and party every day... ;)