Comments/Ratings for a Single Item

~~Earlier~~ ⇧Reverse Order⇩ ~~Later~~

Immortal Chess. 36 Immortals with hidden powers create chaos on the board. (10x10, Cells: 100) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]

💡📝Florin Lupusoru wrote on Sun, Mar 17 10:46 AM UTC:

Here is another crazy idea. So, what do you think?

Bob Greenwade wrote on Sun, Mar 17 02:19 PM UTC in reply to Florin Lupusoru from 10:46 AM:

I think I've seen a very similar game somewhere around here, though this one is different enough to be distinctive. (HaruNY or Bn Em will probably know or be able to find the game I'm remembering.)

The only note that I have for now is that the Immortals should be represented by an icon other than Queen, such as a circle or the double-crown associated (in Alfaerie) with Chameleon. (I'll probably have additional thoughts later.)

💡📝Florin Lupusoru wrote on Sun, Mar 17 04:58 PM UTC in reply to Bob Greenwade from 02:19 PM:

I think I've seen a very similar game somewhere around here, though this one is different enough to be distinctive.

That was still one of my previous games called Celestial Chess, which I deleted a few months ago.

The only note that I have for now is that the Immortals should be represented by an icon other than Queen, such as a circle or the double-crown associated (in Alfaerie) with Chameleon. (I'll probably have additional thoughts later.)

The red Queen was one of the few neutral pieces available.

💡📝Florin Lupusoru wrote on Tue, Mar 19 02:41 AM UTC:

For some reason, all the Immortals (Queens) have vanished from my previous diagram, so I had to upload a new diagram.

Bn Em wrote on Fri, Mar 22 10:51 PM UTC:

The big omission I see: can an Immortal capture on the move it's brought in with?

While bringing them into the game players have to make sure that they are moved at a safe distance from both Kings, so that no King will be in check

Is this an extra rule? Ensuring your own king won't be in check makes sense, but you've nowhere else suggested that it would be a bad idea to potentially check the opposing king, unless this is supposed to tacitly forbid that

I am not sure if anybody has ever tried before to use chess pieces with hidden identities

The Disguised Pieces tag has a couple games that might be similar; These two probably come closest, though neither goes quite as far as your Immortals

💡📝Florin Lupusoru wrote on Sat, Mar 23 10:02 AM UTC in reply to Bn Em from Fri Mar 22 10:51 PM:

The Desguised King is very similar to my own Secret King, while the Deception Chess has removed everything but the title.

The big omission I see: can an Immortal capture on the move it's brought in with?

Yes, the Immortals enter the game through a non capturing move.

Ensuring your own king won't be in check makes sense, but you've nowhere else suggested that it would be a bad idea to potentially check the opposing king, unless this is supposed to tacitly forbid that

This is a good point. I'll change the rules right now.

Bn Em wrote on Sat, Mar 23 12:40 PM UTC in reply to Florin Lupusoru from 10:02 AM:

the Deception Chess has removed everything but the title

That's odd; it shows up fine for me

(the gist of it is that each piece has a secret identity (chosen by the owning player) and on your move you can change a still‐disguised piece into its secret counterpart. Pieces have their secret identity revealed on capture, and the secret king is the one that has to be checkmated/captured)