Single Comment

Actually, I have to disagree about the combination of King capture and checkmate. <p> <ul> <li>First, it occurs in a lot of double King variants where the first King is captured and the 2nd King must be checkmated.</li> <p> <li>Second, I think it confusing in <u>Battle Chieftain Chess</u>. At one point you use one mechanism for a situation, and later you use another. It seems gratitiously complicated to me.</li> <p> </ul> Let me explain something about the second point. As well as being a variant designer, I'm a software designer/programmer. I have a real liking for simplicity and consistency. The mottos of a software designer trying for elegant code (as we all should be) are 'when in doubt, leave it out' and Law of the Least Suprise (software should always do what is least surprising to the user). Looking at it that way, the following rule would make more sense to me: <blockquote> When the King occupies an enemy attacked square, it may switch places with any Berzerker before the player's move. If a King is captured, the owning player's next turn consists of converting a Berzerker into the new King. </blockquote> (<i>Note: in the above rule I wrote a Berzerker switches places with the King -- this is equivalent to making the King a Berzerker and the Berzerker a King.)