Single Comment

Secret Agent Chess. Each player chooses one opposing minor piece to be a secret agent. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]

gnohmon wrote on Thu, Feb 27, 2003 04:48 AM UTC:

Thanks for the comments about Identity Crisis.

Identity Crisis was just an idea thrown out without much thought, whether
playable or not, no complete rules, just an interesting idea. But, since
you're interested, here goes:

It's not prechess, so you know which piece is your opponent's King. In
order to keep it a 'minimum moderation' game, the players must resolve
check.

1. You say check when you give check. If the reply fails to get out of
check, you say so and a different move must be tried. You don't say
double check. For example, in the position from Reti-Tartakower, blitz
game at NY 1924, White (Reti) plays Bd2-g5 check; Tartakower (whose King
is at d8 in case you don't remember) does not know if the check comes
from the Rd1 or from the Bg5, or both; but he can find out by trying 2
illegal moves.

2. If your opponent moves into check, you reject the move and a different
move must be played. Notice you do not say which of your pieces is giving
check.

a. These rules make it possible to gather info with your King. Risky, but
possible.

b. If you deliberately allow an illegal move in order to sucker your
opponent into a later disaster, you are a dastardly cur and no gentleman
will play with you. If you mistakenly allow an illegal move, it should
stand as given?

Perhaps these rules are not perfect; but I doubt one can improve them more
than 50%, and so the question arises whether Identity Crisis would be a
better game if it used an active moderator, like Kriegspiel except that
the moderator has a bit less work to do.

I like your list of pieces, but remember more is better because the bigger
the list the more uncertainty.