Single Comment

Arm said: "This is only a technicality really, but there's another way to think about the camel movement to put it in perspective. To use an analogy:

A camel is to a bishop as a knight is to a rook. That is, a knight moves in an orthogonal L-shape while a camel moves in a diagonal L-shape. While it works exactly the same way to say the camel does a (3,1) leap, it makes the camel fit better into the chess schema to think of it as a diagonal analogue of a knight.

Whatev, though."

If I am right, another way to think about camel is to think he moves to the closest square from the one he is, excluding the one he is in and the ones that rook, bishop and knight can move to.



Anyway, following those idea, If you wanted to make a variant with leapers only (and assuming you consider bishop a leaper). You could do this
Rook = Fide Bishop moves
Bishop = rider version of Fide Knight
Knight = Camel
King = A mix of fide knight and ferz
Queen = Fide bishop and rider version of fide knight
Pawn = Ferz moves thad advance as move only and knight moves that advance as capture moves.


If you dont consider Bishop a rider you can do
Rook = rider version of fide Knight
Bishop = rider version of camel
Knight = moves as a (3,2) and a (1,4) leaper 
Queen = Rider version of camel + rider version of fide knight
king = camel + fide knight
Pawn = Fide knight moves that advance but only as move, and moves of camel that advance but only as capture.