Check out Modern Chess, our featured variant for January, 2025.


[ Help | Earliest Comments | Latest Comments ]
[ List All Subjects of Discussion | Create New Subject of Discussion ]
[ List Earliest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]

Comments/Ratings for a Single Item

Earlier ⇧Reverse Order⇩ Later
ChessPlusDice[Subject Thread] [Add Response]
George Duke wrote on Tue, Aug 6, 2013 01:38 AM UTC:
First just look at some of the fifty in Chess With Dice of Main Index.  Not
all are in the directory dice.dir. Most CVs of this class are generated
by CVPage itself and not appearing in Pritchard 'ECV', and the following
Juggernaut inspired several more like it:
http://www.chessvariants.org/dice.dir/juggernaut-chess.html, once Internet made CVs easy to propagate.

Prolific Aronson's Piece-eater, http://www.chessvariants.org/dice.dir/piece-eater.html, chronologically cites earlier Behemoth, http://www.chessvariants.org/dice.dir/behemoth.html, and Behemoth cites original Juggernaut.

(zzo38) A. Black wrote on Tue, Aug 6, 2013 03:25 AM UTC:

Note that a few of them use dice only for indication and not for randomness. (Most of them do use throwing the dice for random, though.) Also note that a few of them have only a very minor randomness (and that I consider a coin toss to be a "d2" dice roll).

(I don't mind either way; I think good games can be made in both ways.)


George Duke wrote on Tue, Aug 6, 2013 04:45 PM UTC:
GM Vukevich would say Chess may evolve rigorous rules-randomization, just as the beginning had dice for four-player. 

Http://www.chessvariants.org/index/displaycomment.php?commentid=18729.

Http://www.chessvariants.org/index/displaycomment.php?commentid=18909.

Only still getting familiar with what has been done, here's a three-player: http://www.chessvariants.org/large.dir/contest84/orwellchess.html.  A lot of viewers have just registered ''okay a dice chess,'' not yet discriminating  more serious ideas.

Charles Gilman wrote on Fri, Aug 16, 2013 05:57 AM UTC:
Yesterday evening a news story made me think about Chess with dice. The treasurer of UKIP¹ was railing against attempts to get more women on company boards. His argument was that women are less competitive than men, and he cites as an example the shortage of women in competitive activities - not just physical sports² but also more cerebral pastimes like Chess and Bridge. It occurred to me that Chess is not that good an analogy for running a business anyway, but that adding a random element with dice would increase the similiarity to managing employees without the unquestioning obedience of Chessmen. Not that I would suggest that even a randomised variant would be a good test for business leadership, but it does add to realism in terms of the civilian world alongside the familiar fog-of-war arguments³. Of course what would really be needed would be something to represent differences in powers of persuasion, but how that could be achieved short of having an extra person participating for each piece, I cannot imagine.

¹a British political party routinely embarrassed by racist and/or sexist comments by its activists

²in which he claims women are inherently disadvantaged, as many with his attitudes do

³as also used by servicemen who have just shot an obnoxious superior in their own regiment


4 comments displayed

Earlier ⇧Reverse Order⇩ Later

Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.