No, castling is possible if three conditions are met. First is "unmoved:" neither the king nor the rook can have moved. Second is "unattacked:" the king may not castle out of, through, or into check. Third is "unimpeded:" all the squares the king and the rook move through (and into) must be empty of other pieces (besides the king and the rook).

It's all explained in the wikipedia article linked to in the first post of this thread.

Yeah, its good fun, I'm finding my feet now. After turning at a low 869 rating, I'm back to 4 figures and climbing. I wonder whether there are setups which have forced wins for White from move 1?

im still confused....

In high school, we set it up this way:

1) Set the pawns up.

2) Black picks the first piece's position (because white gets to move first)

3) White mirrors black's placement and chooses the second piece.

ect.

And now you don't need 960-sided dice or anything, just you and a friend.

and a chess board.

you make no sense

 Made sense to me

for the most part I think bringing out one's queen early is still a bad idea.

I don't like the castling rules in Chess960.  I invented a different variant just to simplify the castling rules.  Everything else is the same.

... 960 castling is virtually the same as standard castling. What's not to like?

the only thing that excites me is that it casts a level playing field in the opening. both players are on their own since standard opening repertoires are useless here

This sounds very interesting and exciting.

Can you give us your castling variant?

My variant is:

1. When the king and the rook are next to each other on any files, they castle by moving the king to the rook square and the rook to the king's square.

2. When the king and the rook are one file apart or more they castle by moving the king next to the rook  and move the rook on the opposite of the king.

In other words rule #1 and #2 are the same as you can appreciate, just wanted to give it more explanation.

Naturally all of the current castling rules apply.

Now this  would really  be playing random chess as one never knows what to expect in any game and all previous castling rules being out the door, we have a true new game played in real time and the combinations are limitless. 

Well, actually it isn't.

Quoting FIDE Laws of Chess

...counting as a single move of the king and executed as follows: the king is transferred from its original square two squares towards the rook on its original square, then that rook is transferred to the square the king has just crossed.

That, of course, is not how it's done in Chess960. Nor is it how most people who are first introduced to Chess960 expect it to be done...

Chess480's rule for castling in rather simple. 

...counting as a single move of the king and executed as follows: the king is transferred from its original square two squares towards the rook on its original square, then that rook is transferred to the square the king has just crossed. If the King can not move two squares because the Rook is on the edge of the board, then the King and Rook exchange places.

What I meant is the king & rook land on the same squares after castling, regardless of position, and all of the basic rules apply, like not moving through check.

The castling rules for 480 are actually more complicated than for standard or 960 chess because the castled king could land on any square in the back row, depending on rook placement.

I don't wish to get into a symantics argument about "complication", but the majority of the rules for Chess960 involve how to castle.  This is, IMHO, too complicated.  I think very few people learn how to castle by memorizing the columns.

The idea for Chess480 was to simplify Castling and I think it does that by useing the same rules that apply to FIDE Standard Chess.

Note that I'm talking about the rules, not the tactical situations which may or may not be more complicated in Chess480 due to King placement after Castling.

chess960 for live would be the ultimate addition :)

 Oh, give me a break, neo. Most of the rules on castling in FRC are the same as the rules in Chess. Beyond that it's just "If you are castling a-side, the king goes to b1 and the rook to c1, otherwise the king goes to c1 and the rook to d1." Compared to "Move the king two toward the rook and put the rook on the other side of the king. If this would move the king off the board, switch the rook and the king instead."

And frankly, both of those rules are the same as castling in Chess. It's just different interpretations of what those rules are.

ichabod801:  I simply don't think I can call a move castling if the King fails to move.  I've never seen rules for chess that name the squares the pieces end up on, but rather I've always seen it written as the King moves two spaces. 

This is partcially due to the origins of Castling, called "the King's Leap".  The King's first move was one where he could move two spaces in any direction, leaping as he moved.  It became a popular to move the Rook next to the King and then leap it on the next turn.  As with the change allowing for pawns to move two spaces on the first move, these moves were combined to speed chess up.  The other options for King's Leap were removed.

But I digress.  Play whichever you enjoy.  My goal was to make it easier for new players to learn to play.  Chess960's castling rules are confusing to both Chess and Chess960 newbies.  Chess480 is easier to learn because the rules (for castling) are essentially the same as you'd read in any version of stanard chess you might find.

{shrug}

I didn't get the castling(I understand where the pieces go. BUt, I tried to castle in a game and it wouldn't let me.)

Is it just all the same rules as in regular chess for castling(can't be in check, pieces out of the way etc)?

Yes.

 See these suggestions on how to castle in Chess 960:

http://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess960-chess-variants/how-to-castle-properly-in-chess960