When pawns were given the ability to move two squares at once, this was not intended to significantly alter gameplay, merely to speed up the game, which is why the en passant rule was introduced, so I'm wondering, if it was meant to keep gameplay as if pawns could only move one square, why is it only pawns that can capture as if the opposing pawn only moved one square, why not pieces? Imagine this endgame:

White wins this with a4 with promotion soon to come and a Q+K vs K endgame, but if the king were allowed to take "en passant" as if the pawn moved only one square, this would be a K vs K draw. So it can theoretically affect gameplay.

Thoughts?

this is true

i have thought about why cant other pieces capture en passant like bishop,queen,and king

many/most beginners have alot of trouble with the en passant rule; if the concept were extended to other pieces the difficulty  of the game would increase significantly...i'm no master, but i must confess i am having a great deal of difficulty understanding how the rule could be applied to other pieces.... after looking at your board example my head feels like it will explode cranial matter like in that movie "scanners" from circa 1979.  If you haven't seen that movie please rent it or see it the next time its on TV.  But i digress.....was just thinking outloud here.....

I've had to explain it a few times just with pawns. The trick is if it moves up two squares, en passant means you move it back one square and capture it there normally.

If the rules were changed to allow all pieces to do this, it would be pretty much the same: push it back a square and capture it as if it were there the whole time.

Just remember that pawns are really only meant to move one square at a time by the original rules, and that the double move was only meant to speed up the game, not change the way it's played, and it makes sense.

very good thinking... what u say is true

yes

Because all pawns can move the same way, black as well as white have the possibility to move a pawn two squares as the first move, this does not give any colour an advantage, but makes the pawns a little bit more mobile, as you said - the game a little faster, and I think pieces should not be able to capture "En Passant", although it wouldn't be hard to implement as a rule.

Nulu_Jr, it's not about any side getting an advantage, it's that it changes gameplay from back when pawns could only move one square. That's *why* en passant exists for pawn captures, and I just think it should be extended to pieces.

I think it may be because it may happen so rarely it wouldn't be worth it?

I thought the reason for en passant was so that in an endgame with pawn versus pawn, one player couldn't gain an advantage by moving two spaces at once to the other pawn's single space. Maybe I'm wrong, but if this is the case, then the rule should only apply to pawns, as king + pawn versus king should be a 'won' position. Theoretically, at least.

The Move En passant Only works when one pawn is next to another

your point? It only works when one pawn is next to another because that's the only situation where a pawn could otherwise jump past an opponents pawn on an adjacent file using the initial 2-move jump.

In true nature to the rule, a king should be considered first up for induction to this rule since it's mobility is virtually the same as the pawns. I still think though that it should apply for all pieces, anyone know for certain?

If, hypothetically, it applied to all pieces being able to en passant (which is a bad idea), would a Pawn moving double and passing a king (ie king is in check when on the first square of the move but not second), would that count as a move putting the king in Check for the other players turn?

The move was used by one of my opponents recently.