How would chess be different if...

...the object instead of checkmating was the take the king.

Obviously on the highest levels it would be pretty much exactly the same since all checkmate really is is the forced capture (next turn) of the king.  But for beginners the game would be significantly different since king dropping blunders would be an issue.  The game might actually be easier to learn since "taking the king" is easier for a child to understand than "checkmate".

However, I think something would be lost.  There's something noble about ending the game just before the king is taken.  It's sort of a moral lesson in mercy (for the victor) & humility & the admission of defeat (for the vanquished).  It eliminates all talk of "Well, I could've gotten out of it".  I daresay I don't think chess would be as popular as it is today if it the goal was simply to capture the king.

Just a spur of the moment question that popped into my mind.

Thoughts?

Chess games would be much quicker and not as fun.

In blitz if someone hangs their king proper procedure is to stop the clock and claim the win :).  And no one ever says anything about that :P.

$%#@ Say What ?

I thought the proper blitz etiquite was to snap your opponent's king off the board & hold it up high like a trophy all the while showboating & talking trash.

I dunno, I'd play a lot slower (outside of blitz) if I knew I could accidently hang him king.

 When I was in grade school back in the 1970's we played chess for about 30 minutes a day if we wanted to skip recess outside due to weather, or having a cold or similer circumstances.  Because it was impracticle to leave the board set up in the classroom from one day to the next the teacher introduced us to the point system where each piece was given a point rating based on its capabillities.  Under the point system the King was just a piece like any other, if it were captured it was worth 2 points but it did not nessecerily end the game.  However if your king was captured you had to send a pawn to the other side of the board and get it back as quickly as possible, and if you had no pawns and no king you lost.

As I recall Pawns were 1 point, King was 2, Knight was 3, Bishop was 4, Rook was 5 and Queen was 10.  It makes for some interesting games knowing that your captured pieces are 'in jail' and you need to save your pawns to do 'prisoner exchanges'

I think the only differences would be bigger blunders, and slatemate (It wouldn't exist)

The game would be significantly different. If the object is to take the king, then moves that put the king in danger have to be legal. This completely eliminates the idea of stalemate. So even at the highest level, the game would be affected.

i've asked a similar question to this. the problem would be no stalemates. a big difference/issue.

At the highest level it wouldn't be changed as much.  How often do grandmasters accidently stalemate their opponent?  I think it would change endgames because you don't have the threat of stalemate, so it will make the side with the material advantage have an easier time.  The change wouldn't be that huge though.  It would make amateur games go quicker.  It seems like when I'm playing against beginners I have to tell them a few times per game "you can't do that, it puts your king in check." 

Yes -- a lot of key drawing ideas go out the window, along with a lot of the game's elegance in my opinion.

It would not be as fun for me if I had to keep my king from being captured while trying to capture my opponent's. Played a few games against my bro where we had to capture the king and queen in order to win. Was fun, but too complicated now that I look back on it.

Yeah, I forgot about stalemate, that would drasticly change things.

The accidental stalemate that beginners fall into isn't what makes stalemate important. The following position goes from a draw to a win:

Here's another that's a dead draw for white under the current rules, but is a loss if stalemates are gone.  Some of my favourite puzzles are draws by forced stalemate -- this is where the elegance of the game erodes with this change.