Is check necessary?

In similar discussions I've seen people say either an older version of chess or a similar game (I've forgotten) had/has the rule the stalemate is a loss... for the side giving stalemate!

But anyway, this is a good question, and much less silly than "why can't pawns ride the knights?" or some dumb thing.  But even so, what I like to say to those is the game and rules aren't meant to tell a story or emulate real battle / war or anything like that.  The rules are only there to make a game rich in strategy and tactics that's enjoyable, and I think the current rules are good.

Not that I don't understand the logic.  Sometimes I think during a game, if my king is in check, why can't I counter with a check and if they capture my king I capture theirs and it's a draw?  Seem fair to me

Well right now if you are in an OTB tournament and you move your king onto a square controlled by an enemy piece and then punch the clock...what happens? While the clock was depressed during your illegal move, your opponent lost time that he shouldnt have lost.

Suppose in the worst case scenario, your opponent was off in the bathroom while you made your illegal move, and he lost 5 minutes on his clock. When he returns, he sees your king is on an illegal square, so what now? Just unpunching the clock doesnt undo the damage to his time.

I think in that case you need to call the TD over so he can reset the clocks, but I am not sure.

If instead the rule was "capture the king", then the solution is obvious...the game would end right there!

I guess because if someone stabs you first, you're not alive to make the return stab... but I know the feeling :-)

They should give you two queens and king should be able to duck behind a rook to escape check.

All jokes aside, it's an interesting thought...

All jokes back on check out this video for the real future of chess:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZV1bpMamCtY

That's what people say, but it's silly.  My last orders to my bishop are... if I die, kill the enemy king... "ok boss" then next turn king dies, so then bishop retaliates. ez pz.

Totally Agree, chess should be about capturing the king, stalemates don't need to change at all... That's a separate rule. Just allow placing the king into check and make it not mandatory to remove the king from check.

The game doesn't change in the slightest for experts, and beginners wouldn't have to suffer the "that move is not allowed" warning so often. Plus, the real advantage is when playing fast games in a physical board when both players miss a check and find out several moves later that the whole game has been invalid for the past 3 or 4 moves.