New Piece: Metamorph

I'm not sure what you mean but does this answer your question?

"The notation for changing forms is M-[The form]. Examples: Normal to attack form would be: M-AttackForm. Defense to normal would be: M-NormalForm"

This seems kinda excessive, surely 

MA, MD and MN are sufficient.

For those who wish to watch: https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/test-game-with-metamorph-captaintugwash-v-marks1420

"M" is used for all forms for simplicity's sake. 

I prefer the form I mentioned because it is the most sure way to avoid notating mistakes. Remember, it only applies for when you want to change forms. 

Yes, that's exactly what I meant. Every version of this piece on both colors of squares (for people who make boards by cut-and-paste).

I might want to play this game or mod a game eventually. I'll watch the game that started for now.

Some assumptions/suggestions wrt Metamorph and Joker:

When a Metamorph moves, the opponent's Joker imitates the normal move and capture abilities of the form that that Metamorph has while completing that move.

When a Metamorph changes form, the opponent's Joker imitates te new form.

The ability to capture a Dwarf without a second allied piece also attacking the Dwarf, is a special ability and is not inherited by the Joker.

The transparency abilities are not inherited by the Joker.

The dwarf strikes back!

Thought: Can a king castle through check if the checked square is supported by a defense-form metamorph? Is there a rule about it with the angel that could clarify it?

For the Angel we concluded that you can castle through a protected square.

ok so lemme get this clear:

Normal Form: Witch & Guard

Attack Form: Spirit (Difference: Can capture) & Guard

Defense Form: Angel & Dwarf (Difference: Cannot capture)

is it right?

No. Check my post #29 that is an accurate summary. Although nothing just beats the original description from Marks.

ok

Just one thing: In defense form, allied adjacent pieces are immune from capture, but not immune from special effects such as transparency. Only the metamorph itself is immune from such effects. 

That's an important detail. I had missed it until now.

Question, can you clarify these situations?

Diagram 1

Diagram 2

Diagram 3

Diagram 4

Diagram 1 can happen when a player promotes and gets a 2nd metamorf.

Diagram 2 can happen when people want to play a rated game with Metamorf and Angel in one army (I would regret it if such a combination would not be eligible for rated Bulldog).

Diagram 3 is not your responsibility, but maybe we can draft a rule about allied protectors in general.

So question is can we add a rule that prevents a path to forced draw?

My suggestion is to state that two allied protectors never protect eachother against capture.

Diagram 4 is no problem, we can allow a protector to protect a Metamorf in attack or normal form.

Is diagram 3 possibly a win for white?

If diagram 3 is winnable for white, then your suggested rule would turn a win into a loss, which is extremely unfair, imo. Diagrams 1 and 2 can't be winning for white because the metamoprh would need to un-defense to move around.

lol that would be amusing. I can see how it might happen too, the queens are useless defending against the attacking king which cannot be captured. The problem though would be that white needs to move three pieces to advance the king safely, while black only needs to move his king to avoid losing.

Here is my answer: Metamorphs cannot provide immunity to other pieces/forms which grant immunity.  I will add this to the rules.

Although it is not my discretion, I think Angels should be able to grant immunity to any piece. We don't need to alter both pieces here. I think altering the metamorphs makes more sense since diagram 1 and 2 are not winnable while diagram 3 is conceivably a win for white.