i request to include my "secret kings variant"

Yeah this is cool!

Sorry about the double up, maybe you guys could agree on a name if it were to be accepted (?).

Still super cool concept : D

I would encourage you to join the variants club too (if you haven't already) that's likely why Green's forum got more replies etc.

We've been talking in PMs about the rules and such, and we both agreed that Ahab Chess is a cooler name, so that's probably what we'd go with.

what is the variants club???

nevermind i found it

Wow, will this variant be called "Secret King" or "Ahab Chess"?

Ahab Chess. We're still discussing the rule differences, but we settled on the name.

Royal king can't be queen/rook, simply no way you can catch them.

you can't put your king in check so therefore you can't allow yourself to be in check

I think you should be able to put your king in check.

That way there would be no checks.

I feel like it is too simple to tell what it is if you attack it and the piece always moves.

why have someone constaintly call shots in the dark? theres no stratagy, checks allows you to pin point its location

People in other clubs copying and now I know that people copying in the same club .

really? thats not cool i think i was one of the first to suggest this idea (hopefully i was) and it would be rude for others to take credit. (excluding greens leaves he actually independently came up with it 2 weeks after i)

That's people for you

it's greensleeves

Each of them independently thought about that variant. I also have the evidences:

@arctevious_the_3rd posted before, then how could she copy? Using time machine?

@Green_sleeves posted after, but he explained why it should be called "Ahab chess". In USA, there isn't the story of Ahab king.

And they don't negate other's idea. Nothing should we talk.

So this could be copied and just because in the USA the Ahab king story is not their means nothing.

I think what is meant by this is that it's what we call a "capture the king" variant. Where checks are not forcing moves. Check notation would also be an issue of sorts, one should not be able to simple threaten a piece and notice that the move qualified as a "check". xD

Well, if we go the route of checks instead of capture-the-royal (we still haven't decided), the + would just need to be hidden from the notation, in a similar way to how in Fog of War, the notation of your opponent is always only visible to you as "?."

Oh right, I misunderstood (possibly?)

It's a lot to figure out I guess, then there's the whole testing process