May I mention that the existing variant Superchess has a piece called Joker which works more or less the same?
Joker Chess
Sort:
The piece also features in omega chess' 'advanced rules' though I don't think a set for omega chess advanced was ever produced.
I don't think a joker can put a king in check. But when the joker is "within sight" of a king he will prevent the opponent from making any move where the joker in return can attack the king.
The joker is a great piece - an example of a game with both a joker and angel is (here).
Btw, I don't think I agree about 10x8 boards being asymmetrical (even when there is only one piece on one side). The board can be setup with 180° rotational symmetry (see below).
The only non-symmetrical aspect is that White moves first, which is the same as normal chess.
Also, what's the purpose of letting the joker move like a queen on its first move? You already have two jokers, and there's many ways the joker can come into play without that special rule. What's your thinking? Just curious.
When I say asymmetrical, I meant that the board's size is rectangular, not that the positions of the pieces are asymmetric. Wrong choice of words. I just prefer square boards over rectangular ones. The idea behind 10x8 over 10x10 is that hand-to-hand fights start sooner, I think. But the 10x10 board then requires you to give pawns a triple-step option in addition to its double-step option, unless the pieces are shifted up a rank. So, I ended up just using the 10x8 board.
And a joker's check isn't really a check, it's more or less an indirect absolute pin. But in an endgame where you're chasing down a king with your own king and a joker, is it stalemate or checkmate once you corner your opponent's king with the joker?
The purpose for the initial queen move was so that the joker can get into the fray really early. At least, that's what my line of thought was when I came up with it. Once you move a pawn out of the way, it makes the jokers immediately active.
If it's joker and king against a king, I think that's the same as two kings against a lone king. (one king of the pair is not royal). Every move, the joker gets a king's move.
I'm not sure if that's enough to checkmate. That is probably a draw due to insufficient material.
I think your game is excellent, but a joker initially moving like a queen is not necessary in my opinion,
A joker can come out anytime the opponent moves a knight, or with one pawn move, can come out with a bishop or a queen move. And like rooks, they can remain valuable even if not moved for a while.
I hope to see the game played sometime.
Is king and mann vs king a draw? Do you know if there's any available theory on that? If there isn't, I could always plug an endgame like that into winboard.
Perhaps the initial queen move is unnecessary. I tried an initial non-capturing queen move, and also an initial amazon move, but I get that any sort of initial move on the joker kinda goes against the idea that it's a wild card piece, that it must move by mimicking the opponent's moves.
And as for games? No; there's more than enough play-by-forum threads as it is. You could always play a game with me through PMs. I just wanted to put this out there because I wanted to share one of my own personal experience with chess variants.
I just want you to know Ebinola that I had a dream last night about Game theory and about how chess is played. I had a dream that there was a piece missing off the chess board that was very crucial to the game. I had a dream that there was a Joker piece missing off the board that moved in a triangle kind of like a rhetorical triangle in speech, knowledge and expression. So I googled joker chess in Bing and came across your new invented game of chess. I was astounded because I live all the way in Northern California and it is crazy that we both have had the same ideas about chess. I always thought it was odd that when a king castles it makes the game much harder fo beginners of the game because it takes a complexity in mathematics and logic to lean how to unseat a king from his castle. knowing how to beat a castled king separates the beginner chess player from the intermediate or advanced player. It is not hard to figure out how to unseat a king but I always thought the complexity of it was counterintuitive to a game that is usually very intuitive even to someone who just learned the rules. In my dream the joker moves in a triangle as to trap the king or to stalemate him. Than I read how you wrote that the joker first starts out making its first move as the queen which makes perfect sense because in ancient times the Joker walked a fine line and put himself on display in front of the kingdom and the king by making fun of the king and his misgiven's. But if the Joker jabbed at the king or said a joke that was cut to deep that the king did not like than it was off with his head. The joker must have had to impress the queen or make her laugh so that she may persuade the king to laugh along and not have him executed. It is very important that the jokers first move must be that of a queen. It also makes sense that the Joker piece copies that last piece of the player before him as in ancient times the Joker must make fun of the very last misgiven or mistake the kingdom has just made because if the Joker spent to much time on an old joke that jabbed at the king than the joker would be executed or lose all of its power as it focuses to much time on making fun of the king or one particular player instead of the other players in the kingdom that made a mistake more recently. The joker would make fun of the knight or bishop that made a mistake or misgiven that affected the kingdom in order to make the king and everyone else in the kingdom laugh including the Knight or bishop that had recently just made a bad mistake or misgiven that affected the entire kingdom. The joker must copy the last piece that had just moved because another piece moving affects how the joker goes into play or makes his joke towards the entire kingdom or all the players on the board. It makes a lot of sense that the joker loses power as all the other pieces are taken off the board because as all the other pieces are killed or eliminated the joker cannot do what he does best and make fun of them or attack them because it was a fopaw to make fun of a knight or bishop who made a mistake that had just died or been killed because that was very disrespectful. That is why the joker used satire to make fun of them and not an outright cruel joke directed towards the recently killed player. and even the joker in all his cruel jokes must honor the dead or the rest of the kingdom or players would turn against him and he would lose all his power and be executed by the king or the people. It it also very important that the joker loses its main power by copying a pawn because who would want to copy a pawn anyway because it has limited moves and use to the kingdom or other pieces. I agree that the joker acts as a stalemated player and pins the king so it cannot escape and make his next move as that was the power of the joker in ancient times. The joker could mold a consensus through his jokes and affect culture in a way which made the king listen to the people or his subjects rather than using his absolute power and authority as a king. The joker is much more powerful in the beginning because it has more options and players to copy. The initial queen move is very necessary as the joker must copy the most powerful player on the board to eliminate other players. As time goes on the joker loses its privileges as the other pieces are killed. I think if a joker corners a king than it would be much easier for a rook or bishop to eliminate him. If the joker tries to encircle the king in a triangle formation than it forces the player to move other pieces to protect the king. While the joker encircles the king the other pieces like the rook, bishop, or queen can be used from far away to eliminate the king while the other pieces are trying to protect the king because they are distracting the player. the jokers main objective is encirclement. I think moving the knight towards the joker would be the jokers biggest enemy as the joker has to follow the same move as the knight diverting his attack away from the king. Using the bishop, queen ,or rook after the kings encirclement by the joker would be a big mistake because than the joker would be able to copy that move and eliminate another player. I don't think the joker could outright kill a king only in perfect conditions. it would be like once in 176,000 times or more that a joker could actually out right kill a king. The jokers best use would be to use him in the shape of a pentagram on the board as the other players would have to scramble and readjust to protect the king and the other players. we should play this game together Ebinola . you are an absolute genius, I feel that chess was meant to be played this way in a more asymmetrical way because reality is asymmetrical in nature. I have a feeling that people played chess in this manor predating Shakespeare's time.
When I started to invest time in chess variants, I figured that in order to get a better grip on them, I had to make a variant of my own. So you could consider this my first ever variant. Considering how popular 10x8 variants are here, it will be interesting to hear your thoughts.
At the time, I had just discovered Capablanca chess, and I was fascinated by the concept of a bigger board and new pieces. Nowadays I'm not a big fan of the 10x8 board because of its asymmetry, but back then I really wanted to use it in a variant of my own. It was also about that time that I had discovered the joker piece, a piece which moved like the last piece moved by the opponent. It was really alien, but at the same time it was also very familiar; it felt like it belonged in the chess piece family, but the way in which it moved completely went against the ideas of chess. I simply had to use it in a variant. So, I combined the two concepts, found a second smaller chess set and truncated the king and queen, sanded them down a bit and gave them a finish, got some plywood and I made a board out of it. And in January of 2015, joker chess was born.
Joker chess is played on a 10x8 board with an extra new piece - the joker. Both players start with 2 jokers on the b and i files. This ensures that the knights are nearer the center, as a common problem found within 10x8 variants is that the knights are too far away from the center unless they're on the c and h files. The joker, on its initial move, may move as a queen. It also moves and captures like the last piece moved by the opponent. This creates unique scenarios not seen in vanilla chess, such as indirect pins and 'joker checks.' A joker check is a bit different from a regular check because it can be escaped by moving a piece which then makes the joker unable to capture the king. Say if White's king was on e4, and Black's joker moved like a rook to e6. White could then move a knight, and in doing so escape check. The joker cannot promote if it copies a pawn. The value of the joker is more or less unknown, but I would guess that it's about as strong as a queen initially but loses some value over time as the number of pieces on the board lessens.
From the document I had made with the variant, I established that stalemate is a loss for the stalemated player. This respects the stalemate rule of old. Also from the document I established a method of recording the joker's moves. When it moves, the move is labelled as J(X), where X is the name of the piece it copied in algebraic chess notation. If the joker copies a pawn, the letter P will be used. I don't believe that this kind of notation is necessary anymore, since anyone who is viewing a recorded game will know the joker's available moves at a certain point in time by looking at the last piece moved by the opponent. Castling is the exact same as it is in regular chess - the king moves two squares towards a rook, then the rook immediately moves to the first square the king crossed over. Aside from that, the rules are the exact same as they are in vanilla chess.
A year or so down the line, and I discovered s-chess. The drop rule allows for the archbishop and chancellor to be on the board without having to make 8x8 board bigger, which I liked a lot. I then decided to create a fork of the original joker chess. This 'joker s-chess' plays exactly like s-chess, but you are only given one joker to drop into play. I even tried playing s-chess with the joker as an extra piece in hand. It wasn't a very pretty sight. The joker was far, far too powerful. Better to keep s-chess as a separate entity and not muck it up with any extra and more complex pieces.
So, let me know what you think! I reckon I did a decent job for my first variant.