Coward
Moves as a queen, but can not capture pieces. Must move when an enemy piece is threatening to capture it.
Coward
Moves as a queen, but can not capture pieces. Must move when an enemy piece is threatening to capture it.
Discussion on already very weak pieces here:
https://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess960-chess-variants/weakest-and-strongest-pieces
Coward
Moves as a queen, but can not capture pieces. Must move when an enemy piece is threatening to capture it.
That's almost the Wuss:
http://play.chessvariants.com/wuss
what if it and the king are forked? which is moved?
The Jester
The adjacent pieces cannot move because they are being amused by the Jester. Any piece can land on a square that is adjacent to the Jester, but that piece cannot move again until the Jester moves away from it.
The Hot Potato
Every turn (at the end of the turn) it moves to a random square (within two spaces, horizontal, diagonal, or a combination of both) occupied by one of your pieces, and every five turns, captures the piece upon which it resides. The King is immune to the Hot Potato. If the piece upon which the Hot Potato resides is captured, so is the Hot Potato. It starts on a1 for white and h8 for black. If the Hot Potato is not within two squares of another friendly piece, it will be passed to an opposing piece. If there are no pieces within two squares of a Hot Potato, the Hot Potato captures itself and the piece upon which it resides.
The spy
The enemy, if the spy is adjacent to one of your pieces, can capture that piece as a move (unless the piece is a king). Spy moves like a pawn, and captures the other player's pieces like a pawn.
This isn't a bad piece, but how about this?
Chess is a game that models warfare, right?
What if another player can send "troops" in onto your side? Provided that they have enough pieces in their own board.
Now I'm thinking that in tournaments you can make alliances with other players, that would be messed up
The spy
The enemy, if the spy is adjacent to one of your pieces, can capture that piece as a move (unless the piece is a king). Spy moves like a pawn, and captures the other player's pieces like a pawn.
I should probably clarify that it is your piece, it just is completely useless to you. If you promote it, it turns into an enemy queen
The Gandhi. Complete pacifist and will not capture any enemy pieces. Any pieces directly behind it will join it in a march to the 8th rank, where they will then be captured.
The Gandhi. Complete pacifist and will not capture any enemy pieces. Any pieces directly behind it will join it in a march to the 8th rank, where they will then be captured.
The Treasurer
Moves one square orthogonally, not backwards. Cannot capture any piece but can be captured.
Any piece capturing a Treasurer promotes to another piece at will - also considering the general promotion rules which apply in the game being played.
This piece offers your opponent promotion opportunities, so it is bad to have in your army. You'd probably keep the piece covered by a pawn, as to lower the profit of capturing it for your opponent. By doing so, it will probably remain an annoying obstacle in your own position.
I would like to introduce a new challenge. But as opposed to this topic I would like to be serious about this challenge.
The challenge is to invent a piece, which is bad to have at your disposal. Bad enough so that losing the piece would be an advantage, and capturing the opponent's one would be a disadvantage.
But in the end, the piece should be an interesting extension of the game.
To make this challenge more exciting, we could in the end vote for the best bad piece, and the inventor will gain a trophee.