Interesting Scenario.

this is the conversation I had with Bing Copilot about a really interesting scenario. Here is how it went:

   Me and my bro where playing chess and came upon a situation. I was wondering if I could share.

 Copilot
Certainly! Let’s examine the chessboard setup you’ve provided. Please go ahead and describe the positions of the pieces, and I’ll analyze it for you. 👑♟️

You
Have the Black king at position D,5 and his rook at D,6. assume the rest of Black's pieces have been captured. As for White his king is at B,4 and his knight is at A,4. assume the rest of White's pieces have been captured.

The A.I. upon request simplified it to

Black King is at position D5 
Black Rook is at position D6 
White King is at position B4.
White Knight is at position A4. 

What I'm about to Copy/Paste below is the scenario itself along with the A.I. reply and a rule I proposed That could fix this situation and lead to an interesting end:

Now for this scenario say it's White's turn and he moves the knight to C,4 putting Black king in check.  per rules Black king would have to move out of check. but for this scenario we will pretend that he doesn't have to but instead moves his rook to B, 6. During White's turn he could end the game and take the king. This stumps me because as per real life battle the rook could kill the king regardless of whether his king is dead or not thus causing a stalemate. I feel that because scenarios like this exist a rule should be made if it does not exist that: 'If a King in Check can put his Opponent in Check it results in a stalemate.

Copilot

Ah, the intricate dance of chess! Your scenario presents a fascinating conundrum, and I appreciate your thoughtful consideration. Let’s delve into this intriguing situation:

Black King in Check: White’s knight has boldly leaped to C3, putting Black’s king in check. The rules dictate that Black’s king should move out of check, but for our fictional twist, let’s imagine it remains defiantly in place.
Black Rook’s Bold Move: Black’s rook, perhaps sensing the gravity of the moment, slides to B6. A daring maneuver, indeed!
White’s Critical Decision: Now it’s White’s turn. The white king eyes the black king hungrily. The rook stands ready to strike. But wait! The black king, though imperiled, still has some fight left.
The Stalemate Dilemma: You raise a valid point. In real-life battles, a rook could indeed eliminate a king, regardless of the king’s status. However, in the realm of chess, we must adhere to the rules. If the black king were to capture the white king, it would be checkmate, and the game would end. But alas, the black king is stubbornly refusing to move.
Proposing a New Rule: Your proposed rule— “If a King in Check can put his Opponent in Check, it results in a stalemate”—is intriguing. It would add a layer of complexity and strategic depth. Imagine the tension as kings face off, each threatening the other. A delicate balance between survival and aggression.
The Stalemate Resolution: While this rule doesn’t currently exist in standard chess, it’s a fascinating concept. Perhaps it could lead to more thrilling endgames. However, for now, we’ll stick to tradition: the black king remains in check, and the game continues.
Remember, chess is a dance of strategy, rules, and imagination. Whether we adopt new rules or cherish the old, the beauty lies in the endless possibilities on the 64 squares. 🤔♟️👑

 I have Posted this today in the hopes of seeing other people's stand in this situation and if people would be willing to see this rule in effect.

A rule like that would end up with a lot more games ending as draw, which I don't think most people would want.

Replying to Martin_Stahl.

True but it would also lead to quicker endings, which are useful in some games between friends pressed for time or if you just straight up preferer that your opponent does not win. Honestly all I really want the rule for is a more realistic feel.

Here is a revision to said proposed rule.

If a player is put into Check and has the ability to put his opponent in Check, instead of moving out of Check on his turn he can instead move to put the opponent in Check and that itself would be the choice of Stalemate if the opponent who is now in check chooses not to move but instead go for the kill.

There are variants of fast chess that allow you to leave your king in check, but you lose if your opponent captures your King. The idea is that it is your King that directs the other pieces and so the player that first captures the other king wins as the rook in your example no longer receives orders from their their now defeated King, and so can no longer do the 2nd capture.

Replying to AngusByers

Those variants of fast chess are pretty cool and they themselves utilize to an extent the rule I'd like to add to official chess. But as I stated before in real life warfare the rook would still make the 2nd capture ending in a Tie or Stalemate which is what the rule would allow for. Still pretty cool that there are variants of chess that exist that allow for you to put the King in Check. thanks for letting me know of their existence.