That's bonkers. 
It could add twenty possible moves to some positions! I'd miss stalemates too.
Time Oriented Chess Style (TOCS)
Sort:
May 29, 2015
0
#2
May 29, 2015
0
#3
I don't see a rationale for rule 1.
Rule 2 would make many won endgames drawn, including K+R vs K. So it's idiotic.
Tatzelwurm wrote:
I don't see a rationale for rule 1.
Rule 2 would make many won endgames drawn, including K+R vs K. So it's idiotic.
well the rationale for rule 1 is, don't be reckless! you may be ambushed on the road.... Plus, if "en passant" makes sense, why shoulden't rule 1?
about the second comment, you truely have a good point. K+R should absolutly win K. i'll look for some elegant solution for that :)
so i got this idea, and i wonder what do you think.
I wonder what it would be like, to play chess with an additional two rules, which make the game more "time oriented".
1. Every piece can "en passant" every piece.
for instance, in this position, bishop attacks the king.
but little did he know that rook can capture "en passant":
It changes the game dramaticly and it may cause players to watch each other's peaces trails carefully....
Breath on to the 2nd rule i suggest.
2. Every turn a player can choose to stand still. This means, that he may not move any peace. It cannot happen while the same player is in check. this rule has some implications. For instance, if white stands, then black stands, then white again, it's a draw. In addition, a stalemate can't happen.
I think these rules give somewhat realistic perspective to the game. I'm quite sure, they're not going to improve it, but I find it interesting to wonder what it would be like, to play TOCS.
What do you think?