Chess variants--Love 'em or hate 'em?

It was at first Capablanca's idea of creating a variation of chess to reduce the chance of tying games and to make the game more exciting and unpredictable.  He proposed the new chess board to be 10 by 8, either adding a chancellor (combining movements of rook and knight) and an archbishop (combining bishop and knight) plus two more pawns, or adding an extra queen plus an abassador (who can move as a queen and a knight).  All chess rules apply.  Even though the public at first rejected the idea, he had inspired others to create variations of chess (e.g. antichess, fischerandom, etc.) either by slightly adjusted rules or different boards and pieces. Do you like those chess variants, and which ones do you like? 

Some of the variants I created back in the days before computers included one where you had to put an opponents piece back on the board immediately after you captured it. Material was always equal and quadruple pawns were common.

Another variant was functionless pieces were the first person to move a piece got to assign it a function. usually we had a bunch of weird Knights that might move up 3 and over 5, etc.. We eventually stopped using teleportation and atomic dead zones.

But my favorite invention was always POWERCHESS:

1. The pawns moved diagonally and captured horizontally or vertically.
2. The Knights also have the powers of a Bishop.
3. The Queen also had the powers of a Knight. They can checkmate all by themselves.
4. The King had one teleportation move per game.
5. The Bishops were allowed to jump over one thing but not two things. So if there are two pawns between a Bishop and a King both pawns are pinned.
6. And the master piece of POWERCHESS... da Rooks. Rooks were now Tanks. Instead of occupying a square held by another piece they would push the piece to the next square. For example a Tank on a1 could move to b2 and push the pawn on be to c3. You could also take your own material with a Tank. On the first move the Tank on h1 could move to g1 pushing the Knight/Bishop to f1 which pushed the Jumping Bishop to e1 which pushed the teleporting King... until finally the last pieces was pushed off the board.

Then there were the usual variants that most bored players try:

1. Wrap around chess. The Rooks are already protecting each other and Bishops are decisively more powerful than Knights
2. Using dice to decide who moves. 1 = pawn, 2 = Knight, ... etc..
3. Multiboard tandem chess. Imagine playing bughouse and being fed from the boards on your left and right.
4. Three people taking turns on one board so every other move you changed colors.
5. Promotion! In this variant each side starts with 8 pawns set up as per chess. When a pan reaches the other side it becomes a Knight. The Knight has to come back to your side to become a Bishop. Next it goes back to the opponents side to become a Rook. Finally the Rook comes back to become a Queen. (Sometimes we allowed a Queen to promote to a King plus some more pawns.)

Even back in the early days of chess they held a tournament where the Knights and Bishops were reversed because "They had played all the moves there were to play." I think I read about this tourney in Irving Chernev and Fred Reinfeld's Fireside Book of Chess.

Frankly, I think regular chess is enough of a challenge. Mabe if I were Anand I would consider them.

pawnshover:

Those were certainly interesting chess variants!

Loser's chess can be instructive, but you can't play it here.

Some variants are very useful in preparing for standard chess.  For example, I encouraged the high school chess team I coached to play Bughouse because they had to visualize where a Knight or Bishop or even a Pawn would win for them - and ask their partner to provide it - and give them a better understanding and intuition of the unique abilities of each Piece.

Otherwise, if it's fun for people to play, why not?

Not my cup of tea, frankly I consider them a waste of time. Let other people enjoy it.

FIDE Chess is a chess variant.

Please check your facts carefully before you respond.

Thank you.

Warlord

I don't like any variant except 3 check, bughouse, crazyhouse, and 4 player chess

Loser's chess and Seirawan chess are moderately interesting. Other variants meh.

I like variants with different pieces

I'm currently involved in one game.  Was curious about what one would be like.  Takes a lot of time.  But at least your opponent and you are on equal footing:  no memorized openings. (most likely)  They screw up your ability to play regular chess.  So, no 'love'.  Hate…?  Not that, either…  This: