experimental chess set design

---

 They can move one vertically one square forward (two on their first move) and they capture one square diagonally forward.

---

 True. There should be a line that's vertical between the Y arms.

---

 That would imply, the pawn moves backword.

---

 Read post #22.

---

No, the lines would point towards the possible pawn moves from the point of origin -- the tip of the arrow.  This is consistent with the design of the other pieces.

Incidentally, in a previous discussion here about universal symbols someone put forth the idea that an arrow was one such symbol.  After a little research, I managed to find a reference to the Australian Aboriginal peoples actually interpreting arrows as pointing in the wrong direction.  Why?  Apparently they viewed them not as arrows pointing directionally towards the tip, but rather as an emu's footprint, for which the direction of travel would be opposite to the typical interpretation of an arrow.

or

I'm saying that the mind after seeing the Staunton piece has to translate it to a geometrical pattern, so why not just start with the geomterical pattern first?

---

That's what I'm talking about.

Sorry, I am busy hunting emus.

(emu foot from Flickr)

I think he's heading thataway:

<---

for the pawn ?

Wow. Bomstrown, I love the chess set, as well as the thinking that went into it.  I find it astonishing, that goldendog designed so similar a set (actually, similarities aside, just the fact that two individuals designed, and built, original sets is astonishing enough).  Your workmanship looks as good as the design.  I'm not sure it's an "improvement," since I like the figurines in traditional sets, but it's certainly an alternate and equally valid representation.

Thanks. Right, I'm not presenting it as an improvement that all players would appreciate, merely an alternate way to represent the pieces. I think it does say something the people can come up with similar symbols to represent the pieces independently. Symbols are not new to chess when it comes to representing the pieces. The late Marcel Duchamp came up with an artistic design back when he was immersed in chess and I'm pretty sure others have done it too. I was interested to get a better understanding of the way the brain handles the chess pieces. It can sometimes seem like a jumble of images when planning the next move. Layers of visual-spatial pieces of information. I thought what if I can cut through to the common denominator of all of these chess thoughts...the lines that the pieces travel along. Maybe it would help with the calculations. I dunno. We'll see if it helps any as I play through some games.

Paw to a4.

The Purrfect Opening.

I prefer Staunton sets

have you thought of gluing multiples of the same piece on top of each other to build them up vertically so they present a taller profile and also make them easier to handle?  this set of yours brings to mind a famous series of art chess sets from the bauhaus period (1924) designed by josef hartwig.  same concept illustrating the piece movement, only more stylized (simplified).  just google his name to see it because i don't yet know how to attach pics.  anyways, good effort on your part; i also like your choice of colors for the pieces.

Sorry, I'd rather go with the standard Staunton pieces.  I already have it ingrained into my brain how they move, so changing the look of the pieces would make it harder for me to play with this set you designed than with regular Staunton.

However, this reminds me of a chess set for beginners I've seen where it had printed on the base of each piece how that particular piece moves, like this one for example: