Have you named your pieces yet?

pretty sure only bad players name their pieces or do things like that

J. Rawson hints to talk with your pieces while playing. So this is a good idea normally. But in my case it leads to often to apologies what I did to them. :-(

Chess does seem a bit psychopathic. You sacrifice your peons, warriors, priests, castles, and queen all in the name of the king!

Nice idea, from now on I will call my king Ned Stark.

3 problems I can envisage with this idea:

1) Naming your opponents pieces is definitely a bad idea. Farmers do not name their livestock because once you have named an animal you cannot eat it. (Who would eat a Bambi sandwich?). So if you give your opponents pieces names then you can't take them.

2) If you give your own pieces a personality then it could be problematic to sacrifice them. Years ago the Battlechess queen looked and moved like Jessica Rabbit. Boys of a certain age made sure the queens stayed on the board till the end.

3) When you get one of your little chaps Albert to Henry to the back rank you would, in all decency, have to underpromote. Otherwise which changing room would they use to make the transformation? Can you imagine the fuss all those princesses would make when an uncouth peasant walked in and started to strip off his clothes? It just wouldn't do! So you would be putting yourself at a disadvantage.

The only piece you can really name is your King because he can never be sacrificed and can't promote. And even naming kings is a bit problematic. My current king has lasted 3 games so far, almost a record. All hail his majesty the good King Baldrick MDCCLXXVII.  

Well, Elvis Presley called his "piece" ,  little Elvis...But then he was the King.

I actually love the idea of putting my kings into dyanasties with winning streaks. That's a fantastic idea.

My king is called Sam Malone and my queen is Rebecca Howe.

Are the rooks Norm and Cliff? 

 Indeed, you remind me of something. What happens in chess is really amazing. A lowly peasant can become a Royal Highness

I call my Queen Cordellia, after the dog.

Most of my Kings don't last long enough to found a dynasty. Even if they survive long enough to take the necessary first step (i.e. find their way to the queen's bed chamber) their queens are lucky to stay alive for 9 minutes, never mind 9 months. So I'm afraid the Baldricks are not really a dynasty as such. Anybody willing to take on a job with such a limited life expectancy is sure to be accepted and become Baldrick the Next aka Baldrick the Doomed. Baldrick MDCCLXXVII (known as Baldrick the Fortunate) was a reluctant candidate. He was actually on death row and was offered the choice, the gallows or the throne. He chose the gallows but was over-ruled. Despite this inauspicious start, he has enjoyed his three games in charge, mainly because during that time he has had no less than four queens. His first queen was Ursula the Unbecoming; he failed to find his way to her bedchamber and sacrificed her, some say with unseemly haste, in order to promote a new queen of his own choosing. Since then he has had few problems finding the bed chamber but his consorts have not lasted long, since Baldrick the Fortunate has a liking for queen sacrifices. Candidates for the job of queen have suddenly become very scarce. Ironically there is now a waiting list to become king, mostly from death row where Baldrick the Fortunate is known as Baldrick that Jammy Little B*s*ard!

:)