19. because stalemating the opponent would win a game hundreds of years ago.
Hypothetical Rule Changes
Sort:
Bishops can do en passant lol that's my idea... (not that it's realistic)
A friend and me used to play the following rule:
Once every game you can force your opponent to make a different move.
Makes for interesting tactics, you have to keep 2 defenses agains possible mates until your opponent has used his option..
Hi gang,
Chess960, ... Nuff said.
Watch your backrank.
7
I vote for 25!
WanderingWinder wrote:
Well, it's not a stalemate, but it is a draw. And that's the major point of the rule change.
I meant stalemate in the deadlocked sense, not in the chessic sense.
If the point of the change is to allow someone to force a draw at any time (even if the game is only two moves in) then I don't see how that would make the game better.