If you could add or remove 1 rule to chess, what would that rule be?

I would probably make a rule according to which a different amount of points is granted for different types of draws/stalemates. For example, if you force a draw by repetition I think the point distribution should be something like 2/3-1/3 rather than 1/2-1/2, or something along those lines.

I want to invent my own chess variation game, and one of those rules are to improve the knight to suit long distances and endgames. I'd make it that if one of your own pieces was in a spot the knight could land, it can instead opt to keep "riding" along that file/rank until there's a vacant square or a square with an enemy's piece on that you can land on. Not only would it improve the knight, but it would make for some clever traps.

3 points for a win
1 point for a draw
0 points for a loss

Like in that Bilbao (or how its spelled) tournements. And maby its on its way! I cant stand those GMs that take a draw after 10 moves. 

Not a rule of the game, but I would make it a regulation in top tournaments for at least on super GM to publicly analyze the game for the spectators after the game ends, like in Wijk An Zee. People are too much obsessed with the "sofia rule," I myself don't think draws are a problem, but watching those analysis videos by the super strong players themselves are priceless imo.

White first move advantage ...

Lasers.

I would make it so that a pawn promotion could only be promoted to a piece that has already been captured.  To me, getting the pawn to the end of the board is like getting deep into enemy territory.  So you can "sacrifice yourself" and free one of your captured prisoners.  And if your queen hasn't been captured yet, then you can't turn your pawn into a queen.  Only into a piece that has already been captured.

And how exactly would you get rid of that without giving the same advantage to black?

but what if there are no pieces captured?

Then in that case the pawn sits on the 8th/1st rank taking up space until a piece is captured.

Look here

http://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/proposal-to-equalize-black

I would add more cowbell.  Isn't it obvious???

I will not add/remove a single rule. Because today's rule are at perfect fit for playing this wonderful game.

I've got a fever...

I think that pieces should be replaced by shotglasses.

I would say you get nothing.  Why are you pushing your soldier so far into enemy territory if there isn't a reason to?  It would add an extra thing to think about when pushing your pawns down the board.

And as another poster said, maybe the pawn just stays there, until a piece is captured.  But it obviously cannot move any more, so it's a dead duck, unless you sacrifice a piece for something of theirs.  Again, something else to consider when moving your pawns.

I think it is tricky enough to promote pawns without also thinking about what it will become. Though I think it would be interesting in certain endgames if your first promoted pawn was a knight or bishop, then the second one is a rook, the third a queen...

My suggestion was more in keeping in the spirit of a war game.  Your opponent captures your "men" and then you can free them.  Turning a pawn into just any random piece is, well, just random.  Anyway, it was just a thought.  I actually like the fact that it involves more thought when promoting your pawns.

you know, because there just isn't enough thinking in chess. 

Not allow me to play.

I agree with ivandh...1st pawn  n or b...2nd pawn r...3rd pawn q