It usually is in a standard Tournament chess set.
Topic: The king should be the tallest piece. Discuss.
Sort:
Only if you're trying to win.
The queen is the tallest in both of my chess sets. 
I believe the king is the tallest.
While the capture of the king moght be the aim of the game, the Queen is the most powerful piece on the board so I can understand why they might make her taller!
Bishops are taller than rooks. So are pawns sometimes.
I like my Staunton chess set, the king is the tallest and heaviest piece
Jun 29, 2009
0
#9
Kupov wrote:
Bishops are taller than rooks. So are pawns sometimes.
That's what I don't understand. All the other pieces are in order of value in terms of height.
in the original Stauntom sets from Jaques, the rooks are much more massive. I prefer the old rooks. They are important pieces after all.\
There is also an aesthetic to follow, such as the natural flow down in height from king to queen to bishop to knight to rook, as they sit in the starting positions. While the rook is almost always shorter than the knight in the old sets, the rook is also a big fat tower and is more massive than the knight. Seems correct.
For me when it comes to selecting a chess set its all about the horse.
The king and queen are equal in height with my board.
How would the king hide behind the queen if he was taller? 
I agree with trant
the king is at least one centimeter taller than my queen
my pieces are all massive and barely fit on the squares so any position feels like a cramped position
In my chess set, the height order is pawn, bishop, knight, rook, queen, king.
'The King' is the tallest piece, as illustrated by this diagram:
Jun 30, 2009
0
#19
Ive always seen a similarity in the rook and the U.S. dime. The rook is better than than the bishops and knights but is smaller, while the dime has to play second fiddle to the nickle (size wise). Its just a weird comparison I've alwasy drawn.
A little mindless banter on a Monday morning.