Half a croissant, on a plate, with a sign in front of it saying '50c'
h a l f b a k e r y
Inexact change.

idea: add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random

meta: news, help, about, links, report a problem

account: browse anonymously, or get an account and write.

user:
pass:
register,


                                   

Pacifist Chess

In a world of "pawn for a pawn" we all end up pawnless.
  (+2, -5)
(+2, -5)
  [vote for,
against]

One side can only retreat. Allow some latitude to the direction pieces can move so they won't get cornered.

The only way to win on the pacifist side is hope the other guy gets tired of hunting down and killing your pieces and gets bored.

Great for guys like Richard Gere who are better than the rest of us.

That first bone is mine by the way.

doctorremulac3, Jun 24 2010

[link]






       Wouldn't work. Many moves are offensive and defensive at the same time.
daseva, Jun 24 2010
  

       I'll see your first bone and raise you a [mfd] no idea. So what's with "Richard Gere" ?
FlyingToaster, Jun 24 2010
  

       Sorry, I'm being a pacifist on this one. Not participating in any arguments at this time.   

       Plus it's a stupid idea anyway.
doctorremulac3, Jun 24 2010
  

       or white feather chess where both sides avoid each other like the plague. kind of "h's dodgy chess"
po, Jun 24 2010
  

       How about going the other way, boxing chess? Where the players box and play chess at the same time.   

       The trick is picking up the pieces with boxing gloves.   

       That and getting punched in the face while trying to move a piece.
doctorremulac3, Jun 24 2010
  

       I suppose chess as a drinking game is baked to death.
RayfordSteele, Jun 24 2010
  

       I thought chess was a drinking game.
doctorremulac3, Jun 24 2010
  

       what Mr. Toaster said.
Voice, Jun 24 2010
  

       Can't see this one being a big seller to Klingons ...
8th of 7, Jun 24 2010
  

       boxing chess already exists its pretty populare.
daseva, Jun 24 2010
  

       I like it. In pacifist (or pacification) chess, taking a pawn could cost ten bucks for housing and education. Actually winning the game could cost a thousand. That would go for hunting down rogue pieces that won't surrender, and for nation building.
ldischler, Jun 24 2010
  

       Is that pacifist chess or no socialist chess?
RayfordSteele, Jun 24 2010
  

       Every non threatening move must be followed by the words "g'day mate".
pashute, Nov 12 2012
  

       Pacifist chess would have to involve some complex negotiation resulting in the marriage of one of the Bishops of one side to one of the Knights of the other, thereby unifying the opposing kingdoms
smendler, Nov 13 2012
  

       So what you're saying is... French chess?
neo_, Nov 15 2012
  

       At risk of taking seriously what’s not intended to be, any game where the object is to bore a player so much he stops is rather a meta-game, and a necessarily a boring one – rather a recipe for popular failure.   

       There are already a lot of chess variant. One a little like this idea is “reverse chess”, where players must make a capture if one is possible, and the object of the game is to be the first to lose all your pieces (the King has no special capturing rules, and can be captured without ending the game). Another is “loser chess”, where the object of the game is to force your opponent to checkmate you.   

       With a “one side can only retreat” rule, you’d obviously have to have a non-standard board and/or setup, as in the standard one, no piece can retreat in its first move.   

       I can imagine a variant that might be called “pacifist” (pacifist is not a synonym for "one who wants to lose"!), where the player who has captured the fewest pieces when a checkmate or other game-ending condition (eg: advancing a pawn to the 8th rank; a standard rules draw) occurs is the winner. It’s so obvious, it might already have been played seriously somewhere and when. From playing one game with myself, it appears an interesting variant.
CraigD, Nov 24 2012
  

       I would think that in serious Pacifist Chess, each side starts by agreeing a bilateral treaty about where the border between their territories lie. Then during subsequent moves, each is careful not to move a piece over the border unless forced to, or unless they have received an official invitation from their opponent.
pocmloc, Nov 24 2012
  
      
[annotate]
  


 

back: main index

business  computer  culture  fashion  food  halfbakery  home  other  product  public  science  sport  vehicle