Comments/Ratings for a Single Item
So what the point? I don't understand this discussion at the end. It is becoming upsetting. You completely misunderstood me and you drive me where I don't want to go.
I prefer to stop.
I checked ebay, because I was looking for them being sold commercially. Some photos on your site are not evidence of this. So, my point remains. Figurine Chess pieces are being sold commercially, whereas bamboo Chess sets seem to be just a makeshift craft people without manufactured sets sometimes resort to. It's not as though people are just using RPG figurines to play Chess with because they lack real Chess sets. Companies manufacture and sell figurine Chess sets, and sometimes for a lot more than regular Staunton sets.
EBayis not the best source. You can see some Bamboo sets from Indonesia there:
I don't think these images add much to these pages. I'd rather see them in a separate article.
These images are for illustrating the Piececlopedia articles with appropriate imagery of possible ways to portray a piece. I do not see any point in moving them to a separate page.
I don't think these images add much to these pages. I'd rather see them in a separate article. To the points about different piece sets/themes, you could aggregate similarly themed examples into a "set" article.
I second this idea. A discussion on designing physical pieces for chess (both orthodox and fairy) would be a good idea, especially taking some of the thoughts that have been mentioned in this discussion. It'd be a lot of work sifting through images to find acceptable ones, but in the end I think it'd be worth it.
(Other things I wonder: How, in a one-color piece, does one show the difference between a Knight's horse and a Zebra, or a Leopard and a Tiger? How do I figure out how tall a piece should be? Stuff like that.)
The newer images looks better to me. I don't know how you do these ai art things, but couldn't it be used to make 2d pieces for game courier?
Refresh the page.
I added another gorgon image.
Either that wasn't successful, or something funny is going on: I only see the figurine image.
I don't think these images add much to these pages. I'd rather see them in a separate article. To the points about different piece sets/themes, you could aggregate similarly themed examples into a "set" article.
I'm not playing with words. There are literally numerous figurine Chess sets being sold commercially. In contrast, I checked ebay for bamboo rod chess sets and didn't find any. I do share your preference for Staunton pieces, but for many Chess variant pieces, something more representational can be appropriate.
You play with words. Of course, anything can be a chess piece, even 3 bamboo rods like in Pilipines. Figurines like in Warhammer can also be used to play chess but for chess and chess variants I think the best is Staunton-like pieces. Staunton's style is remarkable because it is at the good balance point between something purely abstract and very descriptive pieces like figurines.
I added another gorgon image. This one is a bust that would fit well with Peter Ganine's Superba/Gothic pieces or with the Musketeer Chess variant pieces.
My favored representation of the Immobilizer is a (horse shoe) magnet.
For the coordinator I prefer a dish antenna, (or the more rectangular version used for radar, usually revolving), symbolizing action at a distance.
Attempts to have the AI draw these as Chess pieces have not been successful.
It misses the goal for me. It is not a chess piece at all. It is a figurine.
There are figurine Chess pieces. So, being a figurine doesn't stop it from being a Chess variant piece.
Sounds good suggestions for both (answer to HG, for magnet and antenna dish)
I've drawn a few ideas from this chart that someone did on DeviantArt, but not so much the Immobilizer. For that I put an octagonal figure at the top (and as a bonus I can add that figure to other pieces to create immobilizing versions).
As for the gorgon here, I agree with Jean-Louis; the pose and the base both say "figurine" rather than "chess piece."
My favored representation of the Immobilizer is a (horse shoe) magnet. A simple shape, easy to recognize, easy to put on a pedestal to make it into a Chess piece, and a good mnemonic for something that holds other pieces in place.
For the coordinator I prefer a dish antenna, (or the more rectangular version used for radar, usually revolving), symbolizing action at a distance.
It misses the goal for me. It is not a chess piece at all. It is a figurine.
I added an AI image of this piece in the form of a gorgon.
It would stop immobilizing when it is no longer a queen's move away from that piece
It's still not clear what this means. A withdrawer captures by making a move, whilst an immobiliser stops others from making moves — the former's effect is on its own turn while the latter's is on the opponent's.
As such there's a couple of interpretations possible:
- It stops things from moving away like a withdrawer. This is just a weaker immobiliser, and is already attested in Euqorab
- It petrifies pieces that it moves away from rather than capturing them. Then the question is whether and if so when pieces can come back into play: never (as with Nemoroth's basilisk)? When the withdrawing‐petrifier moves again (leaving it able to only petrify one piece at a time)? After a larger but still fixed number of moves (turn counting, ugh)? Under some other condition? Are involuntary moves (from Swappers, shepherding pieces, Go Away!s, ⁊c.) counted? Does capturing it release pieces?
Imo the former option is not very interesting, nor necessarily well‐defined (how does it deal with knights?), while the latter is quite complex in principle and perhaps not very immobiliser‐like — though I admit the possibility of ulima‐style pieces with effects besides capture is interesting and not very well explored
No, it would immobilize similarly to the Withdrawer
Would that mean other pieces could only move if they're within range of a hostile mobilizer?
The paralyzing Gorgona is implemented in Zillions here: http://hem.passagen.se/melki9/gorgonachess.htm The Gorgona is more powerful as it paralyzes pieces within queen range. /Mats
25 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.
I was looking at V. R. Parton's description of Gorgon Chess, and it turns out that the Immobilizer is just a weaker version of Parton's Gorgon. Both the Gorgon and the Immobilizer move as a Queen, though the Gorgon can also capture as one, and instead of just immobilizing any adjacent enemy piece, it can immobilize any enemy piece within its direct gaze, which means on a space it could move to.