Check out Symmetric Chess, our featured variant for March, 2024.


[ Help | Earliest Comments | Latest Comments ]
[ List All Subjects of Discussion | Create New Subject of Discussion ]
[ List Earliest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]

Comments/Ratings for a Single Item

Earlier Reverse Order Later
Ludus Equitum. Dice chess variant, using standard set and two dice, designed in a 13th-century style for the SCA. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
Peter Aronson wrote on Mon, Aug 12, 2002 08:13 PM UTC:Excellent ★★★★★
I do like to see a good Chess variant with dice once in a while. So many variant designers and players have an attitude about anything with a random element which I suspect stems from delusions about the predictablity of the real world.

💡📝Glenn Overby II wrote on Mon, Aug 12, 2002 08:30 PM UTC:
I've noticed that resistance, too, primarily among chess enthusiasts who
don't play a lot of other games.  Chess players who are gamers in the
broader sense seem to enjoy (or not enjoy) dice chess on the same basis as
anything else.

Glad you liked it!

(zzo38) A. Black wrote on Wed, Mar 9, 2011 04:31 PM UTC:

I like the game with skill and chance together. Backgammon and poker is other such games. Even if you try to do the same way every game because it made you win and your opponent doesn't have any other move (such thing is uncommon in chess and so on, but still possible), you can't because it is random. However, games such as this game and backgammon have complete past information and complete present information, even though it has not complete future information; while most card games (such as poker) and most forms of mahjong (but not the solitaire mahjong) have incomplete information both ways, which adds something other than just deciding the best move based on the knowledge. Game without random, such as chess (and shogi), is very good game too, however.

I made unofficial implementation of this game on Zillions. Please tell me if you think I made any mistake in the implementation. I added bogus moves (which can never actually be done) because otherwise it says knights are worth only 100 and the peers are worth more.


(zzo38) A. Black wrote on Tue, Dec 10, 2013 06:04 AM UTC:

While this is good, I think the pieces other than knights aren't moving often enough. A subvariant is if you roll 1 then you can move anything other than a knight or squire.


4 comments displayed

Earlier Reverse Order Later

Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.