[ 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 Cavalier. Piece from RennChess that steps one diagonally then slides orthogonally, or steps one orthogonally then slides diagonally.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]Ben Good wrote on 2002-11-29 UTCgreenwood thinks a cavalier and king can beat a lone king. we're playtesting it now, if he proves me wrong, then i'll update the page. David Paulowich wrote on 2004-09-10 UTCExcellent ★★★★★Apparently Wayne Schmittberger describes a piece called the Octopus with a similar movement diagram, in some unpublished material on a game concept called 'Generalized Chess'. Adrian King writes: 'It wasn't clear from Wayne's description whether his Octopus could actually move one space diagonally or had to move at least as far as a Knight, so I split the difference and allowed the Scirocco Octopus to move like a Firzan but not to capture like one.' However, King says nothing about this piece having multiple paths to its target and the Octopus piece in his scirocco.zrf is precisely a Griffon which lacks the ability to capture on adjacent squares. Jean-Louis Cazaux wrote on 2008-03-11 UTCPoor ★Poor just for the name because 'Cavalier' just means Knight in French. Using foreign language (from English) words should be avoided I think. It shows either ignorance or, worst, contempt for players whose English is not their mother tongue and can get confused. (Well, it is true that Alfil is the Bishop in Spanish... This should remain an exception) Joe Joyce wrote on 2008-03-11 UTCI would suggest that it was lack of knowledge, at most, not any sort of contempt. Further, I suspect the lack of knowledge might go both ways. It's unfortunately the case that Americans are noted for being unable to speak any 'foreign' language, including their own. This leads to problems that in a better, and better-educated, world, would not occur. For many Americans, a knight is a guy in a tin suit, and a cavalier is a guy in a floppy hat and fancy clothes with a sword, and is far more of the 3 Musketeers era that that of King Arthur or Charlemaigne. It's a romantic image of a fighter, but a different sort than that of the knight. I truly believe Mr Greenwood meant it respectfully, and never the reverse. George Duke wrote on 2008-03-11 UTCGood ★★★★I think Greenwood's name Cavalier is very good because, reading English, 'Cavalier' is normal English word, and here it sets off with 'Duke' its counterpart-piece. In English, meaning of Cavalier overlaps 'Knight', but we think of them not as the very same at all -- although both falling under more generic meaning ''man-at-arms.'' Cavalier has more social and also organizational connotation than Knight, whilst the latter bears more exclusively on war-making. I doubt Greenwood was thinking of the French, or was most likely wholly able to. So, Cazaux's muted point is well taken that USA people are weakest in knowledge of other languages among contributors and, moreover, sans humility about thus being English-bound. Now similar case of near-synonyms is King, Emperor, and Maharajah with all their differing amplifications. After 15 years of CVPage, any given Comment resonates further, or it ought to. Thus, more could always be added on this nomenclature question and piece-movement definition: (1) Piececlopedia entries are not done nowadays. (2) Ben Good is presumably no relation to Jeremy Good. (3) Credit Ben Good, at one time among the 3-4 most active member/editor, for recognizing the Cavalier as two-path: ''two different paths to any destination square'' way back in olden days of year 2002. 5 comments displayedEarlier ⇧Reverse Order⇩ LaterPermalink to the exact comments currently displayed.