The Chess Variant Pages
Custom Search




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

Comments/Ratings for a Single Item

Later Reverse Order Earlier
This item is a game information page
It belongs to categories: Orthodox chess, 
It was last modified on: 2016-01-06
 By Daniel Robert MacDuff. Lifeform Chess. Instead of individual units, pieces are parts of the body of a giant animal. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
Daniel MacDuff wrote on 2016-02-25 UTC
Paolo: Yes, the "joint lock + elbow strike" is possible.  As for your meta question, I suggest you do just that.  If there is an error, it is likely that ohers will see it before you do.

Paolo wrote on 2016-02-25 UTC
Sorry, another question. In general it is possible to capture up to one enemy piece, but is it possible to capture and immobilize in the same move? (A "joint lock + elbow strike" if you will)

You can imagine when it might happen, the Hand moves and lands on a enemy piece immobilizing it, at the same time a Hand-connected Limb moves and captures.

According to the wording of the rules I'd say it is possible, but I just want to be sure.


While I am here I also do an extra "meta" question, I have an idea for a variant. But I am not sure it makes sense or I am missing some details; what is the best way to proceed? Simply write it down, send it, and await for comments?

Daniel MacDuff wrote on 2016-02-24 UTC
Paolo: Having not taken the time to playtest yet (most of my variants are posted as untested ideas), I had not considered the awkwardness of the setup.  A fluid setup seems to be the best way to play, however,

Paolo wrote on 2016-02-24 UTCGood ★★★★
I played few games with a friend and I kinda liked it. However, I felt that the starting position is a bit unnatural, did you consider different setups?

In one game we let the players decide, you could setup the pieces as you wanted (as long all the rules were respected) in the first three rows. White first, Black second, game as usual. In my opinion it was a better game because we actually managed to use the Hair.

John Lawson wrote on 2016-01-23 UTC
Just to clarify, Hands either move four spaces as a Rook, or one Knight move?

Daniel MacDuff wrote on 2016-01-20 UTC
I don't know.  I feel like Microorganism would be too strong, and a virus assault (for instance) could easily overrun the Lifeform.  Are you familiar with David Howe's variant Mega Chess?  It features pieces that are also games.  Perhaps Lifeform Chess with Microorganism board-pieces would be an interesting variant.

George Duke wrote on 2016-01-16 UTC
In 1999 by Mark Hedden is <a href="http://www.chessvariants.com/large.dir/microorg.html">Microorganism</a> of related name to Lifeform. Microorganism is on very large 16 with 9 types of pieces. The Notes say Different Armies form is feasible, so how about Lifeform versus Microorganism.

Ben Reiniger wrote on 2016-01-15 UTC
Thanks for addressing my earlier questions.  Is there any advantage to "grabbing" a piece with the Hands instead of capturing?  (Perhaps so, if the opponent is not allowed to capture the Hand because it would enter the same square as its own piece?)

If a major piece does not capture, can only one limb/hair capture that turn, or any of the adjacent ones?

Is it true that if there are several necks, the capture of any one wins the game?

Ben Reiniger wrote on 2016-01-14 UTC
In the starting setup, a Foot is directly attached to the Torso, violating Rule 2.  Maybe you didn't mean "never directly", but rather that the required chain of limbs cannot be empty?

You use "Legs" at one point where I think you meant "Feet".

If the Head and Torso are not adjacent, but have two (or three) limbs as common neighbors, is that illegal (because of "a single Limb")?

The Sprint is very unclear.  Do the pieces block each other?  How does capturing work?  Does the edge of the board stop movement?

Fergus Duniho wrote on 2016-01-06 UTC
The content of your submission didn't get through. I think I have now fixed the problem. So you should try again. Save what you write before submitting, and pay attention to the contents of the SQL code that appears at the top of the page when you make your submission. If it is full of empty strings and fits on one line, your submission didn't go through. If it doesn't go through, the remedy is to reload the page. Please let me know if you have to do that.

10 comments displayed

Later Reverse Order Earlier

Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.