[ List Earliest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]
Comments/Ratings for a Single Item
The two most important features of any piece set are recognizability and beauty. To be recognizable, a piece image should make sense, usually by meeting expectations for what a piece of that kind should look like, and it should be clearly distinguishable from the other pieces. Using a simple style can make it easier to distinguish pieces from each other. Bold lines and monochromatic coloring are good for this. Monochromatic coloring also makes it easier to tell one side from the other. The beauty of the set as a whole is enhanced by consistency of style.
Joe Joyce wrote on Sat, Jul 1, 2006 05:50 PM UTC:I would like to add one lesser attribute. If the pieces could somehow represent the moves they make, that would be nice. For example, the squirrel move is a combo of the alfil, dabbabah, and knight. Of course, my current example of that piece looks like Dumbo on wheels, complete with pillbox circus hat. But I believe the idea is a good one. I don't recommend pieces like those in Navia Dratp, where the moves are shown schematically on the piece base, but the use of common symbols combined [hopefully better than Dumbo on wheels] in an artful manner would make it a lot easier [certainly for me] to concentrate on the game, and not keep having to look up piece moves [I play bad enough], which is very distracting; or worse, mistake one piece for another. Some games [like Postal Chess] or piece sets [like the Pizza Kings] need unique themed pieces, but this is much more the exception than the rule.
well i like pieces indicating moves too, but as Fergus said, graphics should be functional and possess beauty, and if we go crazy trying to get every piece to indicate where it goes, i think that takes away from the beauty aspect. We don't care for 'indicators' on the rook, knight, bishop and queen etc, and well, as far as alfaerie graphics go, for instance, the 'squirrel' graphic seems a pretty good graphic to indicate a piece that moves as a knight/alfil/dabbaba. The name 'squirrel' also is often used for a piece that moves like this. still, to suit all tastes and allow variety on game courier, it can't hurt having a 'knight/alfil/dabbaba' piece like you want.
I don't know if drawing a piece in a way which describes its move, or including some kind of graphic move indicator, like the Drapt pieces, is practical, mainly because the icons may be adopted for another variant later and its move altered. I tried marking the bases of my Jetan variant sculpted pieces at first with graphic indicators, but that locks you in to one type of move for that piece, which isn't always desirable if you want to use the same piece differently in another variant. A few things I realized while studying Jean-Louis Cazaux' set: Icons can be either instantly recognizable by most people, such as most animals are, or they must be memorized, such as abstract or heraldic images must be. While abstract or heraldic icons can lend dignity to the look of a board, they can steepen the learning curve of a new game a little due to the fact that a new player must first labor to remember what the pieces are, in addition to how they move. That's okay if you like the game to look more mysterious to newcomers, or make them work a little harder; the experienced player will have a stronger advantage over a newcomer at first, also. All the icons in a set should look like they were drawn by the same hand. Consistency of size, color, or line quality and execution tend to unify any single piece with its brothers. Although realistic draftsmanship can be a nice feature, it is not a necessary feature, except for easy piece identification at first; consistency of 'look' across a piece-set is more important, and there are an infinite number of ways to stylize icons homogeneously. I am partial to realism, or possibly a cartoony but recognizable type of whimsy, as the best look for icons, based on my experience with art, which has always shown me that more people like realism than abstraction, mostly because they can tell if you got it right or not. I've always had to keep an eye out for the new customer because I believe that to expand the client-base I have to make it easy for them to recognize the subject, then show them something new about it (content) and feel that the same thing is true with any form of art, such as chess icons.
I've dug around to find the location of David Howe's Alfaerie set additions, and for the life of me I can't find that goofy Frog I swear I saw in it somewhere. He was so funny-looking I almost fell out of my chair laughing; I want to know what that Frog has been smoking. I think it was at the bottom of a long piece-list of a new game that Jeremy posted not long ago. Is there a complete list of the Alfaerie pieces somewhere? I've noticed that there are lots of fractions of that set here and there; I've also looked for some kind of Piece Index that a user could go to to find out what piece does what, what it's called, what its other names are, what other graphic versions of it look like, etc., but what I can locate seems piecemeal and scattered. Piececlopedia seems fragmentary, too. The Alfaerie set looks like it's building into quite a toolbox of generic pieces that could be used for almost anything. They look clear and workmanlike to me.
you know i think i saw that frog leaping around 'presiding chess' :) i am not sure that every alfaerie graphic has a certain type of move, but maybe it does, i do know that people can use them for varying piece types. the frog is a leaper though, it is a 0-3, 1-1 leaper, and it is mentioned at 'all the king's men' site http://homepage.ntlworld.com/gpjnow/VC-GM.htm alfaerie has 3 expansion sets, alfaerie2, 3 and 4. that is the complete set, anything else you see has been done by someone else, as far as i understand, most likely for a game they made using alfaerie graphics.
The Frog was devised by Tucker Kao for his game Presiding Chess. You can view a list of Alfaerie or Alfaerie-like pieces for the alfaerie-many piece file at this preset.
(I misread Tucker Kao as Tucker Rao, hence the TR_ prefix.)
(I misread Tucker Kao as Tucker Rao, hence the TR_ prefix.)
That's the one, Antoine, and thanks. Ha-haaaaaaaa! He looks like he swallowed a crawdad that's diggin' its way out, O he'p me! Archabbot preset, boy, that's one helluva piece collection. It'd be hard to improve on it. I think I'll stick to sets by request for specific presets and maybe play with some different looks, different stylizations, explore a little. Joe's waiting for a Postal set and Jeremy's got some whopper projects.
Interesting comments, M. Spratt, with which I do not disagree.
Thank you, Magritte; yes, a very stimulating and productive exchange. C'est bon.
Are there pieces people would like to see made that currently have no graphics? I'd like to know whether anyone has done a graphic for the pieces in Tripunch Chess, for instance the Aanca described in this essay.
Described there is a piece which makes a one step Rook move, i.e., wazir move, and then continues outwards as a Bishop.
I have seen people refer to an aanca as belonging in Grande Acedrex, but aren't they confusing the Aanca with the Gryphon?
This piece is very closely related to Eric Greenwood's Duke piece, but not quite the same.
D - Duke: moves one square straight and any # diagonally; or any # diagonally and one straight. May not jump or move to an adjacent square.
Jeremy: I would like to see additional Spearmen so there is a complete set to allow pointing in all 8 directions (for a conventional Fide board). They can be made by flipping the exisiting Spearmen - but 2 horizontal Spearmen will still need to be created. Perhaps direction changes can be done via a command code for a smaller set of '3 key' Spearmen (Point up/down; point left/right; point 45 degree angle (4 cases)? Anyway, I will need to have white, red, blue and green Spearmen for my upcoming 4-Handed Elephant Chess pre-set. I suppose I can make them. Then, should I send them to you along with the other color pieces needed?
Gary, I could do the 8 Spearmen, if you don't mind them looking sort of like the Pikeman in Imperial Chess. I'm thinking about expanding that piece-set, but maybe you'd prefer your own look? Jeremy, the Bent pieces are going to be difficult to symbolize, I think. I'm a little in the dark about background colors, so I'll just send you what I've got so far in jpg and you tell me if you can work with it or not. Once I know we've got the technical part of it whipped, I'll feel freer to get down to drawing.
Gary: If you don't mind, please do, and please copy Antoine when you do and ask him to add them to the Alfaerie - Many. Also, if you could send the other colored pieces that we don't already have in Alfaerie - Many, such as the green and blue and red colored elephants, colored crooked rooks, etc. Would be deeply appreciated. Should be lots of fun to play. Thanks. (I'd do it myself but creation of even the most rudimentary graphics is just beyond my reach at the moment. Apologies.)
James, looking forward to seeing your tripunch ideas. Thank you.
You could diversify the SISSA by having a Sissa, a Rook-Sissa, who'd be obligated to make the rook-leg first, then the bishop-leg, and a Bishop-Sissa, who'd be obligated to make the bishop-leg first, then the rook-leg of the move. Maybe symbolized by a character holding two weapons--swords, maybe, with one held vertically to symbolize the rook move, the other held at an angle to symbolize the bishop move. The Sissa could hold his at the same height, the Rook-Sissa could hold the vertical one higher, and the Bishop-Sissa could hold the diagonal one higher.
Great ideas, James! The deadly sissa triad will be something to behold.
18 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.