Check out Grant Acedrex, our featured variant for April, 2024.

[ 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
Hit and Run Chess. After the first move, players may move 1 piece twice or two pieces once, capturing only on any piece's first move.[All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
💡📝Stephen Howell wrote on Fri, Jan 8, 2021 06:43 PM UTC:

If anyone has questions or wants examples, please feel free to ask. I've been playing this since the 80's and if it's something that hasn't come up I'd be interested in looking at it, and if it has come up I am more than willing to explain how it works.

Ben Reiniger wrote on Thu, Jan 7, 2021 03:46 PM UTC:

I like that the existing one also emphasizes that you can't capture with the second move, but this would suffice I think yes.

💡📝Stephen Howell wrote on Thu, Jan 7, 2021 05:40 AM UTC in reply to Ben Reiniger from Wed Jan 6 07:14 PM:

You mean like this? If you think this illustrates the Knights Capture and Move better than the current one, it can certainly be added, or even replace the other one.

Capturing en passant

Ben Reiniger wrote on Wed, Jan 6, 2021 07:14 PM UTC:

I've approved the article.

I still would prefer a knight 2-move diagram that shows that they can move after capture in the same direction. And I think the bulleting structure of the rules section could be made clearer; I may take a stab at that later (and you can use the Revision tool to revert or rearrange things to your liking).

And yes, all of the editing options remain post-approval; the only things that changes is that non-logged-in users can view the page, the banner of alerts is removed, and the page will show up in all index queries.

💡📝Stephen Howell wrote on Wed, Jan 6, 2021 04:50 PM UTC:

So, how does this work, I believe I have covered everything that has ever come up since it's inception in the 80's. I can add examples if needed, but will it be open for adding graphics after it gets off probation or not?

💡📝Stephen Howell wrote on Sun, Jan 3, 2021 04:06 PM UTC:

Well, I believe I've clarified Capturing en passsant. That's always been a sticking point as I've only ever taught it in person and simply mentioned it in the rules before.

I've just never had the right words for it, but I guess the diagrams help. :)

However, I felt it was a bit vague as well and needed clarifying.

💡📝Stephen Howell wrote on Sat, Jan 2, 2021 10:16 AM UTC in reply to Ben Reiniger from 05:15 AM:

Checkmate is only ever achieved on the defending Kings turn, as it is in Chess. The King always gets a chance to get out of Check. The 50 move rule is as much a thing in Hit and Run Chess as it is in regular Chess.

If your piece moves to put the king in Check, and that move reveals a piece lined up to capture the king, It is still just Check. Sovereign defeat can't be taken, it must be accepted. You can't just swoop in and capture a king.

Check Mate, Stale Mate, mutually agreed upon draw, it's all determined on the Defending Kings turn. However, you can try to pad your Check as much as you like with your pieces. A King that can't escape is always a Checkmate, after all, unless they can't move at all and are not in Check, of course. I believe a stale mate is always in favor of the defender in Standard Chess, at least that's how I was taught.

I did say no King can ever be captured without a Check, but I see that was a vague. I guess I've always just felt the Check/Checkmate rule to be Standard Chess rules, but it makes sense that with two moves it should be clearly stated exactly when Check and Checkmate take place.. I'll add the above clarification to the Rules.


Ben Reiniger wrote on Sat, Jan 2, 2021 05:15 AM UTC:

One other question has occurred to me, and I don't see it addressed (but maybe just missed it). If the first move reveals check, can the second move capture the king?

💡📝Stephen Howell wrote on Sat, Jan 2, 2021 01:40 AM UTC in reply to Bn Em from Fri Jan 1 08:54 PM:

I was worried the Queens diagram was a bit busy, but the Queens options are much more complicated , so felt it still helpful. In actual play it doesn't seem so complicated, but I'm also not trying to convey a physical image of good and bad choices. :)

The diagram itself is probably a symptom of me being a programmer...

💡📝Stephen Howell wrote on Fri, Jan 1, 2021 11:46 PM UTC in reply to Erik Lerouge from 11:00 PM:

Thank you very much, I hadn't even thought about the spelling.

Erik Lerouge wrote on Fri, Jan 1, 2021 11:00 PM UTC:

Just a little remark on language: it is 'en passant', not 'en passé'. ('En passé' is grammaticaly wrong in french).

💡📝Stephen Howell wrote on Fri, Jan 1, 2021 09:43 PM UTC:

Very interesting, I looked through the known Double Move Variants and I really didn't know there were so few. There are elements of each one that I particularly don't like. One even sounded like an opposite of mine regarding returning to the original square after a capture.

Hit and Run Chess was developed with the premise of trying to keep the game as close to chess as possible, while keeping it balanced and not introducing new pieces with special moves.

The first move in any game can be pivotal. No matter what side you play. Starting out with 2 moves seemed to break the game. Equally, forcing only the first player to forfeit their second move seemed unfair. So both players open their games as they would in standard chess, they both move one piece once.

A straight line capture and advance also proved to be game breaking. Way O.P. and resulted in much faster and less interesting games. The concept of Hit and run was basically born, although not realized, by the introduction of the divergent path after capture. It seemed unfair that this affected all pieces except the knight. However, the night had one annoying predilection, that of striking out from behind the safety of the Pawn wall and retreating back to safety after capturing. So to even things out and to challenge both the player and his Knight, the Knight was restricted from doing this, Ostensibly applied under the divergent path rule, as for all pieces, their Starting square was along their path of attack and it seemed bth balancing and fair.

Capturing on the second move was also way over powered, as it could conceivably result in a Check Mate without Check, which is why I suppose, other variants impose the end of turn if a check is made on the first move. However, who wants to lose their second move, really. So to further drive home the idea of Hit and Run Chess, and the thing that truly gave it life, was to limit all captures to only the first move of any piece. Thus also allowing the wonderful feeling of being able to capture two pieces in the same turn when moving two pieces once, while making the second move of any piece that captured on it's first move. a maneuvering move.

As balanced and fair as possible, uncomplicated due to retaining all of the regular rules as far as how the pieces themselves move. Should be easy to remember as there are only a few stipulation.

Move one piece twice, two pieces once, Capture only on the first move of any piece, and taking a divergent path if moving one piece after capturing.

Well, I guess you might not be interested as to why the game has evolved to what it is, but I found it interesting how these other variants approached the same issues.

I'm definitely biased ... :)

Bn Em wrote on Fri, Jan 1, 2021 08:54 PM UTC:

Any movement (aside from the null move if you count that) has a direction; in the knight's case, as with oblique leapers in general, it happens to be between the usual ortho‐ and diagonals, but it's still a direction just as a dabbaba's or alfil's (2‐square leap ortho‐ resp. diagonally) leap. Hence also the nightrider, which makes multiple knight leaps in the same direction (e.g. from a1 to b3,c5,d7 or c2,e3,g4 on 8×8), and with which many readers will be familiar, hence the confusion over the knight's ‘path’.

Fwiw the queen diagram is cool, if a bit daunting‐looking at first

💡📝Stephen Howell wrote on Fri, Jan 1, 2021 07:57 PM UTC in reply to Ben Reiniger from 06:59 PM:

Thank you, I don't know if this will be an issue, but I added one more image to illustrate an OVER examination of the Queens options with a Hit and Run move. As you can imagine Queens have many more options.

I hope it does not cause issues. If it is, I can re-upload it later. if images can be added to the Variants after they have been released, or will that be a final form?

I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "... the knight diagram would be better if the second move in the same direction was on-board." Knights don't, technically, have a direction, they jump. The only real restriction for the Knight is that it can't return to it's original square after capturing.

I didn't want to clutter the image up with a bunch of L shaped arrows. (Unlike the Queens examination, which is a bit busy, but hopefully understandable, with Captures referenced by the red X along with the Restricted Movement After Capture Arrows, rather than the long green arrow, which was ok on the diagrams with fewer options, but was just too much for the Queens Diagram.)

Again, I really appreciate your help.

Ben Reiniger wrote on Fri, Jan 1, 2021 06:59 PM UTC in reply to Ben Reiniger from 06:38 PM:

I think I've fixed all the database references to the old ItemID, and updated the summary and index entry.

I was unable to add a new index entry using the editor forms, with error

Insert Link
Error!: SQLSTATE[23000]: Integrity constraint violation: 1048 Column 'PrimaryLink' cannot be null

I imagine it's just that the form treats the empty checkbox as a null when it should instead send a 0 to the table. I can't get to that right now, but if Fergus or Greg don't have time I'll do it in the next few days. (It's not urgent, being just an editor convenience.)

Ben Reiniger wrote on Fri, Jan 1, 2021 06:38 PM UTC in reply to Stephen Howell from Thu Dec 31 2020 09:33 PM:

Changing the ItemID is a bit more work, but I think worth it here; I'll try to get around to that.

The Link Description also is editor-only, although easier. I'll get to that now (though now I want to have a variant with pies...).

I still think the knight diagram would be better if the second move in the same direction was on-board.

💡📝Stephen Howell wrote on Thu, Dec 31, 2020 09:33 PM UTC in reply to H. G. Muller from 03:34 PM:

Sounds reasonable. As this is my first entry here, I simply put it in as I have it in the handout/rules pdf I created for ShadowCon.

I am more than willing to listen to the advice of those with experience on how best to utilize this site.

If anyone can inform me of how to fix this, from the Link Description I think; "After the first move players may move 1 pies twice or two pieces once,"...

I would be most appreciative.

Thank you.

H. G. Muller wrote on Thu, Dec 31, 2020 03:34 PM UTC in reply to Stephen Howell from 09:04 AM:

As for the names, it was originally dubbed RuneChess, but that was simply because I ran a BBS by the name of RuneStone. Hit and Run Chess is the name that best describes the game. Calling it Pirate Chess sort of just happened and is a bit more enigmatic and fun. I run gaming for a local con called ShadowCon and there was a local Cosplay Pirate group, so one year I put it out as Pirate Chess and it sort of stuck.

Presenting alternative names this way is not very useful: people would never find the article when looking for the alternative name. I think it would be better to just use Hit-and-Run Chess in the title, mention the alternative names in the introduction, and ask an editor to create multiple index entries for the other two names, pointing to the article, and using "see Hit & Run Chess" as description.

💡📝Stephen Howell wrote on Thu, Dec 31, 2020 09:04 AM UTC in reply to Ben Reiniger from Wed Dec 30 04:49 PM:

Technically, the restrictions only apply after a capture and only if you choose to move the same piece for the second move. Sort of a checks and balances type of thing.

Knights are kind of special to begin with. They don't really have "lines" or "paths", rather they have landing sites. Without a capture the Knight may go anywhere it can legally reach on it's second move that is not blocked by friendly or unfriendly pieces. So (assuming all potential landing squares are clear) a knight has all 8 squares free to move to after it's first move, and if it captures on it's first move then it has 7 places it can go since it can't return to the square it attacked from.

The restrictions on movement after capturing helps to balance the game and imparts an element of danger when you can't just strike out from a safe position and then simply return to safety every time. The reason for limiting the attack to the first move also helps maintain balance. If you are allowed to capture on the second move a checkmate condition is more likely too early in the game and really doesn't make the game any more fun.

However, if you are simply going to move one piece twice for the sake of positioning, then the board is your playground. If you want to sandbag your two moves by moving and returning to your original place, so be it, you just can't do that after a capture.

The ability to make two captures in one move is still there, so long as you use your two moves with two pieces moving once each.

Keep in mind that you can't really cover another piece very reliably, as you can in standard chess, because someone can swoop in and capture it, then run away.

As for the names, it was originally dubbed RuneChess, but that was simply because I ran a BBS by the name of RuneStone. Hit and Run Chess is the name that best describes the game. Calling it Pirate Chess sort of just happened and is a bit more enigmatic and fun. I run gaming for a local con called ShadowCon and there was a local Cosplay Pirate group, so one year I put it out as Pirate Chess and it sort of stuck.

Ben Reiniger wrote on Wed, Dec 30, 2020 04:49 PM UTC:

Thanks for adding the images on same-line restrictions. I think the knight one could be improved by showing that the knight can continue on its same line (if I'm understanding the text rules correctly).

I think this page would benefit from some discussion on the reasoning behind the restrictions, especially as compared to other double-move variants (I've added the tag double-move to as many as I could find). I'm also unclear why the variant has three different names, only the first of which seems at all related to the game's mechanics (but I think suggests somewhat the opposite of the same-line restrictions...).

💡📝Stephen Howell wrote on Tue, Dec 29, 2020 06:50 AM UTC in reply to Zhedric Meneses from Fri Dec 25 05:34 AM:

Does it make more sense now?

💡📝Stephen Howell wrote on Mon, Dec 28, 2020 03:47 AM UTC in reply to Zhedric Meneses from Fri Dec 25 05:34 AM:
Sorry, for some reason my response was just blank when I previewed.

If a Rook moves from E3 to G3 to capture, and the player wishes to move the same piece after the capture it may not continue along the same row to H3 or return towards A3, but must instead follow G either toward G1 or towards G8.

Same goes for Bishops, but they may only move along the opposite diagonal from the diagonal moved along to make the capture.

Knights cannot return to the square they moved from to capture, but may go to any other square it can reach, so long as the square is unoccupied, since no piece may capture on it's second move.

Queens may follow any other path than the one they used to capture.
In order to move, they have to diverge from the path they took to capture. If they cannot go another way the piece cannot take a second move.If no other piece can move, the second move is forfeit that turn.

Zhedric Meneses wrote on Fri, Dec 25, 2020 05:34 AM UTC:

Saw this in r/chessvariants recently and I just wanna ask what do you mean in this part

If a piece moves after capturing, it may not: o move along the same:

Column ( i.e. castle, king, or queen )

Row ( i.e. castle, king, or queen )

or Diagonal ( i.e. bishop, king or queen )

I'm just confused on that rule

💡📝Stephen Howell wrote on Fri, Dec 25, 2020 04:48 AM UTC:

Please let me know if this is not ready for submission.

24 comments displayed

Later Reverse Order Earlier

Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.