- Blind mode tutorial
lichess.org
Donate

Dice Chess Rules

#3

Great. Will try this. Probably pretty fun for playing variants, too. Except atomic. Games would be over way too fast.

Great. Will try this. Probably pretty fun for playing variants, too. Except atomic. Games would be over way too fast.
#4

in the rule of getting out of the check, what does it mean that they will lose a turn but not the game if they didn't get a number that makes a legal move??

in the rule of getting out of the check, what does it mean that they will lose a turn but not the game if they didn't get a number that makes a legal move??
#5

If your king is in check, but not in checkmate, you have to make a legal move to get out of checkmate, but you don’t automatically lose if you can’t make a legal move based on your roll. Your opponent has to either capture your king or complete the checkmate.

For instance, imagine you are playing black, the white queen has taken on f7, and the only legal move for black is Kxf7 because the white queen is unsupported. It’s not checkmate because you can take the queen. If you roll a 6 or doubles, you can take the queen. If you don’t, you don’t have a legal move, but you still haven’t lost. White has to either capture your king or complete the checkmate by supporting the queen.

I had this situation in a few games I played where I got super aggressive with my queen and hoped that my opponent didn’t make the roll that would let them take my queen before I won the game. I got lucky each time.

If your king is in check, but not in checkmate, you have to make a legal move to get out of checkmate, but you don’t automatically lose if you can’t make a legal move based on your roll. Your opponent has to either capture your king or complete the checkmate. For instance, imagine you are playing black, the white queen has taken on f7, and the only legal move for black is Kxf7 because the white queen is unsupported. It’s not checkmate because you can take the queen. If you roll a 6 or doubles, you can take the queen. If you don’t, you don’t have a legal move, but you still haven’t lost. White has to either capture your king or complete the checkmate by supporting the queen. I had this situation in a few games I played where I got super aggressive with my queen and hoped that my opponent didn’t make the roll that would let them take my queen before I won the game. I got lucky each time.
#6

Id rather simply remove check as a mechanic and just have capturing the king be the goal, you could even gamble on your king not being captured.

Id rather simply remove check as a mechanic and just have capturing the king be the goal, you could even gamble on your king not being captured.
#7

Yes, it can be difficult to explain the difference between check and checkmate to a beginner, so that would solve the problem.

It does remove some winning conditions. In one of my games, I had the king in double check and could have taken it with the queen or knight, but the king could have captured my queen and gotten out of check. I checkmated by covering my queen with a bishop.

Feel free to modify the rules as you see fit, or search out a set of rules that make sense to you. There are lots of variants out there. There was even one variant where you moved all the pieces that you rolled, so that you got two or three moves per turn. That could lead to very quick games if you had a serious chess player playing.

Yes, it can be difficult to explain the difference between check and checkmate to a beginner, so that would solve the problem. It does remove some winning conditions. In one of my games, I had the king in double check and could have taken it with the queen or knight, but the king could have captured my queen and gotten out of check. I checkmated by covering my queen with a bishop. Feel free to modify the rules as you see fit, or search out a set of rules that make sense to you. There are lots of variants out there. There was even one variant where you moved all the pieces that you rolled, so that you got two or three moves per turn. That could lead to very quick games if you had a serious chess player playing.
#8

Can we put it on Lichess that sounds very fun to play

Can we put it on Lichess that sounds very fun to play
#9

I invented this as kid but still crushed my sister, I think probabilistic chess is actually more harder than the normal. Having uneven amount of dice is great addition!

I invented this as kid but still crushed my sister, I think probabilistic chess is actually more harder than the normal. Having uneven amount of dice is great addition!
#10

This brings chess closer to the character of backgammon, a game of skill where a distribution of probabilities must be managed.

Some possible variations, borrowed from that game, which occur to me:

  1. when one of your pieces (not pawns) is captured, it goes "on the bar," and you may not move any other piece until you make a roll that allows you to "move" a captured piece back into the game on its starting square. A piece entering from the bar may capture on its home square. Alternately, such a roll might additionally be used as coordinates to place the piece somewhere in the six by six area encompassing the player's kingside home row. (For example, if white rolls a 1,2, after losing a knight, he may place the knight on h2 or g1, if not occupied by his own piece, but if he has only lost a bishop, he loses his turn). This would add some of the dynamics of shogi-like variants such as crazyhouse while limiting the chaos. One might also allow for choosing to reserve drops for later moves rather than compelling immediate reintroduction.

  2. in addition to choosing between dice, one could sum the dice, allowing major pieces more activity in the distribution. This would reduce randomness overall and lessen the handicap that arises for players who have gained material on trades. If I've traded my knight and bishop for a queen, for instance, 2,3 rolls will not destroy my game, since I can now move the queen with them. It also makes the king more active, reducing the possibility that a loss will be forced by chance. (Combined with the drop rule in the example above, the player rolling 1,2 would now be able to place the bishop on either of the squares mentioned). Doubles, instead of allowing any piece to move, might allow a double move (5,5 moves a queen twice, 1,1 allows two pawn moves, or when combined with the summing rule above, two knight moves or just a single knight move depending on the rules you agree on), as in backgammon.

This brings chess closer to the character of backgammon, a game of skill where a distribution of probabilities must be managed. Some possible variations, borrowed from that game, which occur to me: 1) when one of your pieces (not pawns) is captured, it goes "on the bar," and you may not move any other piece until you make a roll that allows you to "move" a captured piece back into the game on its starting square. A piece entering from the bar may capture on its home square. Alternately, such a roll might additionally be used as coordinates to place the piece somewhere in the six by six area encompassing the player's kingside home row. (For example, if white rolls a 1,2, after losing a knight, he may place the knight on h2 or g1, if not occupied by his own piece, but if he has only lost a bishop, he loses his turn). This would add some of the dynamics of shogi-like variants such as crazyhouse while limiting the chaos. One might also allow for choosing to reserve drops for later moves rather than compelling immediate reintroduction. 2) in addition to choosing between dice, one could sum the dice, allowing major pieces more activity in the distribution. This would reduce randomness overall and lessen the handicap that arises for players who have gained material on trades. If I've traded my knight and bishop for a queen, for instance, 2,3 rolls will not destroy my game, since I can now move the queen with them. It also makes the king more active, reducing the possibility that a loss will be forced by chance. (Combined with the drop rule in the example above, the player rolling 1,2 would now be able to place the bishop on either of the squares mentioned). Doubles, instead of allowing any piece to move, might allow a double move (5,5 moves a queen twice, 1,1 allows two pawn moves, or when combined with the summing rule above, two knight moves or just a single knight move depending on the rules you agree on), as in backgammon.

This topic is now closed.