bureaucracy is essential. start thinking lmao
My take: Just add time and different scenery.
Some pieces couldn’t move at night. Some could only move on grass land, some other only within woods or rocky mountains. And then there is a catapult where you can shoot pieces randomly back on the board.I want a piece that can push other pieces, friendly or not
The Cardinal.
Unending has a bunch of piece-pushing (and you must get enemies to push each other for you to survive)!
duck chess
yep
The duck is shared and can be moved every turn. The beaurocrat sounds like it exists on a side and requires a turn to move.
The Priest. It moves like a bishop, but it can only capture pawns (doesn’t matter which team, pawns from his own team are fair game for the Priest). The US is weird, they call it “the republican”.
Call it the Pedo not the Priest. Same function though.
Can it perform an il vaticano with a normal bishop?
Yes, and normal bishops don’t consider it an ennemy when it eats pawns of the same color
I’d go with a more recent classic from Age of Empires, the monk and its “wololo” ability to convert enemies to become your unit. To keep it balanced, maybe it should only be able to convert certain pieces and taking more than 2 turns to complete its conversion as to give the opponent a chance to counter its special move.
EDIT: Totally off topic,but..
I just found out that if you put an evoker in minecraft next to a blue sheep, it’ll do the wololo sound and convert it to a red sheep.
Smiling at the bonus content in this post.
The Schemer, moves like a King, but attacks like a Queen. That way it only moves around the board slowly, until it can strike. Escape is tricky as it can’t move fast when not attacking, so it needs to enlist the support of other pieces to cover it’s moves.
It should start in place of the King’s bishop, whispering intreague in his ear.
So for example: A Knight is 5 spaces away. The Schemer can move 5 spaces to take it, but if it doesn’t, it can only move 1 space?
That’s the idea. Powerwise I figure it falls below the queen, but still has the potential to suddenly attack across the board. The downside being, it’s then potentially quite vulnerable as it can only move one square at a time to get away, unless it can attack again.
A glass cannon for sure. I love it!
deleted by creator
Isn’t that just the duck mode on chess.com?
Yup.
Which is fun but it needs more player.
The Landlord: any square it touches becomes blocked and can no longer be used in the match. It can start from any square and then move to any square adjacent to any square in its domain.
it starts out only being able to move every x turns, but as it gains squares, it speeds up
Exponentially!
“No, you’re doing it wrong”
The toilet’s always leaking, but it’s because you’re not flushing correctly.
There was a chess roguelike I can’t remember the name of that actually had a piece like this, except it was a big duck. It was very, very powerful.
Duck chess is honestly a pretty fun variant.
oh damn i forgot about that chess balatro knockoff.
Comparison is the thief of joy my dude! It’s best to let people be creative and have similar concepts without calling their work knockoffs
that’s not how that saying works
Passant?
Passant is the only chess roguelike I know, is that it?
Bureaucrat special move: Red Tape (translates to En Passan’t) - When an adjacent piece captures another adjacent piece, there are forms to fill out and reports to write. The capturing piece cannot move next turn.
And the counter can be “legislative action” that changes the beaurocrat’s authority in future moves at the cost of a pawn.
Add an executive piece to cut through the red tape and then you can call it, “Rook Paper Scissors” chess
Bureaucracy is good and this is stupid.
I get what you mean, but I think bureaucracy is an inherently negative term.
I’d say policy and legislation can be good. Bureaucracy is policy that overcomplicates things.
Of course, what people call bureaucracy entirely depends on their incentives. For a CEO anything that makes it harder for him to increase profits (like privacy laws) would be bureaucracy.
Not always. If you really need to keep track of several things, then it’s a necessity. The real question is whether some things actually need to be tracked.
The thing is that a lot of bureaucracy feels like it’s been weaponized in order to piss off people - I nearly didn’t get my current job because of that, I was asked for my PIS/PASEP number (Brazilian thing), but the bank didn’t have the means to print a whole ass official document stating that my number was whatever, I was literally given a photo of the manager’s screen checking their system, showing my data and said number. When I went to give my documents to my new employer, they looked at the number without any “official” paper and were like “no, this is invalid”.
Hi, excuse me, but it looks like you dropped this: /s
Nope. Bureaucracy is how you keep a society functioning. There’s nothing inherent in it that makes it bad or inflexible. That’s just poorly implemented bureaucracy.
I want bureaucracy enforcement by smart contract sitting on a public ledger hosted by each individual that verify each other through critical mass making changes only possible by votes.
Reworded using AI:
I wish there was a system for democracy that isn’t relying on human representatives but instead runs automatically through a network that everyone can participate in. In this system, rules and laws wouldn’t be enforced by politicians or government officials—they would be enforced by computer programs called smart contracts. These programs automatically make sure that everyone follows the rules and that nothing can be changed without the proper approval.
Every person in the network would have their own copy of the system running on their device. These copies constantly check each other to make sure no one is cheating or trying to change the rules secretly. If someone tries to break the rules, the network immediately notices and prevents it.
When it comes to changing the rules, nothing happens unless a majority of the people in the network vote in favor. This means that every citizen has a direct say in decisions, instead of relying on representatives who might have their own interests. Every vote and decision is permanently recorded in a transparent, public ledger, so there is no way to tamper with the results.
Applied to an entire democracy, this system could replace elections, legislation, and even enforcement. Policies, budgets, and laws could be proposed, debated, and voted on directly by the people. The system would enforce the outcomes automatically, ensuring fairness, transparency, and accountability at every step. In essence, it would create a digital democracy where power truly belongs to the citizens, not to politicians or bureaucrats.
You can call it Vogon Chess.
Oh freddled gruntbuggly,
Thy micturations are to me,
As plurdled gabbleblotchits. On a lurgid bee,
That mordiously hath blurted out,
Its earted jurtles, grumbling
Into a rancid festering confectious organ squealer.
Now the jurpling slayjid agrocrustles,
Are slurping hagrilly up the axlegrurts,
And living glupules frart and stipulate,
Like jowling meated liverslime,
Groop, I implore thee, my foonting turlingdromes,
And hooptiously drangle me,
With crinkly bindlewurdles.
Or else I shall rend thee in the gobberwarts with my blurglecruncheon,
See if I don’t!
My ears! My eyes!
Grab your towel.
Would Vogons even like Chess, or any game that didn’t involve smashing something to bits and eating it?
I imagine to get a Vogon to play Chess, you would have to get a specially requested form signed in triplicate across 12 different divisions of the Chess Department (A sub-department of the Entertainment and Leisure Department, a department that only one middle manager knows about, and he’s on Annual Leave today), one for each type of piece for the game, and again for each colour. After a period of 18 months they will maybe approve your request for the forms you need to fill in to request a game of Chess with one specific Vogon, who will then be asked to fill in another form (also signed in triplicate) to accept the challenge.
By the time you get to actually sitting down to start the chess match, you realise you didn’t mention on the form who was going to go first, so you have to pack everything up and start the process all over again!
You’d have a faster and livelier time playing 6 hour session of Monopoly with humans from this backwater planet
As written the bureaucrat would be useful in preventing stalemate, which isn’t accurate since bureaucrats cause stalemates.
The Oligarch
While still standing, can force any non-pawn, non-oligarch piece on the opposite side to preform one move on their choice per turn.
The Landlord
Can claim any spot on the board as their own displacing the existing piece there and forcing it to move. If the piece has no viable move, they are just culled.
Both of these are waaaaaay to strong. Landlord just “culls” the Queen first turn. Or why not just the king?
Oligarch may also may just end in repeated moves. White uses oligarch to move black piece to bad position. Black moves same piece to good position again. One round wasted without any change to board.
Also, chess is based on the premise that you have to move a piece every turn and if you can’t, the game is a draw. Both of your pieces work by not moving.
