I've created many Chess Variants. AMA.

@liminal (#26)

I get it now.

It's an interesting idea, but not really a chess variant, because it pulls us away from opening theory, trading, exchanging, positional advantages, etc. and there is no more calculation or logic.

In short, it's a new board game where you predict where the 'Key' piece is, and you take it. The other piece's moves are based on chess.

All the parts that make chess chess are gone.

Can you patent a chess variant that you invent?

@InnateAluminum

You make an interesting point. If you use FIDE Chess as a starting point, at what point is it no longer a variation of Chess (Chess Variant) and is actually it's own game.

For me, the answer is that if there's more rules that are from Chess than there are rules that aren't, then it's a variant of chess. Call it "The 50% Rule."

So it it takes more time to explain the 10 new pieces, the shape of the board, the winning condition than you gain by starting out with Chess rules.... yeah, that's no longer a variant of Chess, it simply has Chess elements in a new game.

But, if the game is mostly Chess Rules and you changes three rules or added three rules, then that's a variant, IMHO.

Your list of criteria:
1) Opening Theory
2) Trading
3) Exchanging
4) Positional Advantage...
5) Logic (or perhaps "perfect knowledge" would be more appropriate?)

...and you seemed like you had more you could think of. These don't define Chess. These are the results of the rules. Take the Chess960 Variant, arguable the most common currently, and you can see that 99.9% of the time your opening book is useless... so is it still Chess? Well no. It's Chess960. It's a variation of Chess.

There was a great video game call Archon: The Light and the Dark from 1983 [en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archon:_The_Light_and_the_Dark].

It was clearly inspired by Chess, but when you captured you played a mini-video game where you fought for the capture. Some people will call that game a Chess Variant and some won't. The Wikipedia article walks the line on it and in the "reception" section you can see how different people felt about it.

As a Chess Variant designer I'm constantly having this same conversation with people who have dedicated themselves to Chess. The deeper the investment in FIDE Chess, the hard it is for them to invest in a Chess Variant, because honestly playing variants tends initially hurt your regular chess play. You have the stray thought about dropping a Queen on your opponents back row because you were playing Crazyhouse, for example, but this isn't going to help you win your current FIDE Chess match and is a distraction. I understand that and I don't think that those are the kind of people who are interested in Chess Variants.

At what point would you consider a set of rules a new game versus a Chess Variant? (Based on the percentage of the rules that were retained from Chess... no wrong answers here, I'm just curious on your opinion and views.)

@NeverBeenTimid

Theoretically yes. Would it hold up in court, I don't know.

There was one variant, that I won't name here, who's designer patented his variant. He defended it, because he happened to work at a law firm (although he wasn't a lawyer) and even forced some people from producing boards that mentioned they were "capable of playing <name of variant>"... the board variant and pieces are common among variant designers and has been around for hundreds of years. The fact that you could play his patented version was just a bully tactic for him to try to get money, IMHO. He eventually stopped paying for the patent and it lapsed, IIRC.

So copyright is probably the most you are going to get unless you spend money and even then the courts might see your variant as trivial or prior art, meaning your patent is useless.

Short answer: Yes, but why would you?

@liminal (#33)

I never said I had any specific criteria.

In Crazyhouse, some things are valued more and it's pretty different. But this Strate-Go chess is not like chess at all, it is a game that works differently - it isn't a strategy board game, so it really can't be a relative of chess.

Technically this game isn't a variant.

@liminal (#33)

I'd say a strategy board game where there needs to be creativity, intuition, a sharp eye, but also lots of planning would be a chess variant.

I'm not saying what does not need as much planning is not a chess variant, but anything that is played like chess (similar game - there are pieces, and you use the pieces to achieve something; there may be certain elements such as material and space).

The objective doesn't even need to be checkmate, it could be racing a king to the eighth rank, to the center, or nuking your opponent's king. But these pieces move similarly.

I believe the easiest way to make one (or demonstrate one) is to take chess and modify a few major rules, perhaps the objective, whether you have to capture, or maybe add and change pieces.

There's no true boundary for what is and what isn't, but a game played like Go except with capturing and pieces that move isn't a chess variant.

Oh, and if you were wondering, from my standpoint I'd say Solo chess may be a variant but seems to be a different game - just similar.

Similar =/= Variant

@InnateAluminum

Thanks for explaining your view. I think, for example, Racing Kings is a great example of a variant that is close to crossing the line to being it's own board game... by your definition. When you look at the elements of Chess that are present:

• Piece movement
• Illegal to move into Check

All the pawns are gone, there's not mate or even King's capture, the winning condition is a position, players side on the same side of the board... you certainly aren't going to be using many of your skills from Chess here.

Compare that to Strate-Go Chess, the difference is information. The pieces are secret. Much like in Dark Chess... there's a "fog of war" element (that I personally enjoy in Chess Variants.) There's even a strange test that you could theoretically play a FIDE Chess game in Strate-Go Chess (both players putting the pieces in the right spots and making legal moves....)

So I'm think I disagree with you, but I certainly understand where you are coming from. Everyone comes to Chess Variants from a different place and people disagree about what is and what isn't a chess variant. I think this good and healthy for both FIDE Chess and Chess Variants (As well as any game that might be like chess but isn't close enough to be Chess, like Xiangqi or Shogi.)

I think there's also room for talking about intent. If someone creates a new thing and their intent is to create a Chess Variant, then I think that passes my personal test as well.

@liminal (#37)

Yes, from my viewpoint Racing Kings isn't really a Chess Variant, but maybe it has a small connection.

If they played legal moves, I would know what is a knight or bishop or queen etc.

@liminal
I have a question.

Has a Crazyhouse Antichess Variant ever been created?

I realize; it would be ridiculous; as you'd have to somehow eliminate everything without trades; and would probably take hundreds of moves. But, if it exists....i wanna play it. Once...then never again.

@breakreign

If Crazyhouse Antichess has been invented, I haven't played it or seen it. That doesn't mean it's not possible someone invented it. Google says... nothing of interest regarding such a variant.

There was one site, which I will refrain from mentioning the name of, that was going to create "a modular variant system". In other words, you would be able to challenge someone to a game, but the game could be a mixture of elements from numerous other variants. Want to mix Crazyhouse with Antichess.... no problem.... but why stop there, why not Crazyhouse Antichess Horde or Crazyhouse Antichess Horde 960?

The idea never finished initial staging because the coding to keep some specific kinds of games from interacting couldn't be done easily. For example what are the win conditions for Antichess Racing Kings? Well, you have to decide if you can capture the King or not... and then it gets complicated.

I still think you could make such a system, but you'd need to stack the variant modules in a hierarchy, so one could have precedent over the other. "Win Condition King Capture - ON" and "Racing King Starting Position - ON" and "Win Condition King to 8th Rank - ON" would be possible then.