Here's a theory: Chess is not war, it's a board game. Mystery solved.
lame theory 1/5
The idea of chess is more than the military ideas.
Chess is a strategic game in several meanings.
"Dying King/pieces" is in this context a tactical thing.
The thing with the king is more philosophical about ideals, principals, strategic => abstract things.
You can't kill a dream, a idea, a ideal.
On the board two sorts of pieces:"real fighters" and "abstract fighters".
I avoid using the forum because the social balance is not working here.
You get short destructive like "lame theory 1/5" or no answers .
This is alright in general but I don't want to be part of it.
My point is: The rules have a purpose, they are good. No more information from me here. Take it or leave it :)
Chess is a strategic game in several meanings.
"Dying King/pieces" is in this context a tactical thing.
The thing with the king is more philosophical about ideals, principals, strategic => abstract things.
You can't kill a dream, a idea, a ideal.
On the board two sorts of pieces:"real fighters" and "abstract fighters".
I avoid using the forum because the social balance is not working here.
You get short destructive like "lame theory 1/5" or no answers .
This is alright in general but I don't want to be part of it.
My point is: The rules have a purpose, they are good. No more information from me here. Take it or leave it :)
it is true that checkmate is kind of nonsensical in view of a real battle, but from another point of view, is it worth the extra complexity to modal reality? ANY tabletop game is an abstraction, and not every game need keep track of individual arrows, for instance.
Um...
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.