Somehow this reminded me of a ‘law game’ I once read about. (Googled it now, but couldn’t find it.) It was roughly like this:
§1. The game is played in N rounds, in each round every player has the chance to win points, whoever has most points after N rounds wins. The exact way of winning points is defined in later paragraphs.
§2. In each round the rules (paragraphs) can be changed by suggesting a change and putting it up to a vote. The exact way of changing rules is defined in later paragraphs.
§3. The first 3 paragraphs can never be changed.
$4. Each player rolls one die in each round and gains points correspondingly.
And another paragraph defining the initial suggesting/voting procedure.
Thanks, yes, that must have been it. I probably read some sort of re-print of the Hofstadter article a few years later, since I didn’t read the Scientific American at that age.
I recently came up with what I think is a really nice Chess and Go mashup. I posted the rules a few days ago over in the Board Game Geek Abstract Strategy games forum, but essentially you have go stones and chess pieces, all played on the intersections:
you place your king first
chess pieces cannot be placed so they check the king
chess pieces cannot capture go stones except by surrounding
chess pieces also count as go stones for territory & capture purposes
pawns move orthogonally or capture diagonally, but in any direction
on a turn you can only do one: 1. move a chess piece or 2. place a chess piece or go stone
unless they don’t make sense (castling) rules from both chess and go still apply
you win immediately if you capture your opponent’s king, or by territory after both players pass
If you click-through and scroll to the top, my original idea for this (posted last year sometime) was more like playing both games at once, with go stones on the intersections and chess pieces in the squares. I’ve done quite a bit of research since, and there are some much older ways to play both games together, but none of them quite like mine.
Most notably, Chego, which was followed up later with a bunch of different ideas for Go with Chess Pieces, but essentially those are all games where you play chess pieces as if they were go stones – meaning after placement they do not move – but they influence squares on the board in the way that they would move in regular Chess. The goal is to have more territory (by influence) after the game ends. More recently, Kanare Kato designed another game in this vein he calls Chess Territorial.
I understand that. Now I 'm curious to know if there was ever a tournament claiming ing rules and not following this pattern of time setting. If not included in the OGS rules, we should provide aside a similar time setting, called like ing rules time setting.
Some randomly chosen fields are secretly “Treasure” and worth more points. At the start players don’t know where the treasure is, but every move reveals nearby Treasure for just this player.
This reminds of how Microsoft updated its Minesweeper game to include an “adventure mode”, which has treasures and traps, and has a new graphical theme
I like the “Hand and brain” mode in Chess. Its played in teams of two while each team has a “brain”, someone who names a type of chess piece to be moved (pawn, knight …), and a “hand” who has to choose the piece and move it. (Actually you could also play it 2vs1 with one player playing normal and the other two in the hand/brain format)
A translation to Go may be to devide the Go board in (e.g. 4) equal big quatrants, number them up and the brain tells the hand the number of quatrant to play in.
Im just not sure if it would be a bit more boring to act as brain.
A other possibillity would be to let the brain name some kind of move the hand has to play (keima, attachment, 1 space jump …) with tenuki being a move that can not be described otherwise.
In this article on chess there is mentioned freestyle chess (also referred to as Fischer Random or Chess960).
The pieces are placed in a random starting position. All there is on opening theories does become useless. The game becomes unpredictable and therefore more attractive.
How would this concept translate to the game of go?
In go we don’t have a starting position, but suppose that we let the computer randomly place some stones for each player and that the human players continue with that.
