The Picard Maneuver@lemmy.world to AnarchyChess@sopuli.xyz · 1 year agoThe many life paths available to a pawnlemmy.worldimagemessage-square32fedilinkarrow-up1488arrow-down18
arrow-up1480arrow-down1imageThe many life paths available to a pawnlemmy.worldThe Picard Maneuver@lemmy.world to AnarchyChess@sopuli.xyz · 1 year agomessage-square32fedilink
minus-squareBigmouse@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up42arrow-down1·1 year agoYou cannot promote to King or Pawn. As such, your statement is wrong and i feel betrayed.
minus-squareThe Picard Maneuver@lemmy.worldOPlinkfedilinkarrow-up19·1 year agoI’d love to watch someone try to do this at a tournament. Just swapping out their pawn for an extra King with a deadpan expression.
minus-squareArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up10·1 year agoThe game would end when any king is captured so having more than one (as opposed to making the pawn a queen) would be a strict disadvantage. I’d allow it.
minus-squareSotuanduso@lemm.eelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up11·1 year agoIncorrect, the game ends when a king cannot avoid capture. As such, your statement is wrong and I feel betrayed.
minus-squaretaiyang@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up6·1 year agoI misunderstood the rules and shoved my king into my mouth, with a deadpan expression. Too bad they cut that out of a clip of Queen’s Gambit.
minus-squareTier 1 Build-A-Bear 🧸@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up5·1 year agoSwap it for an enemy pawn.
minus-squareDrRatso@lemmy.mllinkfedilinkarrow-up2·edit-21 year agoGranted, but checkmate on either of the kings = loss E: And now that I think about it, forking the kinds would also have to be a loss.
minus-squareGrabtharsHammer@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up6·1 year agoPawns were players and players were pawns, once upon a time. Now that it’s the opposite it’s twice upon a time.
You cannot promote to King or Pawn. As such, your statement is wrong and i feel betrayed.
I’d love to watch someone try to do this at a tournament. Just swapping out their pawn for an extra King with a deadpan expression.
The game would end when any king is captured so having more than one (as opposed to making the pawn a queen) would be a strict disadvantage. I’d allow it.
Incorrect, the game ends when a king cannot avoid capture. As such, your statement is wrong and I feel betrayed.
I misunderstood the rules and shoved my king into my mouth, with a deadpan expression.
Too bad they cut that out of a clip of Queen’s Gambit.
Swap it for an enemy pawn.
Or a bionicle
Granted, but checkmate on either of the kings = loss
E: And now that I think about it, forking the kinds would also have to be a loss.
Can’t be promoted to player either
Pawns were players and players were pawns, once upon a time. Now that it’s the opposite it’s twice upon a time.
Bet