Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
10 Posts

Chess 2: The Sequel» Forums » Rules

Subject: Various Rule Questions rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Mick
United States
Baldwinsville
New York
flag msg tools
1) Do ghosts block knights from moving through them (or pieces that move as a knight)?

2) Can a jungle queen "jump" pieces when moving as a rook, or only when moving in the knight pattern?

3) Can a elephant capture in a direction where he can only move < 3 spaces? For example, if he is 2 away from the edge of the board, would capturing in that direction be an illegal move because he cannot move his maximum distance?

4) Following above, what if the third piece in an elephant's path is a ghost, can he not rampage in that direction because the ghost is not capturable?

5) Can two kings armies put themselves in check in their normal move if their king move will remove the check?

6) Is it an illegal move to make a capture that could *potentially* put you in check? (i.e. it triggers a duel that you end up losing)

7) If such a move in #6 is legal, and it happens, do you immediately lose the game?

8) If a elephant rampages through multiple enemy pieces, how does dueling interact? Do you trigger a duel in order of capture, and if the elephant loses a duel does that prevent the capture of further pieces down the line?

9) The rules state that a warrior-king's whirlwind attack will "destroy" the pieces around it. Does destroying an enemy pawn (as oppose to capturing) still earn you a dueling stone?

10) Can a warrior-king whirlwind if it is next to a ghost? (This ties into question #4 in a way. Basically it's a distinction between the ghost making moves that would capture it be illegal, or by simply not being captured, or destroyed(?), during a move that would do so.

11) Can a warrior-king whirlwind if no pieces are adjacent?

12) If an elephant is 3 tiles away from another elephant, with capturable pieces between them, what happens if one elephant rampages in the direction of the other? Does the elephant stop short of its full rampage because it cannot capture the other, or is capturing any piece in that direction an illegal move completely?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrew Lamoureux
msg tools
These answers are based on my interpretation of the 2.4 PDF and by reading the Chess 2 support forum: http://www.fantasystrike.com/forums/index.php?forums/chess-2...

1) no, knights are "leaping" pieces
2) no, as a rook she "slides" and is thereful blockable by other pieces or ghost rooks, but as a knight, she leaps so apply answer #1
3) it's not illegal: he charges up to the edge of the board and is then stops on that edge square, unable to charge further
4) the ghost acts like the edge of the board, so apply answer #3
5) no, PDF explicitly says that neither the normal move nor the king move can enter check
6) good question!
7) good question!
8) the first defender has option to initiate the duel - if the elephant loses the duel, he and the first piece are removed and the charge is over; else the charge continues as normal
9) good question!
10) yes, the ghost can be thought of as a void just like the edge of the board
11) yes, it seems to be a no-op
12) good question! same question applies to nemesis stopping a charge early

Please post your good questions to the forum, I'd like to know the answers too!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Edouard Lorenceau
France
Boulogne-Billancourt
Ile-de-France
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
9) The gameplay video of the online version of the game shows the whirlwind earning you a stone. So yes, you do earn one

5) is also confirmed in that video

as for 12) id imagine that the logic is the same as 8): you check if you can keep going after every captured piece.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Edouard Lorenceau
France
Boulogne-Billancourt
Ile-de-France
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
In here https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=MO..., at 56m they mention that a double check would be checkmate. Little detail ive been playing wrong for a long time.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Some Donkus
Canada
flag msg tools
unreal_ed wrote:
In here https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=MO..., at 56m they mention that a double check would be checkmate. Little detail ive been playing wrong for a long time.


Not all double checks end in checkmate. If you can take the threatening piece in one move, you don't end your turn in check.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Berger
United States
Round Lake
Illinois
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Cymsdale wrote:
6) Is it an illegal move to make a capture that could *potentially* put you in check? (i.e. it triggers a duel that you end up losing)

7) If such a move in #6 is legal, and it happens, do you immediately lose the game?


No answer on these? I was wondering about that situation. I wouldn't think that it would be illegal to make the capture - it would cause a lot of confusing situations where a move looks legal but isn't. I thought maybe it should be illegal to initiate the duel, but that would punish the defender because of the potential to threaten the attacker's king and that doesn't feel right. I guess it should just cause the attacker to lose(?), thus he should avoid making such a capture unless he has enough stones to guarantee winning the duel.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Sirlin
United States
California
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
Check is computed assuming no duels, for simplicity. That way you can see if something is check or isn't right away without having to look at how many stones you have, how many stones the opponent has, and then think it all through.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Berger
United States
Round Lake
Illinois
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Sirlin wrote:
Check is computed assuming no duels, for simplicity. That way you can see if something is check or isn't right away without having to look at how many stones you have, how many stones the opponent has, and then think it all through.


No, that's not what I meant. What I mean is, say you have a rook behind a pawn in a column. And I have a rook in front of that pawn with my king behind it. If I capture your pawn with my rook, I am not in check. But if you initiate and win a duel, then both your pawn and my rook are removed from the board. Now you have a rook threatening my king and it is your turn. You can't capture a king, but my king is in check on your turn. What happens? My guess is, I lose.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Sirlin
United States
California
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
If I understand that correctly, then of course you lose. There is no other thing it could be. It would be my turn with a 100% guaranteed way to capture your king, literally 0 you can do about it. Maybe you meant it as a UI question of when the game should tell you that definitely 100% lost. But no matter when the online game chooses to notify you that you lost, it has to be the conclusion.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Berger
United States
Round Lake
Illinois
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Sirlin wrote:
If I understand that correctly, then of course you lose. There is no other thing it could be.


Yes, I suppose so, but it seemed odd that it was unanswered for so long. It does seem like something like this should be addressed in the rulebook. Because the Chess 2 rules state the differences from Chess 1, and it is not possible to capture a king in Chess 1.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.