Chess, a game about true equality

[Epic_Bubble]

So a while back when Mr Sterling asked which game featured a strong female lead that wasn't good looking and had character flaws etc etc. I was a bit hard pressed to think of one. That is until now....

Chess a game where everything is equality, where it doesn't matter what the color of your skin is, if your strong or weak or if you are poor or rich. Where a pawn can kill a queen and vice verse.

Going back to the strong woman role here we have a Queen who is a complete bad ass, the strongest piece in the game. While the male role is weak and flawed and needs protecting.

Sure Chess has crappy graphics, horrible repetitive gameplay, a boring plot, and unattractive action scenes but Chess a game that has been around since the roman empire was crumbling is the most equal game I can think of.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Excepting that the king is the vital piece, all other pieces exist solely to defend it. Rather classist.

 

[Flutterguy]

White goes before black. Queen is replaceable with a pawn. Lots of this could be found.

Truth of the matter is logic is not perfect. Something can always be made to appear right/wrong.

 

[Teoes]

Yeah, chess is classist towards poor people, sexist towards men and encourages racial segregation and conflict. I think it's a disgusting example to be setting to our children.

Snakes & Ladders is where it's at. All pieces of all colours and backgrounds are equal.

[footnote]WINKY FACE![/footnote]

 

[JoJo]

Snakes & Ladders is where it's at. All pieces of all colours and backgrounds are equal.

I disagree, Snakes and Ladders is terribly biased against snakes, associating them with negative consequences. I say the most truly equal game is Twister, since all colours are treated equally and aside from colour no circle is different or worth more than any other!

 

[Teoes]

Snakes & Ladders is where it's at. All pieces of all colours and backgrounds are equal.

I disagree, Snakes and Ladders is terribly biased against snakes, associating them with negative consequences. I say the most truly equal game is Twister, since all colours are treated equally and aside from colour no circle is different or worth more than any other!

Ah. Good point, well made. Plus it's all decided at random. We all know that the thing about chaos is, that it's fair.

Plus, y'know - people bending over and stuff.

 

[blackrave]

Excepting that the king is the vital piece, all other pieces exist solely to defend it. Rather classist.

What is this "queen" everybody keeps talking about?
I know there is a "shah" and "vizier", but "queen"? Never seen such unit.
Maybe everyone is playing some other form of chess I'm not aware of?

P.S. Yes, I'm not stupid, I realize what people mean by "queen" and "king", but only because you name them so doesn't mean they are actually named so. To explain in more modern terms shah represents commander in HQ, that is why shah is so limited when it comes to movement and so important to lose. Vizier represents special task force (well originally they were considered closer to second in command/bodyguards and in early days bodyguards of leaders were one of best fighters), thus their insane mobility and disposability. And that also explains why pawns can be promoted after reaching end of the board (aka "green rookie going through hell and surviving"). "King" and "Queen" is just imprecise and obsolete terms to use.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Excepting that the king is the vital piece, all other pieces exist solely to defend it. Rather classist.

What is this "queen" everybody keeps talking about?
I know there is a "shah" and "vizier", but "queen"? Never seen such unit.
Maybe everyone is playing some other form of chess I'm not aware of?

P.S. Yes, I'm not stupid, I realize what people mean by "queen" and "king", but only because you name them so doesn't mean they are actually named so. To explain in more modern terms shah represents commander in HQ, that is why shah is so limited when it comes to movement and so important to lose. Vizier represents special task force (well originally they were considered closer to second in command/bodyguards and in early days bodyguards of leaders were one of best fighters), thus their insane mobility and disposability. And that also explains why pawns can be promoted after reaching end of the board (aka "green rookie going through hell and surviving"). "King" and "Queen" is just imprecise and obsolete terms to use.

Pft, next you'll be saying that the bishop is some kind of vehicle.

(More seriously, though, while it is certainly true that they used to be different, that doesn't mean they are "actually" the old way, and the new terms most definitely aren't the obsolete ones.)

 

[Vegosiux]

Well, if I go translating from Slovene, we have "King", "Lady", "Hunter", "Hopper", "Fortress" and "Peasant", that's the "official" chess language. Casually, we do have "Queen", "Runner" (for the bishop) and "Horse" as possible terms as well.

As for a game that's truly equal in all regards, my vote goes for Minesweeper. Because, let's face it, everyone hates having to jump 200 feet into the air and scattering themselves over a wide area.

 

[blackrave]

Pft, next you'll be saying that the bishop is some kind of vehicle.

(More seriously, though, while it is certainly true that they used to be different, that doesn't mean they are "actually" the old way, and the new terms most definitely aren't the obsolete ones.)

Well, from my POV you either use closest translations to traditional names, or you use more modern ones.
But then again my opinion isn't rule, sadly.

 

[FalloutJack]

White goes before black. Queen is replaceable with a pawn. Lots of this could be found.

Truth of the matter is logic is not perfect. Something can always be made to appear right/wrong.

Actually, that who-goes-first rule is interchangeable and don't tell me that people never do this. Also, queen is replaceable with a pawn because the queen is so badly wanted as a power piece.

BTW: In the age-old video game of Battle Chess, the queen is noted as being a powerful sorceress.

Game. Set. Match.

 

[Naeras]

Chess is horribly balanced. Blizzard needs to nerf protoss to remedy this.

 

[thesilentman]

I'd like to add that just the queen used to be called something similar to a minister in a language I'm not remembering right now. So yeah, chess is pretty equal for the most part. Of course there are going to be imbalances somewhere, like the queen square for each side and who goes first, but it is pretty equal.

 

[josemlopes]

Somehow this is relevant:

 

[Saelune]

Chess. Where white should strive to win, and black should just try not to lose.

 

[Phrozenflame500]

Chess is racist, not only does white go first (perhaps subtly denouncing black scientists?) but also stating that characters of opposing races can never get along and must have violent intentions against one another. In addition, the only religious piece of any significance is the Bishop, implying that none of the other religions have the same power as Christianity.

Chess is sexist, the king, a male piece, is the most inherently vital piece on the board, with him losing resulting in the loss of everybody. The queen on the other hand, while powerful, ultimately is just a tool to be used. The game's mechanics encourage sacrificing the queen for either the opponent's queen or another goal, furthering the objectification.

Chess is classist, the piece's importance are determined by their social status and wealth. The king, despite being one of the weaker pieces in shear offense, is the most important piece solely by virtue of his born social status. Meanwhile, the lonely pawn is weak and often used by the more powerful pieces as human shields and distractions. The only way for a pawn to become as valuable as a another piece is to reach the other end of the board, symbolizing the hard journey the lower class must go through to be accepted by the upper class. Despite this, the pawn can never become a king, symbolizing the futility of such a journey.

 

[Flutterguy]

White goes before black. Queen is replaceable with a pawn. Lots of this could be found.

Truth of the matter is logic is not perfect. Something can always be made to appear right/wrong.

Actually, that who-goes-first rule is interchangeable and don't tell me that people never do this. Also, queen is replaceable with a pawn because the queen is so badly wanted as a power piece.

BTW: In the age-old video game of Battle Chess, the queen is noted as being a powerful sorceress.

Game. Set. Match.

I had no idea who-goes-first was interchangeable. Must have been changed after the civil war emancipation or something.

As for being a powerful sorceress i mean come on, the title is feminine in itself. Clearly that is hidden oppression, like actor/actress.

The game should not be black/white and does not require genders. All tiles and pieces should be made grey. The king should be called the 'the ambiguous ruler'. The queen could be 'the consort'.

Check.

 

[FalloutJack]

White goes before black. Queen is replaceable with a pawn. Lots of this could be found.

Truth of the matter is logic is not perfect. Something can always be made to appear right/wrong.

Actually, that who-goes-first rule is interchangeable and don't tell me that people never do this. Also, queen is replaceable with a pawn because the queen is so badly wanted as a power piece.

BTW: In the age-old video game of Battle Chess, the queen is noted as being a powerful sorceress.

Game. Set. Match.

I had no idea who-goes-first was interchangeable. Must have been changed after the civil war emancipation or something.

As for being a powerful sorceress i mean come on, the title is feminine in itself. Clearly that is hidden oppression, like actor/actress.

The game should not be black/white and does not require genders. All tiles and pieces should be made grey. The king should be called the 'the ambiguous ruler'. The queen could be 'the consort'.

Check.

Most cases of anyone being acknowledged as a sorceress in any media is a title commanding fear and respect.

There are an equal amount of pieces and tiles of each color.

I realize you're taking the piss out of it on purpose for a laugh, and it IS funny that you do so.

Errr...mate?

 

[Buzz Killington_v1legacy]

I had no idea who-goes-first was interchangeable.

It's not, at least according to the FIDE Laws of Chess [http://www.fide.com/component/handbook/?id=124&view=article]:

The game of chess is played between two opponents who move their pieces alternately on a square board called a 'chessboard'. The player with the white pieces commences the game. A player is said to 'have the move', when his opponent's move has been 'made'. (See Article 6.7)

It's a relatively recent rule in terms of chess history, though. It wasn't really codified until 1889 by Wilhelm Steinitz (the first world chess champion).

 

[x EvilErmine x]

You know that moving first can be a huge disadvantage in chess right? So actually it's an advantage to be black, coz if your opponent moves first a good chess player can figure out his strategy based on what they move first and how they move it. Also I believe the colours of the pieces are down to to fact that chess is well old and they carved the pieces from Ivory and Ebony way back when. If they had access to cheep pigmented material back then I bet it would be blue v red or something.