ruin a game with stupid upgrades

CrystalShadow

don't upset the insane catgirl
Apr 11, 2009
3,829
0
0
So... Chess has been around a really long time. And it's basic rules really haven't changed in ages.

Which isn't such a bad thing, because, after all, it is easy to learn, but hard to master, nearly perfectly balanced, and all round a very well thought out game.

But... That's boring. So... Let's change it.
Come up with some new... 'features'. (heh. Yes. 'features'. XD)

So... What would you suggest to create a new version of chess?
New rules, new pieces, new board layouts, extra sides... Anything is fair game.
They can be silly, or serious, well thought out, or completely broken.
It's up to you.

Let your imagination run wild, and see where it takes you.
Who knows. There might even be a handful of good ideas in there... Somewhere. XD

OK, I'll start.

Some new pieces:
- The princess.
The princess can move 1 square in any direction (like the king), but can only capture pieces directly in front of or behind itself. (no diagonals, not to the side)
If you have lost your queen, you can bring a bishop, the king and the princess together in adjacent squares, and the princess becomes a new queen. (you can also do this without a bishop, but only if you have none left.)
If captured by an enemy, rather than being removed from play, the princess now becomes your opponent's piece. (and they can do anything with it they could do with their own princess).
You can attempt to recapture the princess.

- The wizard. The wizard can either move one square in any direction, or teleport to any square in which all adjacent squares are empty. No enemy piece may move into a square directly adjacent to a wizard, except another wizard. However, if the wizard moves adjacent to existing pieces, they do not have to be moved. Also, pieces which can move multiple squares in one go (Queen, bishop, rook, knight) may still take the wizard if they would ordinarily be able to - but they may not move into a square adjacent to it regardless.


OK. Your turn. What clever (or absurd) things can you come up with? (or, feel free to comment on what someone else has devised. XD)

Good luck. And have fun. (or, um, you know. Whatever. >_>) XD

Update: Re-reading this I'm thinking it might be better moved to off-topic. (or I have to rethink the format a little.). Going to need to give that a little more thought though...
Get back to you all in a bit. XD

OK...
Thought about it.

Right, let's open this up a little.
Pick a game (preferably a board game, but whatever you feel like), and come up with a way to improve or upgrade it somehow.

it can be a serious attempt, or a joke, or anything inbetween.

So, first, comment on the idea of the person above you. (again, your comment could be a serious critique, a joke, or whatever. Just don't make it personal. XD)

Then, come up with an idea of your own, and so on.

So... I'll start.

----------------------

You know what chess needs? Hexagonal spaces in 12 different colours... You can only make a move onto a square if it's one of the ones in the sequence that keeps changing randomly.
Because that game is WAY too predictable. XD
 

Barbas

ExQQxv1D1ns
Oct 28, 2013
33,804
0
0
The pawns level up with every 5 moves. Each time they do, they get to cover a further square with each move. Additionally, if you have more than four pawns within two squares of each other after 10 moves, the king and queen on that side are killed and removed.
 

CrystalShadow

don't upset the insane catgirl
Apr 11, 2009
3,829
0
0
hah. That... That sounds like it could be amusing... Would probably ruin the game completely, but...
That's half the fun.

Risk. Risk totally needs a tactical nuke option. Enemy being all annoying and heavily fortifying a key country, blocking you from expanding anywhere else?
Nuke em! And watch your problems disappear!
Well, until you start getting radiation poisoning...
Or destroy the world... Hehe.
 

tilmoph

Gone Gonzo
Jun 11, 2013
922
0
0
Candyland. No one ever eats the candy people and steals their powers. So naturally, if you draw a card teleporting you backwards on the board, you may roll a d6; on a [6-candy lords eaten}, you eat the lord or lady of the land. Anytime a players are in your domain, you may choose to not draw a card that turn and instead roll a d6. On a 6, they roll a counter die. If they don't get a 6, they skip their next 3 turns. On a 6, they eat you, sending you back to start and skipping your next 2 turns. They now have the candy lord title from you.
 

Dalek Caan

Pro-Dalek, Anti-You
Feb 12, 2011
2,871
0
0
Fallout.

Every time you take a step the game has to pass a walking check. Anything above 75% results in damage. 100% breaks one of your legs. Going over a flat surface decreases these chances by 10%. Rough terrain increases the chances by 10%

It's super immersive.
 

CrystalShadow

don't upset the insane catgirl
Apr 11, 2009
3,829
0
0
Monopoly right?

I mean, it already starts serious arguments... But, you know what? It lacks realism. I mean, everyone starts the game with the exact same amount of money and resources?
What is this, communism?
What it needs, obviously, is dice rolls or something else that randomly determine what each player starts with.
Maybe even some advantages or disadvantages to movement around the board?

Heh. Yes. That will definitely improve the game. XD

(Although... It does make an interesting social experiment... How much does it influence who wins if you make the starting conditions unfair?)
 

Headsprouter

Monster Befriender
Legacy
Oct 14, 2020
8,662
3
43
Add a sword to TF2 that goes nicely with a shield that makes you hard to kill. Not to mention the sword makes you faster and tankier the more kills you get with it. Oh, and it works in perfect synergy with the most hated weapon in the game.

OH WAIT

Jokes aside, add Van Helsing's crossbow to Chivalry: Medieval Warfare.