Jack Vance's Dying Earth series is populated by all manner of strange creatures, from the wee Twk-Men to the flying, carnivorous pelgranes. In chapter 5 of Eyes of the Overworld, while Cugel is travelling with the pilgrims, Cugel learns of Mad King Kutt of a past eon, who assembled a menagerie attested in the casebook of the wizard Follinense. From the little left of his notes, it is learned that...
Gid: hybrid of man, gargoyle, whorl, leaping insect
Deodand: wolverine, basilisk, man
Erb: bear, man, land-lizard, demon
Grue: man, ocular bat, the unusual hoon
Leucomorph: unkown
Bazil: man, felinodore, (wasp?).
Saturday, June 13, 2009
Friday, June 5, 2009
Chess Variants 2
It's probably because chess variants are so easy to invent that there are so many of them. Luckily, I have discovered this extensive collection of chess variant-playing applets. Luckily for my wife, anyway, because I will stop pestering her. I have never been a fan of playing chess versus computers, but some of these are merely interesting, trivial games.
That category would include Dunsany's Chess, Joust Chess, Narrowness, and Peasant Revolt, some of which are games that are almost chess problems. Maharaja and Sepoys aptly demonstrates the overwhelming might of the amazon. It's also useful to have chess for four players, as well as the truly bizarre.
I remain fascinated by the toy chesses: Miniature Chess (5x5), Mini-Shogi, Toystore Chess, Petty Chess (5x6), Speed Chess, Dragonfly Chess (6x6), and the 19th-century Diana Chess. At the least, they seem like interesting ways to teach or learn chess, and games are very short.
There are a few variants inspired by fantasy or fiction, including Alice Chess, Gary Gygax's DragonChess, and Edgar Rice Burrough's Jetan, possibly the first fictional chess in speculative fiction.
Historical forms of the game and their derivations are represented by Chaturanga, Shatranj, Shogi, the circular Byzantine Shatranj, and its contemporary revival as Circular Chess.
Some of the modern chess variants like Berolina Chess aspire to be a serious direction for orthodox chess to go forward in the future. Aside from Fischer Random Chess, the most common variation of chess invented by skilled players for serious play includes two pieces, one that combines the moves of the bishop and knight and the other that combines the rook and knight, and a consequently larger board. These combination pieces date to at least 1617, but there is no consenus on whether to use one or both pieces, nomenclature, castling rules, initial setup, or board size. Capablanca Chess, developed by world chess champion José Raúl Capablanca (and played with Emmanuel Lasker), and Grand Chess are important contenders, although there are several others (1, 2, 3, 4, 5).
That category would include Dunsany's Chess, Joust Chess, Narrowness, and Peasant Revolt, some of which are games that are almost chess problems. Maharaja and Sepoys aptly demonstrates the overwhelming might of the amazon. It's also useful to have chess for four players, as well as the truly bizarre.
I remain fascinated by the toy chesses: Miniature Chess (5x5), Mini-Shogi, Toystore Chess, Petty Chess (5x6), Speed Chess, Dragonfly Chess (6x6), and the 19th-century Diana Chess. At the least, they seem like interesting ways to teach or learn chess, and games are very short.
There are a few variants inspired by fantasy or fiction, including Alice Chess, Gary Gygax's DragonChess, and Edgar Rice Burrough's Jetan, possibly the first fictional chess in speculative fiction.
Historical forms of the game and their derivations are represented by Chaturanga, Shatranj, Shogi, the circular Byzantine Shatranj, and its contemporary revival as Circular Chess.
Some of the modern chess variants like Berolina Chess aspire to be a serious direction for orthodox chess to go forward in the future. Aside from Fischer Random Chess, the most common variation of chess invented by skilled players for serious play includes two pieces, one that combines the moves of the bishop and knight and the other that combines the rook and knight, and a consequently larger board. These combination pieces date to at least 1617, but there is no consenus on whether to use one or both pieces, nomenclature, castling rules, initial setup, or board size. Capablanca Chess, developed by world chess champion José Raúl Capablanca (and played with Emmanuel Lasker), and Grand Chess are important contenders, although there are several others (1, 2, 3, 4, 5).
Dandelion mini-shatranj & mini-chaturanga
Chaturanga, of course, is the medieval Indian game that became contemporary chess after it passing through Persia as shatranj and into Europe. Dandelion shatranj is a minimalistic miniature shatranj inspired by mini-shogi (tho with somewhat less interesting gameplay) and named for the small, weedy flowers that pop up everywhere so easily. Gameplay and moves are exactly like shatranj, but occurs on a 5x5 board with only six pieces and a somewhat modified setup.
King (K): Moves as in orthodox chess.
Counselor (C): Moves one square diagonally in any direction.
Knight (N): Moves as in orthodox chess.
Elephant (E): Moves two squares diagonally in any direction, jumping over the intervening square.
Rook (R): Moves as in orthodox chess.
Pawn (P): Moves as in orthodox chess. When they arrive at the last rank on the board, pawns promote to counselors only.
Miniature shatranj has very limited play, but may be fun for a few games. There are only three or so viable opening moves, for example, and the elephant can only visit three squares on the board including its starting square. The king is fairly powerful, often threatening as many squares as the rook.
Mini-chaturanga is a group of variants on mini-shatranj, offering different early historical versions of the elephant's move. Standard mini-chaturanga is essentially the same as mini-shatranj, but the first player to expose a bare king wins without exception.
War Elephant Mini-Chaturanga: The elephant can move two squares orthogonally in any direction, jumping over the intervening square. This is the move of the Dabbabah, or war engine.
Silver Elephant Mini-Chaturanga: The elephant can move one square diagonally in any direction, and one square orthogonally forward. This is the move of the silver general of contemporary xiangqi and shogi, but in mini-chaturanga this piece does not promote.
Double Happiness Mini-Chaturanga: The elephant can move two squares orthogonally or two squares diagonally, jumping over the intervening square. This unhistorical move, as the alibaba, combines the move of the elephant and the dabbabah.
5 r e n c k
4 - - - - p
3 - - - - -
2 P - - - -
1 K C N E R
a b c d e
King (K): Moves as in orthodox chess.
Counselor (C): Moves one square diagonally in any direction.
Knight (N): Moves as in orthodox chess.
Elephant (E): Moves two squares diagonally in any direction, jumping over the intervening square.
Rook (R): Moves as in orthodox chess.
Pawn (P): Moves as in orthodox chess. When they arrive at the last rank on the board, pawns promote to counselors only.
Miniature shatranj has very limited play, but may be fun for a few games. There are only three or so viable opening moves, for example, and the elephant can only visit three squares on the board including its starting square. The king is fairly powerful, often threatening as many squares as the rook.
Mini-chaturanga is a group of variants on mini-shatranj, offering different early historical versions of the elephant's move. Standard mini-chaturanga is essentially the same as mini-shatranj, but the first player to expose a bare king wins without exception.
War Elephant Mini-Chaturanga: The elephant can move two squares orthogonally in any direction, jumping over the intervening square. This is the move of the Dabbabah, or war engine.
Silver Elephant Mini-Chaturanga: The elephant can move one square diagonally in any direction, and one square orthogonally forward. This is the move of the silver general of contemporary xiangqi and shogi, but in mini-chaturanga this piece does not promote.
Double Happiness Mini-Chaturanga: The elephant can move two squares orthogonally or two squares diagonally, jumping over the intervening square. This unhistorical move, as the alibaba, combines the move of the elephant and the dabbabah.
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
Chess Variants
I think the first chess variant I was seriously interested in was Gary Gygax's dragonchess. It seemed like it'd be hard to get a set together, and gameplay'd be outlandish and complicated. And it is!
There are plenty of others, but I've played almost none of them. By far the most interesting, for a number of reasons, is Alice Chess. The pieces go through the looking glass every time they move. The most worthwhile is Fischer random chess or Chess960, invented in 1996 by Bobby Fischer.
Chess with different forces also looks interesting, especially Dunsany's chess. These are probably in the "a game or two would be fun" category.
There are a couple of four-handed chess games, aside from stuff like chaturanga and Enochian chess. I think the Dessau chessboard looks the most practical, as it eliminates pawn capture problems. Four-handed competitive play sounds more interesting than cooperative play. The Battle of Four Armies: capture an enemy king to force that player out of the game (their pieces cannot move or threaten, but are not removed from play until individually captured) and the last king standing wins.
The miniature shogi variants look like they give quick and elegant games. There are a couple of miniature versions of orthodox chess: HP Minichess, apparently presented by Marvin Gardner in Scientific American, is played on a 5x5 board. Toystore Chess is essentially miniature chess with placing. Quick Chess and Speed Game Chess are played on a 5x6 board.
The shogi variants are wild and impressive. Five-minute poppy shogi and mini-shogi are beautifully minimalistic, while taiyoku shogi is epically huge and unwieldy: there are 1296 squares on the board and each side has 402 pieces of 209 different types, totalling 253 different moves. Totally crazy.
There are plenty of others, but I've played almost none of them. By far the most interesting, for a number of reasons, is Alice Chess. The pieces go through the looking glass every time they move. The most worthwhile is Fischer random chess or Chess960, invented in 1996 by Bobby Fischer.
Chess with different forces also looks interesting, especially Dunsany's chess. These are probably in the "a game or two would be fun" category.
There are a couple of four-handed chess games, aside from stuff like chaturanga and Enochian chess. I think the Dessau chessboard looks the most practical, as it eliminates pawn capture problems. Four-handed competitive play sounds more interesting than cooperative play. The Battle of Four Armies: capture an enemy king to force that player out of the game (their pieces cannot move or threaten, but are not removed from play until individually captured) and the last king standing wins.
The miniature shogi variants look like they give quick and elegant games. There are a couple of miniature versions of orthodox chess: HP Minichess, apparently presented by Marvin Gardner in Scientific American, is played on a 5x5 board. Toystore Chess is essentially miniature chess with placing. Quick Chess and Speed Game Chess are played on a 5x6 board.
The shogi variants are wild and impressive. Five-minute poppy shogi and mini-shogi are beautifully minimalistic, while taiyoku shogi is epically huge and unwieldy: there are 1296 squares on the board and each side has 402 pieces of 209 different types, totalling 253 different moves. Totally crazy.
Thursday, May 28, 2009
My First Dragonchess Set
About a year ago, I made a set with which to play dragonchess, the three-dimensional fantasy chess variant invented by Gary Gygax for a story in the 100th issue of Dragon magazine. I made the pieces out of polymer clay, painted gold and scarlet. Rather than copying the conventional Staunton chess piece design of the 19th century, I based the design on the original Persian designs that entered Europe at the beginning of the Middle Ages.
Although the first chautaranga pieces from India were representational, Islam's proscriptions against iconography caused the pieces of shatranj to assume a very abstract, nonrepresentational form. Since chess came to Europe through the Islamic world, the earliest Spanish, French, and Viking chess sets had more abstract shapes. I thought it would be an interesting variant—especially with my primitive sculpting skills. Also, I gave the pieces for the lower, upper, and middle boards different shapes (cubes, cylinders, and pyramids respectively) to help distinguish the pieces. The boards are posterboard and watercolor.
Rather than the 8x8 board of chess, dragonchess uses three 12x8 boards. Each player, both Gold and Scarlet, has 6 Slyphs, 1 Dragon, 2 Griffons, 12 Warriors, 2 Oliphants, 2 Unicorns, 2 Heros, 2 Thieves, 1 Cleric, 1 Paladin, 1 Mage, 1 King, 6 Dwarfs, 2 Basilisks, and 1 Elemental. That's 15 unit types and 42 individual figures, compared to the 5 unit types and 16 figures of orthodox chess.
I've played a few games of dragonchess since putting the set together. It is a very complicated game. Some of the pieces move similarly to orthodox chess; others move slightly differently; and nearly every piece that can move around the board does so in a different way. These moves are not at all systematic. It is confusing to keep straight the moves, blockable and unblockable and special powers of each piece, and it usually involves a lot of referring to the instructions.
Apparently Gygax didn't spend a lot of time playtesting this game.
The Lower Board...
The Middle Board...
The Upper Board...
The pieces of conventional chess...
Arranged for a game of conventional chess...
The lower board pieces (basilisk, elemental, elemental, & basilisk; dwarves in front)...
The dragonchess-specific middle board pieces (thief, paladin, cleric, & thief)...
The upper board pieces (griffin, dragon, dragon, & griffin; sylphs in front)...
Although the first chautaranga pieces from India were representational, Islam's proscriptions against iconography caused the pieces of shatranj to assume a very abstract, nonrepresentational form. Since chess came to Europe through the Islamic world, the earliest Spanish, French, and Viking chess sets had more abstract shapes. I thought it would be an interesting variant—especially with my primitive sculpting skills. Also, I gave the pieces for the lower, upper, and middle boards different shapes (cubes, cylinders, and pyramids respectively) to help distinguish the pieces. The boards are posterboard and watercolor.
Rather than the 8x8 board of chess, dragonchess uses three 12x8 boards. Each player, both Gold and Scarlet, has 6 Slyphs, 1 Dragon, 2 Griffons, 12 Warriors, 2 Oliphants, 2 Unicorns, 2 Heros, 2 Thieves, 1 Cleric, 1 Paladin, 1 Mage, 1 King, 6 Dwarfs, 2 Basilisks, and 1 Elemental. That's 15 unit types and 42 individual figures, compared to the 5 unit types and 16 figures of orthodox chess.
I've played a few games of dragonchess since putting the set together. It is a very complicated game. Some of the pieces move similarly to orthodox chess; others move slightly differently; and nearly every piece that can move around the board does so in a different way. These moves are not at all systematic. It is confusing to keep straight the moves, blockable and unblockable and special powers of each piece, and it usually involves a lot of referring to the instructions.
Apparently Gygax didn't spend a lot of time playtesting this game.
The Lower Board...
The Middle Board...
The Upper Board...
The pieces of conventional chess...
Arranged for a game of conventional chess...
The lower board pieces (basilisk, elemental, elemental, & basilisk; dwarves in front)...
The dragonchess-specific middle board pieces (thief, paladin, cleric, & thief)...
The upper board pieces (griffin, dragon, dragon, & griffin; sylphs in front)...
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
Cycling, Luck, Preakness...
Last Friday was Bike-to-Work Day. I always ride my bike to work anyway; I live in Old Louisville and work downtown, and most often a two-mile bike ride in the morning is very pleasant. But I support cycling to work in general, so I registered for the event.
One of the official rides into downtown ran from Iroquois Park to 4th Street Live, which is basically along my usual route. So I decided to join the cyclists as they passed by, but since the official ride departed at 7:30am, while I leave for work a few minutes before 9am, the roads were empty of bike-to-work riders by the time I left. There were events at lunchtime at 4SL, but I forgot to go until it was nearly over.
Later that evening, I got an email from the bike-to-work organizers: "Congratulations!" it said, "Your name was drawn by Terry Meiners to win a Trek 7000 commuter bikes for registering to Bike-to-Work Day!"
I was completely dumbfounded.
The next day, I went on a cycling trip to Mike Linnig's out in southwestern Jefferson County. We took the long route around the Riverwalk, had a flat tire, a detour, and a mild crash, and made much slower time than I had hoped. We got there around mid-afternoon, and I had a plate of fried gator and turtle soup to recharge. My wife drove us home because we had evening plans, and I made a few quick wagers on the Preakness before we headed out to dinner at Rocky's acrosss the river in Indiana.
We had a great table with fantastic views of the city; it was a great time to go, and they had a TV with the race on. We watched the Preakness, and I said: "OMG! I think I hit an exacta!" When I got home, I checked my tickets: not only did I hit an exacta, I hit the trifecta! I won about $150 on that race.
Of course, he whom Fortune's wheel lifts high will soon be cast down, so I was wary of coming unluck. But on the bike ride, my front tire hit a patch of mud at the bottom of a hill, and I flew over my handlebars and slid along the muddy path upside for a couple of feet. I was unharmed but for skinning my elbow, but it's at least a little bad luck to leaven what good fortune I had this weekend, aha.
EDIT
Fried gator and turtle soup at Mike Linnig's...
One of the official rides into downtown ran from Iroquois Park to 4th Street Live, which is basically along my usual route. So I decided to join the cyclists as they passed by, but since the official ride departed at 7:30am, while I leave for work a few minutes before 9am, the roads were empty of bike-to-work riders by the time I left. There were events at lunchtime at 4SL, but I forgot to go until it was nearly over.
Later that evening, I got an email from the bike-to-work organizers: "Congratulations!" it said, "Your name was drawn by Terry Meiners to win a Trek 7000 commuter bikes for registering to Bike-to-Work Day!"
I was completely dumbfounded.
The next day, I went on a cycling trip to Mike Linnig's out in southwestern Jefferson County. We took the long route around the Riverwalk, had a flat tire, a detour, and a mild crash, and made much slower time than I had hoped. We got there around mid-afternoon, and I had a plate of fried gator and turtle soup to recharge. My wife drove us home because we had evening plans, and I made a few quick wagers on the Preakness before we headed out to dinner at Rocky's acrosss the river in Indiana.
We had a great table with fantastic views of the city; it was a great time to go, and they had a TV with the race on. We watched the Preakness, and I said: "OMG! I think I hit an exacta!" When I got home, I checked my tickets: not only did I hit an exacta, I hit the trifecta! I won about $150 on that race.
Of course, he whom Fortune's wheel lifts high will soon be cast down, so I was wary of coming unluck. But on the bike ride, my front tire hit a patch of mud at the bottom of a hill, and I flew over my handlebars and slid along the muddy path upside for a couple of feet. I was unharmed but for skinning my elbow, but it's at least a little bad luck to leaven what good fortune I had this weekend, aha.
EDIT
Fried gator and turtle soup at Mike Linnig's...
Thursday, May 14, 2009
"Twilight" Reviews
I went to go see "Twilight" with my sisters &c. around Christmas. It was really beautifully filmed in the Pacific Northwest. And the premise of the film was delightfully ridiculous.
Not only is it a love story between a human girl and a vampire... The vampire is a sparkle-vampire. Srsly. He can't go in the light because everyone will see that he's a glitter vampire. It's amazing.
Book Review: Twilight (Prettier than Napoleon): Twilight is an evil book. A bad influence. Something that should be kept away from children for reasons of content and prose style. There is, as one Jezebel commenter noted, Harry/Draco fanfic that is better written. ...The problem with this book is it sums up exactly what it is to be a teenage girl, and teenage girls are callow and dumb.
...I haven't even addressed the horrendous sexual dynamics and messages in the book: guys lose control, girls have to monitor their behavior at all times lest they cause a guy to lose it and kill/rape them, and sex = death. I understand it only gets worse in future volumes, as hot-blooded Bella pushes for them to get it on and Edward argues that he can't unleash his sexual feelings without losing control and hurting her (thereby normalizing the idea that being hurt during sex is an unavoidable consequence of intimacy with a man, instead of an example of a guy being a weak-willed, inconsiderate jerk who "can't help" but cede all autonomy to his lizard brain once you take your clothes off).
What Girls Want (The Atlantic): Twilight centers on a boy who loves a girl so much that he refuses to defile her, and on a girl who loves him so dearly that she is desperate for him to do just that, even if the wages of the act are expulsion from her family and from everything she has ever known.
...The erotic relationship between Bella and Edward is what makes this book—and the series—so riveting to its female readers. There is no question about the exact nature of the physical act that looms over them. Either they will do it or they won’t, and afterward everything will change for Bella, although not for Edward. Nor is the act one that might result in an equal giving and receiving of pleasure. If Edward fails—even once—in his great exercise in restraint, he will do what the boys in the old pregnancy-scare books did to their girlfriends: he will ruin her.
And then...
Not only is it a love story between a human girl and a vampire... The vampire is a sparkle-vampire. Srsly. He can't go in the light because everyone will see that he's a glitter vampire. It's amazing.
Book Review: Twilight (Prettier than Napoleon): Twilight is an evil book. A bad influence. Something that should be kept away from children for reasons of content and prose style. There is, as one Jezebel commenter noted, Harry/Draco fanfic that is better written. ...The problem with this book is it sums up exactly what it is to be a teenage girl, and teenage girls are callow and dumb.
...I haven't even addressed the horrendous sexual dynamics and messages in the book: guys lose control, girls have to monitor their behavior at all times lest they cause a guy to lose it and kill/rape them, and sex = death. I understand it only gets worse in future volumes, as hot-blooded Bella pushes for them to get it on and Edward argues that he can't unleash his sexual feelings without losing control and hurting her (thereby normalizing the idea that being hurt during sex is an unavoidable consequence of intimacy with a man, instead of an example of a guy being a weak-willed, inconsiderate jerk who "can't help" but cede all autonomy to his lizard brain once you take your clothes off).
What Girls Want (The Atlantic): Twilight centers on a boy who loves a girl so much that he refuses to defile her, and on a girl who loves him so dearly that she is desperate for him to do just that, even if the wages of the act are expulsion from her family and from everything she has ever known.
...The erotic relationship between Bella and Edward is what makes this book—and the series—so riveting to its female readers. There is no question about the exact nature of the physical act that looms over them. Either they will do it or they won’t, and afterward everything will change for Bella, although not for Edward. Nor is the act one that might result in an equal giving and receiving of pleasure. If Edward fails—even once—in his great exercise in restraint, he will do what the boys in the old pregnancy-scare books did to their girlfriends: he will ruin her.
And then...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
