How to play 3 Player Chess

[@m.a.r.i.a.9861]

This version is much more reasonable than the circular 3-man chess

[@qwq1017]

But still very much unreasonable

[@m.a.r.i.a.9861]

@@qwq1017 especially diagonal movements

[@ItemVexReview]

Was the circle version a bit weird and wacky to understand? Either way, it's still the same. And I can't argue about that.

[@TheCheesyNachos]

@@m.a.r.i.a.9861 diagonal is hard to follow, but it does make sense when you remember that diagonal moves will leave a piece on the same colour as when it started, so it makes sense to define diagonal moves that way

[@qwq1017]

@@TheCheesyNachos But that's not diagonal moves anymore, a diagonal should connect two OPPOSITE cells of all which have a given point as a vertice.

[@marclarell]

How about "non-euclidean pentagon chess" where each tile is a pentagon. Since pentagons can not be arranged on a flat surce, the chessfield has to be distorted in some way...

[@qwq1017]

I invented chess where each cell is an irregular pentagon

[@goldeer7129]

I was about to say that, then, the pieces would fall. But we can actually use magnetic pieces so that they stick to the board even if it's tilted.

[@isavenewspapers8890]

This is unrelated, but may I just say that that Rubik’s Cube in your profile picture is significantly cursed.

[@qwq1017]

@@goldeer7129 Invent the game first, and then think of how you would make a real-life set. Anyway you can write a computer program to run any variant

[@MrRyanroberson1]

you'd call it hyperbolic geometry, and it sounds like the perfect test game for hyperbolica

[@oenrn]

This is way more intuitive than the circle version. It's easy to remember how pieces move if you just think of forward/backward/lateral movement as going through the sides of the squares, and diagonal movement as going through the corners of the squares towards the same colour. Then all pieces pretty much move like in regular chess.

[@tomonetruth]

Yes, I've not played the circle version, but on this one: you can figure out the moves by looking at the colours of the "squares" and thinking in terms of opposite and adjacent sides. I wouldn't say it's intuitive (especially knight moves and pawn captures near the middle), but you can work it out. It's a good version.

[@Silas_MN]

surprised that "once a player is eliminated, their pieces are removed from the board" wasn't a given option

[@rosiefay7283]

S trouble is that removing their pieces might expose another king to check.

[@zoa666]

I’m late to the party but that should also be talked about as legitimate strategy. If Player A was being blocked by Player C’s piece, and Player B checkmates Player C… …Then in the next turn, Player A just has to move their king away (or block) from the discovered check. IF this proves impossible, then, ladies and gentlemen… We now have a double checkmate.

[@appleviict3526]

you could also get yourself in a checkmate by removing those pieces, so in that case it's just an illegal move

[@kishascape]

You're not required by law to obey that. If you and your friends want to change that rule you can. Theres even standardized chess clubs with local variants, for example I played at one club that banned en passant before.

[@sanskarthepro]

​@@rosiefay7283or even checkmate

[@isavenewspapers8890]

Whenever I see these chess variants, I always think of FIDE’s official definition of the knight’s movement: “The knight may move to one of the squares nearest to that on which it stands but not on the same rank, file or diagonal.” Funny to think about, really.

[@ActualDumBatcha]

i just visualised it, and that actually works xD

[@sapphirestarblazer6805]

By those rules, a knight can theoretically stand on the opposite side of the center rosette from which it started

[@maxthexpfarmer3957]

I think that the Xiangqi knight is also an influence on many of these chess variants.

[@maxthexpfarmer3957]

Also, if we go by the FIDE rules, there isn’t an obvious way to define “closest” on this board as the squares are all different sizes. It seems like they took the “L” shape that you learn when you first learn chess seriously. Also, it would be cool if a king had a special move to the opposite side of the rosette as it is a special piece.

[@beaclaster]

@@maxthexpfarmer3957 topology i guess ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[@rosiefay7283]

3:16 Option 2. That's an interesting privilege -- being able to use the mated player's pieces as well as your own. So if A mates C, B might be none too keen to continue playing someone who now controls both A's and C's pieces. So B might do C the kindness of getting them out of check. Or what happens if A mates C and then B goes and captures A's mating piece, or interposes on its line of attack, with B's own mating piece? Does B now usurp A as controller of C's pieces?

[@RiskierGoose340]

Checkmate essentially means impossible to escape capture. In a multiplayer chess game, that would mean you have to actually capture the king like any other piece.

[@mcfixer9503]

@@RiskierGoose340 alt, if theyre in checkmate due to a piece such as a rook, a knight, or a bishop, killing/replacing/blocking that piece with your own of a different type (rook with bishop, etc) would mean they're no longer stuck

[@maddoxmonteza]

a will have 2 kings

[@dragonkingf3]

I feel like a fourth option of the enemy piece is going to your opponent would be a far better rule. It would encourage you to keep all 3 players in the game as long as possible to avoid your opponent getting a larger Army when you check mate someone. I feel like with option 2 if I were the third player and I watched someone else just get taken out and now my opponent has twice the Army I'm just going to concede most of the time.

[@ItemVexReview]

I don't care about the chess rules anymore. I just wanted the Premium Quality Wood. But really. Your videos are awesome, go to point, and easy to follow. Well, some videos.

[@outtabubblegum7034]

That chess set is not premium quality wood.

[@ItemVexReview]

@@outtabubblegum7034 Not the chest set, board itself. Why would they be lying? _Obviously joking._

[@PaGDu333]

Nothing is as premium as Triple S games himself

[@kishascape]

Same. I forgot all my strategy after 10 years and went from 1700 rating to 800. But at least those tournaments are more laid back now.

[@CSmyth-]

Because there are three turns, there is also the question of when checkmate occurs. Assume the turn order follows A > B > C... Player B puts player A into check. Player A has no legal moves which can break the check. From A's perspective, this would be checkmate. However, it is player C's turn, not player A's, and C could conceivably make a move breaking check on A. It's important to know if checkmate occurs immediately (when that player in particular has no way out of check), or at the start of a player's turn (that is, when they are required to move but have no legal moves available). Edit: Clarity

[@microz0258]

Checkmate on 3 player chess games usually happen on your turn, as it basically is in the normal variation

[@tomonetruth]

I've played this version a bit and it works. I find it better not to have a concept of mate, but just play to capture the king - this also removes the ambiguity over what can happen when it is your turn and you are already attacking a king (when your "ally" gifts you a discovered check). I play that unforced king blunders can always be taken back, so it functions almost the same as checkmate. It's missing is the possibility of playing for a stalemate, which is quite a fun feature of standard chess, but in a three player game - who cares? This variant works really well with mixed abilities. There is a big psychological element, and there's a natural evolving diplomacy that's a lot of fun when played over the board. I think it's probably a very flawed game in that the optimal strategy is going to be to form some sort of bunker and wait for a draw. Unless you play the version where the mating player gets all the pieces, exchanges are always bad. That said, I've never had a game turn out like this: there's always intrigue, twists, and plenty of violence. I've always played that the defeated player's pieces are just removed from the board, but like the idea of just leaving them on as capturable obstacles - will definitely try that. To be honest, it's usually very predictable and far less interesting once a player has been eliminated, but the three-player stage is great.

[@Ggdivhjkjl]

​@@tomonetruth Chess requires mating a single piece. If that king piece can be captured then it's not chess.

[@Meepersa]

@@Ggdivhjkjl Given the number of variants of chess in this channel's playlist for them that don't do this, no it's not required.

[@chillin5703]

I like the idea of being forced to "warp" movement. Very cool. Rooks stick on flats, bishops on "tips". Knight looks like it can mice two flats and a "tip". Queen can move any number of flats or tips following warps, and king can move one at a time following warps. The star in the center gives the board cohesion.

[@elizatolley7502]

Played this game for the first time today with my partner and daughter and thoroughly enjoyed it! The negotiating and tag teaming was a fun addition, the peices all moved intuitively along the centre and we played our own variation of what we thought the rules were 😂 we had a checkmated player held prisoner by another and so theyre peices were under the checkmaters control, it sounds like an easy win for the checkmater but this happened a little later in the game and the checkmater actually gave up valuble peices and took a loss to battle the remaining player. We let the checkmater move peices and release theyre capture if they wanted to bring them back into the battle, it may sound confusing but this way of playing felt natural and gave the person captured the ability to bargain and still be invested after checkmating. Ill learn the proper rules soon but this was alot of fun! 😊😊

[@user-ft3jq5vi2l]

I think this is my favourite solution to 3-player chess yet.

[@Thesmus]

first option is the quickest version, second seems to give a huge advantage to the initial winner, but the third one is probably the most interesting version, where the defeated pieces now became obstacles in an ongoing battle.

[@davidhills703]

Option 4: when the first player is checkmated, the game ends and all players tally the value of the pieces taken. The winner is whoever has the most points. It’s very nice if your the one getting tag teamed, and it incentivizes the other two to betray each other at some point.

[@Closer2Zero]

The three ways you outline for how to end the game definitely sound like they peel all the different skill levels. The first one sounds like it leans more towards two players getting up on the third. The second one sounds like it leans more towards the player winning get an advantage to win even harder. And then the third one sounds like the most even across-the-board

[@FaraanBabar2616]

I learnt this from The Big Bang Theory from the 4th season where Sheldon Cooper and his close teammates of his group are playing it, very difficult to win and play this type but awesome video.

[@John73John]

Wasn't that the one where Sheldon came up with absurd new pieces, like a snake and a golf cart or something?

[@evanlawrence]

the board is hexagonal because its the bestagon

[@Liliana_the_ghost_cat]

Hexagons are the bestagon

[@lastman2759]

CGP grey was here

[@captainozannus6090]

Awesome, I've been looking forward to this

[@etheriousjackal5577]

Good job with the explanation! This is surprisingly easy to understand. Will probably take some practice to actually get a hang of the game though but the rules seem pretty clear.

[@CrystalClearWith8BE]

Another 3 player chess board here. However, it's hexagonal instead of circular.

[@qwq1017]

Only the board. But not the cells.

[@thangphamquang6312]

Chess community: *make 3 player chess* Grey: HEXAGON ARE THE BESTAGON Chess community: yes chef, ok chef

[@qwq1017]

Grey: WHY THE CELLS ARE NOT HEXAGONAL

[@PaGDu333]

@@qwq1017 ewwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Why weren’t cells hexagon?! Circle is worst cle

[@qwq1017]

@@PaGDu333 what do you mean?

[@juanital.2608]

I have this set. I didn't know about the 3 different endings. Thanks for that👍👍

[@theomelettecuber5458]

The difference between this 3P chess Ver and the round chess board Ver is that you don’t have some kind of random lines on the board anymore.

[@qwq1017]

Diagonals here are pretty random still.

[@oenrn]

@@qwq1017 not really, diagonals move through the corners to a "square" of the same colour.

[@MrAlsachti]

Option 4: If you are checkmated, your opponent on your right wins and the game stops. With this option, two opponents cannot team up against the third one. You attack the opponent on your left but defend against the opponent on your right. If you accidentally checkmate the opponent on your right, you both lose and the third player wins. If after player 1's turn, player 2 cant make any legal move (stalemate), then player 3 wins and the game stops.

[@zoa666]

You can also play 2 players on the 3 player board. Just set up the pieces opposite to each other. The only difference is that the battlefield is 96 squares, and the rosette/distortions. 4 pawns promote on the left, 4 pawns promote on the right, unless they’re able to capture their way directly to the opposite side of the board.

[@bearscaveofminiatures6396]

Oh my... it's like... space chess. With warped planes. Lol I like it What a twist

[@maddoxmonteza]

if the the player checkmates another persons king and before the players chose the control opponents pieces after checkmate the person who checkmated will have 2 kings does that mean that the person can avoid checkmate or is the new king just another piece?

[@georgios_5342]

0:50 Copyright strike by Mitsubishi Electric

[@Swingylad]

wut

[@Arpo7j]

I remember playing this when I was 5 years old. This was the best board game that I ever played.

[@GreenMeansGOF]

Finally! A good video on the rules. However, wouldn’t another possible rule be: The game ends when a player checkmates an opponent and the third player is given a turn to stop the checkmate but is unable to?

[@TripleSGames]

You could play that way if you want to, but that was not part of the rules that came with the game

[@Staxxyy]

who wins when red's king is surrounded(no more places to move) but not yet mated by black, and then white checks red?-> Black (whos next in turn) then does a second "check" wich is mate. Does white win in this case because it delivered the "first" check or does black win because it delivers the "last" check/mate ?

[@ryanr27]

Interesting, especially the rosette

[@stfosnipe2426]

3:55 The queen can be captured because a pawn is diagonal to the queen and also the king can capture it himself. so thats not a checkmate

[@Shees6481]

Three man chess vs Three player chess

[@KatsuRobotto]

One thing I don't believe was addressed is: does the third player count towards checkmate? ie. if the third player can break the check they must, unless the player in check can break it on their turn

[@Yu-Gi-Oh36508]

i like this more the the circle one, it makes a bit more sense (and mostly it looks better)

[@Lucas-pk9mu]

Thank you! so much for making this !!!!

[@Agent_B0771E]

When a player is eliminated in option 3, can you capture their king to occupy it's space like you would with a regular piece?

[@Peripepp]

This is the strategic equivalent of monopoly. Little chance of success, high chance of fightings.

[@Jerry_9997]

Great guide. Now I know all that I nedd. Almost. Do you know, what about a situation, when some player give up? With the first ending variation, do the other players continue or is it a draw between them?

[@johnjoshua30]

Question: Let's say, 3 pawns are at the Rosette and they are all on the same colored square. White pawn captured black pawn and it survived for a whole turn. Can white pawn still capture red pawn(the one that is also at the Rosette) next turn when it's already on an enemies territory(Black's territory)?

[@AhmadHossam]

This really good variation

[@LukeLane1984]

I have that exact same board! It's fun, but I've only played this variation a handful of times in the 15 years I've had this board. It's already hard enough to get 1 person to play chess with me, let alone 2.

[@gonzalojoohe]

Thanls a lot, very good explained. I have a question for option 3: Should the checkmated King remain on the board with all its pieces. Or should be (only the King) taking away?. Thanks in advance for the answer.

[@gcubing_4064]

Make sure that you say non-circular in the title

[@gschitz]

⥊ 15: 16 0: Good (if not good, then not zero) 0001: Uniqueness 001: Identity 002: Individuality 003: Variability 004: Diversity 005: Tolerance / Inclusion 006: Acceptance 007: Consonance / Harmony 008: Innocence 009: Transcendence 01: Awareness 02: Diversion 03: Sensing 04: Love 05: Grace 06: Reasoning 07: Ingenuity 08: Decency / Honesty 09: Truth Seeking 1: Ethical 2: Problem-Solution 3: Situation 4: Abstraction 5: Expression 6: Why/Who/When/How/Where/What 7: Information/Code 8: Stability 9: Sanity 10: Network (Good Network, because zero) 11: Justice 12: Time/Spread/Dissipation/Easter 13: Death / Fact 14: Cognition 15: Agent 16: Reason 17: Discourse 18: State 19: Discipline / Control 20: Judgement 21: To Solve Problems with Ethics 22: Resistance / Differentiate 23: Consideration 24: Humor / Mental State 25: Behavior 26: Motivation 27: Cohesion 28: Dependability 29: Diagnostic 30: Liberty 31: Consent 32: Discernment 33: Response 34: Ideas 35: Showing 36: Option 37: Opinion 38: Decision 39: Prognostic 40: Wellness 41: Attention 42: Critical Thinking 43: Acknowledgment 44: Free Love 45: Plan / Task Force 46: Purpose 47: Perspective 48: Character 49: Ambition 50: Good Expression 51: Manifestation 52: Support 53: Respect 54: Care 55: War 56: Pointing / Profiling 57: Tell / Counter-Terrorism 58: Invoking / Building 59: Proficiency / To Excel 60: Certainty 61: Identification 62: Qualification / Characterization 63: Inquiring 64: Conjecturing 65: Function / Role 66: Investigation 67: Arguing 68: Indicator 69: Scrutinity 70: Validation 71: Illustration / Knowledge 72: Construct 73: Explanation / Informing 74: Data 75: Materialization 76: Delineation / Instruction 77: Flow / Cadency 78: Share 79: Accountability 80: Personal Soverenity 81: Independency Constancy 82: Resilience 83: Established 84: Autonomy 85: Executing 86: Authority 87: Stream 88: Consistency 89: Boldness 90: Wisdom 91: Assertiveness 92: Optimism 93: Scrupulousness 94: Integrality 95: Composure 96: Blockchain: ⥊ (TRACE MARKER) 97: Anarchy 98: Veganism 99: Revolution 100: Liberation 101: Peer-2-Peer 102: Partnership 103: Proposal 104: Design 105: Collaboration 106: Necessities 107: Vocabulary 108: Clarity 109: Regulation 110: Virtue 111: Honor Righteousness Principle 112: Distributed Ledger 113: Privacy / Assistance 114: Abolitionism 115: Pride 116: Justifiable 117: Equitable 118: Liberation State Formation 119: Mission / Objective 120: Harvest 121: Deliverance 122: To Sort Out / Separate 123: Inclusion 124: 125: Differentiate 126: Distinguish 127: 128: Frankness / 129: 130: Realization 131: Fulfillment 132: Regard 133: Responsability 134: Address 135: Execute 136: Obtain 137: 138: To Mark / Formation 140: Serenity 141: Idea 144: To Notice 148: Mindfulness 150: Good Character 151: Virtue 153: Declaring 155: Perform 158: Rising 160: Technology 161: Communication Systems 166: Causality 167: To Label 170: Knowledge 185: System Accessibility 181: Structure 199: Commitment Conviction 200: Sanctuary 209: Enlist 210: Resolution 211: To Engage 212: Secure 215: Mobilize 219: Annihilation 220: Contemplation / Meditation 221: Either Way / Alignment 222: Cooperation 230: Resilience 250: To Thrive 255: To Emerge 266: Correlation 299: Elevate 300: Crusade / Jihad 301: Confront 309: Consensus 310: Self 311: Bodily Autonomy 320: Deliberation 322: Oportunity 330: Win-Win 331: Self-Determination 333: Abundance 340: Conceive 353: Energy Management 360: Technology 373: Remote Killing 370: Efficiency 390: Economicity 399: Revolution Gear 400: Earth Population 410: Permaculture 430: Ecosystem 440: Fellowship 444: Direct Digital Democracy 500: Assumption / Honor 501: Leadership 502: Credit 503: Esteem 509: Prestige 510: Admiration 511: Heroism 512: Altruism 520: Proficiency 530: Acceptance 535: Denoucing 540: Appreciation 550: Diplomacy 555: Gathering 556: To Pick Up Someone/Something 590: Excellency 600: Organizator 620: Diagnose 660: Operation 661: Operator 665: Role 666: Method 676: Deduce 700: Honor 702: Credit 710: Intelligence 717: Desing 720: Quantum Mechanics 733: Argorithm Explaining 747: Artificial Intelligence 750: Consolidation 751: Enlightment 756: Inspire 757: Prompt 766: Plan 770: The Gear 771: File 773: Algorithm Recoginzing 775: Output 777: Pattern / Rhetoric 778: Development 780: Systematization 799: Revolution Algorithm 800: Providence / Heroism 801: Production 802: Necessities 803: Resorces 804: Energy 808: Renewable Cycle 810: Permaculture 820: Management 830: Logistics 831: Scheme 832: Reach 833: Demand 834: Stock 835: Distribution 840: Consumption 850: Labor 860: Human Resources 863: Assignments 870: Structure 880: Peace 888: Globalization 890: Needs 899: Conception 900: Transparency 910: Institutions 911: Emergency Call 930: Energy Distribution 931: Only One Global Currency 960: Blockchain 962: Traceability 970: Optimization 990: Inspection 995: Accountancy 998: Regulation 999: Implementation 1000: Militancy 1001: Nova Era 1030: 1042: Drug Liberation 1100: Liberation Army 1160: Pacifism 1312: Boycott 1400: Unity 1500: Benevolence 1550: Charity 1807: Black & Yellow 2222: Paradox 3000: Freedom 3100: Triumph 3311: To Revolt 3330: We All Can Live In Abundance 4000: Coexist 4411: Riders of Justice 5000: Glory 5500: Greatness 6999: Mystery 7220: Unified Field Theory 8000: Sustainability 8999: Finitude 9997: Discovery 9998: Unknown 9999: Universe 10000: Existence . This is a Numeric Matrix for Communications Purposes. . This Can Be Used to Convey Meaning. Ex.: 2034: To Judge the Idea. . Mathematical Operators Can Be Used to Calculate Meaning. Ex.: To Judge the Expression: 25 20 + 5 = 25 (Behavior) . Logical Operators to Create statements. Ex.: ¬11: 13. If not Just then Death. . Colors can also be used as information. - You can help build it.

[@gschitz]

13

[@jonathanschmitt5762]

2:55 my lord! Is that... legal? TSG: I will make it legal. Edit: I looked up the official FIDE rules, and there are a lot more (potentially) legal moves for the knight in the center than the ones TSG has shown us. Can someone tell me how much the designer of that variant knows about that rabbit-hole?

[@timbomb374]

Rosette is a pretty cool word

[@rodmkt]

Thank you! Great explanation

[@legendgames128]

So is the center of the rosette an ideal point?

[@JonahHuffman]

I played this with some friends the other night not knowing too much of the rules, but we only had the rosette and end conditions wrong, so it still played pretty fair. But believe it or not, we got to a point where one player got stalemated, and we had no idea what would happen after that, so we just assumed he lost and removed all his pieces (that was how we were playing, if someone loses, all their pieces get thanos snapped)

[@Vearru]

One day we need to see 100 player battle royale chess

[@Groxcima]

I will never play these board games but regardless I'll watch the video.

[@gargazoth7936]

What about Sheldon Cooper"s 3 player chess ?

[@blookarakal4417]

That would be a mess, that game has a pope, old woman/grand empress, catapult, gorilla, serpent, golf cart, beekeeper and time machine.

[@bartoszfrackowiak2047]

Thanks you now I know how play

[@umegghju]

Non capisco perché il cavallo al centro può andare dove vuole, con ben 10 case occupabili (2:43), e la torre ha le stesse case occupabili di una scacchiera normale (2:07)

[@joshyycute5823]

You know you are fcked when a random spirit has been summoned by this board and moves the piece

[@mcfixer9503]

how about it's played as Deathmatch, first to lose all their pieces loses, then remaining players can play til checkmate. loss of king isnt an instant loss for the 1st player, but they must swap a piece for their king/mark a piece as their newest highest ranking

[@haroothy]

Underrated Chess !

[@qwq1017]

Overrated Chess

[@PieMoe]

So a scenario that would come up. Let's say player 1 moves their queen to checkmate player 3 by placing it in a square threatened by player 2's bishop. If 2 takes the queen, 3 is free to escape or capture. If 2 moves their bishop, 3 is free to capture. Logically, if 2 does not interfere with this sequence, then 1 is responsible for 3's mate. However, what if 3 moves a rook into position to redundantly threaten 1's king? 1 is still in checkmate but who gets the win? Logically the first-next player should get credit since they'd be the ones to capture the king. Minor additional note, it is possible for a player to turn a check into a checkmate unintentionally this way (by, say, moving a piece that threatens or blocks a checked player's only legal moves). It's solid logic to say that the player threatening the king gets the win, but I can see people being salty about blundering this way. Final funniness. If the stalemate rule is inherited unmodified, then one player having no legal moves at the start of their turn means the game is a draw for everyone.

[@umegghju]

There is the version of Filippo Marinelli from 1722 :) → Il giuoco degli scacchi fra tre - Filippo Marinelli

[@SkSafowan]

This version is much more reasonable than the circular 3-man chess But also very confusing then circular 3-man chess

[@doigt6590]

3 man chess' movement make more sense and are easier to understand, but 3 player chess has fewer exta rules to memorize

[@carealoo744]

I swapped parallel universes somewhere. I know that when he explained the second option of how to play, he used the words: "now armed with the first loser's pieces."

[@Someone-cp2op]

is a stalemate possible and is it a stalemate for everyone?

[@hisamy5103]

Yay🎉 Fantastic! Finally 3 women can play with each other!

[@mikelblanco4868]

Whats about passed pawns?

[@Fowlware]

Looks like jarmge finally remembered his pieces

[@Eternalwarpuppy]

What happens if a player's king gets captured? With 3 players it is possible for player 2 to make a move that puts player 1's king in check with one of player 3's pieces and player 3 would have the opportunity to capture the king before player 1 has the chance to move out of check.

[@edspace.]

I had an idea for a chess variant that I call 'combined arms chess' the rules are the same as regular chess with these exceptions; 1) En Passant is not allowed but Pawns can capture one space in any direction, pawns also have the 'Sniper' ability which lets them eliminate any piece within 2 tiles of them without leaving their space, provided no other piece (friend or foe) is in the direct path, pawns also have the 'Medic' ability which means that if a friendly piece was captured adjacent to them the previous turn they can use their move that turn to revive the piece on a nearby vacant space. 2) Rooks can capture without moving, but cannot capture a piece within 2 spaces of them unless they move to that space, also if there is a vacant space adjacent to that piece the piece is not eliminated but relocates to that space. 3) If a Knight jumps over an enemy pawn that pawn is "run over" and eliminated unless the space behind the pawn is vacant then the pawn is not "run over" but retreats to that space, also a knight can eliminate another knight without leaving their space if that knight is within their normal movement range but if they do this then any enemy Pawn or Rook who is within movement range of either knight involved can provide 'Anti-Tank support' and eliminate the attacking knight as well (this does not apply if the knight captures in the standard way). 4) Bishops have two extra moves; 'Airstrike' and 'Airlift', in an 'Airstrike' the Bishop can eliminate any piece that has no vacant space without leaving the space they started the move on but if 3 or more enemy pieces are adjacent in any direction to the target of the 'Airstrike' then the Bishop is 'shot down' and eliminated from the board, in an 'Airlift' the Bishop swaps positions with any other friendly piece (this can be used to escape check), however if the friendly piece is surrounded on all sides by enemy pieces then the Bishop is 'shot down' and eliminated from the board. 5) When capturing a piece if one other friendly piece is capable of moving the the space the piece under threat of capture then the capture is blocked, if two or more friendly pieces are in that position then the attacking piece is eliminated, however the attacker can call other pieces capable of moving onto the square the attacking piece started on as 'Reinforcements' and then the ratio is increased by how ever many reinforcing pieces are involved (e.g. one attacker and one reinforcement means 2 pieces are needed to prevent the attacker capturing and 3 needed to eliminate the attacking piece and 4 to eliminate the reinforcement as well), if the attacking piece but not the reinforcement is eliminated the reinforcement moves to the space the attacking piece started on and ends turn. I'm not sure how well this would work.

[@TheCheesyNachos]

you lost me at “en passant is not allowed”

[@DreamingGodofstorys]

American chess how to play

[@edspace.]

@@TheCheesyNachos Yeah, it just seemed a little overpowered when I gave pawns the ability to pick off any piece in 2 spaces without moving (if the path is unobstructed) so I guess the pawn's 'Sniper' ability replaces it.

[@edspace.]

@@DreamingGodofstorys Is this a suggestion for an alternate title of 'combined arms chess'?

[@DreamingGodofstorys]

@@edspace. Well yes (if it's offensive. For some reason I'm sorry)

[@kaz3817]

With option 2, if I checkmate one person. Can I use his pawns to go back in his own direction to receive a Queen? Or does it have to come back in its natural direction?

[@John73John]

I was kind of wondering the same thing. I would assume that pawns have to continue moving the direction indicated by their color.

[@TripleSGames]

Natural direction

[@ohadish]

What about how to play for points?

[@okamisansempai557]

really interesting!

[@veggiet2009]

I like the idea that the eliminated players pieces remain on the board as obstacles, but I feel like the checkmated king should be removed, just the king

[@honeyjuice219]

now that one guy won't have to annoy us about when is he's turn

[@gamerboy0499]

what if there is 5 or 6 player chess

[@oenrn]

@@gamerboy0499 just use 2 boards.

[@carealoo744]

Why does your queen pieces actually look like Queen pieces? I love the board I have, but the Queen pieces are just a little dot on top of the piece. Other than the fact that the dot is slightly bigger, it literally just looks like a Bishop

[@RoleighMartin]

Is there a link to the rules written up? Thanks in advance.

[@TripleSGames]

In the description.

[@RoleighMartin]

@@TripleSGames I saw the writeup, but it would be nice to have the writeup with color pictures of where pieces can legally move when they are adjacent to the border between 2 or 3 sides. As it is now, one has to watch the KZbin while playing the game and that gets difficult. Thanks!

[@TheCat_3]

What happens if someone can take the king by the person before making that opportunity, is it like the other one?

[@Nexieus753]

What about the En Pessant rule

[@FhionaStar]

What's the option 2?

[@arcadenewgames7]

Very interesting

[@soup-flavored-soup6613]

Better than 3 man chess

[@nobilt]

i have this one, except with blue and green for white and black, i still don't know which one goes first

[@gcubing_4064]

3:38 Is this a new trend?

[@deadersurvival4716]

What's a new trend?

[@gcubing_4064]

@@deadersurvival4716 If you wish to

[@deadersurvival4716]

@@gcubing_4064 What are you talking about?

[@dma1176]

Where do I get this?!?

[@zusettegracemartinez7039]

Yes

[@saleh_alnour]

If the red was gray it would've make the game even better

[@otabek.cephalo]

The second option of playing this form of chess is brutal, man.😅

[@AliceStClair-lq3zp]

Option 3 seems like the only truely balanced option

[@Person-ef4xj]

On the internet there's a fourth option, in which the game ends when one player is checkmated, but the player to neither checkmate nor get checkmated neither wins nor loses.

[@KeruToL]

Question: if one side is checkmated, is it possible to be un-checkmated by being rescued by another side? I dunno why someone would do that, but I’m still curious.

[@crowreligion]

Someone will do that if they can capture the piece that checkmated and rescuing is a side affect

[@Shees6481]

Triple s games you dont feel cold

[@Shees6481]

Because that time was winter

[@mattheworchard481]

2:43 distorted chess

[@sujimanimanimaran723]

Super🎉

[@jarvispoulton9652]

*”the rules are the same, except these changes”*

[@thetrexarrian9307]

Good variation, just weirded out by the fact you're not using the flat pieces for this video

[@georgios_5342]

There's another version with a circle

[@lukatolstov5598]

I HAD SEEN IT IN THE SCHOOL!!

[@UntotenTheo]

Wait wasn't there a 3 Man Chess video?

[@OakTree57]

It was a different kind of 3 man chess.

[@ralphadams7462]

3 person chess game 🎮 with black red and white

[@bernelvlogs5678]

Bro this is atleast better than the circle one the circle one is more simple NAD ISNT HARD LIKE THE CIRCLE ONE