Progression Chess

[Randall Bart <barticus@att.net>]

When I posted this, I banged the wrong button on the spellchecker and 
mangled two items.  This is the corrected text:

Progression Chess

The starting position is just like regular Chess, but the Rook, Knight, and 
Bishop on the Queen side are indicated by lower case letters (called little 
Rook, little Knight, and little Bishop).

The challenge command has two additional switches:  -list and 
-promote.  The -list command takes an eight character parameter.  This is 
the progression list for the game.  It designates the eight pieces, eg, 
"-list:nbNBrRQK".  Positions in this list may be replaced by x or z.  If 
-list is omitted, it defaults to "-list:xxxxxxzz".  For White's first move, 
he specifies his progression list.  Every z in the progression list must be 
replaced by Q or K, while x's may be replaced by anything.  After White 
specifies his progression list, Black specifies his.  The progression list 
must specify each of the eight pieces once.

The -promote parameter specifies one to eight digits 1 thru 8.  If -promote 
is omitted, it defaults to "-promote:1".  When a pawn is promoted, it is 
promoted to the piece in that position of the progression list.  Eg, if the 
progression list is "nrRQbRBK" and the promotion list is "15", then a pawn 
may promote to a little Knight or little Bishop.

Pawns move and capture normally.  When a major piece is moved, it moves 
normally, but then it changes to the next piece in the progression 
list.  This includes Kings.  A player may thus end up with two or more of 
the same piece including multiple Kings.

A player loses if he has no remaining Kings.  There is no such thing as 
check or checkmate.  There is no stalemate due to being forced to move into 
check (you have to move).  If you move your only King, you lose.  The only 
draw is from too many moves without pawn move or capture.  (I can visualize 
a stalemate position where the seventh rank is full of pawns, and the eight 
rank is full of pieces other than Knights, but I can't see it 
occurring.  Does anyone else see a possible stalemate?)

Since there is no check, you may castle out of or through a 
threat.  Castling changes both the Rook and the King.  If the Rook 
progresses to King, you may castle even if you have only one King.

If each player has only one King, and one King captures the other, the 
capturing player wins (the capture happens before the capturing King 
progresses).

Would anyone play this crazy game?  If there are two people who want to 
play, is there a programmer who would like to implement it?
--
RB |\  Randall Bart
aa |/  admin@RandallBart.com     1-818-985-3259      Barticus@att.net
nr |\  Cell: 1-917-715-0831              Office: 1-212-343-1234 x3016
dt ||\ Here I am: http://RandallBart.com/                  I LOVE YOU
a   |/    Cardinal Virtue: http://RandomHouse.com/wotd/?date=20011024
l   |\ DOT-HS-808-065       MSMSMSMSMSMSMS=6/28/107       Joel 3:9-10
l   |/    Terrorism: http://www.markfiore.com/animation/adterror.html