Single Comment

Piece names[Subject Thread] [Add Response]

Robert Shimmin wrote on Thu, Jul 10, 2003 05:03 AM UTC:

When talking about piece names, I think it's important to separate naming
a piece for including it in a game vs. naming a piece for talking about
the theory of pieces.  In a game, the piece should probably be named to
fit the feel of the game, if it has a theme, or otherwise establish
something logical sounding that helps compare the piece to pieces with
well-known names. (I had a partial game that included a straight+crooked
bishop and called it the inquisitor; the idea was later scrapped because
it's hard to use a superqueen-class piece that's still colorbound, but I
digress.)  The battle to keep the same names for the same piece between
games was lost before it began, and isn't particularly important anyway. 
The best names are both aesthetic and mnemonic.

When talking about the theory of pieces, the name is unimportant, because
most of the time you'll end up using a shorthand notation anyway.