Cleaner 4 player chess: New rule - cannot mate/take someone who is already in check

I've gotten bored of the regular chaos of 4 player chess.  I think this new rule wont be a burden on developers and will give us something for us to try during corona lockdown!

So many games get ruined because 1 check destroys your whole position.  This is like a cheap tactic I feel and we deserve to try a game without it.  A clean strategical based chess game where luck like this has less influence.

I understand people can still take someone by pushing a pawn and taking your piece the move after while you are busy defending against check but this is easily avoidable to strategize against.

If the mate is forced while the person is already in check, the mated person will instead get stalemated.

We can call this variant, check safety?

Thoughts?

Build a better defense

I think this would take a lot of teaming out of the game.

When I read the title at first I thought "this is a stupid idea" but I think this would affect the game positively.

Would you make every mate a stalemate, or would you just stop 2nd checks or only mates with 2nd checks?

Yeah, only get rid of team-based mate.  So we can get back to those solo vibes.

Uh... Why not just play solo?

I'm bored of the same safe openings and the constant moving piece back and forth waiting for someone error...this may avoid those problems.

Because hyperteaming is the cancer of FFA

nobody says that you don't need to team a little bit, but if you just wanna play nice combos and outteam somebody, just play teams.

That's literally taking out the essence of the game.

I'm not suggesting this to be implemented in the main version.  But it would be fun to try out as a variant.

this is a bs rule 

Could be worth testing...

It would just be an option. Like the "mate is 40 pt"  or the "promote to any piece" options.
The "double-check-checkmate = stalemate" option.

It wouldn't affect the normal game, but people who prefer this option could choose it.

Best comment so far

or maybe git gud and don't allow the guy on your left to check you

That is basically the best way to go, but it's very frustrating if you miss one check and go down due to this. Or you don't miss the check, you just think that would be a totally blundered Queen, so you don't need to prevent it, but you missed the mate.

to me personally that would take the fun out of it, in my playing style, i often try to create chaos in the camp of the player to the right of me and try to use pressure put by other players to make their position crumble - which either works tremendously or severely backfires

chaotic positions where you constantly have to keep track of threats coming from all sides is the essence of 4-player chess, it's unique in the way that all four players can simultaneously be under attack and be attacking someone else

it's a harsh environment, yes, people are always looking to profit off of others' attacks and you have to be ready to betray anyone at any given time - one misstep and suddenly all three players might look at you as the beating boy

but doesn't that make it fun, though? honestly 4-pc really levels the playing field as very often how good you are at 4-pc doesn't depend on how good you are at regular chess

there are only  3 type of politics  ( i m calling temporary teaming  as politics   )

1. meaningless check 

2.multiplier attack

3.pining the piece

i already post regarding pure solo , just applying less the  check will only solve 50% problem  give solution of other 2 you will get 100% solo in which you get advantage for your playing 

https://www.chess.com/clubs/forum/view/politics-in-ffa-teaming-on-spot

I'm taking from this what I think would work...

What if the goal in FFA is to score 75 points

Taking someone king does not get them out of the game, but is worth say 40 points?

Keep in mind I don't play FFA enough to know if 75 point is an accurate starting pt

Hm. Interesting. 

If the game doesn't finish with a checkmate (or with the loss of king if it's eaten), that would change a lot of things. Basically (if we keep the 40 and 75 pts of the example above), you would need either to checkmate/eat 2 partners or to checkmate one for example and eat 3 queens and a couple of rooks before you've won. And then the 2nd, 3rd, 4th place could be given as per points reached so far.

That could also make games faster in fact (there won't be anymore 3-players phase nor 2-players phase).

To be tested definitely.

Immediately please forgive me for my English, I use Google translator.
But the point is not what to ask the developer to do. The essence of the culture of the game. Today, chess for four stand aside from the classical game and nobody cares about them yet. Except for the players. Even the classic game has its own rules, and here, if no one is interested, we must come up with it ourselves. And to create a society in which there will be other standards of the game.

This is how you need to pose the question. The fact that the chaos in this game is a special highlight, another thing is that there is no fair play. And it depends on the players, and not on the moderators. Let's cultivate a game culture for four.