En Passant Enhancement possible with Bishop and Queen ?

Can En Passant be allowed with Bishop and maybe the Queen as well ? Would this speed up the game and make it more interesting ?

I got this situation in a recent game. Now generally Black is considered the weak starter. However Black is in a strong position here. But if we consider the general situation where black is in a weaker position due to a weak start,  If white made the move f4, then En Passant Enhanced version would allow the pawn to be captured by the bishop at g4. Or if the Queen was at g4 even it could capture the pawn. With the recent trend towards fast games like blitz and bullet, this enhancement would make the game more interesting. Would it not ?

Sorry but that makes no sense.

Why would black capture the f pawn when the queen is hanging?

Sorry if  I was not clear. What I was suggesting is a change in the game rules. After f4  if En passant is allowed with the Bishop, then the next move could be Bxf3, But this is by the Bishop at g4 not the one at e5. I hope I am clearer now. May not be relevant in the game screenshot I shared as black was winning anyway.  But if black was in a different position and if black was allowed this en passant move "Bxf3" then maybe it could make black position stronger. I cannot share the PGN as this is a change in the game rules. 

If we start changing the rules of the game, then where do we stop? Allow Knights to para-drop? Allow Rooks to push pieces around the board like a bulldozer? Allow Queens to explode, wiping out all nearby units?

Actually, allowing rooks to push pieces could actually be interesting to see.

ya well. Its just a variation. If en passant was supposed to speed up the game this could too.

Bishop is said to be the weakest among the three i.e rook, knight and bishop. Bishop could have some initial advantage in black's opening game.

i'd like to see exploding queens

I believe en passant was introduced to negate the possible advantage of the pawn double square first move after it was introduced, not to speed up the game. (Maybe the double square first move rule was introduced to speed the game?) If the pawn moves two squares in certain situations it could avoid capture by the opponent's pawn if only a single square move was made. So en passant takes away that potential advantage, but only on the very next move.

Over the centuries chess has been modified slightly, castling was one such change, but recent changes have involved starting positions (Chess 960), adding pieces (chess variants), or different rules variants (King of the Hill etc).

I think the way "Basic Chess" is played is likely to remain as it is played now forever.

During the opening game most likely the bishops are far from each other. Especially for black

If the double square rule was introduced to speed up the game then I would assume adding "en passant" to that does the same.  An open ended question would be "What is the reason black has a disadvantage during openings" ? And can "basic chess" be changed to fix it ?

I was about to pose a new question asking this exact point, as I was explaining the en passant rule to a work colleague yesterday, but couldn't answer exactly why it was a rule in the first place. I wondered if it gave an advantage to a more attacking player, with a pawn further up the board, and hindered the more defensive-minded player, discouraging them from sitting on their hands all game. Thanks for your thoughts.

I see that some of my potential innovations have supporters.

@firefangled

> I was about to pose a new question asking this exact point, as I was explaining the en passant rule to a work colleague yesterday, but couldn't answer exactly why it was a rule in the first place. I wondered if it gave an advantage to a more attacking player, with a pawn further up the board, and hindered the more defensive-minded player, discouraging them from sitting on their hands all game. Thanks for your thoughts.

The first time I found out about it was as a kid in a chess tournament on a cruise from England to Australia. I had just checkmated my opponent, or so I thought! I was quite suspicious when the man I was playing pulled out this dodgy rule out of his, errrm, hat; but it turned out he was right. I went on to lose the game, but the lesson was learnt.

It's a fair rule. It's to compensate for the fact that a pawn can avoid ever being challenged by a pawn on the fifth rank bypassing it by moving two spaces. If it could only move one square at a time, it could never do that.

The rule doesn't exist to give the more attacking player an advantage, it's there to give him a fair go and mitigate the unfair advantage a player would have if the rule didn't exist. On the very next move, he can take that pawn as if it had only advanced one square.

C'est porquoi!

"a pawn ever being challenged by a pawn." would I be wrong if I say the pawn is also avoiding ever being challenged by a bishop ? again especially during opening games. and the bishop can get behind the pawns but much later. looks like a hack to me. I seem to be winning more often with black when I open d5, e4 or e5,d4 with the pawns. But is that not a restricted opening game choice for black.

sounds cool