Before I even started writing this entry, I made sure to Google “Chess Tower Defense,” and sure enough, it exists. I haven’t taken a look at any versions on the Internet, but you can rest assured that Kongregate has one. As to their quality I have no idea, I didn’t actually try any of them. I wasn’t that committed.

But then again, this idea was less about making a traditional tower defense game, and more about modifying Chess slightly to appear as a tower defense game, in order to teach people how to actually play Chess. The idea would be to break the game down into stages, focusing on a few pieces at a time, starting with pawns.

Pawns advance across the board and meet each other in the middle. It’s assumed that the other pieces have all been captured except for the King and Pawns, and you have so many pieces to play at once. The idea actually came about because I was trying to imagine a tower defense game in which the towers moved as part of their attacks.

Chess lends itself naturally to that sort of thinking.

Now that I think about it, Chess is actually a really fantastic example of a game in which all pieces are equal in strength, if not maneuverability. A Pawn may take any other piece, even the King. “In Chess, even a Pawn may defeat a King.” And there are a lot of Pawns, after all. Statistically, it should be likely that a Pawn will take a King.

You know, apart from the “morale bonus” I guess the King is supposed to represent, you know, what with your side surrendering the moment he’s captured — he isn’t all that much different from a Pawn. Except, perhaps, in his ability to move in any direction on the battlefield, like the Queen (just not as far, obviously).

Rook, Knight, Bishop, Pawn, King, and Queen. *ponders* I’ve forgotten if I’ve touched on Chess much in this blog. (One hasty search later.) Actually, it seems I’ve written quite a few references to Chess into my blog, especially the concept of “Check” as a game mechanic. I’m going to have to look into this some more.