Drow Chess

[Chainsaw Hobbit]

I'm currently reading the first book in the War of the Spider Queen saga, in which a common pastime in the Underdark city of Menzoberanzan* is a chess-like game called sava. Sava has game-play nearly identical to chess, but the game is made to symbolize a war between rival drow houses, the pieces are named after different noble drow ranks, and dice are used in a way that will be explained later.
I decided to make make the unofficial sava rules, complete with names for each piece on the board.

Pieces:

Spoiler

Show

Queen = Matron Mother
King = Ambassador
Bishop = Priestess
Rook = Weapons Master
Knight = Assassin
Pawn = Solder

The Sava Dice:

Spoiler

Show

Original Mechanic: At the beginning of a player's turn, that player can choose to roll the sava dice instead of moving a piece. If both the sava dice roll ones (spiders), the player can remove any one of their opponent's pieces from the game, as long as it has another piece adjacent to it..

My House-Ruled Mechanic: Same as the original, but instead of needing to roll ones, the player simply needs to roll any two of the same number. Also, th king can't be removed with the dice.

* I hope I spelled that correctly

[Dark Herald]

the probability of rolling doubles is the same as the probability of rolling any specific number on one die. So you needn't use two dice if you don't want to.

Aside from that, moving the opponent's piece seems like a really stupid move. If they didn't like the move, they could always just move back, and otherwise they would get a free turn and a piece moved into a different location.

Edit:
http://forgottenrealms.wikia.com/wiki/Sava

So actually the dice can only be rolled once, and allows the removal of one piece next to one of your pieces if double ones is rolled.

You could create other rules that apply on different rolls of the dice. I'm not sure whether you should let the dice be rolled more than once. If so, make the probability of something good happening small, otherwise make all the possible results helpful.

Also the link says there are only four types of pieces in Sava. Not that that matters.

So either allow the capture of one enemy piece next to one of your pieces on the roll of doubles, or make the dice only roll-able once and make all the rolls meaningful. That's my advice.

[Eldan]

Hmm. Bishops should be assassins... that's what they were in the old version of the game, back when Rooks were still war elephants.

[flabort]

What? War elephants?
You mean "Chinese Chess", or properly, "Xiangqi"?

[Eldan]

I meant the Indian/Persian precursors of western chess, actually. Unless I'm mistaken, those had assassins and war elephants, instead of bishops and rooks. (The small towers are basically what's left over from the back platforms.

[Severus]

Seems like chess, but once a game you can choose to roll dice and if you get snake eyes, remove a piece next to yours. This is in addition to your normal move, not instead of it.

[Chainsaw Hobbit]

I revised the sava dice rules. They still aren't identical to the game the drow play, but are more balanced.

[huttj509]

I meant the Indian/Persian precursors of western chess, actually. Unless I'm mistaken, those had assassins and war elephants, instead of bishops and rooks. (The small towers are basically what's left over from the back platforms.

I think bishops were ships, diagonal movement due to tacking into the wind, etc.

[Warlawk]

the probability of rolling doubles is the same as the probability of rolling any specific number on one die. So you needn't use two dice if you don't want to.

Now, I admit I'm not generally a numbers guy and math has never been my strongest suit.

However, I'm fairly sure that rolling the same number on two D6s is a 1 in 36 probability while rolling any given number on a single D6 is 1 in 6.

It's late, and like I said... not my strong suit here but somehow I just don't think the probability of rolling doubles on two dice is the same as rolling a given number on one die.

[Jan Mattys]

Now, I admit I'm not generally a numbers guy and math has never been my strongest suit.

However, I'm fairly sure that rolling the same number on two D6s is a 1 in 36 probability while rolling any given number on a single D6 is 1 in 6.

It's late, and like I said... not my strong suit here but somehow I just don't think the probability of rolling doubles on two dice is the same as rolling a given number on one die.

No :)
Rolling the same number on two dice is 6/36 (double one, double two, double three, double four, double five, double six).
So it's exactly 1/6



ps: if this makes it easier to understand: imagine to roll the two dice separately. You roll the first die first: it can be any number from 1 to 6, right? Now, to have two dice with the same number, you need the second to match the first. What's the chance of the second die matching the first? Exactly one in six.

[huttj509]

Now, I admit I'm not generally a numbers guy and math has never been my strongest suit.

However, I'm fairly sure that rolling the same number on two D6s is a 1 in 36 probability while rolling any given number on a single D6 is 1 in 6.

It's late, and like I said... not my strong suit here but somehow I just don't think the probability of rolling doubles on two dice is the same as rolling a given number on one die.

Rolling the same SPECIFIC number is 1/36.

However, just rolling doubles as opposed to specifically double ones (snake eyes), is 1/36 for each of 6 possibilities, so 1/6.

Look at it this way, for doubles in general, what the first die rolls doesn't matter. What matters is that the second die matches the first. So whatever the first die rolls, there's a 1/6 chance of the second matching.

Now if, say, double 1s is different effect from double 2s, etc, then it's 1/36 for each of those.

[The Rose Dragon]

I meant the Indian/Persian precursors of western chess, actually. Unless I'm mistaken, those had assassins and war elephants, instead of bishops and rooks. (The small towers are basically what's left over from the back platforms.

Bishops were war elephants. I have no idea where assassins come from.

Also, the queen was called the vizier and the king was called the shah.

[Eldan]

Bishops were war elephants. I have no idea where assassins come from.

Also, the queen was called the vizier and the king was called the shah.

Huh. What were rooks, then? The explanation that they are towers because they are stylized elephant platforms always made sense to me.

[Kalirren]

Etymonline gives "rook" as being derived from Hindi rath = "chariot", which jives with the Chinese chess interpretation of the analogously located and powered piece as a chariot.

[Coidzor]

Sorry, I think of Drow Chess and I think of their constant murdering sprees more than them actually sitting down to play a game other than to try to murder one another...

[Eldan]

You obviously smear contact poison on your enemy's queen.

[Chainsaw Hobbit]

You obviously smear contact poison on your enemy's queen.

You seem to be one of the first people who actually gets it.
Drow society is a web of deceit, subtle strategy, and surreptitious murder; not open warfare.

[jpreem]

You smear contact poison on your own queen, let the fool win the Sava game :D.

[Ormur]

My character just stole a chess set from a Drow Queen in a session earlier tonight, best check for poison before I use it.

[Khatoblepas]

You obviously smear contact poison on your enemy's queen.

Even better:

Say you've poisoned one of your own pieces. Wear gloves. If the enemy wins, they win your entire houses' estate. If they lose, they forfeit their life and the life of their family.

In reality: Your foe will be so paranoid about taking a piece, or moving a piece, knowing they might die, they'll not play to their best ability, and you can win against them while they cower and squirm in their seat.

You actually didn't poison any piece at all.

Alternatively:

You poison the gloves you have set aside for them if they chicken out.

[Coidzor]

Well, no, because no drow would go into that situation without having several plans to kill the other one.

So while they pretend to agonize over their move they're really aiming an hand crossbow at your forehead that's been hidden with illusion magic while their assassins drug and kill your servants and counter-assassins.

[Chainsaw Hobbit]

Well, no, because no drow would go into that situation without having several plans to kill the other one.

So while they pretend to agonize over their move they're really aiming an hand crossbow at your forehead that's been hidden with illusion magic while their assassins drug and kill your servants and counter-assassins.

The drow are so awesome.

[lightningcat]

It has been a few years since I read the War of the Spider Queen saga, but I thought that there was a downside to using the dice. The possibility of losing one of your pieces on a bad roll, or something like that.

[NNescio]

Even better:

Say you've poisoned one of your own pieces. Wear gloves. If the enemy wins, they win your entire houses' estate. If they lose, they forfeit their life and the life of their family.

In reality: Your foe will be so paranoid about taking a piece, or moving a piece, knowing they might die, they'll not play to their best ability, and you can win against them while they cower and squirm in their seat.

You actually didn't poison any piece at all.

Alternatively:

You poison the gloves you have set aside for them if they chicken out.

What's stopping them from bringing gloves of their own to wear?

[Khatoblepas]

What's stopping them from bringing gloves of their own to wear?

Nothing. But that is just a decoy for the REAL trap.

The chair he's sitting on will be a Mimic!

Drow assassination gambits are silly.

[NNescio]

Nothing. But that is just a decoy for the REAL trap.

The chair he's sitting on will be a Mimic!

Drow assassination gambits are silly.

AKA the "I know you know that I know you know that I know you know..." ploy.

[Coidzor]

Also known as "Your Poison is now diamonds!"