There's nothing wrong with this...

>I checkmated an arrogant fag once with just the king and a pawn lef
>t. Lelouch
Please learn to Chess properly.

It's the same as some guy simply throwing away his piece off the board, or taking his king piece and knocking away all the other pieces off the board. I don't understand why "putting the king in check" is more appropriate than laying the king on its side. The point is, the meaning is blatantly obvious.

Only in Speed Chess, and there's no clocks on the board. And you show it's an illegal move by capturing the king.

>is more appropriate
Meant to say "is less appropriate".

>It's the same as some guy simply throwing away his piece off the board, or taking his king piece and knocking away all the other pieces off the board.
Exactly. Neither of them are legal moves. And neither of them are officially considered forfeiting the game. Though such behaviour might indeed get you into trouble at a tournament.

>you show it's an illegal move by capturing the king
Which is exactly what everyone thought Lelouch was gonna do but didn't

>style on some guy with a 4 move checkmate
>he farts in your face, flips over the board and walks away
>ummm sorry sir that was not a legal fart, I'll be waiting for you to return here and put your king to the side like you're supposed to

People get too hang up on the rules of the game that are completely irrelevant to the meaning of the scene. The scene doesn't even imply its a good move, its just that Lelouch can't accept such a victory.

>walks away
That, however, would most definitely count as forfeiting the game.

Purposely putting yourself in check is against the rules.

>The scene doesn't even imply its a good move
It implies that it's a legal move. That's the problem. That renders any "meaning" the scene could have had moot.

It's an illegal move and the way to show is by moving your piece and taking the king, which ends up in your victory. That's exactly what everyone in the show expected Lelouch to do

>It implies that it's a legal move
No, every character in the scene is wondering what the fuck Schneizel is doing. Just because you don't have a character shouting out "Hey, he made an illegal move!" doesn't mean that it's not illegal. The show knows everyone knows it's an illegal move.

Question: Did Schneizel plan to Damocles the world from the very beginning? Or was it only after he saw Euphemia's plan fail? If Euphemia had succeeded with the SAZ plan would he have still gone through with it?

Attached: Schneizel_el_britania.jpg (1280x720, 63.94K)

>the way to show is by moving your piece and taking the king
No, it's not. Stop spouting bullshit.
An illegal move simply CANNOT be made. Ever. It does not result in the opponent winning.
The chess ruleset does not say any such thing. It does not give any procedure in case of illegal moves. But what it does, in fact, say is that each player has to complete a (legal) move for his respective turn to end. It's called Zugzwang. And if your opponent makes an illegal move, his turn does not end and the move has to be treated as not taken at all.

>That's exactly what everyone in the show expected Lelouch to do
Because the writers obviously knew nothing about chess.

>The show knows everyone knows it's an illegal move.
He himselve apparently does not and neither does Lelouch. That's the problem.
Nor do the writers know what an illegal move is.

Attached: whitetomove.png (607x610, 24.53K)

It's exactly how it works when you're competing against someone. You don't go "it's an illegal move, do it again". You win, and you need to show why. "an illegal move simply CANNOT be made" doesn't apply to reality. It's not how a serious official match works. It's like saying it's a draw because one of the opponents refuses to make a move

I can't even imagine how badly you'd have to play to end up in this very particular situation

Such a setup does not occur naturally.

Black and white are both literal children. Instead of winning, black decides to gobble up each remaining pawn white has, then sacrifice his queen for white's final pawn as a show of disrespect.

>It's exactly how it works when you're competing against someone. You don't go "it's an illegal move, do it again".
No, it's not. Here's what the USFC tournament ruleset states (note, not the game ruleset itself), for example:
>11A. Illegal move during last ten moves. If, during a game, it is found that one of either player's last ten moves was illegal, the position shall be reinstated to what it was before the illegal move. The game shall then continue by applying Rule 10, The Touched Piece, to the move replacing the illegal move. If the position cannot be reinstated, then the illegal move shall stand. Move counters on clocks that have them may by readjusted.
>11D. Illegal move. If, a player completes an illegal move by pressing the clock, in addition to the usual obligation to make a legal move with the touched piece if possible, the standard penalty specified in rule 1C2a applies (i.e. two minutes added to the opponent's clock).

Now fuck off with your stupid bullshit "reality".

>It's like saying it's a draw because one of the opponents refuses to make a move
Are you really this stupid? You CANNOT refuse to make a move, just like you CANNOT make an illegal move. In a timed game, the clock will just run down. In any other kind of game, you'll probably be asked whether you want to give up and just regarded as a moron if you deny that.

>An illegal move simply CANNOT be made
Yes one can. Chess is a physical board game you can put pieces anywhere you want, nothing can stop you. Is it against the rules? Yes. That's why it's illegal. So why did Lelouch want to continue playing after an illegal move? Because he offered to draw when they put themselves in a threefold repetition and Schneizel then moved his king forward. Schneizel stopped playing chess when he put his king forward he just wanted to see what Lelouch would do. And Lelouch decided to continue the game and retreat.

>And Lelouch decided to continue the game and retreat.
Which shows that he knows nothing about chess.

Attached: qd5.png (611x609, 28.02K)

And you know nothing about social interaction.

He didn't want Schneizel throwing the game. It's literally a plot point

Game rules have nothing at all to do with "social interaction".

No, but playing games are entirely about social interaction

>He didn't want Schneizel throwing the game.
In which case the correct solution would have been to point out the illegality of the move in question and then to undo it. Why is that so hard to get?

We're not debating why they played the game, we are literally debating what to do in case of an illegal move.

>In which case the correct solution would have been to point out the illegality of the move in question and then to undo it
Then they would have just gone to 3 fold repetition. Boring.

No, we're debating how autistic you are

>Then they would have just gone to 3 fold repetition. Boring.
So what? If both players agree that that's what they want to do, so be it.

It wouldn't have been nearly as entertaining or symbolic if that had been the case.

>If both players agree that that's what they want to do
The point is that it literally wasn't

Says the retard who cannot accept that the writers of his favourite anime fucked up spectacularly, even in this one scene. To the point where he starts claiming things about chess that are simply untrue.
At least admit that this scene only works if we assume that all the characters presesnt are absolute idiots.

Because he was playing along. The game is a draw and Schneizel decides to put himself into checkmate. So Lelouch plays along and knows that in order for this game to not end in a draw one of them has to make a mistake on purpose hence why Schneizel puts himself in check mate. But if Lelouch is gonna win, he wants win the right way, with his strategy, not because Schneizel hands it to him. Therefore they continue the game albeit illegally, but it was a mutual illegality.