CCI people might be but I was never a member. I used to be a bit active in one of the chess collecting circles but we were never very interested in this kind of thing. I can't speak to your real question about the marketability of this set. Now maybe what you've got is what you've got and you will not find dinosaurs unique and different enough to make clear chess piece signatures, but it's just my 2 cents on what I look for. that said one other thing about tall thin pieces is they can be associated with Bishops. Chess & Games Shop - Europe - Best Online Shop with awesome prices - Buy chess clocks, boards, sets, pieces, tables, exclusive luxury chess sets. I also like sound67's idea of the Triceratops as the rook, particularly if you want to go with standard piece heights, but I think the rooks as you have can work already, though some of your other pieces seem less clear. I think the egg idea for a pawn is a good one. I kind of see where you are going with the Bishops having a crest, but then what makes the Knight look like a Knight? (all the pieces "look like Knights") so it's a challenge. What I look for in a unique design such as this, instead, personally, is that the piece signatures are clear and recognizable, and I'm not sure they are here. Part of the modern Staunton set is these piece heights, not quite as mathmatical in their proportions as some of the old German ones, but KQBNRP in that order, although even some Jaques sets have Knights a little taller than Bishops. Knights have sometimes been the tallest piece as well which makes sense as a horseback thing. Piece heights were big in Germanic countries with some designers drawing a line down the set King, Queen, Bishop, Knight, Rook, Pawn and making them geometrically smaller as they go, but even them at the same time would sometimes make an ornamental rook with a flag on it that surpassed the height of the King. There's nothing wrong with having tall rooks.
0 kommentar(er)
