The FIDE laws of Chess do not forbid threefold repetition; rather, law 10.10 allows either player to claim a draw in the event a threefold repetition occurs.
In the absence of such a rule, the game would presumably go on forever, with neither player willing to break the cycle. The threefold repetition rule is simply an observation of the fact that if both players find an endless loop preferable to other options, then they have both implicitly consented to a draw. It doesn't change whether any position is theoretically won, lost, or drawn, it just cuts short the infinite loop.
For the Crown has many unorthodox pieces, and is adding more with each expansion. However, material values are quite different than they would be in a FIDE-like context, due to differences in piece density, deployment (dropping) rules, and various other factors. And mate #s are completely irrelevant, since both players have the ability to bring new pieces into play as the game goes on, and therefore bare king endgames do not arise.
I have composed rules and recommended piece values for using the For the Crown pieces in a point-buy chess variant, which are available on the publisher's product page. I believe I have subjected these values to rather more rigorous analysis than George has used in this thread, but I still consider them to be educated guesses, at best; I haven't tried to get more precise than nearest-pawn, and it wouldn't surprise me if several were wrong, even by that loose standard.
The FIDE laws of Chess do not forbid threefold repetition; rather, law 10.10 allows either player to claim a draw in the event a threefold repetition occurs.
In the absence of such a rule, the game would presumably go on forever, with neither player willing to break the cycle. The threefold repetition rule is simply an observation of the fact that if both players find an endless loop preferable to other options, then they have both implicitly consented to a draw. It doesn't change whether any position is theoretically won, lost, or drawn, it just cuts short the infinite loop.
For the Crown has many unorthodox pieces, and is adding more with each expansion. However, material values are quite different than they would be in a FIDE-like context, due to differences in piece density, deployment (dropping) rules, and various other factors. And mate #s are completely irrelevant, since both players have the ability to bring new pieces into play as the game goes on, and therefore bare king endgames do not arise.
I have composed rules and recommended piece values for using the For the Crown pieces in a point-buy chess variant, which are available on the publisher's product page. I believe I have subjected these values to rather more rigorous analysis than George has used in this thread, but I still consider them to be educated guesses, at best; I haven't tried to get more precise than nearest-pawn, and it wouldn't surprise me if several were wrong, even by that loose standard.