Have the rules of xiangqi changed over time?
These answers restate the rules implemented by our open-source engine, which follows the WXF laws for movement, checkmate and both repetition rulings: a side that forces a repetition by perpetual check or perpetual chase loses rather than drawing. The chase half has not been validated against the official casebook. Where an answer refers to a specific position, that position lives on the linked reference page, where the build verifies it before publishing.
Direct answer
The movement rules have been stable for centuries — the pieces have moved the same way since the game settled in the Song period. What has changed in the modern era is the codification of repetition: perpetual check and perpetual chase were governed by convention long before they were written down precisely.
Why repetition needed codifying
Because the edge cases are genuinely hard. Is chasing a protected piece a chase? What if one side checks while the other chases? Conventions varied regionally, and international competition made a written standard necessary — which is why the WXF publishes a casebook of adjudicated positions rather than a short rule.
What has not changed
The board, the piece set, the palace and river restrictions, the flying general rule, and stalemate being a loss. A player from the Ming dynasty could sit down at a modern board and play without being told anything.
Related questions
Are there regional rule variants?
In repetition adjudication and tournament regulations, yes. Movement is universal.
Has stalemate always been a loss?
It is long-established and is one of the stable features of the game.
.