Barebone Chess

I would like to introduce a chess variation that I can't seem to find anywhere. If there is ever a place where this could land it would Little Golem.
I call it Barebone Chess, because it doesn't have any of the extra rules outside of the way the pieces go at any moment. To keep it concise, I would state the rules like this:
The standard rules of chess but:
- no pawn jumps
- no castling
- no stalemate
- no repetition
Pawns just move one step at a time at any point in the game.
If the player wants to castle, do it the laborious way, step by step.
Moving yourself into chess is no longer illegal, it is just stupid or forced, so that stalemate loses.
Repeating a position becomes a no go area. If the opponent notices the repetition, you have to choose a different move.

What do you think of this idea?

I'd play it. And I think we can play using the regular settings, if we just remember to not play any of the forbidden rules..... (For example, I'd start by making a comment in the game that this is a barebones game, perhaps in all caps.)

Interesting idea. Let's try.

Would the server prevent any repetition? You said "if the opponent notices" but how would disputes be resolved? "That's a repetition" "no it isn't" Note that repetitions can occur many moves apart. Also if the arrangement of pieces is the same but it's the other player's move, that is not a repetition.

There's a game in progress now....

https://www.littlegolem.net/jsp/game/game.jsp?gid=2526050

We have played 2 games now, but I am afraid we need many more to conclude something.
The no-pawn-jumps rule is certainly something to get used to. The opening patterns change. The no-castling rule creates a different dynamic. If you still have the queens on the board, it definitely makes a difference. In the first game we couldn't investigate how troublesome it is to castle with the queens still around, because they were gone early. And in the second game the kings didn't castle manually like in shogi. They just stayed in the centre.
The no-stalemate rule was not applicable at all nor was the no-repetition rule. They will only count in the far endgame. But experts have said that 20-30% of all endgames that now end in a draw, would end in a win/loss.
To David J Bush I would like to say that I tried to formulate the no-repetition rule in such a way that it is more gentlemanlike: "Repeating a position becomes a no go area. If the opponent notices the repetition, you have to choose a different move." So if a repetition is claimed and acknowledged, then it is not a loss, but the move is reset and the repeating move is forbidden. If it is not recognised, then life goes on. Yet, resetting a move is not standard procedure here.

I´d still like to play a few more games. Anyone?