Traditional chess is played in a strict and silent way, with harsh procedures like the touch-move rule.
I sometimes enjoy playing in a radically different way, with the options for each move openly discussed and considered. There is no possibility for cunning traps, but I think it is an educational process. Every person considers the board a bit differently, and the insights which they share might be things that would not have occurred to you during silent solitary strategizing.
The recollection of those insights will probably also help during more competitive play.
It can also be pleasant and useful to allow moves to be made in an experimental way, just to see how the board would look in the new configuration. Does the move produce any unexpected consequences? You can wander a bit down one of the branches of the game tree – for the purposes of thought and discussion – then step back and choose an official move.
I have not seen the approach suggested in the last paragraph. However, I expect many opponents would allow the approach you outline in the last paragraph. This would also be useful for an opponent to get insight into the not only her/his options but also to get insight into your own options.
Next time we (or Sasha and I) play perhaps we can consider this approach.
When playing correspondence chess, I find it useful to make a trial move on the board, then turn it around and think how I would respond if playing on the other side. I often turn it around again to think of my response to their response.
I suppose excellent players can do all this mentally, but I find it much easier with a board to toy with.
Sasha and I have a stalled correspodence game. Perhaps you and I can start a second one?
Learning Chess at 40
What I learned trying to keep up with my 4-year-old daughter at the royal game.
I find the annotated approach works as well for Hive as for chess, and it’s more fun because Hive is a more intriguing game.
See, for instance, the 2016-09-11-D series in https://www.sindark.com/genre/hive/