[ANSTHRLD] Wisdom and comments desired

[tmcd at panix.com]

Since I went into the grungy details in another message, I'll just
address the diffs here.

On Thu, 23 Mar 2006, Darin Herndon <DHerndon at chkenergy.com> wrote:
> 1) Per fess embattled versus plain line per fess (complex line
> versus plain line) - 1 CD

Yup.

> 2) Griffin versus dragon is substantial change to more than half the
> primary charge group - 1 CD

Not more than half: dragon + sword + sword.  Almost all the CD rules
say that you have to change at least half the group.

Terminology nit: the type CD, RfS X.4.e, says "significantly"; the
quick route, X.2, says "substantially".  Yeah, it sucks big fat donkey
dongs having both terms start with "s".  I often have to look them up
to remember which is which.

Luckily, (griffin+cross moline) all are significantly different in
type from (dragon+swords), so there's the type CD.  Otherwise, I'd
have to dig out a rarely-used Da'ud precedent on the special case of
type change within one group of charges on a divided-half-and-half
field.

> 3) Statant versus segreant is change of posture - 1 CD

Again, less than half the group in the dragon's case.

> 4) Two crossed swords versus a cross should also get you a CD.

You didn't specify a CD for what: number, type, orientation?

And in CD counting, you compare groups to groups.  (Except for RfS
X.4.a, which deals only with the field.)  When you have half a group
changed, you can get away with just mentioning the diff, but that's
not the best for explanatory purposes.  You can't get a CD for type
change for half of a group, and then a second CD for type change for
the other half.

> I am not sure that you can claim all of the CDs that affect the
> primary charge group at the same time

All the CDs are independent from each other for the same group, except
for one case where it's excluded explicitly:

    g.  Arrangement Changes - Changing the relative positions of
     charges in any group placed directly on the field or overall is
     one clear difference, provided that change is not caused by other
     changes to the design.

     Changes to other parts of the design frequently cause changes to
     the arrangement of charge groups, so changing from "Argent, a
     fess between two unicorns within an orle purpure" to "Argent, a
     pale between two unicorns within an orle purpure" requires that
     the unicorns move from "in pale" to "in fess".  Changing from
     "Argent, three unicorns purpure" to "Argent, four unicorns
     purpure" will also cause some change in arrangement.  These
     changes do not provide independent difference.  Changes that are
     made on their own, like changing from "three mullets in fess" to
     "three mullets in pale", or from "six mullets" on an uncharged
     field to "five mullets in cross", are clear differences.

Danihel de Lincolnia
-- 
Tim McDaniel; Reply-To: tmcd at panix.com