[ANSTHRLD] Advice on two blazons

[Britt]

> >Sigenoth the Blissful - January of 1998 (via AEthelmearc): Per pale
> >sable and vert, a Latin cross bottony argent.

X.4.a. Significantly changing the tinctures, direction of partition
lines, style of partition lines, or number of pieces in a partition of
the field is one clear difference.
X.4.a.i. Charged Fields  - If charges other than an uncharged
peripheral ordinary are present, at most one clear difference may be
counted for changes to the field.

There is a charge on the field, so there can be only one CD for
changes to the field.
A Latin cross bottony gets no difference from a cross crosslet by
Laurel precedents cited before and the tinctures of the charges match.
So this is a conflict.


> >Sigenoth the Blissful - January of 1998 (via AEthelmearc): Quarterly
> >sable and vert, a cross bottony argent.

Again, there is a CD for changes to the field but as the type of cross
is the same, as is the tincture, no more CDs may be gained and this,
too, is a conflict.

> >Vitus Polonius - November of 2005 (via Drachenwald): Per bend gules
> >and sable, a rogacina doubly crossed and fourchy argent.

The fields match, so no CDs under X.4.a.

X.4.e. Type Changes  - Significantly changing the type of any group of
charges placed directly on the field, including strewn charges or
charges overall, is one clear difference.

There is probably a CD for type of charge.  Both crosses are argent,
so no other CDs. Conflict.

- Teceangl