[ANSTHRLD] Conflict check help needed.

[Tim McDaniel]

I've been asked in PVT E-MAIL why there's not just the one CD for the
field.

One important insight: "counterchanged" is not a tincture.  It's
heraldic shorthand for a combination of tinctures.  In unusual cases,
it's not possible to blazon the design accurately without it, but in
most cases, you can substitute the tinctures of the charge(s).

"Combatant" is "rampant respectant", both rampant facing each other:
the dexter one is rampant to sinister and the sinister one is rampant
(to dexter, the default).

So
     Registered: Kilian Schnell: Per pale azure and argent, in fess
     a stag rampant contourny argent and a stag rampant azure.

     Considering: Per pale argent and azure, in fess
     a moose rampant contoury azure and a moose rampant argent.

One CD for the field.  The tincture of each corresponding charge has
changed, so a second CD for the tinctures of each charge.  Two CDs.

However, while you can blazon your way out of a style problem, you
CANNOT blazon your way out of a conflict.  Therefore, you have to
consider any possible path that can cause a conflict.

A second path would be to consider a forced change.  The only forced
change in the RfS is change of arrangement caused by other changes on
the field.  The field changed (swappie-doodled), so the beasts can't
stay where they are: you'd get a blue moose

     o/~
     Blue moose
     You saw me standing alone
     Without a dream in my heart
     Without a love of my own

     Blue moose
     You knew just what I was there for
     You heard me saying a prayer for
     Someone I really could care for

     And then suddenly there appeared before me
     The only one my arms or device could ever hold
     I heard somebody whisper 'please addorse me'
     But when I looked, that moose had turned to gold -
         well, actually argent

     Blue moose
     Now I'm no longer alone
     Without a dream in my heart
     Without a love of my own
     o/~

[Gad, that works too well.  Please don't suggest an azure moose and
an Or moose addorsed regardant.]

on the blue part of the field, and an argent moose on the argent
part.  But if you just move them to the other sides of the field,
you'd get

     Registered: Kilian Schnell: Per pale argent and azure, in fess
     a stag rampant           azure and a stag rampant contourny argent

     Considering: Per pale argent and azure, in fess
     a moose rampant contoury azure and a moose rampant          argent.

On this path, the second CD would be change of orientation of each
beast, so it's clear by this path too.

Or so I think, but I'm getting rusty.  I'll inflict this on the SCA
Heralds' list for confirmation or denial.  As well, maybe they can
find a pertient precedent on a type CD or substantial difference for a
deer versus a moose (or elk or whatever), obviating the bloviating
above.  Given the prominent antlers, the boot-like face, humped body,
and heavier build generally for moose versus deer, I'd argue a CD at
least.

Danyll "BA baba BA ba BA ba BA BA" Lincoln
-- 
Tim McDaniel, tmcd at panix.com