[ANSTHRLD] Conflict check help needed.

[Tim McDaniel]

On Mon, 5 Feb 2007, Jennifer Smith <jds at randomgang.com> wrote:
> Alasdair wrote:
>> Per pale argent and azure, two moose combatant within a
>> bordure embattled counterchanged.

> Kilian Schnell: Per pale azure and argent, two stags combattant
> counterchanged.
>
> 1 CD for the field via RfS X.4.a. (Reversing azure and argent to
> argent and azure counts.)
> You get no CD for reversing the tincture of the charges, however,
> since in both cases you still have one blue one and one white one,
> and their coloring is forced by the field.

There's no such rule as "no CD for coloring forced by the field".
The only time you lose a CD for a forced change is a change of
*arrangement* that's forced by some other change.

You could say that swappie-doodling the field means that the stags
have to swap sides, and that's true.  But on Kilian's device, the
argent stag is facing to sinister and the azure stag is facing to
dexter.  If you just swappie-doodle the field (1 CD) and just move the
charges (no CD for forced change of arrangement), you get
     Per pale argent and azure, two stags ADDORSED counterchanged.
Hence a second CD for change of orientation of each charge on the
field.

> So in summary, you're probably safe without the bordure, but adding
> it sure couldn't hurt.

I disagree.  In the SCA, in my insufficiently humble opinion, there's
too much emphasis on "oh, there's a conflict, so slap on a bordure or
a chief".  More generally, I'd like to see simpler designs.

Danyll Lincoln beareth "Per chevron embattled argent and azure"
-- 
Tim McDaniel, tmcd at panix.com