[ANSTHRLD] Conflict Question
brianoftheloch at gmail.com
Tue May 15 16:13:27 PDT 2007
Thanks, that's what I *thought* it meant. Back to the drawing board.
On 5/15/07, Britt <tierna.britt at gmail.com> wrote:
> > The RfS states: *X.4.j.i. *
> > * j. Changes to Charges on Charges* - Changes to a group of charges
> > entirely on other charges may create one clear difference.
> > No more than one clear difference can be obtained from changes to the
> > group of charges on other charges.
> > *i.* Making two or more visually significant changes to the same group
> > charges placed entirely on other charges is one clear difference.
> > Changes of type, number, tincture, posture, or independent changes of
> > arrangement may each count as one of the two changes.
> > I am having a little trouble interpreting this text. I look at it two
> > but I think the first is correct:
> > *Interp 1:* I can only get one CD from the green shamrock versus the
> > fox even though they are substantially different (paraphrasing Daniel:
> > X.4.j.ii allows a substantial difference in type in simple cases to get
> a CD
> > all on its own.) and the tinctures are different. I am looking at the
> > sentence under the deinition of X.4.j.
> > *Interp 2:* I get 1 CD for the tincture of the tertiary charge and
> > CD for the substantial difference of the tertiary charge. I am looking
> > the second sentence of X.4.j.i.
> The Rule is clear. No matter how many changes are made to a group of
> charges entirely on other charges, the most you can ever count is a
> You get that CD by X.4.j.i. by changing type and tincture of the
> tertiary charge. OR you get that CD by X.4.j.ii. by changing type only
> from shamrock to fox. But you only get one. The whole of X.4.j. is
> beneath the sentence, "No more than one clear difference can be
> obtained from changes to the same group of charges on other charges,"
> which governs the subsections.
> - Teceangl
> Heralds mailing list
> Heralds at lists.ansteorra.org
More information about the Heralds