Answers.Body: <p>Yes, it can, as long as the opposing piece is not protected. It's even possible when the king is in check; all that matters is the position <em>after</em> the piece is captured. If there is an opposing piece attacking the king, the move is illegal; if not, it's legal.</p>
  <pre><code>[FEN &quot;kR6/2B5/8/8/8/8/6r1/6nK b - - 0 1&quot;]
  [startflipped &quot;&quot;]
  
  1... Ka7 {This is Black's only legal move.} 2. Kxg2 {However, this is a legal White move.}
  </code></pre>
  <p>Black to move can't capture the rook, since it's protected by the bishop. White to move (disregarding the situation in the upper left corner) can capture the rook, since it's not protected, but not the knight, since the rook protects it.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-01-03T09:26:03.627Z
Answers.Text: Nitpick - the question is "If a king is not in check". So maybe change the white rook to a knight?
Answers.UserDisplayName: Ian Bush
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-01-03T11:06:56.997Z
Answers.Text: This answer needs to mention that a king can capture an opposing piece **even if** it is in check (but won't be after the capture).
Answers.UserDisplayName: vsz
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-01-03T13:32:55.200Z
Answers.Text: @vsz thanks, I had a 'not' too many there.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Glorfindel
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-01-02T17:45:07.227Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2021-01-03T13:30:28.193Z
Answers.LastEditDate: 2021-01-03T13:30:28.193Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Glorfindel
Answers.Body: <p>If the king is not in check, or even if it is in check, it can capture an opposing piece as long as so doing would not put or leave it in check, which would be illegal.  The king can be a strong attacking piece, particularly in the diminished force endgame when it would be less likely to be putting itself in jeopardy.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-01-06T19:56:54.440Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2021-01-06T19:56:54.440Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: CConero
Body: <p>If a king is not in check, can it capture an opposing chess piece?</p>
  
Tags: <rules><check><kings>
Title: If not in check, can a king capture an opposing chess piece?
ThreadText: # If not in check, can a king capture an opposing chess piece?
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2021-01-02)
  
  If a king is not in check, can it capture an opposing chess piece?
  
  **Tags:** rules, check, kings
  
  
  ---
  
  ## 2 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_1 on 2021-01-02. Score: 7
  
  Yes, it can, as long as the opposing piece is not protected. It's even possible when the king is in check; all that matters is the position *after* the piece is captured. If there is an opposing piece attacking the king, the move is illegal; if not, it's legal.
  
  ```
  [FEN "kR6/2B5/8/8/8/8/6r1/6nK b - - 0 1"]
  [startflipped ""]
  
  1... Ka7 {This is Black's only legal move.} 2. Kxg2 {However, this is a legal White move.}
  
  ```
  
  Black to move can't capture the rook, since it's protected by the bishop. White to move (disregarding the situation in the upper left corner) can capture the rook, since it's not protected, but not the knight, since the rook protects it.
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_2**: Nitpick - the question is "If a king is not in check". So maybe change the white rook to a knight?  
  > **username_3**: This answer needs to mention that a king can capture an opposing piece **even if** it is in check (but won't be after the capture).  
  > **username_1**: @username_3 thanks, I had a 'not' too many there.  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_4 on 2021-01-06. Score: 0
  
  If the king is not in check, or even if it is in check, it can capture an opposing piece as long as so doing would not put or leave it in check, which would be illegal. The king can be a strong attacking piece, particularly in the diminished force endgame when it would be less likely to be putting itself in jeopardy.
  
  
  ---
  
  