Answers.Body: <p>So long as capturing the checking piece would not <em>also</em> cause the King to be in check, yes!</p>
  
  <hr>
  
  <p>In the position below, the White Queen is giving check. After <code>...Kxf7</code>, the Black King is <em>no longer</em> in check, so it is indeed a legal move.</p>
  
  <pre><code>[FEN "rnbqkb1r/pppp1Qpp/5n2/4p3/4P3/8/PPPP1PPP/RNB1KBNR b KQkq - 0 0"]
  
  1...Kxf7
  </code></pre>
  
  <hr>
  
  <p>However, it is illegal to make any move that places your own King in check. If you did, the opponent would be able to capture your King immediately. Since you can never actually <em>capture</em> a King in a game of Chess, making a move that would allow it is illegal.</p>
  
  <p>So, if White's Queen is "protected" by another piece (such as a Bishop, below), the Black's King <em>cannot</em> capture it, as doing so would leave his King still in check. In fact, in the position below (the "scholar's mate"), Black is <strong>checkmated</strong> because he has no moves that would not result in his still being in check.</p>
  
  <pre><code>[FEN "r1bqkb1r/pppp1Qpp/2n2n2/4p3/2B1P3/8/PPPP1PPP/RNB1K1NR b KQkq - 0 0"]
  
  1...Kxf7 2.Bxf7
  </code></pre>
  
  <p>Remember that in the position above, <code>1...Kxf7 2.Bxf7</code> are given as <em>examples</em>: neither move is actually legal, as Black is <em>already checkmated in the starting position!</em></p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2014-07-29T14:10:05.527Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2014-07-31T13:45:27.560Z
Answers.LastEditDate: 2014-07-31T13:45:27.560Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Henry Keiter
Body: <p>If the king is in check, and the piece that is holding it in check is directly adjacent from the king, can the king take it?</p>
  
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2014-07-29T14:41:32.137Z
Comments.Text: If the piece is not protected, then the king can take it.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Dag Oskar Madsen
Tags: <strategy>
Title: If the king is in check, and the piece that is holding it in check is directly adjacent from the king can the king take it?
ThreadText: # If the king is in check, and the piece that is holding it in check is directly adjacent from the king can the king take it?
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2014-07-29)
  
  If the king is in check, and the piece that is holding it in check is directly adjacent from the king, can the king take it?
  
  **Tags:** strategy
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_1**: If the piece is not protected, then the king can take it.  
  
  ---
  
  ## 1 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_2 on 2014-07-29. Score: 6 | Accepted answer
  
  So long as capturing the checking piece would not *also* cause the King to be in check, yes!
  
  ---
  
  In the position below, the White Queen is giving check. After `...Kxf7`, the Black King is *no longer* in check, so it is indeed a legal move.
  
  ```
  [FEN "rnbqkb1r/pppp1Qpp/5n2/4p3/4P3/8/PPPP1PPP/RNB1KBNR b KQkq - 0 0"]
  
  1...Kxf7
  
  ```
  
  ---
  
  However, it is illegal to make any move that places your own King in check. If you did, the opponent would be able to capture your King immediately. Since you can never actually *capture* a King in a game of Chess, making a move that would allow it is illegal.
  
  So, if White's Queen is "protected" by another piece (such as a Bishop, below), the Black's King *cannot* capture it, as doing so would leave his King still in check. In fact, in the position below (the "scholar's mate"), Black is **checkmated** because he has no moves that would not result in his still being in check.
  
  ```
  [FEN "r1bqkb1r/pppp1Qpp/2n2n2/4p3/2B1P3/8/PPPP1PPP/RNB1K1NR b KQkq - 0 0"]
  
  1...Kxf7 2.Bxf7
  
  ```
  
  Remember that in the position above, `1...Kxf7 2.Bxf7` are given as *examples*: neither move is actually legal, as Black is *already checkmated in the starting position!*
  
  
  ---
  
  