The King can not move into check but can pin the opponents King allowing another Chess piece to checkmate ~. see related link below .
You cannot capture opposite king in chess. You can attack him with check, and your opponent should immediately defend it. If the opponent has no way to defend, it is checkmate and you are awarded victory of the game.
Any opponent piece, except the opponent king.
Yes, but only if that results in you not being in check anymore. For instance, if it is the one that is checking you. When your king is in check, your only option is to stop the king from being taken. Otherwise, the game is over and you've lost. There are three ways to stop the king from being taken: move the king out of check; block the piece that has attacked the king; or -- here's the answer to your question -- capture the piece that has attacked the king. Any of your pieces that is able to do so, including the king itself, may capture the attacking piece.
Yes, as long as it doesn't put him in check.
No. In addition to moving the King, check can be escaped by capturing the checking piece or blocking its path. Of course a Knight cannot be blocked, so that option is not available in that case. Also note that the King cannot avoid check by "castling".
Only if the piece won't be able to attack him then. Example: moving in front of a bishop is okay. Moving in front of a pawn is okay. Moving in front of a knight is okay. King, rook, or queen? No ma'am/sir.
No The rules state that one may never place his own King in check. Because a King can only move one square, it must be adjacent to a piece in order to attack it. But the act of moving your King adjacent to your opponent's King would be putting it in check. And so the move is not allowed. If your King is two squares away from your opponent's King, it is not attacking it, and thus it is not putting the other King in check. --CM
The game is over when the king can not move and is in danger of being taken. Any piece could put a king in danger of being taken. Theoretically, a king is capable of capturing an opponent's king. However, the opponent's king would first have to have moved into check, which is an illegal move. Therefore, while a king can take a king, it can never happen. But a king can participate in checkmating an opponent's king by contolling a square into which the opponent's king could otherwise move. No, there is an exception. A king cannot directly threaten another king because they cannot ever share adjoining squares, or even any that meet at a corner. Only a queen, rook, bishop, knight or pawn can directly apply the attack resulting in checkmate (though a pair of them might collect the win in the case of double check that is checkmate).
Yes, so long as the queen is not being protected by another piece or is more than one space away. The king cannot move into check, but if the queen is right in front of him, with nothing protecting, take her.
In normal chess rules, the only piece that can be "checked" ... put in check ... is the opposing King. Technically, the King is never actually "taken", but rather put in checkmate; a state in which it is in check and no legal move to get it out of check exists. The game ends at this point, so there's little point in actually "taking" the King.
If what you mean by "leaving your king open" is not moving it out of check if your opponent puts your king in check, then yes, that is an illegal move. If your king is in check you mustmove to protect it. If you mean simply that you leave your king in the center of the board without castling or other protection, then it is not an illegal move. It may (and probably will) result in your king coming under attack very quickly, however.
You don't take/kill a king in chess. You have to put it into checkmate, ie, there are no moves the opponent can make with any piece, to take the king out of check. When this happens, the game is over.