The King is not allowed to be in check. If a piece is on a square where if the King were there, the King would in check, the King isn't allowed to capture it.
The king can capture a piece and put the opponent's king in check by moving to a square where it can capture the opponent's piece while also threatening the opponent's king.
The objective of chess is to checkmate the king, where the king is in check by a piece and it cannot block the check, move to another square, or capture the piece checking the king.
Yes, in chess, you say "check" when you threaten the opponent's king with capture on the next move.
If a king is placed in check by a rook and the rook is unprotected, they yes, the king can capture it. Another way to view the situation is that if a rook is used to put a king in check and the king will not end up in check by capturing that rook, then the king may take the rook.
Yes, the king can capture in chess, but only under certain circumstances. The king can capture an opponent's piece by moving to a square that is occupied by that piece, but only if doing so does not put the king in check.
No, a king cannot capture a queen if it is in check. In chess, when a king is in check, it must make a move to get out of check, either by moving to a safe square, capturing the attacking piece, or blocking the attack. Since the king is unable to move without resolving the check, it cannot capture the queen.
In chess, the objective is to checkmate the opponent's king, which means putting the king in a position where it cannot escape capture. The king can be captured by moving a piece to a square that attacks the king, known as a check. The opponent must then move the king out of check or block the attack. If the king cannot escape capture, it is checkmated, and the game is over.
Yes, in chess, when you put your opponent's king in a position where it is under threat of capture, you are supposed to say "check" to alert your opponent.
Yes, it can, as long as it doesn't put the king in check. PS, it's "capture", not "kill".
No. This is because in theory, checking the enemy king by leaving your king exposed to a check will result in your opponent capturing your king before you can capture theirs.
what a stupid question you capture a king!