Search the Community

I am having issues seeing the importance of bindpoints and their progressive nature. If anyone has thoughts on the following questions/comments, I would appreciate it. 1) What are the effects of missing the exact bindpoint? For example, if I am trying to draw a line of forbiddance connecting two bindpoints and I draw wrong and miss one of them, does that simply mean that the line of forbiddance just doesn't anchor that bindpoint? 2) In a lot of the drawings of defenses at http://coppermind.net/wiki/Rithmatics, you can see that often the line of forbiddance is drawn through the bindpoint. Thinking of bindpoints and anchoring from a kinematics standpoint, it seems as if a single line of forbiddance that passes through a bindpoint constrains the line of warding in both translation and rotation (e.g. The Osborn Defense). However, in something like a Sumsion Defense without the rear line of forbiddance, would the large line of warding be able to rotation about the bindpoint connecting to the smaller, anchored circle line of warding? I am having a hard time understanding how much constraint a line of forbiddance adds to anchoring and whether tangent bindpoints have any kinematic constraints. 3) It seems to me that at the start of any primary line of warding that the first construct added severely restricts the space of future constructs. For example, if a person tries to draw a line of forbiddance between two bindpoints of an assumed six-point circle and misses, then they have necessarily started one of the nine-points circle which have that chord as a possibility. This leads to the next question of "how close is close enough" to actually get a line of forbiddance to attach to a bindpoint? I will illustrate a scenario: I try to do a line of forbiddance between bindpoints on a six-point circle (imagine I am trying to start the Eskridge Defense). But let's say I mess up. Do I know I missed the exact bindpoint? Let say I don't know that I missed the bindpoint, so really I started the nine-point circle corresponding to my messup. I now try to draw the second line of forbiddance for the Eskridge Defense. The problem is that the bindpoints aren't where I thought they were. So, the second line is still a valid line of forbiddance, it just doesn't anchor my circle, right? Or potentially only anchors it in translation but not rotation for the once anchor point I did hit? Well, since the first line of forbiddance anchored my circle line of warding, do I really care that the second line of forbiddance is slightly off? Is there some advantage in a lot of scenarios like this to actually be right on the bind points as long as the line of warding is already fully anchored/constrained? The reason I ask this is because I have done a bunch of hobby iOS games in the past and started thinking about the actual mechanics of the game and it brought up a lot of questions about the importance of bindpoints. They seem really emphasized in the book, but they became less critical to me as I read through the wiki, various articles on here about all other circles being a specific case of the 9 point circle, and the concept of anchoring. Thoughts?