Shadow points for self-defence killing

[Faire]

I totally like it as a corruption roll wherever it is justified by the narration. First kill? Oh yes! Slaying a long-time opponent? Definitely! Major battle just took place in homeland? Sure! But even once at the end of the session if a fight occurred still sounds fine.

I would aim to make it narratively significant.

[Corvo]

Well, I understand the reasoning. It is similar to losing a Sanity Point in Call of Cthulhu for witnessing or participating in a shocking event. I think that J.R.R. Tolkien, as someone who saw the horrors of trench warfare in the First World War, would understand as well.
(...)

Another of the reasons is that, too many times, dealing death is the "easy" solution in RPGs. Realistically, it's a solution most people is keen on avoiding, unless they are callous, soulless individuals: the sort of people who got a lot of Shadow Points, in other words.

By the way, my players understand that Shadow points aren't a punishment, but a consequence of their character's experiences, and at the same time a sort of description of them (as in "if you can do something like this, you sure have some Shadow points")

[Corvo]

I totally like it as a corruption roll wherever it is justified by the narration. First kill? Oh yes! Slaying a long-time opponent? Definitely! Major battle just took place in homeland? Sure! But even once at the end of the session if a fight occurred still sounds fine.

I would aim to make it narratively significant.

Yes, the idea was to lend some weight to the act of killing.

[Glorelendil]

I like this idea, Corvo.

In addition to the stress of the killing, being attacked by a slavering monster trying to kill you has to be a little...upsetting.

[Corvo]

I like this idea, Corvo.

In addition to the stress of the killing, being attacked by a slavering monster trying to kill you has to be a little...upsetting.

The leader of the King's Men Fellowship likes to explain his two shadow points as the consequence of the fearsome one-two punch that a Swamp Ogre delivered him:
"I'm not the same ever since"

[Glorelendil]

I like this idea, Corvo.

In addition to the stress of the killing, being attacked by a slavering monster trying to kill you has to be a little...upsetting.

The leader of the King's Men Fellowship likes to explain his two shadow points as the consequence of the fearsome one-two punch that a Swamp Ogre delivered him:
"I'm not the same ever since"

Think about Frodo taking that Troll spear to the gut. Sure, the mithril saved him...but it's gotta give him nightmares.

[Stormcrow]

The system you are considering seems perfectly in keeping with anguish as a source of corruption as written in the rules. I think, however, that it should remain in the judgment of the Loremaster as to whether a particular slaying would affect a particular character; a general rule should not be imposed.

Since the assignment of Shadow points is up to the Loremaster, and since the exact circumstances of when they are due are left vague for interpretation, I'd say you've probably been too light in handing them out, and assigning them for traumatic events concerning death is a good idea.

ANY time a character could be shocked, disgusted, or horrified is a good time to call for a Corruption test. It's up to you to realize when those times are.

[Evening]

Everyone is going to run their game world as they see it, especially in terms of what they consider ‘right and wrong’, but I would like to suggest an alternate viewpoint. I read these threads on doling out Shadow Points and I can’t help notice they are (IMO) heavily influenced by modern timidity and squeamishness, when it come to blood, guts and mud, and what is right and wrong, according to modern mores.

We can look to the (not so distant) past and remember that husbandry also involves wringing chickens’ necks or lopping them off while alive. And let’s not forget that cows, pigs, sheep, lambs, and calves all have their throats slit and the gushing blood is collected to drink there on the spot or saved to make pudding. (Can’t you just hear the hobbits cheering on the prospect of pig trotters and blood sausage with some nicely braised lamb chops?)

And again, remember these people (both real and imagined) all do these vivisections without giving it a second thought.

For a less bloody example we can use the 'modern sensibilities' of Ahmad ibn Fadlan, a 10th arabic ambassador of sorts. He is completely disgusted and appalled by the hygiene and social norms of the Varangians (vikings) he is exposed to (no pun intended). Apparently vikings don’t wash their rears or their hands after taking a crap (gasp!), nor do they clean their junk after sex. How could Ahmad possibly know the latter? (or the former for that matter). Because these vikings apparently have no compunction or modesty when it comes to ‘using’ slave girls in front of all and sundry. We can only imagine that Ahmad did alot of shoe gazing while all this was going on. He also notes they are always armed to the teeth.

ANY time a character could be shocked, disgusted, or horrified is a good time to call for a Corruption test.

I like this statement, and I would also balance it by using the character's culture and family upbringing as context. Obviously 'citified' folk will be more easily horrified with killing/death than those who have lived hand-to-mouth all their lives and have known fathers, uncles, cousins, brothers that have killed others or have who been killed.

[Glorelendil]

I can only speak for myself, but I wasn't referring to the gross-factor of seeing brains, I was thinking of the psychological effect of killing a sentient being. For which I don't believe slaughtering chickens prepares you.

It may be that a culture used to "cheap life" would be less affected by the killing (or almost being killed) but:
1) I don't choose to imagine Tolkien's cultures as reflecting the ugliest historical examples I can find. And I don't believe he would either.
2) If such a culture did exist in the game world, I would argue the reason they are unaffected is because they already have a fair amount of Shadow.

[Azrael Macool]

I think it's a good idea. Though, I would generally only roll for Orcs if it was, like... their first battle, or it was massive and bloody or something. Spoilers for Tales From Wilderland:


(if there's a spoiler tag you can do on these forums, can someone tell me?)

The fights with the orcs in Of Leaves and Stewed Hobbits, Kinstrife and Dark Tidings, Those Who Tarry No Longer (maybe), and The Crossings of Celduin, I figured would call for Corruption tests. I don't wanna put any more info, because I don't want to spoil them too much.


And a roll after every battle with say, humans, would probably call for it. And maybe if they fight like, a lot of battles in one session. I don't know what a high amount actually is, I've only ran The Marsh Bell so far.