Shadow points for self-defence killing

[Glorelendil]

Since there is no shame or dishonor in protecting others....

...then they shouldn't be punished for saving their own lives. Instead role play....

We had a big discussion on this in another thread, but the gist is that there are two different views of what Shadow points represent. Both are valid; the choice is a matter of preference:
1) Punishment for doing evil deeds
2) Symbolic of the vulnerability to the Shadow that comes with self-doubt, inner turmoil, and guilt.

If definition #2 interests you, then killing those of your own species (and similar species) causes this kind of anguish for humans, even if justified. Sure, you can become hardened to it: and that 'hardening' is what Shadow represents. It's not a moral issue per sec, except in the sense that we seem to have evolved some forms of internal, subconscious morality (for good game theoretic reasons, according to the evolutionary psychologists.)

Action movies and adventure stories convey the impression that 'good guys' can kill 'bad guys' without being bothered by it, but real life does not work that way. Nor does being used to blood and guts prepare you for it: slaughterhouse workers and farmhands may be less disturbed by, say, a fatal car accident than an accountant or soccer mom, but they will face similar psychological challenges if they kill an intruder in their homes. If they don't...they have Shadow.

(Are hunters better able to handle it? Maybe. I wouldn't want to express an opinion without seeing research. But if they are, is that because hunting prepared them for it, or are people with more natural 'hardness' more likely to become hunters?)

It also should be noted that military actively encourages the dehumanization of opponents during war (thus the official propagation of derogatory terms like 'krauts', 'slopes', 'nips', 'ragheads', etc., in various wars) because...guess what?...soldiers finding themselves in the heat of battle simply unwilling to shoot back is a very common problem.

...if the character expresses guilt or pity or shame. Do they comment on the tragic waste of life, or regret that the incident came to pass? Have a villager or some one of interest to the dead make harsh comments or lay a guilt trip. Have a close companion or patron express concern for the character or relay the possible repercussions of the incident. Have a love interest express concern because they notice the weight the character is carrying but won't speak about.

I agree, and yet...that is what I believe Shadow points represent. We don't just ask players to role-play being good with a sword, or being hardy, or having keen eyes, or being valorous: we have stats that represent it. Shadow is the stat that represents what you wrote above. (And, yes, it's even better if they also role play it.)

Like Rocmistro, I have no dog in these agility trials (...), but I think it's an interesting question, and it may offer narratively rich options for increasing the amount of Shadow in the game, as many people seem to be reporting that Shadow isn't an issue for their players.

[Evening]

Are hunters better able to handle it? Maybe. I wouldn't want to express an opinion without seeing research.

I'm always leery of those types of 'research' since they tend to be heavily speculative with a biased agenda, either pro or against. People who hunt usually begin at a young age between 8-12. It's like riding a bicycle or driving a car for the first time. It's scary at first, but after while it (killing) just becomes second nature. What you don't keep to eat, you give away to people you know will eat it.

It also should be noted that military actively encourages the dehumanization of opponents during war (thus the official propagation of derogatory terms like 'krauts', 'slopes', 'nips', 'ragheads', etc., in various wars)

You make it sound like they coined those words and encouraged their use. If by official propagation you mean they didn't actively discourage the use of those words, doesn't a govt at war have more pressing issues than being 'pc' ? (you can add 'humps', 'sandies', jq's, and 'knuckleheads' to the list that isn't actively discouraged.) And is being called a caricature like 'kraut' really dehumanizing? The first thing that pops in my head for dehumanizing is the japanese military telling their soldiers and their civilian population that when an american joins the marines, he proves his loyalty to the corp by killing a family member.

because...guess what?...soldiers finding themselves in the heat of battle simply unwilling to shoot back is a very common problem.

There are all kinds of reasons, but mostly the fear of getting your head blown off is the motivator. And that's more of training issue than a moral one. People that have that kind of baggage don't usually pull that kind of duty anyway. They're assigned elsewhere. That or busted.

[poosticks7]

If killing becomes easy then surely that is the road to shadow?

"I do not slay man or beast needlessly, and not gladly even when it is needed."

Perhaps Gimli and Legolas were totting up shadow pts - the only way both could cope was to turn it into a grim game.

Now killing fellow men/elves/dwarves etc is certainly a source of anguish and should call for a test in my book.

"The enemy? His sense of duty was no less than yours, I deem. You wonder what his name is, where he came from. And if he was really evil at heart. What lies or threats led him on this long march from home. If he would not rather have stayed there ... in peace. War will make corpses of us all."

As to orcs/trolls etc - I would rather describe it as the anguish of war, of surviving once more, it takes a toll on even the hardiest soul.

I've heard no one here mention seeing friends/allies cut down in battle (perhaps that is straying from the initial topic).

Survivors guilt is another cause of anguish, why was I spared when so many fell?

[Seosaidh]

I've heard no one here mention seeing friends/allies cut down in battle (perhaps that is straying from the initial topic).

Survivors guilt is another cause of anguish, why was I spared when so many fell?

So this is partially implemented in the Fellowship Focus rules in that if your fellowship focus is even wounded, you get a shadow point, and if they are killed you get 3 points (pg 134 of the revised rules). You could implement a survivors guilt by ruling that if a member of the company dies, then it falls into row 1 or 2 of the Anguish table (pg 223 of the Revised rulebook).

[poosticks7]

I was actually referring to allies outside the fellowship. Take the Kinstrife battle as an example - surely some Beornings die in that battle.