This is something that has bothered me for some time. In my book, my main character who has been trained in the art of swordsmanship from a young age has never killed before. And this makes me wonder about how am I going to deal with the first kill. I know that it varies from character to character but I think that this is a very important point to take note of. For some reason, most books seem to gloss over this point.

Yeah, books that gloss over first kills seem pretty ridiculous. Still, the only one who can really answer this question for your character is you. The only real advice I have is to go punch a punching bag, and then bunch a person, and then take the difference between the two and multiply it by about a hundred.

My characters usually feel terrible after their first kill, vomiting, nightmares, ect. First Kill in a lot of books really irks me, the characters feel bad for a chapter… and POOF by the next chapter they don’t even remember what happened.

My characters usually feel terrible after their first kill, vomiting, nightmares, ect.

Blood, guts, vomit, sweat, fever and urine.

Yes. Exactly. I’m thinking about making my character torture and then kill a small bird, and I think the nightmares are going to happen even then. So when it comes to killing another human, just think extreme. Extreme throwing up, horrid nightmares, etc.

Also, under know circumstances use the phrase “watering the ground with the sap of men’s limbs.”

Some terrible and out of place musing by Roran in Brisingr IIRC. Not his first kill, but the lesson is not to have them wax poetic about it or else it’ll just sound stupid.

Ahem. Makes it sound like I’ve killed before.

It did, actually, especially as you went into graphic detail. Which is actually very useful – I want my characters to fight in a war, but I’m holding it off for several books and I’m not sure I can go into that sort of tactical/emotion stuff yet.

As much as I love George R.R. Martin, I think he could have handled first kills better. Especially with Arya, unless the Starks are just that awesome.

I don’t think everyone’s stock reaction to their first kill would be the same. You don’t want to fall into the trap of having a brief but intense physiological reaction (vomiting and collapsing) without any lasting effect on the character’s psyche. And by lasting effect, I don’t mean just give the character nightmares and call them changed. Try to show a difference in the way that the character thinks. Does he develop a zealous hatred of his enemies to justify his action? Does he refuse to think about it, and start suppressing all feelings of guilt? Does he take an overly intellectual approach, and begin thinking of life largely in vague, metaphysical terms? There are ways to show that murder had a lasting effect on the character without (or in addition to) the cliched vomiting and nightmares.

For Arya...she didn't really seem to understand the gravity of what she'd done. I can't remember the exact details though.

Anyway it is true...the experience would really differ from person to person. I guess I should just do what I think that character would do. (I am searching online for some interviews with war veterans.) And what about those young people? Who WANT to join the war for their country? I think that the way they deal with the first kill would really be different too. And not to mention they are using guns, so it is possible that they would feel more detached.

This is quite interesting: http://www.sheehanmiles.com/2007/04/what-does-it-feel-like-to-kill.html

I just wrote a first-kill scene for one of my supporting characters and to be honest, I didn’t lay on the extremity of his reaction too thickly. I didn’t think it was really justified because firstly, it wasn’t exactly his fault, more just dumb luck, and secondly, the person he killed was the villain and he’d been after her for a long time. It did change him, however, and not all for the better, especially because his friend was killed at about the same time. The repercussions lasted through to the end of the story. I tried to avoid writing about his nightmares, too, because nightmares have become so incredibly cliche. D: What a hassle.

Well, she is kind of a princess. With the whole King in the North thing.

^ That’s what I thought too. Also, if she’s a little girl, without much knowledge of the world, and as resilient as she appears to be (I’ve only read the first book), it might even be that it wouldn’t upset her as much as a more mature/sensitive person.

Or is that totally bogus?

Like crazy in a good way, or crazy in an insane way?

Kristin Cashore did it well— Katsa grew up killing since she was seven, so she’s quite desensitised.

But moving on, my MC does actually kill someone when she’s trying to escape, and I want to know how long to dwell on it before it becomes wangst. It’s also a catalyst for her really trying to get out of ganglands, because she doesn’t want to do that ever again.

I need to read ALL THE BOOKS

Fix’d.

Read 2, 3, and 4 simultaneously. It’s the only way.

I read this book only a few months ago and I’m completely blanking on that part. Which part again?

I read the first two Barti books, too, and I can’t remember that part. Then again, this was when I was in sixth and seventh grade, so…

Maybe it was symbolic? The second book was considerably darker from Nathaniel’s point of view. (Kitty saved it. Kitty’s are awesome.)

Maybe all of his increasingly apathetic behaviour from then on was a result of that and all the deaths they were directly responsible for a chapter later.
At the end of tAoS, Bartimaeus said that he didn’t recognise Nathaniel, only John, and Nathaniel was pleased? Maybe he used John Mandrake as a psychological/mental shell whilst he recovered.
He was still recovering from , as well, so maybe that’s why the effect wasn’t as immediate.

If this has confused you, I apologise.