I really don't understand the shooting-while-in-check rules: sometimes I'm allowed to shoot and it kills the thing that was checking me (good); other times it's not allowed, and instead I lose a shield (bad). I can't see any feedback wrt which one is going to happen, but it feels really bad when it doesn't let me shoot -- why not let me shoot either way *and* steal a shield? That way it's consistent. (Or am I missing something? I understand that it will let me shoot if I would kill the thing, but since whether I kill the thing or not involves random chance, how does the game (or the player) know which will result??)
Also, it seems like when I'm in checkmate (no souls, no safe moves, no possible kills) I still have to click three times to burn through shields and die.. why? If I'm in checkmate, ie there's no solution, it should just kill me -- the current behaviour feels weird/awkward and makes me think I'm missing something. Am I?
Anyway, really fun and interesting game! :)
Viewing post in Shotgun King: The Final Checkmate comments
In situations beyond that, you can still fire - you just have to burn through all your shields first. (You get them all back after your shot, natch, assuming you lived.) There's a reason shield quantity is freely adjustable - once one is good enough at the game (or is already a chess grandmaster and isn't about to blunder), shields only get in the way.
With all the abilities/powers in the game, it can be REALLY HARD to determine whether a situation is truly hopeless or if there's a slight chance somewhere; the game ending on you automatically when there WAS a hope would be FAAAAAAR worse than what it does now, which is not even try to figure it out. I don't blame the devs on that one at all. Also, now that Black Mist is a thing, what you choose to do when it is hopeless - your "parting shot", often literal, as it were - actually can matter.
EDIT: You always get back all your lost shields after every single turn you take. Taking a shield AS you take a shot, as you suggest, makes no sense, so maybe that's what you were missing?