Intimidate and Rally both replace your attack.

Prepare Shot and Escape Combat are both described as being your action.

Protect Other says that you spend 1 Hope but not that it replaces your attack/action. Hope is quite a hefty cost and it makes more sense than replacing an entire attack/action as whether you do it or not is contingent on that PC being attacked and they may be attacked multiple times.

Thoughts?

As I read Protect Other, it implies that the Hope expenditure is per attack.

"When the protected character is attacked, the protecting character may choose to spend a point of Hope and become the target of the attack in his place. The attack is resolved normally, as if the attack was originally aimed at the defending character."

The price, particulalry when coupled with the general "expense" of recovering Hope, seems hefty as a -per attack- stipulation. Without having actually played through a Protect Other situation, I am inclined to believe the price may be too steep, instead offering that the expenditure of Hope covers all attacks against the specified target for a given round. I would, however, have to run it "as written" before any instinct-based tinkering.

I could also see the argument, however, at eliminating or stretching the Hope cost in lieu of sacrificing actions, especially if the aforementioned modification were to prove "friendlier". In other words, spend the point of Hope, protect your specified target, and receive your usual alotment of actions, or skip the point of Hope, still protect your specified target, but get no other actions. In both cases, the protector is likely to take damage and more rapidly forced to opt out of protecting another due to escalated Endurance loss, Wound reception, and increasing risk.

In the end, it strikes me as a valiant, heroic maneuver that rapidly becomes quite costly to the defender, in terms of Hope, Endurance (Fatigue), and general survivability.

Added thought: as another possibility...perhaps a Hope cost could be applied with the caveat that the defender may automatically apply their Body to any protection task (as per normal Hope and protection rules), while Protecting Other sans Hope would consume actions (as above), as well as provide no other additional damage ablation.

Per my reading of the rules, I do not believe that it replaces your attacks. All of the other actions explicitly reference what happens to your attack. As this one does not, I don't think it prevents you from attacking.

I have no issue about the 1 Hope per attack cost. I just wanted to make it clear if it replaced your action as well. I don't think it does, given its interrupt like nature.

Thanks all.

Agreed.
It says Protect Companion is something you can do when fighting in defensive stance, so I think you still get your TN 12 attack roll.

I wouldn't be literal about this option applying only to one's Companions, or that it allows you to "protect another hero fighting in open or forward stance". Surely it could be used to defend the fleeing innocent farm girl from the attacking goblin, without requiring her to be in an actively combative stance at all?

And as for the Hope point cost, when you are protecting a Companion who's also your Fellowship Focus, perhaps the 'Source of Inspiration' rule should come into play. You're not spending the Hope to get an Attribute bonus on an action that directly protects or favours them, but surely this is in the same spirit? So if you take a hit for your cherished pal, at least you have the satisfaction that you've fulfilled your aim, and get to keep your Hope point for subsequent attacks?
Then again, since this is successful without any roll, you can't fail in it -- so your Hope would never be depleted. And surely the depletion of Hope should be one of the hallmarks of forlorn last stands etc.

Cheers,
--Os.

All great points.