Defensive Stance - Defend ally

[Elmoth]

If you can spend hope or not after seeing thwe attack you could decide to intercept only those attacks that do not pass over your own defence (assuming it is higher t6han that of your ally). This is not how it is supposed to work: you throw yourself in the line of attack and receive the attack instead of your ally, not after you see if it hits him and if it would or not affect you. It is acting bodyguard with all its consequences.

It DOES grant an automatic success: it prevents an attack from getting to your ally with 100% of effectiveness.

[Glorelendil]

If you can spend hope or not after seeing thwe attack you could decide to intercept only those attacks that do not pass over your own defence (assuming it is higher t6han that of your ally). This is not how it is supposed to work: you throw yourself in the line of attack and receive the attack instead of your ally, not after you see if it hits him and if it would or not affect you. It is acting bodyguard with all its consequences.

It DOES grant an automatic success: it prevents an attack from getting to your ally with 100% of effectiveness.

Ok, but that same argument could be applied to every case of Hope expenditure. But that's how it works anyway. You spend the hope after you see if your attack hit, or if your attempt at healing worked, or if you convinced Thranduil to dress up like Beorn for the 10th Anniversary of the Battle of the Five Armies Costume Ball.

That's how Hope works: it lets you guarantee a success without spending points when the dice don't need the help.

The only (slight) difference from the case at hand is that if you spent the point before, say, making an attack roll you might still miss if you rolled badly.

[Yusei]

That's how Hope works: it lets you guarantee a success without spending points when the dice don't need the help.

But you don't see the Loremaster's dice, so you can't know if they need the help or not. You can't expect the LM to tell "the attack will succeed, but if it were to target you, it would fail". Allowing spending hope after the fact would essentially require the LM to do his rolls in the open (which is fine for some, but it's a choice).

[Glorelendil]

That's how Hope works: it lets you guarantee a success without spending points when the dice don't need the help.

But you don't see the Loremaster's dice, so you can't know if they need the help or not. You can't expect the LM to tell "the attack will succeed, but if it were to target you, it would fail". Allowing spending hope after the fact would essentially require the LM to do his rolls in the open (which is fine for some, but it's a choice).

That's a totally fair point: you're 'altering' the LM's roll, not your own. (Although really you're altering the target, not the roll.) Still, you can narrate the story in a way that the binary outcome of the roll is apparent, without revealing the roll, giving the players time to react:

LM: (rolls dice) "The Orc leaps toward Perry and swings his two handed axe. The Hobbit holds up a quivering short sword with both hands in what looks like a clearly doomed attempt to parry."
Player: "I dive toward Perry, shoving him out of the way."

[Rich H]

[hat's how Hope works: it lets you guarantee a success without spending points when the dice don't need the help.

It seems to me that we may be discussing apples and oranges here - Hope can be applied in two general, but different, ways as per the design of the TOR rules.

i) Hope can be spent to invoke an attribute to a test in order to turn a failure into a success. And in this instance the player only spends the point of Hope if they know it will change failure to success.

ii) Hope can be spent elsewhere as defined in the rules in exceptional/specific circumstances. Like Elmoth stated above, "It [Defend Ally] DOES grant an automatic success: it prevents an attack from getting to your ally with 100% of effectiveness".

I think how Defend Ally works is fine when compared to other virtues. Consider the Elf virtue Stinging Arrow; that requires a Hope spend to change the successful attack to a Piercing Blow, but it doesn't guarantee the blow will produce a Wound.

[daddystabz]

We will agree to disagree. I find it inconsistent and out of whack with the rest of the themes of the game a bit.

[hat's how Hope works: it lets you guarantee a success without spending points when the dice don't need the help.

It seems to me that we may be discussing apples and oranges here - Hope can be applied in two general, but different, ways as per the design of the TOR rules.

i) Hope can be spent to invoke an attribute to a test in order to turn a failure into a success. And in this instance the player only spends the point of Hope if they know it will change failure to success.

ii) Hope can be spent elsewhere as defined in the rules in exceptional/specific circumstances. Like Elmoth stated above, "It [Defend Ally] DOES grant an automatic success: it prevents an attack from getting to your ally with 100% of effectiveness".

I think how Defend Ally works is fine when compared to other virtues. Consider the Elf virtue Stinging Arrow; that requires a Hope spend to change the successful attack to a Piercing Blow, but it doesn't guarantee the blow will produce a Wound.

[Rich H]

I find it inconsistent and out of whack with the rest of the themes of the game a bit.

What specifically? I've compared it to another Virtue that exists in the same design space - ie, allowing for the opportunity to do something but not guaranteeing the final result. If I've quoted something that also behaves in the same fashion, from a design point of view, how can Defend Ally be "out of whack"?

[Corvo]

Tangentially, I have to agree with Rich H's interpretation for game-balance reasons:
We used to play with "spend hope after you know the attack roll", and it was a bit too much effective.
We got two "defensive" PCs (one with reinforced shield, another with swordmaster) and they were able to save their fellowship focus with too much ease.
We found that once in a while is cool and dramatic, three times in six turns is anti-climatic

[DavetheLost]

Haven't had this one come up in game, yet, but here is my thinking, if you use Protect Companion to protect your Fellowship Focus you immediately regain the Hope point. Otherwise the rule seems clear to me, when you declare Defensive Stance you also declare the character you are protecting (if any), if and when that character is attacked you may spend a Hope point to become the target of the attack, this happens before any dice are rolled. If you spend the Hope point the dice are rolled and the attack is resolved against you. If you opt not to spend the hope point then the attack is resolved against your companion as normal.

You are not spending a Hope Point to change the outcome of an attack, you are changing the target. This occurs before dice are rolled. You do not know if the attack will hit your companion if you do not intervene, nor do you know if it will you. All you know is that the companion you declared you protecting is the target of an attack and that you can spend a point of Hope to shift yourself to be the target.

I would say that you can shift as many attacks on your designated companion in one combat turn as you have Hope available, picking and choosing for each one. Thus if I declare that I am protecting the Elf this turn and she is attacked by two orcs and a troll, I could opt to let either, both, or neither of the Orcs target her with their attacks while still shifting the target of the Troll's attack from her to me. This is where managing Hope points available and knowing your companion's armour and Endurance levels can add to the tactical game of combat.

[daddystabz]

Is that how it is supposed to work? If you protect your companion and that companion is your Fellowship Focus do you get the point of Hope you spent back or do you forfeit it?