Armour Tests and Fellowship Focus

[zedturtle]

I'm sure this has come up before, but I want folks opinions. In one of my PbP games, a hero did the Protect Companion action and selected his Fellowship Focus. Sure enough, he was attacked, the attack hit the protecting hero and provoked an armour test that could only be passed by spending Hope.

So, does the player get the Hope back for protecting his companion? YES. Does the player get the Hope back for the armour test? MAYBE?

[Stormcrow]

You only get Hope back if you spent it invoking an attribute to directly protect or favor your fellowship focus, not because you spend it to Protect Companion.

So, does the player get the Hope back for protecting his companion? NO. Does the player get the Hope back for the protection test? YES.

[zedturtle]

You only get Hope back if you spent it invoking an attribute to directly protect or favor your fellowship focus, not because you spend it to Protect Companion.

So, does the player get the Hope back for protecting his companion? NO. Does the player get the Hope back for the protection test? YES.

Wow. I mean, you're ending up in the same place I am (1 Hope spent) but I don't understand the logic.

Taking the Protect Companion action and designating your FF as your target is, to me, the quintessential act that would define the rules for getting hope back for protecting your FF. You took an attack directed at him... why would that not count?

[Falenthal]

I would say that the Hope point spend to pass the protection test is spend to protect you, not the companion.
The companion is already protected because of the Protect Companion action.

So, I would give back the Hope point spent in the action of Protect Companion, but not the one spent on the Protection Test.

My 2 cents.

[Stormcrow]

You took an attack directed at him... why would that not count?

Because you didn't invoke an attribute bonus, the only circumstance in which you get Hope back for protecting your fellowship focus (aside from the end-of-game evaluation). You don't get Hope back merely for making sacrifices for your focus.

I would say that the Hope point spend to pass the protection test is spend to protect you, not the companion.

I consider taking a hit meant for your fellowship focus close enough to directly helping your focus to warrant the free point.

[Falenthal]

I would say that the Hope point spend to pass the protection test is spend to protect you, not the companion.

I consider taking a hit meant for your fellowship focus close enough to directly helping your focus to warrant the free point.

I might accept it without major problems.
I consider that the Protection Test is meant to save yourself, not your fellowship focus. Your FF is already saved by the fact you did a Protect Companion action, whether you get Wounded or not.

But I could accept your view too.

[Rich H]

So, does the player get the Hope back for protecting his companion? YES. Does the player get the Hope back for the armour test? MAYBE?

I'd personally go with NO (as you haven't invoked an attribute) and NO (because you're spending Hope to directly protect yourself, not your companion).

[zedturtle]

So, does the player get the Hope back for protecting his companion? YES. Does the player get the Hope back for the armour test? MAYBE?

I'd personally go with NO (as you haven't invoked an attribute) and NO (because you're spending Hope to directly protect yourself, not your companion).

Huh... I had always focused on the "action that can be considered to directly protect..." and less on the attribute bonus part. Well, I guess my choice is between 1 & 0 then.

[Rich H]

Huh... I had always focused on the "action that can be considered to directly protect..." and less on the attribute bonus part. Well, I guess my choice is between 1 & 0 then.

I could be convinced to award the point of Hope for Protect Companion, as I think you could say its within the spirit of the rules based on the quote you make above, but not for the Protection Test. So, yep, I could go with 1 point of Hope back in such situations.

[Murcushio]

Huh... I had always focused on the "action that can be considered to directly protect..." and less on the attribute bonus part. Well, I guess my choice is between 1 & 0 then.

I could be convinced to award the point of Hope for Protect Companion, as I think you could say its within the spirit of the rules based on the quote you make above

It might be within the spirit of the rules, but it's also mechanically broken and should absolutely not be allowed.

Let me give you a real-life example. A friend of mine in my game is playing a Barding, Ivarr, who is heavily optimized for defense and survivability; longsword and shield, the highest Wits score a Barding can have (4), mail armor, and the Swordmaster virtue, which adds the Encumbrance of that long sword to his Parry rating. When in Defensive Stance, his total parry is 21 and he rolls 3d for his protection checks. Once he frees up some Encumbrance he might take a Great Shield to push that up even higher.

My character, Alette, who is his Fellowship focus, is optimized for maximum damage. I wield a Keen Great Spear (soon to be a Keen, Fell, Giant-Slaying Great Spear), don't have a shield, wear only leather armor, etc.

Riddle me this: if Ivarr is allowed to reclaim the Hope point spent for using Protect Companion on Alette, his fellowship focus, what is to stop him from using it on her every single round of combat while in defensive stance, while Alette shifts into Forward stance and just stabs the holy living hell out of everything while hiding behind Ivarr's ungodly high Parry rating and superb Protection rolls? Ivarr doesn't even need to give up his own attack for that to happen! He can just stand there, blowing unlimited Hope to take every single blow meant for Alette while she rolls against very low TNs to just stab and stab.

Literally the only thing stopping us from doing this right now is that you can't reclaim the Hope point you spend on Protect Companion, which means Ivarr saves Protect Companion for when it is really needed. If he could get effectively unlimited Hope protecting me in this way, we would absolutely turn into a combo engine of doom.

It's hella broken. Don't allow it.