Foul Reek and Protect Companion

[Baldrick0712]

The Foul Reek adversary ability says that characters must spend 1 Hope to perform any action other than an attack, including Combat Tasks. How should this be handled for a Defensive Stance character performing the Protect Companion combat task? Some possible options...

1) Spend 1 Hope when companion to protect is named, and 1 Hope to receive an attack aimed at the named companion.
2) Spend 2 Hope to receive attack aimed at the named companion
3) Ignore "Foul Reek" for this combat task

It seems a little harsh to cost the character additional Hope when they have to spend Hope to use the action.

[uhu79]

I would vote for 3) as "Protect Companion" is a defensive action and already costs Hope. I believe it to be the intention of "Foul Reek" to make them creatures so aweful that you just want to hit them or get them off you and nothing else.

[bluejay]

Pretty sure it's 1 by the RAW to be honest. Sure it's hard on the heroes but that's the point of Foul Reek. It's a particularly nasty ability that severely curtails combat options.

[uhu79]

I agree with RAW but am not sure with RAI, so there's room for interpretation.

[Baldrick0712]

Thanks. OK, I will charge the player 1 Hope to declare the "Protect Companion" combat task in addition to the 1 Hope it costs to actually receive the attack aimed at that companion. It might push the player's character into the "Miserable" condition though after a few rounds, so he might want to revise his choice of Stance at some point.

[zedturtle]

Thanks. OK, I will charge the player 1 Hope to declare the "Protect Companion" combat task in addition to the 1 Hope it costs to actually receive the attack aimed at that companion. It might push the player's character into the "Miserable" condition though after a few rounds, so he might want to revise his choice of Stance at some point.

That makes sense to me... it is supposed to be an ability that represents a greater foe. So far, the only time I've used it for was a Fell Beast. That was fun.

[Earendil]

I think requiring 1 Hope when you declare "Protect Companion" is a bit harsh. You could argue that you're not actually carrying out the action unless you spend the Hope point to protect your companion. So I would be inclined to say you must spend 2 Hope at that time, but don't need to spend any at the beginning of the round when you declare you're doing it.

[Deadmanwalking]

I think requiring 1 Hope when you declare "Protect Companion" is a bit harsh. You could argue that you're not actually carrying out the action unless you spend the Hope point to protect your companion. So I would be inclined to say you must spend 2 Hope at that time, but don't need to spend any at the beginning of the round when you declare you're doing it.

I've got to agree with this (if going with option #1 in the first place, which is a reasonable choice). The other seems unnecessarily punitive.

[Glorelendil]

I would rule 2 Hope. Just close your eyes and imagine "Foul Reek" for a moment. We're not talking a vaguely unpleasant miasma lingering in the air. It's a choking, overpowering stench, so thick you almost feel it slowing the swing of your sword. It's an effort just to force yourself closer to it's source, your eyes stinging, your vision blurring, and your throat swelling. Protect your companion? You're lucky if you can even see your companion.

[Robin Smallburrow]

This is from Francesco's "Clarifications and Amendments" Document on Protect Companion:

A character fighting in a Defensive stance may strive
to protect another hero fighting in an Open or Forward
stance. He must announce the name of the character he
wants to protect right after choosing his stance for the
coming turn.
When the protected character is attacked, the protecting
hero may choose to spend a point of Hope and become
the target of the attack in his place. The attack is resolved
using the stance of the defending character to calculate its
TN. Note that a hero who chooses this task may still attack
when his turn comes.

This reply from Francesco seems to imply that Falenthal etc. interpretation is correct, but I can't find any official reply on whether the Hope point spent can be recovered if used for the Fellowship Focus.

Francesco or Jon, you may need to send us a further clarification! I can see how either interpretation has merit BTW, and for myself I would use a 'depends on a case by case basis'.

Robin S.