I should also have stated that the PC has to use a point of Hope to step in and risk the wound instead of losing the Hound. Detailed posts on smartphones are not the greatest of bedfellows, so my last post was lacking in detail - will therefore explain it further here...James Harrison wrote:"I quickly houseruled the second bit so that you could still make a protection test."
If this the case the hounds "weakness" becomes a strict advantage, takes a wound for you when you want it - and everything is normal otherwise... I'd re-consider this house rule personally.
Anyway, I've used it in active play, for around 2 years and it works for me. The hound can take a wound for you and it's gone for at least a game session (a crappy rule in itself considering the length of a game session can vary significantly for different groups), so that's a Virtue your PC loses access to when other Virtues are not lost by other characters. This was an issue for my group as we play quite long game sessions, so the impact of losing the Hound was very significant. Game mechanics that use out-of-game time measurements are extremely poor ways of enforcing in-game elements, but I've pointed this out on a number of occasions in the past.
No, but you're losing a Virtue that (as Francesco has stated previously) should have a certain level of script protection. Yet this one doesn't. This is fine as it's saving your PC from a Wound *but* using the unmodified RAW your character either loses the Hound (a Virtue he has spent XP on) are *has* to take a Wound himself. I prefer the option of letting the PC choose between losing his Hound or taking the risk of a Protection Test (and if failed succumb to a Wound; which is a risk considering Woodsmen are often lightly armoured; something important to consider in the final analysis). I think this is fairer and more in keeping with the spirit of Virtues. The RAW left a very bitter taste in the mouth for me when we started play and that kind of reaction is not something I like in games unless it applies across the board and is necessary to the game's feel; which this isn't. Granted this house-rule does make the Hound a significant Virtue but I also wanted to deliberately promote this within my campaign as I have a significant element within my long term campaign ideas to do with the Hounds and Werewolves of Mirkwood.James Harrison wrote:And loosing the dog mechanically only looses you some boosts... not crippling.
YMMV, etc.