Gimli's Helm, etc.

[Pepin The Breve]

Skirmish action lasts only for the skirmish they are performed. If you discard Gimli's Helm to prevent all wounds o him, the wounds would be prevented only for his skirmish. So if a companion dies in the next skirmish you can't soack up threat wounds to gimli cause the ability oh helm is not active anymore (ended in the exact moment Gimli skirmish ended). Same thing with Faramir, WP or Promise Keeping.

I think there is a diference in Skrimish Phase relating to "a character skirmish or is skirmishing". If a companion dies it still skirmishing? i guess not cause all actiuons triggered by winning or lose already took place and (by the rulebook definition) the skirmish is already over so he/she is not "skirmishing" anymore. It's like you try to use any skirmish special ability between skirmish phases. Like using Aragorn, DoFP text to heal a dwarf before threats wounds are placed. Keep in mind that Gimli's Helm and Faramir, WP text are not response actions and they last only for one skirmish, Also according to the rulebook the skirmish ends as soon as actions for wining/losing takes place (like placing wounds).

So i think this is just another gap that the rules let us to interpret, but i still belive that is the best way to look over it.

 And yeah, always love cards like High Vantage, i even taught in splashing cost 1 southron in a  deck just to make it soak all archery... But i think the main problem today is direct wounding so not sure if it would help...

[Kralik]

Pepin, I think the idea would be something like this:

Companion A is skirmishing and you know he will lose and die.
Discard Gimli's Helm or exert Gandalf for Wizard's Pupil.
Companion A loses the skirmish and dies.
Threat woulds are all prevented.

You'd have to use the skirmish text in advance. It's just yet to be determined (?) whether the text is still active. I'd go with this:

A skirmish phase ends after all actions triggered
by winning or losing that skirmish have resolved.

Taking the killing wound would be one of the actions triggered by losing, and distributing threats would be a response to the companion dying. I think these all still fall in the Skirmish phase.

[Pepin The Breve]

Pepin, I think the idea would be something like this:

Companion A is skirmishing and you know he will lose and die.
Discard Gimli's Helm or exert Gandalf for Wizard's Pupil.
Companion A loses the skirmish and dies.
Threat woulds are all prevented.

You'd have to use the skirmish text in advance. It's just yet to be determined (?) whether the text is still active. I'd go with this:

A skirmish phase ends after all actions triggered
by winning or losing that skirmish have resolved.

Taking the killing wound would be one of the actions triggered by losing, and distributing threats would be a response to the companion dying. I think these all still fall in the Skirmish phase.

But what i'm saying is: if a companion dies that skirmish ended end the effect of discarded the helm to prevent wounds end as well so you can't assign them to gimli (well you can but you will kill the litte guy )

[ket_the_jet]

But what i'm saying is: if a companion dies that skirmish ended end the effect of discarded the helm to prevent wounds end as well so you can't assign them to gimli (well you can but you will kill the litte guy )

I believe that assigning threat wounds is part of assigning the wounds of a skirmish.
-wtk

[Kralik]

But what i'm saying is: if a companion dies that skirmish ended end the effect of discarded the helm to prevent wounds end as well so you can't assign them to gimli (well you can but you will kill the litte guy )

I'd like a second opinion, but I think:

Skirmish is lost.
Wounding the character is a response to losing. This must be resolved before the skirmish phase ends.
Assigning threat wounds is a response to the character dying as a result of the wounding. This must be resolved before the killing wound is completely resolved...
Hence the skirmish is not resolved until the threats are resolved (thereby resolving the killing wound).

[RedGoldStag]

I'd like a second opinion, but I think:

Skirmish is lost.
Wounding the character is a response to losing. This must be resolved before the skirmish phase ends.
Assigning threat wounds is a response to the character dying as a result of the wounding. This must be resolved before the killing wound is completely resolved...
Hence the skirmish is not resolved until the threats are resolved (thereby resolving the killing wound).

This is correct. The skirmish phase is not over until the effects of winning/losing the skirmish have been resolved, and that, in turn, has not happened until all results of / responses to those effects have been carried out (like threats being triggered by a companion dying as the result of the skirmish), as well as responses to those responses, etc.

[Kralik]

etc. etc. etc.

Makes perfect sense to me.

[Pepin The Breve]

I See your point, and i can't find nothing that states against it, but i still think this should not be allowed. Gimli RB would be the most powerful around since you can keep add threats when he fights then you kill a companions and soak all threats on helm. In standard(where large freeps are even more common) people will start to splash Lorien Protector (13S20) to soak up all threats... Imagine that with Throngil + Aragorn's Bow, RL. Or even hunter elves that add threats to wound minions!

So judgind that obviously that issue didn't came in mind when Decipher designers were creating the cards i say that we have to go with the "no overpower option" in choosing how we read the rules.

EDIT: Use Gimli RB -> add threats to fight (full of threats?) -> add 2 burdens -> now you got Sam, SoH -> remove the burdens you just added -> Assign Sam to the meanest big nasty minion -> discard Gimli's Helm -> Say Goodbye to Sam -> Voila! you have cleaned  around 4-5 threats and 2-3 burdens using only sam and the helm and you can start laughting at the face of your opponent that runs Moria Swarm or ferny or something and taught that he would have advantage against you for keeping assigning Gimli to skirmish every turn!

[RedGoldStag]

I See your point, and i can't find nothing that states against it, but i still think this should not be allowed. Gimli RB would be the most powerful around since you can keep add threats when he fights then you kill a companions and soak all threats on helm. In standard(where large freeps are even more common) people will start to splash Lorien Protector (13S20) to soak up all threats... Imagine that with Throngil + Aragorn's Bow, RL. Or even hunter elves that add threats to wound minions!

So judgind that obviously that issue didn't came in mind when Decipher designers were creating the cards i say that we have to go with the "no overpower option" in choosing how we read the rules.

EDIT: Use Gimli RB -> add threats to fight (full of threats?) -> add 2 burdens -> now you got Sam, SoH -> remove the burdens you just added -> Assign Sam to the meanest big nasty minion -> discard Gimli's Helm -> Say Goodbye to Sam -> Voila! you have cleaned  around 4-5 threats and 2-3 burdens using only sam and the helm and you can start laughting at the face of your opponent that runs Moria Swarm or ferny or something and taught that he would have advantage against you for keeping assigning Gimli to skirmish every turn!

Intentionally killing off characters to trigger threats and soak them up with Gimli's Helm was a very common strategy to keep threats under control in Dwarf decks back in the Reflections / Mount Doom / Shadows eras. Decks often included a couple copies of the helm plus a couple of sacrificial speed bump characters like Sam, Merry FtS, Pippin HoSI, or Thrarin, Dwarven Smith with this purpose in mind. It's certainly powerful, but not something the folks at Decipher were unaware of. Whether they would have eventually gotten around to addressing this situation if the helm hadn't rotated out of the Standard environment, I don't know, but they left it alone in the pre-rotation period.

[Kralik]

Thanks for the perspective, RGStag.