LotR TCG Wiki → Card Sets:  All 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 → Forums:  TLHH CC

Author Topic: Skirmish Wound Prevention  (Read 25498 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

August 28, 2017, 05:44:46 PM
Read 25498 times

Phallen Cassidy

  • ****
  • Information Offline
  • Bowman
  • Posts: 492
Skirmish Wound Prevention
« on: August 28, 2017, 05:44:46 PM »
There are a handful of scenarios involving wounds in a skirmish that I'm looking for some more clarification for. The two cards I'll be looking at are Swiftly and Softly used in a Hobbit's skirmish (outside of Tower's Block) and King's Mail played via Gamling, Warrior of Rohan's text.

So, consider the following scenarios:
The card is played at the Free People's first opportunity (right after the skirmish begins) in a skirmish involving Desert Warrior, who has used his ability
The card is played after the Shadow Player uses Whirling Strike

In each scenario, the companion loses the skirmish without an overwhelm. How many wounds does the Hobbit have, and how many does Gamling have?

I'll go ahead and give my take on these as well. Since King's Mail says "during each skirmish phase," it seems clear to me that it would prevent any wounds after the first regardless of when it appeared in the skirmish. It's measuring the skirmish phase itself, which doesn't change. Swiftly and Softly, lacking any sort of clear measure, would seem to prevent the first wound *after* it has been played, meaning a Hobbit could still take a wound even if he'd been wounded before in the same skirmish. Thoughts?

August 29, 2017, 04:10:18 AM
Reply #1

Dictionary

  • ****
  • Information Offline
  • Marksman
  • Posts: 526
  • Duplicitous Deckbuilder
Re: Skirmish Wound Prevention
« Reply #1 on: August 29, 2017, 04:10:18 AM »
I'd agree it doesn't matter when it's used, since wounds are still being counted regardless of when the effect appears. Naturally if you go over the limit (e.g. Transfer Armor after Red Wrath) you'll have taken 2 wounds instead of one, because the effect wasn't in place to stop the additional wounds before.

I don't see why Swiftly and Softly should be different to Armor. Phase actions last until the end of the phase they're played in, so its effect would still last until the end of that skirmish - if he's already taken a wound in that skirmish, it will prevent him from taking anymore.
Visit LOTR TCG wiki for strategy articles and extra card details, contributed by various community members. All set 1 cards finished.

August 30, 2017, 05:27:16 PM
Reply #2

Phallen Cassidy

  • ****
  • Information Offline
  • Bowman
  • Posts: 492
Re: Skirmish Wound Prevention
« Reply #2 on: August 30, 2017, 05:27:16 PM »
I don't see why Swiftly and Softly should be different to Armor. Phase actions last until the end of the phase they're played in, so its effect would still last until the end of that skirmish - if he's already taken a wound in that skirmish, it will prevent him from taking anymore.

Well, there are several differences between Swiftly and Softly and Armor, besides card type. The biggest difference is in the wording. Armor specifies that "Bearer takes no more than one wound during each skirmish phase." We obviously agree that King's Mail should consider wounds acquired in the same skirmish, and I contend it's because of the wording.

Swiftly and Softly, a skirmish phase event, says "Prevent a hobbit from taking more than 1 wound." Again we agree that effect lasts until the end of the skirmish phase, so until the end of that skirmish if the Hobbit would take more than one wound, further wounds are prevented. But why should that consider wounds that took place before the event was played?

The more I think about it, the more convinced I am that Swiftly and Softly should only consider wounds placed after the event has been played.

August 31, 2017, 01:22:26 AM
Reply #3

Dictionary

  • ****
  • Information Offline
  • Marksman
  • Posts: 526
  • Duplicitous Deckbuilder
Re: Skirmish Wound Prevention
« Reply #3 on: August 31, 2017, 01:22:26 AM »
Well, there are several differences between Swiftly and Softly and Armor, besides card type. The biggest difference is in the wording. Armor specifies that "Bearer takes no more than one wound during each skirmish phase." We obviously agree that King's Mail should consider wounds acquired in the same skirmish, and I contend it's because of the wording.
Armor is a possession that is there all the time, so "during each skirmish phase" makes sense. Swiftly and Softly is an event that lasts for only 1 phase, so naturally that wording would be different.

Swiftly and Softly, a skirmish phase event, says "Prevent a hobbit from taking more than 1 wound." Again we agree that effect lasts until the end of the skirmish phase, so until the end of that skirmish if the Hobbit would take more than one wound, further wounds are prevented. But why should that consider wounds that took place before the event was played?
It doesn't say "Prevent all wounds to a hobbit after the first", it says "prevent a hobbit from taking more than one wound". That's an important distinction, since it's not the wounds being prevented directly (Similar to Too Great and Terrible). Since it applies for the phase it is played in, I still don't see why it should function any differently to Armor.
Visit LOTR TCG wiki for strategy articles and extra card details, contributed by various community members. All set 1 cards finished.

August 31, 2017, 04:35:19 AM
Reply #4

Phallen Cassidy

  • ****
  • Information Offline
  • Bowman
  • Posts: 492
Re: Skirmish Wound Prevention
« Reply #4 on: August 31, 2017, 04:35:19 AM »
Armor is a possession that is there all the time, so "during each skirmish phase" makes sense. Swiftly and Softly is an event that lasts for only 1 phase, so naturally that wording would be different.

Which is why I wanted us to consider King's Mail played on Gamling - the possession isn't there all the time. I know it's usually there, but the fact remains that there's a distinction between the text of the two cards even when played in the same circumstance. Now, perhaps naturally because the two cards are different the text should be different, but that doesn't mean the effects should be the same. You can argue Decipher's intent, but that hasn't mattered for any other card or ruling: we've got to go on what they said.

It doesn't say "Prevent all wounds to a hobbit after the first", it says "prevent a Hobbit from taking more than one wound". That's an important distinction, since it's not the wounds being prevented directly (Similar to Too Great and Terrible). Since it applies for the phase it is played in, I still don't see why it should function any differently to Armor.

I would argue that "Prevent all wounds to a Hobbit after the first" and "prevent a Hobbit from taking more than one wound" are exactly similar (same goes for Armor), but I'd like for you to elaborate on the distinction first. I don't see the connection to Too Great and Terrible. You're quite right, the card says "prevent a Hobbit from taking more than one wound," but it doesn't say to include wounds taken before that event was played. In fact, to do so would be unprecedented. "Each skirmish action lasts only for a single skirmish," but that determines when an event stops working, not when it starts. Every event starts working when it is played: pay the costs, preform the effects. I see no reason why Swiftly and Softly should be different. The effect is not to prevent a Hobbit from taking more than one wound this phase, it's to prevent a hobbit from taking more than one wound and the event is played in a skirmish phase.

August 31, 2017, 05:28:36 AM
Reply #5

Dictionary

  • ****
  • Information Offline
  • Marksman
  • Posts: 526
  • Duplicitous Deckbuilder
Re: Skirmish Wound Prevention
« Reply #5 on: August 31, 2017, 05:28:36 AM »
Which is why I wanted us to consider King's Mail played on Gamling - the possession isn't there all the time.
Ah sorry, just noticed I've been talking about Armor this whole time, even though the example was King's Mail. Aside from the fact that King's Mail is easier to bounce in and out, I think we agreed on the application of this though right?

I would argue that "Prevent all wounds to a Hobbit after the first" and "prevent a Hobbit from taking more than one wound" are exactly similar (same goes for Armor), but I'd like for you to elaborate on the distinction first. I don't see the connection to Too Great and Terrible.

Consider these hypothetical effects:
"Prevent all wounds to Gandalf until the Regroup phase"
"Prevent Gandalf from taking wounds until the Regroup phase"

The former prevents wounds as they are being dealt to Gandalf. The latter prevents Gandalf from being eligible to take wounds. I referenced TGaT because it prevents the effect, not the wounds. In other words, just because the word "prevent" was used, it does not mean that wounds are being prevented (Which has a specific meaning with regards to effects like Steward's Tomb). It is likely Decipher tried to avoid using prevent in such contexts because of potential confusion, and used things like "unable" and "cannot" instead.

You're quite right, the card says "prevent a Hobbit from taking more than one wound," but it doesn't say to include wounds taken before that event was played.
But whether or not a wound has been taken already is not tied to the event, it is simply a fact. The event isn't responding to that wound or doing anything with it.

Every event starts working when it is played: pay the costs, preform the effects. I see no reason why Swiftly and Softly should be different.
It's not different, if I play Red Wrath before Swiftly and Softly is played, playing it afterwards won't magically heal a wound.

The effect is not to prevent a Hobbit from taking more than one wound this phase, it's to prevent a hobbit from taking more than one wound and the event is played in a skirmish phase.
But it is for this phase, because that's how long effects last for. If I make Legolas strength + 2, it lasts for the duration of this phase. Not all phase effects need to specify a time constraint - Gimli's Helm for instance, does not specify how long it lasts for, but we know it know it lasts until the end of the skirmish phase.
Visit LOTR TCG wiki for strategy articles and extra card details, contributed by various community members. All set 1 cards finished.

August 31, 2017, 06:29:36 AM
Reply #6

Phallen Cassidy

  • ****
  • Information Offline
  • Bowman
  • Posts: 492
Re: Skirmish Wound Prevention
« Reply #6 on: August 31, 2017, 06:29:36 AM »
Ah, I'm afraid you're missing my point and I'm missing yours.

Ah sorry, just noticed I've been talking about Armor this whole time, even though the example was King's Mail. Aside from the fact that King's Mail is easier to bounce in and out, I think we agreed on the application of this though right?
Quite right, which is why I hadn't bothered to correct you until then.

Consider these hypothetical effects:
"Prevent all wounds to Gandalf until the Regroup phase"
"Prevent Gandalf from taking wounds until the Regroup phase"

The former prevents wounds as they are being dealt to Gandalf. The latter prevents Gandalf from being eligible to take wounds. I referenced TGaT because it prevents the effect, not the wounds. In other words, just because the word "prevent" was used, it does not mean that wounds are being prevented (Which has a specific meaning with regards to effects like Steward's Tomb). It is likely Decipher tried to avoid using prevent in such contexts because of potential confusion, and used things like "unable" and "cannot" instead.

Sure, and I understand the distinction between being unable to take a wound and preventing a wound from being taken. I don't understand how that plays into this discussion, except that a Hobbit absorbs extra wounds rather than avoiding them entirely.

But whether or not a wound has been taken already is not tied to the event, it is simply a fact. The event isn't responding to that wound or doing anything with it.

It's not different, if I play Red Wrath before Swiftly and Softly is played, playing it afterwards won't magically heal a wound.
I agree entirely, and that's my argument. "The event isn't ... doing anything with it." And of course, as with King's Mail or anything else in the game, a new restriction doesn't hinder an old effect. But if Swiftly and Softly were to prevent all future wounds in that skirmish if a Hobbit was wounded before the event was played, wouldn't that be "doing something" with a wound which you agree isn't tied to the event?

But it is for this phase, because that's how long effects last for. If I make Legolas strength + 2, it lasts for the duration of this phase. Not all phase effects need to specify a time constraint - Gimli's Helm for instance, does not specify how long it lasts for, but we know it know it lasts until the end of the skirmish phase.
I know how long the effect lasts, which is why I included a quote from the rules on how long effects last. An effect lasting for a phase is distinct from an effect being over that whole phase. My initial question (and now position) is on when an effect should start taking effect. It would be unprecedented to say that the effect takes place before it was played unless the card specifically stated that, wouldn't you agree?

I think I can summarize my stance this way: Armor provides a restriction on the number of wounds bearer takes in a given skirmish phase. Swiftly and Softly doesn't provide a skirmish-phase restriction, it provides a restriction which begins in a skirmish phase. To me, these appear to be unequal sentences.

August 31, 2017, 06:55:23 AM
Reply #7

ket_the_jet

  • *****
  • Information Offline
  • King
  • Administrator
  • Posts: 2062
  • He/Him/His
Re: Skirmish Wound Prevention
« Reply #7 on: August 31, 2017, 06:55:23 AM »
But whether or not a wound has been taken already is not tied to the event, it is simply a fact. The event isn't responding to that wound or doing anything with it.

It's not different, if I play Red Wrath before Swiftly and Softly is played, playing it afterwards won't magically heal a wound.
I agree entirely, and that's my argument. "The event isn't ... doing anything with it." And of course, as with King's Mail or anything else in the game, a new restriction doesn't hinder an old effect. But if Swiftly and Softly were to prevent all future wounds in that skirmish if a Hobbit was wounded before the event was played, wouldn't that be "doing something" with a wound which you agree isn't tied to the event?

Looks like it is time for the handy, dandy Snapshot Rule!

Quote from: CRD
Some event cards affect only cards that are currently in play, even though their effects might seem to apply to cards played later in the same turn. These events take a "snapshot" of the current game state, and only those cards are affected.
Eregion's Trails ("Maneuver: Exert a ranger to make each roaming minion strength –3 until the regroup phase.") affects only minions that are roaming when that event is played.
Deft in Their Movements (Regroup: "Spot 2 Hobbits to make each site's Shadow number –2 until the end of the turn.") affects only sites that are in play when it is played.

Naturally, as expressed, Swiftly and Softly would not heal a wound from the aforementioned Red Wrath if played afterwards.

Now here is where the card comes into question. When Swiftly and Softly is played in the aforementioned scenario, the Hobbit had taken a wound in the skirmish via Desert Spearman's game text. The wound is there and Swiftly and Softly prevents more than one wound, so Whirling Strike or a skirmish won (without an overwhelm) do not place the wound on the hobbit.

I think, if we want to get technical about the wording of Swiftly and Softly, here we go:

1. It is a skirmish event. It lasts until the end of the particular skirmish.
2. At any other site, prevent the hobbit from taking more than one wound. In theory, the event does not take into account whether the hobbit has been wounded in the skirmish, the event takes into account whether the hobbit has been wounded at that site in that skirmish.

In theory, you could use Swiftly and Softly on a ring-bearer Frodo to prevent wounds that may come from the Witch-King, Lord of the Nazgul winning a skirmish against, say, Aragorn or more than one threat being assigned, etc.
-wtk

August 31, 2017, 07:27:41 AM
Reply #8

Phallen Cassidy

  • ****
  • Information Offline
  • Bowman
  • Posts: 492
Re: Skirmish Wound Prevention
« Reply #8 on: August 31, 2017, 07:27:41 AM »
I thought someone might bring up the Snapshot Rule ;) However, I don't think it applies here.

Quote from: CRD
Some event cards affect only cards that are currently in play, even though their effects might seem to apply to cards played later in the same turn. These events take a "snapshot" of the current game state, and only those cards are affected.
Eregion's Trails ("Maneuver: Exert a ranger to make each roaming minion strength –3 until the regroup phase.") affects only minions that are roaming when that event is played.
Deft in Their Movements (Regroup: "Spot 2 Hobbits to make each site's Shadow number –2 until the end of the turn.") affects only sites that are in play when it is played.

The infamous Snapshot Rule prevents future changes from altering effects played previously. I'm having a lot of trouble saying that the length of Swiftly and Softly's effect is not what I'm bringing into question here. Once played, it lasts until the end of the skirmish. This we all agree on, I'm not disputing when the event ends. But when does it begin?

Now here is where the card comes into question. When Swiftly and Softly is played in the aforementioned scenario, the Hobbit had taken a wound in the skirmish via Desert Spearman's game text. The wound is there and Swiftly and Softly prevents more than one wound, so Whirling Strike or a skirmish won (without an overwhelm) do not place the wound on the hobbit.

How does Swiftly and Softly know how to distinguish between a wound from archery and a wound from a skirmish? We all agree that effect is to prevent a Hobbit from taking more than one wound, not prevent a hobbit from having more than one wound. If, as with every other event, the effect begins when the card is played, I don't see how it could know the difference - previous wounds are just previous wounds.

In theory, the event does not take into account whether the hobbit has been wounded in the skirmish, the event takes into account whether the hobbit has been wounded at that site in that skirmish.

I'm having a lot of trouble trying to differentiate between "wounded in the skirmish" and "wounded at that site in that skirmish," so before I respond here I'll ask you to expand.

September 02, 2017, 01:06:58 AM
Reply #9

Dictionary

  • ****
  • Information Offline
  • Marksman
  • Posts: 526
  • Duplicitous Deckbuilder
Re: Skirmish Wound Prevention
« Reply #9 on: September 02, 2017, 01:06:58 AM »
Sure, and I understand the distinction between being unable to take a wound and preventing a wound from being taken. I don't understand how that plays into this discussion, except that a Hobbit absorbs extra wounds rather than avoiding them entirely.
Because I argued that the results of Swiftly and Softly and Armor (Or King's Mail) are more or less the same (Aside from one being an event and the other being a permanent). You argued that they are different.

My initial question (and now position) is on when an effect should start taking effect. It would be unprecedented to say that the effect takes place before it was played unless the card specifically stated that, wouldn't you agree?
I'm having a lot of trouble saying that the length of Swiftly and Softly's effect is not what I'm bringing into question here. Once played, it lasts until the end of the skirmish. This we all agree on, I'm not disputing when the event ends. But when does it begin?
How does Swiftly and Softly know how to distinguish between a wound from archery and a wound from a skirmish?
When you break down Swiftly and Softly mechanically, the effect is to "Prevent a Hobbit from taking wounds". It does this based on whether or not they have taken a wound already. We all agree the effect does not apply until you play it (Red Wrath example) so I'm not sure what you're arguing here - Are you saying events can't reference things in the past? Look at Final Shot; would you say it can't know whether the fellowship has moved more than once? Or are you saying the event's wording is not clear? This is why we keep reiterating that it's a skirmish event; it lasts for the phase it's played in.

But if Swiftly and Softly were to prevent all future wounds in that skirmish if a Hobbit was wounded before the event was played, wouldn't that be "doing something" with a wound which you agree isn't tied to the event?
No, I wouldn't. The wound needn't even be there anymore; it could've been healed with Stout and Sturdy. I bring up Final Shot again; it references a past truth-based condition, but it doesn't affect the move limit. Its effect is a mere strength boost.
Visit LOTR TCG wiki for strategy articles and extra card details, contributed by various community members. All set 1 cards finished.

September 02, 2017, 07:40:38 AM
Reply #10

Phallen Cassidy

  • ****
  • Information Offline
  • Bowman
  • Posts: 492
Re: Skirmish Wound Prevention
« Reply #10 on: September 02, 2017, 07:40:38 AM »
When you break down Swiftly and Softly mechanically, the effect is to "Prevent a Hobbit from taking wounds". It does this based on whether or not they have taken a wound already.
I disagree entirely. It doesn't do this based on whether or not they have taken a wound already - it does this based on whether or not they take a wound. That's an important distinction, and my point entirely.

We all agree the effect does not apply until you play it (Red Wrath example) so I'm not sure what you're arguing here - Are you saying events can't reference things in the past? Look at Final Shot; would you say it can't know whether the fellowship has moved more than once? Or are you saying the event's wording is not clear? This is why we keep reiterating that it's a skirmish event; it lasts for the phase it's played in.
Final Shot explicitly references a previous event. If Swiftly and Softly read "prevent a Hobbit from taking more than one wound this skirmish" or "Prevent a Hobbit from taking more than one wound (or prevent all wounds, if that Hobbit has taken a wound in this skirmish)," there would be no question. This is why I keep reiterating that "lasts for the phase" does not mean "starts in the phase."

Consider the fantasy event "Until the regroup phase, make a companion strength +1 for each wound he or she takes." Consider being able to play it in any given phase - should that consider previous wounds in the same phase? If played in the Maneuver phase after being hit by Hate, should that companion be strength +1 from that wound? I would argue not. The length of the effect is until the Regroup phase, but that doesn't mean the event encompasses the phase it's played in - it starts when it starts, and it ends at the end of the specified phase.

My understanding of your argument is that it starts at the beginning of the phase it's played in. That's the only way I can make Swiftly and Softly consistent with retroactively checks for wounds. I argue that an event starts when it is played, and that would mean past wounds are simply past wounds for Swiftly and Softly.

The wound needn't even be there anymore; it could've been healed with Stout and Sturdy. I bring up Final Shot again; it references a past truth-based condition, but it doesn't affect the move limit. Its effect is a mere strength boost.

An excellent note about Final Shot, and perhaps the crux of our communication barrier. I don't see Swiftly and Softly checking for a truth-based condition (which Final Shot explicitely does), but creating one. It does not check true/false for whether a wound has been sustained, it begins checking for a wound. When that wound is placed, Swiftly and Softly then prevents all others. I don't think it should start checking for a wound before it's been played.

September 07, 2017, 02:14:46 PM
Reply #11

Dictionary

  • ****
  • Information Offline
  • Marksman
  • Posts: 526
  • Duplicitous Deckbuilder
Re: Skirmish Wound Prevention
« Reply #11 on: September 07, 2017, 02:14:46 PM »
I can see what you're arguing. I think you're right that we're reading the event differently. Makes me consider when a strength increasing event is played, does it make the companion stronger "from this point onwards" or are they now simply stronger "for this whole skirmish".

Sorry for the delayed reply. Was hoping this thread might have sparked more discussion.
Visit LOTR TCG wiki for strategy articles and extra card details, contributed by various community members. All set 1 cards finished.

September 10, 2017, 07:58:19 AM
Reply #12

BigRedMF

  • **
  • Information Offline
  • Tracker
  • Posts: 114
Re: Skirmish Wound Prevention
« Reply #12 on: September 10, 2017, 07:58:19 AM »
I don't see how the "start" of the event makes any difference. The event is not requiring the Hobbit to take a wound after being played (i.e. "any wounds after the next 1 are prevented"), it is preventing more than 1 during that entire skirmish - which includes any they have already received, since they were part of that skirmish.

September 10, 2017, 12:17:19 PM
Reply #13

Phallen Cassidy

  • ****
  • Information Offline
  • Bowman
  • Posts: 492
Re: Skirmish Wound Prevention
« Reply #13 on: September 10, 2017, 12:17:19 PM »
I don't see how the "start" of the event makes any difference. The event is not requiring the Hobbit to take a wound after being played (i.e. "any wounds after the next 1 are prevented"), it is preventing more than 1 during that entire skirmish - which includes any they have already received, since they were part of that skirmish.

But the event doesn't say that. If Swiftly and Softly read "prevent a Hobbit from taking more than one wound this skirmish" or "prevent a Hobbit from taking more than one wound (or prevent all wounds, if that Hobbit has taken a wound in this skirmish)," there would be no question. Because the event does not say either of these things, the scope of the event makes all the difference and when an event's effects begin matters a lot. I think the event does, in fact, effectively read "any wounds after the next 1 are prevented." This is because I'm arguing an event's scope is from when it is played to the end of the proper phase (the event's phase, unless otherwise stated), and it logically follows (for me) that previous wounds are irrelevant - they're outside the scope of the event.

The wound is part of that skirmish, but the event isn't. The only way I can make sense of Swiftly and Softly retroactively checking for wounds is if events take effect at the start of the phase they're played in, rather than exactly when they're played. I can't think of any other event where this would amount to much of anything, which is why I invented the event to make a companion strength +1 for every wound that companion takes. I couldn't imagine that event retroactively adding strength for wounds taken in the same phase, it's backwards to me. If you can explain it, or offer an alternative to how it could work, I'm all ears.

Now, that said... I see what ket meant when he said this:
2. At any other site, prevent the hobbit from taking more than one wound. In theory, the event does not take into account whether the hobbit has been wounded in the skirmish, the event takes into account whether the hobbit has been wounded at that site in that skirmish.

Correct me if I'm wrong, of course, but I think he's taken "At any other site, prevent a Hobbit from taking more than 1 wound." to indicate the scope of the event - any other site. Since it's a skirmish action, the effect ends at the end of the skirmish it has been played in, but the check for wounds is site-wide. This is a very attractive explanation for how Swiftly and Softly could check previous skirmish wounds for blocking, but I still have a problem with it: the scope is *too* big. If it's a site-wide action, should a Hobbit take a wound in the archery phase at that site (or maneuver, or shadow, or even another skirmish), all wounds should be blocked in a skirmish, not all but one.

The argument could be made for this to be how the event should work, and if anyone would like to take up the position I'm interested to hear it. Until then, I choose to think that "At any other site" is an indicator for which effect to use rather than how long an effect should last. That is, the effect is reduced (outside of sites 1T-5T) to simply "prevent a Hobbit from taking more than 1 wound."

September 10, 2017, 03:16:55 PM
Reply #14

sgtdraino

  • *****
  • Information Offline
  • Knight
  • Posts: 1038
  • Ranger of Ecthelion
    • Facebook
Re: Skirmish Wound Prevention
« Reply #14 on: September 10, 2017, 03:16:55 PM »
I think I would compare Swiftly and Softly to the way the skirmish action on Gimli's Helm works. Once you use it, Gimli's Helm creates a situation where, for the rest of the skirmish, every wound that comes at him is prevented. Swiftly and Softly, once you use it, creates a situation where, for the rest of the skirmish, every wound that comes at him except for the next one is prevented. It doesn't matter how many wounds the character took before you used that skirmish ability. The skirmish action sets conditions for the remainder of that skirmish phase.
"I would have followed you, my brother... my captain... my king." - Boromir