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."