Official Answer
Here's the answer from Nate:

There is nothing inherent in a control change that removes a defending character from the status of "defending." So even if the Wandering Took changes control, he is still considered to be defending the attack.

4) In the player attack sequen ce, since it is possible to play actions after calculating attack strength in step 2, what happens if an attacker is returned to the hand between step 2 and 3 (e.g. Vassal of the Windlord)? Is the attack strength reduced? If yes, why is attack strength calculated in step 2 and then damage applied in step 3? Why interrupting the player attack sequence that way, whereas in the case of enemy attacks, attack strength calculation and damage allocation are part of the same step?

A: The first line of step 3 reads, "This is done by subtracting the target enemy's defense STR from the combined attack STR of all the attacking characters." If an attacking character leaves play before this calculation, it will not be present to contribute to the calculation.

If I declare the Wandering Took as a defender and after revealing shadow cards I use his ability to give him to a different player, does the attack then count as undefended since the Took is no longer a legal defender?

I'm not following this: if you exhaust him to defend, how can you then use his ability?

We had this discussion with Sneak Attack / Son of Arnor a few months ago. The official response from Nate was that if you move an enemy mid-combat resolution (after declaring defenders, before assigning damage) then that enemy's attack will be undefended against the NEW player the enemy was moved to.

I've been mulling this over for a little while, and would love to hear an official ruling on this, but here's how I think it works:

Phase 6: Combat

Step 1: Choose an Enemy

Step 2: Declare Wandering Took as the defender

Step 3: Resolve Shadow Effect. At this point, the attack is defended. If, for example, the Dol Guldur Orcs was the shadow card, the attacking enemy would only get +1 and not +3

---- Use Wandering Took's ability to move him to another player ----

Step 4: Determine Combat Damage. Now that it's time to assign damage, the attack is undefended, and the damage would be placed on a Hero. The shadow card's effect has already been resolved in the previous step, so you shouldn't re-calculate it at this point.

This logic could also apply to a handful of other Shadow Cards if you decide to move Wandering Took after Step 3

King Spider - Defending player must choose and exhaust 1 character he controls. (2 characters instead if this attack is undefended.)

Ungoliant's Spawn - Raise defending player's threat by 4. (Raise defending player's threat by 8 instead if this attack is undefended.)

Cavern Guardian - Choose and discard 1 attachment you control. (If this attack is undefended, discard all attachments you control.)

Misty Mountain Goblins - Remove 1 progress token from the current quest. (3 progress tokens instead of this attack is undefended.)

and many more...

In all these cases, I'd argue that you could use Wandering Took to diminish the shadow card's effect, then allow the attack to go undefended onto one of your Heroes.

I had a question about attack resolution:

Player 1 is engaged by a Nazgul. The Nazgul is dealt a shadow card, declared as attacker, and Gandalf defends. The shadow card is revealed and has a shadow effect. After the effect resolves, Gandalf is chosen to be discarded.

At this point, player 2 attempts to save player 1 and plays Sneak Attack to get Son of Arnor into play. Son of Arnor's response triggers and player 2 engages the Nazgul before damage is dealt.

It's pretty clear that the Nazgul's attack is now undefended, but against whom? Is it player 1, who was attacked originally, or is it player 2, who is now engaged with the Nazgul? Or is it door number three, where the attack simply fizzles?

here are 4 steps to enemy attack resolution, and event cards/ actions can be played at the end of each step (p. 18 core rulebook):

1. Choose an enemy.

2. Declare defender.

3. Resolve shadow effect.

4. Determine combat damage.

In your example, Sneak Attack/ Son of Arnor would have to be played after step 3. Damage will then be determined against the new player with whom the Nazgul is engaged.

(Once step 4 begins, there is no opportunity to play an action until it has resolved.)

Nate French
Senior Game Designer
Fantasy Flight Games

So the real question is, when the +1/+3 shadow card is revealed and resolved, does it give the enemy an immediate attack bonus (+1) or does it give it a passive attack bonus (+1 or +3) that is applied when its attack strength is determined?

I'm actually leaning towards the second alternative.

So the real question is, when the +1/+3 shadow card is revealed and resolved, does it give the enemy an immediate attack bonus (+1) or does it give it a passive attack bonus (+1 or +3) that is applied when its attack strength is determined?

I'm actually leaning towards the second alternative.

Shadow: Deal 1 damage to each character the defending player controls. (2 damage instead if this attack is undefended.)

1) Bring to an end; settle conclusively;
2) Reach a conclusion after a discussion or deliberation
3) Understand the meaning of
...

But my point is that one could argue that the resolution of the shadow effect is that the enemy gets a passive ability saying that it has +1 attack if it is defended and +3 if it is undefended.

Shadow: Remove defending character from combat. This attack is considered undefended.

Choose and discard 1 attachment from the defending character. (If this attack is undefended, discard all attachments you control.)

Choose and discard 1 attachment you control. Discarded objective cards are returned to the staging area. (If this attack is undefended, discard all attachments you control.)

Deal 1 damage to each character the defending player controls. (2 damage instead if this attack is undefended.)

Deal 1 damage to each hero with a Clue card attached. (3 damage instead if this attack is undefended.)

Deal 1 damage to each wounded character. (2 damage instead if this attack is undefended.)

Deal 1 damage to the defending character. (Attacking enemy gets +2 [attack] instead if this attack is undefended.)

Defending player must choose and exhaust 1 character he controls. (2 characters instead if this attack is undefended.)

Defending player must discard 1 ally card from his hand or attacking enemy gets +3. (2 allies instead if this attack is undefended.)

If this attack is undefended, deal 2 additional shadow cards to attacking enemy.

If this attack is undefended, raise your threat by The Nameless Fear's [threat]

If this attack is undefended, return any current active location to the staging area. The Spider's Ring becomes the active location.

Raise defending player's threat by 4. (Raise defending player's threat by 8 instead if this attack is undefended.)

Remove 1 progress token from the current quest. (2 progress tokens instead if this attack is undefended.)

Remove 1 progress token from the current quest. (3 progress tokens instead of this attack is undefended.)

Attacking Enemy gets +1 [attack] (+3 [attack] instead if this attack is undefended.)

Attacking enemy gets +1 [attack] (+2 [attack] instead if this attack is undefended.)

Attacking enemy gets +1 [attack]. (If this attack is undefended, also raise your threat by 3.)

If this attack is undefended, attacking enemy gets +2 if it is a Scout.

If this attack is undefended, the damage must be placed on Wilyador.

I still think the cleanest solution is to resolve everything as much as possible in step 3 which would mean WT would help with all of these. But I also see the logic in delaying the "defended" evaluation of 7 (or fewer) of these effects to step 4.
Where do you draw the line?