I wanted to double-check on the 1 and 3 hammer abilities of this card.

Hammer: Until the start of your next turn, add (one black die) to any Melee Attack or Ranged Attack actions targeting you or any allies in the same engagement as you.

Does this only apply to allies engaged with you or any allies in the same combat as you? We have been playing it as only helping other allies engaged with you. I was just wondering why they chose that wording; it would be crystal clear if the effect said ...any allies engaged with you.

I could kind of see a justification for allowing it help allies that are not engaged with you by a well timed, "Duck!" or "Look out!"

What do you folks think?

Engagement and not engaged, per the wording, would be my decision.

Essentially, as long as you can trace a "link" of touching bases (ie an engagement) to that ally, you are in the same engagement as they are, even if the two of you are not engaged yourselves (have bases touching). You're all essentially in the same small area, and typically if you are both engaged with the same foe, you'd be considered engaged with each other as well, although I don't think it matters for this as I said. It doesn't say "engaged with", it says "engagement".

From the Core rulebook (emphasis mine):

"To reflect two or more targets close enough to interact directly with
each other, there is a special status called engaged. Two characters
engaged with each other are in very close proximity. A soldier needs
to be engaged with a target to hit him with his sword. A barber
surgeon needs to be engaged with his patient to tend to a wound. A
group of people engaged with each other is called an engagement."

Having said that, I think it is just semantics and Dvang's take on things is still right.

We don't worry about bases touching for engaged in our group, so anyone within the engagement is considered engaged will everyone else in that engagement (friend or foe).

Engaged and engagement is the same thing. Anyone in one engagement can attacks everyone else with melee attacks in the same engagement. It just means a group of standups where there is no range between them, so even if 10 standups were standing in a long line, they would all be engaged with each other - being able to use a melee attack on anyone in the engagement.

For instance. A troll slayer and a priest are engaged with some beastment. A hunter is at meduim range with a mage, shooting into the engagement. If the priest were to use improved guarded position if would benefit the troll slayer and himself, but not the mage and hunter.

i remember an exemple from somewhere : A is engaged with B, B is engaged with C, then A is engaged with C (transitivity)

Yes. Don't forget that Engaged is essentially just a range band, NOT a status like other RPGs. Close range could be a room, and Engaged range could be approximately within a few feet (like point-blank range). Ranges are abstract, but you see what I mean. So, in general, if two groups of combatants are fighting, but the two combats are within a few feet of each, game-wise they are close enough to be considered the same engagement, as it would not take an entire maneuver to move close enough to use an action against one of the other combatants.

That's the way we took it. I was just making sure engaged==engagement in WHFRP.