AoS 2 - Legion Of Azgorh Discussion

[mattbarker]

58 minutes ago, Televiper11 said:

I'd also really like to see some evidence regarding Blackshard Armor negating MWs. I don't think it does as the Armor Of Bazherak The Cruel clearly states it negates both wounds & MWs. The difference in the language leads me to believe that Blackshard does not negate MW.

From the rule book

"After they(mortal wounds) have been allocated, a mortal wound is treated on the same manner as any other wound for all rules purposes"

we negate the first wound each phase. Therefore, after allocating its effect on the unit, it is no different. So it applies. At least are the rules I play by

[Lord Krungharr]

5 hours ago, Televiper11 said:

I'd also really like to see some evidence regarding Blackshard Armor negating MWs. I don't think it does as the Armor Of Bazherak The Cruel clearly states it negates both wounds & MWs. The difference in the language leads me to believe that Blackshard does not negate MW.

I totally agree; in AoS they always (as far as I can remember of the units I've used) specify wounds AND mortal wounds, or just one or the other.

I put the Cloak on the Castellan for an 8" fly, and run, and use a CP to get him to run 6" if really needed, which gets him to a 14" move, and flying of course.  That gets him into a good position for turn 2, which is hopefully when the Skullcrackers are in range to attack.  And if the enemy is closing in before turn 2, which is often the case, then no CP is needed.  But I have the extra one from the Artillery Train battalion to use for the +1 to wound ability.  Worked super well against the Mangler Squigs and Rogue Idol in one game.   He can thwack people in combat reasonably well too.

[Grdaat]

29 minutes ago, Lord Krungharr said:

I totally agree; in AoS they always (as far as I can remember of the units I've used) specify wounds AND mortal wounds, or just one or the other.

I put the Cloak on the Castellan for an 8" fly, and run, and use a CP to get him to run 6" if really needed, which gets him to a 14" move, and flying of course.  That gets him into a good position for turn 2, which is hopefully when the Skullcrackers are in range to attack.  And if the enemy is closing in before turn 2, which is often the case, then no CP is needed.  But I have the extra one from the Artillery Train battalion to use for the +1 to wound ability.  Worked super well against the Mangler Squigs and Rogue Idol in one game.   He can thwack people in combat reasonably well too.

I'm new here but I have to agree with mattbarker, the wound is negated after it's allocated, and at that point mortal wounds and wounds are treated as the same thing. The reason the armour and other gear specify mortal wounds is because it's allowing you to take a save roll against them (aka before they're allocated), and normally you cannot do that. Since the armour's effect happens once there's technically no difference between the two, then you should be able to negate it.

[Grdaat]

35 minutes ago, Lord Krungharr said:

I totally agree; in AoS they always (as far as I can remember of the units I've used) specify wounds AND mortal wounds, or just one or the other.

I put the Cloak on the Castellan for an 8" fly, and run, and use a CP to get him to run 6" if really needed, which gets him to a 14" move, and flying of course.  That gets him into a good position for turn 2, which is hopefully when the Skullcrackers are in range to attack.  And if the enemy is closing in before turn 2, which is often the case, then no CP is needed.  But I have the extra one from the Artillery Train battalion to use for the +1 to wound ability.  Worked super well against the Mangler Squigs and Rogue Idol in one game.   He can thwack people in combat reasonably well too.

EDIT: Sorry for the double-post, I'm new here and tried posting the first reply as a guest. For whatever reason it didn't show up so I wrote this second reply.

Edited July 12, 2019 by Grdaat
Accidentally double-posted

[Grdaat]

So here's something I just realized to help people who are still separating wounds and mortal wounds even after they've been allocated (and so think the armour can't negate them). You know how there are some models who can heal themselves or others? If Mortal wounds and wounds were always kept separate, you would never be able to heal damage done by mortal wounds, since there isn't a single datasheet in the game that says you can heal mortal wounds that were done to a model/unit.

[mattbarker]

1 hour ago, Grdaat said:

So here's something I just realized to help people who are still separating wounds and mortal wounds even after they've been allocated (and so think the armour can't negate them). You know how there are some models who can heal themselves or others? If Mortal wounds and wounds were always kept separate, you would never be able to heal damage done by mortal wounds, since there isn't a single datasheet in the game that says you can heal mortal wounds that were done to a model/unit.

Exactly! Amazing alternative example! 

Once allocated they all count as the same. I'm totally printing this out as a reminder next time I get asked this...

[Grdaat]

Hey so I also came across some evidence that helps support the idea that the Chaos Dwarfs Blackshard Battalion would be able to both charge and pile in, while still retaining the bonuses. Here's a bit from the Core Rules designer's commentary:

"Q: Some abilities allow a model to make a move out of sequence (in the hero phase, for example), or to make a specific type of move (a ‘6" retreat move’, for example). Can I run when I make these moves?

A: You can only run if the ability refers to making a ‘normal move’ (which includes any move made ‘as if it were the movement phase’) and the ability doesn’t specify the distance of the move. Note that the restrictions that apply to normal moves (not moving within 3" of the enemy, and having to retreat if they start within 3" of the enemy) also apply to normal moves made in any other phase. Also note that the increase to the unit’s Move characteristic for running only applies to that move."

So the Blackshard Battalion says "a move", not any kind of move or movement as if it were the movement phase, which is odd since it is still vague. I'd find it even stranger though if "a move" wasn't supposed to mean "a normal move", which can only happen if it's the movement phase, instead meant any kind of move, which would mess you up if you wanted to pile in.

You probably could still argue it either way, so it's something you need to talk with your opponent about in advance.

Unfortunately here's something else I found in the same designer's commentary:

"Q: If an ability says it negates a wound, will it also negate a mortal wound?

A: No, unless the ability specifically says it negates mortal wounds. By the same token, an ability that negates only mortal wounds will not negate wounds."

So sorry to say, but the bit in the rulebook stating "After they have been allocated, a mortal wound is treated in the same manner as any other wound for all rules purposes" should be ignored. You actually still do treat them differently for almost all rules purposes (with healing being the only exception I can think of).

[mattbarker]

39 minutes ago, Grdaat said:

Hey so I also came across some evidence that helps support the idea that the Chaos Dwarfs Blackshard Battalion would be able to both charge and pile in, while still retaining the bonuses. Here's a bit from the Core Rules designer's commentary:

"Q: Some abilities allow a model to make a move out of sequence (in the hero phase, for example), or to make a specific type of move (a ‘6" retreat move’, for example). Can I run when I make these moves?

A: You can only run if the ability refers to making a ‘normal move’ (which includes any move made ‘as if it were the movement phase’) and the ability doesn’t specify the distance of the move. Note that the restrictions that apply to normal moves (not moving within 3" of the enemy, and having to retreat if they start within 3" of the enemy) also apply to normal moves made in any other phase. Also note that the increase to the unit’s Move characteristic for running only applies to that move."

So the Blackshard Battalion says "a move", not any kind of move or movement as if it were the movement phase, which is odd since it is still vague. I'd find it even stranger though if "a move" wasn't supposed to mean "a normal move", which can only happen if it's the movement phase, instead meant any kind of move, which would mess you up if you wanted to pile in.

You probably could still argue it either way, so it's something you need to talk with your opponent about in advance.

Unfortunately here's something else I found in the same designer's commentary:

"Q: If an ability says it negates a wound, will it also negate a mortal wound?

A: No, unless the ability specifically says it negates mortal wounds. By the same token, an ability that negates only mortal wounds will not negate wounds."

So sorry to say, but the bit in the rulebook stating "After they have been allocated, a mortal wound is treated in the same manner as any other wound for all rules purposes" should be ignored. You actually still do treat them differently for almost all rules purposes (with healing being the only exception I can think of).

I still think it applies. Only due to the nature of the wording.

Our ability doesn't negate a mortal wound / regular wound. Its not a save or a shrug or a negation. It simply states after all wounds have been allocated, ignore the first one. Important part being once allocated. Not before they're allocated (i.e a save or pre-check or a type screening where a distinction is made between the type of wound). As such  the core rules, which have no FAQ comment to imply they are anything other than as written, applies so they're treated the same, the same as healing.

Our ability is a retrospective thing, not a pre-allocation.

[MrCharisma]

Last night I caught up with 2 of Australia's best Legion of Azgorh players, Gabe Hanna & Rhys McGlinn who notably came 21st out of 196 players at CanCon 2019 with his Chaos Dwarfs. Apologies in advance if Gabe's mic is too soft, we did the best we could during the stream to improve but you can only do so much when you're live;

 

[Grdaat]

8 hours ago, mattbarker said:

I still think it applies. Only due to the nature of the wording.

Our ability doesn't negate a mortal wound / regular wound. Its not a save or a shrug or a negation. It simply states after all wounds have been allocated, ignore the first one. Important part being once allocated. Not before they're allocated (i.e a save or pre-check or a type screening where a distinction is made between the type of wound). As such  the core rules, which have no FAQ comment to imply they are anything other than as written, applies so they're treated the same, the same as healing.

Our ability is a retrospective thing, not a pre-allocation.

It's not a negation? Let's check the rules:

"The first wound that is allocated to each unit with this battle trait in each shooting phase and each combat phase is negated."

Well I think that's pretty clear, it's negation. After thinking on it you probably could argue that it still works since when it takes effect mortal wounds no longer exist, so technically you're not negating a mortal wound.

Also after thinking on it more I think arguing that it works when mortal wounds no longer exist is the only way there isn't a contradiction between the designer's commentary and the actual rules, so with that logic you'd still be able to get the negation.

Edited July 12, 2019 by Grdaat
Realized something later.

[mattbarker]

1 hour ago, Grdaat said:

It's not a negation? Let's check the rules:

"The first wound that is allocated to each unit with this battle trait in each shooting phase and each combat phase is negated."

Well I think that's pretty clear, it's negation. After thinking on it you probably could argue that it still works since when it takes effect mortal wounds no longer exist, so technically you're not negating a mortal wound.

Also after thinking on it more I think arguing that it works when mortal wounds no longer exist is the only way there isn't a contradiction between the designer's commentary and the actual rules, so with that logic you'd still be able to get the negation.

That's the only premise I'd argue it works as it's after its allocated. No argument about allocating the wound. But when you evaluate the effect on the unit, it's just a number that's treated the same. 

Thank you for the opinions by the way. Not dismissing as the right or wrong answer, I genuinely don't know 100% so only have my own justification which I like to see hold up to scrutiny! 

[Charly2912]

Is there any information about an update on the legion from Forgeworld?

What would your wishes  be and what do you think about mine? We certainly wont get all of those or maybe even none, but here they  are:

 

Traits:

Blackshard Armor: Define the wound thing and is fine though. Including heroe phase would be awesome

Burning Skies: Maybe sth to differ from the actual realm feature? 

 

Leaders:

Tau'ruk: can stay pointswise, but would be still ok even with +20 Pts. If he should go up, we might see him make bullcentaurs batteline

Daemonsmith: I think he is perfect where he is

Draz: First of all his Wound negation and reflect could work on everything, his spell could be a 7 (6 in aqshy or he could got get a general + 1 to cast and unbind there), double sword and horn attacks and a point reduction of 20. Thats all I hope for  

BSB: Might let reroll all wounds, not only melee

Castellan: 20 Points down, maybe 16" or more on his command ability

Shartor: 20 Points down at least

Units:

Ironsworn and Fireglaives are ok I guess. Still missing the bomb dropin FG leader though. Is there any other unit with a worse champion than FGs have? 🤬 Maybe a bigger horde discount on  IS to keep up with the old points so 210/30 and a small one for the FG like 270/30

K'daai: They should probally be like 160 pts instead of 140. The same horde discount would be amazin though. 4+ ethereal instead of 5+.

Centaurs: Switch pointswise with actual kdaii from 180 to 140 including the horde discount (not that they are even near of profiting from a horde like kdaai). 

 

Warmachines:

Rocket launcher: 100 Pts.

Magma Cannon: 120 Pts.

Dreadquake: 140 Pts.

Iron Daemon: 160 Pts.

Skullcracker: is fine

 

Battalions:

Drop all for 20, rather 40 pts. 

 

Endless Spells/Terrain Piece:

I would go for a LoA terrain piece and endless spell from FW if  they should bring us to that status of the game (and probally even go for more from the other stuff with all those changes coming true 😂)

Edited July 13, 2019 by Charly2912

[kenshin620]

3 hours ago, Charly2912 said:

Is there any information about an update on the legion from Forgeworld?

 

I think at this point it'd be easier to hope for a plastic hellcannon than a proper FW overhaul.

[Televiper11]

Have a round robin tournament this Sat vs. Nurgle, Sylvaneth, & Beastclaw Raiders. Here is my list:

Leaders

Bull Centaur Taur'ruk (160)

- General

- Trait: Grotesque 

- Artefact: Armour of Bazherak the Cruel 

Daemonsmith (100)

- Darkforged Weapon

Infernal Guard Castellan (120)

- Darkforged Weapon & Pyrelock Pistol

- Artefact: Chalice of Blood and Darkness 

Chaos Sorcerer Lord (160)

- Runestaff

- Mark of Chaos: Nurgle

- Allies

Battleline

10 x Infernal Guard Ironsworn (90)

10 x Infernal Guard Fireglaives (100)

10 x Infernal Guard Fireglaives (100)

Units

9 x K'Daai Fireborn (420)

War Machines

Iron Daemon War Engine (180)

Deathshrieker Rocket Launcher (120)

Magma Cannon (140)

Magma Cannon (140)

Battalions

Hashut's Wrath Artillery Train (120)

Endless Spells / Terrain

Soulsnare Shackles (40)

Total: 1990 / 2000

Extra Command Points: 1

Allies: 160 / 400

Wounds: 108

[Lord Krungharr]

Personally I would dump the Shackles and take the third Magma Cannon.  But I've burned myself with those Shackles, maybe I need to watch a safety video on their proper usage.

[Zedrenael]

On 7/13/2019 at 5:56 AM, Charly2912 said:

Is there any information about an update on the legion from Forgeworld?

Well now that Forgeworld and Games Workshop officially merged in the rules departments. It’s going to be a while before we see another update.

[Entombet]

11 hours ago, Zedrenael said:

Well now that Forgeworld and Games Workshop officially merged in the rules departments. It’s going to be a while before we see another update.

If ever...

[Televiper11]

On 7/16/2019 at 1:18 PM, Lord Krungharr said:

Personally I would dump the Shackles and take the third Magma Cannon.  But I've burned myself with those Shackles, maybe I need to watch a safety video on their proper usage.

Wish I had a third Magma to take.

I need the Shackles, I think. I can use them to block BCR charges, as well as zone out the board to prevent further Wyldwood summons.

[Lord Krungharr]

Ah ha, good point; I forget that the spells can't be topped off by other models.  Zoning out the board is a good reason to have them.   Good reason for that Warp Lightning Vortex in my Skaven army, and the Dyreflock for my Beasts too!

[Zedrenael]

Battle Report

 

this is is a battle report of my Legion of Azgorh for a narrative meeting engagement campaign. It’s week 2 so we only get our spearheads and main bodies. I did make the mistake of having 4 of a single warscroll but it was corrected in the next game and will be for future games. 

[Charly2912]

@Zedrenael

 

cool batrep! give us more of those. What artifact is that on your DS?

 

PS: seems like you forgot about your blackshard armour trait. Could have saved some dwarfs 

Edited July 19, 2019 by Charly2912

[Zedrenael]

6 minutes ago, Charly2912 said:

@Zedrenael

 

cool batrep! give us more of those. What artifact is that on your DS?

 

PS: seems like you forgot about your blackshard armour trait. Could have saved some dwarfs 

Yeah really only my third time playing them so I for got it a lot I do have another bat rep where I remember it a little bit more. You can find it on that youtube channel. I will be posting the rest of my campaign games there as well. Hopefully remembering my rule better next time. 

 

The artifact is the Realmstone Wand from the Narrative Campaign and is already level 5.

 

So I can cast and unbind 1 additional spell.

I get 2 to casting

I ignore spell effects on a 2+ but if I roll a 4+ the caster takes D3 mortal wounds. 

I can re-roll casting rolls for wizards within 12".

I know every spell for every wizard on the battle. 

[Televiper11]

I put up a ******-poor performance in my round robin tournament, suffering major losses to Beastclaw Raiders & Sylvaneth and a minor loss to Nurgle. Deployment errors were my biggest issue. I'm re-thinking my list and definitely dropping the artillery battalion, not worth the points.

[Lord Krungharr]

I'm on the fence about the Artillery Train too, as the Daemonsmith is pretty easy to snipe out, but it does net another relic which if you have some mighty heroes could be of help, plus the extra CP.   However, we will almost lose that first turn initiative so perhaps not worth it at all.  Sure do like that extra magma cannon range though!

Deployment can certainly be a tricky business.

I feel Azgorh needs to take the Boatman or Bridge endless spell for transport purposes to be truly competitive, and Gutrot with Blightkings helps get into the backfield too.  

For my next games with them I'm going full hard engines, with the Artillery Train, another Magma, and 3 Skullcrackers (+30 Fireglaives, Castellan).  Really just want to see how many kill points I can get.  Moral victories are as encouraging for me as actual victories

[Grdaat]

I'm not a fan of the artillery train just because I'd rather have Magma Cannons and more Battleline/ K'daai instead of the Rockets and Mortar. Getting extra CP and an extra item is good and all, but I don't think the cost is worth it in this case.