Are Mortal Wounds a good mechanic?

[AaronWilson]

Hi all, I have been speaking to a lot of buddies today about Mortal Wounds as a mechanic.  Now I appreciate the answer is more nuanced then yes / no, as most answers will most likely be "Yes, but not as abundant" but as a core rule, a wound that negates any sort of armour save are you fan of Mortal Wounds, yes / no?

[wayniac]

I am not, but a big reason why is because they are so prevalent. They seem to exist as a band-aid fix to having 1+ saves or some other nonsense, which is already poor design in the first place. When MWs were rare it was a lot better but when you can spit out a ton of mortal wounds it becomes silly. 

[Enoby]

I like them in concept but not in all implementations. For spells in AoS 0 they were fine - you might get hit by an arcane bolt but it was 18" away, had a chance to fail, and also a chance to be dispelled. There were also some 6+ to hit MWs, but again they could be turned off by a -1 to hit (or made stronger with a +1). MWs felt rate and powerful, whereas now in some armies they feel too liberally integrated. 

I think the main potential issue with MWs is that, asides from ward saves, there's no interaction with the wounds. If it's caused by a spell that's fine because dispelling was (or at least should be) a potential here. If it's an automatic ability or at least an ability that has little to no counterplay, then I think MWs are boring. 

I like MWs to feel like a small reward - you manage to cast a spell so you are rewarded with unsavable wounds, or you lined up a charge and so do some unavoidable chip damage. Basically they're good in small numbers when a condition has to be met that the opponent can stop (e.g. dispelling or charging first), but I think they're poor when they're en masse and without much counterplay. 

[Doko]

Yes it is great and the game must have these cant be saved wounds for very special attacks as magic or dragon breath.

The problem is that with the powercreep we have too much regular units(hey sentinels and every lumineth) with mortal wounds and also they arent the supposed cant save againsth when we have(hey again armywide teclis 5++) so much save after save around.

The mortal wounds are great but as special mechanic and rare

Save after save also must be something very rare and special

 

[PraetorDragoon]

As a specific mechanic, I think they're fine. Sometimes an effect that causes a wound that cannot be saved can feel impressive and useful.

What I do think is that mortal wounds in combination with how AoS resolves attacks closed the door to automatic wound mechanics. I.E. spells or effects that inflict d6 damage 1 automatic wounds (you still roll saves) or similiar could have been an interesting mechanic.

[PJetski]

Mortal wounds create an interesting rock-paper-scissors mechanic.

Some units have a high number of models with many weak attacks that don't do much against good armor saves. Good armor saves aren't very good against mortal wounds. Mortal wounds aren't efficient against high wound targets.

Hordes < Elites < Mortal Wounds < Hordes

Current game has too many mortal wound abilities and spells. There was massive power creep in AOS 2.

[El Syf]

I just feel that almost everything has some sort of save against them these days which lessens their importance.

Take for example killing blow in fantasy; it may be time has addled my brain but that from what I recall went off on 6's no armor save but ward saves were allowed. Pretty similar to mortal wounds however not that many units had killing blow and not that many units had saves against it other than heroes/lords.

Lorewise okay we've had the necroquake and everything has gone a bit mad but it feels like it was overcooked table top wise and they've since been giving units and armies protection against it as a result.

[dmorley21]

I voted yes.

As others have mentioned, they're fine for spells. I also like them for impact hits type of attacks (rolling for them after a successful charge), as you can play against getting charged by something like a monster or cavalry. 

As for models that get mortal wounds, I'd like to see it happen on the to wound roll instead of the to hit roll. This would make it much harder to amass them and would help balance units that can spam mortal wounds IMO. 

[zilberfrid]

In a yes/no, I vote no.

They are too prevalent now and far from equally distributed, and ward saves are a hard have/have not due to that.

Between current mortal wounds and no mortal wounds, I choose the latter.

[mojojojo101]

1 hour ago, El Syf said:

I just feel that almost everything has some sort of save against them these days which lessens their importance.

Take for example killing blow in fantasy; it may be time has addled my brain but that from what I recall went off on 6's no armor save but ward saves were allowed. Pretty similar to mortal wounds however not that many units had killing blow and not that many units had saves against it other than heroes/lords.

Lorewise okay we've had the necroquake and everything has gone a bit mad but it feels like it was overcooked table top wise and they've since been giving units and armies protection against it as a result.

I think this is part of a general escalation of the damage in the game, at least since I started playing about 2 years ago. Because damage goes up > saves go up > need to add more mortal wounds to get through that > need to add more ward saves to counteract that.

I like Mortal Wounds, I quite like mortal wounds on 6's to hit/wound/reflect on a save (in addition I'm less a fan of)  but I do hope 3.0 tones them down along with damage in general.

[xking]

2 hours ago, AaronWilson said:

Hi all, I have been speaking to a lot of buddies today about Mortal Wounds as a mechanic.  Now I appreciate the answer is more nuanced then yes / no, as most answers will most likely be "Yes, but not as abundant" but as a core rule, a wound that negates any sort of armour save are you fan of Mortal Wounds, yes / no?

Yes, No invulnerable units

[Beer & Pretzels Gamer]

I think MWs are an excellent game mechanic in the sense that they are exactly the type of “rule breaking” (no base save) that can add flavor to the game.  I feel the same way about after saves.  The problem as I experience it on the tabletop is that these “rule breaking” mechanics require a fully thought and and relatively consistent game design philosophy.  That is what appears lacking in AoS in both these areas (particularly at the degree of power creep we are seeing as 2.0 enters it’s entropy...) as the use/allocation of mortal wounds has no real overarching logic to it.  Certainly for individual models a a logic can be found but when looked at holistically it just doesn’t have any intellectual coherency.  

[JonnyTheKing]

I'd but 50/50 as my answer if there was one. Mortal wounds are fine as a mechanic if used lightly, however recent books (Looking at you Lumineth) perhaps have them way too much too point in which it becomes a lazy crutch mechanic for an army and I'd argue that it is now one of my main gripes with the game in its current form as it just makes games boring in some situations and frustrating in others. It's one of the main reasons people hate Lumineth right now because they have mortal wounds access very easily on one of the most broken warscrolls in the game (Sentinels)

[Pyrescribe]

My Lumineth Scinari scholars have pored over this question; and through deep contemplation, tribulation and eventual enlightenment, they have come to an objective, unbiased, completely reasonable and unquestionable conclusion: Yes.

[NinthMusketeer]

It is good you didn't put 'yes but there are too many of them' as an option because it would take all the votes 🤣

[Sartxac]

The mortal wounds aren't a good mechanic because everyone do mortal wounds, the mortal wounds should be like warhammer 40k, only for magicians and a few number of special units like precise assasins and heroes. 

[MitGas]

I think they're there because we lost the whole WS/S/T thing with AoS. With only a d6 to work with, it's difficult to introduce nuance into the game.... all the different figures stats are way too close to each other now. Back in WHFB we had Chaos Lords and Elfs  that were so skilled combatants, a normal figure had almost no chance at wounding them.... and attacks with enough bite can't be better than 2+ now which can easily become much weaker with a malus or if the receiving unit gets buffed.... I believe that is why they've introduced MW.

While I loved the amazing stats of Chaos champions (and that elfs didn't have high toughness as a drawback but were really skilled) and the varied unit/hero profiles, I gotta say how much more fun the simpler rules are ingame to me....

So yeah, I like them but IMO not every spell would need to deal MWs for example.

[Ragest]

Go and play vs idk, alrith or obr without mw and you will know what “unfun” means

[RocketPropelledGrenade]

I liked the abundance of Mortal Wounds more back when multiple negates were possible, as it made them a sort of pick/counter-pick gameplay option. I have since become worried that they are staying too abundant relative to defensive capabilities. In general, Warhammer games are often in an arms race with themselves, where offense has been steadily outstripping defense for years now. It's worse in 40k, where the defensive profiles have remained almost unchanged despite massively increased firepower (certain recent changes there like Marine Wounds increases have helped a bit), but still remains a problem in AoS. How big of one? I'm not sure. But I don't hate them or think they need to go away altogether. I just think we need to see more counterplay available to the kind of overwhelming offense some lists/factions are capable of.

[Televiper11]

I voted no for one reason: I want MWs in melee & shooting to trigger on the wound roll, not the hit roll. That makes more logical sense to me, and would draw down a lot of the spam we see for melee/shooting MWs.

For certain things like magic and MawKrusha charges and stuff: lots of MW makes sense as a mechanic. I think the occasional shrug is appropriate. But both are spammed now to a point of passivity. 

[Cronotekk]

Yes, when they are used to represent magical and extraordinary attacks, sparingly, they are good.

However they are used so frequently now that rend and armor are practically useless stats, whoever can output more mortal wounds tend to win the game. It's why magic heavy factions are so dominant right now.

They need to reduce the mortal wound bloat in this game, it's getting completely insane. We very quickly went from rend -1 being good, to rend -2, to the previous too becoming irrelevant due to the sheer volume of mortal wounds at play nowadays.

[Joseph Mackay]

I voted no.

Im fine with mortal wounds from spells, monster breath attacks and ‘impact hits’ from charging. Every other form of mortal wound needs to go away.

AoS 1 mortal wounds were very rare (except for Stormcast), however mortal wounds became a necessary evil to counter the 2+ rerolling save Liberators, and then next thing you know almost everyone has mortal wounds but not everyone has defence against them

[TheMuphinMan]

mortal wounds on 6+ to hit on a unit that just has high attack output (like the old bloodletter bombs from when bloodsecrator portals stacked) is bad but mortals on 6+ to wound seems alright for elite units.

flavorful mortal wounds like the nurgling disease if the wounded model survives also seem fitting.

I think they should be a bonus rather than something you fish for

[Kadeton]

Yes. They're a useful element of the abstraction, a mechanic for saying "armour and resilience offer no defence against this attack", which is entirely appropriate for things like hearing the scream of a Terrorgheist, being zapped by an Arcane Bolt, or being trampled to death by a Mawkrusha.

That said, I don't think they should ever have been used as an abstraction for "this mundane attack is extra deadly". Anything that uses the Attack Sequence should use it consistently, and vary the To Wound and AP values for special effects, rather than short-circuiting to Mortal Wounds on certain rolls.

[Perturbato]

3 hours ago, TheMuphinMan said:

mortal wounds on 6+ to hit on a unit that just has high attack output (like the old bloodletter bombs from when bloodsecrator portals stacked) is bad but mortals on 6+ to wound seems alright for elite units.

flavorful mortal wounds like the nurgling disease if the wounded model survives also seem fitting.

I think they should be a bonus rather than something you fish for

I agree with you but then i think about my poor skullreapers and my slaughterpriest and then i think that without that my bloodbound army would be really ******.