Mortal wounds and resistance

[rokapoke]

One thing I've noticed more and more in discussions about Age of Sigmar, particularly when people ask for recommendations for an army to start, is the idea of mortal wound resistance. In particular, people will say that army X is weak against mortal wounds, as if that's a huge strike against that faction. I personally feel that mortal wound resistance should feel like a bonus in army selection rather than a lack thereof feeling like a drawback. 

I wish it was less common for attacks and spells to deal mortal wounds, and that resistance to them was rare -- even restricted to just Death units on a 6. How does the rest of the community feel about mortal wounds and the ease of dealing them (and the increasing ease of ignoring them)?

[jamierk]

This is just my humble opinion but i don't mind where we are at in terms of mortals wounds and resistance to mortal wounds. There are certainly some builds of armies that can deal a reasonably large number of mortal wounds, although rarely without dedicating ALOT of points to a small wound count of models, which is how balance is somewhat achieved. That said, just looking through what skyre can put out is a little worrying. The point is though, the often overlooked ways to providing adequate 'resistance' to mortal wounds isn't a 4+ save to them (and try to pass one of those when your generals life depends on it), it's either having enough bodies and tactical redundancy that losing a chunk of an army to them isn't cripling, and by spreading your army so that all the mortal wound dealers can't attack everyone at once. It's easy to look at an army and theorhammer out that with the sheer number of mortal wounds your army doesn't stand a chance, but try deploying it in multiple chunks and see just how hard it can be to cover a whole board with an elite army. Not to mention you can go one step further, split your units MSU style, those mortal wounds can't flow between units. At the end of the day, even the 'best' mortal wound saves are 4++, but without a mystical shield and terrain, the best regular saves are 3+ (to my knowledge, happy to be corrected). Plenty of space marines will attest to how ****** 3+ is when your dice seemingly only contain 1's and 2's. I'm more worried about the arrer boy army that forces me to take 100s of regular saves and can't be avoided easily or cleaned up with an alpha strike than the 10 retributors.

 

Just some experience from my games, i think the fact that one build/grand alliance isn't dominating all of the competitive play is a testimate to this being ok for now. I could see it getting out of hand, but we aren't there yet. Another point, GHB2 could completely turn it all on its head, it doesn't take much in the way of points adjustments in units/battalions for them to go from average to awesome.

 

Happy to be proved wrong.

 

Jamie

[TheKingInYellow]

I'm just starting out with AoS after waiting for the fallout to end from WHFB, and I'm still finding mortal wounds to be one my biggest issue with the system.  Anything that completely removes player agency from the game is a problem. 

I played one of my first games last night and brought out my Dwarves against the new Tzeentch book, and seeing that the combination of mortal wounds and destiny dice remove all the crew off my warmachines in turn one with *nothing I could do* was not a good start.

[Veterannoob]

One of the Fyreslayers main bonuses. With new points you can get them even easier now. While lacking magic and many tools, we do surprisingly well vs mortal wound machines like  Destruction and makes a difference. 

 

As as general concern when selecting an army, it's not a deal breakers imo. 

[jamierk]

1 hour ago, TheKingInYellow said:

I'm just starting out with AoS after waiting for the fallout to end from WHFB, and I'm still finding mortal wounds to be one my biggest issue with the system.  Anything that completely removes player agency from the game is a problem. 

I played one of my first games last night and brought out my Dwarves against the new Tzeentch book, and seeing that the combination of mortal wounds and destiny dice remove all the crew off my warmachines in turn one with *nothing I could do* was not a good start.

I wish they would fix this! Not the mortal wounds, the ability to target crew off war machines. Why would you bother shooting the machine? Either way you still only have to kill half the unit to stop it being useful. Randomise or combined profile (like skaven WLC).

[Kramer]

8 hours ago, jamierk said:

combined profile (like skaven WLC).

I think this would be a very easy solution. 

 

9 hours ago, TheKingInYellow said:

nything that completely removes player agency from the game is a problem.

What do you mean by agency?

[Criti]

I think mortal wounds are a fantastic part of the system.  They keep models honest and don't allow anything to be "unkillable" - which waa, incidentally, one of my biggest gripes with Fantasy as it died down.  Sure, your Mystic Shield bearing Archaon is tough... but not as tough against Arcane Bolt!  Don't like that, Mr Big Bad?  Play tactically and use that movement value to maneuver around rather than just barrel in.

To be fair, I was also a big fan of instant death spells that didn't allow Look Out, Sir or Ward Save rolls, too.  I knew far too many people who would slap 1000+ point units on the table in a 2k game and think they were being clever when all they were doing was sucking the fun out of the game.

[Gauche]

I agree that Mortal Wounds are a very necessary part of the game. 40K has AP, AoS has Mortal Wounds. Without them the meta would shift towards 2+ Armor Save spam which is very boring to fight against. Some things that spam Mortal Wounds do need tweaks (Thundertusks!) but the rule is extremely valuable and good for the game. Personally I like denying my opponent the chance to roll hot for Armor Saves and get some guaranteed kills in, as well as having play against Monster Mash.

Have to also echo other posters in here that resistance to Mortal Wounds is a bonus, not standard. You can build resistance into any list by having big Units and/or Multi-Wound Units. Also with Fyreslayers hopefully becoming more competitive there will be a counter to Mortal Wound spam and armies who rely on it will have to tweak their lists and be more generalist. As a Destruction player I already have my eye on that.

[TheKingInYellow]

4 hours ago, Kramer said:

What do you mean by agency?

Player agency means that the player had input on the outcome of an event.

Even in 40k with the AP system you have mitigation in the form of toughness, cover and invulnerable saves, and every player in every Army has some sort of access to one or more of these.

Mortal wounds just happen and you have no defense against them in some armies.  It's a die roll, or in some cases not even that, that the other player can't plan for, react to, or have a chance to resist.

I'm my game my opponent flew his disc sorcerer and archer disc dudes up the table on turn one, used destiny dice to force through unstoppable no roll needed instant wounds onto crew members for war machines.  That inability to plan for, mitigate, or react to the event that required no dice rolling is bad game design because it completely removed my agency in the game.

[Criti]

Did it?  Or did it make your war machine placement and protecrion harder?  Could it have been prevented through more tactical positioning?  If not, could the points exchange of its loss been made favorable by taking something of equal or greater value in exchange?

Could the machine have been placed behind scenery, thus it harder to draw LoS?

Could it have been placed farther back and supported farther up by something fast or something shooty?  Sure, the Tzaangor could have acheived range - but they'd have put themselves (abd possibly the sorceror) in range of your retaliatory shots and/or charges.  And Tzaangor Skyfires are not terribly hard to take down if you can get them in your sights.  If he wants the war machine, he has to risk sacrificing his attackers to get it.

Also... is a Save really "player agency?"

It's not truly player input... it just pretends to be.

[TheKingInYellow]

My opponent went first, had 16" of movement and 16" of range on a 48" board.  Cover doesn't matter against mortal wounds and it's nearly impossible to hide all three crewmen from a raised model with TLOS.  He didn't need to roll a single die to guarantee 3 mortal wounds in my organ gun crew.

What should I have done differently?  Cover wouldn't help them.  He'd still have range if they deployed on my table edge, my table edge didn't have LOS blocking terrain.  

I get that this applies to both sides and I was at the disadvantage of running a compendium Army against the newest toys as well, but this is what the lack of player agency is. 

[rokapoke]

16 hours ago, jamierk said:

the often overlooked ways to providing adequate 'resistance' to mortal wounds isn't a 4+ save to them (and try to pass one of those when your generals life depends on it), it's either having enough bodies and tactical redundancy that losing a chunk of an army to them isn't cripling, and by spreading your army so that all the mortal wound dealers can't attack everyone at once.

I really like this point -- rather than seeking inherent resistance to mortal wounds (the "easy way", so to speak), strategize to mitigate the effects that they have. Honestly I haven't encountered much mortal wound spam in my battles, but I will definitely try to defeat them tactically if/when I do see it on the battlefield.

[Criti]

6 minutes ago, TheKingInYellow said:

My opponent went first, had 16" of movement and 16" of range on a 48" board.

Assuming a straight line move and a 12" deployment, that gives the shooter 44" of threat. Knowing those ranges (which should not have been an issue with the app being a thing and all), the war machine could have been deployed along a table edge and moved up to fire.

If you don't want to sit all the way back, deploy up a few inches, deliberately giving them range, but add a quick fighty unit deoyed at the 12" line which can charge the shooters if they do go for the war machine.

As above, but sub out fighty unit for shooty unit and blow them away if they go for the war machine.

Put the war machine in a corner or to one side of a line of sight blocking piece of terrain in order to dictate which direction the shooters have to go - this can be combined with the above to funnel them into a trap.  Even without LoS blocking terrain, a corner can be used as a funnel.  If they want you, they have to work to that side of the table.  If you deploy center, they can work anywhere they want.

Incidentally, if it were guaranteed to be safe in the deployment zone and could do huge damage to a target that hadn't moved and negated an save with its rend, wouldn't your war machine have taken the opponent's agency away from him?

It's a game of risk and reward.  Sometimes, things die and there isn't much you can do about it (ironically, this is the most "realistical" truth of the game)

[Gauche]

55 minutes ago, Criti said:

Did it?  Or did it make your war machine placement and protecrion harder?  Could it have been prevented through more tactical positioning?  If not, could the points exchange of its loss been made favorable by taking something of equal or greater value in exchange?

Could the machine have been placed behind scenery, thus it harder to draw LoS?

Could it have been placed farther back and supported farther up by something fast or something shooty?  Sure, the Tzaangor could have acheived range - but they'd have put themselves (abd possibly the sorceror) in range of your retaliatory shots and/or charges.  And Tzaangor Skyfires are not terribly hard to take down if you can get them in your sights.  If he wants the war machine, he has to risk sacrificing his attackers to get it.

Also... is a Save really "player agency?"

It's not truly player input... it just pretends to be.

Have to agree. Among my local group a lot of people just play heads up, don't use screens or take advantage of pre-measuring much. Not saying that's the case for everyone but there's a lot more room for positional play in AoS than most people think.

[Kramer]

Thanks for the explanation @TheKingInYellow! I get what your saying and against some cheesy lists it is a problem but I also think your vision of the problem might have disproportionally grown due to your experience. A couple of thinks that stick out for me in your description and I realise I wasn't there so I don't know all of the details:

It was one of your first games since you started with AoS, it sounds like you played Warhammer and you were playing against a completely new book that introduces a very different playstyle to the table. No wonder you had a tough game! 

AoS plays very differently to Warhammer, I can no longer count on my warmachines (saying this as a dwarf player) to perform in the same manner as before. I had real difficulty getting my dwarfs to work, I think I played about 15 games over the summer before I felt I had a bit of control over the game. 

But I wonder what would have happened if you got the first turn? That's the good thing about warmachines, it's a good chance you could have shot his general down...
But even sticking with the situation as you described it. He moved forward to within 16" to shoot down the crew. I assume you had some units screening in front of the war machine? So was there should be a possibility to get a early charge in? Or even gamble a bit on a double turn (because that's the chance he had to sacrifice by moving forward so aggressively)  March 8", move 4" and charge 2D6. 

So to me, and the way i'm wired, it sounds like you have a very fun tactical puzzle to work out. He has that amazing move plus range but can you goat him to moving forward by sacrificing a war machine? And then count him in melee. Or just by playing the objectives. 

And again I wasn't there so I can't know all the details but all in all it sounds more like it should be a fun challenge and not something that should change the core of the rules. Also I'm not saying this to dismiss your frustration or to be a d*ck but as a genuine answer to you and as my answer to the original question of @rokapoke. Cheers  

[Davor]

I am still trying to grasp Age of Sigmar and I am puzzled by what a few people said. I saw someone say 3++ saves. Isn't that a 40K term and not an Age of Sigmar term? If it is an Age of Sigmar term what is it? Also I thought you can't save against Mortal Wounds. So what does it mean someone can have a save against a Mortal Wound? I am puzzled and don't understand how.

What is this "resitance" talk? Can you resist or save against a Mortal Wound or is this ment having enough bodies or wounds on a mini to "soften the blow"?

[rokapoke]

1 minute ago, Davor said:

What is this "resitance" talk? Can you resist or save against a Mortal Wound or is this ment having enough bodies or wounds on a mini to "soften the blow"?

Resistance to mortal wounds shows up on a number of warscrolls. See, for instance, Nagash's "Morikhane" ability (linked for convenience). 

[Davor]

Thank you very much Rokapoke. Thank you again for showing me the example. I didn't know that was possible. Greatly appreciated.

[Gauche]

3 minutes ago, Davor said:

I am still trying to grasp Age of Sigmar and I am puzzled by what a few people said. I saw someone say 3++ saves. Isn't that a 40K term and not an Age of Sigmar term? If it is an Age of Sigmar term what is it? Also I thought you can't save against Mortal Wounds. So what does it mean someone can have a save against a Mortal Wound? I am puzzled and don't understand how.

What is this "resitance" talk? Can you resist or save against a Mortal Wound or is this ment having enough bodies or wounds on a mini to "soften the blow"?

A lot of slang is taken from 40K and/or Fantasy. For example everyone in my group calls Mortal Wound saves Ward saves despite them being different. It just is what it is. Usually ++ means anything that can be taken against a wound that you can't otherwise save. Unfortunately this is complicated in AoS since there are true "Ward" saves where you roll it when you fail other saves, ala Deathless Minion, and saves that ONLY impact Mortal Wounds, ala Talisman of Protection. It can be confusing to be sure.

[Kramer]

2 minutes ago, Davor said:

I am still trying to grasp Age of Sigmar and I am puzzled by what a few people said. I saw someone say 3++ saves. Isn't that a 40K term and not an Age of Sigmar term? If it is an Age of Sigmar term what is it? Also I thought you can't save against Mortal Wounds. So what does it mean someone can have a save against a Mortal Wound? I am puzzled and don't understand how.

What is this "resitance" talk? Can you resist or save against a Mortal Wound or is this ment having enough bodies or wounds on a mini to "soften the blow"?

Couple of answers. 

Models with chaos shields get a special 5+ against mortal wounds. Fyreslayers have (I believe) a special stubborn rule that means that on a 6 they ignore a wound or mortal wound (this gets better in bigger numbers) so in this context resistance is meant as a way to counter the mortal wounds output or at least soften the blow a little bit. 

[darkelf]

18 hours ago, rokapoke said:

I wish it was less common for attacks and spells to deal mortal wounds

agree

[TheKingInYellow]

1 hour ago, Criti said:

Assuming a straight line move and a 12" deployment, that gives the shooter 44" of threat. Knowing those ranges (which should not have been an issue with the app being a thing and all), the war machine could have been deployed along a table edge and moved up to fire.

If you don't want to sit all the way back, deploy up a few inches, deliberately giving them range, but add a quick fighty unit deoyed at the 12" line which can charge the shooters if they do go for the war machine.

As above, but sub out fighty unit for shooty unit and blow them away if they go for the war machine.

Put the war machine in a corner or to one side of a line of sight blocking piece of terrain in order to dictate which direction the shooters have to go - this can be combined with the above to funnel them into a trap.  Even without LoS blocking terrain, a corner can be used as a funnel.  If they want you, they have to work to that side of the table.  If you deploy center, they can work anywhere they want.

Incidentally, if it were guaranteed to be safe in the deployment zone and could do huge damage to a target that hadn't moved and negated an save with its rend, wouldn't your war machine have taken the opponent's agency away from him?

It's a game of risk and reward.  Sometimes, things die and there isn't much you can do about it (ironically, this is the most "realistical" truth of the game)

A few points to make here.  If the only defense against a particular event is an extreme edge case of deployment, then perhaps it's not ideally designed that's all I'm saying.  I only had two peices of terrain in my deployment zone, and neither would have given me LOS blocking.

I did have my general and a melee unit guarding them and they did go and dropkick the teeth out of the disc archer dudes but the point tradeoff was pretty heavily in his favour and it ended with that unit overcommitted and then tarpitted by a pink horror blob. 

If I had gone first, warmachines absolutely do not remove player agency, rend or not.  Even attacks with high rend have to roll to hit, and to wound, and there are other modifications that can be applied such as cover and mystic shield.  Mortal wounds ignore all of these, the lack of mitigation is the issue.

To be fair this was also a bad matchup.  To mitigate mortal wounds you must have either a special save, or the ability to regenerate wounds or models.  Dwarves have none of the above, unless you are dealing with a unit carrying a runic banner and the source of the wounds is a spell.  DoT seem like they can spam a decent amount of mortal wounds, and the destiny dice allow them to guarantee them at least once in a battle if not more.  

This is all also in the context of the inherent balance issues between compendium armies and the new toys.  A unit of 10 Tzaangors priced against a unit of 10 Quarrelers or Warriors is rather depressing as a long time Dwarf player.  Hopefully v2 of the Handbook includes some serious attempts are rebalancing.

[Criti]

21 minutes ago, TheKingInYellow said:

A few points to make here.  If the only defense against a particular event is an extreme edge case of deployment, then perhaps it's not ideally designed that's all I'm saying.  I only had two peices of terrain in my deployment zone, and neither would have given me LOS blocking.

See, I think this is where we disagree.

I think it is very well designed that you have to think of different ways of handling the situation, rather than just being able to drop something like a war machine down and sit assured that it is safe to open the game. 

Against those particular flyers, you sit back and set retaliation.  Against a horde army, you concentrate your war machines' position and open volleys of concentrated fire.  What defense does your opponent have?  Sit out of range - or send something fast to take down the war machine.  Otherwise, he's sitting there getting pelted and his unit is doing nothing and he walks away thinking war machine firepower is over the top.

Rock, paper, scissors, my friend.

Skyfires beat war machines.  Elite melee unit beats Skyfires.  Tarpit beats elite melee unit.  And it circles right back around - war machines blow away tarpits.

Also - what the heck war machine were you using that trading Skyfires for the machine was more beneficial to him than you?!

[TheKingInYellow]

8 minutes ago, Criti said:

See, I think this is where we disagree.

I think it is very well designed that you have to think of different ways of handling the situation, rather than just being able to drop something like a war machine down and sit assured that it is safe to open the game. 

Against those particular flyers, you sit back and set retaliation.  Against a horde army, you concentrate your war machines' position and open volleys of concentrated fire.  What defense does your opponent have?  Sit out of range - or send something fast to take down the war machine.  Otherwise, he's sitting there getting pelted and his unit is doing nothing and he walks away thinking war machine firepower is over the top.

Rock, paper, scissors, my friend.

Skyfires beat war machines.  Elite melee unit beats Skyfires.  Tarpit beats elite melee unit.  And it circles right back around - war machines blow away tarpits.

Also - what the heck war machine were you using that trading Skyfires for the machine was more beneficial to him than you?!

A Dwarven Cannon and an Organ gun.  300pts for me, 160pts for him.  Sitting back and setting retaliation netted him +140pts.

He used destiny dice to force mortal wounds through.  Dwarves have no mitigation for mortal wounds.  Now I didn't have warmachine fire to thin his tarpits and his Tzaangors cleaned up.

[daedalus81]

Your whole army can't revolve around 300 points of models.  You may need a rethink.  Or wait for Steamhead.