AoS Question on wounds

[Glenstorm68]

Played a game Saturday and had an odd ruling on wounds.
My Bastildon shot into a group of 10 Gor archer things. I actually rolled double 6's!!! (like that ever happens)
Rolled 9 hits/wounds. They are 2 damage each, 18 total.
The guy I was playing said the damage didn't spread to all 10 and that only 9 Gor's were hit and killed b/c I had 9 hits....
Is this right?

In the end it really didn't matter, b/c the last one failed it's battle check. But in the future, on more beefy things, it might...

 

[Glenstorm68]

This should be in the AoS Seraphon section...

 

[Aginor]

Thread moved.


Your opponent was wrong.
The number of hits has nothing to do with the number of models that can be damaged by the attack.

In AoS wounds carry over to models within a unit.

Page 7 of the base rules has everything you need.

 

[LizardWizard]

Your opponent is likely coming over from 40k where wounds do not spill over. As @Aginor stated, wounds do spill over in AoS.

 

[Canas]

Has there even been given a reason for wounds carrying over in AoS? Best I can tell it doesn't happen in any of GW's other games.

Also, does anyone know how other non-GW games compare in this aspect?

Kinda curious given that wounds not carrying over does make sense intuitivly.

 

[LizardWizard]

Has there even been given a reason for wounds carrying over in AoS? Best I can tell it doesn't happen in any of GW's other games.

Also, does anyone know how other non-GW games compare in this aspect?

Kinda curious given that wounds not carrying over does make sense intuitivly.

Spell wounds always carried over in WHFBs to my knowledge. Most artilery pieces would also carry damage down a flank or rank based on where they hit.

Mostly I think GW wanted to keep the affect of pie-plates without having to actually keep them and cause debate about what is and isn't under it.

 

[Aginor]

Of all the rule differences between 40k and AoS I always wondered if two of the 40k rules wouldn't make AoS better:
- wounds not carrying over
- all charging units strike first

 

[Canas]

Spell wounds always carried over in WHFBs to my knowledge. Most artilery pieces would also carry damage down a flank or rank based on where they hit.

Mostly I think GW wanted to keep the affect of pie-plates without having to actually keep them and cause debate about what is and isn't under it.

That does sound a bit better, at least it sounds like you can't shoot multiple models with your artillery if the unit doesn't have multiple ranks.

As for magic.. best I know, WFB fantasy was notorious for being OP as hell, so that might be part of it

 

[LizardWizard]

Of all the rule differences between 40k and AoS I always wondered if two of the 40k rules wouldn't make AoS better:
- wounds not carrying over
- all charging units strike first

I think to have all charging units strike first the game would need a full rebalance of combat. Alternating combat is a big part of the strategy atm. Maybe if charge targets had to be declared it would be somewhat more manageable. Shooting would also need to be made stronger. At which point the game is just 40k with fantasy models.

 

[Canas]

I think to have all charging units strike first the game would need a full rebalance of combat. Alternating combat is a big part of the strategy atm. Maybe if charge targets had to be declared it would be somewhat more manageable. Shooting would also need to be made stronger. At which point the game is just 40k with fantasy models.

mwha, the only ones that would be a genuine issue seem the ones that can cycle charge easily (like wraithglaives) and any stuff that's likely to oneshot whatever it charges. The rest should still be more or less fine since you shouldn't be constantly charging with those.

Though a slightly less impactfull change would be to give a minor bonus on the charge. Say +1 to hit or some such. Obviously would involve some rebalancing (especially the stuff that already hits hard on the charge, or stuff like nighthaunt's wave of terror). But it shouldn't require a complete overhaul & it would add something interesting to charging/denying charging correctly. Which might be interesting, especially as it might allow a "weak" unit to overwhelm a stronger one on the charge. Right now the only part you care about is who they charge and the few instances where units gain bonusses on the charge. Adding in more could be fun.

Shooting wouldn't necesarly need to be made stronger though. You can already shoot while in melee (unlike in 40K) and a lot of ranged units have an fairly amazing "melee" profile as a result.

 

[LizardWizard]

mwha, the only ones that would be a genuine issue seem the ones that can cycle charge easily (like wraithglaives) and any stuff that's likely to oneshot whatever it charges. The rest should still be more or less fine since you shouldn't be constantly charging with those.

Though a slightly less impactfull change would be to give a minor bonus on the charge. Say +1 to hit or some such. Obviously would involve some rebalancing (especially the stuff that already hits hard on the charge, or stuff like nighthaunt's wave of terror). But it shouldn't require a complete overhaul & it would add something interesting to charging/denying charging correctly. Which might be interesting, especially as it might allow a "weak" unit to overwhelm a stronger one on the charge. Right now the only part you care about is who they charge and the few instances where units gain bonusses on the charge. Adding in more could be fun.

Shooting wouldn't necesarly need to be made stronger though. You can already shoot while in melee (unlike in 40K) and a lot of ranged units have an fairly amazing "melee" profile as a result.

Idoneth players would disagree. A big part of why the always make top tables is their turn three tide trait. How powerful fighting out sequence is as a trait demonstrates how much the game would break to make it universal.

 

[Canas]

Idoneth players would disagree. A big part of why the always make top tables is their turn three tide trait. How powerful fighting out sequence is as a trait demonstrates how much the game would break to make it universal.

Yeah, but the difference there is that the entire army gets to do it regardless of circumstances. Fighting first on the charge shouldn't give you that situation. It should give you one maybe two out of say 5-6 units in combat that get to fight out of order. And even then only on the turns you actually get a new charge in, which also shouldn't happen every turn.

Admittadly, if anyone manages to reliably get their entire army to charge at the same time, or is powerfull enough to keep wiping out enemies and continously charge every round instead of spending a turn or two, three stuck in melee before getting to a new charge it becomes problematic and would require quite some rebalancing.

Anything that only charges occasionally & is then stuck in the melee for a while should probably be (mostly) fine.

 

[LizardWizard]

What would happen is who ever goes second would crushed the enemy by charging all their units into combat.

 

[Canas]

Hence the prerequisite that it shouldn't be possible to charge most/a lot of your army at once.

To be honest, I'd expect it to work perfectly fine in "normal" play and to be abused to high heavens in competitive play at tournaments cuz the competitive players are liable to just develop a strategy which maximizes the amount of charges per round...

 

[Blitzkriyg]

Of all the rule differences between 40k and AoS I always wondered if two of the 40k rules wouldn't make AoS better:
- wounds not carrying over
- all charging units strike first

Honestly, coming from 40k,these 2 rules are one I've always wished 40k would have adopted