Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

A late night question that just popped up in my head...Meganobz wear mega armour, which means they fight with a power klaw, which is Initiative 1 anyway. So, why do they have stikkbombz as standard equipment?!

charging into cover, maybe some Nobs can be armored differently so to keep them all the same, hell if I know.

there is no reason, maybe it's a leftover from 4th where you could choose not to use special weapons?

anyone who knows fourth like to chirp in?

eg0u80bf wrote:there is no reason, maybe it's a leftover from 4th where you could choose not to use special weapons?

anyone who knows fourth like to chirp in?

I thought you could still opt not to use the special weapon. I know in fantasy you can't but I didn't see anything in 40k where it says you must use the special weapons.

Shas'O Dorian wrote:

eg0u80bf wrote:there is no reason, maybe it's a leftover from 4th where you could choose not to use special weapons?

anyone who knows fourth like to chirp in?

I thought you could still opt not to use the special weapon. I know in fantasy you can't but I didn't see anything in 40k where it says you must use the special weapons.

i thought you couldn't in 5th and i never played in forth and hardly in third, i'm gonna have a look, ok doesn't say they have to or can choose not to but on p42 you have;

a normal and special weapon
these models gain one additional attack. all of their attacks, including the bonus attack, benifit from the special weapon's bonuses and penalties.

powerfists, thunder hammers and lightening claws are an exception to this, only a second powerfist, thunder hammer and lightening claw can confer a bonus attack to a model equipped with one of these weapons

i have no 4th ed rule book so i can't say anything about the context which it was originally written for.

Old Grizzled vet to the rescue!

It is a holdover from 4th, where they could choose to not use their Power Klaws and strike at initiative.

Since they were always hitting last (because of Slow and Purposeful), they have Frags so they could either Power Klaw at I1 or Normal attacks at I3.

In 5th however, you must ALWAYS use the Power Klaw, so they are "useless". You can still use them against vehicles though, which might be advantageous (you want to stay in combat with a unit of War Walkers for example on your turn then destroy them next turn so you don't get shot at).

Gwar! wrote:Old Grizzled vet to the rescue!

It is a holdover from 4th, where they could choose to not use their Power Klaws and strike at initiative.

Since they were always hitting last (because of Slow and Purposeful), they have Frags so they could either Power Klaw at I1 or Normal attacks at I3.

In 5th however, you must ALWAYS use the Power Klaw, so they are "useless". You can still use them against vehicles though, which might be advantageous (you want to stay in combat with a unit of War Walkers for example on your turn then destroy them next turn so you don't get shot at).

Explain this last statement? Can you use stikk bombs / frag grenades against vehicles as your attacks? I thought that was only krak grenades?

Dashofpepper wrote:

Gwar! wrote:Old Grizzled vet to the rescue!

It is a holdover from 4th, where they could choose to not use their Power Klaws and strike at initiative.

Since they were always hitting last (because of Slow and Purposeful), they have Frags so they could either Power Klaw at I1 or Normal attacks at I3.

In 5th however, you must ALWAYS use the Power Klaw, so they are "useless". You can still use them against vehicles though, which might be advantageous (you want to stay in combat with a unit of War Walkers for example on your turn then destroy them next turn so you don't get shot at).

Explain this last statement? Can you use stikk bombs / frag grenades against vehicles as your attacks? I thought that was only krak grenades?

Nope. All types of grenades can be used against vehicles. Assault and Defensive grenades are weaker than Krak, however.

Page 63 of t3h rulebook Dash.

Actually... do Stikkbombs even have rules?

"Stikkbombs count as frag grenades in all respects."

Since there technically aren't any rules for "frag grenades..."

Wait, so there aren't any rules for the frag grenades my Guardsmen have? Or the ones Space Marines have?

(psst, the answer is "there are rules, because SaintHazard is wrong")

Melissia wrote:Wait, so there aren't any rules for the frag grenades my Guardsmen have?

Well, it all depends on whether you count an example as an explicit ruleset.

See, "frag grenades" don't seem to have rules.

On the other hand "assault grenades" do, but the only place the words "frag grenades" show up is in a list of examples in that entry - which, in many opinions, cannot be directly linked to a ruleset referenced by a codex.

So, no.

Your Guardsmen have grenades that do nothing, and so do my damned Orks.

As for the Space Marines, their grenades have rules, because their Frag Grenades count as Assault Grenades in all respects.

Melissia wrote:Wait, so there aren't any rules for the frag grenades my Guardsmen have? Or the ones Space Marines have?

(psst, the answer is "there are rules, because SaintHazard is wrong")

Actually, the answer is "Sainthazard is right because there are only rules for Assault Grenades, not Frag Grenades."

But this will end up as a major gakstorm (as it always does), so I am getting the feth out now.

PS: Guardsman Frags don't work either. SM ones do though.

They make a loud noise and a bright flash of light ..... Thats about as orky as it gets.... do they need a reason beyond that?

And actually, frag grenades in fourth helped orks out a bit more, as they counted as the same I10 as the defenders, not at their normal I.

Polonius wrote:And actually, frag grenades in fourth helped orks out a bit more, as they counted as the same I10 as the defenders, not at their normal I.

Except that in 5th, they don't let the Orks assault through cover at their normal initiative, because, as stated before in this thread, they're "frag grenades."

Were they "assault grenades," they would. As it is, they do exactly nothing.

I was just pointing out that frag grenades helped orks out more in 4th than Assault grenades do in fifth.

I really don't care about an academic argument about RAW.

Fair enough.

They are better against Tau in 5th than in 4th.

Gwar! wrote:They are better against Tau in 5th than in 4th.

Not sure I follow your logic.

Orks are I3, Tau are I2. In fourth, when you assaulted with frag both would be I10. Now Orks would be I3 and Tau I2. Assuming they have assault grenades, of course.

Polonius wrote:Orks are I3, Tau are I2. In fourth, when you assaulted with frag both would be I10. Now Orks would be I3 and Tau I2. Assuming they have assault grenades, of course.

Orks are I3 on the charge (not exactly relevant, but it's an important distinction - they're I2 normally, but have Furious Charge). If Orks charge through difficult terrain, they're I1. If Orks charge through difficult terrain with Stikkbombs, they're I1, because Stikkbombs are not assault grenades. At least if they were both I10, they'd be striking at the same time as anything they charge. As it is, when Orks charge through terrain, they always strike last, no exceptions.

So how do Stikkbombs help Orks in 5th?

SaintHazard wrote:

Gwar! wrote:They are better against Tau in 5th than in 4th.

Not sure I follow your logic.

In 4th, Frags let you strike at the same initiative (aka Simultaneously) as the defending unit. This meant the orks struck simultaneously with whatever unit they were assaulting, from Grots to C'Tan, despite their Low I of 3 (on the charge).

In 5th, they strike in normal initiative order instead, meaning that anything with I4+ hits first anyway, negating the Frags effect. Models with I3 will strike at the same time, like in 4th. Models with I2 or I1 will get hit first, possibly losing models (and attacks) before hitting back.

This means against Models with I2 or I1 (Such as Tau, who are for the most part I2), Frag Grenades became BETTER for Orks, while they became WORSE for anything I4+.

Not that any of this matters, since Stikkbombs don't do anything anyway.

Sainthazard, we are talking as though Stikkbombs were Assault Grenades.

Gwar! wrote:Not that any of this matters, since Stikkbombs don't do anything anyway.

Well exactly, that's the bottom line. They're not better for Orks in 5th, because they don't do anything.

Easy killer. I'm saying, even if you accept that stick bombs are assault grenades, they were better against most models in 4th, except Tau.

I'm not arguing whether or not they have anything. I don't play Orks, and I play where people have, you know, sense.

Pretty much when I started practicing law I stopped caring about rules debates. Environmental regulations aren't interpreted by RAW, but by intent, history, etc. I'm certainly not horribly interested in applying a more rigorous standard to a game.

So you are saying that I can dump lead into a stream because I think the RaI says I can?

Awesome.

Lol.

I'd have better RAI to argue that you can't, so you'll lose.

Law is different from 40k, in that there are professional adjudicators that finally make these decisions. Of course even then interpretations are often controversial. The point is that textual analysis is a pretty minor aspect of any statutory interpretations, with legislative history, previous similar legislation, and plain text reading all being far more important.

In the frag grenades debate, it would take a federal judge about 45 seconds to rule that they're assault grenades. A state judge might take a bit longer, but he'll get there as well.

Now, I'm not advocating anything for rules debates here. I save my rules arguing for when I'm before a TO. Everything else is just academic, and while a fun exercise, shouldn't be mistaken for any sort of progress.

The judge ruling that they are Assault Grenades would be the same as GW issuing an Errata.

Polonius wrote:a fun exercise,

With you so far.

Polonius wrote:shouldn't be mistaken for any sort of progress.

Lost me.

I used to be a rules-noob. I started posting on and reading YMDC. Now I am gooder at the rulesings. Is that not progress?

Frag grenades are Assault Grenades. Read the rulebook.

There is progress to be had in understanding the way the rules work. There is seldom progress made for areas where rules are genuinely unclear. there are simply times in the text where a rule could be read two different ways.

@Gwar: not really. Congress writes laws, an agency writes regulations based on those laws, and the Courts interpret them. They are three separate bodies. And errata would be if the EPA change the regulation to be more clear.

There simply is no real body of jurisprudence in 40k, where rulings are made and respected. The INAT is close, and like all jurisprudence incredibly unpopular for the two fatal flaws of 1)challenging people's notions of how to play, and 2) not creating rulings that 100% of the people agree with 100% of the time. And sometimes they're just wrong and dumb.