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.

Ok i tried using the search function and eather no one's asked or i suck at fiding stuff.

So here goes:

I was playng ma guard the other an the a rule for assault grenades came up, and it was cinda weird.

By RAW it says that "models" with assault grenades fight as normal so does that mean that the other models in the same unit still fight as per the assaulting in cover rules, and why would that be.

Examples.

Guard sergants can have Frag G's
Broodlords can have Flesh hooks
And i think SOB sister superiors have wargear Frag G's as well (not shure)

Editet to avoid nagging thats waht my other post is for

Only the model that has the grenades ignores the initiative penalty for assaulting through cover. The guys that dont have them get the penalty.

And pretty please...spell check before you post.

Me not form ingland or uther englsh spiki'n cunti dont make fun

I wasnt making fun...it's actually hard to read what you are typing.

HoverBoy wrote:Me not form ingland or uther englsh spiki'n cunti dont make fun

I call bs. Those are not the mistakes of a second language speaker.

I think so too. I've seen some other posts he's made and no mistakes there. Just lazy I guess.

OMG my offtopicness is contageous

Only one model in a unit has to have assault grenades for it to recieve the bonus.

Umm ok now i'm confused again

Ealiom wrote:Only one model in a unit has to have assault grenades for it to recieve the bonus.

I support this statement as the rule book says the grenades keep the defenders heads down (as opposed to grenades keeping the attackers heads up).

shatter wrote:

Ealiom wrote:Only one model in a unit has to have assault grenades for it to recieve the bonus.

I support this statement as the rule book says the grenades keep the defenders heads down (as opposed to grenades keeping the attackers heads up).

It also says that 1 space marine can kill 1000 orks, IN THE FLUFF... the RULES for grenades are quite explicit, models and not squads or units who assault through cover and are equipped with assault grenades strike at initiative value instead of suffering the normal penalty.

Hehe, I'm sharp enough to spot heroic narrative when I see it.

As for this point, your statement would carry the most weight here as it's fairly RAW. (last sentence, bottom left page 36)

However if I were to continue to play devil's advocate and play with the numbers of the unit, it makes less sense. i.e. 1 model alone could keep the heads down of the biggest unit possible in the game. Add one model without grenades and half (or more of) the unit can stick it's head up. Awesome logic.

No wonder folks get so heated here!

I bet high post counts are worn like service studs!

In cover if you have assault grenades you assault with your 'I' if you don't you're at I1

Stupid GW made shure again that RAW and RAI are incompatable

Ealiom wrote:Only one model in a unit has to have assault grenades for it to recieve the bonus.

This is 4th editionism. Back in the 4th ed rulebook, the wording used for grenades was that if a unit had em (meaning if one model had them in the unit) then the whole unit was I10.

But 5th ed changed the wording in this instance. And instead of using the word 'unit' they use 'models'. Meaning only models that have grenades may fight in initiative order; those without have to do so at I1.

padixon wrote:

Ealiom wrote:Only one model in a unit has to have assault grenades for it to recieve the bonus.

This is 4th editionism. Back in the 4th ed rulebook, the wording used for grenades was that if a unit had em (meaning if one model had them in the unit) then the whole unit was I10.

But 5th ed changed the wording in this instance. And instead of using the word 'unit' they use 'models'. Meaning only models that have grenades may fight in initiative order; those without have to do so at I1.

Nope. It was by model in 4E also.

shatter wrote:Hehe, I'm sharp enough to spot heroic narrative when I see it.

As for this point, your statement would carry the most weight here as it's fairly RAW. (last sentence, bottom left page 36)

However if I were to continue to play devil's advocate and play with the numbers of the unit, it makes less sense. i.e. 1 model alone could keep the heads down of the biggest unit possible in the game. Add one model without grenades and half (or more of) the unit can stick it's head up. Awesome logic.

No wonder folks get so heated here!

I bet high post counts are worn like service studs!

I don't get it. You're saying that one bloke with a frag grenade charging a unit that doesn't have one (eg a power armoured Marine commander with some assault terminators) will force 30 Orks to keep their heads down long enough for the lumbering Terminators to slice the Orks to pieces?

Nope, it's worded as per model and I would play it as such. If you want to say that my example is too extreme, then where do you draw the line?

Cheexsta wrote:
I don't get it. You're saying that one bloke with a frag grenade charging a unit that doesn't have one (eg a power armoured Marine commander with some assault terminators) will force 30 Orks to keep their heads down long enough for the lumbering Terminators to slice the Orks to pieces?

Nope, it's worded as per model and I would play it as such. If you want to say that my example is too extreme, then where do you draw the line?

But the opposite is saying that 19 grenades being lobbed into a squad of 5. and because one guy doesnt have them he is forced to strike last. Grenades are not localised to one person. They are loud, dangerous area effect weapons. You throw one grenades into a crowd and they will all dive for cover...

Marines throws grenade clambers through the cover and assaults without the adverse effect of attacking into cover... But anyone in that same squad will be diving through there cover at the same time, not waiting until the grenades have gone off. All Initiative being equal he should be attacking at the same time as his grenade toating buddies.

I can see it both ways to be honest.

Ealiom wrote:But the opposite is saying that 19 grenades being lobbed into a squad of 5. and because one guy doesnt have them he is forced to strike last. Grenades are not localised to one person. They are loud, dangerous area effect weapons. You throw one grenades into a crowd and they will all dive for cover...

Marines throws grenade clambers through the cover and assaults without the adverse effect of attacking into cover... But anyone in that same squad will be diving through there cover at the same time, not waiting until the grenades have gone off. All Initiative being equal he should be attacking at the same time as his grenade toating buddies.

I can see it both ways to be honest.

Sure it goes both ways fluff wise, the rules on the matter are quite specific though, and anything other than a per model basis is a houserule

Yep, you can play the rules or you can play the fluff(y bunnies). Rules, by model.

shatter wrote:As for this point, your statement would carry the most weight here as it's fairly RAW. (last sentence, bottom left page 36)

However if I were to continue to play devil's advocate and play with the numbers of the unit, it makes less sense. i.e. 1 model alone could keep the heads down of the biggest unit possible in the game. Add one model without grenades and half (or more of) the unit can stick it's head up. Awesome logic.

This is a rules debate not a question of logic. The rules say that the effects of grenades are determined on a model by model basis so that's the way it works regardless of what "makes sence".

Phoenix wrote:

shatter wrote:As for this point, your statement would carry the most weight here as it's fairly RAW. (last sentence, bottom left page 36)

However if I were to continue to play devil's advocate and play with the numbers of the unit, it makes less sense. i.e. 1 model alone could keep the heads down of the biggest unit possible in the game. Add one model without grenades and half (or more of) the unit can stick it's head up. Awesome logic.

This is a rules debate not a question of logic. The rules say that the effects of grenades are determined on a model by model basis so that's the way it works regardless of what "makes sence".

Yeah if you start mixing GW's rules with logic, you're gonna suffer 1 str 10 eadbang attack with no armour save

Ealiom wrote:

Cheexsta wrote:
I don't get it. You're saying that one bloke with a frag grenade charging a unit that doesn't have one (eg a power armoured Marine commander with some assault terminators) will force 30 Orks to keep their heads down long enough for the lumbering Terminators to slice the Orks to pieces?

Nope, it's worded as per model and I would play it as such. If you want to say that my example is too extreme, then where do you draw the line?

But the opposite is saying that 19 grenades being lobbed into a squad of 5. and because one guy doesnt have them he is forced to strike last. Grenades are not localised to one person. They are loud, dangerous area effect weapons. You throw one grenades into a crowd and they will all dive for cover...

Marines throws grenade clambers through the cover and assaults without the adverse effect of attacking into cover... But anyone in that same squad will be diving through there cover at the same time, not waiting until the grenades have gone off. All Initiative being equal he should be attacking at the same time as his grenade toating buddies.

I can see it both ways to be honest.

That's my point; you can't argue based on fluff logic since there is no 'hard line' you can draw to determine the actual number of models able to strike at Initiative. Since the fluff logic is flawed in both extremes of the arguments, you really have to go with RAW because that's the only possibility you're given. There's no ambiguity in the wording, it's definitely per model.