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.

Is the effect of Rad Grenades cumulative with other Rads, eg: 2 Inquisitors with Rads reduce enemies' toughness by 2. If the answer is yes, what happens if the unit is reduced to T0? Is it destroyed for some reason, or does it just continue with everything ID'ing it?

The effect is not cumulative.

It doesn't matter, but anything with T0 would be auto-wounded, everything causing ID.

Reading the entry in the codex, if it was 2 different units assaulting that both had rad grenades then I don't see why they wouldn't stack.

MasterSlowPoke wrote:The effect is not cumulative.

It doesn't matter, but anything with T0 would be auto-wounded, everything causing ID.

There is no rule for auto-wounding. As a roll of 1 never causes a wound, you'll wound on 2+ and all attacks cause ID. So T0 is actually exactly the same as T1, unless you mange to do S1 attacks.

Attacks from rad grenades do not change instant death

Why not?

ThatMG wrote:Attacks from rad grenades do not change instant death

They do. It specifically states they do in their entry.

I have read the RAD Grenades and and they do indeed change ID toughness value...

I remember reading it and thinking to myself that my Nobz now have 1 less target to charge into if they have powerfist...

To answer T0 I think the game states somewhere that no characteristic may go below 1 ever... If not stated explicitly I think that this is a general enough rule that it just used as a given.

QuietOrkmi wrote:I have read the RAD Grenades and and they do indeed change ID toughness value...

I remember reading it and thinking to myself that my Nobz now have 1 less target to charge into if they have powerfist...

To answer T0 I think the game states somewhere that no characteristic may go below 1 ever... If not stated explicitly I think that this is a general enough rule that it just used as a given.

Nope, says below 0, just checked (BRB pg. 6).

You should not bring any kind of nobz against GK whatsoever

Jidmah wrote:Nope, says below 0, just checked (BRB pg. 6)

Regardless there is no to wound chart for T0 so the game would either break and stop at the new unwoundable models or the toughness would stop a 1... for the sake of not creating "unwoundable models" lets all agree for T1... after all what do GK gain from creating unwoundable models vs having people be Toughness 1

Jidmah wrote:You should not bring any kind of nobz against GK whatsoever

What about a tournament that might include a GK player?

Sorry for the mass edit, I am eating breakfast and typing this at the same time...

It's not like the table is an assortment of magic numbers, you can easily calculate how to wound T0 models.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

QuietOrkmi wrote:What about a tournament that might include a GK player?

Uh, hide them on an objective if they're scoring?

unless theres a s1 then just count it as t1, it really isnt hard if your looking at the chart.

how often are your gk gonna assault in more then 2 units anyway though? so imo unless your fighting a guy with t2 its very unlikely to get t0 anyway.

IF this came up, id assume it would run like this:
__ t0
s1 3+
s2 2+
s3 2+
based on the current chart (since if strength and toughness are equal its 4+) and all wounds would be insta death since double 0 is 0.

Would that mean that a S0 model would wound on a 4+ and inflict ID?

After reading the entry, I believe that separate units each containing Rad Grenades would stack, but multiple rad grenades in the same unit do NOT stack.

Now, characteristics CAN be 0, and range from 0-10. They dont go below zero. If a characteristic is 0, then per the rules the model has no ability in that characteristic. Thus, when you get to the 'to-wound' portion, you must compare your strength to the enemies toughness, BUT the enemy with toughness actually HAS no toughness. Thus no roll to wound is taken.

Now, if you look at pg 7, if a model has WS 0 then it is hit automatically, no roll involved. So there is precedent here, as WS is the other stat that is comparison based with a chart.

Thus, if you have a GKGM, 3 tech marines, and an inquisitor all with rad grenades AND all in separate units, AND all 5 units initiate a charge on the same enemy unit, then the enemy unit will suffer -5 to their toughness, stopping at 0. And at 0, they are wounded automatically instead of on a 2+, as they have a 0 level characteristic as per page 7.

Edit: QuiteOrkmi, a model with a 0 strength value can not ever roll to wound, as per page 7. Thus without another rule, a model reduced to 0 str can not ever hurt the enemy.

DevianID wrote:After reading the entry, I believe that separate units each containing Rad Grenades would stack, but multiple rad grenades in the same unit do NOT stack.

Now, characteristics CAN be 0, and range from 0-10. They dont go below zero. If a characteristic is 0, then per the rules the model has no ability in that characteristic. Thus, when you get to the 'to-wound' portion, you must compare your strength to the enemies toughness, BUT the enemy with toughness actually HAS no toughness. Thus no roll to wound is taken.

Now, if you look at pg 7, if a model has WS 0 then it is hit automatically, no roll involved. So there is precedent here, as WS is the other stat that is comparison based with a chart.

Thus, if you have a GKGM, 3 tech marines, and an inquisitor all with rad grenades AND all in separate units, AND all 5 units initiate a charge on the same enemy unit, then the enemy unit will suffer -5 to their toughness, stopping at 0. And at 0, they are wounded automatically instead of on a 2+, as they have a 0 level characteristic as per page 7.

Edit: QuiteOrkmi, a model with a 0 strength value can not ever roll to wound, as per page 7. Thus without another rule, a model reduced to 0 str can not ever hurt the enemy.

Well met, as for the 0 strength... I just could not resist putting forth that... it makes sense that a 0 characteristic would result in auto _____ as a model with a 0 BS does not auto hit on a 6...

QuietOrkmi wrote:

DevianID wrote:After reading the entry, I believe that separate units each containing Rad Grenades would stack, but multiple rad grenades in the same unit do NOT stack.

Now, characteristics CAN be 0, and range from 0-10. They dont go below zero. If a characteristic is 0, then per the rules the model has no ability in that characteristic. Thus, when you get to the 'to-wound' portion, you must compare your strength to the enemies toughness, BUT the enemy with toughness actually HAS no toughness. Thus no roll to wound is taken.

Now, if you look at pg 7, if a model has WS 0 then it is hit automatically, no roll involved. So there is precedent here, as WS is the other stat that is comparison based with a chart.

Thus, if you have a GKGM, 3 tech marines, and an inquisitor all with rad grenades AND all in separate units, AND all 5 units initiate a charge on the same enemy unit, then the enemy unit will suffer -5 to their toughness, stopping at 0. And at 0, they are wounded automatically instead of on a 2+, as they have a 0 level characteristic as per page 7.

Edit: QuiteOrkmi, a model with a 0 strength value can not ever roll to wound, as per page 7. Thus without another rule, a model reduced to 0 str can not ever hurt the enemy.

Well met, as for the 0 strength... I just could not resist putting forth that... it makes sense that a 0 characteristic would result in auto _____ as a model with a 0 BS does not auto hit on a 6...

touche salesman. i forgot about that

Nah T0 just means you are dead. If T is ever reduced to 0 like wounds you are removed as a casualty.

FlingitNow wrote:Nah T0 just means you are dead. If T is ever reduced to 0 like wounds you are removed as a casualty.

Is there a rule to back this up? I failed to find one.

FlingitNow wrote:Nah T0 just means you are dead. If T is ever reduced to 0 like wounds you are removed as a casualty.

definatly not, there is nothing thats causing automatic wounds in a game of 40k (ie: magic the gathering: toughness goes down to 0 you die from taking 0 damage). they have to be hit by something in the 40k games, you may not be able to stand the hit, but you have wounds. the wounds are pretty much the only reason it wouldnt be an automatic id.

im 50/50 about it being wound on 2+ or just id on hit. the problem i have with auto id is that 1 always fails.

Ignore me the rule is in fantasy...

FlingitNow wrote:Ignore me the rule is in fantasy...

this isnt fantasy, pivoting isnt movement here

unless otherwise stated, 6 always passes and 1 always fails.

The rules tell us that a model with WS0 is automatically hit. As both WS and S/T are using a reference table, I'm inclined to say it's an auto-wound.

The whole thing is kind of theoretical anyways, if two squads of grey knights charge a unit of gretchin, it's not like they aren't getting murdered anyways.

yeah just got confused thought it was a rule in both...

Jidmah wrote:The rules tell us that a model with WS0 is automatically hit. As both WS and S/T are using a reference table, I'm inclined to say it's an auto-wound.

The whole thing is kind of theoretical anyways, if two squads of grey knights charge a unit of gretchin, it's not like they aren't getting murdered anyways.

never give up hope, iv seen weirder happen. (genesteelers squad got ate by ig infanty) bad rolls happen

There is no rule for rad grenades stacking in the codex.

i am going to go ahead and predict the faq will implicitly state that they do not have a cumulative effect.

In the same way grenades that give enemy units assaulting a unit with them -1 initiative do not give -2 initiative to a unit multi assaulting 2 units with said grenades...

kenzosan wrote:

Jidmah wrote:The rules tell us that a model with WS0 is automatically hit. As both WS and S/T are using a reference table, I'm inclined to say it's an auto-wound.

The whole thing is kind of theoretical anyways, if two squads of grey knights charge a unit of gretchin, it's not like they aren't getting murdered anyways.

never give up hope, iv seen weirder happen. (genesteelers squad got ate by ig infanty) bad rolls happen

Indeed sir I had 1 crusader hold out against 6 th/sh terminators and my space monkeys manage to (by what i can only assume was a junk punch) drop 2 of them. To bad that game was already more or less lost for me :/.

blaktoof wrote:There is no rule for rad grenades stacking in the codex.

i am going to go ahead and predict the faq will implicitly state that they do not have a cumulative effect.

In the same way grenades that give enemy units assaulting a unit with them -1 initiative do not give -2 initiative to a unit multi assaulting 2 units with said grenades...

It does not have to tell you to stack, stacking is the default.

I have no idea what genades you are talking about, but if the do that, they are either worded or faqed that way.

Actually pivoting is movement from the perspective of embarked models.

Yeah, first to reiterate if you have 0 toughness you dont roll a die to determine if you wound, you wound automatically, no roll can be taken.

Second, the wording is that the unit with grenades does something. Thus if you have 2 units, then you do 2 somethings. If the grenades did a wound, then you would do 2 wounds from 2 units with the grenade, right?

A lot of other rules say that if you are hit by something then something happens to you. Here, you have the argument for not stacking, because whether there is 1 or 2 somethings, the rule is that if you are hit by something. 1 or 2 does not matter. Weapons that cause enemies hit to take pinning checks, for example, dont stack in the same unit.

Anything stacks, unless specified otherwise.

Pinning was faqed to say otherwise. Specific Rules are worded to work otherwise (for example Furious Charge or Waargh! banners). Unless done so, the default is used.

If you disagree that stacking is the default, you never get more than +1 to the roll on the damage table, even when firing DS1 weapons at open topped vehicles, models with strenght or initiative bonis by marks of chaos/weapons/wargear never benefit from either furious charge bonus, and any unit with mark of nurgle would be imune to rad grenades.
Since all of this is not the case, stacking is the default, and a permissive ruleset always uses the default unless specifing otherwise.