Switch Theme:

Ideal implementation of Grenades in tabletop combat games?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut







This is something I am curious about: How would folks ideally see grenades used in a game, either skirmish or "early 40k" (3rd/4th in terms of size)?

2nd ed 40k or Warmachine have "every model with a grenade can throw one." Which could easily bog a game down in hit rolls, scatter rolls, etc. Minutiae.

On the other hand, 40k from 3rd-5th "abstracted" grenades as melee tools. 6th onwards kept this, with "one model per unit may throw a grenade" which was just eh.

Personally, I have a soft spot for the Brikwars 2001 implementation, where you bought a particular combination of explosive and delivery vector. DIY-ish but this meant a Mk1 explosive could be a grenade, landmine, or a warhead. However, this seems more suited for rpgs instead of regular wargames.

Another question is, should there be rules for using grenades in varied ways besides the "pull the pin and chuck?" I remember reading an issue of Command Magazine, where a battle report of Panzergruppe Guderian fluffed out an assault as German soldiers tearing up basement floorboards and dropping grenades to flush out Soviet holdouts. Other options could include rolling them down gutters, boobytrapping terrain, etc. A question becomes, would being allowed to "boobytrap" areas in-game slow things down unnecessarily, or allow for more varied gameplay?

For really small skirmish games (ex: One Xcom Skyranger Team), grenades that don't immediately explode have the potential for...shenanigans. Variable countdown fuses and all. That said, I generally want to avoid such items, as too many "maintenance markers" slows things down. Gorramn Blind Grenades.

What are your thoughts regarding what grenades "should" be able to do in a game?

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/11/24 16:35:33


 
   
Made in gr
Thermo-Optical Spekter





Greece

Depends on the game and the detail one wants to go really, as with most things the more models on the table the less the detail there can be.

I do not have an ideal implementation for grenade rules to be entirely honest.
   
Made in us
[DCM]
Infiltrating Prowler





Portland, OR

Grenades don't really slow the game down because they aren't done in addition to "shooting". Typically they are used as an either-or action, either you shoot your weapon or you throw a grenade. Both of these actions still require you to roll in order to have a successful hit. The only real difference is that Grenades could, but don't have to, require you to roll a scatter which in itself doesn't really add a lot of time. That extra step alone doesn't add a lot of game time. Traditionally grenades are utility-based, if I'm able to shoot a target then I'm not really going to throw a grenade as shooting tends to have more benefit.


 
   
Made in ca
Longtime Dakkanaut




Welcoming refugees from Dumbfethistan

Assuming a 28mm D6 game, grenades could be a 6" shooting attack that hits on a 2+ regardless of cover, with 1s hitting your own unit, to represent thrown back/ bad bounce, or even whoops-I-threw-the-pin.

We were once so close to heaven, St. Peter came out and gave us medals; declaring us "The nicest of the damned". 
   
Made in gr
Thermo-Optical Spekter





Greece

 Dark Severance wrote:
Grenades don't really slow the game down because they aren't done in addition to "shooting". Typically they are used as an either-or action, either you shoot your weapon or you throw a grenade. Both of these actions still require you to roll in order to have a successful hit. The only real difference is that Grenades could, but don't have to, require you to roll a scatter which in itself doesn't really add a lot of time. That extra step alone doesn't add a lot of game time. Traditionally grenades are utility-based, if I'm able to shoot a target then I'm not really going to throw a grenade as shooting tends to have more benefit.



Since he did mentioned 2nd edition, I may have fielded Harlequins back in the day and at least 40 blind grenades per shooting phase add an interesting amount of extra time per turn.
   
Made in us
[DCM]
Infiltrating Prowler





Portland, OR

 PsychoticStorm wrote:
Since he did mentioned 2nd edition, I may have fielded Harlequins back in the day and at least 40 blind grenades per shooting phase add an interesting amount of extra time per turn.
That isn't an issue with how grenades work but really is technically two different issues. WH40K back in the day, played with very little or any terrain at all meaning in order to advance or utilize open spaces effectively, relying on blind grenades was a valid tactic. Having better terrain blocking fire lanes eliminates the reliance on using grenades. The other issue, although relevant to the terrain, is that they provided a larger benefit than they should of as a result of the terrain. At least that is my opinion. If you find that the choice is to utilize grenades with every movement or attack, over just moving, other actions then there is an issue with the purpose of the grenades.

 
   
Made in us
Master Sergeant




Iowa

I like the old 40k method of modifying assaults, especially those against vehicles. Bolt Action has a similar effect with anti-tank grenades letting you destroy vehicles instead of just inflicting superficial damage.

I would like to see grenades also give bonuses against units in structures.
   
Made in us
Slicing Orb of Xandros






SoCal, USA!

Grenades are a function of scale. In most cases (Flames of War, 40k, Bolt Action), grenades are so close in, they can be abstracted as part of close combat.

OTOH, if I'm playing a 25+mm gang fight on a "true scale" board, then I suppose they could be a shooting-equivalent action with scatter, etc.

-- 9k Craftworld Tian-Bing Eldar
-- 7k Ragnarok 1st "Einherjar" Imperial Guard
-- 4k Knights Sovereign SM
-- 2k Pale Templars CSM
-- 2k Ordo Lucifer =I=
-- 1k Sisters SoB
-- 4k Solland's Ghosts WFB Dogs of War 
   
Made in gb
Highlord of Terra






Adrift within the vortex of my imagination.

I think one model per ten members in the unit (round up) can throw a grenade instead of shooting is correct.

My reasoning for this is that it is fairly cinematic, and mostly accurate. Grenades are an upgrade or standard equipment for a squad, if squad threw many grenades at once, no more grenades, wheras throwing one normaly has the desired effect.
A squad that has grenades may well enter combat with less than one grenade per member of the squad, a squad would still have grenades. Larger squads can have more throws and still keep enough for later.

Some specialist units do their own thing, like stikk bommerz.

n'oublie jamais

It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. By the juice of the brew my thoughts aquire speed, my mind becomes strained, the strain becomes a warning. It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion.
 
   
Made in us
Plaguelord Titan Princeps of Nurgle






Jacksonville, NC

So in reality grenades are thrown when clearing an area or trying to hit unknown enemies in cover, or while in cover to try and damage the enemy on their way in. That said, usually only a few people carry or throw them at a time, and they are often inaccurate as f*** unless you roll it in.

I would say that only one model in a unit can throw a grenade. If its outside 6", roll a hit to scatter for a small template (on a 1 the template is placed on the throwing model). If its within 6" (such as an overwatch, or a charge) then it hits the nearest model to the thrower and that where the template is placed. This would be more thematic, realistic, and less time consuming.

TL;DR - Outside 6" - roll to hit for small template/scatter. On a 1 it hits the model that threw. Within 6" - auto hit small template on closest model.

Newly returned to 40k, Nurgle! 
   
Made in ca
Purposeful Hammerhead Pilot






Grenades can be dangerous to your own troops, especially fragmentation grenades. Modern frag grenades have a casualty radius of 15 meters! And they can send fragments for hundreds of meters. Defensive grenades (designed to be thrown from solid cover) have a casualty radius larger than the average throwing range, which is really scary. I think in a skirmish game (most tabletop combat games), the use of frag grenades would be very low for this reason. Any unit that doesn't have something solid to hide behind shouldn't be throwing grenades!

   
Made in us
Slicing Orb of Xandros






SoCal, USA!

 John Prins wrote:
Any unit that doesn't have something solid to hide behind shouldn't be throwing grenades!


Or, if they're super-armored, like a Space Marine...

-- 9k Craftworld Tian-Bing Eldar
-- 7k Ragnarok 1st "Einherjar" Imperial Guard
-- 4k Knights Sovereign SM
-- 2k Pale Templars CSM
-- 2k Ordo Lucifer =I=
-- 1k Sisters SoB
-- 4k Solland's Ghosts WFB Dogs of War 
   
Made in ca
Purposeful Hammerhead Pilot






 JohnHwangDD wrote:
 John Prins wrote:
Any unit that doesn't have something solid to hide behind shouldn't be throwing grenades!


Or, if they're super-armored, like a Space Marine...


Space Marines are always behind something solid!

OTOH, even they can be hurt by frag grenades, so maybe they better be careful too.

   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut







Another question I have is with regards to "arcs."

While things like bullets ricoheting or penetrating through solid walls are ideally reserved for ultra-simulationist games and would only slow things down, grenades are known for their bounce factor. If you throw it at a wall, it will roughly bounce off a variable angle of incidence. It's harder to throw a grenade 20 feet high than it is to throw it 20 feet forward, etc.

Should Grenades only be throwable if there would be cover between them and the throwers?
   
Made in au
The Dread Evil Lord Varlak





For a 25mm game or thereabouts, unless its a skirmish game then having every single model in a unit throw a grenade and tracking each scatter is bad. But capping grenades to a single thrower is also plain horrible.

It's not a 25mm game, but Epic:Armageddon has a nice solution, where you add up the number of models firing a blast weapon and compare to a table, this tells you the odds of hitting each enemy under the template, if you get extra templates to place on the target, and any extra suppressive effects. The Epic system isn't perfect and be gamed a little, but something similar could be done to produce a fairly quick way of resolving a unit flinging a pile of grenades at the enemy.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/11/20 08:39:41


“Faced with the choice between changing one’s mind and proving that there is no need to do so, almost everyone gets busy on the proof.”

John Kenneth Galbraith 
   
Made in gb
Highlord of Terra






Adrift within the vortex of my imagination.

Why is capping grenade use horrible? If every soldier threw a grenade there would be much wasteage and they would likely have no grenades quickly, in only-war they need more for later.

n'oublie jamais

It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. By the juice of the brew my thoughts aquire speed, my mind becomes strained, the strain becomes a warning. It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion.
 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut







Why not scale it by size: For every full 5 models beyond the first in a unit, an additional model may throw a grenade?
   
Made in us
Slicing Orb of Xandros






SoCal, USA!

EVERY soldier is trained to throw grenades, so 1/5 is kind of a silly restriction.

-- 9k Craftworld Tian-Bing Eldar
-- 7k Ragnarok 1st "Einherjar" Imperial Guard
-- 4k Knights Sovereign SM
-- 2k Pale Templars CSM
-- 2k Ordo Lucifer =I=
-- 1k Sisters SoB
-- 4k Solland's Ghosts WFB Dogs of War 
   
Made in gr
Thermo-Optical Spekter





Greece

Assuming we discuss about regular, professional, soldiers with good training yes.
   
Made in us
Slicing Orb of Xandros






SoCal, USA!

Even if we're talking about Taliban, EVERY one of them can throw a grenade.

The ones who couldn't throw a grenade died during training.

-- 9k Craftworld Tian-Bing Eldar
-- 7k Ragnarok 1st "Einherjar" Imperial Guard
-- 4k Knights Sovereign SM
-- 2k Pale Templars CSM
-- 2k Ordo Lucifer =I=
-- 1k Sisters SoB
-- 4k Solland's Ghosts WFB Dogs of War 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut







For games that are larger-scale, would it make sense for "alternate uses" of Grenades to be akin to perks bought by Heroes to use, or "special skills?" Like, supposing a unit can fly or is on a catwalk, should dropping a grenade be implicit?
   
Made in us
The Conquerer






Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios

There is a bit of a problem with grenades, namely that there is always a huge disconnect between real grenades and how grenades end up getting portrayed.

Real life, every soldier tends to be given grenades. Typically only a couple. Grenades are also actually quite hideously powerful. Games tend to fail at portraying this for balance reasons. They don't make grenades powerful enough, and they tend to limit their use. Because otherwise we would mostly have every soldier throw a grenade if we could.

Maybe the issue is very few games bother to make you keep track of ammunition use. IE: If grenades were limited use, but you could use them all in one go if you wanted, it might be more realistic.

Sure, go ahead and have your whole tactical squad throw Frags. They can only do this twice of course because they only have 2 frag grenades each. But this adds bookkeeping to your game. Though it wouldn't be that bad.

Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines

Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.

MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! 
   
Made in gr
Thermo-Optical Spekter





Greece

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Even if we're talking about Taliban, EVERY one of them can throw a grenade.

The ones who couldn't throw a grenade died during training.


You might be surprised how much this part of training is skipped, it costs a lot, grenades are dangerous in hands of troops, ectr ectr. especially in armies that are not 100% professional.
   
Made in us
Slicing Orb of Xandros






SoCal, USA!

I watch the Tailban fail videos, so I assume they do train. I particularly like the mortar fails.

-- 9k Craftworld Tian-Bing Eldar
-- 7k Ragnarok 1st "Einherjar" Imperial Guard
-- 4k Knights Sovereign SM
-- 2k Pale Templars CSM
-- 2k Ordo Lucifer =I=
-- 1k Sisters SoB
-- 4k Solland's Ghosts WFB Dogs of War 
   
Made in ca
Huge Hierodule






Outflanking

 Grey Templar wrote:
There is a bit of a problem with grenades, namely that there is always a huge disconnect between real grenades and how grenades end up getting portrayed.

Real life, every soldier tends to be given grenades. Typically only a couple. Grenades are also actually quite hideously powerful. Games tend to fail at portraying this for balance reasons. They don't make grenades powerful enough, and they tend to limit their use. Because otherwise we would mostly have every soldier throw a grenade if we could.

Maybe the issue is very few games bother to make you keep track of ammunition use. IE: If grenades were limited use, but you could use them all in one go if you wanted, it might be more realistic.

Sure, go ahead and have your whole tactical squad throw Frags. They can only do this twice of course because they only have 2 frag grenades each. But this adds bookkeeping to your game. Though it wouldn't be that bad.


This is the sort of thing that would be great for a skirmish game (Each soldier may spend upgrade slots and pay a couple points to add one or more grenades), but could get really cloggy in a larger scale game.

Q: What do you call a Dinosaur Handpuppet?

A: A Maniraptor 
   
Made in us
Incorporating Wet-Blending





Houston, TX

Well, there is also a practical problem trying to deploy thrown explosives while under fire. Throwing from a standing position affords the greatest distance and accuracy, but also is the most vulnerable to direct fire. Crouching throws can be done if there is only low cover, but degrades range and accuracy. Worst is throwing from a prone position.

An entire squad trying to ready and throw grenades simultaneously is a great way to get mowed down, and probably overkill anyway. 1 or 2 effectively thrown should do the same job and allow for covering fire.

Generally, you want to suppress the enemy first or come from an unexpected angle as the thrower is vulnerable to fire. That is the ideal use, after all, dislodging entrenched enemies. The more fixed the target is, especially when protected from direct fire, the more useful they become.

Trying to deploy grenades against mobile forces or when shifting position is much less effective. They can be used effectively when entrenched against advancing enemies. Remember that grenades also have to be armed then deployed, so training is very much a factor.

For game purposes, I would think reflecting grenade mechanics would only apply to smaller scale games. In unit based games, it should probably just be a part of the unit's overall firepower and provide a relative advantage. For skirmish games, whether to focus on dedicated, speedy movement, clinging to cover, engaging in direct fire, engaging in higher volume suppressive fire, or deploying a grenade should all be tactical decisions. Likewise, models should be able to deploy various grenades for various purposes. Fragmentation for short range, indirect high lethality blasts, incendiary for harder target /equipment elimination, smoke for cover/signals, etc. Of course, carrying more grenades results in more encumbrance. And poorly trained grenadiers may be a liability causing friendlies to get caught in blasts, revealing positions, blocking good fire lanes with smoke, etc.

Infinity seems to have some pretty neat mechanics for indirect fire weapons. I like the idea of allowing bounces, throwing through windows, etc. with the caveat that trying that while under fire will likely get you shot. Such a system also provides a nice role for suppressing fire.

-James
 
   
Made in au
The Dread Evil Lord Varlak





 Orlanth wrote:
Why is capping grenade use horrible? If every soldier threw a grenade there would be much wasteage and they would likely have no grenades quickly, in only-war they need more for later.


Two reasons it is bad.

1) It is arbitrary. You said grenades after the first tend to not add much more effect. Then write rules that model that. Have the first grenade give a powerful suppression effect, which subsequent grenades don't increase. Then the player is able to decide if the extra grenades are worth it for the small increase in effect. Your system, that doesn't model that impact but just mandates a standard doctrine for all forces, is arbitrary.

2) Conserving ammunition makes zero sense given the ultra-violent nature of almost all tabletop wargames. We are talking about games where one or both sides are regularly reduced to a quarter or less of their starting forces, where whole squads getting wiped in a single phase is routine. These are environments where the best defence, in some games the only defence, is to kill the enemy before they kill you. In that environment the idea of a squad in very close range with the enemy saving some of its weapons for later is downright bizarre.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Grey Templar wrote:
There is a bit of a problem with grenades, namely that there is always a huge disconnect between real grenades and how grenades end up getting portrayed.

Real life, every soldier tends to be given grenades. Typically only a couple. Grenades are also actually quite hideously powerful. Games tend to fail at portraying this for balance reasons. They don't make grenades powerful enough, and they tend to limit their use. Because otherwise we would mostly have every soldier throw a grenade if we could.


Sort of. You're right that the power of grenades is downplayed, but actually the power of every weapon is downplayed. This thing in most games where around half the time people hit by missile attacks carry on as if nothing happened is fairly ridiculous. This is done because the stuff that actually keeps people safe - staying out of sight and only exposing yourself to the enemy to take quick snapshots, would likely be very boring to play in a game. So instead we build wargames where cover is only slightly useful and most survivability comes from being able to shrug off bullets and explosions.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/12/06 01:56:03


“Faced with the choice between changing one’s mind and proving that there is no need to do so, almost everyone gets busy on the proof.”

John Kenneth Galbraith 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut






Have any of you looked at ultramodern skirmish games? Things like Spectre Ops, Skirmish Sangin, that sort of thing? Those games are most likely to have a "realistic" depiction of grenades. SS is either written by veterans of Afghanistan or has had contributions from those who did.

Spectre distinguishes between throwing grenades to blow someone up and throwing smoke, gas, etc, grenades at an area of ground. I've not played Spectre much, and hardly used grenades even then, but IIRC the main effect of lobbing a frag grenade at the enemy is to suppress a unit (but then again, the main effect of shooting them with a rifle is the same )
   
Made in gb
Fresh-Faced New User




 Orlanth wrote:
Why is capping grenade use horrible? If every soldier threw a grenade there would be much wasteage and they would likely have no grenades quickly, in only-war they need more for later.


In chapter aprove 2nd book they had an article where they showed how to use smoke grenades using a space wolves grey hunter pack. the orriginal 40k had far too many grenades when they cut down the grenade list inevitably things got moved or deleted so hence the article. Anyway the Space wolves fighting Eldar all used their smoke grenades in order to create a screen for them to escape. the eldar got demodifiyer for shooting at the spae wolves and the spacewolves moved back into the line with the rest of the army.
   
 
Forum Index » Game Design
Go to: