FAQs and Grenades

[Lord Manton]

The other night I was playing a game and my opponent went to roll multiple grenade attacks. We hadn't clarified prior to the game whether the FAQs would be used, and since he made a compelling argument that they're just in draft stage, I let it slide and we played on.

Afterwards we were having a chat. Basically, I don't mind either way about the new grenade ruling, but some people seem genuinely put out.

Question:
What is the rationale for getting more than one grenade attack per unit in a close combat?

The rule book seems pretty clear on this one, with the only real confusion being that it says "throw."

"Some grenades can be used to make shooting attacks or attacks in the Fight sub-phase, albeit to different effect. Only one grenade (of any type) can be thrown by a unit per phase."

[CoffeeGrunt]

People interpreted "throw" as the standard 8" Ranged Attack you can make with Grenades. This made sense given how GW priced upgrades like Krak and Haywire Grenades, as well as Meltabombs. I.e., paying 50pts so my Platoon of 50 Guardsmen can use one Krak Grenade per Assault Phase has taken it from, "eh, maybe occasionally," to, "literally never."

Why is the cost per-model nine times out of ten, when the models don't get to use one each?

Ah well, either way. It makes vehicles far more durable against Assault, I guess, as well as Monstrous Creatures.

[Nurglitch]

People interpreted "throw" as the standard 8" Ranged Attack you can make with Grenades. This made sense given how GW priced upgrades like Krak and Haywire Grenades, as well as Meltabombs. I.e., paying 50pts so my Platoon of 50 Guardsmen can use one Krak Grenade per Assault Phase has taken it from, "eh, maybe occasionally," to, "literally never."

Why is the cost per-model nine times out of ten, when the models don't get to use one each?

Ah well, either way. It makes vehicles far more durable against Assault, I guess, as well as Monstrous Creatures.

Actually, paying for one per model means that you'll always have a krak grenade handy, rather than having them be able to be sniped out like special weapons and characters. So there's that. Plus, being able to huck a grenade is really handy at time. I'm very happy to pay 50pts for five of my Infantry Squads to be able to use a krak grenade in both shooting and assault. Ain't how it used to be, but should an Imperial Guard Infantry Squad really be able to take down a Tyranid Monstrous Creature in an assault?

[CoffeeGrunt]

For 300pts? Yes.

[Charistoph]

People interpreted "throw" as the standard 8" Ranged Attack you can make with Grenades.

It is also because "throw" was only used with the Shooting Profiles and "used" was the verb in the Assault Profiles.

This is consistent through all variants of the Grenades. "Throw" is never used for the Assault portion of the Grenades, and "used" is never the verb of the Shooting portion of Grenades.

[Lord Manton]

For 300pts? Yes.

But this 300pts surely encompasses not only the grenades, but the fact that there are five squads of infantry. each with lasguns and totalling 50 men. Now, I don't know if lasgun fire can take down a MC, but if you use all 300pts of troops to mob said MC, it surely won't be able to kill them all, and you would get 5 grenade attacks (as they're separate units), so you could potentially hurt the MC, otherwise you can keep it locked in combat and out of the game for a long long time.

It is also because "throw" was only used with the Shooting Profiles and "used" was the verb in the Assault Profiles.

I think this is where the original interpretation really came from, but when you read the initial sentence, the first thing in the Grenades section of the rules, it isn't much of a stretch to understand that it applies to both phases. The first sentence mentions both shooting and assault, and the second sentence clarifies that only one grenade can be used per phase. Sure, you can read each sentence in isolation from each other, but that's not how rules work in 40k or any other game.

[CoffeeGrunt]

But this 300pts surely encompasses not only the grenades, but the fact that there are five squads of infantry. each with lasguns and totalling 50 men. Now, I don't know if lasgun fire can take down a MC, but if you use all 300pts of troops to mob said MC, it surely won't be able to kill them all, and you would get 5 grenade attacks (as they're separate units), so you could potentially hurt the MC, otherwise you can keep it locked in combat and out of the game for a long long time.

Nope. One, lasguns are terrible. Even if you have a lot of them. Two, the Carnifex will inflict enough Wounds to cause the Guardsmen to run away and be Swept. Three, they're better deployed as one, large blob. Five individual squads of Guardsmen die like flies.

[Lord Manton]

Is that not why the good Lord Emperor gave us Comissars?

Though I accept the short comings of lasguns and such.

[CoffeeGrunt]

Adding a Commissar adds to the cost.

[Charistoph]

I think this is where the original interpretation really came from, but when you read the initial sentence, the first thing in the Grenades section of the rules, it isn't much of a stretch to understand that it applies to both phases. The first sentence mentions both shooting and assault, and the second sentence clarifies that only one grenade can be used per phase. Sure, you can read each sentence in isolation from each other, but that's not how rules work in 40k or any other game.

But the first sentence does not associate "throwing" with either shooting and assault. It would be a stretch to make that association. In fact, nothing does in the section until it starts going through the aspects of each Grenade. If they only wanted one Grenade used per unit per Phase, they should have kept their verbs straight. Often a rule difference can be based on the word chosen, such as Psychic Shriek "Wounding" a Vehicle.