Why can't I throw a grenade?

[Muse2k8]

I can't see it even being practical. You could do more damage shooting.

[sendaf]

You will only find that being able to throw grenades is a hinderance to your game. As such keeping grenades as assault only, which is their role in real life anyway, is both more realistic and conducive to a more streamlined, smoother gaming experience.

Why exactly do you feel they will hinder the game? assuming they would be "assault weapons" it would not be very different from using a pistol anyway. Maybe shooting them in the assault phase is a step too far but its worth a try. Besides, house rules are not ment to be streamlined in the first place.

[Heirodule]

Just for once i think the honest answer lies in fluff. Bolters are in effect, rapid fire grenade launchers. Why bother throwing a grenade a few meters when youve got a weapon that can headshot someone from hundreds of meters away? Even guardsman's lasguns would boil the tissues of their target, grenades would simply be sub-par compared to actual weapons.

Using them to keep enemys pinned down in cover is probably as much use as you could expect to get.

[Muse2k8]

Using them to keep enemys pinned down in cover is probably as much use as you could expect to get.

Pretty much the point of a grenade tbh. They weren't designed to be destructive weapons but to pin down your enemy so that you could advance/retreat and keep the enemy from shooting you.

By all means play house rules, that is the fun of this game but they were dropped from 40k back in the days as throwable for the reason they were weak, ineffective and not a realistic interpretation of a grenades use.

Tbh a range of 6 - 8, str 3, ap - would be a fair assessment using a 2p coin as a blast marker.

Again though everyone has a different opinion

[antique_nova]

i use grenades in halo to kill always, or severly dam,age my enemy to kill them quicker. in what way does a grenade pin the target? by throwing it in front of the enemy? at thenm or behind? in a tight space like a building i would rather throw a grenade than shoot a lasgun with rapid fire. bolters are slightly different, they shoot explosive rounds and can punch through most city buildings.
i just though of a rule. instead of rapid firing, you can throw a grenade and get opne shot off, maybe at -1 BS?, but you cant charge into combat. i thought about a -1 I as well, but i think that's too much. would be nice if 40k had the fantasy stand and shoot and we could minus 1 to our initiative?

thanks
antique_nova

[sendaf]

We could make a table that include a list of generic grenades that all armies have acess to buy for their troops (like the common magic items in WHF this would allow you to purchase grenades that are actually useful and cover a unit's weakness. So if my IG vets have 3 flamers, they could all purchase plasma grenades and be able to throw them at termies instead of using their flamers (or chuck them while assaulting after useing the flamers in the shooting phase.)

in many games they may not be practical but its not ment to be a game changing mechanic

[Korona]

I agree that the rules suck but also agree that having a blast marker for each grenade is too much for a standard game. The problem with making grenades an assault weapon is that it really hurts units with fleet since they can't run and still use their grenades before an assault. To that end I really like how FW handled the Death Korps Engineer Squad's "Gas Grenades" -

Basically they can only be used once, you declare they are being used before an assault and they give the Engineers an initiative of 10. They also deal D6 Strength D6 hits with no cover saves.
I would tone them down a little since Gas Grenades cost 20 points. The free assault grenades could just give the standard "go at initiative order regardles of cover" and deal D6 Strength D3+1 hits on the charge.