Well, how could you know that they were behind the wall if there was no line of sight?
"Recon by fire"
or in this case, grenade.
If there is noise, movement or fire coming from behind an obstacle, why not?
Risks a "blue on blue" if you're uncertain where your lads, & any friendlies, are.
I would have given it a cover modifier just to make it a little more difficult.
Certainly reasonable, given the opportunity to have one flung back...
Of course construction of that wall will enter into the decision making process.
Always good to be reasonably certain you won't self inflict.
We decided I couldn't because I didn't have line of sight to the point of ground on the other side of the wall. Was that correct?
No. Rulesmanship, not based in reality. I can shoot, or throw a grenade, any damn where I please. Question is,
should I? Ammunition concerns, friendlies, revealing my own position, collateral damage, all play a part in the decision to engage
without a clear target.
Matters not if it is ball ammunition, a grenade, a belt of MG, a tank round or one from a howitzer, all it takes is the will.
During a recent game, my opponent hid some figures behind a wall that completely blocked line of sight. I wanted to toss a grenade over the wall as my rifle armed guys couldn't shoot them.
In this case you wanted a crack at what you
could see, but weren't
supposed to... Was it an ambush? A trap? Or a matter of circumstance. Justify
why you would use a grenade under these circumstances, & I'd allow it. " 'cause I don't have LoS to shoot 'em" does NOT persuade me. Send a squad, or a squaddie, to draw fire, then no argument about rationale. Tis a valid tactic, if dangerous & unpleasant for your bait.
YMMV
Valerik
still uses the pin of his first live grenade as a keyring