Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Arbitrator

The problem with Commissars.

162 posts in this topic

Dulahan said:

Honestly, this problem is writ large with all the support specialists. 

 

Ogryns?  They're not part of a normal platoon structure.  They're their own units.  (And I'll ignore my issues with how they are represented mechanically!)

Ratlings?  OK, MAYBE.  Some regiments.  But not really, tend to be their own things.  Still, one of only two that isn't too theme breaking most of the time.

Tech Priests?  Maybe in a Tank Game…  MAYBE.  But they'd be helping far more than just the PC's tanks. 

Stormtrooper?  WTF?  Seriously….  They make almost the least sense.  With a caveat I'll go into below.

Psyker?  Yeah, this is high level stuff too, not squad level.

Priest?  This is the only other one that makes some sense, especially in a more pious regiment.  Though I can't help but feel it would've been better represented by being a normal Guard Specialty called "Chaplain" instead.

 

Now, there are ways, but honestly an Enginseer, Psyker, and Commissar all dictate the campaign more than most things.  It would mean your squad is the squad attached to said uber specialists as a sort of bodyguard unit.  It is when this is the case there -might- be a justification for Storm Troopers.  Say said PC was the only survivor of a unit, so attached to the 'key role' type as a bodyguard.  (Especially Commissar and/or Psyker). 

 

Alternately, that group - Commissar, Psyker, and Stormtrooper almost make for a super specialist unit on their own.  And attaching a Priest to them as a command squad type thing almost makes sense.  But that is still a very different game than a group of normal guardsmen.

 

 

 

You're right,  to a point.  Specialists really are not part of your standard Imperial Guard squad.  However, Specialists are still part of the Imperial Guard and as such should be in the game.

 

To wit, Hammer Of the Emperor focuses on the "Guard" classes giving them new talents and advances - the Specialists get nothing from this book.

 

Specialists could be used as temporary/guest characters for when on of the Player Character's Guard character is medivac out.

 

Techpriests are pretty imortant for a setting that stresses the ignorance towards technology and where the average citizen lacks any mechanical aptitude.

 

If anything, I see problems with the Psyker and Abhumans based on the typical prejudices against those types of characters from the average Imperial Citizen. Sanctioned pysykers are a rare individuals and Abhumans are dying breeds based from the 40k cannon.

 

Only War gives you the tools to build the story.  As the Storyteller and or the Group have final say what actually makes it into the game and more importantly how the group will play this game.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It boils down to what version of the fluff you're following. All by itself, the classes make sense for Only War as written by FFG. It's just when you compare it to other sources such as GW's codices that you'll note discrepancies - such as Storm Troopers not being seconded as individuals but always as complete units, or Vostroyan Firstborn being an all-male regiment, or the lasgun charge slider being unique to the Triplex-pattern rather than a standard feature, ..
Pick what you prefer and adjust your game accordingly. That's the only way to prevent headache here.
 
As far as Priests go, that's probably the least problematic even as per the original fluff, simply because there's no real rules for how an Ecclesiarchy cleric has to behave in a regiment of the Guard. They can pretty much go where they want, and being members of a Warrior Church it is common to see them on the front lines. It doesn't take much to consider a young, fanatical cleric with pious aspirations of glory to pick a random squad of footsloggers to stick around.
 
Ultimately, "temporary/guest characters" as Darck Child mentioned is probably the easiest solution for the majority of Specialists, provided one has difficulties accepting them the way they are presented in FFG's RAW yet has someone in the group who absolutely wants to play one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ramza82 said:

"Commissars have been known to assume leadership positions for brief periods (usually only one battle), after executing a leading officer, such as a sergeant or minor lieutenant, and lead their charges forward with zeal and confidence that other Officers are rarely capable of even considering in the face of the enemy. Only a handful of Commissars have ever obtained leadership over large Imperial forces as a Lord Commander, or even a Governor Militant, such as Yarrick at Armageddon, and only a handful are known to have even retained full command of an entire regiment, such as Colonel-Commissar Ibram Gaunt. Commissars are enabled to execute any officer they see fit, including regimental commanding officers, and can even execute Lord Generals and Governors Militant if they have sufficient evidence of incompetence or treachery."

http://warhammer40k.wikia.com/wiki/Commissar

"Junior Commissar - Junior Commissars are subordinate to full Commissars, performing the role as a junior aide in the oversight of the regiment or voidship assigned to a full Commissar. They primarily perform as adjutants and in an investigatory role as well as carrying out the usual Commissarial duties. Junior Commissars often undertake their Commissarial role with smaller formations such as an individual squad, platoon or company."

 

They are line officers, they can't go around summarry executing command staff willy nilly! They're sole purpose is to make sure the rank and file guards men remain motivated and loyal. They can execute command staff sure, but that would be a rare situation, and they wouldn't be able to just walk up and shoot him like a guardsman. They were need a valid reason which would require judicial tribunal. You cant walk up to a Lord General and point a gun in his face and just call him a coward.

I dont believe anyone here was making the arguement that they can just execute anyone they want whenever they want, however if they have sufficient evidence that the officer was derelict in their duties they are able to execute anyone they see fit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One would hope that a Player playing a Commissar will use common sense when playing said character.  More importantly that the Storyteller takes into consideration any consequences stemming from the Commissars' actions.

 

Like the squad plus commissar was intended to fight an ork patrol of similar size and strength.  Prior to the two forces meeting the Commissar executes two comrades thus weaking the Imperial forces.

 

Worse what happens if replacements are a long time coming, then it's not just one encounter that the squad is weaker for…

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alot of long posts here, i would like to adress a few points here which have been repeated to the point where quoting is just an eyesore.

1) "Executing and uninjured soldier to motivate an injured one makes no sense" Well yes out of context and without the help of the gm to make use of what he probably dropped his starting 300 xp just to get so he could RP the character every 40k nerd ever wanted to be would make no sense. However if you were to say give him a valid reason to use his ability to execute the fresh faced stary eyed boy who marched off to war not knowing what it was or the horrors it held i can think of several reasons why he might show cowardice or incompetence.

For example his personal hero whom he follows around carrying most of his (or her no need to be gender exclusive) guns ammo and whatevery else the pc decided to saddle onto his pack mule (which is what is one of the real bizzare issues of the game!) see's his idolized hero whom has shown him most of what he knows about war since he got assigned to the unit lying in a pool of his own blood thinking of the girl he knew since he was a child and the woman he left at the space port with tears in her eyes the pc clutches a photo of her as he breaths what he thinks what are his final breaths of life. He freezes where he stands unable to contemplate what he see's a stary round catches him HE IS GRIPPED WITH TERROR! He screams "WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE!!!" and flees furthing crippling the morale of the unit. You turn to the player controlling the commisar he sees conviction in your eyes and he knows fear. You tell him that he knows what must be done that his duty demands that this poor boy thrust into a mans war cannot handle the burdens set upon his young shoulders, ask him if he CAN do it. Remind him how attatched he has become to the boy of all those conversations at meals all those batlles they have fought together of how he was supposed to remain detatched but how is still human, but also remind of that the burden falls upon HIS shoulders to do what is best for the squad, for that is what is best for the unit, for that is what is best FOR ALL OF MANKIND! Remind him of the God Emperor he was bred to serve and the passion and zealotry that grips his very soul. Then ask him "What do you do?" 

So yes excecuting an injured soldier for seemingly no reason is cruel stupid and a blatant abuse of power, but if you give him a good reason to be able to use the ability he bought at heavy expense of XP then it make for some deep and truly thoughtful roleplay. Essentially evil genius shoots minion twirls mustache and laughs vs "I am sorry but this is the way it must be" or "The man who assigns the punishment should swing the sword.

2) "Support units don't fit well with the usual guard in the lore and etc etc etc" 
Hmm well who made the 40k lore? Games Workshop, what do they do *Deep Breath* they make models. They realized that if they made a game out of their models they would sell more and did, "why are these giant blocks of men fighting each other?" well thats why they wrote the lore to explain why the models were the way they were and also justify the whole "Only War" aspect of the universe for why said game exists. 

The lore was written for the tabletop, a game not with men but with insane 50 man blocks of lasergun wielding hyper cloned troopers backed by artillery and all the other insanely awesome IG vehicles, yes it wouldn't make sense to have a lone ogryn model with the IG 50 man meatshield for vehicles/firing squad formation. Why do commisars exist and specialists exist? To buff said 50 man block for game purposes said lore reflects. ONLY WAR is not a models game it is an RPG you can be more flexible and squads aren't meant to only do 1 thing the way the models do RPG player characters are generally more versatile than that if you know the player like role playing. How they have taken said lore (LOVE the lore btw) and made a good RPG is amazing A+ to Fantasy Flight!

3) Insert Class Here is brocken and can be abused.
Well you know people who play these games are generally smart and left to make a hero of course said power can be abused. From what i've seen the games decision to balance out the specializations by you know giving some only 300 xp is smart. I am not arguing at all that it can't be abused and or what the offending players do is justified and not incredibly frustrating nor am i saying that these problems (and previosly mentioned ones) aren't legit just not hard to fix, this is a toughy cause you know players are human and we can break almost anything. My personal golden rule of running an RPG there is always a bigger fish, i usually roll an ungoddly brocken beat stick of hard to kill to whip out when i need to. It usually never gets to this point but still it's there and the players don't know about it. 
You think this is bad? Hand them a D&D 3.5 psionics hand book and tell me thats not hard to handle fun fact psionics is the most house banned 3.5 book ever.

Wasn't trying to be mean and i wish you the best of luck with your campaign, hope it goes well and be nice to your players and give them little treats to treasure forever, and if they are bad well you can play that game as a vengeful god of wrath and fire, or THOR god of thunder!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've played a Commissar in my last OW game. The other players liked him because I didn't do the 'shoot anyone disrespectful' character, but one who fought beside them, had a strong and funny German accent (DKoK) and even cooperated with some Eldar when our situation was dire. The only time I shot players was when the Psyker went all warp-derpy (it was his first time with one, wanted to see how long he'd endure while Pushing everytime).

Luckly we destroyed the 100 orks charging uphill and then the GM took that from our minds (basically a mindset reset). In the end of the campaign, we were fighting rebels when a Knight (yeah, the mini-Titan) shot plasma over me… luckly I survived and fell in the water (we were on a bridge). My companions destroyed the Knight and rescued me (scarred and burnt, but alive and serving the Emperor!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guards said:

Hmm well who made the 40k lore? Games Workshop, what do they do *Deep Breath* they make models. They realized that if they made a game out of their models they would sell more and did, "why are these giant blocks of men fighting each other?" well thats why they wrote the lore to explain why the models were the way they were and also justify the whole "Only War" aspect of the universe for why said game exists. 

The lore was written for the tabletop, a game not with men but with insane 50 man blocks of lasergun wielding hyper cloned troopers backed by artillery and all the other insanely awesome IG vehicles, yes it wouldn't make sense to have a lone ogryn model with the IG 50 man meatshield for vehicles/firing squad formation. Why do commisars exist and specialists exist? To buff said 50 man block for game purposes said lore reflects. ONLY WAR is not a models game it is an RPG you can be more flexible and squads aren't meant to only do 1 thing the way the models do RPG player characters are generally more versatile than that if you know the player like role playing.

Now, that sounds as if it'd put the burden of responsibility for a flawed interpretation on GW's shoulders - when you could just as well ask why FFG has made such a large number of Specialists available to be included with a grunt squad. The reason is rather obvious: simply because they figured that giving players an expanded amount of freedom for their characters would be preferable to sticking to what had been written before.

If one prefers one version or the other is up to anyone's individual taste, but I wouldn't fault GW for writing an oppressive, dystopian setting without accomodating for maximum versatility of the countless grunts within the draconian Imperial war machine. They already went out of their way to provide loopholes for people to come up with their own ideas (custom regiments from extremely diverse cultures), but of course this would still require people to write something new instead of taking GW's material and rewriting it because they just don't like one part of the other, or find it "too restrictive". Case in point: the existence of female Vostroyan Firstborn in this RPG's interpretation of the setting, because apparently it's just not cool enough to simply write another regiment with a similar style but without a gender-exclusive recruiting policy.

I for one fully understand when people are confused for something going against their expectations, even though in this case such confusion generally stems from a misinterpretation of how GW handles their IP, in that most fans still seem to believe in consistency between the different sources of fluff when it's generally not even meant to tie into each other.
Fortunately, it is comparatively easy to houseruly any differences for anyone truly bothered by such conflicts. For example, my current DW group is using GW's original background for the Deathwatch. Took us just about half an hour to "fix" things to our preferred interpretation of the setting. Anyone can easily do likewise - that's one of the big advantages of pen&paper RPG!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is one way to look at it yes, and equally valid to my way :) 

Perhaps you could allow me to clarify i was stating that FF did a good job with taking an existing lore that worked GREAT for what it was meant to do and turn it into something different that was still fun and enjoyable. 

I am very much so a "Personal Touch" GM/DM i handmake almost all my settings where 40k is the exception, to a degree i use the lore as a basis and build from there. Alsoi was more so attempting to constructively vent my frustration with what i had read. GW is good at what GW does, FF is good at what FF does. Blame falls on no ones shoulders basically saying here is my explanation for what i have seen repeated over two pages. Here are my direct answers to questions asked.

To your second point, having more options in an RPG is a bad thing why? I feel the game treats me with enough respect to say we are giving you alot but you can handle it. Think that all of these bizzare specialists in the squad makes no sense? Well you know it is pen and paper so you know house rule, but i stand by my point that it is not always needed. Sit down and talk with your players, make your own regiment have your first session be a "Zero" session where you make everything so next to time you can just roll deep. Ask the players why the want to play that engage with them. 4-6 intelligent people + the gm can easily come up with a valid solution for why the squad is together as has been since the dawn of tabletop RPGs also the game gives you a better start then well you all met in a bar now go forth and adventure??? -_-

A fair counterpoint however i never faulted them for well anything the made what they made and we seem to love since we are on this forum. I gave some insight as to WHY they made all this doing something to make money isn't bad, i was simply trying to address why in the lore mixed squads you would see in games like this wouldn't be accounted for. 

People: "This doesn't make sense with the lore why do we have mixed squads"
Me: "Hmm well here are my thoughts on why that might be." 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ooh, I understand completely - and from how I've understood the explanations of the various GW designers and BL authors, it is actually intended that you "make the setting your own", so to say!

It really comes down to the individual group/players, I think. I've always been very committed to consistency, so it was almost a shock to me when I realised that the 40k franchise does not even try to deliver on that angle. I've learned to cope with it, and now simply prefer the fluff from GW before anything else, whilst recognising all the other material as equally valid options to pick and choose from, all depending on one's own individual preferences.
 
But to answer your question: Having more options in an RPG is, of course, not inherently a bad thing. It's just subjectively bad when these options go against what you'd expect from the setting. Depending on how the material we've read shaped our interpretation of the setting, some things we read somewhere just don't add up. At times, we can work around them using various possible in-universe explanations, but other times it's just too much and we have a direct conflict that cannot be argued away without it sounding fishy.
 
Again, that doesn't mean that anyone is wrong there, this is just to explain why some people are surprised or even put off by such things: expectations. The more we read about X, the more likely it is we dislike something because it disagrees with what we've become used to. Just take all my previous ramblings about the "power gap" we have in FFG's RPGs between humans and Space Marines and the mere concept of "civilian bolters", for example - that was from a time shortly before the aforementioned epiphany regarding the issue of 40k and consistency. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Glad we understand each other :) thats what i always seek to do, i see why this is a problem for other people i get that and it's legit to me. My style i don't have this problem :) all the smart people we have at our table will something awesome and horrible about a game within the first hour of character gen. 

I love both lores, they play off of each other very well like an astral waltz. To me a game mechanics aren't the game it's just HOW you play the world, a game heart and soul should be the players and the FEEL of the game. Dark Heresy makes me feel indanger and it makes the combat that much more edgy, minutes to minute and time is running out. Only War sought to convey brotherhood sacrifice and the horrors of war, it seeks to provide the chance to role play life in the Imperial Guard, The Hammer of the Emperor. It gives the tools to do, i feel like this game put a sketch pad on the table with a pencil said have fun. For an example read the RP at the beggining of my first post i hope you enjoyed it :)

Back to commisars, a game is only as serious as it's players take it. If they don't care about scale by which a commisar would fluctuate then yes it would be ridiculus. Give them a reason to care, or show them why they should. Positive and Negative feedback can be useful we can give you ideas for this but ultimately you must decide what is best in each situation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Commissars were added by FFG for the sake of completeness, nothing more, same as Ogryns, Ratlings and Storm Troopers.  All 3 should require special considerations before being allowed.

Like the commissar could be just a "cadet-commissar" not a full commissar, so he is asigned to the squad for experience.

What i think would be an entertaining campaign would be an all Ogryn squad with 1 commissar "leading" them, and the Ogryn with the highest INT would be the "Bone 'Ead" Maybe with best quality cranial implants for Unatural INT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always viewed Commisars as outside the chain of command of the Imperial Guard.  They have authority, but they don't necessarily have military rank. As such they have the big picture civilian approach to Munitorium interests but no real command allowances to ensure them except through established Munitorium regulations.  They don't even technically have power outside of a war zone or Munitorium busness, iirc.

Essentially, Commisars only have as much authority as the soldiers allow them.  It's real easy for a Commisar to claim  authority on the field when they're the ones with their heads on straight and superior weaponry, but on post or outside of a battle, the Commisar's only real protection are his/her weapons and the same regulations s/he's sworn to uphold--if the Uplifting Primer that the guard's supposed to have on him still has all its pages. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Commissars have NO military rank and are not supposed to command troops.  To quote what someone else said: The Sergeant is there to order the soldiers to take a hill and the commissar is there to make sure they do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spazmunke said:

Commissars have NO military rank and are not supposed to command troops.  To quote what someone else said: The Sergeant is there to order the soldiers to take a hill and the commissar is there to make sure they do.

 

There is always going to be an exception to any rule, I can think of one example of a Commissar with rank, actually he holds both a military rank and is part of the Commissariat: Colonel - Commissar Ibram Gaunt .   ;)

 

He is one of the few exceptions.

 

But as of right now with the rules we have mechanically The Commissar is NOT part of the military.  It's unfortunate that the core riles didn't offer a ranking system for any of the Support Specialists - like  Cadet Commissar to Lord Commissar…  Maybe in a later supplement they can expand of this but for now we are left to our own devices…

 

It should be noted that the Commissar  rules describe is an experienced individual that holds that position.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My opinion on all of the support specialists is that they are included more for "completenes" sake, and should not be included without permission of the GM if at all.  They all seem to require a lot of work just to fit in. A commissar really wouldnt be assigned to a squad, nor would an Ogryn or Ratling.  Hell none of the Support guys would be assigned to a squad on a permenent basis.  In one game we played the ST was in the squad, but with heavy modifications, such as no ST carapace and no HS Lasgun, but had a long las if I remember.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spazmunke said:

My opinion on all of the support specialists is that they are included more for "completenes" sake, and should not be included without permission of the GM if at all.  They all seem to require a lot of work just to fit in. A commissar really wouldnt be assigned to a squad, nor would an Ogryn or Ratling.  Hell none of the Support guys would be assigned to a squad on a permenent basis.  In one game we played the ST was in the squad, but with heavy modifications, such as no ST carapace and no HS Lasgun, but had a long las if I remember.

 

I understand your point all to well, and I'm not going to dissuade you of it otherwise. On most levels I agree with it.

 

Having said this I could see where those roles would work in a story but not in every story.

 

Ultimately it's up to the Storyteller and the group to allow any character into the story.  The Storyteller wanst to run an armoured tank platoon, there isn't going to be much room for a weapon specialist aiming to become a marksman.  

 

Heck some roles/characters are best left suited as a NPC.

 

It all comes down to the group and the story they want to tell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have both a Commissar and a Tech Priest in out group as support specialties. 

At first we thought they might be out of place within our group but I trust both players to pull it off and they have.

Our Commissar isnt their just to Execute everyone or use his rank to bully the squad. It is for the Squads Chain of Command and Sgt to give out the orders. It is the Commissars job to ensure the orders are carried our and proper discipline is maintained. 

The Commander says charge the orks to buy the Tech Priest time to fix the ship. Weapon Specialist says No … Commissar shoots his comrade or intimidates him. 

Or

Werid Boy Casts a Fear spell and everyone fails … well the commissar is there and "Modivates" the squad to counter the Fear spell.


In these aspects of the game he fits in very well. I would have designed them a bit better for that role imho …  Summary Execution for instance would be to give everyone a bonus on WP tests vs Pinning/Fear or a reroll :P or both

They are there for moral support.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very true, any of the support specialists can do well in a group if you can roleplay it.  My biggest concern is the fluff reason why they are with your squad indefinetly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It should be remembered that the support specialist have no actual rank in the section's Imperial Guard regiment.

 

To be specific to Commisars, as this is the tread:

Ibram Gaunt is noted as being a wierd exception for Commissars in nearly every one of the Gaunt's ghost novels.

Commissars are there only to see disciplne is maintained; that orders obeyed; & ensure heretical & traitorous leanings squashed.

 

Commissars inhabit a grey area, they must obey orders from those higher up the IG chain of command, but can not actually give them, unless there is evidence of wrong doing from the ordering officer, then the Commissar can assume command if he/she is the senior Commisar available, but she/he better have the evidence to back him/her up with the rest of the Commisariate or she/he just may find themselves up against the wall.

 

Also, the Commissar is actually subject to THREE chains-of-authority, that of the regiment he/she is attached to; the departmento Munitorium; & the commisariate.

 

To use Dan Abnett's books; Gaunt has no love for the Munitorium paper work, so fobs all of it off onto Hark, who in turn fobs it off to the lower ranked commissars of the regiment. But the endless paper work from the Munitorium; Guard; & Commisariate are always poping up in the novels.

 

Player character Commissars should officially, be spending alot of their down time writing reports & filling out paper work to justify the actions taken; munitions expended; casualties taken; etc, by the PC's unit on the mission. This of course can nicely help the PC's if their current CO has secretly turned traitor.

 

Something the other guardsmen do not have to do, except the Sergent, but he only has to answer to the CO, & depending upon the regiment, may not have to write reports at all.

 

Only the Enginseer & Priest have similar demands upon their time, but they have absolutely no authority & no actual responsability with respect to the Guard, particularly the Enginseer.

 

As to why there is a permently assigned Commissar, well the 40K game has Commissars joining individual sections in the Codex:Imperial Guard army lists.

 

But my personal preference is that the standard Only War RPG unit is an ecclectic mix of personel from Guardsmen; Ratlings; Priests; to even Ogryns.

 

Obviously a misfit/cast-off unit that noone is really sure what to do with. So fob 'em off to a Commissar that the other Commissar's are not really sure what to do with.

 

To butcher dialogue from one of my Favourite movies:-

 

Commissar Ripley: "I am sorry Govenor, but I think Corporal Hicks has authority here,"

Govenor Burke: "Corporal Hicks?!"

Commissar Ripley: "Yes, this operation is under Imperial Guard control, and Corporal Hicks is next in chain of command; am I right Corporal?"

Corporal Hicks: "Yeah, *sigh*, that's right,"

 

 

Treatise endeth......

:P

Edited by Dracurian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"When it comes to dispensing battlefield justice a commissar is given complete discretion and authority, his judgment is the will of the emperor and beyond censure" -Imperial Infantryman's uplifting primer.

 

yes a commissar must fill out paperwork and justify himself/herself, unless it is under battlefield circumstances. In combat a commissar has absolute authority over the situation, they still need to write after action reports but they will not be punished for their actions of executing guardsmen, even if they had no real cause to.

 

Only War should be about the massed ranks of ordinary men and women fighting the horrors of the universe, the misfit/castoff dirty dozen unit has been used ad-nauseum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"When it comes to dispensing battlefield justice a commissar is given complete discretion and authority, his judgment is the will of the emperor and beyond censure" -Imperial Infantryman's uplifting primer.

 

...............

 

 

Yeah, but the Uplifting primer also goes on to state that: "It is enough to know that an Ork is slow-witted and will cause no problems for a properly trained Imperial Infantryman." and "..is easily confused by loud noises & sudden movement."

 

So I think we can all agree it is written in a very specific way.

 

However, you did make a point about the guardsmen. Whilst the Guardsman executed may not get a mention, failure to return/account for the soldiers equipment will need to be justified by the Commissar.

The Commissar is an officer of the Departmento Munitorium, which can have you shot for things like not respecting the office of the Munitorium. Rule XXXI (Art.8533/26q) :D

 

In the Imperial Infantryman's Handbook by the way, Munitorium manual section. Funny stuff.

 

Anywhoo; I think we should agree that it all comes down to what your interpretation of a Commissar is.

After all the common opinion of WWI Generals was; Gentlemen sitting in Paris chatteus drinking sherry & idly throwing soldiers into machine guns. Some were actually compentent. :o

 

My sense of two...........

:ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Yeah, but the Uplifting primer also goes on to state that: "It is enough to know that an Ork is slow-witted and will cause no problems for a properly trained Imperial Infantryman." and "..is easily confused by loud noises & sudden movement."

 

So I think we can all agree it is written in a very specific way.

 

That's the point, you should be playing form the point of view of a guardsmen, this is the information they are given which to them makes it fact. It doesn't matter that it is all propaganda, since you playing a guardsmen in all likelihood you will not know that.

 

as for commissars they are mostly zealots who shoot a soldier for looking away from the enemy and are commanded by likeminded individuals so there is a lot of room for people to mess with the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Robomummy, you need to stop thinking that the way that you force players to play in your games is the be-all end-all for Only War.  ****, I'm running a game where the characters are in a penal regiment, so it's like they're an entire regiment of 'dirty dozen' types.  One of the things about the 40k setting is that it is very, very large - there is room for a huge amount of variety.  Things are not 'just one way.'  There's an insane amount of variation within the Imperial Creed itself, for example, as long as they follow certain basic tenets.  The Imperium is too large for everything to be standardized.  On some planets knowledge of what an ork is and what they do is commonplace, on others they'll ask 'What's an ork?'  It all depends.  Also note that the version of the Primer that we have is the one that's for one particular crusade, not something that's distributed Imperium-wide.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Robomummy, you need to stop thinking that the way that you force players to play in your games is the be-all end-all for Only War.  ****, I'm running a game where the characters are in a penal regiment, so it's like they're an entire regiment of 'dirty dozen' types.  One of the things about the 40k setting is that it is very, very large - there is room for a huge amount of variety.  Things are not 'just one way.'  There's an insane amount of variation within the Imperial Creed itself, for example, as long as they follow certain basic tenets.  The Imperium is too large for everything to be standardized.  On some planets knowledge of what an ork is and what they do is commonplace, on others they'll ask 'What's an ork?'  It all depends.  Also note that the version of the Primer that we have is the one that's for one particular crusade, not something that's distributed Imperium-wide.

I do not force players to play any way, this is the way they choose to play and my problem is the system doesn't support it. Yes you can make something like the last chancers or a group of specialists but there is emphasized to the point where it is difficult to play the way the guard is portrayed in the fluff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0