So as I was moseying through the Core Rule Book, I came to a few mentions of characters being promoted and climbing the ranks. The passages seemed to insinuate a shift from playing simple guardsmen to the ones in command of the platoon, the company, the regiment, division, and maybe even the crusade.

There are rules for mass combat and formation fighting, but has anyone used this to represent a progression to the command elements of a regiment?

Personally, I think this would be a very interesting shift of game play. While combat wouldn't be as much of a focus anymore, the high level decision making, dealing with subordinates, and command staff rivalries could be quite engaging to play in.

What are your thoughts?

Know your players first.

That's all I have to say.

I've run a game that got as high as players taking on the role of a Company Command Squad. One of the PCs, Captain Holt, was forever earning the ire of his superiors through a lack of situational awareness and the actions of his subordinates. Became quite entertaining watching him go through politics, scratching backs and shaking the right hands to gain influence and thus save himself from execution.

One option, certainly for platoon level, might be for each PC to be given the Overseer Trait. Have one player command the platoon and give each of the rest a squad using the formation rules.

My group has expressed an interest in staying as grunts, or not progressing beyond the platoon level. The use of the Overseer trait is a good idea, as I like the idea of giving them the responsibility of a squad each, and making tactical decisions on a scale larger than just themselves.

Another idea is to mix combat situations with decission making. This won't work in every kind of regiment, for sure, but could be a good idea for:

- Armoured regiments. A commander can command from a battle tank.

- "Primitive" regiments, where the commanders are champions and want to be at the first line of combat.

- Others: I remember that in codex Catachan a Veteran squad could have a Captain join the squad, for example. If the players are the best combatants in the Company, why not join a veteran or specialist squad when their habilities are needed? This is also what constantly happens in Gaunt's Ghosts novels.

Personally, I would not enjoy a game where the players lead a whole Crussade or something like that. They would be half of the time attending to parties and dinners negotiating with other factions. bo-ring.

One option, certainly for platoon level, might be for each PC to be given the Overseer Trait. Have one player command the platoon and give each of the rest a squad using the formation rules.

That might work out mechanically, but in terms of narration, I have a feeling this would relegate the other soldiers to a role of faceless numbers - a mere attachment, a "bonus" to the PCs' actions - when squad leaders ought to spend the most time with their squad (and not characters from other units), and really get to know the men and women they lead into battle.

Otoh, perhaps there could be a regiment with a "weird" organisation where the common trooper is not considered to be the basis of a military unit, but merely a supporting element for champions recruited from the nobility. Like ... knights with a squad of squires? And the knights would mostly interact with each other, not mingling with the peasant soldiers a lot but simply expecting them to support their masters. That could be one way to represent the fact that the PCs will mostly play with one another as opposed to the squads under their command, whilst still providing a background explanation.

I see the extra squads as more of a combat mechanic than a roleplaying one. While I'd encourage the players to expand personalities for the members of their squads, I think that within combat they'd be used as extensions of the player's tactics - after all, there's little in-character interaction in a firefight. Outside of combat I can see that most of the interactions would still be between the Squad, since a platoon commander is most likely to talk to his sergeants rather than the other members of the platoon.

I see the extra squads as more of a combat mechanic than a roleplaying one.

*nods* If you're aware of this and it's still not a problem, then all is well, I guess.

Outside of combat I can see that most of the interactions would still be between the Squad, since a platoon commander is most likely to talk to his sergeants rather than the other members of the platoon.

The platoon commander, yes - when holding a mission briefing, and when voxing orders. Perhaps even when having a beer, although as an officer I would expect them to hang around more with the other officers. But the squad leaders?

Essentially .. what I was getting at was what sounded like in a "meta-gaming change" in the players' interaction where the nature of a character (PC or NPC?) took precedence over their role (soldier, squad leader or platoon leader?), which may feel strange to some players. With whom did the PCs talk when they were still just an ordinary squad? With whom are they talking now that each of them is having their own squad?

But as this depends a lot on perception, it may well be a non-issue in your group. It's just something that caught my attention as I was browsing this thread.

I agree that it would be a difficult thing to roleplay well, and would take a lot of finagling to be successful. As a player, I am more interested in commanding the troops then being out there slogging it out. Being an officer in the Imperial Guard would be much better than a common trooper, after all. However, I am the only one in my group who feels that way so sticking to the basic squad is the way we are playing.

Do any of you see an expansion of rules for officers or command elements in the works? The book hints at it, though I know Only War has been receiving less and less support.

Some of the careers have been defined as better fitting of a "Company Command Squad" analogue, then your typical green grunts, and I could see it working out somewhat well. Your Commander would be the CC, and the others would be the Veterans, with a squad size that might more closely match up to a group of players, sans Comrades. The CCS is more likely, I suppose, to have the MoO, the Primaris, several other options, and such. If they play like TT Guard, their higher rank might NOT keep them from footslogging it with the grunts, as many Guard Officers are supposedly expected to lead from the front. You would have the usual stuff a group would, and maybe more concrete access to things like Guard Hordes, artillery, tanks, etc. I actually think it could be rather fun, so long as it didn't totally fall into "we're in a bunker, planning battles we never see, while other officers try to shiv us, for their own glory." Just me, of course. Otherwise, it might be nice to occasionally see the Captain, with an entourage of Storm Trooper analogues, each having some cool extras (medic, banner, a psyker, and such), at least in big ass battles with the whole division/regiment present/whatever.

As an aside, is there any rules/bonuses that the game gives for the guy who carries a banner? Most things in the AM codex I can find an equivalent for in Only War, but not the standard-bearer. They'd be easy to make, of course, but I don't know what sort of mechanical bonus a Platoon/Regimental Standard might carry in Only War; maybe a boost vs Pinning, or to morale, or something. They might even be in there, and I just missed them, but of they have awards that give mechanical advantages, I'd imagine the banners should, too.

That's a good point about the banners, as you always see them portrayed in images and on the TT, but they aren't even mentioned in the core rules. I would imagine being in the presence of a company or regiment standard would let you reroll pinning or willpower tests, and maybe provide a command bonus to whoever is in charge.

Well said, Venkelos. One could argue that with all the variety players are offered in terms of classes, a command squad makes a whole more lot of sense anyways. Grunt teams with their own Commissars and Psykers sounds somewhat odd.

And I also agree about the banners! Curious that this was left out, but given how I don't think this has come up in a discussion so far I suppose it's one of those things that are just easy to forget, but which are a no-brainer as soon as someone points them out.

I think the bonuses you listed as examples are already a good way to approach this. In theory, we could just look at what they do in the tabletop, and see how that would translate to the P&P?

That's probably the most logical way of dealing with them. As balance, seeing the standard fall could give penalties to those around it or cause everyone to immediately try to rescue the fallen flag.

If a Platoon Command Squad is made up of personnel who accompanied the Lieutenant on his rise to power, then it would be the preservation of past friendships and relationships off the field of battle. I personally see nothing wrong with the playstyle and would be delighted to participate in a game.

Addendum, and sorry for the double post, if anyone is planning on running a Command level campaign with grand strategy elements - or even squad command level with the formations rules - via the interwebz, do feel free to hit me up. I don't see myself getting this kind of opportunity any time soon so I figure I'd declare my interest lol.

If a Platoon Command Squad is made up of personnel who accompanied the Lieutenant on his rise to power, then it would be the preservation of past friendships and relationships off the field of battle. I personally see nothing wrong with the playstyle and would be delighted to participate in a game.

Addendum, and sorry for the double post, if anyone is planning on running a Command level campaign with grand strategy elements - or even squad command level with the formations rules - via the interwebz, do feel free to hit me up. I don't see myself getting this kind of opportunity any time soon so I figure I'd declare my interest lol.

I'm afraid ours is around a table, in person. Though I agree that it would be fun to play a platoon level game with a command squad, hopefully our new campaign reaches that level. It would make a great change of pace if your players get sick of just being footslogging grunts!

I have always believed that the Commander advanced specialty represented the actual officer class. Like many here, I believe it should not require to much effort to play a group that represents the commander and his command squad. I present here a couple of thoughts on the matter:

The Unit Standard (They exist in Platoon and Regimental levels) are issued to command squads as a requisition available to the appropriate unit commander. A Platoon Standard provides a +10 to all melee attack rolls if the character has direct line of sight to the Standard. A Regimental standard gives the same benefit as the Platoon standard but additionally gives all friendly characters within direct line of sight the effects of the Nerves of steel and Unshakable faith talents.

Players in this type of campaign should realize that the higher they go in rank the less they should be involved with direct action on the field. Also, Irl, Promotions require a certain number of years of service in order to attain the next Higher rank. Of course, Valiant action and the needs of the campaign can change this but seniority among all ranks is at least partially determined by time in rank. It would not be unrealistic for the orders of a commander to be carried out by an entirely separate squad under their command! (Thus allowing the Gm to create lower level games within his campaign if they so desire.)

A Platoon commander (Rank Lieutenant or equivalent) is tasked with achieving Battlefield tactical objectives (Such as taking a building or scouting an area) By their nature, Platoon commanders are typically involved heavily in direct action scenarios. They may requisition a Platoon standard (Or the Platoon members may create one). A platoon typically consists of the Command squad, 3 rifle squads and 2 Heavy weapon or Special weapon squads. An Armored Platoon is called a Squadron and consists of the command vehicle and two other vehicles of the same type. (Tank, Apc, etc) Platoon commanders do not have direct access to support elements but may be assigned such from higher command levels.

A Company commander (Rank Captain or equivalent) Is tasked with achieving local Strategic goals (Such as taking a Hill or small town or Manufactorum) Company commander delegate many tasks to their subordinates but will likely become directly involved in Achieving their primary objectives. A company commander typically commands 3 to 5 Platoons/Squadrons and has direct access to some support elements such as Tech priests, confessors and such.

A Battalion commander (Rank Major or equivalent) is tasked with achieving regional strategic objectives such as taking a small city. Battalion commanders will delegate most of their missions to subordinates but again, may support the primary objective directly. Battalion commanders typically command 3 to 5 companies of the same type basic type (Infantry, armor etc.) Battalion commanders also have direct access to support assets such as Artillery, Air power and logistics depending on what's available. They may assign these assets to support lower levels of command as necessary.

A Regimental Commander (Rank Colonel or equivalent) Sets the entire tone for their regiment. If a Player character is the regimental commander; that character's personality is used to determine the starting skills/talents granted new characters based on the commander's personality. A Regimental commander is tasked with achieving large Strategic objectives such as taking a major starport or Large city. They have Access to the most powerful support assets available including Naval gunfire support (Planetary bombardment) and Officio Strategium elements. Additionally, Regimental commanders control the deployment of the most potent support elements in the regiment such as Commissar's and Stormtrooper or Psyker detachments. They may of course assign these to lower command levels as necessary. Regimental commanders may requisition a Regimental standard. Regimental commanders will only rarely become involved with direct actions except in the case of Vital Objectives. They are however, Primary targets of any enemy force looking to disrupt command and control elements. (So look out for assaults by Chaos space marines! )

Just to restate: This represents my personal opinion on how I would handle this and does NOT represent anything official. I would be interested in people's opinions though!

What Venkelos said.

Also with vehicle based regiments i'd throw in the super heavy ones.

"Congratulations, chaps! You get to drive the baneblade now!"

I have always believed that the Commander advanced specialty represented the actual officer class. Like many here, I believe it should not require to much effort to play a group that represents the commander and his command squad. I present here a couple of thoughts on the matter:

The Unit Standard (They exist in Platoon and Regimental levels) are issued to command squads as a requisition available to the appropriate unit commander. A Platoon Standard provides a +10 to all melee attack rolls if the character has direct line of sight to the Standard. A Regimental standard gives the same benefit as the Platoon standard but additionally gives all friendly characters within direct line of sight the effects of the Nerves of steel and Unshakable faith talents.

Players in this type of campaign should realize that the higher they go in rank the less they should be involved with direct action on the field. Also, Irl, Promotions require a certain number of years of service in order to attain the next Higher rank. Of course, Valiant action and the needs of the campaign can change this but seniority among all ranks is at least partially determined by time in rank. It would not be unrealistic for the orders of a commander to be carried out by an entirely separate squad under their command! (Thus allowing the Gm to create lower level games within his campaign if they so desire.)

A Platoon commander (Rank Lieutenant or equivalent) is tasked with achieving Battlefield tactical objectives (Such as taking a building or scouting an area) By their nature, Platoon commanders are typically involved heavily in direct action scenarios. They may requisition a Platoon standard (Or the Platoon members may create one). A platoon typically consists of the Command squad, 3 rifle squads and 2 Heavy weapon or Special weapon squads. An Armored Platoon is called a Squadron and consists of the command vehicle and two other vehicles of the same type. (Tank, Apc, etc) Platoon commanders do not have direct access to support elements but may be assigned such from higher command levels.

A Company commander (Rank Captain or equivalent) Is tasked with achieving local Strategic goals (Such as taking a Hill or small town or Manufactorum) Company commander delegate many tasks to their subordinates but will likely become directly involved in Achieving their primary objectives. A company commander typically commands 3 to 5 Platoons/Squadrons and has direct access to some support elements such as Tech priests, confessors and such.

A Battalion commander (Rank Major or equivalent) is tasked with achieving regional strategic objectives such as taking a small city. Battalion commanders will delegate most of their missions to subordinates but again, may support the primary objective directly. Battalion commanders typically command 3 to 5 companies of the same type basic type (Infantry, armor etc.) Battalion commanders also have direct access to support assets such as Artillery, Air power and logistics depending on what's available. They may assign these assets to support lower levels of command as necessary.

A Regimental Commander (Rank Colonel or equivalent) Sets the entire tone for their regiment. If a Player character is the regimental commander; that character's personality is used to determine the starting skills/talents granted new characters based on the commander's personality. A Regimental commander is tasked with achieving large Strategic objectives such as taking a major starport or Large city. They have Access to the most powerful support assets available including Naval gunfire support (Planetary bombardment) and Officio Strategium elements. Additionally, Regimental commanders control the deployment of the most potent support elements in the regiment such as Commissar's and Stormtrooper or Psyker detachments. They may of course assign these to lower command levels as necessary. Regimental commanders may requisition a Regimental standard. Regimental commanders will only rarely become involved with direct actions except in the case of Vital Objectives. They are however, Primary targets of any enemy force looking to disrupt command and control elements. (So look out for assaults by Chaos space marines! )

Just to restate: This represents my personal opinion on how I would handle this and does NOT represent anything official. I would be interested in people's opinions though!

I agree with you on what sorts of objectives a player of that rank would be expected to accomplish. Though, it has previously been agreed on that being anything higher than Lieutenant would probably be quite boring, as it would be playing characters who are looking at maps at moving pieces around.

As for the Standards, it makes more sense to have Regimental and Company standards, not so much platoon. Also, I think that bonus is a bit much for a flag - especially since it would mean they would be using bayonets better, which doesn't make that much sense. A unit standard exists to denote different units, commemorate notable actions, and inspire soldiers in the face of adversity. What they don't do is make you swing your sword harder.

In TT, a Platoon Standard increases damage output. A regimental standard increases damage output, and allows a unit to reroll failed Fear, Morale & Pinning tests.

Therefore, a reasonable mechanical benefit would be a Platoon Standard conveying a passive +2 damage bonus whilst held aloft, and a Regimental Standard conveying +2 or +4 Damage, and the Nerves of Steel & Unshakeable Faith talents.

Obviously, these benefits would only be in play as long as a character was holding the flag aloft.

In TT, a Platoon Standard increases damage output. A regimental standard increases damage output, and allows a unit to reroll failed Fear, Morale & Pinning tests.

Therefore, a reasonable mechanical benefit would be a Platoon Standard conveying a passive +2 damage bonus whilst held aloft, and a Regimental Standard conveying +2 or +4 Damage, and the Nerves of Steel & Unshakeable Faith talents.

Obviously, these benefits would only be in play as long as a character was holding the flag aloft.

Ah, well then forgive my mistake - I never played TT against an IG player. I think what you've just proposed sounds reasonable, then.