Regimental Logistics Question

The text says "The Guardsmen's squad begins the game with a Logistics Rating of 10" (p. 114).

Ratings can go up by either A. Munitorium Influence talent or B. Fulfilling battlefield objectives.

What is the purpose of chart 6-1 ("Logistics Rating") on page 114? Does it ever come into play when attempting requisition?

Eradico Pravus said:

It's just a reference point. For instance, if you decide to give your PCs a Logistic rating of 100, you should be aware that's giving them power equivalent to a Salient Command, etc. It doesn't affect the game other than giving a context to otherwise vague numbers.

HTMC said:

What this says. That table is largely a contextual point for story telling and doesn't have a whole lot to do with mechanics.

OK, thanks. Those answers help.

I was kinda wondering why the PC's team wouldn't send the squad commissar into the supply tent with a requisition sheet and a fully loaded auto-pistol when getting supplies.

It is useful if you need a way of telling about how capable another organization is at getting something. E.g. while the squad may not be able to appropriate the item, perhaps the fact that you're owed a favor from the CO of another regiment, perhaps they can use their pull to try and acquire something for you.

Eradico Pravus said:

Because that would be an abuse of the position of Commissar, and so beneath any Commissar of repute!

Let's face it: there are two kinds of players who want to be commisars. The first want to be any of the cool commisars from the fluff and aspiring to be like Yarrick can only end in awesome. The second are secretly waiting to find any excuse to execute the party, defend it as a character decision, then ask "how much xp do I get for the guard squad?"

Darklordofbunnies said:

Which is Caiphas Cain? I assume you would categorize him with the former but in many ways he's the "Anti-Commissar." I don't think he would be above lying/cheating/intimidating/stealing a particular piece of equipment if he thought it would help the mission (or save his own skin).

Well Cain is technically a fluff commissar and so falls into the former but he's less of a commissar and more of a…"leisure suit larry" for lack of a more apt description. By all rights Cain should have executed himself for dereliction of duty several dozen times.

Darklordofbunnies said:

Completely agree with what you wrote. Since Cain *IS* fluff I think some Commissar players might take his example into play (not saying that's good or bad--just that it might happen).

I wouldn't really use Cain as a great source of fluff. There are a lot of contradictions in his books. For example, according to Cain and some of his soldiers, daemons are common knowledge when in the wider fluff entire planetary populations have been killed when daemons where on the same planet, regardless of the fact that those particular people didn't see any daemons.

DJSunhammer said:

However, since it's pretty much official GW policy that "there is no canon" in regards to 40k, it's just as valid a view of 40k as any other source - it just depends on what sort of setting you want to portray as GM.

Personally, I see the Cain fluff as being the more reasonable view of the Imperium, as the Guard is actually competent, the characters act like real people, and not everything is 100% grimdark, 100% of the time.