So lemme get this straight. The big difference between a trooper requesting an item for personal use per the Logistics system, and a trooper requesting an item from the list of mission assignment gear prepared by the GM is that in the latter case:

- you suddenly don't use availability modifiers anymore

- and you get a flat +10 on your Logistics roll because it's Ordinary (+10) difficulty?

You don't request single items from the list of mission assignment gear. Your squad rolls once and applies the results (see table 6.4) to the entire list.

The point of mission assignment gear is to make sure the squad gets the mission-critical gear they need, without the vagaries of availability and a Logistics Rating of 10. Incidentally this is why the list should always include at least 3 items, to mitigate the fact that two items on the list may well prove to be unavailable - and your squad will be tasked with blowing up a bridge with a bunch of winter blankets.

Well, that's an easy one...

Step 1: Pile up half the winter blankets.

Step 2: Barter the other half with your regiment's ratlings for as big a pot of soup as possible.

Step 3: Should be obvious.

Step 4: KABOOM!

If the squad needs certain gear, according to their commander, why not just give it to them? all these rules to get across the fact that sometimes Munitorum bureaucracy screws up .... seems like a big distraction and the rules even state as much.

@The Laughing God

If the squad needs to kill something, why roll BS?

Making one roll to vary the difficulty of the mission depending on the squad's efforts to ingratiate itself with the Munitorum and the state of the war sounds not too difficult. "All these rules" boil down to looking at two simple tables and throwing a d100.

Maybe that holds true for non-mission critical items. But in the example of blowing up a bridge .. if we need to roll to see if we actually get the explosives, and end up not getting them, we will be in for some pretty silly missions.

Maybe that holds true for non-mission critical items. But in the example of blowing up a bridge .. if we need to roll to see if we actually get the explosives, and end up not getting them, we will be in for some pretty silly missions.

That is what the fate points are for. In my first mission I rolled so poorly that we weren't getting ANY gear and munitorium was in fact demanding us to return some of our hand grenades. (no mission gear meant that we would have been walking across a death world rather than riding a chimaera...)

One reroll later we got all the necessary gear and two extra crates which had been left in the chimaera.

Besides, if you are afraid of occasionally getting poor equipment or missing some vital gear, then you shouldn't live in a horribly grimdark dystopia with an cruel and sometimes inefficiant bureucracy. Also, any IG squad that cannot trade/steal/buy/make the missing gear isn't worth their daily rations.

Yeah but that is pretty silly ennit?

Fatepoints should be used to survive encounters with daemons, not to get the gear you actually need to perform a mission

"Oh we're out of toiletpaper? I use a Fate point!'

a) Very few guardsmen can survive an encounter with a demon, surviving several sounds unlikely and is either grounds for being executed by the Inquisition or drafted into Inquisition service. In fact, my squad has already been burning Fate points when fighting regular orks without any daemons or even warbosses in sight. Even Nobs are quite the challenge to a newbie squad. (Krak grenades did hurt it at least.)

b) The byzantine logistics system is a part of the fluff so I like that they included it.

c) The GM can adjust the target number for the mission gear roll if the guardsmen would be screwed without ALL of the gear.

d) If you are routinely being sent into missions where you need stuff that you don't have in order to have any chance of success the squad is being utilised wrong. In our last mission the mission gear was stuff like: bayonets, additional grenades and ammo, poor weather gear and additional rations. If any or all of those had been missing the mission would have been harder but certainly not impossible. If your squad keeps getting sent on airborne or underwater missions then relying on mission gear roll to get gravchutes/scubagear can end badly, but why is your squad ordered to do stuff like that?

Don't try to take on missions that are completely out of scope for the type of regiment the player squad is in, the GM should plan the campaign to suit the regiment (unless of course the GM is incredibly sadistic or everyone wants to play as the surfer regiment that got sent to desert planet by accident.)

On the other hand, once you've done few missions and it is likely that you can get some better gear through personal logistic rolls (and similarly the squad already has a reputation as problem solvers and allaround badasses) doing some extravagant missions is easier as a poor roll simply means that the squad has to (and can) get their gear through some other sources (and personally, in that scenario getting the gear would be a separate and funny miniadventure in itself.)