Followup Commissar question

MajorDomo

DM? Chuck H2O in his face
Joined
Sep 1, 2003
Messages
2,853
Reaction score
522
Location
Fluid
Country
llUnited States
Earlier thread consensus was that a concealed Commissar does not lose concealment due to raising the morale of squad in his location, while a 9-1 would lose concealment to increase the morale with his -1 leadership.

How about a concealed 9-1 Japanese leader in a location with a squad:

A. Can he choose to only use his "commissar" morale benefit and stay concealed.
B. Must he use his -1 leadership also and lose concealment.

Rich
 

klasmalmstrom

Forum Guru
Joined
Feb 26, 2003
Messages
16,076
Reaction score
2,553
Location
Sweden
Country
llSweden
He must use his -1 leadership DRM.

A10.72:
"A player cannot decline use of a non-zero (whether positive or negative) leadership modifier in the same Location or moving stack when performing a MC/TC or Rally attempt or Ambush, Concealment, Search Casualties, or Integrity Check dr/DR unless there is another leader present in the Location or moving stack whose leadership modifier he can substitute...."
 

Magpie

Member
Joined
Feb 20, 2019
Messages
252
Reaction score
71
Country
llAustralia
I think it is an important distinction to note that the -1 leadership does not alter a unit's morale and it isn't a passive thing, it's a deliberate application of something.

I conceptualise it as a leadership modifier is the leader jumping to his feet and inspiring the men, the morale boost due to a Commissar is the troops stiffening their own resolve due to the proximity of the Commissar.
 

Honosbinda

Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2014
Messages
489
Reaction score
82
Location
Eastbourne Sussex UK
Country
ll
He must use his -1 leadership DRM.

A10.72:
"A player cannot decline use of a non-zero (whether positive or negative) leadership modifier in the same Location or moving stack when performing a MC/TC or Rally attempt or Ambush, Concealment, Search Casualties, or Integrity Check dr/DR unless there is another leader present in the Location or moving stack whose leadership modifier he can substitute...."
So a silly trick is to keep a level 0 drm leader in a hex to substitute that leader drm, then decline using it, to keep everyone concealed?

It seems to me this rule should reflect that even 0 drm leaders would try to use their leader modifier even though it is ineffective. Why give such subordinate leaders more flexibility than a superior 10-3?
 

klasmalmstrom

Forum Guru
Joined
Feb 26, 2003
Messages
16,076
Reaction score
2,553
Location
Sweden
Country
llSweden
So a silly trick is to keep a level 0 drm leader in a hex to substitute that leader drm, then decline using it, to keep everyone concealed?
Usually when there is a MC/TC involved one wants to use a -DRM (is present). If one has 0-DRM leaders to spare, I think such a scenario might have other issues. :)
 

Magpie

Member
Joined
Feb 20, 2019
Messages
252
Reaction score
71
Country
llAustralia
So a silly trick is to keep a level 0 drm leader in a hex to substitute that leader drm, then decline using it, to keep everyone concealed?

It seems to me this rule should reflect that even 0 drm leaders would try to use their leader modifier even though it is ineffective. Why give such subordinate leaders more flexibility than a superior 10-3?
Because 0 leaders are just doing the minimum, not being inspirational.
 

Honosbinda

Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2014
Messages
489
Reaction score
82
Location
Eastbourne Sussex UK
Country
ll
Usually when there is a MC/TC involved one wants to use a -DRM (is present). If one has 0-DRM leaders to spare, I think such a scenario might have other issues. :)
Yes, no doubt a notably silly use of a spare leader ;)

Because 0 leaders are just doing the minimum, not being inspirational.
Again, harking back in our other discussion about the lack of nuance amongst these zero leaders....
 

klasmalmstrom

Forum Guru
Joined
Feb 26, 2003
Messages
16,076
Reaction score
2,553
Location
Sweden
Country
llSweden
Personally I think that perhaps a 0-leader DRM should be required to "use" (albeit with no effect) his DRM as well - losing "?" in the process. That, IMO, would have been more consistent.

I note that under the 1st Edition rules, one was only required to "use" a +1 leader DRM. Not sure why it was changed - perhaps there was an old Q&A.
 

Honosbinda

Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2014
Messages
489
Reaction score
82
Location
Eastbourne Sussex UK
Country
ll
Personally I think that perhaps a 0-leader DRM should be required to "use" (albeit with no effect) his DRM as well - losing "?" in the process. That, IMO, would have been more consistent.

I note that under the 1st Edition rules, one was only required to "use" a +1 leader DRM. Not sure why it was changed - perhaps there was an old Q&A.
Agreed on both points. I also recall the distinction only for the +1 DRM at the time, because everyone was making sure to never use it unless they had to!
 
Top