Commander Loss

A unit including the Leader of a command rolls a 6 for a cohesion test and tests for the immediate effect of leader loss.

The Command does not rout and remains in play.

For future turns what happens?

Does the Command lose the leadership modifier to the initiative roll? This seems reasonable and is how we currently play it.

However...

A Command led by a poor Commander (Level 0) not only has no modifier to the initiative roll but also gets no turn if a double is rolled. Thus having no Commander is better than having a Poor Commander.

So should we be playing that in the event of Commander death where the Command remains in play it also suffers the penalty of no turn if a double is rolled?

Should the penalty for no Commander whatsoever be even greater on the basis that as long as there is a Commander, even a poor one, there is at least some form of Command giving orders no matter how dodgy?

Hey GG, we too have noticed this anomoly in the system. Like you I think when a leader is killed the commander should immediately be replaced by a poor commander with all the consequences you've outlined. But for the moment as you say no commander is better than a poor commander.

Granicus Gaugamela wrote:


Does the Command lose the leadership modifier to the initiative roll?  This seems reasonable and is how we currently play it.

....and his troops are out of command for the rest of the game for the purposes of discipline tests.

That's how we'll play it at Cancon, Richard and Rob.

Good point Tarty. Having no commander puts all units out of command which is a pretty heafty penalty.