|
I think its a great role playing idea. A good
player as CO makes for a great unit. A bad player as CO makes for either
a.) a bad unit or b.) a great unit with leaders behind the scene.
Look at the movie "Kelly's Hero's" for example. The Lt. was an
idiot. Telly Savalas was a good Sgt that looked out for his men as best he
could. Clint Eastwood was a former Lt that got busted to Pvt for something
not his fualt but is able to motivate his unit and plan and orchestrate the gold
hiest. Having rank is great. Having a bad CO just makes for more
role playing opporunities for the other players as they try to get away with
things behind the CO's back, under his nose or just simply try to un-do his
mistakes. Personally I would love to play the platoon sgt or a squad
leader corporal under an idiot CO. It makes for some great role-playing
events and should lend the GM a whole bunch of extra plot hooks.
A military game needs a rank
structure. I think it should initially be a purchasable edge during
character creation. This would almost garuntee that the snot nosed 2nd Lt.
is inept. Afterwards rank and medals should be part of the rewards for a
succesful mission. If the Lt leads the men in a suicidal charge but
Corporal Smith manages to call in artillery support saving the day then the Lt
should get court martialed and demoted and Corporal Smith might get a battle
field commission.
well that's my $.02
Mikhael
|