Cmdr I. Heartly Noah wrote:Okay, then: King Banhammer, King Stanley IV, King Slately, Don King: As far as we know, none of these men were ever warlords. The question is, can they lead units? We've never seen them do it, but my guess would be yes, as if you lose all your warlords and Casters, you should still be able to lead your last few units.
Normally I'd have defined, offhand, a warlord as any non-caster with leadership. Overlords would fit that definition if, as it is reasonable to assume, they have that ability. Address them as "warlord" at your peril, however.
Cmdr I. Heartly Noah wrote:As far as a non-bonus, non-caster "Commander," I'd say it's possible... but why pay their upkeep? I'd disband them if I had any warlords at all. And who would these people be? Faq sounds like a likely candidate, but if there were any other commanders in Faq besides Jillian (I can't remember atm if they were specifically mentioned), why wouldn't they be Warlords, like Jillian, and wasted like the troops who are more like clerks? Capable of fighting (or leading/providing bonus) but never used for that. Or like, Big Al. Big Al would be a great use of this possibility, but isn't he also a Warlord? (I'll have to check).
Yes, you might disband them... after you've confirmed that they aren't worth keeping on their own merits as fighters (based on strength vs. upkeep, cost-benefit analysis, presumably). Of course, if you're a poor side it might be worth it to keep them simply because of their leadership advantage and with the hope that they can gain in level—after all, poor sides with small cities, or perhaps barbarians, might only pop low- and no-bonus leaders/warlords.
Jillian does mention that Banhammer had at least a few warlords under him. http://www.erfworld.com/book-1-archive/?px=%2F082.jpg