Commanders: Chime in

[DevilDan]

So you're saying you think this is a matter of propriety (he wanted to get rid of 'potato man" altogether) and not a matter of official office/structure?

I think it's a potential confluence of factors. Another is that to Erfworlders there is probably little day-to-day confusion between the meanings of "commander" in a given context. Since they are unlikely to have discussions about whether a given unit can or cannot lead troops—for a given unit or type, they know this all and assume knowledge of this by all—"commander" almost invariably refers to a formal title or recognition of rank.
"Can this unit command" is not a question they ask often anymore than we normally ask whether an adult can read or drive—at least in many parts of the Western world

[Anton Gaist]

It's stated in Klog #5 that Commanders can either be promoted from infantry or popped at major cities. So if you are popped as a Warlord then yes, that's what you are.

I can only assume that Wanda used the term Commander because she had summon Gotti to be a commander. He still had to be "properly inducted" by Stanley, who could have disbanded him if he'd wanted to, but he already was a Warlord unit under GK.

So I tend to think that the actual naming of a Commander means that the Ruler, in this case Stanley, is putting the Warlord (unit) in the CoC, be it as a Warlord (title) or Chief Warlord.

Which begs the question, if 2 warlords of the same side are stationed in the same (not capital) city, is there a Chain of Command? Could a warlord receive orders from another warlord (other than the Chief Warlord)?

[Cmdr I. Heartly Noah]

Well that I can comment on confidently - we saw Jillian interacting with Webinar and Dora. Webinar was pretty peeved at Jillian, but she got to give him orders that he followed, albeit unhappily. She also said "I'm a nine. You're a five, and your girlfriend's a two," which indicates level is the key to the Chain of Command. However - it seems that this can be circumvented by orders of a higher-up (Chief Warlord or Ruler), as after they sent the Thinkagram and got word back, Jillian made note that there was no change in command structure/who was in charge - indicating that there could have been, which is what Webinar must have been hoping for.

[Kreistor]

It's stated in Klog #5 that Commanders can either be promoted from infantry or popped at major cities. So if you are popped as a Warlord then yes, that's what you are.

Technical correction: Parson uses the term "Warlord" in Klog 5, not "Commander". Warlords can be raised from the ranks.

[DevilDan]

Well that I can comment on confidently - we saw Jillian interacting with Webinar and Dora. Webinar was pretty peeved at Jillian, but she got to give him orders that he followed, albeit unhappily. She also said "I'm a nine. You're a five, and your girlfriend's a two," which indicates level is the key to the Chain of Command. However - it seems that this can be circumvented by orders of a higher-up (Chief Warlord or Ruler), as after they sent the Thinkagram and got word back, Jillian made note that there was no change in command structure/who was in charge - indicating that there could have been, which is what Webinar must have been hoping for.

This is all complicated by multiple factors, such as the fact that Jill is a mercenary and may only have role- or mission-based rank rather than a fixed rank and that Webinar has—rightly so, as it developed—reasons to doubt Jill, suspect her of betrayal, and thus question and even disobey her orders if he thinks they run counter to his side's interests.
Later on, Webinar follows orders after she's been expressly placed under her command. She could have been a level 1 at that point.

[raphfrk]

Okay, good. So we agree that some casters can lead units into battle, but you're not sure all casters can.

In klog 4, Parson says "Any unit with leadership is a commander or warlord".

Casters don't have leadership (at least the general stat).

However, in klog 10, he says "[Sizemore] told me that casters are commanders and can lead stacks".

Thus, probably all casters can. However, presumably, they only do so in an emergency and when leading their own type of unit, so as to get the bonus.

[Cmdr I. Heartly Noah]

Assuming all Casters have an associated unit that they can provide a bonus to. Personally, I bet Thinkamancers, Lookamancers, and Foolamancers don't, among others.

[Maldeus]

Well that I can comment on confidently - we saw Jillian interacting with Webinar and Dora. Webinar was pretty peeved at Jillian, but she got to give him orders that he followed, albeit unhappily. She also said "I'm a nine. You're a five, and your girlfriend's a two," which indicates level is the key to the Chain of Command. However - it seems that this can be circumvented by orders of a higher-up (Chief Warlord or Ruler), as after they sent the Thinkagram and got word back, Jillian made note that there was no change in command structure/who was in charge - indicating that there could have been, which is what Webinar must have been hoping for.

This is all complicated by multiple factors, such as the fact that Jill is a mercenary and may only have role- or mission-based rank rather than a fixed rank and that Webinar has—rightly so, as it developed—reasons to doubt Jill, suspect her of betrayal, and thus question and even disobey her orders if he thinks they run counter to his side's interests.
Later on, Webinar follows orders after she's been expressly placed under her command. She could have been a level 1 at that point.

Jillian still heavily implies that level=rank.

[DevilDan]

Jillian still heavily implies that level=rank.

Or maybe she just wants to humiliate Webinar.

I still don't see how "leadership" must necessarily be the same as "leadership bonus." In theory, I don't know why Maggie, Misty, or Jack, for example, couldn't lead troops simply because they don't give a bonus to a specific unit or unit type.

[Kreistor]

Or maybe she just wants to humiliate Webinar.

Jillian's a merc. Unless contracted to obey any Jetstone unit, she'll act according to her best estimate of Ansom's desire. And Webinar is not required to obey a merc. Alliances are clearly complex things, so we can't for the moment assume a ranking officer of one side can order a different side's units, just because of a higher level/bonus. That may be a stipulation of any alliance contracts.

[Cmdr I. Heartly Noah]

Jillian still heavily implies that level=rank.

Or maybe she just wants to humiliate Webinar.

I still don't see how "leadership" must necessarily be the same as "leadership bonus." In theory, I don't know why Maggie, Misty, or Jack, for example, couldn't lead troops simply because they don't give a bonus to a specific unit or unit type.

Um... who says they can't? In my mind, "leadership" just covers the bonus. The ability to command troops is just part of being a warlord/commander/caster. Call it "commandership."

[SteveMB]

Um... who says they can't? In my mind, "leadership" just covers the bonus. The ability to command troops is just part of being a warlord/commander/caster. Call it "commandership."

Part of the confusion is that the term "leadership" can refer to either the ability to lead troops or to a bonus. Non-warlord Commanders (i.e. casters) have the former but not the latter (except in special cases).

[Cmdr I. Heartly Noah]

Right. And since Casters don't have Leadership, Only Warlords Have Leadership, then it can't mean the ability to lead troops, as Casters are Commanders and Can Lead Troops.

[Kreistor]

Okay, this has mostly settled down the way I expected. I'm glad I stayed out. (I deleted like 5 responses I almost posted.)

I have only one question left:
How many people think that there is a Commander rank that is not a Warlord and not a Caster?

That's the only question remaining, I think. The Special "Caster" is now recognized by all parties to include all known Leadership functions, except providing a general Leadership Bonus to all troops under the Unit's command (instead providing a bonus to some specific types of units).

Personally, I have always seen it both ways. The scope of the story has never been such that we would see someone of that rank. Transylvito wouldn't send non-bonus Commanders to the gap, because of the "Transylvito Style" requiring bonuses. Stanley wouldn't care about them at all (he cares so little about so much of importance). RCC already has too many Warlords to bother introducing such minor characters. (THis is a story still, and fundamentally limited by the number of people the author can afford to create.) A Unit of that type would really do little more than prevent Stacks from Auto-attacking and providing on site direction, and so are not noteworthy enough from a story perspective to justify a presence. So, really, I can still go both ways. It's a little nail in the coffin against the existence of such a unit. So, opinions?

[DevilDan]

I have only one question left:
How many people think that there is a Commander rank that is not a Warlord and not a Caster?

Why couldn't there be one? A given overlord or chief warlord can create ranks around any name. On the other hand, commander could simply be a general term of respect or of recognition of the capacity to lead. As a parallel example, we wouldn't blink if Bogroll/Sizemore had addressed Parson as "Sir," even though "Sir" is also apparently a specific Jetstone title.

Personally, I have always seen it both ways. The scope of the story has never been such that we would see someone of that rank. Transylvito wouldn't send non-bonus Commanders to the gap, because of the "Transylvito Style" requiring bonuses. Stanley wouldn't care about them at all (he cares so little about so much of importance). RCC already has too many Warlords to bother introducing such minor characters. (THis is a story still, and fundamentally limited by the number of people the author can afford to create.) A Unit of that type would really do little more than prevent Stacks from Auto-attacking and providing on site direction, and so are not noteworthy enough from a story perspective to justify a presence. So, really, I can still go both ways. It's a little nail in the coffin against the existence of such a unit. So, opinions?

The part of what Transylvito did or didn't send could be confusing. As far as we know, most warlords have some bonus, however small. The only leader unit they could have sent without a bonus—again, as far as we know—would have been a caster, and we know that casters are very rarely sent into battle due to their strategic value. I don't see why there could be a bonus-less leader, but I wouldn't expect them to be used on anything but unimportant scouting sessions or as support for a more powerful leader.

[Kreistor]

The part of what Transylvito did or didn't send could be confusing. As far as we know, most warlords have some bonus, however small. The only leader unit they could have sent without a bonus—again, as far as we know—would have been a caster, and we know that casters are very rarely sent into battle due to their strategic value. I don't see why there could be a bonus-less leader, but I wouldn't expect them to be used on anything but unimportant scouting sessions or as support for a more powerful leader.

Transylvito style stacks leadership bonuses on top of each other. A Commander, with no leadership bonus, wouldn't fit the style, with his stack only getting a portion of the CW's bonus for being in the hex. It would be a sacrificial stack against dwagons.

Anyway, I'm not debating. I'm just looking for the fact people believe it, so that I know what to do with the Wiki. You do, at least, so I feel that the option should remain present as Speculation. (That's the way it is now.)

[DevilDan]

To clarify: I meant to write "I don't see why there couldn't be a bonus-less leader." Such a leader would be, of course, significantly of less use to a bonus-reliant side like TV. So why bother sending him, even if such a weak unit—as warlords go—would have enough moves per turn to make it to the rendezvous point?

[cloudbreaker]

I have only one question left:
How many people think that there is a Commander rank that is not a Warlord and not a Caster?

I think we have already seen a unit that fits that description. Stanley. A ruler commands troops, but is not a warlord or caster, and I am willing to bet they give a generous leadership bonus as well.

[DevilDan]

I have only one question left:
How many people think that there is a Commander rank that is not a Warlord and not a Caster?

I think we have already seen a unit that fits that description. Stanley. A ruler commands troops, but is not a warlord or caster, and I am willing to bet they give a generous leadership bonus as well.

He is identified as being a warlord by Sizemore here: http://www.erfworld.com/book-1-archive/?px=%2F079.jpg

"As a warlord, he found the arkenhammer..." As far as we know, a warlord is a non-caster that has leadership.

Or am I missing the point?

[Cmdr I. Heartly Noah]

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.

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).


Anyway, short answer: Possible but no evidence.

Though I'm open to the possibility of discovering new types of Commander that are neither Warlord nor Caster (engineer maybe? I dunno)