Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Aldarc" data-source="post: 6745132" data-attributes="member: 5142">Yes and no. Yes, I would like to curtail and minimize the 'leadership' language of the warlord. But you take "as much as possible" far beyond either my intent or what I have communicated. I have not stated that I would like to see the removal of 'inspiring' or 'command' abilities. Although leadership is inherently a part of the 'warlord' concept, the problem arises from the fact that leadership is commonly and frequently connected to authority, not just by warlord detractors, but by many people, in general, and throughout history. 'Authority' and 'leadership' also commonly are linked in thesauruses. Distinctions certainly exist, but there are also strong links, despite what buzzword marketing strategies contemporaneous organizations have used for 'leadership' training. My preference is for 'leadership' to be deemphasized in favor of a warlord that more strongly emphasizes tactical cooperation and combat teamwork. You can certainly call that 'leadership' by any other name, but for me it's a matter of flavor that makes for a more inclusive table.</blockquote>