by sigmazero13
Hermjard wrote:
From a certain point of view, it would be consequent then, that a routed commander in an area, where diplomacy failed and the army must retreat, is also eliminated, because of the same reason.
The rule for destroying-if-already-routed really only applies to actual battles. If there is no battle, then the Commander isn't really involved, and I would argue that they stay there.
Also, note that if attempting diplomacy against Routed neutrals, and you use a grey result, the routed neutrals CAN retreat - they are not destroyed. So from what i can see, really the only time routed units are destroyed is if they are routed prior to a BATTLE, and are then forced to retreat after the battle.
For Commanders, there's nothing that indicates they are tied with an army in an area other than during battle. As such, I would say that from the rules-as-written, they are not affected by Diplomacy results.
However, I think this is one worthy of asking Corey about, so I'll submit the question :)
However, I should note that getting a routed Commander into an area with unallied neutral units is going to be pretty rare, since Commanders can't do quests, and if they are in battle and retreat, they'd have to retreat following unit retreat rules. It's not impossible, just unlikely (unless there's something I'm not thinking of).