Richard's Animorphs Forum
Animorphs Section => Animorphs Forum Classic => Topic started by: Chad32 on May 11, 2009, 11:49:26 AM
-
I don't think Jake ever made an official second in command. The need rarely came up. But if there was going to be one, who do you think it would be? List pros and cons for each member.
Rachel
Pros: She's the closest thing the group has to a true warrior, besides Ax.
Cons: Her favorite morph is a Grizzly bear. It's powerful, but has poor eyesight. Meaning that sometimes she just can't see how many enemies there are, and on at least one occassion she mistakes Horks for Humans. Namely in book 7. That can cloud her judgement in a situation. she had a shot at being #2, and blew it when she suggested they all go polar bear. If given another chance, she may have learned from that, though.
Marco
Pros: He has a strategic and ruthless side that can be an asset in battle.
Cons: He's the least willing to fight. He's the complainer and joker. That's not really good leadership ability.
Cassie
Pros: She has the highest morals, and thinks beyond the moment.
Cons: Her morals are extremely rigid. Even though she shows some growth beyond this in parts of the series like book 35, she slips back into that rigidness. This has caused her to do things like quit the group so she doesn't become like Rachel, trap David as a mouse instead of giving him a quick death, and hand over the box to the yeerks.
Ax
Pros: He is the official warrior of the group. The guy that knows more about Yeerks, does most of the talking to the enemy, and oftn the one who demorphs first in case there are enemies in a certain room.
Cons: He can be arrogant, and is extremely biased towards Yeerks. This is bad in a morally gray universe.
Tobias
Pros: Besides Ax, he's the most driven to fight the Yeerks. This is because it gives him purpose in life. He is the official lookout of the group, and having a bird's eye view of a battlefield is good for a commander.
Cons: For thirteen books, be lacks the power to morph. He's also not really a leader type guy. Judging from his Human life, he's much more of a follower.
There you go. Add to it, contradict what I said, or otherwise debate on who would make the best #2 of the group.
-
Cons: He's the least willing to fight. He's the complainer and joker. That's not really good leadership ability.
he was least willing to fight until the end of book 5... and him being a joker isn't always a bad thing. he does it to hide his true emotions or to keep the others from being zombies...
-
I always thought either Marco was second in command up until the book where Jake left Rachel in charge, meaning Rachel was the unofficial second in command
-
Jake didn't exactly leave Rachel in charge, more they had a vote and rachel ended up being in charge, unless you're thinking of another book...
-
eh, close enough. Either way tht kinda made Rachel the unofficial second in command
-
He seemed to leave Tobias in charge a lot when it was Tobias, Marco and Ax. But Marco usually took over in these cases, so I guess that tells us that Marco at the very least has more charisma when it comes to leading.
-
I think it's kind of circumstancal; of the rest only Rachel and Marco had any honest leadership drive (I'd say Ax, but he took his role of Artish everywhere otherwise he'd probably be fairly good at it.)
Marco would be fit to lead in planning and preperation
Rachel shined in spur of the moment and keeping up the charge.
So I'm torn between the too
That's what made Jake special; he could do both to various degrees
-
there's a lot of interesting discussion on TVTropes, since the Animorphs tend to follow the formula of a "Five Man Band (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/FiveManBand)," which works this way:
The Hero (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheHero)
The Lancer (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheLancer) (2nd in command, has tension with the Leader but also may be their best friend. Think Lancelot to Arthur.)
The Big Guy (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheBigGuy) (The muscle, could be dumb, could be smart, but he's the one you always go to when you're in a physical pinch)
The Smart Guy (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheSmartGuy) (The nerd with the computer and glasses who always talks in tech-speak)
The Chick (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheChick) (I think they may have changed this to "The Heart" to be more PC, but essentially, they're the person who keeps everyone in line moralistically and offers moral support.)
All those articles go into it a lot more deeply.
I mean, it's hard with the Animorphs because they share a lot of the characteristics. It's clear that Jake is the hero, and Rachel is mostly The Big Guy (but sort of the Chick b/c she likes *shopping* and *girl stuff*), but Marco, Cassie, Tobias, and Ax are a little harder to categorize. Ax is mostly the smart guy with his Hitchhiker's Guide level knowledge of the galaxy, but so is Cassie, because she always tells everyone what to expect when they use a new morph. Cassie is also sort of the chick, because she *cares about the animals* and *always knows when something is bothering someone*, but so is Tobias, because he's very in touch with his emotions (lol) and he was sort of an outcast because he was a nothlit. BUT Tobias also has aspects of the Lancer, since he does lead the trio of him, Marco, and Ax, and he often contradicts Jake on the important stuff. Then there's Marco, who I personally think is the Lancer, especially since he's Jake's bff, and because he was most opposed to being an Animorph at first, but even he has aspects of The Big Guy (gorilla morph) and The Smart Guy (go-to strategist.)
Anyway, the point is, I like that they're hard to pin down, it shows the depth of their characters that they all had opposing strengths and weaknesses and they aren't just clear-cut archetypes. And, to be totally fair, I think they all played aspects of "second in command" at different points in the series, and they mostly decided everything together anyway, so there was never any real hierarchical structure, even with Jake being the leader.
-
I vote for Marco for sure. He has the best leadership abilities, next to Jake, IMO. The only downside is that if Marco were in charge I can see them crossing quite a few moral boundaries much quicker. That would put a lot of pressure on Cassie and she might not be able to handle it.
-
I always felt like Marco would have made a good 2nd in command...his quick decision-making and tactical planning abilities are things definitely needed in a leader, and he seems to have a much better balance of qualities than the only other legitimate option, Rachel.
Rachel was dependable in a fight, but clearly lacks the planning ability needed to lead. She's more of the impulsive, act now think later type
-
I don't remember much about the Marco, Tobias, and Ax moments together.
I do like the idea of Marco and rachel taking over in Jake's absence. Marco could make an overall plan, and once the battle starts, Rachel could make spur of the moment plans are things develop. It remeinds me of when a friend of mine used to play war together. I would be the Mwarco, and make an overall pre-battle plan. If it started going wrong, I would rely on my partner's think on his feet talents.
They all have some good qualities, but my opinion would fall on rachel and Marco working in tandem. If Jake and Marco/Rachel were absent, then one of them would be wise to lean on Cassie, Tobias, or Ax a bit. To help balance out the flaws. Cassie is a good moral compass, but she always point in one rigid direction without budging. Tobias is good at watching his friends backs, but he's a bit too much of a follower. Ax has some follower tendencies as well, mainly because of his rank.
-
i always thought marco BECAUSE he is such a good stratagizer. that is what you need out of a leader. And had there been an official second in command, book 37 could have been avoided (that is the 1 where they get the cheetah morphs right?)
-
For me, Marco would bee the second in charge... Morfowt is right: Marco accept to fight, and he's the best for strategy.
Rachel can't be a leader, she's really too crazy! Would you follow a psychopath?
Ax can't be either for another reason: he doesn't know Earth very well, even after a while he makes mistakes, he still jumps on food... It's another reason for his "cons" :P
-
Rachel is not a psychopath. Far from it.
-
Rachel is not a psychopath. Far from it.
agreed. would a psychopath stay in kitty morph purring for her friend till she fell asleep like she does in book 2? yes thats in the beginning of the series, but that person rachel was was still her, deep inside, as witnessed in the end of book 48
-
I think that Ax could be a good leader if he was ever asked to. It's just that he was always faithful to his current leader that he never seemed like he could be a leader himself.
I agree with most that Marco is probably more likely, but I that's because Ax was disconnected from Earth for a lot of the series. Andalite morals and human morals were often quite different and Ax could not lead a species he did not know.
-
furthermore, would a psychopath refuse Crayak's temptation to be Super Rachel? No. And that's the last book she narrates before the end. The last thing she thinks about before being killed is shopping.
-
lol yeah, mea culpa... The Drode said "a sociopath" :P
I know she isn't a true psychopath, but her love for fight and death (the death of Controller and her own death...), when she fight until near death, you see there is a problem somewhere... if nobody stop her, if no leader to say to retreat, she'd die earlier in the series. She's a little crazy, you should accept that, every RAFians are a little crazy too so you know what is it :P
-
Fighting to near death desn't mean there's something wrong with you. It just means you don't fear death. That's a kind of bravery. Psychopath or Sociopath are rather strong words. the Drode does tend to hit on the money with the characters, but I feel it's only a half truth.
-
Of course it's half truth ^^ But it was so funny when he said that! (sorry, I just love the Drode ^^')
And in the case of Rachel, it isn't only bravery, it's a little more... There are insanity in her fight, and it's OK for the Animorphs, because they won many fights because of that. But what would really happen if she survived the war?
-
Go steady with tobias. Get into the fight against the terrorists. Or the military/police force. There would be plenty for her to do. She may even settle for a non fighting career.
-
I think Marco would have made teh best choice for 2nd .
Though it would be interesting to see what would happen if Aximili was in charge XD.
I think it might go to his head. going from the Aristh who calls Jake prince to being the Prince. It might be to much for him.
-
"People without fear aren't brave. They're just crazy."
I don't remember where, but I believe that came up somewhere in one of Rachel's books.
Despite her qualms she grinded through a challenge.
Not the only quality you want in a leader, but it's definetly not without it's beneits
-
Oh, really? Well I guess it's said that true courage isn't about being unafraid. It's about doing something even when you're afraid. Still, warriors shouldn't fear death. And she was a warrior.
-
I, personally, think they should fear death (unless they're helmacron warriors, because we all know helmacrons are crazy), just not so much they can't face it.
-
While I don't think Rachel was psychopathic or insane I do think the other Animorphs viewed her that way, I think to a degree they'd all have had problems following her orders long term. Rachel wasn't incapable of functioning outside of war, honestly I think she could have been a "real" survivor like Cassie, she might have been bored like Marco but I don't think she would have gone off playing "Rachel the Homicidal Maniac" she was poorly handled in the books not narrated by herself, the others had this image of her that, regardless of her actions, they never really seemed interested in changing. Rachel's need to always appear ready to fight is as much for her friends' benefit as anything, being self sacraficing and fearless is a decent quality in a leader but not if it costs you your image to your troops, I think the others saw Rachel as the Riddick (yes I know Riddick came out later, it's just the best analogy I can think of right now, just roll with it) of their group, the technically evil creature they sick on the much eviler creature to bring about peace, and, like Riddick, Rachel isn't actually evil, but I don't think the other Animorphs really appreciated that, I remember finding it really hard to forgive Cassie for essentially quitting the group for fear of being like Rachel, I remember thinking "you should be so lucky, princess!" but meh.
Marco on the other hand, it's tricky to say. Marco is very much a strategist and for that I like him, I always like the strategist characters, they're the best. He shows at least a degree of command ability at several points in the books and its true that after 5 he was definately in it to win it (I know, I hate myself for not coming up with a better way to say that) but I don't know how effective he would be in the thick of a fight, how well he'd pay attention to the larger picture when he's got to keep track of where everyone is, what they're doing, and fend off the Hork-Bajir's blades, in this area I feel like Jake really excelled, possibly out of necessity, still as second in command Marco definately has his merits, assuming that he can put up the right image for it, like Rachel everyone has this way of seeing Marco that isn't wholly accurate, in the heat of battle when the king is gone will you follow the Jester into war? Few people can honestly say "yes" to that.
Overall I think the idea of Marco and Rachel working together wins out, though a good second in command could well have been Cassie. Cassie who knows everyone so well she could--if she wanted to but she rarely wanted to--manipulate them all into doing her bidding ("now bring me cheese puffs! vegitarian cheese puffs!") and probably make them think it was their idea. Would they be the super Yeerk busters they might be under Rachel or Marco's rule? No, they'd probably be a lot less agressive and attack loggers, or deer hunters, but they'd all do so with a strange sort of happiness because afterwards Cassie would touch all their sadness with her magical wand and turn it into--okay this is going downhill, but seriously, Sun-Tzu said it best "Know yourself, know your enemy, find not to fear in 100 battles, know yourself and not your enemy find victory and defeat in equal measure, know not yourself and not your enemy find defeat in every battle" Cassie knew the group better than they knew themselves (minus Rachel I think), by Sun Tzu's logic she should have at least found victory and defeat in equal measure whereas Marco knew himself but not his group really, at least not like Cassie knew them, and Rachel didn't really seem to know the group or herself . . . so yeah, my bias says Rachel and Marco together, but my unbiased head says Cassie deserves serious consideration.
-
I think Marco Would be the best, Or perhaps A Tobias/Ax combo could of worked out ok... Because they both always did have a level head. Well Tobias didn’t when it came to Rachel and Ax when it came to how great the andalites where.. until near the end he got over it.
And I think of all the characters I feel most sorry for Rachel, because Jake being a good leader I guess as they said throughout the books used Rachel, but more so then everyone else. And like someone else said Cassie quits because she doesn’t want to become Rachel when Rachel knows she has a problem. And in the end dies a Martyr, willingly so that everyone else didn’t have to die. Pretty big sacrifice really, but everyone especially towards the end of the books was harassing her about being a war monger, it’s not like she didn’t have enough personal daemons.
-
Definitely not the Rachel that she was towards the end.. I'd go with Marco, or Tobias. Marco and Jake would be good at leading together.
-
It sure seems like Marco is 2nd in command, at least at the end -- in book 53, when Jake falls into the Taxxon hole, he yells for Marco to get everyone back to camp...This shows he trusts Marco to get the job done more than anyone else.
-
Definitly Marco, despite the idea that their is something heroic in being stupid, what you really want in a leader is strategy.
-
didn't jake leave rachel in charge that time he left? that shows that at least he thought of her as second in command at some point. its a tough choice, each character has advantages and disadvantages to being leader. when it comes to strategizing and a thought out plan, i would rather have marco, but in the heat of battle, rachel is more quick thinking. sure, occasionally she would choose to stay and fight when running is the best option, but overall she would be good at it. tobias is probably the most balanced, but he doesnt really have leadership skills, same goes for ax. and cassie, while strategizing, is far too nice.
-
I don't remember if Jake left her in charge, or if it was just decided without him that she would lead. Jake has left Tobias in charge of the Tobias/Marco/Ax power trio, so he trusts Tobias to keep his friends alive when the group is split up.
Marco has strategy, Rachel has drive, and Tobias has experience in alerting the others of dangers. Rachel would make a good leader if she has someone under her to help her focus her strengths. While Tobias is good at keeping them out of danger, I think Marco would be better at dealing with said danger once Tobias catches on to it.
Cassie, Marco, and Tobias would all be good at helping Rachel focus her strengths constructively, but between those three I would rather have Marco calling the definite shots.
-
looking over the wonderful tv tropes, wondering who is what stereotype. good point about Tobias being the chick.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/CharactersAsDevice
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Characters
-
i think it should be Ax, he knows the most about yeerks which really help and stuff
not Marco, in my opinion, he's not serious enough for it
-
Honestly it would be Tobias if he wasn't such a lone wolf who actively shied away from being a leader.
The others have more glaring flaws.
-
Just found this thread and I think it's a really interesting question.
At first I tought Marco would be really good leader after the 5th book, he is a great strategist and so he can make good plans, but Marco is also ruthless. He would have crossed some moral boundaries much faster and I think Cassie wouldn't be able to follow him like she followed Jake, it would have caused many disputes between them and the rest of the group so it would be problematic.
Also when it comes to Visser1 Marco is very conflicted and it wouldn't be that good if he was in charge in this cases.
Rachel would be also problematic because at the end she is way to ruthless, and you saw how it ended it #37- The weakness...
Tobias would be a good leader if he could accept himself as a leader, after he got his morphing power back.
Jake left Tobias in Charge when he sent Ax, Marco and Tobias to a mission, so he knows he can trust him. Also Tobias hast a good balance between moral and ruthlessness: But Tobias isn't a character that could see himself in leading...
Cassie would be way to morally, I think she wouldn't do some things even if there were necessary...
And Ax could be a good leader if he was older. He was taught to follow leader and he would need time to go over this...
I think the best second in command would be a team with Tobias and Marco, I think they would have the right balance, like Jake had it.
But I mean to remember that Ax/Tobias/Marco ended always in Chaos like in 51-The Absolute. It was very funny and I laughed so hard but it wasn't what Jake had planned (Like the destroyed house from Chapman).
-
I don't think I'd call Rachel ruthless. She can be emotional, and her morph makes it hard for her to gauge her surroundings due to low vision and feelings of raw power. Like in book 7 when she charged into a group of Horks thinking they were Humans.
-
I think if anything it would/should be Marco. He has a mind that's relatively cool under pressure/stress, and he has the strategic approach. If you want to win a war you have to be able to think about everything in a pragmatic fashion, or else you're going to get into situations you can't get yourself out of, like Rachel seemed to do at times. Marco also had the ability to look at everything objectively, which seems like the rest of the others had a hard time doing. He was willing to do what it took to win, even if it meant killing his own mother, and that just demonstrates that he could be counted on to make an informed, logical decision no matter what.
I wouldn't go so far to say that Rachel was "ruthless," but she definitely didn't always think before she did things. She was more of a "tell me what to do and I'll do it no matter what," type of person, which is valuable, but things never really go well when she calls the shots. There were numerous times when Jake went down she took charge immediately after, and she didn't always make intelligent moves. I think in MM3 when Jake got shot she told Ax to go and kill the people who did it, which was really dangerous to Ax and it didn't help the mission at all (they should have been going after V4, not the people in the battle.) I think in the last book in the David trilogy Rachel did something similar, which split the group up and left her vulnerable to David. And of course, there's book 37...but I hesitate to really quote any of that because the book was just not that great on a lot of levels. -_-
While Ax seems like a good candidate because of his knowledge/military training, I don't think he'd really be able to thrive in a leadership position (at least on earth) for a lot of reasons. Firstly, he doesn't know enough about earth to lead a guerrilla group. If it were a straight up attack force, maybe, but since they have to blend in and hide in a lot of places, he wouldn't know what the best morphs were for each place/job. And an Andalite leading humans is just asking for a lot of values dissonance in the group (what do you mean don't just blow it up?!). I think Ax had the right idea, when in Rome act as the Romans do and just let the humans handle their own invasion.
Though on top of that, I think Ax had a really big insecure streak too, which would make him undermine himself in a leadership position. He always seemed to feel as though he needed to be led (which was part of his training,) but on top of that he seemed to just crumble down when he was put on the spot to make decisions at times. There was a lot of that in 18, even though he was basically dealing with a lot of hostility directed towards him, part of being a leader is dealing with decisions that screw up and make a lot of people mad. But he also didn't trust his own judgment enough, like in MM3 when he noticed something was wrong about the troops that came and killed Jake, but he didn't press the issue when someone told him it was okay.
As for Cassie, I think if she were second in command they'd be so careful and moral they'd never get anything done. Though at times in the book I wonder if she was really the second in command. I wonder how much influence she had over Jake's decisions. I don't know if this is correct, but it seemed like towards the end part of what caused their relationship to crumble was the fact that Jake just started to disregard her opinions, and she wasn't able to handle that.
-
I quite like JFalcon's idea (+1) about Cassie being a valid 2nd in command (I'm not sure I agree but he made a good point out of it). Of all of them I think Cassie would be able to handle the group best which in real life terms is called management. There's a difference between leadership and management. Whilst Cassie would be able to make everyone feel good, keep the team together, listen to everyone equally, earn and give respect I don't think she is decisive enough for unanticipated events or combat situations. For example her most notable decisive action was to stop Jake from stopping Tom. That turned out...well it depends on your pov (yay eventually saved Earth? boo too many sacrifices? A whole topic in itself.)
Marco as almost everyone has said would be closest they have to the optimal 2nd in command. It's a staple of military stories/shows that those who follow a chain of command but have not been tested as a leader yet realise later the responsibility of "the big chair". If Marco was second in command he'd adapt and think twice about the loss of his team mates (ie be more cautious about being ruthless). An example of a similar case would be in the BSG Miniseries (Battlestar Galactica) Colonel Tigh being hesitant and looking at Commander Adama when he's forced to decide whether or not to sacrifice the lives of a deck full of engineering crew.
Some are born natural leaders but even then they need the experience to round off the rough edges. Marco already has the tactical skills which will develop more with experience, for Rachel to achieve this skill would require too many sacrifices and frankly with only a limited number of resources (just the Animorphs) they can't afford a single casualty/captured.
Ax is similar to Rachel in this respect, he learns to be a Captain in relative peacetime at the end of the series. Some may even say he's just given it for free when he hasn't actually led as a leader which is kinda stupid. (Just because you're considered a hero you're suddenly a tactical military genius worthy of being Captain of your own ship?) Better than Rachel though Ax is more analytical with better field awareness. The decisiveness he'll learn on the way but unlike Rachel he will think first. Given the opportunity to develop, Ax would learn quicker than Rachel. Tobias is too much of a loner and follower. He needs Cassie's people skills and empathic awareness even if he can observe the battlefield better than others he's not even worthy of being noted as a candidate second in command. (Had to be said.)
As for combination leaders it's...plausible albeit theoretically. Practically, the whole point of a leader is so you know which person to follow. The Animorphs as a small group could decide that Marco decides the plan and say Ax handles the execution but inevitably they will face a situation where loyalties will be divided. If you consider an even worse case where you divide leadership even further down you have Tobias micromanaging from the skies (or backseat fighting), Marco yelling a reminder of the objective and Ax trying to keep Rachel from killing herself, Cassie leaving her position to support Rachel's vulnerability. Things will NOT turn out well.
In short, at least in my mind, there is only 1 optimal solution to this problem and that's having Marco as second in command and trusting him as he picks up the essentials of leadership. I wouldn't trust anyone else to be able to pick things up fast enough to not get me killed.
-
Marco because of his strategy.
-
This is an extremely hard question to answer, and this is simply because K.A. went out of her way with each of the other 5 characters to highlight why they are not "leaders".
Rachel and Marco are the two most viable "seconds in command" simply due to their willingness to make difficult decisions and other qualities (fearlessness and assertiveness in Rachel's case, intelligence and cunning in Marco's case). Despite this, these characters were both put in charge in different books, and both to very poor results.
Rachel: Overly aggressive when elected leader when Jake is out of town, and only narrowly gets Cassie rescued after a failed raid leads to her capture. Ultimately acknowledges her shortcomings as a leader and essentially begs Jake never to be away again.
Marco: Plan to kill two vissers and his mother is an absolute disaster, and only dumb luck and a little literary latitude keeps multiple Animorphs from being killed as a result his overly ambitious plans. He's very clever, but ultimately not great at making clutch decisions. Despite his pragmatic nature he let his emotions lead the Animorphs into an abnormally risky situation even by their standards, and the other Animorphs let it happen against their better judgement.
The others never took any leadership initiative, and this alone puts them on a tier below the above 2, but they've each got other issues as well.
Cassie: This one's easy. She's defined by her moralizing and her compassion. Great qualities in their own way, but there's simply no way she'd ever be able to make the tough decisions needed of a leader.
Ax: Naturally a soldier, not a leader. Happily embraces Jake as "his prince". Paradoxically, his other poor leadership quality is his arrogance. Both of these qualities are harped on repeatedly throughout the series since his introduction as a character.
Tobias: I used to think he was a solid one simply because his leadership flaws aren't as glaringly obvious as the rest. He's a poor candidate due to his more moral nature in a manner similar (but not as extreme) as Cassie. More importantly, though, he is a poor leader because he doesn't WANT to be a leader. This is something he explicitly states many times. He's a follower by nature.
I feel like K.A. made such a effort to justify Jake's position as leader as to cast all of the other 5 characters as obviously NOT leaders. The two most viable alternatives (at least IMO) even had whole books devoted to highlighting their shortcomings as leaders. I think trying to choose between the two is splitting hairs and trying to argue for any of the other 3 is unjustified.
-
I don't know if The Reunion would be a good book to use to make the statement that Marco isn't a leader. It's not like there weren't some extenuating circumstances with that one. If Marco didn't feel like he had to prove he could kill his mom, he could have done all right with it. Not like The Weakness, where Rachel was driven by nothing other than her being able to say "All right! I have the keys now."
However, I think what made Marco not an ideal "leader" is that he was so damn good and useful in the role he had. I think that there was a comfort level there for him and the group.
-
There are always extenuating circumstances in these books. Always. Leaders make the right decisions in spite of them.
I don't really think those excuses apply.
-
There are always extenuating circumstances in these books. Always. Leaders make the right decisions in spite of them.
I don't really think those excuses apply.
Then explain The Conspiracy. Jake was not coping well, and Marco leads the Animorphs to save Jake.
-
There are always extenuating circumstances in these books. Always. Leaders make the right decisions in spite of them.
I don't really think those excuses apply.
Then explain The Conspiracy. Jake was not coping well, and Marco leads the Animorphs to save Jake.
I remember Jake ultimately taking charge of the situation at the end, though in the end the plan was Marco's.
I never said he wasn't a good planner. Thats not the same as being a leader.