Children of an evil king vs chosen one killing him and the consequences of it

[EldritchCoomer]

(okay, so, edit cause the last post was confusing)


So I had this idea for a story I'm planning where there a few chosen people by the deities of their world that have to fight against an evil king on world conquest where the climax of the fight is coming to a close, at the same time the children of the king would get a taste of how the world operates and the harm their people cause and work to assist in his downfall.

Now I want peoples takes on what they think realistically the consequences of what would happen afterwards. Like after the dust had settled and the [insert clever fire nation here] and also how I would go about rebuilding relationships cause I have no idea how politics works so I need some insight on people that would know what would realistic happen.

Also by the way if he chosen ones kill the king there would a lot of discourse and more wars and push backs by the not fire nation trying to keep the delusional kings dream alive.

As for the children doing it and taking over it would take a lot less effort to retrieve all the power and land stolen as well as giving the chosen ones more support than labelling the entire family as evil from the chosen ones point of view and try to find someone more trustworthy to take the place of ruling the not fire nation.

 

[SailusGebel]

What?

 

[EldritchCoomer]

What?

Sorry, edited. Hope it makes more sense now

 

[Empyrea]

Fan fictions seem to be pretty popular in the trending thingy. So you might not even want to cross out fire nation.

I would personally have the kids overthrow the king. Then they get slaughtered by the hero party as they're trying to make life better, but failing. You've said before that your story is more lighthearted though, so I'm stumped. Politics are hard, maybe throw an orgy at it and see if that helps.

 

[EldritchCoomer]

Fan fictions seem to be pretty popular in the trending thingy. So you might not even want to cross out fire nation.

I would personally have the kids overthrow the king. Then they get slaughtered by the hero party as they're trying to make life better, but failing. You've said before that your story is more lighthearted though, so I'm stumped. Politics are hard, maybe throw an orgy at it and see if that helps.

Well, no orgy this time, but I would have them join forces with the heroes in some form or fashion of the heroes failing and having them work together. Orgies can happen after I've built a sexual relationship between them all, although throughout the rebellion run I would make them enemies because of conflicting interests and less monstrous and not directly terrible enemies.

Also, this is for a different story and it was originally planned to be a fanfic for avatar, but I hate writing humans too much to keep it that way so needed to make it its own thing.

 

[Empyrea]

Well, no orgy this time, but I would have them join forces with the heroes in some form or fashion of the heroes failing and having them work together. Orgies can happen after I've built a sexual relationship between them all, although throughout the rebellion run I would make them enemies because of conflicting interests and less monstrous and not directly terrible enemies.

Also, this is for a different story and it was originally planned to be a fanfic for avatar, but I hate writing humans too much to keep it that way so needed to make it its own thing.

Well, you could have had the fire nation be fire breathing lizardmen, water tribe could be slimes or mermaids or something. Earth benders could be that crystal race you were talking about before, and air benders could be flying bison people. I see no conflicts here.

 

[Anon2024]

You could also have an anon race, a race of trolls who always get the upper hand by making the other races make angry mistakes.

 

[LilRora]

If I was writing something like I think you're describing, I would purposefully make it chaotic. Normally, after the king is killed, there's high chance you'd have some local gangs or organizations trying various things - both good and bad for the people. Trying to say what the consequences would be is a very difficult question as we have no details about the people.

For example, if you had a very king-centered race, there would likely be some people trying to become kings in their own right - although that can also heavily depend if the people would try to find a new king or cling to the dead one. My advice is to think in detail what's the nature of the people and the country, and when you have that, it will at least be easier to come up with the consequences of killing the king.

As for rebuilding relationships, my advice is to try to make it happen spontaneously, but do no deeper introspection during the chaos caused after the death of the king. Many things is such situations are done out of need and lack of alternative, with even sworn enemies becoming temporary allies. It is only after the danger passes that the relationship is put into question and either destroyed or maintained.

The relatively realistic option is that various people do various things and you'll have people that want a friendship or whatever and those that don't; that will inevitably lead to a lot of conflict. Try to go for a mix of both, with some people kicking a beaten dog and other helping a stranger in need, be it openly or in secret.

You could also have an anon race, a race of trolls who always get the upper hand by making the other races make angry mistakes.

 

[ACertainPassingUser]

If you want to know how politic works, I'd recommend you to read both of these :

1. Realist Hero

2. A Sponger Life

Read both online Manga (or WebNovel, whichever you like) and tell me your impression of both story.

Choose which one you like for your story progression, and we can see how politic might work in your story.

 

[JHarp]

Usually things like this are a lot more chaotic and people don't tend to consider all the angles for them.
In the first place, figure out why there is a royal family. While 'power' is a good metric, usually royal families ruled over the general populace by limiting access to vital resources like food. When it comes to trade the 'crown' in a sense tends to control the most lucrative markets.

So unless the entire operation is killed off, removing one or two 'bad people' won't do much.
There is also major issues when it comes to support and power. Royal families have lineages for a reason, it 'runs in their blood' and while the whole 'hero saves a kingdom and is made its king' is a fun story; absolutely no one would trust that 'king' with that type of power. Nobility do more than get fat even if most novels tend to forget that logistics, standing militaries as well as territory management is required to hold positions of power.

So the best bet is someone of royal blood; with the populace on their side, who has eliminated some of the core reasons that the crown originally ruled. This would lead into a government switch. As has been shown for real world examples like France. Royalty can only screw up so much.

As was mentioned by someone else; culture can play a massive part; godkings specifically if they run the religion extremely well, it can be very difficult for a population to act against it, further cementing the need for another member of the royal family 'protecting the people'.

Usually to reclaim a throne you need friendly external supporters if you plan for a proper war; this is why englands history has the english who sent the royalty of wales into monasteries rather than overseas. If they manage to get a position of power or end up in a powerful family, it can backfire due to other countries pressuring the right for another descendent to rule; it becomes a cause for war. Leading to why there is only a 'prince of wales' and not a 'king of wales'; meanwhile the UK has 'the royal family' who are based in england due to that.

It is also why in many cases, taking a concubine of the losing royalty can help cement the position, usually making that child a heir can settle down a lot of opposition.

As for general chaos throughout the nation; it really wouldn't notice a change in king unless major policies were being changed. The whole point of a monarchy is to de-centralise the chain of command, to give trusted officials 'rule' over their territory. The Romans did extremely great with this, making sure to never border a persons territories which allowed them to prevent them from amassing a large army due to adjacent territories. Making one of the major reasons they were able to expand so well and maintain control.

The common folk really wouldn't notice, guards and merchants don't really 'stop' what they are doing the moment the king is killed; at most they would delay trade of valuable goods if there are any changes to the law so they aren't caught out on new bans for goods.

And as a final note; no country would help freely, they would expect better trade with no tax, they would likely want help with allied pacts, free borders, marrying some of their officials into noble families, or taking some territory as payment.
Novels seem to love making other nations give free help and expect their new friends to just be happy. Depending on the tech level of your setting; the time when sword fighting was the main thing, and even a bit before guns; no country would have the resources to rebuild another nations worth of people. It is why refugee rules now a days are extremely friendly compared to what they would have been back then.

People in ancient rome straight up would beat up immigrants in the street at times. There is a massive shift in how humane we have gotten; but many nations and cultures didn't start this way.

 

[K5Rakitan]

Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Once the kids get the king out of their way, they'll be locked in a power struggle. If not for themselves, they'll want to secure power for their children and grandchildren.

 

[BearlyAlive]

So you want a discussion on "Hero killing Evil Overlord vs. Not-Evil Heir to the Evil Overlord killing Evil Overlord"?

First one turns either into hero just taking over as "Benevolent Overlord" or abdicting their chance to the "Rightful Heir" which in the long run would make no difference between the second choice as the child would fall into the "Rightful Heir" trope in both cases.

If you want the "Against Dad"-Fight to have any kind of emotional involvement you need to set those characters up way before. Just pulling a "Hey, Dad, are we the bad guys? Wait, we really are?! Then I have to fight you!!!" during the villainous monologue before the final fight would just be a cheap cop-out and destroy every involvement the reader had in your story.

If the Prince/ss is seen by the reader to actively go against their parents by either confronting them on multiple occasions or by actively trying to lessen the evil it's another story.

You could also let the Heir be too young to understand good and evil and let them deal with both the political aftermath and coming to realization that their parents were actually evil.

 

[Cipiteca396]

people by the deities

There's your answer. The deities indirectly murdered the king for upsetting them. Everyone with any common sense would fear the same fate.

So they'd ask the deities to pick. And if they refused to pick, they would probably pick someone who's in a favorable position with the church anyways. Just to make sure it doesn't happen again.

As long as the kids and the chosen heroes are working together, there's not much anyone else can do. They literally took down an entire nation already, so nobody could hinder them.

The real problem is that the children have an informed lack of common sense. They'd need support from more reasonable people to teach them what to do. Most likely, they would be sent off to other nations to build relations, while a regent took care of the kingdom.

Obviously the presence of the heroes would prevent any sort of (successful) insurrection, in addition to having legitimate heirs to the throne on standby.

After that, the only thing you need to worry about is what you want from the story. If you want the (suddenly incompetent) heroes to fail to save the children or stop crazy loyalists, then that can be a 'fun' plot point. Maybe have one of the kids go off the deep end too. You can spread as much chaos as you want for the sake of drama.
On the other hand, if you want things to go peacefully, then just have the heroes be proactive about sniffing out dissent, and make sure to show the regent and heirs are working hard to meet the deities' expectations.

 

[T.K._Paradox]

(okay, so, edit cause the last post was confusing)


So I had this idea for a story I'm planning where there a few chosen people by the deities of their world that have to fight against an evil king on world conquest where the climax of the fight is coming to a close, at the same time the children of the king would get a taste of how the world operates and the harm their people cause and work to assist in his downfall.

Now I want peoples takes on what they think realistically the consequences of what would happen afterwards. Like after the dust had settled and the [insert clever fire nation here] and also how I would go about rebuilding relationships cause I have no idea how politics works so I need some insight on people that would know what would realistic happen.

Also by the way if he chosen ones kill the king there would a lot of discourse and more wars and push backs by the not fire nation trying to keep the delusional kings dream alive.

As for the children doing it and taking over it would take a lot less effort to retrieve all the power and land stolen as well as giving the chosen ones more support than labelling the entire family as evil from the chosen ones point of view and try to find someone more trustworthy to take the place of ruling the not fire nation.

If you want to be realistic about it there is going to be a power vacuum and people are going to have to take the mantle of governance.

Rebuilding will be needed, and shakey alliances may start to form in a bid to have a stronger control in this new magistrate and chances are some of the old 'Evil King's' court is going to be part of it.

After unless you have foreign support or internal support chances are your chances at overthrowing the current regime are slim to none.

Trade routes, borders, reparations, immigration, and factionalism are some of the many things to consider when creating a new dawn for this new country as well.

 

[TheEldritchGod]

STEAL SHIT.

It's called history, pal. Find some Empire that got overthrown. Copy that. Why reinvent the wheel?

 

[EldritchCoomer]

Well, you could have had the fire nation be fire breathing lizardmen, water tribe could be slimes or mermaids or something. Earth benders could be that crystal race you were talking about before, and air benders could be flying bison people. I see no conflicts here.

Different story beat, different beat, different themes, different layout of story structure and different reason for existing all warranted a new story to be told.

Also different races for a whole host of different reasons that would come to light as the story goes of which I originally planned to tie in with the avatar series and all their spirit and separate worlds both existing together simultaneously.

There would be a reason for such things to not come to light immediately, but will be brought to light as the story progresses.

 

[T.K._Paradox]

STEAL SHIT.

It's called history, pal. Find some Empire that got overthrown. Copy that. Why reinvent the wheel?

Because copy pasting reality into a fantasy setting feels half baked and lazy, also coming up with something remotely unique is better than 'oh it is just *insert previous real world country here*'

 

[TheEldritchGod]

Because copy pasting reality into a fantasy setting feels half baked and lazy, also coming up with something remotely unique is better than 'oh it is just *insert previous real world country here*'

Dude. Making up shit that doesn't make sense is worse. And who said copy paste? Game of thrones is very popular and its just the war of the roses.

Abraham Lincoln, vampire hunter.
Pride, prejudice, and zombies
Taking domething old and putting a twist on it is writing 101.

Guess what?

THERE IS NOTHING NEW. IT HAS ALL BEEN DONE BEFORE. SUCK IT UP. YOU WILL NEVER BE ORIGINAL.

Now instead of trying to make a new breakfast dish out of eggs, make the best scrambled eggs anyone has ever eaten.

It's not about copy paste. It's about your brand. There are a million stories just like yours. So make your brand of story better than anyones. If a historical template does most of the work, don't be a moron. Take the short cut so you can focus on the parts that matter.

 

[T.K._Paradox]

THERE IS NOTHING NEW. IT HAS ALL BEEN DONE BEFORE. SUCK IT UP. YOU WILL NEVER BE ORIGINAL.

Kinda sad if you actually believe this, despite the inspiration in your story coming from something else that doesn't mean your work will never be original.

There will never be another you and your story will always have a little bit of impact in regards to artistic expression and may even set new tropes into motion.

So cheer up dude, and stop being so nihilistic, after all regardless if your story is 'bad or 'good' you will always have your mark on the canvas of life.