So this could be 2 questions in one but context:: there are 3 (tech 4) countries: one is monarchy, one dictatorship, and last is militarism (4th is like vatican state so it doesnt count) but i digress, the militarism tries to destroy the monarchy but members of the royal family survive--all of this occur within a night. So my question would be how would the country baracade itself from the militaristic country? Or if the monarchy country is destroyed, how would the country survive until the heir returns? Help plz.
I'd suggest to research any similar situation in world history and base it on that. If there isn't a similar situation, that's something that could limit the relatability of the story. Normally countries 'kept up with the Joneses' militarily. I can't think of an occasion where an invasion specifically targeted a royal family whilst leaving its country relatively intact. Maybe they selectively assassinate certain members of the royal family so as to put a puppet on the throne who's well-disposed to their regime. But then, monarchies' neighbours in history were mostly also monarchies - everywhere tended to keep up with the Joneses constitutionally as well as militarily - and the royal families weren't confined to one country: there were often other family members on the thrones of nearby countries that would try to get them back on the throne or support a rebellion.
This is part of the writing process you need to find out for yourself. There is exactly infinite ways to believably develope the story from where you placed it. What are you finding hard to do at the moment about it?
So would it work if the militarism country was more of a militaristic monarchy? Cousin of the monarchy country?
Realistically speaking, is that possible for a country to fall overnight and in 3 years the heir returns to take the throne but without causing a war?
Something like that occurred in Cambodia. It took a lot more than 3 years and the "heir" was the old king himself, but his return to power did not cause a war because: 1. He was revered like a god by the people; 2. The withdrawal of the occupying forces was achieved by international negotiations rather than military force. So, yes, there can be a number of reasons why the conquerors have to or choose to leave, and the people tired with instability can place high hopes on the heir improving their lives.
That's a loaded question. Here's the thing: a country cannot simply "fall" - not overnight, not in 10 years. At least, technically. In reality, before the democratization of most governments, a country was divided between the citizens (townsmen, peasants, sometimes slaves, etc.) and the "ruling class" - aka aristocracy, nobility, sometimes rich townsmen. The matters of a country had barely anything to do with the citizens. In most cases, peasants didn't even know what country they were a part of. Before the propagation of communist ideals in Russia, which proved to be a powerful tool to control the populace (as Russian nobility was vastly outnumbered by the country's citizens) only people who cared about what was going in the government were the nobles. For the rest of the citizens, at best, they were able to gain enough money to be suitable partners for royal weddings, therefore getting themselves into the noble families or getting a status of a knight during a war (however, that happened mostly during early medieval years) for becoming a war hero, despite a non-royal upbringing. In most cases, things like changes in government in Monarchies only affected the nobility. If a king died, most of the people weren't really affected. If a country "fell", because it was conquered during a war older civilizations didn't really care - like Romans - and the "fall" was more or less a formality. Yes, most of the German tribes were under Roman control - but so what? Germany exists because the people there were from a vastly different cultural circle. They weren't Romans, so with the fall of the Roman empire they didn't "appear" out of nowhere - their country was more or less just "recognized" by other powers. So, if you want a coup de grace to happen in your story, it likely won't affect the populace at large. A government can collapse overnight and many situations like that happened in history (check out the partition of Poland). But there's a difference between "fall of the government" (different nobles ruling the land) and fall of the country (said land cannot sustain its own economy, creating a state of unease, being slowly robbed of its worth by other powers, forcing the inhabitants to emigrate to other lands in order to keep a somewhat safe lifestyle, burning the countries culture, language, and identity deep under the sands of history.) Both things happened in history frequently, but before the industrial era, these two types of "falls" had almost nothing to do with each other. I recommend reading a bit about Babylon - once a formidable kingdom reduced over the years to an almost village-like status only to fade away from history. If you want your country to "fall" (which I'm guessing will make the militaristic country the villain of the story that the heir to the throne will have to defeat), have the conquerors abusing the people of the conquered kingdom. Again, take a look at what Germans and Russians did to the Polish populace during the Partitions - that's a way to destroy a country. Devaluing its culture, evicting the native populace, banning the use of a native language - it's a slow process, but it's the only way to make a country "fall". Because otherwise, once the people will get their voice, they will just make their own country, because they acknowledge their difference from their conquerors. As Chromewriter said, there are a number of ways to create a believable fall of a government. Have the king be assassinated, fill the noble houses with the militaristic country's supporters, have them form a contemporary government that will decide to form a union with the militaristic country. That's just one idea that popped into my mind. In order to have the kingdom "fall" you'll need to show that the new rulers make life in the land miserable - maybe the native peasants of the conquered country are forcefully evicted from their farms in favor of the conqueror's citizens? "Lion King" is a good example of how to make such a story work. Scar does a coup the grace, becomes a ruler, and under his command, the land itself suffers, animals are hungry, and the resources are not distributed properly. "Country" is a very abstract term. It's not just a different player in a strategy game. In most cases, countries are formed because of differing cultures, ideologies, religions, resources, military prowess, current political situation, etc. Making a country fall means destroying everything it stands for - not just winning a war in "civilization 6".
Do some reading and look around you, see how people reacted and are reacting to the various lockdowns around the world. Your answer should come from your own extrapolations from your own observations.
If this were Stack Overflow History you'd be told by a mod to update your original question to clarify what you are specifically trying to find out, and to show your research to-date. Its not Stack Overflow, but still. They say "write what you know", which in this case means you should probably have a keen interest in history before trying to write a story like that. Possible models for your scenario are all over the history books. If none occur to you maybe you shouldn't write that story. If some do occur it would be good if you could reframe the question so people can help you move on from your own research. For e.g., "I'm currently using the fall of Constaninople as a model, but I need the heir to come back, which obviously can't work in that case, so any suggestions for something similar etc etc" .
It doesn't seem unrealistic. Politics and war as an extension of politics is a mad house. The strangest things can make the biggest difference. Germany possibly only loss the war in ww2 due to poor supply management when fighting the Russians. Or whatever else. But we need to make the conditions for the sequence of events just right to be believable. If your country was invaded and all the top brass died within the invasion, most likely only violent revolution or uprising or war could change the regime. But if the monarchy ran away and the enemy decided to leave the government largely intact to make some sort of puppet government its feasible; all your prince has to do is become a figurehead for their political uprising. But the conditions have to be met for a no war reclamation. 1. The enemy is weak in some way. You cannot hunt a lion in the prime of his strength. 2. The population still have loyalty to the Prince. But time and subjugation erodes this quickly. 3. He has some way to expel the invaders out. - 1. Can be done by getting a political alliance against the enemy. 2. Can be done by propaganda. 3. Can be done by forcing them to fight with their army somewhere else, rather than occupy the princes country. This is just a quick example. You'll find more problems and will require more solutions. But it's infinitely possible. You just have to think of this part of the story as cornering your character into decisive cleverness. If he doesn't have that, he becomes mediocre or dies.
It took a bit longer than that but the Restoration in England put Charles II on the throne, basically without firing a shot, after the Protectorate disintegrated. But as others said, if politics and history aren't particularly interesting to you, then this might be the kind of story you want to tell.
