Board Thread:What If?/@comment-5674726-20140906160841/@comment-24762954-20141005133012

ReganX wrote: I doubt that it would invalidate the agreement, not it there was no clause to state that Queen Annis had to continue to rule over it. The advantage for Queen Annis would be that she wouldn't make an enemy of the dangerous sorceress and would keep Morgana's attention fixed on Camelot.

As for the rulers of other kingdoms, they didn't care enough about who sat on Camelot's throne to lift a finger during either of Morgana's conquests so I can't see them doing anything in this scenario. If anything, it helps preserve the balance of power if the strongest kingdom is divided in two, rather than half of it being attached to Caerleon, and if Morgana is focused on Arthur, she's not targeting them, which is a major plus.

I'd say that they'd leave it to the Pendragon siblings to fight it out amongst themselves, and then decide what to do once/if there was a winner.

I wonder how Merlin would deal with the idea of one Camelot where magic can be practiced freely while it was outlawed in the other Camelot. It is intrusion into the succession war which makes any peace agreement a laughing stock. Furthermore, it could be viewed as alliance between Annis and Morgana.

Also, there are kings willing to wage war and Camelot's allies who are obliged to help. Neither of Morgana's conquests lasted long enough to do it. After all, war preparations take time. Even if we are going to be cynical, there are kingdoms who want to weaken Camelot, but there are also those who want it to be strong.