No system no matter how well structured, will work if every stakeholder is corrupt. More stakeholders means fewer failure points, but the Waterdeep system is based off of one of the more historically sustainable systems, the Merchant Republic.
OK, you asked.
www.historytoday.com
Look, I get that my last response was a bit harsh, but I made a thread asking about what political elements of the setting could fuel a Waterdhavian to revolution, not to be harangued about how my goals are wrong.
Oh, did Venice have an immortal demigod ruling it alongside an entirely anonymous council based primarily on nepotism?A good historical study, that Waterdeep and similar fantasy cities are directly based on, is the remarkably stable 1100-year Most Serene Republic of Venice, which ended through outside force and the people tried to restore through revolution for decades after Napolean oversteer the system:
'In Place of Strife' - The Guilds and the Law in Renaissance Venice | History Today
The last part, yes.
Not wrong, but extremely complicated if stiking to canon. As I said earlier, if I was DM and a player had this concept, I'd change canon. I was trying to think within the parameters set in the OP, which makes for a steep climb.
I don’t want to continue arguing about this. I respect your perspective, I just disagree with it. I think a place like Waterdeep would already have deep political divisions and socio-political resentment, as written.
