PLEASE DON'T RUN OFF! ;_;
Alright, here's the deal.
A story, it's characters, a world - it's all defined by intent. We've devised that. We want to show the parallel between these two peoples, and the absurdity inherent in that they are the same people and are warring with each other for almost no reason. The absurdity of war between people who were once kin. The missed parallel between them as they refuse to look at their similarities/
The next step in the storymaker's process is to figure out the problem, and a solution to the problem. (There are other kinds of plots, and if you want to mention a really well-thought out plot in the following posts that doesn't follow that general guideline, be my guest!)
Currently, the problem is the war. Can we all agree on that? The war, especially in terms of the "clashing cultures" of two peoples that are really the same people with slightly different values and appearances.
There are a few different common solutions to such a problem. I am going to detail three of them that I think would be the most plausible method for building a plot around.
(Naturally there are other ways to solve this problem in a way that would be dramatically appealing. However, this is not a novel, this is a comic. Because we are already changing things up a bit, I think it would be advisable to stick to something tried-and-true for this sort of thing, especially because none of us really has experience in alternative storytelling, so it'll be hard enough as it is without screwing with the fundamentals. If you have an idea that does not fit into these, you are welcome to detail it in posts below, but please keep my warning in mind.)
These are:
Good End: A good end, typically, is an end where the problem is resolved in a manner that is satisfactory. Naturally, a war will have death, loss of innocence, and trauma, but this is an end where, just maybe, everyone (or most everyone) comes out all right (or mostly all right). This would probably be an end in which a peace treaty would be present and a restless peace would be achieved. In more elegant terms, this is the end in which humanity manages to right itself from it's pointless wrongs, and perhaps begin to heal the wound that the shift and parallel has created.
To go into a little more detail, just think of how in Pocahontas we had some very near martyrs trying to force the two cultures through their own deaths to realize the foolishness of going to war on rumors and spite. (Smith, of course, doesn't come out exactly unharmed.) Though no one actually dies a martyr death (sorry Kokoum), it has some rather charged moments where you aren't quite sure if everyone (aka the heros) is going to come out alive.
A good end celebrates humanity's transcendence of prejudice and ability to stop what some may believe is their natural instinct to war.
Bad End: A bad end, typically, is an end where the problem is not resolved, or is resolved in a way where humanity manages to destroy itself. This is an end in which the main characters will die or can die as a result of the inherent stupidity, shortsightedness, and general prejudice anger of man in rage and war. This could be an end in which the main character attempt to stop the war, fail, and die - or perhaps an end in which the main characters embrace war. Such things as this create an almost tragic end, where humanity does not transcend brutishness and inevitably begins to undo itself entirely.
To go into a little more detail, just think of Lord of the Flies. I know you've all read this, by now, and if you haven't,
wikipedia will summarize. In Lord of the Flies, Piggy - and half the other children on the damn island - die because Jack succumbs to animalistic behaviors and instincts and follows his savage desire to become the islands alpha male by killing the current one as he sees it, Ralph. This is a bad end, because obviously a lot of people die and the underlying problems of overcoming animalistic savagery obviously are not overcome as Jack succumbs to them and manages to destroy a lot of shit.
A bad end laments humanity's inability to transcend prejudice and serves as a circumspective analysis on what humanity actually is in terms of everything else that lives.
WTF end: A WTF end, typically, is an solution to the problem in which something else other than humanity manages to solve the problem. For example, Nature is often used as a tool to end the problem - like, say, as a volcanic explosion of apocalyptic measure in which most of humanity is destroyed, and what little is left over (and what little of humanity survives, if at all) must band together for the good of all. If they manage to do it, the ending is hopeful. If they do not, it is like a bad end. This ends up making the argument that humanity is always ruled over by nature, and they must cope with what they are while also coping with nature herself.
To go into a little more detail, just think meteor in FF7. Though meteor is brought about by humanity (which is also part of this), it ends up being nature herself threatening humanity, and they just have to deal with it. For a less nerdy reference, think Noah's Ark, in which the world is flooded.
A WTF end usually focuses more on man vs nature, or man vs some other aspect he is not able to control, and in which case is a little bit of a deviation from what we are trying to accomplish. (Unless you have a really good idea for the plot following this construct, I wouldn't bother too much with this.)
The reason I have detailed these out is because we need to figure out the solution to the problem of war. If we can do that, the rest of the plotmaking becomes easier, and we can actually begin to flesh out a skeleton and begin the real meat of the work.
Please post your opinions on what kind of end you'd like to see this go here. I'll post my opinions last, so as not to influence anyone unduly.(If you need help getting started on an opinion, just pick one of these that you'd like to see happen and just try to type out your thoughts about it. No opinions are wrong here!)
tl;dr: Happy ending, sad ending, y/n?