That is another valid POD to discuss. Guess I was just coming at this from the perspective of ''what if the rebellion was more successful?''The obvious significant POD isn't Henry Tudor becoming King two years early but Richard's men successfully luring him ashore. Henry presumably is subjected to successful treatment for dandruff shortly thereafter and never becomes King. So, either Richard hangs on in the absence of a strong alternative dynastic contender or the Lancastrians and disaffected Yorkists rally around another contender. If so, who? And it would take a year or two to establish who would take on the mantle so Richard would have at worst a slightly longer reign than OTL and at best might establish himself sufficiently to see the pretender off.
A lot of stuff I came across claimed that Richard had promised the remainder of the Bohun inheritance to Buckingham, and this only awaited parliamentary ratification. If true, that would seemingly remove that grievance as a motivation for the revolt.so this was rank ingratitude as Richard fumed - but was he annoyed at not getting more of the inheritance of his ancestress Eleanor Bohun, co-heiresss in the late C14th of the Brecon/Builth lordship, from Richard? The lands of the Bohun dynasty, earls of Hereford, had been divided between the last earl's daughters Eleanor, married to Buckingham's ancestor Duke Thomas of Gloucester who was ex. 1397, and her sister Mary, married to King Henry IV, so Eleanor's daughter and her husband, Lord Stafford,and their son, B's grandfather Duke Humphrey of Buckingham, only got half of them; Henry IV and his heirs Henry V and then Henry VI got the other half. As of 1483 the 'Henry IV half' was in the crown's hands, and B seemingly wanted Richard to give all this to him. This is usually cited by most historians as why Buckingham turned on Richard, out of greed; but some allege that he was using Richard as a route to the crown for himself , and that he then used Morton too. But was he really so clever and devious?