They probably ignore him as much as they can and live their own lives. For the vast majority of people in history, who the king was didn't matter much for their lives.
Most of history, the local lord was the one you had to worry about, and the king's power was limited by how loyal the nobles were, as they had to keep the nobles happy.
Lloyd is openly "loyal" (obedient), and should be making sure the other nobles want him to stick around, as if they felt they wanted him around the king's ire would be severely limited.
Heck the openly suicidal orders the king is sending out are something the nobles should complain about on principal alone as is sets a precedent for the king to get rid of them for an imagined slight. Which makes me think that the other nobles both know and are in some level of agreement with what the King is up to.
And how long did their rule last before they drove their kingdom into the ground, were deposed, or turned into a puppet for someone else's agenda? My guess in most cases no more then a decade.
No ones who ruled for decades happened. Gaius Julius Caesar Augustus rules for just over 40 years, and picked fights with his competition for power to get rid of them just like the King here is. Nero is considered one of the worst Roman emperors and ruled for over a decade.
What we do know is the King wants LLoyd dead, but even that position makes some logical sense as LLoyd is a walking super weapon, and as such a potential threat to his rule. Rulers tend to remove threats to their rule. In fact many of the most competent and longest lasting rulers tended to think like this. The fools who did not were more likely the ones who get ousted or made into puppet rulers.
In fact the way the king has been trying to remove LLoyd up to now is actually more in the competent but morally dark side of things. He has been giving LLoyd difficult jobs that opn paper LLoyd should either die in attempting or be severely weakened.
Politics is a game, and it is more about knowing who they can and should target. We have only seen the King target one person, so can not know how he treats the other nobles.
The thing is since we only really see the king's interaction with LLoyd there is no evidence for how good a ruler the king is, and it is beyond idiotic to make assumptions about his rule based on this one case alone. LLoyd is a special case that does not really have a equivalent in the rest of his rule.
The other thing you need to consider is they they just ended a war, and wartime mentality would have affected the threats to his rule, and how he seen by the populace. There is more leeway when you are fighting a war if your actions can all be seen as being towards winning it, and military leaders do not complain when they feel they are being supported in their needs to fight the conflict.
The real issue, and this is something that we have known since Roman times, is when the fighting ends how do you transition back to a non-war time economy and military without irritating the soldiers leading to the people who have the big weapons revolting and taking over. Seeing how many countries have military Junta's it is a valid worry.
