spoilers At a Crossroad

[Corlan]

After the 5th play-through, I thought it's about time to discuss the privileges of the two paths. What path will be "the one" for you? Meaning if it comes to a third game, which one of your endings will you import? Why do you think that path is better?

 

Well let's start with the very person who started this, the main and most important choice for me was the choosing between the Blue Stripes and the Scoia'tael. At first choosing the Scoia'tael seemed a bit... Odd so to say. Since you are aiding those who aided those who you're chasing, true that "My Enemies Enemy is my Friend", but it seems a bit rude to piss on a strong and powerful friend and Ally just to make a new one. So I reasoned that the Scoia'tael are fighting for more Just reasons than the Blue Stripes, and taking on Zoltan's advice, Geralt's choice of aiding Iorveth makes a lot more sense.

 

What followed-up made it a lot more worth while. You start the path with helping the Scoia'tael escape, end up fighting for a free and equal Pontar Valley. Helping good old friends against a Tyrant. On the other hand walking in to Philippa Eilheart's quarters... As Cecil Burdon likes to say "My favorite type of Magic... Lesbomancy!". Yet still it bothers me that you somehow didn't make a very good and friend friendly choice with choosing this choice in the first place. And you end up being saved by Roche two times in this path, and the way he wields guilt when talking about Ves was amazing.

 

In any case, with making my own reasons and seeing the outcome, I decided that a Free Pontar Valley with united people and strength can be far more Powerful than the four Kingdoms. Aedirn is in shite, Temeria, preserved or split between his two neighbors is none-the-less weak. Kaedwen, either ends up in chaos after Henselts death, or if Preserved starts dealing lands with Nilfgaard to insure it's safety. Same for Redania.

 

There is still a long way to regain Temeria's strength with Anais in Roche's path, with Nilfgaard on the march preserving Temeria is more than Impossible. With Saskia on the other hand, the the unification of the kingdoms and races and hopes for a second Victory like the one in Brenna seem more probable.

 

So in the end, the choice between "The Spellbreaker" and "Where is Triss Merigold" gave me the same guilt feeling. Thinking that Triss will eventually get executed by Shilard, thus with choosing the other you have yet abandoned another friend in need got me thinking when I was saving Saskia, again I thought "For a Higher Cause" and again it didn't satisfy me to leave a friend to do things that actually don't have anything to do with you, although it didn't seem much like the Witcher path, I decided it's what should be done because there are more friends at risk. Cecil, Skalen, Yarpen, Zoltan and so on.

 

And here's something that didn't make any sense to me, if the Letho fooled the Lodge and was working for Nilfgaard, why did he kill half the Nilfgaardians and intimidate the rest just to save Triss? Doesn't that make all he did so far in vain? To save the school of Viper and so on. This gave me some doubts about killing him, since I wasn't sure if he would just walk away and go back to the path or try killing the Monarchs of Cintra, Caingorn, Rivia and others. I don't know what's so bad about it but Geralt found himself fighting Nilfgaardians from the first novel "Blood of Elves".

[Draco856]

Personally, I'm not going to be playing a game where I didn't side with the Elves. I made some choices in the first game I no longer agree with, meaning I very nearly sided with the Order, but I just barely managed the neutral path. If ever an editor is released that can modify the save game without having to replay it again I'd be happy so I can choose the path I believe in now, instead of being blind and not looking past the Squirrel moniker. In the second game I managed to look past it and realized that Iorveth was fighting for freedom, not revenge. I went after Triss the first time in Act 3, and let Saskia go instead of killing her, and killing Letho. The second time I got the dagger and saved her as well as killing the other sorceress, and letting Letho live because he saved Triss when I chose to get the dagger and help Saskia.

[dragonbird]

I seem to be getting to the same point in the game at the same time as Corlan all of the time now - I was thinking this same question last night.

 

I'm personally seeing two totally contradictory "best" endings, and will probably use one of them for TW3.

 

My "feel good" ending is based on Iorveth path. I make sure that Saskia is safe and not controlled by the sorceresses, so the Pontar Valley free state is created, for the benefit of all. I kill Letho because I felt bad about letting Roche down and at least I can honour my promises on this. I let Aryan go, and didn't condemn Stennis, because seeing the peasants beat him to death is pretty gross. I enjoyed my moment of revenge killing Sile. I leave Iorveth and Saskia with a possible rosy future, and I've given Roche what I promised.

 

But what about that future? Is this version of the Northern Kingdoms going to be in any state to fight off the Nilfgaardians? Probably not, as both Saskia and Iorveth will have problems uniting the North. So I also have Plan B.

 

It'll be interesting to see what does happen in TW3, but I'm gambling that, when it comes to the crunch, neither Radovid nor Henselt will ally with the Nilfgaardians. They're both cunning and they both like power - I don't see their negotiations as anything more than a ruse.

 

So my "political" option. Support Roche. Don't let him kill Henselt. Rescue Triss. Don't kill the dragon. This should leave Redania and Kaedwen powerful, and ensure the Council gets created with its own pet dragon as a WMD. Tough about the personal futures for Roche, Iorveth and Saskia, but it will leave the Northern Kingdoms strong. I'm going to hate myself for it though.

[BarefootWarrior]

There doesn't seem to be a right or wrong ending. It seems to be more of a matter of conscience then anything. I agree with dragonbird, I felt much better going on Lorveth's path, for many reasons, but funny as it sounds, I can relate to Lorveth. I won't go into that too deep, but being Native American, I understand Lorevth's issues to a point. I admit, I probably wouldn't mind having pointy ears now...LOL. The thing is, after playing Roche's path, the more I got to understand him as a character, and as it turns out, the more I started to dislike him. And I started not to trust him. I really can't say why, but that is the feeling I had. Both Roche and Lorveth would do what it takes to get the job done, but Roche would go farther. In time, I feel he would / could turn on Geralt, I don't think Lorveth would do that. I think this is because Lorveth thinks things out and Roche is impulsive, my opinion anyway. Roche's path seems to be one of getting back or revenge and Lorveth's path has a purpose. I'm not big on revenge, but that's just me.

 

I am still not sure what ending I would use for TW3. I feel best (so far) with the ending of Lorveth and letting Letho and the dragon live. I am willing to bet Letho will come back. I'm pretty sure we will see Saskia again as well if you let the dragon live. Time will tell, eh? :P

[LenSquig]

Im hoping to try out as many variations as I can. Its fun looking for those changes the previous ending makes.

 

Ive tried out TW2 using TW1 Neutral, Order and Scoia'tael (killed or saved Adda). None of these choices makes any changes to the actual endings in TW2.

 

Its fun to chat with Siegfried if you supported the Order. If you choose to help Roche and save Anais, Siegfried will play like he didnt see you and let you go... its good to have the Grandmaster as your personal friend! Its possible that might be handy in the future, if the Order becomes fully established in Redania.

 

If you choose the Roche path, one of the knights of the flaming rose will give you a small gift in chapter 2 (that same knight will have you on his KOS list if you supported the Scoia'tael *hehe*)

 

If you supported the Scoia'tael and help Iorveth, you can mention you knew Yaevinn. Iorveth will tell you Yeavin is an idealist, dreamer. The way Iorveth spoke (not in a unkind way), you get the feeling Iorveth has been around for a long time, while Yaevinn is still very young in elven terms.

 

So, Im hoping for more of these small but fun things that makes replay so amusing.

[dragonbird]

I'm still puzzled about Aryan La Valette. The official list from the devs of the 16 endings includes your decision on Aryan, but it doesn't seem to affect the ending. It just seems to change a couple of minor comments in the dialogue and lets you have a short conversation with him if he's alive. That makes me wonder if it's going to be important in the next game.

 

I've still to do a playthrough where I resuce Anais but DON'T talk Roche into breaking his word to Radovid. I want to try that sometime as a possible ending, leaving her with Radovid. The more I play, the more I'm starting to think that Radovid is probably a decent king, by the standards of the Northern Kingdoms.

[Corlan]

 

If you supported the Scoia'tael and help Iorveth, you can mention you knew Yaevinn. Iorveth will tell you Yeavin is an idealist, dreamer. The way Iorveth spoke (not in a unkind way), you get the feeling Iorveth has been around for a long time, while Yaevinn is still very young in elven terms.

 

 

In my imported save I was Neutral, saved Adda. I remember having a talk with Iorveth about it, in chapter 2. This is what I remember :

 

Geralt : I once met another Scioa'tael leader.

 

Iorveth : Yaevinn, I know. He had beautiful dreams and desperately wanted me to share them, asked the same of you I heard.

 

-You know a lot about me.

 

-I try to know as much as I can about anyone.

 

-I didn't take his side tho, I remained neutral.

 

-Maybe that's the best thing one should do, let things run it's course, it'll be worse if you end up asking what should have been.

 

-Decisions should be considered before they are made, not after.

 

-How is it that we are on the same side today?

 

 

Well it's not exactly THE Conversation, but I tried to be as close as I can!

 

I'm still puzzled about Aryan La Valette. The official list from the devs of the 16 endings includes your decision on Aryan, but it doesn't seem to affect the ending. It just seems to change a couple of minor comments in the dialogue and lets you have a short conversation with him if he's alive. That makes me wonder if it's going to be important in the next game.

 

I've still to do a playthrough where I resuce Anais but DON'T talk Roche into breaking his word to Radovid. I want to try that sometime as a possible ending, leaving her with Radovid. The more I play, the more I'm starting to think that Radovid is probably a decent king, by the standards of the Northern Kingdoms.

 

 

I don't trust any of the Northern Kings, except Foltest. All of them are lying pricks, bastards and murderers. Radovid was raised by Philippa Eilheart, that gives one something to think about. And he was in Vizima and saw the former Grand Master's madness yet allowed the Order to have a head quarters in Redania. Even Philippa says he is unpredictable. But I'm still wondering if leaving the dragon alive on Roche's path is a good idea. Seems like Philippa and most of the Lodge get away, and after the coup in Thanedd it's unlikely for the sorceresses to do something like Francesca Findabair did to ensure her position in Dul Blathanna. But still seems like even she is part of the Lodge, I would rather die for Emhyr var Emreis than to see Sorceresses with all their mischief rule the most important land in the north, I think Iorveth, Roche and any other sane person caring about the north thinks the same way. They could manage to drive the Nilfgaardians out with Saskia, but that also means they can force themselves on the Northern Kingdoms.

 

So if I go with Roche, I'd rather kill the Dragon and if I go with Iorveth I'd free it. Both paths leaving Triss alone with feeling a little guilty since you don't know what's going to happen to her.

 

Besides that, the one thing that bothers me is... To kill Letho? Or Not to kill Letho... That is the question.

 

On one hand, if you do Iorveth's path you owe Roche this one for saving your back three times, but he saved Triss.... Now, if he did all of this Kingslaying to have Nilfgaard's support with the School of the Viper, why does he storm their camp to save Triss, the person he ploughed up so bad when teleporting?

Edited July 24, 2011 by Corlan

[LenSquig]

 

Besides that, the one thing that bothers me is... To kill Letho? Or Not to kill Letho... That is the question.

 

On one hand, if you do Iorveth's path you owe Roche this one for saving your back three times, but he saved Triss.... Now, if he did all of this Kingslaying to have Nilfgaard's support with the School of the Viper, why does he storm their camp to save Triss, the person he ploughed up so bad when teleporting?

 

 

Letho does seem to be making it a habit of saving Geralt's love interests *laughs*. Letho might have saved Triss, to put Geralt in his debt. He knew Geralt and Triss were very close.

 

I don't think Letho intentionally wanted Triss to be hurt, but he was certainly going to force her to risk doing the teleport spell even though she didnt know the landing site. Thats why they fell out of the sky near Verden (and Triss got hurt in the fall).

 

In TW1, they talk about why there are no new witchers. One of the reasons is that there was no one left that knew how to make/use the mutagens and mages that could cast the spells for the trials (process of training and mutating a human child into a witcher). Letho might also have saved Triss so that she might help him with the magic part of the trials when he rebuilds his witcher school. He saved her, she owes him a favor now.

[BarefootWarrior]

Out of all of this the 'Letho' issue was the hardest to me. In my first play through, I wanted this guy in the worst way, but, at the end when we have that talk, a lot of what he said made sense. That is, why he was doing what he was doing...I let him go. But, in Chapter one when you meet Letho (when you talk to Lorveth at the Elven Garden), and end up fighting Letho, he does say he is no longer a Witcher. I no longer understand where this guy is at, or what his real motives are. Maybe I missed something, but Letho is still a mystery to me. Oddly, I don't regard him as the 'bad guy'.

 

As for Roche, I didn't trust him from the start and I still don't. I'm probably the only one that thinks this, but that is my opinion none the less....lol.

 

I haven't finished TW1, maybe there are some answers there. :unsure:

[LenSquig]

 

As for Roche, I didn't trust him from the start and I still don't. I'm probably the only one that thinks this, but that is my opinion none the less....lol.

 

 

I think Thaler was correct in his message to Geralt about Roche: Listen to Roche. While he may be a prick, he is also a (Temerian) patriot. Thats pretty high praise coming from Thaler, who is the chief of Intelligence of Temeria. Also during the prologue when he is interogating Geralt in the dungeons, Roche says something to the effect that he owes everything to King Foltest. This leads me to believe that Roche can be relied upon for anything that helps Temeria and Anais (Foltest's daughter).

 

However... what Roche believes is good for Temeria and Anais may not coincide with the witcher's goals in the future... Roche would make a ruthless enemy (I saw what he did to Dethmold *shudder*)

Edited July 25, 2011 by LenSquig