[Big question is coming]Why the Nifgaardian Empire and Emhyr is a bad side in this war?

[cathulu12]

Hello there, guys. It's a question I’ve been giving some serious thought. I mean, of course, Nilfgaard is an oppressor and this is bad, but then Emhyr is not a fanatic mage-hater or anyone-hater, really. He is a strong, stern leader of his realm (prosperous one at that). And once he has something, assuming it’s ready and yearning for peace and not revolt, this something and its people are safe from… unconventional methods of cleansing, should I say.

There're not a lot of sentiments to his actions, true, but is really that bad? Remember Foltest, who molested his sister and killed so many people, when she refused to give up their kids, unadmitted heirs. Where the f*ck was the subtlety to his actions, where was the responsibility of the king? But there were lots of emotions. That being said, I was relieved he had been killed. Serves him right. A D*ck.

Let us return to the topic at hand. Var Emreis is one who actually made Nilfgaard the Nilfgaard. So will it be such an awful thing if his actions unite the continent under the rule of one with vassals and such? Look at the Empire, really look. Who wouldn’t like to live in a civilized country which leader ensures stability there and not the chaos, which ruled Northern Realms instead of kings for who knows how long (with still living rulers I daresay), where laws are heeded and executed, where you can rely on the justice and not the prejudice? If you’re not an overly nosy sorceress, that is. Who likes impolite witches, anyway? So it’s a justice in a sense too.

For those, who knows at least two endings: one, where a victory in that war was after Nilfgaard and the other, where Radovid won, I have something more to tell. Compare damn endings and states of the country in each. With Radovid the Northern Realms burned, suffocating in the smoke and with Emhyr peace was not such a far-fetched concept. Hell, there had been started the building of the road through Crookback Bog even.

I am all hands for freedom and democracy, don’t get me wrong, but hell if those people are ready for it or will have a chance, in any case. I mean, it’d be the monopoly on political power anyway, so why not to give it to one man, who actually knows what to do with it, except shaking it in front of others, that is? And Emhyr var Emreis has done more than necessary to prove he’s not an amateur in the art of the government an empire, The Empire (which is huge).

Some could say one country - one mind, eradication of all of the old traditions from the respectful histories of each realm. I’d say they’re wrong. Remember Toussaint? It’s Nilfgaard. With their duchess (annoying as hell, but it’s not the point) and a whole bunch of different customs. Hence my belief that Emhyr doesn’t aim to subdue the Realms, but to unite them by the only effective way possible – conquest is not unreasonable.

Maybe he does what he does even for another reason rather than bringing enlightenment and ensuring a progress. Perhaps he has an Oracle, who told him about the end of the world by the White Frost or whatnot and man decided the only chance humanity has to stay alive to see another century is to be united, not shuttered and weak. For what I know it’s a possibility. Certainly fits the Witcher lore. He might even have a sense of premonition himself, I wouldn’t be surprised, really. The man is a miracle as it is anyway.

So, guys, tell me your thoughts on the topic. Does something still evade me?

Edited July 10, 2018 by cathulu12

[olnorton]

Read the books, you will see how you are wrong in nearly every statement you have made.

Emhyr var Emreis was a total failure as a leader.

In his time as Emperor, with the vast might of Nilfgaard, all he added to the empire was Cintra. (In an effort to get Ciri back)

He lost the first war with the north, and the second, and could only win the third if Geralt killed both Radovid V and Dijkstra, both of whom where vastly superior military leaders and either could defeat him with much smaller armies..

 

His Oracle, if you could call him that, was Vilgefortz. He told Emhyr, (who at the time was the rightful heir to the throne of Nilfgaard, though his father the Emperor had been deposed.)

that Ciri's grandchild was prophesied to rule the world. Vilgefortz was only playing him for the fool he was, and planned to betray him down the line.

So Emhyr seduced the 14 year old Pavetta (Ciri's mother) and got her pregnant. He married her using the name Duny, planning to kill her once the child was born (which he did do.)

Then he planned to rape his young daughter so the child the prophesy said would rule the world would be his grandchild.

Vilgefortz had his own very different plans for Ciri.

[cathulu12]

Read the books, you will see how you are wrong in nearly every statement you have made.

Emhyr var Emreis was a total failure as a leader.

In his time as Emperor, with the vast might of Nilfgaard, all he added to the empire was Cintra. (In an effort to get Ciri back)

He lost the first war with the north, and the second, and could only win the third if Geralt killed both Radovid V and Dijkstra, both of whom where vastly superior military leaders and either could defeat him with much smaller armies..

 

His Oracle, if you could call him that, was Vilgefortz. He told Emhyr, (who at the time was the rightful heir to the throne of Nilfgaard, though his father the Emperor had been deposed.)

that Ciri's grandchild was prophesied to rule the world. Vilgefortz was only playing him for the fool he was, and planned to betray him down the line.

So Emhyr seduced the 14 year old Pavetta (Ciri's mother) and got her pregnant. He married her using the name Duny, planning to kill her once the child was born (which he did do.)

Then he planned to rape his young daughter so the child the prophesy said would rule the world would be his grandchild.

Vilgefortz had his own very different plans for Ciri.

Good point, though I’d prefer not to mix together headcanon and game-universe.

Well, mostly because the game is a sequel and sort of speculation, and in addition to an already different playground in it only the player decides on his course of action, create his own Witcher-land so to say. What I mean to express by it is that written story is pretty much set in stone, as for the game… So, yeah there’s no point to estimate any characters and their potentials based on both game and books.

My little rant was all about games since the majority hadn’t read books. Besides, it is the game forum, is it not?

That’s being said I agree that E has used unsavory methods, but as I’ve pointed out before the possible future with Nilfgaard in charge has its appeal.

 

Anyway, thank you for your opinion. It was more helpful than one could have thought based on my reply. I do appreciate the effort.

P.S. I take great joy in quotes from books slipped here and there throughout the 3d chapter and genuinely don’t understand lack of lore about the Emperor.