Anais or Triss?

[gibb_geralt]

Anais or Triss?

Really is the hardest decision in the game for me. My Geralt doesn't give a shit about the politics, but choosing between the likely death of an innocent girl or the likely death of his lover is a really hard one. With the Saskia Triss one it was easier, as Saskia was the head of a potentially revolutionizing state. A woman with no bias to humans, dwarves or elves. Letting Triss die for such an ideal was a worthy sacrifice, though he would never forgive himself.

This one's a bit harder though. Anais didn't choose her heritage and just got caught up in the greed of warmongers. Triss on the other hand, from what Geralt knows at this point in time, meddled in politics and colluded with the Lodge. Whether or not it ends up being true is irrelevant. But he still loves her.

Hard choice indeed. What did you guys choose and why?

 

[GuyNwah]

You're right; this is a hard decision. It would be harder if Geralt doubted that Roche could succeed alone; then Geralt would be in the position of having to choose between rescuing an innocent child and rescuing his friend.

Remember that Geralt doesn't give a spoiled spud for kings and nations. It does not matter to him that Saskia represents an ideal that he does not share. Nor does it matter to him that Triss may have colluded with the Lodge; you can hear how vehemently he denounces Renuald's insinuations.

To me, the "canon" decision is always to rescue Triss, even though there are good arguments for the other decisions. He came all the way to Loc Muinne to rescue his friend and clear his name, not to meddle in the affairs of mages and kings.

 

[gibb_geralt]

You're right; this is a hard decision. It would be harder if Geralt doubted that Roche could succeed alone; then Geralt would be in the position of having to choose between rescuing an innocent child and rescuing his friend.

Remember that Geralt doesn't give a spoiled spud for kings and nations. It does not matter to him that Saskia represents an ideal that he does not share. Nor does it matter to him that Triss may have colluded with the Lodge; you can hear how vehemently he denounces Renuald's insinuations.

To me, the "canon" decision is always to rescue Triss, even though there are good arguments for the other decisions. He came all the way to Loc Muinne to rescue his friend and clear his name, not to meddle in the affairs of mages and kings.

Geralt wouldn't care about the very first nation to have true equality among it's inhabitants? The Squirrels and humans have been at odds wherever Geralt went; to have that conflict squashed is revolutionary. And the ideal of equality among races has been a primary ideal of my Geralt since the first game, he just never believed it was possible.

Plus, Geralt is the player character. With a few exceptions, the players decide Geralt's motivations and thought processes.

 

[GuyNwah]

I can't bring myself to agree with that: I don't believe that this is a blank-slate RPG. Geralt is not the player's alter ego. Geralt is Geralt. He has a history and attitudes that he comes with and you are not really invited to rewrite for him.

While the ideals of Saskia's rule may indeed be admirable and revolutionary, Geralt consistently holds that entangling himself in them is folly.

You asked me why I allowed my Geralt to choose the way he did, and I don't care to argue against a claim that my decision is somehow incredible.

 

[Lurtz_Of_Orthanc]

Sorry guy, you're wrong on the Saskia point. There's a dialogue option that directly allows you to decide whether Geralt shares Saskia's ideals or is with Vergen for 'his own reasons.' Both are equally valid - Geralt loves Triss and wants to find the Kingslayer, and Geralt is also a witcher, a semihuman social outcast who can relate directly to the plight of the downtrodden - human and nonhuman alike - as they attempt to establish a truly free state in the Pontar Valley - unlike the sad joke that is Dol Blathanna. Not saying your perspective is invalid, just that Geralt does NOT "consistently hold that entangling himself in [Saskia's revolution] is folly." He expresses a shade of doubt as you sail away from Flotsam, but you control his opinions after that, culminating in your dialogue to Saskia in Vergen and your choice to save her or Triss in the finale.

 

[gibb_geralt]

If Geralt was Geralt, there would be no point in choice. Because Geralt would do the same thing every time. Why would the option for helping the Scoiatel be there if Geralt could not believe in some form of ideal? Why else would he help a band of misfits over the Temerian special forces who have vowed to clear his name? Because people have different versions of Geralt, and why he does what he does. There are some definite cemented parts of his character, but there is still much to mold.

This is an RPG. Geralt is subject to the player's vision. This is especially evident in TW1 when we are actually given a quest to shape his identity. I understand you may be upset if you have read the books and want everyone to abide by "canon Geralt", but this is RPG territory now.

 

[GuyNwah]

Nowhere did I write that I wanted everyone to abide by "canon Geralt". My views on how to play this game are mine, yours are yours, and we can disagree with each other without believing that one is trying to force his own views.

For me, I cannot play a Geralt who after a lifetime of avoiding political entanglements unless they are forced upon him suddenly becomes an idealist willing to share a cause he never shared before.

There are RPGs and there are RPGs. In many RPGs, you are called upon to invent a character from a blank slate. To me, this is not one of those at all; it is one in which you are called on to interpret a definite role.

 

[gibb_geralt]

Nowhere did I write that I wanted everyone to abide by "canon Geralt". My views on how to play this game are mine, yours are yours, and we can disagree with each other without believing that one is trying to force his own views.

For me, I cannot play a Geralt who after a lifetime of avoiding political entanglements unless they are forced upon him suddenly becomes an idealist willing to share a cause he never shared before.

There are RPGs and there are RPGs. In many RPGs, you are called upon to invent a character from a blank slate. To me, this is not one of those at all; it is one in which you are called on to interpret a definite role.

That's fine. That's how you interpret the character. This is an RPG, except some of the characteristics you would usually invent are already there for you to further mold. It's a different experience, but still one left to the player.

 

[eglard]

I never rescued Anais. There is no emotional tie between Geralt and her, and the bond between Geralt and Triss is very strong. Of course it doesn't have to be, but in my opinion this game is about saving Triss and clearing your name. Everything else just makes it harder to make the "right" choices. The political consequences of Geralts choices are inevitable, and they will probably be worse if Geralt follows his emotions and tries to remain neutral. If Geralt tried to make the correct political decisons he wouldn't be a very good guy. Infact he would be an awful guy..

 

[wichat]

choices, choices and more choices.

Please, be a little honestly with yourself and admit that often in real life you would have your act in one way or another either, a decision not only depends on one's own personality but your mood, or the person who is with you at that time influences, and the site too, and even the time of day does it.

Infinitely many variables make our everyday life, the decisions taken without thinking, those that we think twice or longer to meditate

And about Geralt of Rivia, can we be consistent with the personality that we gave in TW1? Are we obliged?. What if Geralt chose Triss instead of Shani? Or just know that Tris is a woman who knows and accepts the consequences of following next to it?

THE lucky difference between play and real life is that the first you can go back and change to a different action any times you want.

So enjoy it!

 

[fesper]

Indeed. It is up to the player to decide Geralt's ego, and his ideals. True, some choices might differ from the ones that a ''canon book'' Geralt would make, but c'mon , it's an RPG. There are numerous choices throughout the game. Anyway, my personal opinion about this decision(which probably is the most difficult one) is that it would be better if you saved Anais. The fate of Temeria is up to Geralt. Should Temeria remain without a rightful ruler, then it would be divided into provinces by some damn nobles. Chaos would ensue. And all that in order to save Triss? Well, it might sound a little cruel, but if it is between a sorceress's life and the fate of Temeria( a stronger north) the choice is pretty clear. Though in my first playthrough, I chose to save Triss. Besides, even if you don't go save her yourself, (spoiler) Letho saves her for you(I know it's rather shameful but it's better than nothing). So, Triss lives, and at the same time Anais is saved.

 

[GuyNwah]

I just can't make Geralt out to be a patriot of Temeria. He has no ties to Temeria except any obligations he feels to Roche or Thaler or the memory of Foltest. That said, he may still decide to rescue Anais because she is a helpless child in grave danger and the child of a man he served and let down.

I think you should take, even if only once and not as your "canon", the viewpoint that Geralt is politically neutral because he has learned the hard way not to meddle in the affairs of kings and is loyal only to his friends and to the downtrodden to understand him completely.

 

[fesper]

I just can't make Geralt out to be a patriot of Temeria. He has no ties to Temeria except any obligations he feels to Roche or Thaler or the memory of Foltest. That said, he may still decide to rescue Anais because she is a helpless child in grave danger and the child of a man he served and let down.

I think you should take, even if only once and not as your "canon", the viewpoint that Geralt is politically neutral because he has learned the hard way not to meddle in the affairs of kings and is loyal only to his friends and to the downtrodden to understand him completely.

I can see your point. Anyway...

 

[username_2093396]

I rescued Anais. I was angry at Triss for not explaining everything at the beginning and going after Sile on her own, and I felt like it was her own fault that she ended up being captured. On the other hand, Anais was an innocent little girl and I simply could not leave her with Dethmold so I had to help Roche save her. And similarly I saved Saskia as well because it wasn't her fault she had been spellbound and I had to free her.

 

[CTPhipps]

I went with rescuing Triss.

I could see Geralt going after a child because of two factors:

1. It's a child.
2. It's to pay back his failure with the King.

As with Saskia, I think "canon Geralt" (games only despite having read the book) wants to have a world of equality where humans, dwarves, and elves can share in it in peace. I do think, however, he'd never be one of Saskia's true believers because he'd realize that it's going to be a long and bloody road.

Later, he'll note that Saskia is a Dragon and while that's great for the nonhumans it's not the sort of monarch that's really OF the people. She's basing her rule and legend on a lie.

 

[username_3608252]

Geralt rescued Anais in my playthrough.

1. She is a child, and a more innocent victim than Triss, even if Geralt has less of a personal connection to her.

2. Redemption: I decided that Geralt felt he owed something to Foltest's legacy, since he had failed in protecting Foltest himself.

3. A weak and divided (or annexed) Temeria just seemed like a really bad idea, with Nilfgaard continuing to loom over the entire North as a threat. A civil war between the Temerian nobility or an uprising against Redanian occupation, was also claim thousands of innocent lives. It was hard to give that less weight than the life of one sorceress, even if she is Geralt's lover. I also felt that Triss, with a similar moral outlook, would have understood and agreed with Geralt's decision.

It was a very difficult decision but in the end those three factors led me to have Geralt choose Anais. I like the way it worked out as well, because Letho ends up saving Triss. It made the final confrontation with him all that more bittersweet, since I decided going into it that Geralt couldn't let him just walk away.

 

[RSIK_4]

rescuing triss is good choice
geralt has an emotional attachment , loving and caring attachment with triss..
how could u forget that
anais is with roaches safe hand in epilogue
rescuing phillipa is not worth..

 

[GuyNwah]

rescuing phillipa is not worth..

As concerns Philippa herself, agreed. But Philippa is the key to freeing Saskia from her spell, and that is a reasonable thing for Geralt to want to do.

Even if you play Geralt as anti-political, Geralt has a personal tie to Saskia, because she is the daughter of Borch Three Jackdaws, and on Iorveth's path, Geralt has probably figured this out even before they talk about it.

 

[wichat]

More I read the books, more I am sure that Geralt feels a soft spot for children, and innocents in general ... and well, Triss does not smell of lilacs and raspberries ....On the other hand, Geralt failed to protect the king, and his heart feels somewhat responsible for the girl's orphanage... It is my opinion

 

[Dracolich55]

Hello guys, I was wondering what choice you made regarding Saving Triss or Helping Roche save Anais, and if so who did you give Anais to?