The last time Geralt really saw Ciri was in the year 1268. If you go for the book lore the events of The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt are in the year 1975 (because CDPR messed up/changed the year when the battle of Brenna took place). If you go for the game lore, the events of the third Witcher game play in the year of 1272 (the year Geralt Ciri saw the last time is in the game the year 1265).Bracala;n10688751 said:
So, 7 years ago Geralt saw Ciri for the last time.
Last edited:
I don't know if this is the right thread to ask this questions, but since the last post in Ciri's thread is from 2015 and I cannot start threads I will ask here.
I finished the game once romancing Triss, decided to play the new game+ so I can romance Yen and then I made the mistake to start reading the books, because they were supposed to start make me like Yen, acording to book readers. That didn' t happen. The problem is that after Time of Comptempt I hate my previously favorite , Ciri. I cannot even see the point in finishing the second game, or to continue reading the last books.
My question is for book readers, and please use spoilers, Is there a moment later, in the books, that would make me actually root, or at least even care what hapoens to Ciri? Because in this moment, all the terrible things that she suffered or will suffer in the future are more than diserved. Does she even regret her actions?
Secondly, does Gerald finds out about her actions? Because it feels hypocritical as hell killing bandits in the game, or even monsters, while searching and trying to help Ciri.
So please give me a reason to continue playing or even reading the books, because for days I feel myself unable to do so, not when the second most important character, and the driving force of both stories, feels more evil than most "villains" in the books.
I don' t know how to use spoilers so I tried to not enter in too many details. Also I am not a native speaker of english so I appologise for my mistakes. Lastly if there is a better thread, please move it to the right one. Thanks.
I finished the game once romancing Triss, decided to play the new game+ so I can romance Yen and then I made the mistake to start reading the books, because they were supposed to start make me like Yen, acording to book readers. That didn' t happen. The problem is that after Time of Comptempt I hate my previously favorite , Ciri. I cannot even see the point in finishing the second game, or to continue reading the last books.
My question is for book readers, and please use spoilers, Is there a moment later, in the books, that would make me actually root, or at least even care what hapoens to Ciri? Because in this moment, all the terrible things that she suffered or will suffer in the future are more than diserved. Does she even regret her actions?
Secondly, does Gerald finds out about her actions? Because it feels hypocritical as hell killing bandits in the game, or even monsters, while searching and trying to help Ciri.
So please give me a reason to continue playing or even reading the books, because for days I feel myself unable to do so, not when the second most important character, and the driving force of both stories, feels more evil than most "villains" in the books.
I don' t know how to use spoilers so I tried to not enter in too many details. Also I am not a native speaker of english so I appologise for my mistakes. Lastly if there is a better thread, please move it to the right one. Thanks.
Dan_Florian_Eremia;n10766651 said:
If you want to use spoiler tags, highlight the text you want to hide, then choose the exclamation mark from the advanced editor (A next to smiley, upper right corner of where you type your message). If you are on mobile and can't see all possible options to edit your posts, try turning your device sideways
In the game she was my favourite. In the books
I don' t know in the rest of the books, I only read until Time of Comptempt and and I skimed only throug some chapters with her in the next book.
when she is 14-15 she joins a band a teenage psycho bandits. It is specified in the books that they robbed because they adored killing and not for money. And Ciri is the the one that enjoys murdering inocent people the most, according to them, and becomes obssesed with killing. At some point she is upset that they didn't rape a girl when they robbed her. She is literally a sociopathic serial killer. But apparently since she had it rough before that ( not as rough as her innocent victims off course), she is attractive and charismatic and since she is Gerald and Yens daughter that is enough to ignore her actions and victims in the game, and more to make her some kind of world saving hero. The only time in the game when that period is referenced is when she is in sauna and she discuses her tattoo on her thigh, and one of the dialog options is something like she was young and stupid. And she really seams very broken up about it
Last edited:
Dan_Florian_Eremia;n10770471 said:
Well... let me say in time of Comptempt I never read about that Ciri was upset that they didn't rape a girl. I only know the polish and german version, but in those languages nothing like this happend.
But Ciri will change. In the 3rd novel you will barley read about her, only some small episodes. But in the 4th novel you will read much more about her and she make a big change of heart and many things will happen to her, that you will feel very sorry for her, and that you will love her and want her to be successful
What we find out in the 5th novel is that Yennefer and Geralt know some things of what Ciri made in her past, so it is very possible, that both know what she went through and what she did.
All is part of the big story, the bad and the good ones
Deemonef;n10770581 said:Well... let me say in time of Comptempt I never read about that Ciri was upset that they didn't rape a girl. I only know the polish and german version, but in those languages nothing like this happend.
But Ciri will change. In the 3rd novel you will barley read about her, only some small episodes. But in the 4th novel you will read much more about her and she make a big change of heart and many things will happen to her, that you will feel very sorry for her, and that you will love her and want her to be successful
What we find out in the 5th novel is that Yennefer and Geralt know some things of what Ciri made in her past, so it is very possible, that both know what she went through and what she did.
All is part of the big story, the bad and the good ones
Yeah, sorry that I wasn't clear,
she said that they should have fucked the baron's daughter when they robbed her when she was getting her tattoo at the start of Tower of Swallows. I read completely the books only until Batism of Fire. After I finished Time of Comptempt I only searched for Ciri's name in Baptism of Fire and at the start of the Tower of Swallows hoping to see that she ditched the Rats. . But at this point I stopped reading the books, or playing the game, because I feel that she has become truly irredeemable.
No change of heart can restore all the innocent people that she killed, all the pain she brought to the surviving families. Honestly, how many of the monsters or people that my Gerald killed in the games are as evil as she was, before her change of heart that is. We are talking about someone that felt
I know that bad characters are to many people more interesting, and I know that wars, abuse and severe traumas can turn people into what she became. Most serial killers in real life have terrible childhoods and a history of abuse. That doesn't excuse their behavior or actions, and they definitely are not presented like someone that you should love and want her to be successful. If caught most of them are in prison where they belong or dead. If bad things happen to her in the future books then they are more than warranted, and frankly is small part of what she deserves.
If Yen would know of her actions I don't think to many things would change, since her moral compass, like all other sorcerers isn't that great to begin with, at least from what I read until now.
But in Gerald's case things are different. He actually seems to care about other people besides him and a precious few others and secondly he is the one that taught her how to fight, that gave her the tools to kill what he usually tries to protect. The Rats are something that he would kill in an second, and in the games he spends a lot of time doing just that.
No change of heart can restore all the innocent people that she killed, all the pain she brought to the surviving families. Honestly, how many of the monsters or people that my Gerald killed in the games are as evil as she was, before her change of heart that is. We are talking about someone that felt
when she didn't get to kill, and who watched fascinated when a young man dies after she opened up his artery. Someone that needed to be stopped from going after a peasnt because she didn't like the way he looked at her. Someone that had her eyes full of hatred and evil. This is a monster in human skin, and if it would have been almost any other character in media, maybe with the exception of Dexter (who killed criminals btw) she would be acknowledged as one.
I know that bad characters are to many people more interesting, and I know that wars, abuse and severe traumas can turn people into what she became. Most serial killers in real life have terrible childhoods and a history of abuse. That doesn't excuse their behavior or actions, and they definitely are not presented like someone that you should love and want her to be successful. If caught most of them are in prison where they belong or dead. If bad things happen to her in the future books then they are more than warranted, and frankly is small part of what she deserves.
If Yen would know of her actions I don't think to many things would change, since her moral compass, like all other sorcerers isn't that great to begin with, at least from what I read until now.
But in Gerald's case things are different. He actually seems to care about other people besides him and a precious few others and secondly he is the one that taught her how to fight, that gave her the tools to kill what he usually tries to protect. The Rats are something that he would kill in an second, and in the games he spends a lot of time doing just that.
Sadly like I said I regret reading the books. It appears that they ruined probably my favorite game ever. It made me hate characters I loved (Ciri), dislike characters I liked (Gerald if he knew of Ciri's actions, dislike characters i didn't really like (Yen, I heard that she is a lot better in the last books but in the first ones she is way worse as a person than in my first game when I romanced Triss). The only people that I still like and respect are Triss and Shani (and according to book readers if I continue reading I will dislike Triss also). Now I understand why Ciri was not in the first games, why they changed her personality, glossed over her history in her glossary and in her dialogs and why they gave her that ridiculous plot about saving the world from the White Frost. Because otherwise not to many people would have give a damn about her, even less actively trying to help the little "
repented (apparently) socyopath
I get that Andrzej Sapkowski tried to create a world without good or evil, black or white, only grey. But at this point Ciri is pitch black to me. And her having a change of heart, or getting a part of her due punishment isn't enough to change her color, to me at least. I hoped that, even if unlikely, some book reader will give me a few examples of deeds, actions or reasons why I should try to get over her past, because frankly at this point the witcher world would actually be better if she died when she was a child.
I think that it would be best for me to let a few days pass, and after that to try really hard to ignore everything I read in the books, to keep them completely separated in my mind, like unrelated stories with similar characters . And maybe then I will be able to enjoy the game again.
I also think that any other gamer that is told to read the books, because it would make him appreciate some characters like Yen, and enrich the game universe should also be warned that it could also spoil the game. There is a reason why a lot of content in the books was sanitized in the game (Ciri's history, nilfgardiaan rule, etc.) and that reason apparently is people like me.
Ciri was not in the first game, cause CDPR wanted to tell another story. Some kind of retelling of the books to bring Geralt's world to the players (if you didn't know the books so far). Same reason why Yennefer was not there. They needed a character like Alvin, and bringing Ciri there would make it complicated to tell the story or bring it to a top in Witcher 3, cause Ciri/Yennefer was already there and not reason for searching her
The World of Sapkowski is dark. Zoltan is a friend, but killed a merchant with his friends to get his money and jewerly. Triss is kind and nice, but betrayed her friends etc. A very "real" story about the human being and a whole real world. I mean, how many writers write about a war and mention that the nature will be destroyed here and there cause the soldiers need a place to poop and pee and that this stinks like hell
And never forget Ciri is a child (I don't like her actions either but). Children makes stupid and mean descisions. In our world, stealing in a market, shout at parents, taking drugs etc. And when times pass they don't like the fromer descisions.
The brain evolve with every day. New neuronal bridges are built in the brain and with every day we understand the world more and more. What I did with 15 and what was great at this moment is very embarrassing when I remember it now.
Killing people like Ciri is way more bad but this storypart will show us how bad the times are, that a 15 is left alone again. Thinks the parents she loved let her alone in this cruel world amkes her angry and she graps every straw. Like a teenager in our world who slide into a gang.
I can't say to you, that Ciri will fall on her knees and one point and regrets what she did while crying infront of a church, cause this never happens.
And as I said, Geralt knows the past of Ciri. He and Yennefer visit the places Ciri went through whil with Bonhart, where she suffered a lot. So both of her parents know why Ciri want to go there and both of them help her when Ciri visits the grave of the rats, or burning down a place where Ciri suffered a lot.
And the game was not sanitized when it comes to Ciri
At no point is mentioned that all the things she did with the Rats never happend. Yeah some things are changed in the story, but not cause of sanitizing things, it was made, so that CDPR can tell their own story
Every person is different and like/dislike different things. Some people like Leo Bonhart other hate them. Some like the books other can't understand why someone can like this. Some love Yennefer and Geralt together, othe can't stand Yennefer. As for you, you dislike Ciri now, and I think there is nothing what can change this for you.
The World of Sapkowski is dark. Zoltan is a friend, but killed a merchant with his friends to get his money and jewerly. Triss is kind and nice, but betrayed her friends etc. A very "real" story about the human being and a whole real world. I mean, how many writers write about a war and mention that the nature will be destroyed here and there cause the soldiers need a place to poop and pee and that this stinks like hell
And never forget Ciri is a child (I don't like her actions either but). Children makes stupid and mean descisions. In our world, stealing in a market, shout at parents, taking drugs etc. And when times pass they don't like the fromer descisions.
The brain evolve with every day. New neuronal bridges are built in the brain and with every day we understand the world more and more. What I did with 15 and what was great at this moment is very embarrassing when I remember it now.
Killing people like Ciri is way more bad but this storypart will show us how bad the times are, that a 15 is left alone again. Thinks the parents she loved let her alone in this cruel world amkes her angry and she graps every straw. Like a teenager in our world who slide into a gang.
I can't say to you, that Ciri will fall on her knees and one point and regrets what she did while crying infront of a church, cause this never happens.
And as I said, Geralt knows the past of Ciri. He and Yennefer visit the places Ciri went through whil with Bonhart, where she suffered a lot. So both of her parents know why Ciri want to go there and both of them help her when Ciri visits the grave of the rats, or burning down a place where Ciri suffered a lot.
And the game was not sanitized when it comes to Ciri
At no point is mentioned that all the things she did with the Rats never happend. Yeah some things are changed in the story, but not cause of sanitizing things, it was made, so that CDPR can tell their own story
Every person is different and like/dislike different things. Some people like Leo Bonhart other hate them. Some like the books other can't understand why someone can like this. Some love Yennefer and Geralt together, othe can't stand Yennefer. As for you, you dislike Ciri now, and I think there is nothing what can change this for you.
Last edited:
I don't expect Ciri to fall down on her knees and cry in front of a church. One: because I always hated how in some media, usually teen oriented, a villain or anti-hero decides to turn the leaf, regrets his actions and just like that his heinous past is forgotten, or at least forgiven. Secondly: because to do that would imply that she has a conscience.:wisegirl:
I'm sorry but I cannot agree with relegating her actions to just stupid mistakes that kids do. Besides the fact that in Sapkowski's dark world a 15 years old would be a hell lot more mature than one in our world, even in our world a 15 years old that would do what she did would be tried as a an adult in many if not most countries. And no, what she does is not equivalent to shouting at the parents or stealing at the market,
The part with sanitizing Ciri, common, while CDPR didn't deny that part of the past they also didn't mentioned it, at all. They are the only source of information about Ciri for a person that didn't read the books. Not mentioning it is in this case virtually the same as erasing it from her history.
Yup, people like different things and I guess that indeed there's nothing in the books that can make me at least not hate her character anymore. Like I said, for me reading the books beyond the Blood of Elves was a really big mistake.
I'm sorry but I cannot agree with relegating her actions to just stupid mistakes that kids do. Besides the fact that in Sapkowski's dark world a 15 years old would be a hell lot more mature than one in our world, even in our world a 15 years old that would do what she did would be tried as a an adult in many if not most countries. And no, what she does is not equivalent to shouting at the parents or stealing at the market,
although the part with the the drugs is similar, since she also takes drugs in the books 
. What she does already has an equivalent in our world: while I somewhat erroneously called her actions serial killing, the more appropriate name would be a killing spree: "A spree killer is someone who kills two or more victims in a short time, in multiple locations", and this killings are "usually accompanied by the commission of another felony." Usually type of killers consider themselves about the law and feel they can do whatever without guilt or fear of repercussion. Now doesn't this remind you of an ashen haired girl with green (evil) eyes?:anger:
I haven't reached the part with Leo Bonhart, I don't know if I ever will, but I fail to feel any sympathy for her plight and the suffering that you imply she will suffer. Or to be more exact, I feel the same sympathy that she felt for her victims, or her victims families.
. What she does already has an equivalent in our world: while I somewhat erroneously called her actions serial killing, the more appropriate name would be a killing spree: "A spree killer is someone who kills two or more victims in a short time, in multiple locations", and this killings are "usually accompanied by the commission of another felony." Usually type of killers consider themselves about the law and feel they can do whatever without guilt or fear of repercussion. Now doesn't this remind you of an ashen haired girl with green (evil) eyes?:anger:I haven't reached the part with Leo Bonhart, I don't know if I ever will, but I fail to feel any sympathy for her plight and the suffering that you imply she will suffer. Or to be more exact, I feel the same sympathy that she felt for her victims, or her victims families.
The part with sanitizing Ciri, common, while CDPR didn't deny that part of the past they also didn't mentioned it, at all. They are the only source of information about Ciri for a person that didn't read the books. Not mentioning it is in this case virtually the same as erasing it from her history.
Yup, people like different things and I guess that indeed there's nothing in the books that can make me at least not hate her character anymore. Like I said, for me reading the books beyond the Blood of Elves was a really big mistake.
The thing with the chruch was just a kind of exaggeration to answer your question in a funny way
Every person is different even in the biology. A prince/king can act like a child whle a child can act like an adult. Just wanted to say that the growth of the brain is important for how you act.
It's not like erasing this part of her story. If you say it like this, Triss never betrayed her friends, Geralt never killed three men just to get to a king, Ciri never knew a unicorn, Ciri was never a great medium, Zoltan never travelled with Geralt, Yennefer nevere cheated with Geralt on Istredd etc.
There are sooooo many facts that are not told explicitly in the games, cause you cannot put everything in the game. But most of the stuff happend (if not changed to make the games possible).
Just try to look at the books and games independently. I do it and it works fine for me. Unless I love the books far more than the games
Every person is different even in the biology. A prince/king can act like a child whle a child can act like an adult. Just wanted to say that the growth of the brain is important for how you act.
It's not like erasing this part of her story. If you say it like this, Triss never betrayed her friends, Geralt never killed three men just to get to a king, Ciri never knew a unicorn, Ciri was never a great medium, Zoltan never travelled with Geralt, Yennefer nevere cheated with Geralt on Istredd etc.
There are sooooo many facts that are not told explicitly in the games, cause you cannot put everything in the game. But most of the stuff happend (if not changed to make the games possible).
Just try to look at the books and games independently. I do it and it works fine for me. Unless I love the books far more than the games
Last edited:
So I continued reading Baptism by Fire, and I have reached a quote from an storyteller name Pogwizd, that basically expresses better, and more poetic, my arguments that I tried to convey: that there is wickedness and cruelty in Ciri and that the witchers made a mistake in training her to kill. Well is a good thing that is wasn't just something I imagined, misread or misinterpreted, but it is actually specified in the books, if only by a strange dude that makes his appearance for the first time, but seems to know a lot about the characters and their history.
That is why I asked if Gerald knows of Ciri actions, since he is indirectly gulity of all the murders Ciri comited since he, with the other witchers teached her how to kill. And that is why is hypocritical to punish other people (or monsters with lower body counts) for doing what your beloved daughter loved doing. He even said that in his dreams Ciri was Happy with her life as a Rat.
Also Pogwizd words are why I don't agree with saying Ciri's actions are just the result of immaturity or of her traumas. She always had that in her, she just needed the right circumstances to show her true self. Because many people get through what she went true, some through even worse. But the vast majority don't resort to doing what she did. According to studies most soldiers intentionally miss their targets, which is other soldiers, in war, and this kill or be killed, against people that they hate, people that killed their comrades, and many times civilian countrymen. So imagine how twisted you must be since when you where born to take such pleasure in "punishing" innocent people for what the world "did to you".
BTW can anyone tell me who Pogwizd is, and if he will appear again? And if not, were any fan theories about who he is, like an alterego of Sapkowski?
That is why I asked if Gerald knows of Ciri actions, since he is indirectly gulity of all the murders Ciri comited since he, with the other witchers teached her how to kill. And that is why is hypocritical to punish other people (or monsters with lower body counts) for doing what your beloved daughter loved doing. He even said that in his dreams Ciri was Happy with her life as a Rat.
Also Pogwizd words are why I don't agree with saying Ciri's actions are just the result of immaturity or of her traumas. She always had that in her, she just needed the right circumstances to show her true self. Because many people get through what she went true, some through even worse. But the vast majority don't resort to doing what she did. According to studies most soldiers intentionally miss their targets, which is other soldiers, in war, and this kill or be killed, against people that they hate, people that killed their comrades, and many times civilian countrymen. So imagine how twisted you must be since when you where born to take such pleasure in "punishing" innocent people for what the world "did to you".
BTW can anyone tell me who Pogwizd is, and if he will appear again? And if not, were any fan theories about who he is, like an alterego of Sapkowski?
Just stopping by to add a couple of cents. I have not read the complete series yet, so I can only speak so far. But all of the stuff you find "detestable" and "irredeemable" about Ciri I would argue are very necessary for her character. The Witcher series, much like Game of Thrones or Macbeth, goes to great length to ensure there are no "good guys" in their world. I think it's meant to reflect a world where "goodness" is basically impossible. There's only lesser degrees of filth. What Ciri is, as far I've read, is incredibly honest with herself. She may be frightened or confused by things. She may make mistakes or just horrible choices. But she doesn't try to run and hide from what she is. She embraces her flaws and imperfections without any hesitation whatsoever.
Regardless of whatever she has done, I don't think it matters in the greater scheme of what she is. A Source. I guess, the idea is she is the Source. If so, we're getting into deity levels of power here. How can someone with that level of power possibly learn to manage it "responsibly" unless the individual has a full understanding of life. The good and the bad. To have felt "evil" at the hands of others, and to have visited it upon others. She needed to feel joy, and deliver joy. Etc, etc, etc. That's the only way she would ever have the breadth of understanding necessary to decide what course the world truly needed to take. It is, after all, up to her.
Regardless of whatever she has done, I don't think it matters in the greater scheme of what she is. A Source. I guess, the idea is she is the Source. If so, we're getting into deity levels of power here. How can someone with that level of power possibly learn to manage it "responsibly" unless the individual has a full understanding of life. The good and the bad. To have felt "evil" at the hands of others, and to have visited it upon others. She needed to feel joy, and deliver joy. Etc, etc, etc. That's the only way she would ever have the breadth of understanding necessary to decide what course the world truly needed to take. It is, after all, up to her.
Funny how different people people can read the same thing and draw totally opposite conclusions.
I also haven't finished the books, I just finished The Tower of the Swallow, so maybe my opinions will change. But the last 2 books haven't done anything else than to confirm my feelings. I'm glad that you felt that making Ciri the worst kind of murderer was necessary. It means that at least you can enjoy her chapters in the books. To me sadly they have became an incredible chore, I just wish I would be able to skip chapters when reading books, at least then I could enjoy this series.But I also can't remember a single instance in any other book that I read in which I felt that what a protagonist really needs to build character is to kill a bunch of innocent people and to watch fascinated his victims bleeding to death, so there's that. Also I would think that you don't actually need to kill a bunch of innocent people, and terrorize countless others, just to know that that is bad. And anyway even if that were true, Ciri is NOT the Source in the books, her unborn child will be. So if anyone needed to go on a murderous spree of innocent people for philosophical reasons that would have been her child and not her.
You call Ciri incredible honest about herself while I find her incredible hypocritical. Like when she called Leo a murderer, after killing the Rats (in self defense). Or for calling evil the 4 bandits that waited her in the village for doing exactly what she and her friends loved to do. Man,y times in the discussions with Vysogota she leaves the impression that she still considers herself to be good and different than the other bandits even after all that she did. And lastly, the peak of her hypocrisy: calling herself a witcheress when she is nothing like them, even Letho when he killed innocent people actually did it for what he thought was the greater good, not for his sick pleasure. And btw, since she claims she will kill human monsters that do what she does (or did), why doesn't she takes a hard look in the mirror and cuts her own throat, since she is so honest? Honestly, if you want an example of a sincere and realist bandit, Angoulême is the one, not Ciri.
Also the fact that she doesn't have any kind of remorse for her actions means to you that she just embraces her flaws and imperfections. To me just means a lack of empathy and conscience.
I agree that in the books there aren't many good guys. But there are some of them: Shani, Nenneke and her volunteering pupils, Vysogota, Fringilla and Margarita (so far) for example, and there are plenty of those that are close enough like: Geralt, Cahir, Triss (so far), Yen (less in the first books, more in the last), hell even Three Jackdaws and many others. Many of them have been her tutors or role models.
But my problem is not that she is not as good as them, is that she is a lot worse than many antagonists or people with dubious morality in the books. I will take any day someone like Phillipa, The Coroner, Dijkstra, who killed or get people killed because they are truly patriots or for some ideals over someone who kills and terrorize for her pleasure. I prefer Leo to her, at least while a sadistic bastard, he only killed or hurt people that deserved it, at least in this book. I can get behind someone like the Scoiatel guerrillas who envision themselves freedom fighters or even behind Milva who takes her own people to be slaughtered by dryads and elves because she has an obligation to the Matriarch dryad, at least those were soldiers. I can't get behind someone like Ciri. To me she is only under Rience, Schirru and Vilgefortz on a scale of "not goodness". In a world full of gray characters calling her not black makes to me as much sense as calling the sky not blue but green.
Look I know that I sound very vehement in my dislike of Ciri after the Baptism of Fire. Probably because she was my favorite in the games and I loved her character in the early books. My point is that while I have no problems enjoying darker characters as villains or antiheroes I do have a problem in presenting basically a spree killer (or serial killer depending on definitions) as a hero we should root for because we saw her grow up and the main protagonists love her. I hate that just by changing her name back to Ciri from Falka all the evil that she did is just ignored like it never happened and that the only character that tried to punish her, and somewhat succeeded in doing that, is vilified.
Anyway,after venting my frustrations, let me congratulate again all the book readers that enjoyed Ciri deveploment, wish I was you.
I also haven't finished the books, I just finished The Tower of the Swallow, so maybe my opinions will change. But the last 2 books haven't done anything else than to confirm my feelings. I'm glad that you felt that making Ciri the worst kind of murderer was necessary. It means that at least you can enjoy her chapters in the books. To me sadly they have became an incredible chore, I just wish I would be able to skip chapters when reading books, at least then I could enjoy this series.But I also can't remember a single instance in any other book that I read in which I felt that what a protagonist really needs to build character is to kill a bunch of innocent people and to watch fascinated his victims bleeding to death, so there's that. Also I would think that you don't actually need to kill a bunch of innocent people, and terrorize countless others, just to know that that is bad. And anyway even if that were true, Ciri is NOT the Source in the books, her unborn child will be. So if anyone needed to go on a murderous spree of innocent people for philosophical reasons that would have been her child and not her.
You call Ciri incredible honest about herself while I find her incredible hypocritical. Like when she called Leo a murderer, after killing the Rats (in self defense). Or for calling evil the 4 bandits that waited her in the village for doing exactly what she and her friends loved to do. Man,y times in the discussions with Vysogota she leaves the impression that she still considers herself to be good and different than the other bandits even after all that she did. And lastly, the peak of her hypocrisy: calling herself a witcheress when she is nothing like them, even Letho when he killed innocent people actually did it for what he thought was the greater good, not for his sick pleasure. And btw, since she claims she will kill human monsters that do what she does (or did), why doesn't she takes a hard look in the mirror and cuts her own throat, since she is so honest? Honestly, if you want an example of a sincere and realist bandit, Angoulême is the one, not Ciri.
Also the fact that she doesn't have any kind of remorse for her actions means to you that she just embraces her flaws and imperfections. To me just means a lack of empathy and conscience.
I agree that in the books there aren't many good guys. But there are some of them: Shani, Nenneke and her volunteering pupils, Vysogota, Fringilla and Margarita (so far) for example, and there are plenty of those that are close enough like: Geralt, Cahir, Triss (so far), Yen (less in the first books, more in the last), hell even Three Jackdaws and many others. Many of them have been her tutors or role models.
But my problem is not that she is not as good as them, is that she is a lot worse than many antagonists or people with dubious morality in the books. I will take any day someone like Phillipa, The Coroner, Dijkstra, who killed or get people killed because they are truly patriots or for some ideals over someone who kills and terrorize for her pleasure. I prefer Leo to her, at least while a sadistic bastard, he only killed or hurt people that deserved it, at least in this book. I can get behind someone like the Scoiatel guerrillas who envision themselves freedom fighters or even behind Milva who takes her own people to be slaughtered by dryads and elves because she has an obligation to the Matriarch dryad, at least those were soldiers. I can't get behind someone like Ciri. To me she is only under Rience, Schirru and Vilgefortz on a scale of "not goodness". In a world full of gray characters calling her not black makes to me as much sense as calling the sky not blue but green.
Look I know that I sound very vehement in my dislike of Ciri after the Baptism of Fire. Probably because she was my favorite in the games and I loved her character in the early books. My point is that while I have no problems enjoying darker characters as villains or antiheroes I do have a problem in presenting basically a spree killer (or serial killer depending on definitions) as a hero we should root for because we saw her grow up and the main protagonists love her. I hate that just by changing her name back to Ciri from Falka all the evil that she did is just ignored like it never happened and that the only character that tried to punish her, and somewhat succeeded in doing that, is vilified.
Anyway,after venting my frustrations, let me congratulate again all the book readers that enjoyed Ciri deveploment, wish I was you.
Last edited:
Dan_Florian_Eremia;n10814211 said:
It is understandable, you said it yourself - your first encounter with her character was TW3, a non canonical sequel where any mention of her past wrongdoings was deliberately avoided (for obvious reasons). It is not something that was restricted to Ciri, either (also for the reasons that should be obvious).
As for myself, I did have a sympathy for her, but I still hate reading those "Rats chapters" with passion because I think it's boring, uninteresting slog and all of the Rats are shitty characters.
Question: The witcher Geralt is a very self-sufficient hero. Why did you need to create the destiny girl, Ciri, who appeared in the following novels? How did you come with her? What for?
A.S. I meant for Ciri to be a monster. I wanted to show how people turn other people into monsters. Ciri is Evil, Evil incarnate. Everyone makes a monster out of her: the Rats, the sorceresses, Bonhart and even her own father Duny. She is already unconsciously taking revenge on everyone-Riens, the swamp people. "With these fingers, were you going to teach me pain, Riens?" She says. "With these hands?" They all teach her pain! When she comes to the village in the swamps, with black eyes, the old man asks her: "Who are you?", She replies: "I am death." Remember how in the end they go down the stairs to the enemies, the witcher and the girl, shoulder to shoulder? So, this is Good and Evil going down. Good and Evil. That's why no one can stop them.
Question: So the witcher is Good?
A.S. The Witcher is Good.
Question: But then it means that the Good dies ...
A.S: Yes it is. He leaves, he and Yennefer. But Ciri after that ceases to be Evil.
Question: And what does she become?
A.S. She doesn't know yet. And I won't tell you.
Source : https://www.reddit.com/r/wiedzmin/co...scon_18022001/
A.S. I meant for Ciri to be a monster. I wanted to show how people turn other people into monsters. Ciri is Evil, Evil incarnate. Everyone makes a monster out of her: the Rats, the sorceresses, Bonhart and even her own father Duny. She is already unconsciously taking revenge on everyone-Riens, the swamp people. "With these fingers, were you going to teach me pain, Riens?" She says. "With these hands?" They all teach her pain! When she comes to the village in the swamps, with black eyes, the old man asks her: "Who are you?", She replies: "I am death." Remember how in the end they go down the stairs to the enemies, the witcher and the girl, shoulder to shoulder? So, this is Good and Evil going down. Good and Evil. That's why no one can stop them.
Question: So the witcher is Good?
A.S. The Witcher is Good.
Question: But then it means that the Good dies ...
A.S: Yes it is. He leaves, he and Yennefer. But Ciri after that ceases to be Evil.
Question: And what does she become?
A.S. She doesn't know yet. And I won't tell you.
Source : https://www.reddit.com/r/wiedzmin/co...scon_18022001/
Last edited:
Thanks for the quote Gwynbleidds, at least we can now put to rest the notion than Ciri was a just a good girl that made some bad decisions. That she is Chaotic Good and not Chaotic Evil like I felt all along. I almost started to doubt my interpretation of what I have read with all the posts claiming it:hmm:
And now we reach the crux of my complains: The fact that even after all the evil deeds that Ciri does, she is still considered in the later books and Witcher 3 to be a good person by the rest of characters, especially by the truly good ones like Geralt. That is why I asked if Geralt knows all the truth about her actions, because she is now exactly what he has hunted all his life, a monster. And to ignore it, I don't mean hunt her down, but to not even address it reeks of hypocrisy to me.
And now we reach the crux of my complains: The fact that even after all the evil deeds that Ciri does, she is still considered in the later books and Witcher 3 to be a good person by the rest of characters, especially by the truly good ones like Geralt. That is why I asked if Geralt knows all the truth about her actions, because she is now exactly what he has hunted all his life, a monster. And to ignore it, I don't mean hunt her down, but to not even address it reeks of hypocrisy to me.
Last edited: