vivaxardas said:
First one, most obvious: why Geralt and everyone assumed that Mikul raped Ilsa??? We know that she poisoned herself, and that Abigail sold her the poison. When Mikul learned about it he was, it seems, sincerely upset. Salamandra guys openly told Geralt they gang-raped Ilsa outside the village. Alvin in trance also talked about gang-rape ("plow her well, show her that you are a man!") It seems that she killed herself after that, and instead of helping her to cope Abigail sold her a poison. So why exactly Geralt told the Reverend it was Mikul??? Just because Abigail told him so?
Odo killed his brother, but Abigail did have a doll of him, and, I wouldn't put past her that, as Odo told Geralt, she wanted to enthrall his brother, and when it failed, she bewitched him using his greed and hate to do the deed. So here it seems they both are equally guilty. At least there is not enough evidence to judge otherwise.
Haren traded with squirrels. So what? Geralt claims he sold one to city guards. How a hell did he learn it? There is nothing about it at all, except Haren telling him it was possible to do. And why does it even matter to Geralt who may be just offed four squirrels himself?
About salamandra: they terrorized the village, and it is pretty obvious they made the villagers to do what they ordered. They themselves told that children (and probably goods from Haren as well) were a tribute, and Reverend had to do it. Why could anyone blame peasants for not standing up to the armed gang (and be massacred in the process), given that salamandra demonstrated they were not joking around?
I know, peasants are really ugly and not exactly lovable, while Abigail is good looking. They all are guilty, but is it really worth it to save her and have the entire village, including every man, woman, and child, exterminated?
Good points but hardly cast iron.
1, Ilsa's rape. Mikul showed remorse and Salamandra raped her, but this doesn't mean that Mikul wasn't part of it, many villains show remorse or hide behind excuses such as addiction or other bullshit. After all he sells out the Witcher on trumped up charges for some reason, most likely because the Wolf knew of his crimes, and the village women all speak of him being a sexual predator. Alvin's visions sound like he was trying to prove himself to the Salamandra. Poisons can be used for vermin or as restoratives in small doses, Abigail cannot be blamed for what a woman does with the wares she sells.
2, Odo's murder. Odo stands to gain from this murder, Abigail did not and does not, she's still in the same position as before, an outcast loner shunned by all except those who can't afford a whore. So why would she do it? As a spurned lover of Odo's brother, in collusion to murder him? Then why hate and pursue Odo who has done as she asked? Because of him not sharing his brothers wealth? No this is too complicated, the simplest answer is usually the right one as criminals are stupid and Abigail is not.
Lastly the Echinopsae thirsting for vengeance rose up on Odo's land, probably where he buried his brother as the mourning dog indicates, not on Abigail's property. It seems quite plain to me that Odo did it.
3, Haren traded with and betrayed the Squirrels, this seems obvious. Zoltan was not assaulted for no reason outside Haren's house, the Dwarf was looking for his friend who had mysteriously disappeared here. It's obvious that Haren is profiteering and selling out his customers to the guards to double his profit, you see many subtle references to this throughout the game. Of course it's not Geralt's place to judge, but it was the Beast's and Haren cannot call himself innocent of his crimes which do not involve Abigail at all.
I've often wondered whether this was a cancelled quest, as it seems to pop up with Vivaldi again in Act 2.
4, Salamandra. Anybody who sells their own children to guarantee themselves peace is a fucking coward and evil, the peasants of the Outskirts did not need to collaborate with Salamandra, they did not need to portray themselves as goodly and vice free despite being gamblers and adulterers, they could have called on Vizima's guard, the Order, the Mercenaries at the Inn or formed their own militia. They chose to give up their children and that damned them.
Now i'm not saying Abigail was completely innocent, she most likely summoned the Beast (probably when a curse on the villagers got out of hand) and was involved in the numerous distasteful duplicities in the Outskirts, but she was not guilty of the villagers crimes and should not be punished for their weak and evil actions. I'd stand up for her again, never mind the fact that she was judged innocent by the healer of Murky Waters, as it's the right thing to do. The Beast would have had no power in the Outskirts were it not for the villagers own deeds.
Gave you +1 as somebody had downvoted you, I think you make a good argument however, and your choice is perfectly valid for your vision of Geralt.
- just as a matter of interest 