Well i don t say that this is a definatly thing that will happen.
And since some heavy clashes in RL happen between family members they love each other.
Why it can not happen between them? Because the BOOKs say so? Pffff please....
Well, this hypothetical family has to be quite dysfunctional if they're ready to kill each other, even if it's for the greater good.
Judging by reports (and Hollywood conventions
) people, especially parents, will actually behave absolutely irrational when some family member is in peril, risking their own life and that of others in order to save their child/spouse/parent. The "the lives of the many outweigh the lives of the few" logic doesn't apply when someone who is dear to your heart is in mortal danger. People are emotional beings. They'd rather let many innocents die if it gave them an opportunity to save their loved ones.
And given how emotionally invested both Geralt and Yennefer are when it comes to Ciri, I doubt their actions would be governed by common sense. I think those two would do a lot of morally questionable things just to secure Ciri's safety and well-being.
Triss did make sure some mistakes, but she would sure put her life in the line for Cirilla i have no doubt
in that.
Oh sure, Triss views Ciri basically as her little sister. She even uses that exact term at one point in the books if I'm not mistaken. I'm certain she wouldn't harm her intentionally.
can you say it for sure? Don t think so... i think "this" Yennefer is slumbering deep down in her...
Just like everybody has to deal with his own darkness in his/ her hearts ...
I think that by the end of Lady of the Lake all major character have developed to a point were they couldn't just go back to the way they were at the beginning of their respective journeys. Even, Triss, who, as I mentioned before, wasn't the most complex character (comparatively speaking), underwent this beautiful mini-arc that found its poetic conclusion during the progrom in Rivia. And this holds true for Geralt, Ciri, Yarpen, Zoltan, even goddam Dandelion (okay, Dandelion is debatable :lol: ), but it applies in particular to Yennefer who was irrevocably changed by the events that occured and, overall, has probably evolved the most out of the core characters. Sure, I'm not denying that there still might be hints of her pre-Last Wish self and a slumbering darkness, as you put it. In fact, I sincerly hope that this is the case. Yennefer is a complex woman, being a strong-willed, vain, oftentimes stubborn and quick-tempered individual is part of her charm. However, I fail to see what this has to do with her taking extreme actions that would put the people she cares most about in the world in mortal danger.
Also, there's a point where a character, if changed too much from what was established before, ceases to be that character. A personality transformation has to make sense internally and can't just be forced upon a character purely for the sake of creating drama and conflict.
Maybe Eredin himself can influence them in some way? "Convincing" them Ciri is better with him or death?
Who knows? And yes since Eredin has "mental altering" powers TW3 Yennefer might not be Book (after last wish)
Yennefer any more...
Um ... In the realm of possibility ... I guess. However, having a character, in this case Yennefer, commit horrible acts under mind control and/or threaten Ciri so that Geralt is forced to chose between letting his adoptive daughter die or killing the woman he loves would be, again, a cheap gimmick that goes for an unearned emotional gut punch. I'm not necessarily opposed to the idea of some character (for instance Eredin) exerting power over someone's thoughts - after all, Witcher 2 did this in form of a spell already, and did it rather well I'd argue - but this has to be handled carefully. In the end, it's always more satisfying to see a character make a choice 1) out of his own violition and 2) with the best of intentions. A tragedy that stems from misguided aspiration, miscalculation and or simply bad luck is much more powerful than a Kobayashi Maru* no-win situation, especially if you are completely aware of the circumstances and know that you lose either way. And so far, CDPR has actually proven that they understand this. Most of the choices in the previous games have offered Geralt the opportunity to make either a selfish decision (let's say, save Triss, extort money), an altruistic, noble one (free Saskia from the spell, rescue civilians) or something in-between. Geralt has made decisions in good conscience that backfired horribly due to some unknown factors or unforseeable events that unfolded, sometimes he made egoistical ones that benefited on party and put another at an pretty awful disadvantage. And occasionally the outcome was undesirable no matter what Geralt did - but never to the extend that you felt completely screwed or betrayed by the game.
*Apropos Kobayashi Maru. One possibility for an acceptable no-win situation would be Geralt pulling a Kirk - a.k.a. cheating
- and finding a third, so far unthought of option. After all, he kinda already did this once in "The Last Wish". Or, if one were more inclined towards a negative interpretation, a situation could arise in which one of the ladies (Triss/Yennefer/Ciri) sacrifices herself before Geralt can make the call. This obviously should be somehow connected to a prior decision that Geralt has made (unbeknownst of the later outcome), since you want to have a certain amount of influence - even if it's indirect - over the events in the game.
By the way, I'm NOT saying that there shouldn't be any hard, morally problematic or ethical dubious choices in the Witcher 3 (or that characters can't die), just that there is a fine balance between providing what I consider a "hard" choice and one that could be summerized as "it doesn't matter, you lose either way, tell your psychologist I said hello".
But all this is - of course - not to say that I can't comprehend someone chosing Triss over Yen - even if he/she has read the books. And while I do have a strong opinion about the topic, it would be especially crazy to criticize someone who tries to go into the game open-minded.
