The Yennefer/Triss choice in TW3

[tasir]

Well, they could've learned about it when the Imperial secret police caught Yen? That's an interesting theory and it's certainly not impossible... I wouldn't give the Lodge THAT much credit though. Not to mention that the secret police is called secret for a reason.

If I remember correctly Sile knew where Yennefer was (she said something like that at the end of TW2) so I assume Philippa knew it as well. The question is that they were the only ones (Sile and Phil) who knew it or every member of the Lodge were aware of that...?! (and perhaps they didn't tell Triss the truth.) --- But I haven't played TW2 for a long time so I could be wrong...

 

[dragonbird]

If I remember correctly Sile knew where Yennefer was (she said something like that at the end of TW2) so I assume Philippa knew it as well. The question is that they were the only ones (Sile and Phil) who knew it or every member of the Lodge were aware of that...?! (and perhaps they didn't tell Triss the truth.) --- But I haven't played TW2 for a long time so I could be wrong...

I would have expected the Lodge to have known (as it had members in Nilfgaard), but not Triss. I believe that she was excluded from Lodge business. I also think that if Triss HAD been talking about Geralt to the Lodge in TW1, she'd have lied to the Lodge in order to protect Geralt, and lied to Geralt in order not to look bad.

Anway, regarding whether or not Geralt knew about the Lodge, weren't there discrepancies in the storylines? I know he says near the end of TW2 that he didn't know, but I'm pretty sure several people told him in TW1 (Radovid comes to mind?) and that it had already come up in TW2. But my memory's failing.

 

[Klavi]

If I remember correctly Sile knew where Yennefer was (she said something like that at the end of TW2) so I assume Philippa knew it as well. The question is that they were the only ones (Sile and Phil) who knew it or every member of the Lodge were aware of that...?! (and perhaps they didn't tell Triss the truth.)

O kurwa, I honestly completely forgot about that, since Sile usually explodes in my playthroughs. :wat:
If Sile knew this, then so did Phili. But perhaps the better question is - did they know about this in W1? If so, then Triss must've known this as well and that's what she was hiding all along. If the Lodge learned about this after the mess in Vizima - then Triss probably never heard about it from them, since she wasn't attending the meetings at that point.

 

[dragonbird]

If so, then Triss would know this as well and that's what she was hiding all along. If the Lodge learned about this after the mess in Vizima - then Triss probably never heard about it from them, since she wasn't attending the meetings.

I think that Triss had been out of the loop for a lot longer than that. She may have been officially a member of the Lodge, but I don't think she'd been in on all of their conspiracies for a long time. It's feasible to me that The Lodge could have known but Triss didn't.

 

[mecha_fish]

Spoiler

I think the lodge has started scheming over upper aedirn at end of the books. Or at least, what to do with Demavend. That's a few years ago, since the gap between end of books and tw1 is either 3 or 5 years. Plotting for a while.

As for knowledge about Yennefer-- I don't know what they know of her in tw1, but at the end of tw2 síle gives you her location. So at least Philippa and Síle knew of her throughout tw2, I'd say. I can't speak for what Triss knew since she claims she was out of the Lodge's loop, but she probably would have jumped at the chance of finding yen since she loves her too. Who knows, though.

 

[Klavi]

I think that Triss had been out of the loop for a lot longer than that. She may have been officially a member of the Lodge, but I don't think she'd been in on all of their conspiracies for a long time. It's feasible to me that The Lodge could have known but Triss didn't.

Well, as far as I understand it, the breaking point was Triss asking about how will they remove Demavend. If, like @mecha_fish says, the Lodge started planning his assassination right at the end of the books, then yeah, she's been out of the loop for a long time.
But Yen's survival is hardly some big conspiracy that'd threaten the organization's plans, is there a reason to keep it away from Triss? She still freely contacts the other members during W1, someone could tell her something, at least. That is, again, if the Lodge knew about Yen in W1 at all.

Honestly, there's a whole clusterfuck of possibilities.

 

[Lieste]

I don't feel that Triss is clean of the meddling of the lodge in the 'current dynastic rearrangements'...

Spoiler

Phillipa was almost certainly behind the assassination of Vizimir II and probably Esterad Thyssen, as well as the attempt on Dijkstra. Plotting against Demavend would have been entirely in character.
These actions may have been unilateral, though I doubt it... seem to suit the lodge's purposes during a period when Triss was still 'in'.

 

[dragonbird]

Honestly, there's a whole clusterfuck of possibilities.

Which is probably deliberate, as CDPR do like to mess with our minds. Hence the fact that there's still debate about Alvin every time it comes up.

What we DON'T know is exactly when Yen and Letho fell into Nilfgaardian hands. The timeline of the events between Geralt's "Death" and Demavend's death. My gut feel, which may be influenced by the fact that I don't WANT Triss to have known, is that there wasn't a big time lag between them being taken and Letho being recruited, which means it was only months before Demavend's death. By then, I think it's OK to assume Triss was out of the loop. And no, I don't think that anyone in the Lodge would have told her anything important once they'd decided to cut her out. They're good at keeping secrets.

There's a lot that Triss did that's morally grey - allowing Geralt to think she was "The Sorceress" at the beginning of TW1, encouraging him not to remember, not telling him about Yen until she had to, and, of course, the Rose of Remembrance stuff. But on this, I think she's clean.

 

[tasir]

I would have expected the Lodge to have known (as it had members in Nilfgaard), but not Triss. I believe that she was excluded from Lodge business. I also think that if Triss HAD been talking about Geralt to the Lodge in TW1, she'd have lied to the Lodge in order to protect Geralt, and lied to Geralt in order not to look bad.

Yes, you may be right. Moreover, Phil and Sile knew well that Triss and Yen were friends. I think that's another reason why they wouldn't have told her the truth. They simply didn't trust her.

Anway, regarding whether or not Geralt knew about the Lodge, weren't there discrepancies in the storylines? I know he says near the end of TW2 that he didn't know, but I'm pretty sure several people told him in TW1 (Radovid comes to mind?) and that it had already come up in TW2. But my memory's failing.

Unfortunately, I don't remember either. Haven't played TW1 for over 3 years. But perhaps someone can help us out?!

O kurwa, I honestly completely forgot about that, since Sile usually explodes in my playthroughs. :wat:
If Sile knew this, then so did Phili. But perhaps the better question is - did they know about this in W1? If so, then Triss must've known this as well and that's what she was hiding all along. If the Lodge learned about this after the mess in Vizima - then Triss probably never heard about it from them, since she wasn't attending the meetings at that point.

I assume they might have known that in TW1. As for Triss... Have no idea. But in my opinion there are three possible variations:
1) She didn't know it as Sile and Phil didn't tell her. (I believe it)
2) Knew it but she wasn't allowed to tell Geralt and/or wanted to protect him - as always.
3) Suspected it but wasn't sure and thus didn't tell Geralt anything.

Anyway, I think even if she knew it she had good reason not to tell Geralt. Also... as we know dual loyalty got her into trouble in the books too.

-------

Fun fact: In my native language (hungarian) kurwa is written as "kurva" and has the same meaning. XD

 

[Vigilance.492]

Unfortunately, I don't remember either. Haven't played TW1 for over 3 years. But perhaps someone can help us out?!

He does - https://youtu.be/aXz9kZX4TGU?t=9m39s I don't recall any other situations where the Lodge is mentioned though.

However I must say I'm currently sitting the opposite boat, where I can't remember a section of TW2 where Geralt claims to be ignorant to the Lodge.

If he does claim to not know about the Lodge, then I wouldn't necessarily call it an inconsistency. The last time he would have heard about the Lodge would have been months ago, and when Radovid mentions it to him it would have seemed like a pretty insignificant piece of information. It's perfectly viable, IMO, that Geralt could have simply forgot about it.
If he never makes the ignorance claim, well then everything is fine anyway.

I'm very much on the same page as Dragonbird in regards to the events surrounding Triss. She certainly hasn't been a perfect little angel, she never was in the books, and she isn't in the games either. She certainly has a few things to answer for in TW3, but so does Yennefer frankly, and then on top of that there's all the possible events and scenarios that flow forth from the Story of TW3. There's much to consider, and much unknown, it's why there's no way in hell (Even if recent showings of Yen and her model look amazing) I'm going to commit myself to one of them before experiencing those events.

 

[dragonbird]

However I must say I'm currently sitting the opposite boat, where I can't remember a section of TW2 where Geralt claims to be ignorant to the Lodge.

Some of the dialogue options when you rescue Triss. I think it's a real (although trivial) inconsistency in the storyline, rather than "he'd forgotten". He does seem to express surprise.

it's why there's no way in hell (Even if recent showings of Yen and her model look amazing) I'm going to commit myself to one of them before experiencing those events.

Yup. I'l definitely just want to see where my choices and the story take me. I can understand WHY people have already decided, but I'm staying firmly on the fence.

 

[Vigilance.492]

Some of the dialogue options when you rescue Triss. I think it's a real (although trivial) inconsistency in the storyline, rather than "he'd forgotten". He does seem to express surprise.

For some reason I've got this odd hunch that you're in general correct. However it definitely doesn't take place in that conversation. The very first dialogue option you can pick is the question of why Triss didn't just get her fellow Lodge members to help her out. So he definitely knows about it by that point.

 

[dragonbird]

OK. I think I was wrong about that. In that case, I can't remember.

 

[wichat]

Wow Wow.... I have mine speculations too about all this complots but I only explain why I'm not confidence with Triss since the begining without the books information.

Geralt is amnesic, he hear this sosrceress talking with somebody about him and to be convinced by someone who don't give a hint about NOTHING, and later she involve you among politicy, and Geralt SITLL dosen't remember nothing from himself. To me, how could I trust someone who doesn't give any hint or information about me but , she seems hidding she want convince me (of what?) and take me to dangerous secrets complots already in a huge lack of vital information?
That's is how I felt the first time I played TW1, I didn't know that something like the Lodge existed, As an amnesic person I should felt like a puppet in this sorceress hands. She doesn't give information about me but she ask me to help her in a dangerous politicy world.

I've foun a powerfull child, I'm looking for dangerous Salamandra bandits and the "best firiend" sorceress doesn't give me anyh information about ME!!! No. I cannot trust her this way. Maybe she is the most sweet and generous woman on the Earth but, how can I know it?

 

[GHOSTMD]

I've foun a powerfull child, I'm looking for dangerous Salamandra bandits and the "best firiend" sorceress doesn't give me anyh information about ME!!! No. I cannot trust her this way. Maybe she is the most sweet and generous woman on the Earth but, how can I know it?

You can' t know my ladys ^^ thats one of the points leading to this dilemma , on the other side, you can' t know
about / be sure about Yennefer too. At this point if you argure like that

Even soo... i am still very sure Triss means no harm here, maybe (as i told several times) her intention is more
private and friendly? "Protecting" Geralt from his (really) painfull past she knows? Encouraging him to step forward?
I don t see that this is... wrong... at last not at all. Thats what true friends do, helping you through your hardships.
She also gives some hints about Geralts past... ok very slight hints though... for example when you decide to help
the elves and dwarves. She says: that THIS is the Geralt she loves so much. If i have this right in my mind.

Besides @Marcin Momot
You have to add something in your new frontpage. Not only Yennefer is the Love of Geralt life
It is Triss Merigold too!
Please change that little text passage there, you know after the games you just can' t say such things for
sure anymore @Marcin Momot and the RED Team.

PS:
THIS ALL YOUR FAULT REDS!!!!

 

[Kaldea]

If Triss is to be added to that blurb, Fringilla Vigo more than deserves to be added too.

 

[Ljesnjanin]

If Triss is to be added to that blurb, Fringilla Vigo more than deserves to be added too.

Yes.
Red point and small fix.

 

[Kallelinski]

You have to add something in your new frontpage. Not only Yennefer is the Love of Geralt life
It is Triss Merigold too!

And what if a player decided to ignore her in both games?

Not giving Alvin to her and don't invite her to the Elven ruin?

 

[Lieste]

Or invite to elven ruins and then gain points in resistance to magic :victory:

 

[wichat]

So Geralt hires his own body pleasant parts in exchange of some magic power? That's love!