About old Lambert-Triss theory and Important message to CDPR

Greetings, witcher community, and dear Reds. As you noticed, I will talk about old Lambert-Triss theory and CDPR's approach. The main purpose of this thread is send messages to developer team and all Reds. You will find it at the end of the thread. First of all, I just want to say that I have great respect for Reds. It is just about what canonical evidences says and what whole situation should be.

Thread will be 2 part. In the first part, we will discuss the evidences of this theory. We will find the answer to ''Did the Triss-Lambert affair really happen?"
Second part will be the main aim of this thread. Lets start. I hope all of you guys enjoy.

(Edit: You can find grammar mistakes. I am a beginner at English. I just started learning it a couple months ago, but I guarantee you guys will understand everything.)

PART 1: Many people believe this theory without having played The Witcher 1 or without doing enough research. I will wrote evidences without adding my personal thoughts. You will not see opinionated discussion. The only reference I will use is what game canon tells us. Let's explain it one by one.

1.) At the beginning of TW1, Salamander steals secrets of the witchers, secrets that are very important to them; then, their priority is to recover them. To complete this task efficiently, Geralt, Eskel and Lambert are directed to different parts of the North; Geralt goes to Vizima, while Lambert goes to Kaedwen and Eskel to another place. So, the game tells us, Lambert goes to Keadwen. Just keep that in mind.

2.) Some people might say teleport. We will discuss it later, but let's think about it quickly. If he came with teleportation or Triss teleported him, why would he jump out a window? He could teleport back. This argument destroys the whole theory.

3.) The traces that can be seen in the house of Triss in Vizima are visible when Geralt wakes up in Triss's bed after losing consciousness during his battle with Azar Javed and the Professor. Triss was busy teleporting Geralt. Also, Triss told us she was looking for magical anomalies. So the game says that when Triss was looking for anomalies, she found Geralt and then teleported his unconscious body to her house. If Lambert was there, he doesn't have to jump out a window because Geralt was clearly unconscious. Also, when Triss is looking for magical anomalies, she could say to Lambert ''Hey, I found Geralt, and I will teleport Geralt to my house''. Then Lambert could easily leave through the door. Whole situation does not fit with the ''jump out a lover's window'' argument.

4.) Footprints are too small for a male and too close to each other for someone who was most likely running. Remember the dialogues in Witcher 1 and Witcher 3. When Geralt and Triss interrogate the agent for Dandelions location after the event, she says she just wants to take a bath. In The Witcher 1, Triss complains because she is missing her bathtub. If you choose Triss over Shani and sleep with her in Chapter 3, you will reach her sex card. In this card, you can see her taking a bath. So the game implies that Triss likes taking baths. Also, you can find a chest and books at the end of the footprints. Many people have asked, "If the footprints belong to Triss, why are they going straight to the window?" Footprints have been there since 2007, and no one claimed they were a lover's footprints until the drinking game dialogue . Also, why do footprints have to turn back or go another place? Maybe Reds did it for great lighting? This question's answers always start with ''maybe, it might be, etc''. Besides, as I said in the first place, we will just talk about canonical evidences, not personal opinions. With canon evidences, we see footprints are too small for a male and too close to each other, and game implies that those are Triss's footprints. That means it cannot be Lambert's footprints. We can say those footprints belong to Triss because the game tells us so.

5.) Probably the worst evidence for this theory Gwent cards have nothing to do with sex. You get Geralt's card from Thaler, and Djikstra's card from Baron, etc. But let's assume Lambert took Triss's card that way. Well, then, Geralt must start Witcher 1 with 3 Triss cards (3 times sex), 1 Shani card, 1 Abigail card, etc. You think just Lambert is collecting cards and using them in Witcher 3? Geralt must start the game with many female cards.

6.) Aside from the fact that Triss is all for Geralt and upset that she’s leaving him in the prologue, there are other points. They only find out where they’re all headed when they’re standing by the fire. Triss will go to Vizima, while Lambert will go to Kaedwen. Neither he nor Triss knew their destinations, and as soon as they did, they went off on their way without talking. So they didn’t make plans to meet. Also in the books, it’s stated that Vilgefortz’s lackeys had to take three portals to reach him, so it could possibly be similar here. Triss also doesn’t know where Lambert will be in Kaedwen, nor would she go to Kaedwen and then search all around for him. To then have sex with him when she’s never shown interest. As you see, this argument from theory does not fit with game canon.

7.) Lambert has more than one friend and states he didn’t want to hurt a friend. Lambert knows Geralt loves Yen, not Triss, and that he has amnesia, so how could he possibly hurt Geralt? Also, if you played Witcher 1 and Witcher 2, there is no clear relationship between Geralt and Triss. Even if you choose to romance her every game, their relationship starts at Novigrad. In Witcher 1 chapter 3, we can clearly say they were just friends (but they are having sex), because Witcher 1 journal says that. Even if you buy a ring and give it to her, even if you chose her over Shani, journal says ''our friendship got stronger''. Aslo, Remember when Geralt, Zoltan and Dandelion were drinking and talking about relationships at the middle of Chapter 3 (after Footpints appears). So if we check what game canon tells us, again, we can clearly say this situation does not fit with Lambert's ''I didn't wanna hurt his feelings.'' sentence. If Lambert slept with Geralt's friend (Triss was his friend in chapter 3, as I said), why would Geralt get hurt?

8.) Besides, there is a quarantine in the trade quarter, and there is no way Lambert could have gotten in there. (Unless Triss gave him a pass or teleported him.) Remember chapter 2, Geralt was trying to enter trade quarter, but guards and Temerian officer Vincent Meis said he could not because only nobles, rich people, etc. could be there. This pass is not something we can find easily like Oxenfurd pass in Witcher 3. When Geralt wakes up in Triss's house, she gave her a pass because she has a house in the trade quarter. But even if Lambert did get into the trade quarter, imagine the situation: a witcher jumping out a window and a lot of people seeing it. Are you seriously sure that wouldn't have been discussed by everyone? The trade quarter was a small place, and even though it was night, we saw many people outside. Triss's window is directly facing the big square. NPCs would definitely talk about it, and Geralt would hear them. But nobody talked about something like that. Do you really think the guards wouldn't have caught him? Because of the quarantine, heavily armored guards are in every corner. When Geralt leaves Triss's house for the first time, the guards immediately ask for his pass and start talking about how he hates mutants. If Lambert would go, the guards would definitely ask for his pass, and they would say to Geralt ''Another mutant left from this house, or how you mutants found those passes, etc''. Geralt 100% found out (or he would have been informed) that there was another witcher on the quarter besides him. Also, Geralt is a witcher, and his senses are highly developed, so he'd have no problem sensing the presence of the other witcher or another man's footprints. When he saw footprints, he could ask Triss about them. But he did not, because he knows those footprints belong to Triss.

9.) For the trail to be evidence, Triss had to open a portal from Lambert's side, let him through, and bang, then he escaped through the window (why would he do that?) and is later transported back. But this is absolute nonsense, because Triss finds Geralt in the swamp and teleports or drags him home. Lambert has no reason to escape through the window because Geralt is unconscious. Yes, they could have done it before Geralt was fighting in the swamp, but again, why would he have escaped through the window if he could have gone out the door?

10.) At the beginning of TW1, after the Salamanders attack, Triss is wounded. Then Lambert took care of her and helped Geralt prepare a potion for Triss. After Triss heals, she says, ''That was terrible. I dreamt Lambert was with me. He was staring at me, saying things like, Don't go dying on me, Merigold, and calling me a bighead. I am so glad to see you, Geralt.''. So many people make the mistake of using it as a ''love'' reference. But Triss identified the event as a nightmare. Lambert's help is kind of a scary thing for her. Also, game explains it with Vasemir. He says, ''He(Lambert) feels guilty. The first thing Triss will hear when she wakes is ''Finally awake, Merigold.'' Thats Lambert.''. Also, journal says ''Lambert is a prick, but he would die for his friends in Kaer Morhen.''. So based on game canon, we can clearly say this event cannot be a love reference. Also remember that, he fought for Ciri in Witcher 3 and nearly died. So that means he was in love with Ciri too?

11.) Witcher 1 journal tells us how Lambert is rude, especially to Triss Merigold. But then journal says sometimes he uses rudeness to express his fondness for someone. People making mistakes again, because they are using it too as a love reference. We know he is rude to everyone. In Witcher 3, Lambert told us how he pissed off Vasemir. Does he love Vasemir too? We also know that when mages (Triss/Yenn) came to Kaer Morhen and gave him orders, he despised it. Remember, he pissed Yennefer too. (dimetrium bombs) Again, nobody can take his rudeness as a love reference. Besides, we know Lambert and Keira together, right? Did you notice him being rude to her? He has to be super rude to Keira because we know they are together. As you see, this argument cannot be in reference to this theory. It doesn't fit with the whole situation, again.

12.) Based on books, there is zero hint about this theory. Theory is just all about Witcher 1 and Witcher 3. Besides, books always imply they hate each other, and she is obsessed with Geralt. But there is no relationship or something between Lambert and Triss.

13.) At the beginning of The Witcher 1, we can see Triss in Kaer Morhen. You know there is a 5–7 year gap between last book and Witcher 1. Many people are saying that Triss was in Kaer Morhen because she had a relationship with Lambert. But it's not worth speculating. Nobody knows what happened during this 5-year gap. If you can say Lambert slept with Triss in this 5-year gap, you can say Lambert slept with Eskel, Lambert slept with Vasemir, and Lambert slept with Leo too. Dialogue is the only source of information for the answer to the question of ''Why was Triss there?". Lambert says when Geralt was assumed dead, she came and forced Vasemir to chase Wild Hunt. Besides, maybe Triss was in Vizima, looked for magical anomalies, then found Geralt's dead body, and went to Kaer Morhen to ask for help from other witchers? But as I said, we can only say ''maybe, could be, etc.'' and this is not worth speculating on. Nobody can say something about that because there is no lore, no canon, no information. The only thing we can find is what Lambert says. She was here for Geralt and forced Witchers to chase Wild Hunt.

14.) Lambert mentions Triss's scars because he want to piss off Yennefer. How did he know Triss's scars? Did he see her naked? Well, in Blood of Elves, Triss mentioned his scars to Geralt, and other witchers (Eskel, Lambert, and Vasemir) heard Triss. Also, let's assume Triss did not mention it and Lambert said that. You think Geralt, Eskel and Yennefer would not ask ''How do you know?''. They know Triss mentioned her scars, and they know everyone knows it.

15.) If you talk with Lambert before Leo's funeral, he explains why he hates Triss. He says ''She is too pretentious for my taste.''. If developers want to hint at something between Triss and Lambert, Lambert would say, ''I had a crush on her, we were lovers but then you appeared.'' or something like that. If developers want to hint at a relationship, they would not add this dialogue, which clearly says Lambert hates Triss. With that, we can clearly understand that developers didn't hint at something between Triss and Lambert.

So, if we check what the game tells us, what is the whole situation of the game and the whole witcher lore, we can clearly say that this theory is completely debunked. Now that we've understood that, let's see the main aim of this thread.

PART 2: First of all, check out this screenshot.


Screenshot is not clear. It can be any Facebook account. All we can see is the Witcher medallion profile picture. When we see it, we can't say ''CDPR accepted Triss-Lambert affair.''. But let's assume it's a real screenshot. Let's assume Reds gave this answer.

So what we got now. They know what happened in Witcher 1, Witcher 3. They know Triss-Lambert affair cannot be true. But in the first screenshot, it seems like they accepted it. First of all, even if official Witcher page gave that answer, we don't know who is behind it. Is he one of the developer team member or just someone working for social media? In any case, we can't use it as evidence. Game canon says it has not happened, books say it has not happened, and lore says it has not happened, but a Facebook page says it has. Thats not how storytelling works. I couldn't write 15 pieces of evidence if they wanted to hint at the Triss-Lambert affair. Remember part 1, number 15. Lambert says he doesn't like Triss. If Reds wants to hint at something, he couldn't say something like that, or, as I said in number 8, guards or npcs would talk about another witcher in the trade quarter. The point is simple. When we look at how storytelling works, we cannot use this screenshot as evidence.

Then Marcin360 answered this screenshot.


This screenshot is different. We can see Marcin's name. We know who is saying this right now. Everything is clear.

Reds, I have great respect for you. But this answer is not enough. For example, we know Yennefer slept with Istredd. People call it as a ''cheating''. But some people say ''it is not cheating''. This is an it's up to the player circumstance. As I mentioned in Part 1, this theory is not true, but you guys said it's up to the player. It can't be!

As you said, we like your games, we like writing our own canon, and we played all your games. But, sadly, we hate dealing with dirty theories. Check every meme or post about Triss or Lambert. Even if it's irrelevant, there's a guy who says, "Triss-Lambert whohohohoh." You can just find a few posts discussing this theory because nearly nobody is discussing it. They are just accepting it and using it as an anti-Triss argument. I won't even get started on how they spread negativity and harm communities. Sorry, but I'll say your answer didn't change anything.

I am not against Triss hate train. People can hate whatever they want. People can disseminate negativity with the ''Triss seduced Geralt, Triss took advantage of his amnesia, etc.'' argument. Those arguments are discussable because they are supported by game canon. But this theory doesn't have that. This theory is not discussable. It's completely debunked.

You guys know this theory is nonsensical. You guys know what I wrote in Part 1. But with that knowledge, why did you let this theory disseminate negativity? Maybe you thought it would be funny. Maybe you just wanted to give people something to talk about. But why Reds? It's 2023, and we're still discussing Triss vs. Yen, and we're still discussing many things about Witcher universe. We love the Witcher name. We are looking forward to the new Witcher saga and Witcher 1 remake. But why did you guys think letting this theory would be nice while canon says it's not true?

Most important question Why did you guys decide to hurt Triss fans?

Here is my message to Reds:
Dear Reds, It's all in the past. Yes, you harmed Triss fans by allowing them to deal with a debunked theory. But we can easily forget it. How? Well, remember Yennefer's room key meme. It was a common item. People were talking about that and disseminating negativity like they did with the Lambert theory. Then you guys did a great thing. Fixed it, and now Yennefer's room key is not a common item anymore. The Witcher universe and community were saved from one of the dirty theories. Doing the same thing is not too hard for you guys. Marcin can make a new statement and say politely ''This theory is not true.''. You don't even have to force someone to talk. Witcher 3 is still getting updates. You can change Lambert's dialogue. Lambert could say, ''It was Aiden's girl. I didn't want to hurt his feelings,'' or something like that. You can update Witcher 1 and destroy footprints. You can easily fix it. If you do that, nobody would get hurt. Besides, all Triss fans will be appreciated. Witcher universe and community will be saved from another dirty theory.

Dear Reds, as Marcin said, we like your games. But we don't like to deal with dirty theories. Shortly, my message is:

Please remove this theory. Like you did in the past...
Last edited:
Respectfully, what is your point? As he said, you can hate Triss; We are not against that. But when this theory is removed, nobody will get hurt. You can still hate Triss because she took advantage of amnesia, etc. Also, did you see any healthy discussion about this theory? Haters are just disseminating negativity with that. Why do you guys just don't want others to live in peace? Like he said, we are against all dirty theories. If it was Yen, Shani, Dandelion, Cerys, we would react too, like he did about Yen's room key meme. But we would never say, "Make it canon." We don't want other fan groups to deal with dirty theories too.

What you think about part 1?
Post automatically merged:

I disagree. Leave it in and make it canon. Modify The Witcher 3 with an intercourse scene between Lambert and Triss.
Besides, Why?
Last edited:
I disagree. Leave it in and make it canon. Modify The Witcher 3 with an intercourse scene between Lambert and Triss.
Don't get me wrong; we are not in the shipping fandom. I saw a guy on the internet shipping Geralt-Dandelion. He had some good points. But it was his canon. Like you, it's your canon. You can ship everybody. But if you want them to modify Witcher with a scene between them, I think this guy can want the same thing too. Let's make every ship canon without canon support.

Anyway. Lambert-Triss theory doesn't have a place in game canon. I explained it in Part 1. Debunked already. But we have just one missing piece. Offical statement. Thats why I am here.

Thanks for sharing your opinions.

I typically don't have anything against big WALLS of text, but...

DAMN, man...

That stuff was just WAY TOO LONG !! :O

Any chance you can convert it to a youtube video format with narration + demonstrated graphical content? (i.e. videos, screens from the games, etc.)

I think this will be to EVERYONE'S benefit! :O



I typically don't have anything against big WALLS of text, but...

DAMN, man...

That stuff was just WAY TOO LONG !! :O

Any chance you can convert it to a youtube video format with narration + demonstrated graphical content? (i.e. videos, screens from the games, etc.)

I think this will be to EVERYONE'S benefit! :O


I know this thread is too long. I was trying to mention every argument about this theory.

Unfortunately, I have zero experience making or editing videos.

If you or someone else wants to make a video using my thread, I would be grateful. Also, you guys don't have to share my name. This thread is not my property. I just wrote what games and books tell us.

My point is clear. Everyone has to know this theory is nonesense and I want CDPR to remove this theory for the reasons I explained.

(Sorry about answering late. My computer had a problem, which I resolved a few hours ago. Besides, I hate writing something on my phone. PC is the best.)
My English is not good so I wrote this answer for you using google translate, the case of triss and Lambert was due to the rivalry between triss and yennefer, back then when the game first came out, yennefer was weak due to the things she did. we work in the story, so team yennefer needed something to restore balance in the debate, so a person from team yennefer posted on websites, talking about the connection between Triss's footprints and Lambert's secret , but that person concealed the truth, only recording a footprint at Triss's window without saying that the footprint originated from a small bathtub in the house. Team Yennefer only took that opportunity to counterattack, but quickly. exposed because their opinions lack logic. In fact, since Witcher 1 came out, no one has paid attention to that footprint. Even when they found it, they thought it was Triss's because it led to the bathtub. , so there was no information post about that footprint on the forum at that time, even CD project reds didn't think as far ahead as they knew Witcher would be popular and planned to go to part 3, right from the beginning that was the footprint by triss, at the time of making part 3 it was too long ago, they didn't remember anything about that footprint anymore, they added Lambert's secret story to make the Witcher's conversation more interesting, one thing is This is also between Lambert and Geralt, they are brothers, they have been trained, have been together since childhood, not friends, this is the important thing in Lambert's secret, team yen takes this in combination with the mark triss's legs to counterattack but failed, as for the cards, needless to say, that was too stupid, moving to the next stage of the argument, the Facebook post of a Cd project red employee replied to the person appeared, because he was team yen or he wanted the forum to explode more, a form of PR to increase the amount of interaction of their fan pages, so he confirmed it, and it seems that this is his personal opinion, so project red staff immediately corrected him, in fact they could choose to stay silent to increase interaction dramatically thanks to the debate, at first the debate took place. They also chose to stay silent to increase interaction, but they couldn't do it otherwise the plot would have big holes, so they had to correct it, but they still wanted to increase interaction, so they let the players decide. Wanting to play a game that fixes a big flaw, or wanting to play a game that is logically reasonable, completely depends on the player, in fact their answer already has the answer hidden in it, "Having said all that and going back to the facebook message you posted in the original message, the first part of the answer is the only part that counts. Apologies about the confusion." the employee said that only the top line counts, what does that mean, it means they deny the bottom line, look at the message again and you will understand, here is the answer of the game publisher. It's just that they want to increase fan page interaction, so they answer in such a roundabout way, so we wish you a happy game
Post automatically merged:

Top Bottom