Well...There's one thing I know.This situation is one the hardest in the whole game.
*blushes* Oh thank you miss game widow I pretty much don't get it.Abigail said that she's sorry for Geralt if he thinks she's the lesser evil and in chapter 4 the healer and the lady says that Geralt has innocent blood on his hands. ???I love this crap.
Perhaps peapole don't like the truth about themselves, too proud to ascept their own mistakes, imagine Geralt saying to Adda : you a real b'''h, or something like that about her to king. He would probably have a lot of problems 
. So it doesen't mean she is so bad just to proud to ascept her own mistakes and responsability for her actions. Also from the look of her place in act IV it seems she left those damn cult, I haven't see sculs or bones or dolls in her new place, also on the mountain she mentioned her offspring so hope she found some kind of normal life . This realy was one of the most dificult decisions altough in mine first playthrough I made it in two seconds just follow the insticts and somehow had a bad feeling about burning the witches in general, so many innocent peapole were burned why not to save one who might be innocent or just lesser evil. Also didn't like those Reverand crap : " women is the nest of all evil " and so on, it sounded realy bad not just about her but women in generaly.
. So it doesen't mean she is so bad just to proud to ascept her own mistakes and responsability for her actions. Also from the look of her place in act IV it seems she left those damn cult, I haven't see sculs or bones or dolls in her new place, also on the mountain she mentioned her offspring so hope she found some kind of normal life . This realy was one of the most dificult decisions altough in mine first playthrough I made it in two seconds just follow the insticts and somehow had a bad feeling about burning the witches in general, so many innocent peapole were burned why not to save one who might be innocent or just lesser evil. Also didn't like those Reverand crap : " women is the nest of all evil " and so on, it sounded realy bad not just about her but women in generaly.My first time. I was surprised by her card. Although she did seem a bit borderline she had seemed basically honest - living as best she could amoungst the villagers. The card made me re-evaluate that position, but I still didn't have much difficulty saving her. Next time round I probably won't.
As the Geralt in the books would say: "There's no greater or lesser evil, just evil. I'll just walk away or try to mediate between both sides". Then he gets in problems with *both* sides, usually with lots of blood involved ;D. They call him the Butcher of Blaviken for a reason.
As I mentioned in another thread, Geralt doesn't Judge... He simply gives then ALL a chance to start anew and lead better lives, Abby realises this and thanks him, more than likely knowing she's not blameless... The villagers on the otherhand are too dumb or too far gone to realise this and continue their wicked ways...So if Geralt doesn't judge, why should we? Sly...
Sly...I didn't really have much of a problem with saving her. This play through I didn't take up her offer of sex, so that I would be truely neutral on the matter. They were all guilty, therefore the mob had no right to judge her and only her, whilst ignoring their own complicity in the crimes. They ethier all deserved to die, or they all deserved the right to a second chance. Which the villiages forfieted after the beast fight.
It doesn't matter your Geralt slept only with Triss. Geralt isn't a character you've created. He have huge history. He is famous with being a playboy. Personally I play the choices as Geralt from the books would have done it. Sadly I haven't read them all (language problem) but soon I will.About Abigail I decided to let her live. First of all I didn't knew she was member of the Cult of the Lionhead Spider. She took care of Alvin so she didn't looked evil. The Reverend and the other villagers on the other side always looked evil. The problem was that they wasn't able to see the truth or realise their mistakes. They was just blind evil fools filled with hatred, even towards Geralt (the man that helped them so much). I'm sure that if they had the chance they would say that i'm bloody mutant and I don't deserve to live. Is there anything worse than fanatic evil priest ? Even a witch of the Cult of the Lionhead Spider isn't that bad. Atleast her crimes won't be forgiven in the name of the holy religion and she won't be able to manipulate whole villages. Abigail was always good to me, she was listening to me and she accepted the chance for new beginning.Estelindis said:Yeah, I think you're right. The Witcher is interesting in that there's no clear way of "winning" in most situations - it draws you in deeper than the more obvious or superficial "dilemmas" that are foisted upon us in other RPGs. It really makes you think about the *consequences* of your actions when nearly everything you do is bound to affect someone negatively in some way. Choosing the lesser evil is... tough. I had to think hard about Abigail, and that wasn't the only time.That said, in other ways I find The Witcher less engaging than other RPGs because of the lack of choice in many situations. Dialogue selection is very limited. And often enough I find Geralt saying things or making decisions automatically, with no choice given whatsoever. I'm not so much of a fan of that. All my engagement and thinking about the issues seems not to matter one whit when the game assumes you're thinking one thing when you're thinking the opposite, that you would never do anything but what it's making you do when you'd rather avoid it at any cost, or when characters act as if you've done one thing when you've done another (and have studiously avoided anything else). For instances, the assumptions about who you've slept with annoy me. I'm playing Geralt as only sleeping with Triss... but the game constantly acts as if I'm shagging everything that moves. It must be doubly annoying for people who're playing him celibate.(Of course, some of my unhappiness is probably sour grapes from what I'm experiencing right now: the abrupt, almost completely unexplained transition between chapters three and four. I mean, I'm in the middle of half a dozen plots... I find it extremely hard to just go yomping around this new area as if all those other things had been suspended. The sense of urgency to get back is killing me.)Estelindis said:I do want to point out however that all of this fits within the first line on the back of my UK version, "There is no good or evil - Only decisions and consequences."Take that as you will but, I believe there is no "winning", it makes the game much more unique in that ideal.
my take: abigail is a member of a cult of murderers. She could A) have not yet killed B) only kill really sorry people. If she was really a psycho she would have offed alvin when he slept. So she is evil...but a lesser evil. the reverend was a slaver and worse. odo a murderer of his brother (whom his dog liked more) , and haren was trading with anyone who would let him..no matter what the consquences. They wanted to kill abigail as the temptress but she did not force them to do evil. she merely made it easier. I think she is bad. but not as bad as some. I still made sure geralt slept with her!
A couple of musings on Abigail:- Abigail could've forced Odo to kill his brother in his sleep. There is nothing to suggest that a hexxed Odo would be able to match the fighting experience of his brother in a fair fight.- Abigail was only too happy for a girl to commit suicide if she was going to make a profit out of it.- How did the Reverend even get ACCESS to Alvin in the first place? Abigail is a powerful witch whom the people fear. She also knows about the immense power contained in Alvin. Would she really accidently leave him unsupervised and let the Reverend have access to him?- Does Abigail really change later on? She helps the Murky Waters village to cheat with their "prize-winning" cow
-That doll is really a problem, don't have exact answer but she could be casting some other spell to punish him or something. Oddo asked help from Salamandra also perhaps bought some potion from Abigail but helping a murderer is lesser crime than murder itself. -again selling potion is lesser crime than rape -She is not that mighty, if there wasn't Geralt she would be burned alive, so she couldn't stop the Reverand taking Alvin away.-It's small funny spell, that exactly point that she has changed (also no dolls, sculls and bones in her new place so she might even left that cult ) plus she helps Geralt deal Alina/Celina situation and on mountain sceene she talk about children, (she also helped Geralt dealing with the Beast for instance by giving him some data on it, spectar oil, and in final fight if you choose her).Generally she is not some good, naive girl but compared with others she is lesser evil, and later became good person or at least seems so.
Well for what it is worth, my two cents.Yes, Abby is a bad girl, who fucked around with the villagers. But the villagers are a bunch of hypocrites. Ok, I screwed her and let her live. But it was more my distast of Odo and the Reverend than my sympathy for her. Additionally I like to have her around in Murky waters and in the Epilogue (but these are practical considerations, not roleplaying).
I'd have to agree with Night Hunter, though I'm not sure helping a murderer is actually a lesser crime as such (morally or legally).Anyway, yes she gave Ilsa the poison to kill herself, but then Ilsa had been raped by Mikul and if Temerian society is anything like the comparable historic world of the High Middle Ages, being raped, apart from being traumatic would have rendered her humiliated and regarded as 'spoiled' meaning unmarriagable and therefore potentially destitute. So was providing the means for suicide an act of malice or of sympathy? Like Night Hunter, I can't account for the doll though. But unless there is some unknown history between Odo's soldier brother and Abigail (perhaps he tried it on) I can't see what motive she would have to want to have Odo kill him. Odo stands more to gain from his brother's death (property etc) and have more motive (the green eyed monster). From reading The Last Wish, Geralt strikes me as being a pragmatist and this being so, when faced with two parties (Abigail on the one hand and the villagers on the other) who are equally open to blame for the misfortunes suffered by the village, it seems to me he would choose (if forced to do so) to back the party most likely to be of use to him in the future. A powerful witch might prove more beneficial as an ally than a village of hypocrites who clearly despise him and Witchers in general, as much as they do the witch.
Wow seems to be a topic hittin peoples nerves ]:->EDIT: Since Lady Olivia mentions it -- Who did rape Ilsa? Or maybe the question should be who didn't? When I went to the inn to battle the Salamandra, one of them was saying about Shani "Let's have our way with her like we did that Ilsa girl" something to that affect. But, at some point, we are led to beleive that Mikul raped her. Maybe that was a wrong assumption :hmmm: I had played ACT I several times and it wasn't til the last one that I caught all the conversation at the Inn before the battle and had always thought Mikul had raped Ilsa :whatthe:
Hard to believe this topic is active a whole year after my first posts in it! Simply amazing Well, I have a few ideas about Abigail that may be fresh. First, I am now convinced that the particle trail leads from her house to Haren's house. Thus I believe her voodoo doll is not meant for Odo, but for Haren. If you think, of all the accusations the villagers have against Abigail, Haren's is the most bizarre one: he claims the witch made him deal with ___ (salamandra? nonhumans? I can't remember) by offering herself to him, no more, no less. It's a bit silly for a man in such a promiscuous setting to go against his will and sanity for the sake of a woman he couldn't think less of?!? Of course, he might have been lying. But I think he was the only one there really enchanted by Abigail, for purposes unknown.Second, the narrative in chapter 2 blames the order or nonhumans for the slaughter of the villagers (depends on whether Geralt protects Haren's good or not). Also note that Geralt told the Reverend to warn people against leaving their houses, and the Reverend did just the opposite, so the villagers might have been killed by the Beast. Then again, Shani keeps referring to the dead villagers as though Geralt was directly responsible for their deaths.These questions still bother me, and I really hope that one day one of the writers will step up and tell us the truth - doesn't matter who's evil and who isn't - just plain facts: who really raped Ilsa? Why did she go to the crypt to die? Who killed Odo's brother and why? What was Haren's part in all the events? Did Abigail summon the Beast? And who/what killed the villagers??? I appreciate the suspension these unanswered questions still produce, but there are just so many of them that I begin to wonder: was this confusion intended, or is it a consequence of having a story too complicated to be represented and well executed in a game?
Well, I have a few ideas about Abigail that may be fresh. First, I am now convinced that the particle trail leads from her house to Haren's house. Thus I believe her voodoo doll is not meant for Odo, but for Haren. If you think, of all the accusations the villagers have against Abigail, Haren's is the most bizarre one: he claims the witch made him deal with ___ (salamandra? nonhumans? I can't remember) by offering herself to him, no more, no less. It's a bit silly for a man in such a promiscuous setting to go against his will and sanity for the sake of a woman he couldn't think less of?!? Of course, he might have been lying. But I think he was the only one there really enchanted by Abigail, for purposes unknown.Second, the narrative in chapter 2 blames the order or nonhumans for the slaughter of the villagers (depends on whether Geralt protects Haren's good or not). Also note that Geralt told the Reverend to warn people against leaving their houses, and the Reverend did just the opposite, so the villagers might have been killed by the Beast. Then again, Shani keeps referring to the dead villagers as though Geralt was directly responsible for their deaths.These questions still bother me, and I really hope that one day one of the writers will step up and tell us the truth - doesn't matter who's evil and who isn't - just plain facts: who really raped Ilsa? Why did she go to the crypt to die? Who killed Odo's brother and why? What was Haren's part in all the events? Did Abigail summon the Beast? And who/what killed the villagers??? I appreciate the suspension these unanswered questions still produce, but there are just so many of them that I begin to wonder: was this confusion intended, or is it a consequence of having a story too complicated to be represented and well executed in a game?After leaving the cave, Odo admits to murdering his brother, Haren makes his claim, and the Reverend is identified as assisting the Salamdra taking child slaves. After having given Abigail the five White Myrtles for Alvin's potion, the "prophetic" speech he gives identifies Mikul as Ilsa's rapist. Which he admits to (and aplogises for) as you enter Wyzim.Given that Haren Brogg was supporting the Salamandra and had just seen Geralt making mincemeat of them, he had the opportunity to come clean and/or say that the Salamandra were pressuring him; instead, he claimed it was Abigail's fault to avoid loosing face in front of the other villagers.Side note: Mikul made Hela (Carmen) pregnant out of wedlock, resulting in her father (the Reverend) running her out of town. He has more to answer for than just Ilsa.As far as Abigail's hut containing no Cult of the Lionheaded Spider paraphenalia, perhaps, if she were still active, she is hiding it elsewhere. The Outskirts seem to be riddled with caves, after all.Ultimately, neither side, Villagers nor Abigail, are innocent in the affair. As others said, though, everyone had a chance to walk away and start over; the Villagers pressed the point, resulting in Geralt murdering them all.To address the "Non-humans/the Order murdered the inhabitants of the Outskirts" thing, this can be explained by confusion on the part of the investigators. A large number of people- some armed- have been killed with a bladed weapon, and everything's on fire. Given that the Order loves fire and carries swords, they can become suspects for the killings. On the other hand, the Scoi'atel have been seen in the area, are in the process of making war against humans, and can be blamed to give the Order causus belli and/or motivate Adda to hand over more power to them.