Common Sense... BaW endings

[Alexius321]

@Shivansps First of all, I am not saying Syanna didn't go through a lot, nor that she deserves to be killed or even punished. I agree with a lot of the points you make. However, that does not and cannot justify her actions. Sure, she might feel it is a valid excuse, but it actually isn't.

What Syanna had to went trought at his age whould have screwed up anyone.....

What she went through at a young age is certainly not exceptional. Plenty of characters went through worse. Think of Geralt and witchers in general. They are bitter, of course, they are angry at and bemoan the fate that was brought upon them, but they're not usually searching for their parents who abandoned them to kill them. Also, Ciri is more than a valid comparison. She has faced much, much worse circumstances than Syanna and at a younger age, all alone. And she was doing rather despicable things later on. I am talking about her backstory from the books here, just to be clear. And she was given a chance to atone herself in the end just like Syanna was (in a sense) - so why couldn't Dettlaff?

Whether Syanna was using Dettlaff from the start or it was 'something real' in the beginning, we cannot tell, but it would be even worse if she actually cared for him and maybe even loved him and then decided to dupe him like that because of her twisted sense of revenge.

Here is the thing, you cannot talk to Dettlaff and talk sense into him because the game does not allow you to, not necessarily because he is only an impulsive and senseless 'adolescent' otherwise. It started great, it ended poorly. This is where I think the writers should have expanded his story.

He is not a child when all of this happen, first off it has emotional problems, and cant understand humans, thats already a problem.......

I am not talking about this particular situation alone. I am talking about his whole life, which is, we can only speculate, probably at least 15 times longer that Syanna's. Dettlaff, just like Regis, knows very well what it feels like to be isolated not only from humans and be perceived as a monster, but also from his fellow vampires because he didn't share their sense of fun in drinking blood, etc, etc. as Regis clearly states in the game. He is in a worse situation than Syanna in my opinion. That's why he has found a safe haven in her when she showed him trust and possibly love and that's why it is understandable that his world would crush when the foundations upon which he possibly wanted to build a new life have proved to be a farce. Dettlaff is not some silly spoiled brat, he is a tragic character here. Of course he would be out of his mind.

Here is the thing, Dettlaff does not perceive death as people do. Innocents are dying is not a valid way with which we can evaluate his character. That's one of the important themes in the Witcher world - which reasoning, which point of view is justified and why. Geralt faces it constantly when dealing with sentient monsters that may have their own reasons and explanations, however far-fetched they may seem to 'ordinary folk'. Why did he leave Orianna when he saw her drinking that kid's blood? The reason Dettlaff sends vampires on the city may be interpreted as this - OK, Syanna, you wanted me to kill a few people here... no, now I will raze the whole city. It is simply vengeance. Rush and impulsive - yes. But he has no intention of killing innocent people just because he is a monster, other things are involved here.

And so on, and so on...

The point is - I am saying that 'defending' Dettlaff and his actions is not in any way invalid and understanding his character is overall beneficial to the story. It should not disturb anyone in the least. In my opinion, Dettlaff should have gotten more screen time and interaction so that the player can feel the polarity and the struggle of all sides. This way it feels too uninspired. He is not just running around throwing bats at people's faces. His character should have been more developed so that the impact of the decisions could leave a stronger impression on the player. And I would personally like another form of ending where you can help Dettlaff and the sisters. I don't see him as a senseless idiot, not at all. Moreover, that sort of ending would have helped Regis as well. If you kill Dettlaff, Regis is pretty much screwed. Maybe it could have been much more difficult to reach, but it should have been there. And such an ending would be in harmony with the idyllic ending at Corvo Bianco CDPR strived to achieve.

 

[KnightessRouge]

The point is - I am saying that 'defending' Dettlaff and his actions is not in any way invalid and understanding his character is overall beneficial to the story. It should not disturb anyone in the least. In my opinion, Dettlaff should have gotten more screen time and interaction so that the player can feel the polarity and the struggle of all sides. This way it feels too uninspired. He is not just running around throwing bats at people's faces. His character should have been more developed so that the impact of the decisions could leave a stronger impression on the player. And I would personally like another form of ending where you can help Dettlaff and the sisters. I don't see him as a senseless idiot, not at all. Moreover, that sort of ending would have helped Regis as well. If you kill Dettlaff, Regis is pretty much screwed. Maybe it could have been much more difficult to reach, but it should have been there. And such an ending would be in harmony with the idyllic ending at Corvo Bianco CDPR strived to achieve.

That goes both ways. I wished Syanna had more screentime too. More time to hear about her stories and get to know her a little bit more. All in all the story felt pretty rushed and we should've seen a lot more of Syanna and Dettlaff.

 

[Krull32]

All in all the story felt pretty rushed

Yep.
Same problem like the main game. Starts excellent, still ok in the middle, but the end....
No offense, but i thought after all the critic the main game got from players, CDPR would put more attention here.

HoS made this really much better, and i dont know why CDPR did go here 2 steps back.

I know HoS had not much side quests, but the main story was much better.
Now B&W has again much more side quest ( nothing against good sidequests ! ) but the main story lacks again...I see a pattern here

 

[summerman1]

The thing is the whole Syanna part and the Fablesphere is very strong and well written, and that just does not allow for the Unseen path to get a happy ending, you are just ignoring Syanna by doing that.
The Unseen path ends the attack sooner, and you need to content with the notion that less innocents where killed, also that is what Geralt points out by choosing that path.

Well yes thats not my main problem with that ending. The thing here is, the story goes in such a way that it looks like if you dont want to save Dettlaff then should go to the unseen one. Regis says a couple of times by not taking the unseen one path we could save Dettlaff too. So it becomes clear that if you dont want to save Dettlaff you should go to the unseen one. So it comes down to this:
>If you want to hunt down Dettlaff you should go to the unseen one
>If you think Dettlaff is innocent/ or want to save Dettlaff you should take the other path.
But what ends up happening is quite different. You should not go to the unseen one if you want to save Anna. That is so random.

 

[Shivansps]

@Shivansps First of all, I am not saying Syanna didn't go through a lot, nor that she deserves to be killed or even punished. I agree with a lot of the points you make. However, that does not and cannot justify her actions. Sure, she might feel it is a valid excuse, but it actually isn't.



What she went through at a young age is certainly not exceptional. Plenty of characters went through worse. Think of Geralt and witchers in general. They are bitter, of course, they are angry at and bemoan the fate that was brought upon them, but they're not usually searching for their parents who abandoned them to kill them. Also, Ciri is more than a valid comparison. She has faced much, much worse circumstances than Syanna and at a younger age, all alone. And she was doing rather despicable things later on. I am talking about her backstory from the books here, just to be clear. And she was given a chance to atone herself in the end just like Syanna was (in a sense) - so why couldn't Dettlaff?

Whether Syanna was using Dettlaff from the start or it was 'something real' in the beginning, we cannot tell, but it would be even worse if she actually cared for him and maybe even loved him and then decided to dupe him like that because of her twisted sense of revenge.

Here is the thing, you cannot talk to Dettlaff and talk sense into him because the game does not allow you to, not necessarily because he is only an impulsive and senseless 'adolescent' otherwise. It started great, it ended poorly. This is where I think the writers should have expanded his story.

I forgot an important point about Syanna, Ciri is not a valid example becuase Ciri had Geralt, Yen, Triss, all her Skillenge friends, maybe they dont where with the whole time, but what whould have been of Ciri without them?
Syanna had Henrietta, and only Henrietta, after that she was raised by bandits and murderers, and it was not her choice. Syanna was expecting Herrietta to issue a pardon for her once crowned, that did not happen, thats what makes her decide go back looking for revenge, against Henrietta. Because she belives Henrietta has no heart and forgot about her.
What happen before, what Syanna said is that Dettlaff was madly in love with her, and she could not return those feelings, so she left, not sure if its true, but thats common in humans i gona say. But all of that was a few years before all this.

With Dettlaff, Regis is a giveaway, Regis understood him and it wants to help him, UNTIL he kills/attempt to kill Syanna in cold blood, after that he belives he went way too far, that is now a beast that cant be saved. So bad he only tell you this in the ending that Henrrietta is alive, and Syanna/Dettlaff are dead, he whould make things more clear if he also tell you this in the happy ending.

At any rate, Dettlaff does not deserve to live more than Syanna does, and i find very disturbing showing sympathy with someone that did things FAR worse, and he was also in a better situacion to handle things in a much better way, after all he had Regis help all way.

 

[Alexius321]

That goes both ways. I wished Syanna had more screentime too. More time to hear about her stories and get to know her a little bit more. All in all the story felt pretty rushed and we should've seen a lot more of Syanna and Dettlaff.

Sure, but I feel Syanna still has more (semi!) meaningful screentime than him and a (semi!) meaningful quest as well. In my opinion Dettlaff had much potential but has been underused. He plays a vital part in the story even though he is not the real antagonist. We have more interaction with Damian and B. B. than with him and can even learn more about the history of vineyards. It feels like Eredin all over again.

Like I said, it started great it ended poorly. I don't know, all of the endings were somehow too unconvincing for me. Also, Anna's reactions and remarks were really cringe-worthy, in my opinion.

 

[Hazevamp]

Im finding very disturbing some excuses of the Dettlaff defenders, i really want to belive they did not understand the whole picture.
One whould think we all gona agreed when a child is a victim of abuse, isolation and mistreatment, and end up with bandits, that she gona come back looking for vengance, and on the other side we have a impulsive vampire that acts like a 8-year old child with a gun, ok she used you and you are pissed off, we get it, thats no reason to attack the city and kill hundreds of innocents. period.

Being abused does not give you free reign to treat everyone like trash. She had every right to get revenge on those who abused her. However her terror extended beyond that. Her actions ruined the lives of countless people and she was quite a sadistic human being BEFORE her abuse took place.

The "Breathe Easy" scene with Jack suggests that she was cruel to the fairytale folks and they were fearful of her.
She made a guy kill his brother through a prank.

The fact remains is that she was quite a sociopath beforehand. The abuse just made it worse.

Also, I don't get why Syanna defenders act like all she did was pull a harmless prank on Dettlaff or just dumped him and that's the reason why he's angry. It's not. Dettlaff was a person who cared about others without asking for anything in return, he admired this trait in others too. What Syanna did was force him to kill because he thought that her life was in danger. We saw this wasn't easy for him to do, but he did it because he was forced to choose between saving the life of the woman he loved or kill these people. That is what she did to him and that is no small matter.

Granted, attacking the city was going too far, but he made the treat, whether out of emotion or otherwise. It was up to the Duchess to comply or not, she chose not to. I blame the city massacre on Dettlaff and the Duchess.

on top of that im not even sure if its a reason to kill Syanna, thats the only thing that may up to a debate, Syanna had reasons to do what she did as well. So if you think Syanna has to die, so is Dettlaff. Even Regis belives that Syanna does not deserved to die.

Syanna was too screwed up and I highly doubt a single Dr. Phil moment was going to change that, Dettlaff on the other hand has a chance at redemption as he's shown to be a far better person before this entire mess started than Syanna. Sure Regis don't think Syanna deserves death, but he also thinks she's evil and he can't stand to look at her if Dettlaff dies.

No so small detail, with a ribbon, the only reason Dettlaff end up dead is because he thinks that Geralt and Regis trick him, whiout even saying a word, that just crazy, and it shows how impulsive he is.

Dettlaff had placed his trust in Geralt earlier, which was a massive feat to do, place his trust in a person hired to kill him, but he did. Yet Geralt really did nothing to cement that trust. Plus Regis was far more loyal to Geralt. Overall, once Syanna vanished again he had no reason to trust either party. Regis wasn't gonna stand by his side over Geralt and Geralt could have very well used Syanna to lure him out just to kill him.

BTW, regis WANTS to kill Dettlaff, in the end that he kill Syanna and them you kill Dettlaff, in the end Regis tells you Dettlaff was now just consumed with rage and it was now a beast and there was no way to fix that.

Regist does NOT want to kill Dettlaff, he tells you this more than once throughout the game. What he wants is for Dettlaff to live, forget Syanna and move on. Regis is FORCED to choose between Dettlaff and Geralt. Big difference. I don't know where you got that he wanted to kill Dettlaff. At the end of my play through Regis' plans are to find Dettlaff and help him.

Also, if you go to Damian, Regis tells you Dettlaff is mind controlling the lesser Vampires, the Vampires by themselves does not want to attack the humans.

Dettlaff is controlling the Vampires. However, Regis also told us that Dettlaff's gift is his tribal nature that draws them to him. The Vampires follow him willingly overall and judging by the Orianna scene where one was called to attack the city but decided to kill the kids outside the city instead. It seems as though Dettlaff called them to the city more than outright control their actions.

EDIT: This is very funny, Syanna said that everyones think she is a monster because no one bother no hear her side of the history, and i think its exactly what is happening right now with Dettlaff defenders.

I don't think Syanna is a monster but she most certainly is not innocent just because she has a story to tell. I heard her story, but I also heard everyone elses too. Her story alone does not outweigh everyone elses because she gives Geralt puppy dog eyes.

 

[Shivansps]

Being abused does not give you free reign to treat everyone like trash. She had every right to get revenge on those who abused her. However her terror extended beyond that. Her actions ruined the lives of countless people and she was quite a sadistic human being BEFORE her abuse took place.

And being used as a tool does not give you the right to attack a city and kill countless innocents /period hell it does not even gives you the right to kill the person that used you, specially if you loved that person, do you can imagine Geralt killing Yen or Triss if they used him? Dettlaff is just bad in the head, and Regis warms you of this, Regis said that Dettlaff is more "beasty" than him, and in one on the endings Geralt ask Regis why he sided with him instead of Dettlaff, Regis responded:

- I felt rage consumed him completely. He cross a line where he could not longer control itselft.
-He whould have remained the beast, irrational, unfit to reason with, incapable of experiencing any of emotions that to simplify we call them, humans.
-I dont wish such a life upon to anyone, specially to a friend.
-It is hard to explain. But the option i choosed was the best for everyone... for Dettlaff itselft most of all.

It should be a hint that Regis is not so happy about letting Dettlaff walk away. Again Regis wanted to help him, until he realised Dettlaff crossed the line and could not longer save him.

And you know what? is right, i can see that in Dettlaff, such a shame, that is not on every ending because it explains a lot, well maybe not on the unseen one.

Im not going to continue step by step, you are assuming things you dont know, dates for example, how on earth do you know what happen first? She was even mistreated by his parents! Maybe she was using the fairytale characters as some kind of lightning rod, also kids can be cruel at times, that means nothing, the idot was the guy who killed its brother.

I gona say it again, the Mage that gived her the ribbon did it for a reason, and you can be sure it was not to defend her from some vampire some years in the future.

Its very funny you can condemn someone whiout having all the facts, and filling blanks at will, then pardon someone who attacked a city and killed lots of innocents whiout a reason. Then goes and kill in cold blood someone it loved, whiout even allowing her to explain, yeah, you are OK to me eyes, you may go, no questions asked.

 

[Hazevamp]

And being used as a tool does not give you the right to attack a city and kill countless innocents /period hell it does not even gives you the right to kill the person that used you, specially if you loved that person, do you can imagine Geralt killing Yen or Triss if they used him? Dettlaff is just bad in the head, and Regis warms you of this, Regis said that Dettlaff is more "beasty" than him, and in one on the endings Geralt ask Regis why he sided with him instead of Dettlaff, Regis responded:

Correct and I never said it was. Dettlaff is at fault for attacking the city, the Duchess is also at fault for not even trying to compromise.

If I were to look at their cases as a judge (which I'm not). Crimes are punished harshly or not based on the circumstances surrounding the action. Crimes of passion are sometimes given a lighter sentence than one planned out. Example: If you catch your spouse in bed with someone else, you lose your temper, and hurt/kill them. The judge may be a bit sympathetic.

IMO. Syanna plotted her actions for a long time. Dettlaff acted out of passion. I find him far more sympathetic than her and I think her death is her comeuppance for playing with fire. She knew what she was doing and chose her path. "I'll get burned or burn all else down"

That quote you posted just shows that either Regis is saying what he needs to say to make himself feel better or CDPR is just stroking the ego of player regardless of what choice they've made. Personal I'll say that Regis is saying what he needs to feel better because no matter what Regis hates Syanna for what she did to Dettlaff, and he mourns his death no matter what. besides, that quote doesn't mean Regis wanted Dettlaff dead. He's stating why Dettlaf had to go in the end NOT his desire to see him dead.

Regis does not tell you Dettlaff is "bad in the head" he explains that Dettlaff is more Vampire than most. He does not think like a human being, he tells Geralt that he doesn't spend time with humans et al. There is nothing wrong with that. Regis wants to teach Dettlaff how to coexist with humans.

It should be a hint that Regis is not so happy about letting Dettlaff walk away.

No it isn't.

Im not going to continue step by step, you are assuming things you dont know, dates for example, how on earth do you know what happen first? She was even mistreated by his parents! Maybe she was using the fairytale characters as some kind of lightning rod, also kids can be cruel at times, that means nothing, the idot was the guy who killed its brother.

I gona say it again, the Mage that gived her the ribbon did it for a reason, and you can be sure it was not to defend her from some vampire some years in the future.

I know what happened because I paid attention to the story. She was treated well at home before her parents bought in to that "Black sun" crap. Even Syanna tells you this with the ribbon scene when she claims she wanted it because it reminded her of better times. How can those be better times if she was getting abused? unless she was lying. Anna also tells you that things were good even when their parents thought of Syanna as just a misbehaved girl. It was only after the fight et al that things went down hill and they banished her and this is when the abuse took place by the Knights. Also, Syanna stated that the Knights were not ordered to treat her in that manner. Just to banish her.

BEFORE that. She and Anna were given the fableshpere to play in and it was during this time that Syanna was torturing them. As she herself stated that it got dull and she needed some excitement. She also caused a guy to kill his brother before her banishment, and I believe this was the cause of her banishment. (can't remember that completely).

As for why the mage gave her the ribbon. Most likely because of that stupid curse and her own behavior, he most likely knew she was going to make some enemies. Which she actually did.

Once again. I'm not calling Syanna a monster but her actions all around was very cold and calculating and this behavior started before her abuse not afterwards so her sobby abuse story is not an excuse nor a cause for her actions. It is simply the reason why she wanted the Knights and her sister dead. Meanwhile Dettlaff was a good person before he got involved with Syanna.

And yes, the brother was an idiot, Dettlaff was gullible, so was the rich guy who let Syanna into his manor, and the bandits who allowed her to lead them to their deaths. Yes, they are all responsible for trusting in the word of a lair and manipulator. That is why my Geralt doesn't lift a finger to help her because everyone who did ended up regretting it in the end.

Also, let me remind you that Syanna's actions, had she been successful in killing Anna and staging a Coup, would have resulted in a civil war anyway. Do you really think Damien and those loyal to Anna would just let Syanna sit on the throne and rule? The Country would have been divided between those loyal to Anna and those loyal to Syanna/ those who think she was killed for being a sinner. And that war would have lasted a much longer time than just one night.

 

[Shivansps]

Well yes thats not my main problem with that ending. The thing here is, the story goes in such a way that it looks like if you dont want to save Dettlaff then should go to the unseen one. Regis says a couple of times by not taking the unseen one path we could save Dettlaff too. So it becomes clear that if you dont want to save Dettlaff you should go to the unseen one. So it comes down to this:
>If you want to hunt down Dettlaff you should go to the unseen one
>If you think Dettlaff is innocent/ or want to save Dettlaff you should take the other path.
But what ends up happening is quite different. You should not go to the unseen one if you want to save Anna. That is so random.

But i dont see an alternative here, i think is just fine as it is. You need to realise that Dettlaff is not the antagonist here, Syanna is, Dettlaff is someone that just cant deal with the fact the woman he loved did abandon him, and later on use him, so it ends consumed with rage and screws things up big time, so by going to the Unseen you are thinking Dettlaff is the antagonist, what is wrong, thus ignoring Syanna, the real antogonist, and thats why you get that ending.
That looks OK to me, its a plot twist, and you may fall for it.

---------- Updated at 11:23 PM ----------

Correct and I never said it was. Dettlaff is at fault for attacking the city, the Duchess is also at fault for not even trying to compromise.

She was trying to help the vampire until he did that. Why it had to compromise, Dettlaff is a fault here, he could have a talk with her, instead of making threats.

If I were to look at their cases as a judge (which I'm not). Crimes are punished harshly or not based on the circumstances surrounding the action. Crimes of passion are sometimes given a lighter sentence than one planned out. Example: If you catch your spouse in bed with someone else, you lose your temper, and hurt/kill them. The judge may be a bit sympathetic.

IMO. Syanna plotted her actions for a long time. Dettlaff acted out of passion. I find him far more sympathetic than her and I think her death is her comeuppance for playing with fire. She knew what she was doing and chose her path. "I'll get burned or burn all else down"

No because you are not just killing/hurt them, you are detonating a nuclear bomb on the city just because someone hurt your feelings.

That quote you posted just shows that either Regis is saying what he needs to say to make himself feel better or CDPR is just stroking the ego of player regardless of what choice they've made. Personal I'll say that Regis is saying what he needs to feel better because no matter what Regis hates Syanna for what she did to Dettlaff, and he mourns his death no matter what. besides, that quote doesn't mean Regis wanted Dettlaff dead. He's stating why Dettlaf had to go in the end NOT his desire to see him dead.

Regis does not tell you Dettlaff is "bad in the head" he explains that Dettlaff is more Vampire than most. He does not think like a human being, he tells Geralt that he doesn't spend time with humans et al. There is nothing wrong with that. Regis wants to teach Dettlaff how to coexist with humans.

Nonono, you are moving the goalpost just because you cant accept you are wrong here.

No it isn't.
.

-Geralt: We are letting a murderer go, its that what you wanted from the start?
-"Regis says no with the head."

I know what happened because I paid attention to the story. She was treated well at home before her parents bought in to that "Black sun" crap. Even Syanna tells you this with the ribbon scene when she claims she wanted it because it reminded her of better times. How can those be better times if she was getting abused? unless she was lying. Anna also tells you that things were good even when their parents thought of Syanna as just a misbehaved girl. It was only after the fight et al that things went down hill and they banished her and this is when the abuse took place by the Knights. Also, Syanna stated that the Knights were not ordered to treat her in that manner. Just to banish her.

You are paying atention to the story, but it seems you failed to read the diary in the playroom, like for example, when Anna hit Syanna first, and the father punish Syanna, Syanna was getting mistreated by his parents way before the Black Sun thing, in fact, she says that her parents hated her, and that the black sun curse was planted on her after all that (From her happy ending speech), and after that they banish her.
Does not matter what the knights where ordered to.
You also failed to realise the ribbon remind her of better times because thats the time she was with Anna, the only one who help and understood her, she later explains this in the fablesphere.

BEFORE that. She and Anna were given the fableshpere to play in and it was during this time that Syanna was torturing them. As she herself stated that it got dull and she needed some excitement. She also caused a guy to kill his brother before her banishment, and I believe this was the cause of her banishment. (can't remember that completely).

Syanna and Anna where just childs by then, Syanna was jealous of his sister having a boyfriend, thats why shew pay a prank on him, that normal on sisters, the other kid was stupid enoght to kill his brother. The other is normal on kids. Ill have to remind you you are condening Syanna for doing things when she had 15 years or less? All that stuff are in the game to make you belive in the Black Sun curse, and thats the point actually, not to determine if a good or bad person by the things she did when she was a just a child.
It was stated by both Syanna, Anna and the Diary, that Anna tended to do worse things that Syanna, and Syanna later on was taking the full punishment.

As for why the mage gave her the ribbon. Most likely because of that stupid curse and her own behavior, he most likely knew she was going to make some enemies. Which she actually did.

Why whould that mage give her a ribbon to save a evil girl? It seems more logical to me he wanted to defend her from evil, meaning, his parents, and the posibility of she being killed just because of that implanted black sun curse, and almost got killed by being banished BTW.

Once again. I'm not calling Syanna a monster but her actions all around was very cold and calculating and this behavior started before her abuse not afterwards so her sobby abuse story is not an excuse nor a cause for her actions. It is simply the reason why she wanted the Knights and her sister dead. Meanwhile Dettlaff was a good person before he got involved with Syanna.

You are wrong, you are asuming things wrong, and filling the blanks in your favor and moving goalposts at the same time. First off, she did not even wanted to kill those knights, she wanted revenge on his sister, thats the whole reason she is back, Syanna belived that Anna will give her amnsty and a pardon as soon as she took power, that didt happen, Syanna belived his sister, the only person she ever had, had forgotten about her, the revenge was against his sister, not the knights. Again you are failing to understand the plot. The killing of the knights was to make people belive in the beast killing for virtue (moral decay).

Also, let me remind you that Syanna's actions, had she been successful in killing Anna and staging a Coup, would have resulted in a civil war anyway. Do you really think Damien and those loyal to Anna would just let Syanna sit on the throne and rule? The Country would have been divided between those loyal to Anna and those loyal to Syanna/ those who think she was killed for being a sinner. And that war would have lasted a much longer time than just one night.

We cant be sure if Syanna wanted the power, you are asuming that, he may be that she wanted to kill his sister this way, just to make sure everyone knows she was killed because the lack of compasion.
In the end, killing his sister in plain view of everyone does not fit with the "staging a Coup" teory, to me it looks like she just wanted revenge, at all cost.

---------- Updated at 11:48 PM ----------

I think we just gona have to agree to dissagree, because this is going nowhere, but i do belive you got a few part of the history wrong, and missing a few parts as well, belive me, i played this like 6 times already, and the ending part like 10 because i did several videos for youtube, so i had time so see the plot from diferents POV, thats why i think you are missing a few things.
And really, you just cant tell me that about the scene where Regis said that about Dettlaff, you are suffering from confirmation bias.

 

[Hazevamp]

She was trying to help the vampire until he did that. Why it had to compromise, Dettlaff is a fault here, he could have a talk with her, instead of making threats.

No she wasn't. Dettlaff told Syanna to meet him or he would destroy the city. Anna had gotten her sister back and had no intention to work with anyone. She kept repeating she wanted Dettlaff dead despite Geralt insisting that he can't do that. Anna, got hot headed and locked Syanna up preventing her from meeting with Dettlaff. Had Anna compromised, her sister might have lived. She could have easily sent her guards to protect Syanna along with Geralt and Regis. Talk to Dettlaff and hopefully reach a compromise. If Dettlaff had destroyed the city anyway, then I would say he was completely at fault.

No because you are not just killing/hurt them, you are detonating a nuclear bomb on the city just because someone hurt your feelings.

What on earth are you talking about?

Nonono, you are moving the goalpost just because you cant accept you are wrong here.

No I didn't. Regis never said anything about Dettlaff not being right in the head. Regis also never wanted Dettlaff dead. He spent the entire game telling you this. And the fact that if Dettlaff lives his goal is to find him and help him speaks volumes. Regis does NOT think Dettlaff is beyond help.

-Geralt: We are letting a murderer go, its that what you wanted from the start?
-"Regis says no with the head."

That actually wasn't an answer to Geralt's question. Regis is torn up over how that ended but his primary concern was for Geralt and whether or not he would face an execution over the whole mess. It's not like Regis thinks Syanna deserves death and he isn't condoning what Dettlaff did. But the entire situation was a mess and it just got worse at that point. Once again, Regis's goal is to still seek out Dettlaff and help him. That is not the actions of someone who believes the person is beyond help.

You are paying atention to the story, but it seems you failed to read the diary in the playroom, like for example, when Anna hit Syanna first, and the father punish Syanna, Syanna was getting mistreated by his parents way before the Black Sun thing, in fact, she says that her parents hated her, and that the black sun curse was planted on her after all that (From her happy ending speech), and after that they banish her.
Does not matter what the knights where ordered to.
You also failed to realise the ribbon remind her of better times because thats the time she was with Anna, the only one who help and understood her, she later explains this in the fablesphere.

The black sun curse can't be planted on someone. It's all about the day a person was born. Meaning she was born to evil or some sort of nonsense. The parents at first did not believe in that curse. But I'm sure it was in the back of their minds whenever Syanna was acting up. This is why the parents punished Syanna more after the fight. They eventually banished her after the prank incident. Yes it does matter what the Knights were ordered to do. The Parents did not want her abused. Just banished. You can't ignore that. The actions of the Knights are 100% their own actions.

Syanna and Anna where just childs by then, Syanna was jealous of his sister having a boyfriend, thats why shew pay a prank on him, that normal on sisters, the other kid was stupid enoght to kill his brother. The other is normal on kids. Ill have to remind you you are condening Syanna for doing things when she had 15 years or less? All that stuff are in the game to make you belive in the Black Sun curse, and thats the point actually, not to determine if a good or bad person by the things she did when she was a just a child.
It was stated by both Syanna, Anna and the Diary, that Anna tended to do worse things that Syanna, and Syanna later on was taking the full punishment.

It's not normal to tell someone their brother is going to kill them. That is not normal childhood behavior. But yeah both Anna and Syanna were brats plain and simple. And let me clear this up by saying that I do not think Syanna deserved to be banished, mistreated, and that black sun curse is just stupid. She was a brat and a bit on the sociopathic side but it was the abuse and banishment that set her over the edge. And no, I'm not condemning her based on the things she did as a child. Her track record as an adult is more than enough for me to condemn her.

You are wrong, you are asuming things wrong, and filling the blanks in your favor and moving goalposts at the same time. First off, she did not even wanted to kill those knights, she wanted revenge on his sister, thats the whole reason she is back, Syanna belived that Anna will give her amnsty and a pardon as soon as she took power, that didt happen, Syanna belived his sister, the only person she ever had, had forgotten about her, the revenge was against his sister, not the knights. Again you are failing to understand the plot. The killing of the knights was to make people belive in the beast killing for virtue (moral decay).

You accuse me of moving goalpost and filling blanks in my head, then you turn around and claim Syanna didn't want those knights dead, if not then why does she tell Geralt her reasons for sending Dettlaff after them by bringing up the way they mistreated her? Seems a pointless thing to do if she didn't care about killing them. Syanna wanted revenge on everyone who wronged her, the Knights and her sister. If it was only about her sister, she could have chosen any random Knight.

We cant be sure if Syanna wanted the power, you are asuming that, he may be that she wanted to kill his sister this way, just to make sure everyone knows she was killed because the lack of compasion.
In the end, killing his sister in plain view of everyone does not fit with the "staging a Coup" teory, to me it looks like she just wanted revenge, at all cost.

That's not an assumption. Just read some of pamphlets on the city street urging people to rise up against Anna in favor of Syanna. Syanna had no choice but to kill Anna regardless of the consequences. Her plan was in shambles and all she had left was to killing Anna. I would agree that it wasn't completely about gaining the throne. She wanted revenge most of all, but she would have taken the power if she had managed to fulfill her goal.

---------- Updated at 11:48 PM ----------

I think we just gona have to agree to dissagree, because this is going nowhere, but i do belive you got a few part of the history wrong, and missing a few parts as well, belive me, i played this like 6 times already, and the ending part like 10 because i did several videos for youtube, so i had time so see the plot from diferents POV, thats why i think you are missing a few things.
And really, you just cant tell me that about the scene where Regis said that about Dettlaff, you are suffering from confirmation bias.

Playing it six times doesn't mean you know everything about the story. You have your own opinion and interpretations of events you continue to view as facts everyone else should follow. You refuse to see any other side except for Syanna's. It's your right to do so if you please, but don't try to tell others they need to play the game X times et al simply because they disagree with you. But yeah it's better to agree to disagree. Like I said before. I sympathize with Dettlaff far more and I'm totally cool with Syanna dying. When you play with fire, you get burned.

 

[Shivansps]

Syanna IS a criminal, and you may be right on the part she wanted to make a coup, im not fully sure because Syanna needed a pardon to go back, i find hard to image how she whould have reached the crown, she cant just show up and say "hi, so now my sister is dead, where is my crown"? Syanna said it is a revenge because she thinks Anna forgot her, and her actions at the happy and tragic ending seems to confirm it. But yeah, i may agree with you on that one, but im not conviced either way, there are facts that support both.

Im only talking about known facts on the history here, you are ignoring the facts that does not support your version of events, and making up a history for the ones that may do, like you did with the ribbon, i said there is a reason for it, them you went ahead and maded up a history to make it fit to you. And you are now saying that Anna did not wanted to help the vampire? that is a lie, plain and simple, Anna wanted to help the vampire before she even knew about its sister, and again you are making up a history to make fit, you just cant know that.

And im keep finding very disturbing the lenghs you are going to defend a terrorist that not even Regis wanted to defend at the end, i can put it in a very simple way for you, does not even matters what you think Syanna did or may did, Dettlaff did far worse and had far less motives to do so.

All those things may be accidental, BUT the way you are ignoring the Regis scenes because is a very strong point against you? that just confirmation bias, in sorry.

---------- Updated at 01:20 PM ----------

I want to add a few final words to make it clear.

Its ok for some people to have symphaty with Syanna and others do not, the plot is written that way, it makes to belive in the black sun curse from the start, and then Geralt itselft says that it may not be true, thats why later you get a chance to be with Syanna, see his side of the history and make a decision, thats fine. That does not change the fact that she is a criminal, no matter the motives, thats also why if you belive she is guilty or not does not change the happy ending.

But symphaty for Dettlaff? for what? this vampire has at least 300 years, for what Regis says in the plot, and probably LOTS more, and screws things up big time just because the woman he loved used him, like a 17 year old adolescent.
Then it acts like a terrorist attacking a city just to get what it wants, you just cant put the blame in Anna, thats nonsence, Anna agreed to help the Vampire at first, you just cant blame her for not wanting to surrender his sister to a terrorist, hell, she does not have to negotiate at all.
Then it goes ahead and kills the woman he loved in cold blood, and if that is not enoght he does not have much problem in killing Geralt (that did as he asked, and was because of him he knows she used him at all), and Regis, its blood brother... You know what that means? Regis is RIGHT in his speech, trying to ignore and justify this because you dont like it is not a valid argument.

Its Dettlaff walking away the part i find disturbing, not Syanna dying because you may have no symphaty for her.

 

[Hazevamp]

Syanna IS a criminal, and you may be right on the part she wanted to make a coup, im not fully sure because Syanna needed a pardon to go back, i find hard to image how she whould have reached the crown, she cant just show up and say "hi, so now my sister is dead, where is my crown"? Syanna said it is a revenge because she thinks Anna forgot her, and her actions at the happy and tragic ending seems to confirm it. But yeah, i may agree with you on that one, but im not conviced either way, there are facts that support both.

Im only talking about known facts on the history here, you are ignoring the facts that does not support your version of events, and making up a history for the ones that may do, like you did with the ribbon, i said there is a reason for it, them you went ahead and maded up a history to make it fit to you. And you are now saying that Anna did not wanted to help the vampire? that is a lie, plain and simple, Anna wanted to help the vampire before she even knew about its sister, and again you are making up a history to make fit, you just cant know that.

And im keep finding very disturbing the lenghs you are going to defend a terrorist that not even Regis wanted to defend at the end, i can put it in a very simple way for you, does not even matters what you think Syanna did or may did, Dettlaff did far worse and had far less motives to do so.

All those things may be accidental, BUT the way you are ignoring the Regis scenes because is a very strong point against you? that just confirmation bias, in sorry.

Who is making things up?

You claim Syanna got the ribbon to protect her from evil abusive parents. This is just your own interpretation and you have no facts to back it up. Yet you state this as though it was fact and expect me to just go with it.

You also claimed Syanna didn't want to kill the Knights. Another interpretation of events that even Syanna's own words dispel.

You then claim Regis wanted Detlaff dead. Yet in the two endings where he dies Regis mourns his death, is regretful, sees it as something he had to do.

Regis (to the attacking Vampires at the end): "I did what I had to do!"

Oh yeah and still calls Syanna a lying manipulator who got his friend killed.

You claim that Regis saw Detlaff as beyond help. Yet in the Detlaff lives ending Regis' plans are to find him and help him.

Yet I'm supposed to ignore all of this, because you have one quote? If you wish to see it that way, fine. I don't care. But I don't agree with your interpretation because there are plenty of other facts that stack against it.

You then claim Anna wanted to help Detlaff. If you only meant before she found Anna then you are correct. However, it seemed to me as though you were arguing this to be the case directly until the Vampire attack on the city. If so, then you're wrong. The moment she got Syanna she didn't care about anyone else. She locked Syanna up and three days went by and Detlaff attacked the city.

I don't care what you find disturbing. If you want to bring IRL morals into the picture then I find it disturbing that you would defend a person who uses people and get them killed. I find it disturbing the lengths you would go to defend a person who mentally tortures people for fun. There see, two can do that.

Oh yeah and I never believed in that dumb curse. It was an unfortunate thing Syanna had to live with.

But symphaty for Dettlaff? for what? this vampire has at least 300 years, for what Regis says in the plot, and probably LOTS more, and screws things up big time just because the woman he loved used him, like a 17 year old adolescent.

I love how you're downplaying how she used him. She didn't just have sex with and dump him. She didn't just take his money or anything trivial like that. She made him chose between her life and safety and his own morals.

How would you feel, if you were in love with someone and they up and left you without a trace? You have no idea what happened to them, they could have left you on their own or something terrible could have happened. You search for them and can't find them anywhere. They simply vanished. They could be hurt or something, but you don't know that. Then after months of this person's disappearance you get a letter in the mail telling you that he/she was kidnapped, being tortured, and if you don't do what they say, the person you love is going to be killed in a very gruesome way and their parts are going to be sent to you. So you do what they say in hopes of keeping your loved one alive. Only to discover in the end that they faked the entire ordeal to get you to do their dirty work for them.

Triss and Yen may have done some questionable things to Geralt, but neither of them had ever done something this freaking cruel. At least not that I ever know of.

Syanna treated Detlaff the way she did because he was a Vampire, a killing machine she could turn and use to do her bidding. Now if Triss or Yen ever did something like that to Geralt because he's a "freak" and killing machine they can just use, then Geralt would have every right to punish them in the manner he sees fit.

Then it acts like a terrorist attacking a city just to get what it wants, you just cant put the blame in Anna, thats nonsence, Anna agreed to help the Vampire at first, you just cant blame her for not wanting to surrender his sister to a terrorist, hell, she does not have to negotiate at all.

Anna could have reached a compromise like Geralt and Regis was trying to get her to do. Detlaff only wanted her to come to the location and explain herself. He could have killed her then but was still trying to be reasonable. It was Anna who then wanted him dead right after. She is partly to blame for the city attack. How many times does she need it explained to her that only a higher Vampire can kill another? From her POV, she is dealing with a being of immense power who can not be killed by the man she hired. She was a moron and yes partly to blame.

Then it goes ahead and kills the woman he loved in cold blood, and if that is not enoght he does not have much problem in killing Geralt (that did as he asked, and was because of him he knows she used him at all), and Regis, its blood brother... You know what that means? Regis is RIGHT in his speech, trying to ignore and justify this because you dont like it is not a valid argument.

A woman who showed that she had zero love for him and turned him into a killer. Not a big loss, IMO. And you're ignoring the fact that Detlaff talked to Geralt and Regis afterwards and told them he was leaving and taking the Vampires with him and will go far away. He tells them both that he does not wish to fight them but will if they want to fight. At this point it would have been a battle to the death so why should he pull his punches? If Geralt wants to fight, it's only because he wants to slay him and Regis would stand by Geralt's side. IDK why you are claiming this is a terrible thing for Detlaff to expect.

Its Dettlaff walking away the part i find disturbing, not Syanna dying because you may have no symphaty for her.

So basically you're just angry because I made a choice the game gave me and you don't like it. And why should I care what you like and don't like? I think it's a fitting twist of irony for Syanna to die by the hands of the "Beast of Beauclair" that she created. Best punishment ever. And yes I allowed the true victim in all of this walk away. I had no reason to fight Detlaff and he had every reason to kill Syanna, and then every reason to want to defend himself against Geralt and Regis should they try to attack him for it.. I let him go just like I did with Letho.

 

[Alexius321]

I think it's a fitting twist of irony for Syanna to die by the hands of the "Beast of Beauclair" that she created.

I might be too sympathetic since I always try to 'save everyone', but I actually quite like that line. However, I would personally change the ordering of events. Dettlaff killing her the way he does in the game seems a bit rushed in my opinion. The story would have to be rewritten altogether, but one possibility for a more meaningful ending would be to have him kill her at the very end, not in 'the middle'. Afterwards, Dettlaff could commit suicide or ask Regis and Geralt to finish him off. Such an ending would have been much more convincing, providing an obvious aftereffect and leaving a strong impression, while also providing more depth to the character of Dettlaff. The way he kills her in the game is just too naively portrayed in my opinion.

Additionally, there could be a cutscene in the end with that line, providing a contrast between the alleged 'Beast of Beauclair' and the real Beast of Beaclair'. It would probably be the most fitting ending as well, since both of them were guilty in one way or another. While Syanna was the mastermind, Dettlaff did become a beast himself as well.

The game seems to portray the death of Anna and Syanna as the 'worst' possibility, but I think the death of Syanna and Dettlaff together would have been much more tragic. I personally find it difficult to sympathize with Anna. She was cool at first, but started acting irrationally later on. And while I can find a reason to sympathize with Syanna, Dettlaff is really the most tragic character here.

 

[Hazevamp]

I might be too sympathetic since I always try to 'save everyone', but I actually quite like that line. However, I would personally change the ordering of events. Dettlaff killing her the way he does in the game seems a bit rushed in my opinion. The story would have to be rewritten altogether, but one possibility for a more meaningful ending would be to have him kill her at the very end, not in 'the middle'. Afterwards, Dettlaff could commit suicide or ask Regis and Geralt to finish him off. Such an ending would have been much more convincing, providing an obvious aftereffect and leaving a strong impression, while also providing more depth to the character of Dettlaff. The way he kills her in the game is just too naively portrayed in my opinion.

Additionally, there could be a cutscene in the end with that line, providing a contrast between the alleged 'Beast of Beauclair' and the real Beast of Beaclair'. It would probably be the most fitting ending as well, since both of them were guilty in one way or another. While Syanna was the mastermind, Dettlaff did become a beast himself as well.

The game seems to portray the death of Anna and Syanna as the 'worst' possibility, but I think the death of Syanna and Dettlaff together would have been much more tragic. I personally find it difficult to sympathize with Anna. She was cool at first, but started acting irrationally later on. And while I can find a reason to sympathize with Syanna, Dettlaff is really the most tragic character here.

I hate the thought of Detlaff dying but I do like the way you think. It would be pretty darn tragic if he couldn't live with himself after everything that happened. Although I would still like the option to keep him alive and for Regis to try and help him out. But him asking to be killed over the whole ordeal would have been great and quite memorable for those who opt to kill him. I do think it was disappointing that all three endings could end up with the same old boss fight. That should have been done for the Unseen Elder ending. CDPR should have been a bit more inventive with the free Syanna route. That's another reason why I like letting Detlaff go. I like that Geralt can solve the problem without a lame boss battle. But killing a Detlaff who wants to die willingly would have been another way to do it without the boss fight.

 

[Alexius321]

I hate the thought of Detlaff dying but I do like the way you think. It would be pretty darn tragic if he couldn't live with himself after everything that happened......

That's exactly what I had in mind. In my opinion, the character of Dettlaff remains unresolved as is. He effectively remains, or rather completely transforms into a beast, which is in contradiction with the way his character was introduced. Committing suicide or asking for death would have shown his struggle and the pain he goes through. I am not sure, but I suppose that is what the writers at CDPR had in mind when creating him - to show the conflict between his 'humanity' which he chose consciously and his love for Syanna and what he was prepared to do for her. But they didn't finish the job, the characterization could have been much, much better.

This is of course just a suggestion for a potential choice. I'd like to let Dettlaff live, but the way game handles 'letting Dettlaff go' is somehow lacking the way I see it, his further fate remains too vague and uncertain. Well, to be completely honest I wasn't exactly satisfied with any of the endings, but that's just my personal opinion.

 

[CTPhipps]

I think Detlaff's issue is he's a very inhuman sort of thinker. He is a nice guy 90% of the time and a friend to children. But if you betray his trust and get him angry, he'll go rampage like the Hulk. It's a terrible thing to go on a mass killing spree but I can understand his anger and rage given he was betrayed by the woman he loved and encouraged to go against his nature by killing innocents he thought he was doing so for his lady love.

I like the "good ending" but the good ending sucks because it's a woman who gets away with murder and a man goes on a killing spree out of revenge.

Which is no different from Robb Stark in this sort of climate.

 

[Shivansps]

I might be too sympathetic since I always try to 'save everyone', but I actually quite like that line. However, I would personally change the ordering of events. Dettlaff killing her the way he does in the game seems a bit rushed in my opinion. The story would have to be rewritten altogether, but one possibility for a more meaningful ending would be to have him kill her at the very end, not in 'the middle'. Afterwards, Dettlaff could commit suicide or ask Regis and Geralt to finish him off. Such an ending would have been much more convincing, providing an obvious aftereffect and leaving a strong impression, while also providing more depth to the character of Dettlaff. The way he kills her in the game is just too naively portrayed in my opinion.

Additionally, there could be a cutscene in the end with that line, providing a contrast between the alleged 'Beast of Beauclair' and the real Beast of Beaclair'. It would probably be the most fitting ending as well, since both of them were guilty in one way or another. While Syanna was the mastermind, Dettlaff did become a beast himself as well.

The game seems to portray the death of Anna and Syanna as the 'worst' possibility, but I think the death of Syanna and Dettlaff together would have been much more tragic. I personally find it difficult to sympathize with Anna. She was cool at first, but started acting irrationally later on. And while I can find a reason to sympathize with Syanna, Dettlaff is really the most tragic character here.

That what a human may do, if he is transformed intro a beast, like Regis said it did, why whould ask Regis or Geralt to kill him? thats a emotional reaction that Dettlaff cant longer experience, instead he has no problem to go on and attack people like Geralt and Regis that just attempted to help him, thats what simbolises that he is now a emotionless beast. He even say "nevermid i rather fight" after killing Syanna if you choose to fight him, he may just leave, instead he choose to kill Regis and Geralt just because they dont agree with him killing Syanna, a rational reaction whould be to turn into vapor and fly off. Because, if you have any emotion, you just dont go on a kill your friend, if you have an option.
There is no doubt in my mind he is converted intro a beast, even before killing Syanna, Regis reactions are way too telling, he conviced Geralt to to help Dettlaff because he thinks there is still hope for him, them at the meeting, they both with the guard down, way too far from Syanna, thats because Regis never belived Dettlaff was capable of killing her, and Regis reaction after that tells the whole history.

The main problem with Dettlaff is that he belives Syanna used him from the start, no just now that she used him as a tool for killing, since Dettlaff has a hard time to understand humans and human relations, he belives that Syanna used him from the start, that means, a few years back since they meet, he belives the whole thing was to use him, thats way too much for him to handle, so thats why he becomes the beast. That point i may understand, but he does not even try to find out if thats true, he just assumed. Because Dettlaff never understood Syanna left him because she does not want to be with him, so he belives Syanna was faking kidnapping since them. Thus it gets consumed by rage.
While there is no way to be fully sure, i do belive what Syanna said to Geralt, i dont think she had a interest in lying to Geralt about that, and what she said actually makes sence, and its common in humans relations, is just Dettlaff that never understood this. (heck Regis did, and he actually tells you about it when you find the blackmailer note). Besides all that happened several years before all this, actually, Syanna left him even before Dettlaff found Regis.

BTW, Syanna does NOT go on free on the happy ending, she still has to go on trial, that what is missing on the happy ending, the trial should follow and acording to what Geralt says she may be convicted or not, because, after all, symphaty or not, she is still guilty.

BTW2, Anna is not a bad character and it does not seem to be a bad person neither, after all she agreed to help the vampire(even before Geralt mentioned the wine), and it helps Geralt in the investigation, personally, probably because she suspects something at that point, and it really seems she had the best for its subjects in mind, but it completely changes her actitude after she confrmed his sister is involved, and i fear that if its sister is killed she may change even more. At any rate, you need to remember she is a ruler, not a common person.

I really think we need ending slides to be added, to see the future of characters to sort all this stuff out.

 

[deboramoreno]

Spoiler

you decide to kill dettlaff by deciding to go to the unseen elder

you get locked into a bad ending.

This one is the worst, really.

 

[mothramdeer]

Aside from Regis (who is just the best character in the entire Witcherverse!) I really liked the character of Dettlaff. I liked the stark contrast between him and Regis and thinking about which one was the odd one out - is Regis more human than normal for their kind, or is Dettlaff more vampire (more bestial)? I found it easy to forget that Dettlaff isn't just a human mind in a super strong vampire body, but that he is a completely different species from a different world and although he may look human most of the time and have something resembling (to us) human social relationships, everything he does is governed by an entirely different set of rules. His actions probably seemed entirely normal to him, in fact, maybe if it wasn't for Regis' example of the ability and reasons to live among humans then Dettlaff might not have even thought to give Syanna those three days, and he would have just killed her on the spot...

Ironically, if he had just done the vampiric thing and killed her as soon as he realised the massive deception she'd pulled, then the night of the long fangs wouldn't have happened. (I guess that thought process only really makes sense if you think of Dettlaff as operating under a completely different set of rules to humans - of course to humans that night didn't have to happen at all, Dettlaff could have just let it go and y'know, NOT massacred a bunch of innocent people who had nothing to do with what Syanna did)

I didn't want to kill him in my playthrough, but ended up having to do it anyway because of giving Syanna the ribbon (not doing that again next playthrough...I only did it for the Gwent) but after Dettlaff unleashed all those vampires on the citizens of Beauclair I think that's the decision Geralt would have made. To Dettlaff his reasoning would have been the mark of a sentient higher vampire (he even gave her special treatment by allowing her three days to meet him and explain her actions, and he was very clear about what would happen if she didn't) but to Geralt it would have been the actions of a beast (indiscriminate massacring of innocent people) and those, those are the things a Witcher kills.