I agree with this, I think it is perfectly reasonable to imagine Geralt changing during his amnesia and influenced by the events of the games. I don't see him 100% resetting himself to his book version as soon as his memories come back like nothing happened and time stood still. The experiences he had might or might not change him to some extent depending on how each person plays and interprets the games. As far as Yen is concerned, I really enjoyed her in the role of the fun and feisty "ex wife" to put it like that and her dynamic with Geralt remained great and made sense to the way I played it, be it the banters, bickering or mutual care for Ciri.Thomas999;n7441830 said:
Yeah, I wonder where I get this.
It was my biggest fear that Geralt won't be Geralt again, but right after starting Witcher 3 that fear was gone. Because that dream he had at the beginning was exactly the dream he wanted to be true in the books and I knew that this is Geralt again.
Here is another quote with Geralt's dream:
@Kallelinski Well, he is the same person, but there is a difference between words and actions and depending on each player's choice he can certainly change his views and feelings and the game allows that. Each person can decide at what measure he has or hasn't changed since the books, but the games clearly allow for such an alternative. It's not like Geralt is a fixed character in the games even though you would clearly like if he was. I on the other hand greatly appreciate choice and being able to influence the story to my liking. And I can easily post a quote from the Triss romance and say, look, he is changed, he never liked Yen, he said he loved Triss before his amnesia and so on.
Ciri: You and Triss. Never expected it, to be honest.
Geralt: Life's full of surprises.
Ciri: So, how did the two of you--?
Geralt: End up together?
Geralt: Hmm. With Yen it was fight after fight, lots of arguments, drama… Not saying it was bad, but…
Ciri: But what?
Geralt: Got o be exhausting. With Triss, it's not. I finally feel… harmony. A calm. Feel like things are the way they're supposed to be.
But that all depends on the player, Geralt doesn't have a mind of his own.
Ciri: You and Triss. Never expected it, to be honest.
Geralt: Life's full of surprises.
Ciri: So, how did the two of you--?
Geralt: End up together?
Geralt: Hmm. With Yen it was fight after fight, lots of arguments, drama… Not saying it was bad, but…
Ciri: But what?
Geralt: Got o be exhausting. With Triss, it's not. I finally feel… harmony. A calm. Feel like things are the way they're supposed to be.
But that all depends on the player, Geralt doesn't have a mind of his own.
Kallelinski;n7442440 said:
Not to burst your bubble, but saying "You haven't changed a bit!" after recognizing one habit or other after years of separation isn't actually evidence that the other person hasn't changed at all. I said the exact same thing to my 8-yearold niece after I saw her bully her sister out of a cookie last time my family gathered. She'd grown almost a foot taller, her hair had darkened and she'd turned from someone you could barely have a conversation with to a real little smartass since the previous time I'd seen her. Obviously Geralt didn't turn into a completely different person, but it's not unreasonable at all to expect, or allow, some of his priorities to have changed and some of his new impressions to have settled in place of old ones.
If you like to think of him as perfectly copy-pasted from the end of the books, however unrealistic, then that's all to the good, but the rest of us don't have to share your little fixation.
Last edited:
Thomas999;n7442690 said:
Geralt has changed from the games but he's also regained all of his memories. Geralt is a fictional character, but hypothetically speaking there are things he 'wouldn't' do based off of his past experiences and lore. Would Geralt 'bring' Ciri to Emhyr for coin? If you want to play that way it's up to you, but there's no past experiences that will justify his actions. It's 'out-of-character' for Geralt to do that, just like killing monsters that aren't harming humans. I'll say again, play whatever way you want, but there are certain situations/decisions in the game that don't match up to Geralt's 'character'.
Forgot the newest one:
How'd that start, anyway? Our duels in wordplay?
Forgotten? It was at a vernissage in Ban Ard. You started it to keep from going mad with boredom. I remember finding your sense of humor both groan-worthy... and somehow endearing.
Never change, Geralt. I beg you
and another one:
My oh my.
Missed you.
I missed you too.
We oughta get back to the wake.
I must dress. Turn around.
Once again I come up with examples and all you do is saying, "No, it isn't this way", just denying it won't change it.
It's just great that all 3 important characters in this family recognize each other as the persons they once were after being separated so long.
In one of the really early interviews it was even said that Geralt is the old again with his amnesia gone and not once I doubted that in the game.
Never asked for it. You created a thread motivating people to break her heart, not me. You can accuse me though that I always defend what Geralt and Yennefer had in the books and continue in the game, that I am guilty of and always will.
How'd that start, anyway? Our duels in wordplay?
Forgotten? It was at a vernissage in Ban Ard. You started it to keep from going mad with boredom. I remember finding your sense of humor both groan-worthy... and somehow endearing.
Never change, Geralt. I beg you
and another one:
My oh my.
Missed you.
I missed you too.
We oughta get back to the wake.
I must dress. Turn around.
Once again I come up with examples and all you do is saying, "No, it isn't this way", just denying it won't change it.
It's just great that all 3 important characters in this family recognize each other as the persons they once were after being separated so long.
In one of the really early interviews it was even said that Geralt is the old again with his amnesia gone and not once I doubted that in the game.
Thomas999;n7442690 said:
Never asked for it. You created a thread motivating people to break her heart, not me. You can accuse me though that I always defend what Geralt and Yennefer had in the books and continue in the game, that I am guilty of and always will.
Kallelinski And yet he still somehow ended up in Kovir with Triss in my game and left Yennefer for good. My point is, each player decides in what measure Geralt has or hasn't changed, simple as that. You can list a thousand quotes of people telling him he is the same, but fact is, he can choose a different life than the one he wanted in the books and the game fully supports that. I don't know what is your point even, we don't all have to choose the same, there isn't one fixed Geralt in the games. Your Geralt might have stayed the same, the Geralt I played, heard and saw in the games hasn't, and both of us are free to enjoy our stories accordingly. It seems to me like you are trying to push you own interpretation as the only valid one and I can't agree with that.
Also the amnesia is something CDPR dropped from the set-go in Witcher 3 anyway. I wish we could have talked with a lot of characters about the amnesia, but we couldn't really except for 1-2 lines.
The amnesia was a cheap method to start a game and explain everything to the player without contradicting the already set world around him.
Why does Geralt need to learn how to brew potions again, if he is already 100 years in this profession? Bäm, amnesia.
How do you introduce characters, although Geralt should already know for years? Bäm, amnesia.
Why would you need to explain to Geralt where he is and what he has to do? Bäm, amnesia.
In this way Witcher 3 has for the first time the complete Geralt and as I said and shown the game confirms that and has eradicted my fear about that. The amnesia isn't used as story element per se.
Sadly Witcher 1 and 2 are so "important" that almost none decisions are taken into Witcher 3, not even the big decisions like going with Roche/Iorveth or saving Anais, which had a huge political consequence.
The amnesia was a cheap method to start a game and explain everything to the player without contradicting the already set world around him.
Why does Geralt need to learn how to brew potions again, if he is already 100 years in this profession? Bäm, amnesia.
How do you introduce characters, although Geralt should already know for years? Bäm, amnesia.
Why would you need to explain to Geralt where he is and what he has to do? Bäm, amnesia.
In this way Witcher 3 has for the first time the complete Geralt and as I said and shown the game confirms that and has eradicted my fear about that. The amnesia isn't used as story element per se.
Sadly Witcher 1 and 2 are so "important" that almost none decisions are taken into Witcher 3, not even the big decisions like going with Roche/Iorveth or saving Anais, which had a huge political consequence.
Hamilton1358;n7443240 said:
Good for you, but the thread was originally about that Yennefer is no good for Geralt and vice versa, and that I don't agree with, not at all, and I think I showed that in books and games this isn't the case.
The interactions Geralt and Yennefer have in the game happen even without you going for her, that didn't change at all.
I believe that Geralt and Yennefer can never work out in the long run, they never could, their relationship was always rocky and with ups and downs, very loving and filled with a deep understanding of each other, but it was never stable, and I think the ending of the books is symbolic in that sense that only in death can they truly find peace. I have no problem with Yennefer, she is a fantastic character and she and Geralt clearly have a deep loving bond. The fact that they wanted to retire by the end of the books is in no way a guarantee that it would ever work, no matter that they want it, hence the appropriate ending imo. That's why I don't buy them spending eternity in Toussaint doing nothing but loving each other, but whatever, that is just how I see it, people are free to disagree, to each their own. Even though my Geralt won't end up with Yen, he still cares deeply for her and their bond goes beyond romance and that is shown in the interactions they have even after the break up.Kallelinski;n7443380 said:
The point of this thread was to show that even if Geralt breaks up with Yen their interactions remain interesting and awarding, although in a different way and I definitely agree with that.
Thomas999;n7442690 said:
You can allow him to change some of his priorities if you want that, of course. Thankfully, the irreversible alteration of his original personality without my input didn't happen at any point in any game (every single time I was offered the opportunity to do something I considered to be out of character for him, I also got the chance to stay in character).
In other words, Geralt doesn't have to forget or discard anything that happened to him during the amnesia in order to be the same person as he was in the books. I can easily do the entire trilogy run playing as "book Geralt"; Going by your own examples:
You pretty much described Geralt from the books here, he was never ever interested at all in the matters of kings, queens or the high society in general.Thomas999;n7398380 said:
No.Thomas999;n7398380 said:
No and no.Thomas999;n7398380 said:
Of course not.Thomas999;n7398380 said:
Nope, he freindzoned her again as soon as he remembered Yennefer.Thomas999;n7398380 said:
Definitely not.Thomas999;n7398380 said:
Geralt didn't change himself or evolve into what you described automatically. It was you who did it.
Last edited by a moderator:
ooodrin;n7445360 said:
...Can you read, buddy? I'm not coming to take your character away. I'm just pointing out subtle ways Geralt CAN have changed over the course of the games, and since those changes came about due to events canon in the games, the resulting Geralt is as canon as one whom you have protected from all possible influences so as to change as little as possible. Just because you didn't make use of Geralt's opportunities to grow doesn't make your Geralt any more canon than ours.
Geralt in the books was antipathetic towards politics and sorcerers' schemes. In the games he can grow to actively hate them. And yes, yes and yes, yes, Triss friendzoned him when he remembered Yennefer and not the other way around, and definitely yes. Every single one of those tendencies and priority shifts are supportable in the games, making a Geralt who began to feel those ways perfectly canon. Just not the same canon as yours. I really don't get why you're trying to argue with this. Nobody is going to play Geralt exactly like he was in the books just because you want them to, and if you insist on only playing him as such yourself then this thread in its entirety just doesn't concern you at all.
Thomas999;n7445980 said:
Can you read pal? Where in God's name did I imply my Geralt is more "game friendly canon" than yours or that your prefered choices are not being properly supported in the games?
Thomas999;n7445980 said:
Ummm, pretty sure I don't care about that one bit, either. Can't see where exactly I was urging you to play as "book Geralt" or whatever. Especially since I don't always play the same way.
Back on topic: My decisions over the course of the trilogy are the result of my perception of Geralt's character and of people around him. Same as yours. Telling Yennefer "it was all the Djinn's magic, bye now..." (which is what your OP was about, btw) is 100% incompatible with Geralt I know. Just like slaying Saskia at the end of TW2, for instance.
I haven't seen a single argument from you (as the thread's title implies) that doesn't boils down to "Geralt could have developed a new personality thanks to amnesia", which is your personal preference and nothing more. Nothing in the game tells us, the players, deciding to dump Yennefer was a good decision for Geralt. Nothing in the game tells us staying with her was wrong for him.
Last edited by a moderator:
ooodrin;n7446400 said:
I don't know what hell you mean by "game friendly canon", but by summarily rejecting all the possible changes to Geralt's personality over the course of the games as invalid you do, in fact, imply that your copy-pasted Geralt from the books with no major changes to his pattern is the only real, canon Geralt. Which is simply bullshit. And I was actually responding to Kallelinski, who said it outright and did not just imply it.
My argument that Geralt can have developed "a new personality" thanks to his amnesia is the one you can't seem to argue against with anything except plain denial, and Geralt doesn't say anything along the lines of "It was all the Djinn's magic", what he says is "The magic is gone for me now.", as in the big magic, the epic magic, the one that kept forcing them together briefly between bitter periods of estrangement for two decades. That statement isn't incompatible with Geralt in the slightest, just your idea of him, and thankfully the rest of us don't have to labor under that.
My other argument, that Yen and Geralt were far more miserable together than they were happy, also seems pretty valid for consideration as to whether or not a post-amnesia Geralt would want to perpetuate that cycle. And what the characters' futures turn out to be after this decision or that can't actually inform the characters' decisions, so "nothing in the game suggest that Geralt and Yennefer are as miserable together as they used to be" isn't relevant to Geralt's decision of whether to continue along the same path they were headed before based on his reflections on the past.
Last edited:
Thomas999;n7446500 said:
Nice job knocking down these strawmen again, man! Congratz!
For the last time, I said Geralt changing his perspective in the games depends on the player and his whim, nothing about it is inevitable. You're the one who started babbling about canon and me promoting the "only real, canon Geralt".
I cringe at the very idea of describing any kind of playthrough in RPGs as "canon". Faithful to to lore in this case - yes (after all, you are staying faithful to Geralt's original characteristics), but anything in the games being proclaimed canon - NO! Games themselves are not canon, ffs.
Thomas999;n7446500 said:
I didn't deny anything, I believe I already said "You can allow him to change some of his priorities if you want that, of course." Read.
Thomas999;n7446500 said:
And I could say: "That statement isn't compatible with Geralt in the slightest, just your idea of him, and thankfully the rest of us don't have to labor under that." Opinions, opinions...
Thomas999;n7446500 said:
Fine, where does Geralt acknowledge he was miserable with her before completing The Last Wish and his "misery" was still relevant?
Last edited by a moderator:
ooodrin;n7445360 said:
How is this not you rejecting the idea of Geralt organically changing out of hand just because it doesn't fit with your preferred idea of him from the books? I don't see the strawman.
If you didn't mean it then you shouldn't have said it, and if you don't have a problem with Geralt actually being affected by his amnesia in other people's playthroughs then what do you have a problem with? Nobody is complaining about the way you play your game or trying to force anything on you, I wasn't the one to start throwing the word "canon" around in this context.
And I hate to break it to you, but Geralt isn't hugely articulate and doesn't feel the need to hash out his feelings for Yennefer with someone else at any point in the game before decisions are made, so his actual thought process is left entirely up to us no matter which way he's leaning. And realistically, if I'd just remembered twenty years of traveling the countryside missing and resenting a woman, only spending a few weeks at a time with her every three to five years, "Wow. That was depressing. Do I have to do that again?" would certainly be one of my immediate thoughts no matter what my feelings for the woman in question were.
Last edited:
Thomas999;n7454050 said:
Simple use of Ctrl+F function would tell you which one of us started throwing the word "canon" around.
Thomas999;n7454050 said:
So, the game doesn't offer any evidence he is or was miserable with her or is in desperate need of a change before The Last Wish?
Thomas999;n7454050 said:
And now you're venturing into the headcanon territory (as usual).
That's basically what confuses me about your thread:
- Everyone should break Yennefer's heart at least once
- Nah, why would I do that?
- My hunch tells me he was deeply unhappy with her and he changed during the amnesia
- OK, but my Geralt thinks and feels differently than yours, here is how and why... He hasn't changed that much either.
- Stop imposing your version of Geralt upon us! Also, stop using the word "canon".
A friendly moderator's reminder: Please, keep this civil, everybody. Thank you.
I get the impression the argument has more to do with miscommunication than either party trying to impose their view on the other. As is often the case with fiction, everyone is bound to have different interpretations of the same events, and the games allow the player to apply their own view of the matter however they see fit.
There are people who believe Geralt and Yennefer to be perfect for each other, kept apart only by circumstance and their own personal failings. And who doesn't have those? Others see their story as ultimately one of failed passion. Yes, they love each other, but they would never work out. There is plenty of support for either viewpoint in books and games, and I find discussing it to be interesting and in good fun. These things are never clear-cut, so there is no need to pretend people with a different interpretation are delusional or any such thing.
With the obligatory disclaimer out of the way, my personal interpretation is that Geralt and Yennefer's relationship is dysfunctional. Not abusive, not toxic, just dysfunctional, which is to say "not operating normally or properly." No matter how many romance novels and fairy tales promote such a setup, I'm having trouble getting behind a relationship where the two people involved are constantly breaking up and getting back together and cheating on each other while remaining utterly unable to develop similar feelings for other people, at least in the long-term. It reminds me of several sitcoms (if not all of them) which rely on exactly the same situation for seasons on end, and it strikes me as being just as unhealthy and frustrating in either medium.
So I feel inclined to agree with Thomas' approach to the scene from The Last Wish quest. Personally, I don't want Geralt to end up with Yennefer. I don't want him to end up with Triss either, to be honest. I don't think his dynamic with either of them justifies a long-term relationship. Admittedly, I dislike happily ever afters in general, but that does not preclude a protagonist ending a story in a relationship. I just like my fiction to be a little more open-ended in this regard and embrace uncertainty.
There are people who believe Geralt and Yennefer to be perfect for each other, kept apart only by circumstance and their own personal failings. And who doesn't have those? Others see their story as ultimately one of failed passion. Yes, they love each other, but they would never work out. There is plenty of support for either viewpoint in books and games, and I find discussing it to be interesting and in good fun. These things are never clear-cut, so there is no need to pretend people with a different interpretation are delusional or any such thing.
With the obligatory disclaimer out of the way, my personal interpretation is that Geralt and Yennefer's relationship is dysfunctional. Not abusive, not toxic, just dysfunctional, which is to say "not operating normally or properly." No matter how many romance novels and fairy tales promote such a setup, I'm having trouble getting behind a relationship where the two people involved are constantly breaking up and getting back together and cheating on each other while remaining utterly unable to develop similar feelings for other people, at least in the long-term. It reminds me of several sitcoms (if not all of them) which rely on exactly the same situation for seasons on end, and it strikes me as being just as unhealthy and frustrating in either medium.
So I feel inclined to agree with Thomas' approach to the scene from The Last Wish quest. Personally, I don't want Geralt to end up with Yennefer. I don't want him to end up with Triss either, to be honest. I don't think his dynamic with either of them justifies a long-term relationship. Admittedly, I dislike happily ever afters in general, but that does not preclude a protagonist ending a story in a relationship. I just like my fiction to be a little more open-ended in this regard and embrace uncertainty.
Last edited:
Break Yens heart in Last Wish - tried it - hated it - reloaded.
Yeas Geralt and Yens relationsship is not all roses all the time. I would believe that this is not in small part due to the fact that Geralts witcher mutations messes with his emotinal life bigtime. In fact one could argue that Yen is perfect for him because she seems to suffer from some of the same "defects" and thus can relate and forgive.
Considering that Triss and Geralt breaks up after TW2 - well just saying that either way, (Triss or Yen), there really just no problem free romance in the series. I think this is probably also how it should be - but then again, eveyone are free to have their own idea of how Geralt should be..
Yeas Geralt and Yens relationsship is not all roses all the time. I would believe that this is not in small part due to the fact that Geralts witcher mutations messes with his emotinal life bigtime. In fact one could argue that Yen is perfect for him because she seems to suffer from some of the same "defects" and thus can relate and forgive.
Considering that Triss and Geralt breaks up after TW2 - well just saying that either way, (Triss or Yen), there really just no problem free romance in the series. I think this is probably also how it should be - but then again, eveyone are free to have their own idea of how Geralt should be..