Eyes colour?

[Germanicanus]

Nabuchodonozor: I said myself 'sorcerers in general', of course I was generalizating. I didn't intend to judge all of them individually (except for Philippa), but their behavior as a group of people with common interests to defend.

They are not different than any other group of people sharing common interests. Let's not demonize them because they are increasing the sphere of their influence and improving their status. In this case we should also condemn dwarves, elves, Nilfgaardians, Temerians, knights, witchers for doing exactly the same!

About the feminism: I didn't encounter a better choice of words; I'm no native English, you see. I'm specifically refering at the argument 'we deserve to rule because we are women, evidently more capable of it, by nature, than men' which is actually implied in one of the Lodge meetings. As a woman, gender-equality feminist myself, this made me facepalm pretty hard.

You see... I believe her statement is rooted in the perception that sorceresses are more talented, more capable of using magic on a higher and more efficient level than in hatred for men. Judging from the lecture Vilgefortz (who was, by the way, a misogynist) gave Geralt on the history of magic, we can conclude female mages made equal if not bigger bigger impact than the male ones; for instance the masters of elemental magic were all women. Furthermore, Vilgefortz says there was a case of 'feminization' among sorcerers, which lead to acquiring the highest positions by such talented women as Tissaia, Francesca (both in the Chapter), Philippa or even Yennefer (representing the lowest chamber, Council). I personally find it very refreshing to have a secret society compromised of women instead of another Big Bad Guy and his sidekicks. No wonder since mr. Sapkowski himself said he is a feminist and thinks women could rule as good if not better as men.

As I said, Nilfgaard is their natural enemy. I don't see how you are differing...?

We are slightly differing since you have stated that Nilfgaard is their natural enemy because sorcerers do not have any privileges there, whereas I explained that they fight against the empire as they mostly represent the Northern Kingdoms' interest, and - as the Lodge - vowed to maintain the status quo meaning Nilfgaard cannot by any means becoming the solo superpower by conquering all the rest states. Them being reduced to servants under Nilfgaardian rule is another but not main reason.

Nah, it was just a silly thought. Because of the conqueror thing, and all this also reminded me of a portion of my country's history, the Peninsular War. During this period, a more advanced France occupied Spain, and there were people (spaniards) who supported being conquered because they thought France would rule better, and overall it would be beneficial for the common folks.

Yeah, we can assume common folks do not care if the serve under Nilfgaardian or Temerians, or Redanians rule. Some of them might have a devotion to their local lord and community but I doubt in patriotism, especially if they are modeled on medieval Third State.

@KnightofPhoenix

really saw nothing in the game that clearly showed Philippa not giving a damn about anyone other than herself. One could be very ambitious and also care about others. I think Philippa genuinely cares for the North and whether she genuinely cares or not about nonhumans, realizes that they need to be treated equally.

My sentiments exactly. I would also add Saskia and Triss to the list of people she more or less cares about. With Saskia I take into consideration what she said about her being innocent and extraordinary good person - I might be wrong but I didn't get an impression she was talking about just a mere tool she used for her own means, there were some emotions hidden in the words. Speaking of Triss, I believed she was genuinely concerned with Tiss' disappearance and could be far more harsh towards her following Triss' protests against the Lodge than just giving her the cold shoulder and scolding ("stop thinking with your vagina and get a hold of yourself"). Again, I could be very much mistaken and projecting what I know about their relationship from books into how game presented this matter. Feel free to prove me wrong!

Keep in mind that Triss is a manipulator herself. Obviously she is going to distance herself from the Lodge. But I would take everything she says with a grain of salt.

IA, IA. She's playing it perfectly too, as not only Geralt, but also a large part of players believes she is absolutely sincere and innocent! ;-)

 

[Dona.794]

You, sir, I agree with you completely.

 

[username_2093396]

I really saw nothing in the game that clearly showed Philippa not giving a damn about anyone other than herself. One could be very ambitious and also care about others. I think Philippa genuinely cares for the North and whether she genuinely cares or not about nonhumans, realizes that they need to be treated equally.

On the flip side, I really saw nothing in the game that showed she did care about anyone other than herself. Plus if she's so concerned about the North, why have Sile show up on the dragon and potentially kill the last of the north's rulers at Loc Muinne? If Geralt hadn't intervened, then likely there would be no one left alive to fight Nilfgaard except for Saskia who was by that point a mindless puppet controlled by Phillipa (Demavend and Foltest were already dead, Henselt was either dead or present at the dragon attack, Radovid was there too, and so was Natalis who was probably the only one who could lead Temeria without causing civil war). That's why I think Phillipa is more concerned with her own personal power than with any of the supposed ideals she tells everyone else she's working towards. Things start going badly for her and suddenly she's ready to destroy everything just to get herself back on top.

Keep in mind that Triss is a manipulator herself. Obviously she is going to distance herself from the Lodge. But I would take everything she says with a grain of salt.

I don't like Triss but I distrust Phillipa much more.

My sentiments exactly. I would also add Saskia and Triss to the list of people she more or less cares about. With Saskia I take into consideration what she said about her being innocent and extraordinary good person - I might be wrong but I didn't get an impression she was talking about just a mere tool she used for her own means, there were some emotions hidden in the words. Speaking of Triss, I believed she was genuinely concerned with Tiss' disappearance and could be far more harsh towards her following Triss' protests against the Lodge than just giving her the cold shoulder and scolding ("stop thinking with your vagina and get a hold of yourself"). Again, I could be very much mistaken and projecting what I know about their relationship from books into how game presented this matter. Feel free to prove me wrong!

If Phillipa really cares about Saskia then why enslave her? That whole situation is really creepy (first she takes advantage of Saskia being unconscious to kiss her, and now that she's got Saskia completely under her power is she going make Saskia a sex slave or something?). It's just wrong. If she really cared about Saskia then she'd let Saskia retain her free will.

And with Phillipa's behavior towards Triss, I find that quote especially rich considering that Phillipa was the one sleeping with the enemy without realizing it XD

IA, IA. She's playing it perfectly too, as not only Geralt, but also a large part of players believes she is absolutely sincere and innocent! ;-)

Triss spent most of the game as a pocket-sized statue. She clearly wasn't involved in most of what Sile and Phillipa were up to. I'm still pissed at Triss for not telling Geralt in Flotsam about the Lodge and what she suspected Sile and Phillipa were up to. If she had trusted Geralt instead of trying to prove stuff on her own then Cedric would still be alive and maybe Triss wouldn't have even gotten kidnapped in the first place. But being stupid doesn't mean she's making it all up either.

 

[Germanicanus]

If Phillipa really cares about Saskia then why enslave her? That whole situation is really creepy (first she takes advantage of Saskia being unconscious to kiss her, and now that she's got Saskia completely under her power is she going make Saskia a sex slave or something?). It's just wrong. If she really cared about Saskia then she'd let Saskia retain her free will.

Mate, I understand what you are coming from, but please let me explain my point. From my point of view Saskia and Philippa's relationship is far more complex and layered than a mindless obedience. I believe Phil cared about Saskia, at least on subconscious level. I consider the scenes when she rushed of to help Saskia after she was poisoned, or the speech she gave to Geralt praising the girl's strong and good character as examples of the fact that Phil didn't view Saskia as a worthless tool. Yes, she did used her but for the reasons explained earlier by KnightofPhoenix, which she put greater importance to. She strikes me as a person who puts her goal (no matter if it's personal or duty) above the rest, friendship and love included. Maybe this is what Saskia meant when she told Geralt Philippa is a tragic figure? Anyway, I doubt she would do the same out of malice or for lulz. Of course this doesn't justify her actions at all! All I am trying to say is that I could find concern, self-mutual respect or even a dose of emotions and a master-student type of relations in their relationship. I don't see any sexual attraction though and I don't think Philippa would use Saskia as her sex slave... not unless Geralt will magically aquire a lesbian sex tape recorded in Loc Muinne ;-)

And with Phillipa's behavior towards Triss, I find that quote especially rich considering that Phillipa was the one sleeping with the enemy without realizing it XD

Hahaha good point! ;-) Although I see this quote and the whole Cynthia storyline as a pun, because in the canon Philippa and Assire used exactly the same trick to gain information from Nilfgaardian spymaster. The spy had even a similar name to Cynthia - Carthia. It could be said that Nilfgaardians learnt from the mistake.

Triss spent most of the game as a pocket-sized statue. She clearly wasn't involved in most of what Sile and Phillipa were up to. I'm still pissed at Triss for not telling Geralt in Flotsam about the Lodge and what she suspected Sile and Phillipa were up to. If she had trusted Geralt instead of trying to prove stuff on her own then Cedric would still be alive and maybe Triss wouldn't have even gotten kidnapped in the first place. But being stupid doesn't mean she's making it all up either.

My accusations towards Triss are based on her selfish need to get and control Geralt for herself. She didn't tell him about his beloved one (and her best friend ffs!), neither she told him about the most important person in his world, Ciri. She did everything she could to led him into thinking she is the only one who loved him and that they should be together no matter what. I agree with you that her fault was not helping Geralt and taking active role against the Lodge's plans. What she thought she would achieve by confronting Philippa? That Eilhart will broke down, apologize for everything and congratulate Triss on her cleverness?

 

[username_2093396]

Mate, I understand what you are coming from, but please let me explain my point. From my point of view Saskia and Philippa's relationship is far more complex and layered than a mindless obedience. I believe Phil cared about Saskia, at least on subconscious level. I consider the scenes when she rushed of to help Saskia after she was poisoned, or the speech she gave to Geralt praising the girl's strong and good character as examples of the fact that Phil didn't view Saskia as a worthless tool. Yes, she did used her but for the reasons explained earlier by KnightofPhoenix, which she put greater importance to. She strikes me as a person who puts her goal (no matter if it's personal or duty) above the rest, friendship and love included. Maybe this is what Saskia meant when she told Geralt Philippa is a tragic figure? Anyway, I doubt she would do the same out of malice or for lulz. Of course this doesn't justify her actions at all! All I am trying to say is that I could find concern, self-mutual respect or even a dose of emotions and a master-student type of relations in their relationship. I don't see any sexual attraction though and I don't think Philippa would use Saskia as her sex slave... not unless Geralt will magically aquire a lesbian sex tape recorded in Loc Muinne ;-)

Well after the fan-service scenes where Phillipa kept leaving her door unlocked accidentally on purpose, I wouldn't be surprised if there was a sex tape too

That might actually be part of why I have trouble seeing anything good in Phillipa. I haven't read enough of the books yet to know her from there (aside from that she also lies and manipulates Geralt in Blood of Elves). So considering that I don't know much about her before the game, I can't respect her at all after those scenes. In the first place she's willing to have sex with her student (which is unethical), she does it all the damned time and doesn't lock her door as if she wants the player to know all of her personal business, and then on top of that she gets totally duped because her lover is actually spying on her.

And I do like Saskia a lot, so combining my complete lack of respect for Phillipa with my anger over what she does to Saskia, I ended up really hating Phillipa. She seems so pathetic, constantly trying to control everyone else and squeezing so hard that everything breaks and falls out of her grip.

Hahaha good point! ;-) Although I see this quote and the whole Cynthia storyline as a pun, because in the canon Philippa and Assire used exactly the same trick to gain information from Nilfgaardian spymaster. The spy had even a similar name to Cynthia - Carthia. It could be said that Nilfgaardians learnt from the mistake.

That's actually pretty clever. I hadn't read that far in the books yet, but it does seem like something the Emperor would do based on what little I've read of him so far And it makes it even worse that Phillipa fell for it because it was her own trick in the first place but she didn't realize it until it was too late.

My accusations towards Triss are based on her selfish need to get and control Geralt for herself. She didn't tell him about his beloved one (and her best friend ffs!), neither she told him about the most important person in his world, Ciri. She did everything she could to led him into thinking she is the only one who loved him and that they should be together no matter what. I agree with you that her fault was not helping Geralt and taking active role against the Lodge's plans. What she thought she would achieve by confronting Philippa? That Eilhart will broke down, apologize for everything and congratulate Triss on her cleverness?

Yeah, I don't like Triss at all. I'm one of the people who suspects that Triss might have been willing to use the Rose of Remembrance on Geralt if Phillipa hadn't gotten to it first XD I still think Triss is telling the truth about Sile and Phillipa's plans though (and Letho confirms it, although I recognize he might not be telling the truth but I believe him anyway).

 

[KnightofPhoenix]

On the flip side, I really saw nothing in the game that showed she did care about anyone other than herself. Plus if she's so concerned about the North, why have Sile show up on the dragon and potentially kill the last of the north's rulers at Loc Muinne? If Geralt hadn't intervened, then likely there would be no one left alive to fight Nilfgaard except for Saskia who was by that point a mindless puppet controlled by Phillipa (Demavend and Foltest were already dead, Henselt was either dead or present at the dragon attack, Radovid was there too, and so was Natalis who was probably the only one who could lead Temeria without causing civil war). That's why I think Phillipa is more concerned with her own personal power than with any of the supposed ideals she tells everyone else she's working towards. Things start going badly for her and suddenly she's ready to destroy everything just to get herself back on top.

Absence of evidence =/= evidence of absence, and her comments to Geralt and Iorveth does imply a genuine caring for the North.

As for Loc Muinne. It's a very good argument you bring forth and it's one of the few tings in TW2's story that makes me raise an eyebrow. Why did Philippa and Sile act so unreasonably?
Now after having thought it through, I believe this act is one of desperation and impulse rather than anything calculate.

Remember what had happened to Philippa. Her eyes were gorged out and her power in Redania completely eradicated by Radovid, who was clearly being assisted by Shilard Fitz Oesterlen and assisting him in turn. In addition, the exposition of the Lodge risked the complete annihilation of the mages (even if Triss is saved, the kings can always change their minds in an instant, not to mention popular sentiment). From Philippa's perspective, the rulers of the North proved to be incompetent and now present a danger to what she deems to be the North's most important asset: mages. Remember the Battle of the Sodden Hill.

It's not reasonable or that intelligent, and I attribute to it desperation and anger. But the act does not conflict with her genuinely caring about the North. It does conflict with her usual intelligence and pragmatism for sure though, but considering the circumstances, I think it's understandable.

 

[Germanicanus]

Well after the fan-service scenes where Phillipa kept leaving her door unlocked accidentally on purpose, I wouldn't be surprised if there was a sex tape too

CDPR should have made a cutscene showing Sheala coming to speak with Philippa or something and interrupting them both during, hmm, NSFW situation ;-)

That might actually be part of why I have trouble seeing anything good in Phillipa. I haven't read enough of the books yet to know her from there (aside from that she also lies and manipulates Geralt in Blood of Elves). So considering that I don't know much about her before the game, I can't respect her at all after those scenes.

Frankly speaking, I am trying separate Philippa from the books and the one from the games, as I see many inaccuracies in how they act to the point I would have to call out OOC. I don't want to spoil you anything, but I can say she has redeeming qualities and even moments, for instance she helps and saves somebody instead of getting what she wants and, frankly, getting the upper hand over her antagonists - something the game version would rather not done. Besides, she has some "human" and cute scenes: she winks and claps when Geralt kisses Yennefer, or when she playfully flirts with him during the Thanned ball. Compared to her, the W2!Philippa seems like a cold-blooded, stiff psychopath.

In the first place she's willing to have sex with her student (which is unethical), she does it all the damned time and doesn't lock her door as if she wants the player to know all of her personal business, and then on top of that she gets totally duped because her lover is actually spying on her.

Like Sheala once said, "such a wise woman, yet she cannot tame her hormones". I cannot explain this one without calling it a fanservice ;-) Btw, you forgot to accuse her of totally neglecting her other student, Felicia! Poor woman is forced to spend entire days on selling mixtures and taking care of Vergen's residents hair, when Cynthia gets free pass and even lives in the same apartment (while Felicia probably sleeps on the bench). Injustice, a true injustice! Anyway, her leaving door open could be her poor attempt to lure Geralt into some wicked sexual acts. What could have been!

And I do like Saskia a lot, so combining my complete lack of respect for Phillipa with my anger over what she does to Saskia, I ended up really hating Phillipa. She seems so pathetic, constantly trying to control everyone else and squeezing so hard that everything breaks and falls out of her grip.

Waiting for somebody to come up with some clever explanation to give her Freudian excuses.
Do we have any psychiatrist here who deals with control issues?

That's actually pretty clever. I hadn't read that far in the books yet, but it does seem like something the Emperor would do based on what little I've read of him so far

Yeah, Nilfgaard tricked everyone, Radovid and Geralt included. Heck, even Letho was cheated in the end.

Yeah, I don't like Triss at all. I'm one of the people who suspects that Triss might have been willing to use the Rose of Remembrance on Geralt if Phillipa hadn't gotten to it first XD I still think Triss is telling the truth about Sile and Phillipa's plans though (and Letho confirms it, although I recognize he might not be telling the truth but I believe him anyway).

Actually, Triss going all Philippa on Geralt would make her more interesting to me; right now she's either annoying (especially when she assassinates me with her fireballs) or dull. I wish she had more do do throughout the game - I dislike her being just a damsel in distress. I am sure she is telling the truth but it's too late, anyway - the same is with her sudden need to rescue her best friends after 2 (?) years spent with Geralt. Hopefully, W3 will resolve this issue and give us confrontation between both sorceresses, though - I AM CALLING IT NOW! - I believe Yennefer will get brainwashed by the emperor and end up as the boss.

 

[chlong7]

My accusations towards Triss are based on her selfish need to get and control Geralt for herself. She didn't tell him about his beloved one (and her best friend ffs!), neither she told him about the most important person in his world, Ciri. She did everything she could to led him into thinking she is the only one who loved him and that they should be together no matter what. I agree with you that her fault was not helping Geralt and taking active role against the Lodge's plans. What she thought she would achieve by confronting Philippa? That Eilhart will broke down, apologize for everything and congratulate Triss on her cleverness?

To be fair, no one else has bothered to explain Geralt's past with Yennefer and Ciri, either. I get the distinct impression that CDPR is trying to leave as many story options open as possible even if it leads to a bit of ooc-ness or other questionable logic. You would think that Dandelion and his silly ballads would have told Geralt considerably more than he ever wanted to know by this time, but that doesn't seem to have happened.

Triss has always had a conflicted relationship with the Lodge--she's more of a conscientious objector than a traitor. She objects to murder, not power politics or the Lodge in general. It's like she's too nice at base to be as realistic about power as she needs to be. She understands it intellectually, but she isn't really ruthless enough to be in the game, so others who are better at it can and do manipulate her. She seemed to be growing out of this problem at the end of the saga and in the first game, but apparently not for TW2. Oh well.

EDIT: I'll second your call about Yennefer. I think that's exactly where we're headed.

 

[username_2093396]

Absence of evidence =/= evidence of absence, and her comments to Geralt and Iorveth does imply a genuine caring for the North.

The burden of proof is always on the one making a claim that something does exist I saw her comments as nothing more than an attempt to further manipulate everybody else. I would have to see significant evidence that she actually cared about anybody else before I'd be convinced that she wasn't just in it for herself, and that evidence doesn't exist in the game (although I supposed the Enhanced Edition might change my mind depending on what new stuff got added).

As for Loc Muinne. It's a very good argument you bring forth and it's one of the few tings in TW2's story that makes me raise an eyebrow. Why did Philippa and Sile act so unreasonably?
Now after having thought it through, I believe this act is one of desperation and impulse rather than anything calculate.

Remember what had happened to Philippa. Her eyes were gorged out and her power in Redania completely eradicated by Radovid, who was clearly being assisted by Shilard Fitz Oesterlen and assisting him in turn. In addition, the exposition of the Lodge risked the complete annihilation of the mages (even if Triss is saved, the kings can always change their minds in an instant, not to mention popular sentiment). From Philippa's perspective, the rulers of the North proved to be incompetent and now present a danger to what she deems to be the North's most important asset: mages. Remember the Battle of the Sodden Hill.

It's not reasonable or that intelligent, and I attribute to it desperation and anger. But the act does not conflict with her genuinely caring about the North. It does conflict with her usual intelligence and pragmatism for sure though, but considering the circumstances, I think it's understandable.

I noticed Shilard with Foltest at first, and then with Henselt. I didn't really see him with Radovid though. I think Radovid did that all on his own because he got tired of how Phillipa tried to manipulate him all the time.

In any case, yes Phillipa was desperate. That's why I think her actions at Loc Muinne reveal her true colors. She didn't have time to plan out an elaborate lie or try to trick everyone into thinking she was working for the greater good. She simply dropped all pretense and decided that everyone else had to die so that she could take over herself, consequences be damned.

Frankly speaking, I am trying separate Philippa from the books and the one from the games, as I see many inaccuracies in how they act to the point I would have to call out OOC. I don't want to spoil you anything, but I can say she has redeeming qualities and even moments, for instance she helps and saves somebody instead of getting what she wants and, frankly, getting the upper hand over her antagonists - something the game version would rather not done. Besides, she has some "human" and cute scenes: she winks and claps when Geralt kisses Yennefer, or when she playfully flirts with him during the Thanned ball. Compared to her, the W2!Philippa seems like a cold-blooded, stiff psychopath.

Ah, I get where you're coming from now I'm only talking about Phillipa from TW2 because I haven't read that far in the books yet.

Yeah, Nilfgaard tricked everyone, Radovid and Geralt included. Heck, even Letho was cheated in the end.

I'm not convinced that Letho was cheated. The Emperor said he would reopen Letho's Witcher school and he might yet do that (especially considering how useful Letho was, the Emperor probably wants more where that came from XD).

Actually, Triss going all Philippa on Geralt would make her more interesting to me, right now she's either annoying (especially when she assassinates me with her fireballs), or dull. I wish she had more do do during the game - I dislike her being damsel in distress. I am sure she is telling the truth but it's too late, anyway - the same is with her sudden need to rescue her best friends after 2 (?) years spent with Geralt. Hopefully, W3 will resolve this issue and give us confrontation between both sorceresses, though - I AM CALLING IT NOW! - I believe Yennefer will get brainwashed by the emperor and end up as the boss.

I think Triss probably thought Yennefer was dead and didn't see any point reminding Geralt of her death. But I still resent Triss for taking advantage of Geralt's amnesia and implying that she was his true love all along.

As for where TW3 is going, I don't think Yennefer will be a boss. I just think that she lost her memory and went back to being a bitch again, and I'm not sure if Geralt will still be patient enough to put up with it.

 

[chlong7]

The burden of proof is always on the one making a claim that something does exist I saw her comments as nothing more than an attempt to further manipulate everybody else.

Philippa always tries to manipulate others, so yes, that's certainly what she was doing at that moment, but even that doesn't mean she was outright lying about her views. She's just twisting the truth into a sweeter narrative. It's pretty well established by the books/in the lore that she absolutely hates Nilfgaard. That's not the same thing as caring for the North, especially the political status quo, but the Empire muzzles magic as much as possible, and Philippa cannot stand that. She's also already a known enemy, so she has every reason to want Nilfgaard to stay south of the Yaruga.

 

[username_2093396]

Philippa always tries to manipulate others, so yes, that's certainly what she was doing at that moment, but even that doesn't mean she was outright lying about her views. She's just twisting the truth into a sweeter narrative. It's pretty well established by the books/in the lore that she absolutely hates Nilfgaard. That's not the same thing as caring for the North, especially the political status quo, but the Empire muzzles magic as much as possible, and Philippa cannot stand that. She's also already a known enemy, so she has every reason to want Nilfgaard to stay south of the Yaruga.

Her attitude toward the North kind of seemed like, "If I can't have it then nobody can." Her actions were focused on putting herself in charge as much as possible, and then at the end she was willing to try to kill nearly all of the Northern leaders just to get herself out of the trouble she got herself into. She may hate Nilfgaard, but I still think her actions were meant to gain power for herself rather than trying to do what was best for the North.

 

[Germanicanus]

To be fair, no one else has bothered to explain Geralt's past with Yennefer and Ciri, either. I get the distinct impression that CDPR is trying to leave as many story options open as possible even if it leads to a bit of ooc-ness or other questionable logic. You would think that Dandelion and his silly ballads would have told Geralt considerably more than he ever wanted to know by this time, but that doesn't seem to have happened.

Ditto. I consider it as a fault on writers behalf, as I believe they are capable of coming up with less contrived explanation, but I guess it was needed to advance the plot and overcome the difficulty of Yennefer and Ciri not appearing in the first two games.

Triss has always had a conflicted relationship with the Lodge--she's more of a conscientious objector than a traitor. She objects to murder, not power politics or the Lodge in general. It's like she's too nice at base to be as realistic about power as she needs to be. She understands it intellectually, but she isn't really ruthless enough to be in the game, so others who are better at it can and do manipulate her. She seemed to be growing out of this problem at the end of the saga and in the first game, but apparently not for TW2. Oh well.

This is true as well. Her speech in the first book illustrates her quite emotional and idealistic motivations to take an active part in shaping the world for better. No surprise for me she joined the Lodge, especially after the role she played in the putsch. I see her relations with The Lodge as mirroring her relationship/affair with Philippa - at first she is all in awe and eager to do everything what is necessary, then she becomes more and more skeptic to the point of getting depressed - but not before feeling scared, hopeless and pressured. Overcoming her fear with the 'hill' issues definitely opened her eyes to a lot of things, being involved in politics and intrigues as well. But it's not like she didn't have any prior experiences - she was in fact a member of Foltest's small council. She is naive and not ruthless, but she is not a personification of innocence.

EDIT: I'll second your call about Yennefer. I think that's exactly where we're headed.

It's going to be dramatic for sure. I am just hoping CDPR will spare us from tragic choices seen too many times in Bioware games, like being forced to choose either the life of your Love Interest or Companions, fate of the world, or your own well-being.

It's pretty well established by the books/in the lore that she absolutely hates Nilfgaard. That's not the same thing as caring for the North, especially the political status quo, but the Empire muzzles magic as much as possible, and Philippa cannot stand that. She's also already a known enemy, so she has every reason to want Nilfgaard to stay south of the Yaruga.

I always get impression that she sees herself as a kind of servant of magic - she often mentions how magic is significant above all else, and that mages should always place magic above their loyalty towards kings. This is a reason why she established the Lodge after all. To me, she considers the status quo as the best solution possible to the problem of Nilfgaard expansion, especially relying on Kovir for being the second superpower, not Redania or Temeria.

I'm not convinced that Letho was cheated. The Emperor said he would reopen Letho's Witcher school and he might yet do that (especially considering how useful Letho was, the Emperor probably wants more where that came from XD).

Even if he will, witchers will be no more than servants - specially trained assassins or special forces - for Emhyr. They won't have as much freedom and autonomy as Kaer Morhen has. I highly doubt Letho would be spared - he confessed to be a kinslayer. I cannot imagine Emhyr tolerating a person who slays monarchs even if it was a part of his plan. Letho or the likes of him could be still used by his enemies within the state.

I think Triss probably thought Yennefer was dead and didn't see any point reminding Geralt of her death. But I still resent Triss for taking advantage of Geralt's amnesia and implying that she was his true love all along.

If that was true, Triss would have nothing to worry about - the competition bites the dust, hence there is no one to steal Geralt from her. It would be 'just' fair and sincere.

 

[Oloroar]

If that was true, Triss would have nothing to worry about - the competition bites the dust, hence there is no one to steal Geralt from her. It would be 'just' fair and sincere.

Did you ever consider that no one said anything because it would have been cruel to do so? Would you tell your best friend, who just recovered from a 5 year coma and has amnesia, that he had a "wife" and "child" that are now presumed dead? Why would you? What good could it possibly do Geralt to inform him of such a thing?

I believe that is why Triss (and everyone else!) did not tell him. In TW2, at the end of the prologue, he asks her "to tell me everything about Yennefer, even the parts that hurt"- and she does. Before you jump and say "she lied", remember that Geralt had flash backs and regained his memories of Yennefer through out the game, and no inconsistencies were pointed out between what Triss said and what he remembered. In addition, he discusses Yennefer with Dandelion in vergen, and Letho at the end, and again, no inconsistencies were pointed out between what they said and what she said.

I dont believe Triss was afraid of telling him the truth about Yennefer, because she thought that Yennefer was dead, like everyone else. She was simply waiting for Geralt to regain some of his memories and indicate that he was ready to talk about it first.

Just make take on it. Also, great discussion! .

Note: This is coming from someone who played the games only.

 

[KnightofPhoenix]

The burden of proof is always on the one making a claim that something does exist

You claim that her apathy towards everything exists. Two can play at this game.

I noticed Shilard with Foltest at first, and then with Henselt. I didn't really see him with Radovid though. I think Radovid did that all on his own because he got tired of how Phillipa tried to manipulate him all the time.

In any case, yes Phillipa was desperate. That's why I think her actions at Loc Muinne reveal her true colors. She didn't have time to plan out an elaborate lie or try to trick everyone into thinking she was working for the greater good. She simply dropped all pretense and decided that everyone else had to die so that she could take over herself, consequences be damned.

Shilard was there when Radovid gorged out her eyes. Yes he did it for his own reasons, but she saw both collaborating.

Desperation does not necessarily reveal true colors. If anything, acts of desperation are usually uncharacteristic of individuals.

Not everyone had to die. In her mind, she was protecting mages from those who would destroy them, and the North's chances of defeating Nilfgaard along with them.

 

[username_2093396]

You claim that her apathy towards everything exists. Two can play at this game.

If you want to get technical, I claim that she cares about herself above everyone else which I do think the game provides evidence for. Purely based upon what is in the game, that's the impression I got of her.

Shilard was there when Radovid gorged out her eyes. Yes he did it for his own reasons, but she saw both collaborating.

Okay, I forgot Shilard was there.

Desperation does not necessarily reveal true colors. If anything, acts of desperation are usually uncharacteristic of individuals.

I have the opposite view, that acts of desperation reveal what a person's core beliefs are when they aren't busy posturing for everyone else. Like with Aryan, he really was willing to die rather than let his castle fall into enemy hands so I know that wasn't just an act to look good in front of his men (and I know he does survive the explosion, but at the time he surely expected to die but he did it anyway).

So when Phillipa is willing to throw away everything that she claimed to be working for in order to save herself, I think that's the true Phillipa.

Not everyone had to die. In her mind, she was protecting mages from those who would destroy them, and the North's chances of defeating Nilfgaard along with them.

That makes even less sense. Everyone at Loc Muinne knew that Phillipa and Sile were responsible for the dragon attack, so if Phillipa had intentionally let people survive then those people would have solid proof that the sorceresses were blood-thirsty murderers who need to be executed.

Once Phillipa pulled the dragon card, everyone who saw Sile with the dragon had to die in order for Phillipa's plans to work. That included most of the North's remaining rulers who had the military strength necessary to fight Nilfgaard. Even if Phillipa believes that mages are essential for defeating Nilfgaard, does she really think that mages alone will be able to compensate for the sheer chaos and lack of unity caused by the northern countries not having rulers or a legitimate chain of command?

 

[KnightofPhoenix]

If you want to get technical, I claim that she cares about herself above everyone else which I do think the game provides evidence for. Purely based upon what is in the game, that's the impression I got of her.

An impression I do not share and an argument I am unconvinced of.

That makes even less sense. Everyone at Loc Muinne knew that Phillipa and Sile were responsible for the dragon attack, so if Phillipa had intentionally let people survive then those people would have solid proof that the sorceresses were blood-thirsty murderers who need to be executed.

Once Phillipa pulled the dragon card, everyone who saw Sile with the dragon had to die in order for Phillipa's plans to work. That included most of the North's remaining rulers who had the military strength necessary to fight Nilfgaard. Even if Phillipa believes that mages are essential for defeating Nilfgaard, does she really think that mages alone will be able to compensate for the sheer chaos and lack of unity caused by the northern countries not having rulers or a legitimate chain of command?

By "not everyone had to die", I am only talking about the mages.

I never claimed what she did was smart or even reasonable, I just said that in my previous post. What I argued however is that this act does not stem from a total apathy towards everything but herself and that this act could still fall in line with her caring about the North and believing, blindly, that she and the mages are the North's only hope.

 

[username_2093396]

An impression I do not share and an argument I am unconvinced of.

With a lot of the other characters in the game, they clearly cared about each other. Roche definitely cared about the Blue Stripes, Ves showed clear concern and anguish for Morril, Aryan was worried about his mother, etc. However there isn't any similar scene for Phillipa to show she genuinely cares about anyone else. Instead she's consistently portrayed as a manipulative liar who will do anything and sacrifice anyone in order to achieve her goals.

By "not everyone had to die", I am only talking about the mages.

I never claimed what she did was smart or even reasonable, I just said that in my previous post. What I argued however is that this act does not stem from a total apathy towards everything but herself and that this act could still fall in line with her caring about the North and believing, blindly, that she and the mages are the North's only hope.

She believes that she's the only one fit to rule, and she'd rather destroy the entire North's leadership than let them rule without her. She's egotistical to the extreme and places herself far above everyone else.

 

[Vermeer]

They are not different than any other group of people sharing common interests. Let's not demonize them because they are increasing the sphere of their influence and improving their status. In this case we should also condemn dwarves, elves, Nilfgaardians, Temerians, knights, witchers for doing exactly the same!

Mmm... I see your point, but... I don't think they are all exactly the same. For instance, dwarves want to stop being discriminated against, witchers and elves want to merely survive (cultural and literally). I'd say sorcerers put themselves a step ahead of that. They not only want to be left alone, they want to take an active role at ruling over all people! And moreso, they rule behind other figures, thus always in the shadows, never actually exposed to public opinion, nor taking responsibility for their decisions. Ugh. I can't help but wonder: what would the sorcerers do if Nilfgaard favored them?

Don't get me wrong; I love sorcerers. I loved reading about them in the books and enjoyed immensely all their appearances, interactions.... I love the lore they provide to the Witcher world. They are extremely cool and always interesting. I just can't bring myself into being sympathetic towards their political goals. I don't desire for them to succeed as I do for, say, Saskia's rebellion.

As for Philippa, I'm almost sure she's human and has some sort of feelings deep inside . Nah, she's pretty likable in the novels. But, despite her hypothetical caring about the North/common people/whatever, I am convinced the primal purpose of her actions in the game is to gain power for the Lodge (and therefore, herself).

Oh, and I totally agree with you about Triss. Her complete silence towards Yen and Ciri already bothered me to no end in TW1. I mean, girl, don't you think that's information Geralt deserve to know? Come on!

 

[Germanicanus]

Did you ever consider that no one said anything because it would have been cruel to do so? Would you tell your best friend, who just recovered from a 5 year coma and has amnesia, that he had a "wife" and "child" that are now presumed dead? Why would you? What good could it possibly do Geralt to inform him of such a thing?

Honestly? I would prefer to hear the truth about the most important parts of my life from my closest ones rather than by being informed by some random bloke. You see, I don't believe in blissful ignorance and what's more, I don't believe in secrets being never revealed. Sooner or later someone is going to spill the beans - better if it's a person I can trust and rely on providing me necessary emotional support. I think Geralt would agree with me on that. Artistic licence case aside, I am surprised no one 'spoiled' Geralt on his relationship with Yennefer - they were a fairly popular couple among commonfolks thanks to Dandelion's songs.

Mmm... I see your point, but... I don't think they are all exactly the same. For instance, dwarves want to stop being discriminated against, witchers and elves want to merely survive (cultural and literally). I'd say sorcerers put themselves a step ahead of that. They not only want to be left alone, they want to take an active role at ruling over all people! And moreso, they rule behind other figures, thus always in the shadows, never actually exposed to public opinion, nor taking responsibility for their decisions. Ugh. I can't help but wonder: what would the sorcerers do if Nilfgaard favored them?

It's not like they can do whatever they want - Brotherhood provides them with a strict code and there are people like Tissaia who serves as moral authority. Actually, the sorcerers who worked with kings were those who enjoyed the biggest privileges and freedom thanks to their sovereigns' gratitude. I doubt, let's say, Philippa would be that ambitious if she was still a Tissaia's apprentice or headmistress of magic school like Margarita.

Don't get me wrong; I love sorcerers. I loved reading about them in the books and enjoyed immensely all their appearances, interactions.... I love the lore they provide to the Witcher world. They are extremely cool and always interesting. I just can't bring myself into being sympathetic towards their political goals. I don't desire for them to succeed as I do for, say, Saskia's rebellion.

That is perfectly understandable! We all have our favorites after all. Glad you understand and appreciate the concept of them even though you don't feel any emotional connection to them.

 

[KnightofPhoenix]

With a lot of the other characters in the game, they clearly cared about each other. Roche definitely cared about the Blue Stripes, Ves showed clear concern and anguish for Morril, Aryan was worried about his mother, etc. However there isn't any similar scene for Phillipa to show she genuinely cares about anyone else. Instead she's consistently portrayed as a manipulative liar who will do anything and sacrifice anyone in order to achieve her goals.

Her goal being, other than her own power, to safeguard the North and mages from Nilfgaard.
I never argued that she cared about specific individuals.

She believes that she's the only one fit to rule, and she'd rather destroy the entire North's leadership than let them rule without her. She's egotistical to the extreme and places herself far above everyone else.

Yes, because in her view she is best fit to rule and she is the only one who can save the North.
I never argued it was reasonable, logical or intelligent, that was never the point. Nor did I argue that she is altruistic or that she is humble. The point was, all that you are saying does not at all mean that she necessarily cares about nothing except herself.