How many human foes can Geralt take before succumbing?

[TheMorbidAtheist]

How many human foes can Geralt take before succumbing?

Let's see. If you decide to save Triss in Loc Muine and take Vivaxardas hostage you will be fighting, how many, 10-12 Nilfgaardians? The two had crossbows, I believe. I think that was the biggest amount of human foes Geralt faced at a time, correct me if I am wrong.

So I thought it could be fun to see how many foes Geralt could take on and survive (given that everyone starts out with zero fatigue and is not disadvantaged in any way).

Given Geralt's stamina and the use of signs, mutagens and/or bombs it is still possible for him to eventually get tired, get wounded and get slayed. I am thinking that he can take no more than 15-16 human swordsmen (minus crossbowmen) before getting wounded at least. I mean, it has to be somewhat realistic insofar as Geralt's "Die hardness" goes, right?

Anyone else can think of any instances from the books or the games wherein he stood better chances at similar engagements?

 

[Aaden]

... and take Vivaxardas hostage ...

I'm not sure @new&improved_vivaxardas would approve of this (Did you just confuse Shilard and his (probably) biggest fan or was it an intended joke?). :hai:

I'm not sure how to approach this thread. There are so many variables and different circumstances involved, and no hard proof to be had. It's nearly impossible to make any good estimates. But I'd definitely say that even the 10-12 at a time are actually exaggerated if Geralt is on his own. But it largely depends on how much space he has to maneuver. And, of course, how experienced and equipped his foes are.

 

[TheMorbidAtheist]

It was a joke

But yeah, I know there are just way too many variables involved. I just know everyone has their limit. I came up with the idea for this thread by playing the Game of Thrones game, particularly from the ending of the first chapter. I don't want to spoil anything though but it would be awesome if something like that was implemented into the main story line in the W3.

 

[C0bR]

Well, the biggest number of enemies he got at once in the books in a 1vX situation was probably when he obliterated the Scoia'tael that were with Cahir at Thanedd, but we are not given the exact number (I would guess somewhere between 6-9) and he got an element of surprise there

Then there are those six mercenaries in Lesser Evil who were ready for him and tried to fight like a team. Cut them down without a problem.

There might be more thought, I don't remember everything.

 

[arkblazer]

Anyone else can think of any instances from the books or the games wherein he stood better chances at similar engagements?

Well, in the last novel geralt, along with ciri managed to slaughter a whole mercenary amy.

so at the most i think he could take out 100 soldiers.

 

[William105]

Let's see. If you decide to save Triss in Loc Muine and take Vivaxardas hostage you will be fighting, how many, 10-12 Nilfgaardians? The two had crossbows, I believe. I think that was the biggest amount of human foes Geralt faced at a time, correct me if I am wrong.

So I thought it could be fun to see how many foes Geralt could take on and survive (given that everyone starts out with zero fatigue and is not disadvantaged in any way).

Given Geralt's stamina and the use of signs, mutagens and/or bombs it is still possible for him to eventually get tired, get wounded and get slayed. I am thinking that he can take no more than 15-16 human swordsmen (minus crossbowmen) before getting wounded at least. I mean, it has to be somewhat realistic insofar as Geralt's "Die hardness" goes, right?

Anyone else can think of any instances from the books or the games wherein he stood better chances at similar engagements?

Hilarious how I didn't notice that untill aaden pointed it out. Nice one! To me they are one and the same

 

[shawn_kh]

Geralt is a Witcher, so he is stronger and faster than your average Joe who is not mutated. Geralt is also faster and stronger than most of the other Witchers, because they pushed him to the limit with his mutation and thus he has the white hair. He is also described to be very good with a sword from a tactical standpoint, so he's not just about being faster and stronger. He butchered a whole village (Blaviken), defeated a whole Scoiatel unit, he turned the course of the Battle for the Bridge on the Yaruga around, and so on. But he got killed by a pleb carrying a pitchfork. So I'd say it depends on the situation and how mentally and emotionally prepared he is at that point and time.

 

[BroccoliSouP]

I can think about battle for some bridge from books. he was not alone but he was biggest playmaker cus enemies were in number superiority. But he definetly had to kill a lot there. In games are numerous enemies not that much problem. Strong ones are bigger deal.

 

[GuyNwah]

Taking and defending a bridge against a large force, as he did at the Bridge on the Yaruga, is a little easier than taking on a large force in an open field. I figure he could hold the bridge against hundreds (IRL, see the uncertain story of the Berserker at Stamford Bridge), but he would be hard pressed against as few as ten soldiers (or a greater number of undisciplined rioters) in the open.

The peasant with the pitchfork was a different kind of situation. Geralt believed the riot had been put down and Rob was ready to leave peacefully. It was a failure of judgment, not of skill at arms.

 

[vivaxardas2015]

If you decide to save Triss in Loc Muine and take Vivaxardas hostage ...

I'm not sure @new&improved_vivaxardas would approve of this (Did you just confuse Shilard and his (probably) biggest fan or was it an intended joke?). :hai:

My avatar was probably taken a hostage and killed several millions times, in the course of world-wide TW2 playthroughts, so he probably got used to it already. Though I DO NOT APPROVE. Safety of the diplomats (even those who start massacres on a regular basis) should be guaranteed by international law and upheld by all parties involved.

Realistically, Geralt shouldn't be able to take on entire military camps stuffed with trained elite soldiers. It is similar to taking on a marine base in RL, and it happens only in cheesy action movies. Also no one in a sane mind would take a hostage and drag him INTO a military camp. What normal people would do is stash him somewhere and offer an exchange on a neutral territory. CDPR went real cheesy on this. I would prefer Geralt sneaking through the sewers, and taking hostage only if he is discovered, and needs a quick exit. The same result, but it least it would have made sense.

But in Geralt being crazily OP overlord, it does not matter how many dumb clones he had to kill. It is not like they used formations. It is funny - in Kimbolt's/Maravel's events Geralt does not accuse them because we have an imagined scene of him instantly being shot. But he drags a hostage into Nilfgaardian camp without a second thought. That makes me wonder... not in a good way. This is one of the developments that is pretty ridiculous and should have been done differently.

The bridge was a chock-point, and there were several of them there, not just Geralt. Also Geralt was defeated by a single opponent, and more than once nearly killed by a single monster. In the games he is generally OP, but it is a part of the gameplay, as long as it does not venture into "being ridiculous" territory. Also he can craft virtually unlimited number of bombs, so even a crowd of nekkers is not a problem even on Dark. Hell, in RL you will be amazed how many attackers I will be able to hold with an unlimited supply of grenades, and I am very far from being "a mutant created for swordsmanship".

 

[HeelPower]

what about the nekkers in the cave in malena's quest ?
There is an insane number of nekkers taken on at once there.
How do nekkers rank in strength in TW world ?

 

[shawn_kh]

Taking and defending a bridge against a large force, as he did at the Bridge on the Yaruga, is a little easier than taking on a large force in an open field. I figure he could hold the bridge against hundreds (IRL, see the uncertain story of the Berserker at Stamford Bridge), but he would be hard pressed against as few as ten soldiers (or a greater number of undisciplined rioters) in the open.

The peasant with the pitchfork was a different kind of situation. Geralt believed the riot had been put down and Rob was ready to leave peacefully. It was a failure of judgment, not of skill at arms.

A regular person can't hold a bridge against an army while waves of enemies after waves of enemies attack, they would tire out and get killed, or get intimidated and run away.
Second point where you said Geralt had a "failure of judgement" as you put it, you are proving my point. How the fight goes depends on his mental and emotional state. He mentally failed and thought the riot was over, he emotionally failed and spared Rob, thus he made two wrong judgements, and he got killed for it. So it all depends on the situation and his mental and emotional state. Geralt is not invincible.

 

[GuyNwah]

what about the nekkers in the cave in malena's quest ?
There is an insane number of nekkers taken on at once there.
How do nekkers rank in strength in TW world ?

I don't think nekkers are significant in the books, and they're not in TW1. In TW2, even the warriors are individually very weak, but they are social and usually occur in numbers sufficient to catch Geralt from behind if he is incautious.

RL legends of nekkers sometimes make them out to be harmless or sympathetic: sad lost souls who may teach you a song in exchange for a treat.

A regular person can't hold a bridge against an army while waves of enemies after waves of enemies attack, they would tire out and get killed, or get intimidated and run away.
Second point where you said Geralt had a "failure of judgement" as you put it, you are proving my point. How the fight goes depends on his mental and emotional state. He mentally failed and thought the riot was over, he emotionally failed and spared Rob, thus he made two wrong judgements, and he got killed for it. So it all depends on the situation and his mental and emotional state. Geralt is not invincible.

He didn't fight alone at the bridge; he rallied a substantial army to fight. But I still think he could have held the bridge for some time before being forced to retire, and inflicted heavy damage in doing so, unless the enemy had a significant number of archers.

I agree with you about his death at Rivia. I was merely pointing out, as did you, that this was a failure of judgment. In so doing, I was emphasizing that it was not a failure of his skill at arms.

 

[Geralt_and_Ciri]

That depend of the quality of the enemies and if Geralt is to 100% of his strength or less (like alway), or over the top with potions, maybe Geralt can take 20 of peasant by himself, or 8 soldiers with armor, and normal training, or 4 assassins, or 1 fucking mage or master sword/assasssin, who know

 

[HeelPower]

In what way does using signs tax Geralt ? Mentally or physically ?

I imagine IGNI sign could be particularly effective in thwarting groups of enemies. you could instantly incapacitate soldiers t if you direct IGNI at their eyes.Even when wearing helmets usually the eyes are exposed in some way for them to see.Combined with Geralt's speed he could be unstoppable.

But then dealing with long range enemies could be very hard still.

 

[vivaxardas2015]

Second point where you said Geralt had a "failure of judgement" as you put it, you are proving my point. How the fight goes depends on his mental and emotional state. He mentally failed and thought the riot was over, he emotionally failed and spared Rob, thus he made two wrong judgements, and he got killed for it. So it all depends on the situation and his mental and emotional state. Geralt is not invincible.

Actually, there are two different things, as I see it. It is one thing how many dangerous opponents Geralt can overcome, and it depends on their number, tactics, and weapons used, and also on Geralt's tactics fighting them. Whether Geralt is invincible, and is able to overcome any adversary, at any time, is a completely different thing. Hobbes, Early Modern English philosopher, is absolutely right in saying that people are pretty much equal in their abilities from this perspective, the witchers included. All people need sleep, get tired, stop paying attention, and make mistakes in judgement. Whatever great warrior someone is, he can't watch his back 24/7/365, and when he is helpless, even a child or a woman can cut his throat when he sleeps, or stick a pitchfork into his chest if he does not expect it. In this respect Geralt is no different than the rest. A monk cutting a throat of a king, a perceived ally shooting crossbow, or a peasant sticking a pitchfork - these are things of the same category, and Geralt immune to such things no more than any other mortal man.

 

[deep-kind]

One.
One guy with a pitchfork.

Oh you mean ingame? well I guess it depends on what difficulty youre playing,
On normal mode he can take 4 guys no problem.

 

[shawn_kh]

Actually, there are two different things, as I see it. It is one thing how many dangerous opponents Geralt can overcome, and it depends on their number, tactics, and weapons used, and also on Geralt's tactics fighting them. Whether Geralt is invincible, and is able to overcome any adversary, at any time, is a completely different thing. Hobbes, Early Modern English philosopher, is absolutely right in saying that people are pretty much equal in their abilities from this perspective, the witchers included. All people need sleep, get tired, stop paying attention, and make mistakes in judgement. Whatever great warrior someone is, he can't watch his back 24/7/365, and when he is helpless, even a child or a woman can cut his throat when he sleeps, or stick a pitchfork into his chest if he does not expect it. In this respect Geralt is no different than the rest. A monk cutting a throat of a king, a perceived ally shooting crossbow, or a peasant sticking a pitchfork - these are things of the same category, and Geralt immune to such things no more than any other mortal man.

I completely agree with every point you make, except you left out "Luck". Luck is very important in a fight, and usually people forget about it.

 

[BroccoliSouP]

I´d like only to point out that Geralt is so fast that he can deflect arrows with his sword. So I think bigger problem than huge amount of enemies would be not enough place to move around(formation in battle) so he can´t use his insane swiftness and dexterity as advantage. Considering the books his biggest problems are bigger amount of archers and his injury. After injury of his ?right? leg he had a problem with one agile guy who was probably good swordsman too (considering he saw Geralts injury so he went for Geralts weak side). Forgive me my crappy memory of names but it was when bandits attacked druids near Toussaint.

On the other side before injury he had no problem with 4 assasins who used sofisticated tacticts and were porbably top class(it was that fight in front of a pub earlier in books) . My point is that Sapkowsky wanted to make out of Geralt best of the best but his weaknesses-emotions(and underrestimating Vilgefortz) made him loose that.

At this point in games he should be top class but not best anymore because in first game was still mentioened his weak ?right? side. He is still insanely fast and hard to kill so he could probably execute even that dumb plan with Shilard Fitz-Oesterlen. But I agree that´s not Geralts typical clever plan.

 

[goopit]

I´d like only to point out that Geralt is so fast that he can deflect arrows with his sword. So I think bigger problem than huge amount of enemies would be not enough place to move around(formation in battle) so he can´t use his insane swiftness and dexterity as advantage. Considering the books his biggest problems are bigger amount of archers and his injury. After injury of his ?right? leg he had a problem with one agile guy who was probably good swordsman too (considering he saw Geralts injury so he went for Geralts weak side). Forgive me my crappy memory of names but it was when bandits attacked druids near Toussaint.

On the other side before injury he had no problem with 4 assasins who used sofisticated tacticts and were porbably top class(it was that fight in front of a pub earlier in books) . My point is that Sapkowsky wanted to make out of Geralt best of the best but his weaknesses-emotions(and underrestimating Vilgefortz) made him loose that.

At this point in games he should be top class but not best anymore because in first game was still mentioened his weak ?right? side. He is still insanely fast and hard to kill so he could probably execute even that dumb plan with Shilard Fitz-Oesterlen. But I agree that´s not Geralts typical clever plan.

where did Geralt get that injury??