I'm a monster hunter, and I'm ok. I work all night, and meditate all day...

[crimzonwarrior]

I'm a monster hunter, and I'm ok. I work all night, and meditate all day...

One particular thing I never understood about Geralt is why he hunts monsters. He seems to be highly sympathetic for supernatural creatures, and can even be considered one himself. Not to mention he is treated like crap by the local human population 90% of the time. Wouldn't it make more sense for him to be a sellsword make a thousand times more money than he is now, and retire to live the good life similar to Letho.

 

[StaGiors]

Because that's what he was trained to do. He hunts monsters that are dangerous to humans. He kills only the monsters that are indeed a danger, and leaves the other ones be.

Now if he was a sellsword, he would have to take contracts that he would not have control or freedom of choice over.

Besides, Geralt only kills humans when he absolutely has to. Even if these humans are monsters.

He'd certainly be more rich as a mercenary, and could even retire and live the "good" life. But why would Geralt care for a good life? He's a witcher.

 

[Sephira]

It is his work, he was trained to do this since he was a child. Geralt has also a personal code: because he has scruples (something he'll realize later on during the saga) because it is a very conscientious person, then he kills only beasts without intellect, like Drowners, ghouls etc ... If you read the books you'll see that he often restrained himself from killing certain "monsters", like dragons. Dandelion complained about it too, in their World there are more monsters than witchers, but at the same time not much work.

Geralt would love to go on retirement sometimes as he is too old for this.

 

[Foxtrot1994]

Besides, Geralt only kills humans when he absolutely has to. Even if these humans are monsters.

Well, that's debatable. He wouldn't have many problems killing someone who is a serious threat for his loved ones, like Ciri, or Yennefer.

 

[Sephira]

Well, that's debatable. He wouldn't have many problems killing someone who is a serious threat for his loved ones, like Ciri, or Yennefer.

Well, Geralt didn't kill (even if he wanted to)

Spoiler

Cahir because the guy gave him a valid reason

 

[Foxtrot1994]

Well, Geralt didn't kill (even if he wanted to)

Spoiler

Cahir because the guy gave him a valid reason

Yeah, but Geralt wasn't alone that time, if I remember well. His friends had a major impact on his decision. He had all the intentions to kill the guy. I wonder what he would have done if he had been alone... I don't think he would have been that merciful...

 

[Sephira]

Yeah, but Geralt wasn't alone that time, if I remember well. His friends had a major impact on his decision. He had all the intentions to kill the guy. I wonder what he would have done if he had been alone... I don't think he would have been that merciful...

He was alone, Ciri had already headed to the Tower of Gulls

 

[Foxtrot1994]

He was alone, Ciri had already headed to the Tower of Gulls

I remember there was Dandelion with him. Maybe Milva too. Anyway, I remain in my opinion. It's not he never killed humans before. Actually, the list isn't even that short. Remember Blaviken? So, @StaGiors statement is wrong: with the right reasons, killing humans is an option.

 

[StaGiors]

Besides, Geralt only kills humans when he absolutely has to. Even if these humans are monsters.

That means he does kill humans. :O

Spoiler

Ha I quoted myself.

 

[Sephira]

I remember there was Dandelion with him. Maybe Milva too. Anyway, I remain in my opinion. It's not he never killed humans before. Actually, the list isn't even that short. Remember Blaviken? So, @StaGiors statement is wrong: with the right reasons, killing humans is an option.

He met him for the first time in Time of Contempt, I'm talking about that book, not Baptism of Fire Blaviken is an entire different matter, actually Geralt tried his best to avoid the fight, and sure he didn't want to kill Renfri, and everything went wrong. Moreover it all happened in front of all the village people.
Since I'm too lazy now to quote the entire part from Time of Contempt I took a pic, (sorry for the italian guys)

Spoiler

View attachment 5084

 

[Foxtrot1994]

Blaviken is an entire different matter

It's not. I know it was a hard decision, but as I said before, with the right reason (saving an entire village), killing men can be done. And so it happened. Cold-blooded too, as he was trained to do. Also, he was ready to duel Istredd to death, and had no problems killing some thugs and an assassin once, I think after he left Brokilon when Ciri was just a child. Also, no problems in brutally mutilating and killing the professional assassins who assaulted him in Oxenfurt (I know it's self-defense, but still... his attacks were pretty brutal btw), and... remember that scene of the first short stories book, in that inn? He cruelly kills a guy for no reason (I still can't get why he did it, actually... but he did). It's all about reasons. Sure, he almost never considers killing the first choice, but it's also true that he never excludes the possibilty at all.

 

[Sephira]

It's not. I know it was a hard decision, but as I said before, with the right reason (saving an entire village), killing men can be done. And so it happened. Cold-blooded too, as he was trained to do. Also, he was ready to duel Istredd to death, and had no problems killing some thugs and an assassin once, I think after he left Brokilon when Ciri was just a child. Also, no problems in brutally mutilating and killing the professional assassins who assaulted him in Oxenfurt (I know it's self-defense, but still... his attacks were pretty brutal btw). It's all about reasons. Sure, he almost never considers killing the first choice, but it's also true that he never excludes the possibilty at all.

Yeah I didn't say he didn't kill humans or excludes it but as you have just said he does it pretty much for self-defense, even when he is really angry. Renfri gang was going to kill him when he went to stop what they were doing, bandits outside Brokilon had just killed merchants to prompt a fight between kings and dryads, and they were going to kill Geralt and take Ciri.
Geralt fight style is brutal and... let's say "choreographic" when he needs it. The pic I posted shows how he killed those elves and spared the knight.

Geralt is not a saint, no one is, but instead other people, he knows he isn't. But if he has valid reasons he can avoid killing, even when he wants to do it. So we agree on that.

 

[GuyNwah]

Possibly more to the OP's point, there's the question of Geralt's willingness to kill humans for coin, as a mercenary, bodyguard, assassin, or bounty hunter. Killing in self-defense or defense of another, "justifiable homicide", doesn't raise the same moral issues.

Sure, it would be a lucrative trade. A swordsman as skilled as Geralt could name his price as a condottiere. But he has the training he was brought up with and the code he has set for himself. And he is well aware of the damage he would do to what's left of his humanity, were he to keep "playing soldier boy". His fear of what he might become was well stated by Dashiell Hammett's Continental Op in The Dain Curse,

"A monster. A nice one, an especially nice one to have around when you're in trouble, but a monster just the same, without any human foolishness like love in him, and - What's the matter? Have I said something I shouldn't?"

 

[Foxtrot1994]

Yeah I didn't say he didn't kill humans or excludes it but as you have just said he does it pretty much for self-defense, even when he is really angry. Renfri gang was going to kill him when he went to stop what they were doing, bandits outside Brokilon had just killed merchants to prompt a fight between kings and dryads, and they were going to kill Geralt and take Ciri.
Geralt fight style is brutal and... let's say "choreographic" when he needs it. The pic I posted shows how he killed those elves.

Geralt is not a saint, no one is, but instead other people, he knows he isn't. But if he has valid reasons he can avoid killing, even when he wants to do it. So we agree on that.

Yep. But at times, he can kill just because... well... he's not in a good mood. At times he can kill not for self-defense. I have to remind you again the scene in the first book (in the story with Foltest and the striga) where he's in the inn, and kills a guy who was simply insulting him. He killed him just for insults. That says it long about how "finger-trigger" Geralt can be.

 

[StaGiors]

Yep. But at times, he can kill just because... well... he's not in a good mood. At times he can kill not for self-defense. I have to remind you again the scene in the first book (in the story with Foltest and the striga) where he's in the inn, and kills a guy who was simply insulting him. He killed him just for insults. That says it long about how "finger-trigger" Geralt can be.

That was once. And it was one of the first stories Sapkowski wrote about Geralt. He had not had enough time to fully "picture" the character in his head. At least that's what I think.

 

[domidawi]

OK since it seems like everyone here forgot about this. Basically: Geralt as mercenary (after some time ofc) = Leo Bonhart. Becasue there is no way there would be no effect on him after doing such things.

 

[Foxtrot1994]

That was once. And it was one of the first stories Sapkowski wrote about Geralt. He had not had enough time to fully "picture" the character in his head. At least that's what I think.

Yeah, maybe. But I have also to mention the mortal duel he accepted to do against Istredd. That was another case of him wanting to end someone's life without a good reason. A woman is not a good reason to kill somebody, if you ask me. He only stopped because he realized that Istredd was making a desperate attempt of suicide by challenging Geralt in a duel. Otherwise, he was ready to end the mage's life. Aaand also with pleasure, it seemed.

 

[Sephira]

Possibly more to the OP's point, there's the question of Geralt's willingness to kill humans for coin, as a mercenary, bodyguard, assassin, or bounty hunter. Killing in self-defense or defense of another, "justifiable homicide", doesn't raise the same moral issues.

Sure, it would be a lucrative trade. A swordsman as skilled as Geralt could name his price as a condottiere. But he has the training he was brought up with and the code he has set for himself. And he is well aware of the damage he would do to what's left of his humanity, were he to keep "playing soldier boy". His fear of what he might become was well stated by Dashiell Hammett's Continental Op in The Dain Curse,

"A monster. A nice one, an especially nice one to have around when you're in trouble, but a monster just the same, without any human foolishness like love in him, and - What's the matter? Have I said something I shouldn't?"

Yeah. Also this reminds me when Geralt talked about it in Blood of Elves.

I'm not suited to be a soldier or a hero. And the terrible fear of pain, mutilation or Death is not the only reason. You can not force a soldier to stop being afraid, yet you can provide a motivation to help him overcome it. And I do not have a similar motivation. I can't have it. I am a witcher. A mutant created artificially. I kill monsters. For money. I defend the children when the parents pay me. If the parents are paying me are Nilfgaardians, I will defend the Nilfgaardians children. And, even if the world will be reduced to ruin, which seems unlikely to me, I'll kill monsters on the ruins of the world until one of them will not kill me. This is my destiny, my motivation, my life and my relationship towards the world. I did not choose me. The others have done it for me.

Yep. But at times, he can kill just because... well... he's not in a good mood. At times he can kill not for self-defense. I have to remind you again the scene in the first book (in the story with Foltest and the striga) where he's in the inn, and kills a guy who was simply insulting him. He killed him just for insults. That says it long about how "finger-trigger" Geralt can be.

This is one of the "bad moments", yeah, one of his flaws, I agree, but at the end he did it for self-defense even if he went a bit too far, and then he did it to gain royal attentions and indeed he was brought to Velerad, and he talked about the striga contract. And what @StaGiors said.

OK since it seems like everyone here forgot about this. Basically: Geralt as mercenary (after some time ofc) = Leo Bonhart. Becasue there is no way there would be no effect on him after doing such things.

Bonhart has no morality. Geralt is "monster mercenary" but he knows what he is doing. Our old Leo goes always a bit too far.

Yeah, maybe. But I have also to mention the mortal duel he accepted to do against Istredd. That was another case of him wanting to end someone's life without a good reason. A woman is not a good reason to kill somebody, if you ask me. He only stopped because he realized that Istredd was making a desperate attempt of suicide by challenging Geralt in a duel. Otherwise, he was ready to end the mage's life. Aaand also with pleasure, it seemed.

Oh that was at the beginning, but when he went really at the meet with Istreed to fight him he didn't want to face him, both the witcher and the sorcerer felt idiots, but while Istredd wanted to keep his promise, Geralt went back to the inn, where the black kestrel with the letter was waiting for him. He stopped because he felt stupid, he realized it.

 

[Foxtrot1994]

@Synvael he killed to gain royal attention. Exactly. I expect that kind of behavior from well other people. Not Geralt. Just sayin'. And however, he "went a bit too far"? What? LOL he MURDERED the guy! Poor bastard, he was just insulting!
And he dropped the duel with Istredd because he realized the mage wanted to commit suicide, not because he felt stupid. Even feeling stupid, he would have engaged that fight if Istredd hadn't given Geralt a glimpse he actually wanted to be killed...

 

[Sephira]

@Synvael he killed to gain royal attention. Exactly. I expect that kind of behavior from well other people. Not Geralt. Just sayin'. And however, he "went a bit too far"? What? LOL he KILLED the guy! Poor bastard, he was just insulting!
And he dropped the duel with Istredd because he realized the mage wanted to commit suicide, not because he felt stupid. Even feeling stupid, he would have engaged that fight if Istredd hadn't given Geralt a glimpse he actually wanted to be killed...

That and the moment he went berkerk in the 6th book, (with his reasons) I can't recall other moments. I said he went a bit too far, because he was also self-defense lol and also the character was not full built yet.
Are we talking about these trifles?

No, he wouldn't have. Istredd would. Geralt wanted to understand only. They made a deal to meet at dawn, yet Geralt is the first one doubting that decision, resigned.

- The magician turned pale, his lips trembling with nervousness. "En garde, I tell you! There is no time for questions, the time of questions has passed! Now is the time of the action!"
"I want to know. I want to know why the sword. I want to know where is that kestrel and why is it with you. I have the right to know. I have a right to know the truth, Istredd."
"The truth? Yeah, maybe you're right. Our rights are equal. The kestrel, you say? He flew by me at dawn, wet with rain. It brought a letter. Very short, I know it by heart. Goodbye, Val. Forgive me. There are gifts that you can not accept me and not There is nothing with which I could repay you. It is the truth, Val. The truth is a shard of ice. Well, Geralt? Have I satisfied you? Have you exercised your right?" -

And yes, it's true that it was a suicide attempt for both, but while Geralt tried it before (it is guessed by Sapkowski at some point before the "fight") and then went to the sorcerer with no intentions of killing him, Istredd understood it lately when Geralt went away.