Hehe, of course! Well, after having played the game again - twice, once for each path - I'm not sure what I will be considering my "neutral canon"-game in the future. I mean, I think I still feel Roche better represents this path, but at the same time, Iorveth's is much more enjoyable. I think it's possible to justify either path as "neutral" if one wants, and this is of course part of the reason the game is so amazing.dragonbird said:Of course, I have another set of justifications all ready if I want to play Roche path
Kindo said:
I don't know the geography. I just remember that it is indicated that Iorveth is headed to Triss's last known location, while Roche is not. I think it was Cedric that told us where she was, and then we find out that Iroveth is going straight there. I haven't played the game in a while, but it think we then find out that Roche is going to Kaedwan or something to gain the help of Henselt.
The fact that Iroveth is going directly to Triss's location is motivation enough to go with Iorveth as opposed to Roche if you Geralt truly cared for her.
ive only played the game once and during that playthrough i went went with the squirrels. geralt struck me as a character who would make this decision as opposed to casting his lot in with roche. i was very stoked to get this game but now that ive played it once im pretty let down. i thought it may rival skyrim, not even close
Gone both ways a number of times with this decision.
The way I play Geralt, he never warms to Iorveth. But he will go with the Squirrels because he doesn't wish on anybody, even his enemies, the fate those elves on the prison barge would meet. Or out of loyalty to Zoltan, who has (despite his denials) openly thrown his lot in with the Squirrels.
Usually he's getting a little bit fed up with Roche by decision time. But he trusts Thaler and likes Ves, and he despises Loredo. When he hears Roche plans to deal with Loredo, he's quite willing to be the button man.
The way I play Geralt, he never warms to Iorveth. But he will go with the Squirrels because he doesn't wish on anybody, even his enemies, the fate those elves on the prison barge would meet. Or out of loyalty to Zoltan, who has (despite his denials) openly thrown his lot in with the Squirrels.
Usually he's getting a little bit fed up with Roche by decision time. But he trusts Thaler and likes Ves, and he despises Loredo. When he hears Roche plans to deal with Loredo, he's quite willing to be the button man.
I still have to go Roche once lol.
Always went for Iorveth so far. I can somehow identify with the Scoia'tael a lot more than with the humans in The Witcher and Iorveth was a nice change of pace after old dreamer Yaevinn, with whom I despite my sympathy for the non-humans never sided. And even though I always felt a bit bad for Roche, since he helped me out more than once and I felt like I owed him somehow, I never regretted going with Iorveth.
All I regret is that I can't get myself to sacrifice the elven women in order to hunt down Loredo, especially after finding out what happens in the end after the EE Epilogue. But helping Iorveth make Aedirn a free state is still worth it any day IMO.
Always went for Iorveth so far. I can somehow identify with the Scoia'tael a lot more than with the humans in The Witcher and Iorveth was a nice change of pace after old dreamer Yaevinn, with whom I despite my sympathy for the non-humans never sided. And even though I always felt a bit bad for Roche, since he helped me out more than once and I felt like I owed him somehow, I never regretted going with Iorveth.
All I regret is that I can't get myself to sacrifice the elven women in order to hunt down Loredo, especially after finding out what happens in the end after the EE Epilogue. But helping Iorveth make Aedirn a free state is still worth it any day IMO.
It's both weird and cool how Roche vs. Iorveth choice works.
It is the most important choice in the game and you have to make it in 5 seconds or less.
It is the most important choice in the game and you have to make it in 5 seconds or less.
I don't feel the game gives you a proper in-universe reason to side with Iorveth since up until and during the exchange after the Arachas fight he's an antagonist with him being responsible for why Geralt is in the predicament he's in and having his men fight him throughout Chapter 1. Not only that but after the confrontation with Letho he offers Geralt nothing.... and provides nothing for the rest of the game.
As lopsided as Siegfried vs Yaevinn was in TW1 at least the latter didn't cause trouble for Geralt like Iorveth did.
As lopsided as Siegfried vs Yaevinn was in TW1 at least the latter didn't cause trouble for Geralt like Iorveth did.
Neither does Roche.Seboist said:
Ironically, Roche is more helpful to Geralt if you're on Iorveth's path than on Roche's path.
In theory, both can help Geralt with finding Letho, but both got caught up in their own politics.
There are several reasons why Geralt would want to side with Iorveth. The problem is not there. What could have been done is have Iorveth have one sentence about Saskia to further the ideological reason for siding with him if one seeks to be ideological.
We know about Saskia in Act 1, but a tiny bit more could have been added. Unlike Roche who is not planning to join Kaedwen, Iorveth is planning to join Upper Aedirn,so we needed more information on it.
EDIT: Yea you might say that the Order / Scoia'Tael was more important and useful in the main plot of TW1. But truth be told, even until now I am not sure why the Order and the Scoia'Tael would even fight Salamandra for Geralt, especially the Scoia'Tael. To me it seems just to be a favor for a favor, but we are talking about risking dozens of soldiers.
In contrast, the Blue Stripes / Scoia'Tael of TW2 seem more real to me because they just don't follow Geralt wherever he wants and they have agendas that far supersede Geralt's. In essence, they don't really give a damn about Letho that much or Triss. Geralt only aligned with them when it seemed like Letho was a priority of theirs (which I believe it was early on), before they got caught up in a war, conflict of interests and the future of their respective nations.
Not agree, as a sentence which coming from an anti-human-monarchy elf leader, (and Geralt knows elven's philosofy), not needs further explanations. Don't forget that you are Geralt of Rivia and you've seen a lot of affronts by both of 2 parts. Geralt doesn't cease to be himself by choosing one or other. It's only a circunstancial choosing.bcheero said:
PD
Thanks God the Google translator exist!
Well i havent played Roche's path in a while. I know he doesnt have as big a part though. Both paths have their strengths, but Iorveth's path just seemed more personal and appealing.CostinMoroianu said:
Iorveth's path felt more like Philippa's path to be quite honest.
I had 1 or 2 conversations with Iorveth in act 2, but was always chatting to Philippa.
In contrast, Roche and I carved our way through the Keadweani army and were always doing things together. And you still leave with Roche (I think in Act 3 even if you go save Triss) which is cool.
Iorveth's path I just felt like Philippa's lackey boy.
I had 1 or 2 conversations with Iorveth in act 2, but was always chatting to Philippa.
In contrast, Roche and I carved our way through the Keadweani army and were always doing things together. And you still leave with Roche (I think in Act 3 even if you go save Triss) which is cool.
Iorveth's path I just felt like Philippa's lackey boy.
I'd like the option to not follow either of them and instead go assassinate kings with letho...