Letho decision: where do you stand?

[vivaxardas2015]

Practically always let him go (killed once for an achievement ). I like Foltest, but on Iorveth's path we do not kill Iorveth for Foltest's death, right? Even on Roche's path we are not given that option. But Iorveth was as much responsible as Letho. So it just did not look right to kill one guy, and let go, or even befriend another. Then on Roche's path Geralt has an option to let Henselt be killed, and essentially becomes an assassin himself. The rest - witchers, politics - who cares, Geralt is not out to right all wrongs, and he is not an internal affairs officer of the witcher order.

 

[HylianColibri]

This is one of those things that make this game so great. The villain of the game, in the end, is not just an evil being that needs to be exterminated, he's a human (or a mutant? I don't really make that distinction) and he had his reasons. Everything is so complex and put you to think about how your decision is going to affect not just the world, but yourself. Pretty neat job.

 

[goopit]

Precisely why the Witchers need a restructuring and a new purpose, before the very people they were designed to protect wipe them all out. They already massacred them in Kaer Mohren and treat them like pariahs.

Letho understood that the New Order (stronger states) will no longer need the old Witchers. FOr them to survive, they need to adapt.

Letho didn't endanger the North, war was inevitable and would have happened with or without him. It was axiomatic. What Letho did was try to exploit the inevitable and carve up a place for himself and his brethren in the new world.

I see the WItchers as having tremendous potential and limiting them to monster slaying for a few orens is, to me, a gigantic waste. That's something Letho and Emhyr seemed to understand. That's why I find Letho's acts justifiable and even agreeable.

From a metagaming pov, Letho was so damn competent and intelligent, that he deserves to get out of it alive. He was such an awesome character and antagonist (my favorite antagonist of all time), that I couldn't possibly kill him in my canon run (killed him in my Iorveth run).

I feel like a Witcher can only do good while an Assassin can be good or bad. If Letho were to restore his school they'd only be tools without free-will which is why my Geralt killed Letho. An individual witcher can only follow the Emperors orders otherwise he'd be hunted down by his fellow brothers, they would only be tools and my Geralt wouldn't want to live that way.

A lot of children have to die to make witchers, will Emhyr sacrifice a thousand children to make a witcher army? not to mention the infertility. I say let witchers die out while they still have some dignity left.

Letho wasn't neutral he chose a side and was brutally efficient in having that side win. If Geralt chose to save Saskia or Anais he wouldn't be able to justify killing Letho in my non-canon playthrough so he didn't.

 

[BogusJuan]

I really wish there was an option to kick his ass and then let him go.

 

[Cooki3Hunt3R]

I didnt killed Letho because he did what he did for a wothwhile cause. Geralt isnt better than Letho,he killed tons of people around the world to save Triss(I chose Triss).

 

[Cipher-Six]

I kill Letho in all of my playthroughs. He deserves death and I have no interest in seeing him again in the future. I owe Roche that much.

 

[CnlSandersdeKFC]

I killed him. I went on Iorveth's path though, and after Roche helps me through Henselt's camp, I think I sort of owe it to him.

 

[Viperswhip]

Letho threw several realms into chaos getting them ready for invasion, look at the epilogue what happens to that village...uhh, ya, he dies. I let him live on one save just in case it makes an epic difference in W3, but that's it, I have killed him every other time I've played.

 

[Goodmongo]

He needs to die for multiple reasons. First off you gave your word to Roche that you would kill him. Can you not be trusted to keep it? You have a reputation. Not killing him means people can't trust you to do what you say.

Next is the fact that without killing him you will be blamed for killing Foltest or at best supporting the killing of him. You will never clear your name and remember this was your primary motivation for wither 2. How can you ignore this.

Third reason is you hate Nilfgaard. Letho worked for them and the game implies he will do so once again. To let him live just causes Nilfgaard to be potentially stronger than they otherwise would be.

Fourth is that he got the better of you twice. Your pride and reputation has taken a big hit. Without that fight people will say that you were scared of him. They will wonder if you are any good since you tucked tail and ran from him.

This is not about owing Foltest or anyone else. It is about you. It is about Geralt. Without killing him your name is dirt. Your reputation is dirt. You can't be trusted and many will see you as a coward.

 

[littlemad]

The question about Letho (Let him live or die?)

I know that this question it is an OLD question, and I couldn't dig out any discussion from the forum (the search result showed many polish topics).

So do you will start as LETHO dead? or alive?
I am super uber duper struggling with this decision. If I remember correctly many years ago I killed Letho, but I loved his character even if it was a nemesis of Geralt, it was very well made. Still I am so happy to have put him to death. But now... knowing that the outcome could completely change the game... I do not know, I have a deep feeling inside that make my stomach turn and twist in doubt.

Only 12 hours fot he game, and I am soooooo much strugling with this decision. Could someone give me some words of advice? I already know that I will do only 1 playthrough, so it need to be a good one.

 

[Elegast7]

"Completely change the game" might be a bit of an overstatement. Nevertheless, I recommend you let him live. I don't think cdpr just put him in TW3 for the sake of having a choice of TW2 matter. I believe he certainly can add to the story and maybe he'll show more of his personality, maybe even becoming Geralt his friend.

 

[dragonbird]

Ouch, that was a pretty big spoiler in the title there, for anyone who hasn't played TW2.
Anyway, moved into the TW2 forum where, as you see, it's always been a popular topic

 

[littlemad]

Aw sorry! I didn't mean to!

 

[Goodmongo]

Playing W2 with no thought for W3 I would fight him the majority of the time. After all he was the only guy to beat you and your repuation and confidence suggests that you need to show who really is better.

But when it comes to W3 I plan on letting him live. Of course I'll try one version of him dying to see how things change, but more content is usually better and I want to see what they have in store for him. And based on the interview question for the decision it seems that he isn't the puppet for Nilfgaard like he was in W2.

In fact I also plan on letting Sile live for the same reason. To see what if any content there is with these characters. In W2 she also dies but for W3 my first time through will be with her alive.

I plan to have the following choices:
1) Aryan alive
2) Iorveth Path.
3) Save Saskia and free her from control
4) Let Sile live.
5) Let Letho live.

 

[littlemad]

I feel that I do not remember anymore the story of w2 to take a decision other than "try to catch up with Letho"!