It's nothing major. Just some inconsistencies with the years from the books. Mainly just wanted to point out that TW3 is not 15 years after TW1.
Well, if TW3 takes place only 2 years after TW1 Emhyr's statement in the trailer "She has returned...after all these years." seems kind of exaggerated. According to CDPR's faked timeline TW3 takes place only 4 years after Ciri disappeared...
Hm, I don't really how to feel about these changes. I can't see a reason yet why to change the canon timeline...
But if the official timeline is cut from in the game, there is no reason to include Voorhis or Calveit in the game neither. They would come to power not before decades later.
Last edited:
Nope.
CDPR made a mistake on the timeline, the dates should be 2 years later. So in "canon" time we are at year 1274. Ciri disappeared in 1268. Which makes the after all these years, not that ridiculous. It is 6 to 7 years. CDPR probably made a mistake, unless the difference is explained some other way, not yet known to us.
Just read this topic and people seem to have read the books a bit different than myself. Either that or... I'm mistaken. Anyway to me the way I took it:
The emperor told Geralt and Yennefer to kill each other in the bath. Or well commit suicide, w/e. They agreed on the condition that the emperor was never to hurt Ciri or make her feel bad/upset. Then he dug his own grave by promising that as he realised how close Ciri was with Geralt and Yennefer and them dying would greatly hurt Ciri. Which he promised not to do, and thus he couldn't go through with it. And the emperor is a man true of his word.
The emperor told Geralt and Yennefer to kill each other in the bath. Or well commit suicide, w/e. They agreed on the condition that the emperor was never to hurt Ciri or make her feel bad/upset. Then he dug his own grave by promising that as he realised how close Ciri was with Geralt and Yennefer and them dying would greatly hurt Ciri. Which he promised not to do, and thus he couldn't go through with it. And the emperor is a man true of his word.
If the timeline is still wrong on the frontpage then there is a reason for it. Maybe just the intro of Witcher 1 was wrong and it should have been 3 instead of 5 years after the first Nilgaard war.Nope.
CDPR made a mistake on the timeline, the dates should be 2 years later. So in "canon" time we are at year 1274. Ciri disappeared in 1268. Which makes the after all these years, not that ridiculous. It is 6 to 7 years. CDPR probably made a mistake, unless the difference is explained some other way, not yet known to us.
You're right.
->
Maybe the only difference is that you think he let them go because he gave his word while I think that he let them go because he couldn't hurt Ciri after all and the promise just reinforced the effect.
Last edited:
In 1274 (date in the game incorrectly given as 1271) the Northern kings, sorcerers, sorceresses and Nilfgaardian ambassador, Shilard Fitz-Oesterlen, assemble in Loc Muinne. The assembly was to decide the future borders and powers in the Northern Kingdoms, as well as restoring the Council and the Conclave of sorcerers. However it eventually turns out the regicides and pinning the blame on the Lodge was ordered by Emhyr var Emreis himself and carried out by Letho.If the timeline is still wrong on the frontpage then there is a reason for it. Maybe just the intro of Witcher 1 was wrong and it should have been 3 instead of 5 years after the first Nilgaard war.
For now, the fate of the war is unknown, except for that the Nilfgaardian army crossed the Yaruga and is steadily marching north, using the chaos of Foltest's, Demevand's and potentially Stennis's or Henselt's death to their advantage.
From the official wiki page.
Check this one out.
http://witcher.gamepedia.com/Timeline
Notice that, according to TW2 memory cutscenes, Geralt and Letho met in 1270.
And after that Geralt was forced to join the Wild Hunt. He rode with them for 2 years if I am not mistaken. Which brings us to year 1272, at the start of the Witcher.
Just a silly mistake that happened in TW1 timeline and nobody fixed afterwards.
Last edited:
In the wiki timeline all three games take place between 1270-1272 (I personally go with this version, seems "more" right to me)...
So Ciri was only disappeared for about four years which makes the "...for all these years" statement exaggerated.
But it seems that there are differing times given in the games which makes the whole issue even more confusing. Couldn't they just patch the games to have a consistent timeline???
Yes they are placed between 1270-1272 in the wiki page, so that they do not differ from those in the games. But if you watch closely at 1270, you can clearly see the inconsistency. If Geralt met Letho in July 1270, in Angren, and still traveled further south afterwards, he couldn't have been near Kaer Mohren in Autumn. And he definitely wouldn't have enough time to ride with the Wild Hunt for 2 years. The problem started with TW1, it was 2 years early. And nobody has changed it since, they kept going with it. Maybe there is a reason for that but we do not know it. Anyway!In the wiki timeline all three games take place between 1270-1272 (I personally go with this version, seems "more" right to me)...
So Ciri was only disappeared for about four years which makes the "...for all these years" statement exaggerated.
But it seems that there are differing times given in the games which makes the whole issue even more confusing. Couldn't they just patch the games to have a consistent timeline???
In the fact, timeline is a bit fucked on both wikies. But remember - Battle of Brenna takes place at 1268. Rivian Pogrom takes place at 1268. TW1 takes place at 1270, TW2 at 1271, TW3 at 1272. Peter became imperial treasurer of the crown at 1290.
I think that English unofficial translation could cause some misunderstandings. In Polish version is clearly stated that Peter became imperial treasurer of the crown after the Northern Wars (in Nilfgaardian point of view, Wars taked place between 1239 and 1268 - since annexation of Ebbing to Peace of Cintra).
Yea, that's what I was trying to say. Also that TW1, TW2 and TW3 should have been 2 years later, in 1272, 1273 and 1274. Don't you guys agree? :O
Don't. Witch Hunts starts at 1272. If TW2 will take place at 1273, Philippa is dead for year, so she can't be in TW2. Also, at 1272, plague of Catriona strikes again. I hadn't seen dozens of corpses at Vizimian streets.
Well Phillipa wouldn't be dead but I see your point, I was placing the Witch Hunts around 1274, when it is clearly stated that they started in 1272.
I would like to know though, how is it possible for Geralt to meet Letho in Angren, in July 1270, and appear in Kaer Mohren, after apparently joining the Hunt, in May 1270. Time Travel with the riders?
I would like to know though, how is it possible for Geralt to meet Letho in Angren, in July 1270, and appear in Kaer Mohren, after apparently joining the Hunt, in May 1270. Time Travel with the riders?
Witch Hunts started at 1272, it was mentioned in one of "Maxima Mundi" encyclopedias.
Time travel or mistake of Reds
Last edited:
God dangit SMiki55, you are going to drive me crazy! :wallbash::rofl:Witch Hunts started at 1270, it was mentioned in one of "Maxima Mundi" encyclopedias.
Time travel or mistake of Reds
Here:
Ithlina, actually Ithlinne Aegli: daughter of Aevenien, the legendary elven healer, astrologist and soothsayer, famous for her predictions and prophesies, of which Aen Ithlinnespeath, Ithlina'a Prophesy, is the best known. It has been written down many times and published in numerous forms. The prophesy enjoyed great popularity at certain moments, and the commentaries, clues and clarifications appended to it adapted the text to contemporary events, which strengthened convictions about its great clairvoyance. In particular, it is believed I. predicted the Northern Wars (1239–1268 ), the Great Plagues (1268, 1272 and 1294), the bloody War of the Two Unicorns (1309–1318 ) and the Haak Invasion (1350). I. was also supposed to have prophesied the climactic changes observed from the end of the thirteenth century, known as the Great Frost, which superstition always claimed was a sign of the end of the word and linked to the prophesied coming of the Destroyer (q.v.). This passage from I.'s Prophecy gave rise to the infamous witch hunts (1272–76) and contributed to the deaths of many women and unfortunate girls mistaken for the incarnation of the Destroyer. Today, I. is regarded by many scholars as a legendary figure and her 'prophesies' as very recently fabricated apocrypha, and a running literary fraud.
Effenberg and Talbot,
Encyclopaedia Maxima Mundi, Volume X