Please, explain me logic of the neutral ending [Spoilers]

[ElvenNeko]

Please, explain me logic of the neutral ending [Spoilers]

I can understand "good" and "bad" endings, even thou they was kinda predictable, but still nice and quite logical.

But that ending what i actually got for myself...

First - i was expecting exellent drama. There is whinter all around, and Ciri is sad, saying things like "we will never do this another time", so i was thinking that after entering tower she remembered all the nice moments that she spend with Geralt, and chose not to save the world, but to go back and be with him for a while more. That would perfectly explain her behavior - because she looking at the world and people that are sentenced to death, and she knows that this whinter will never pass, and all she have left - is a little time together with Geralt, and then - leave this world. That would be very powerfull and dramatic ending.

But instead... she chose to be a queen? What? Ok, drama ruined, here comes the funny part.

"Goodbye! We will not meet again" - she says, or something like that. Why? WHY do you think so? Just invite Triss to be your adviser, make her a better proposal then other king, who already did it - and you will have powerful sorceress on your side, and Geralt will be always near too, because they chose to live together! Is it that hard to do?

Ok, if not that - WHY DONT JUST USE YOUR POWERS? She can teleport anywhere just when she wants! So she can visit Geralt just when she wants to, and then return to the castle without wasting time on travels. Where is the problem? Why they must part ways, and she says it like there is no options for them to meet, when there is plenty of them?

I am not even telling about whole "ruling" thing. She could just accept the throne, and then - give it to someone else who understands better in ruling. She has the power to travel around the universe, so why waste it on ruling some shit country, when there is a lot of people who will do it better? And if she really thinks that she will be the best ruler - why don't place some puppet on the throne, live as a witcher and teleport to the castle when important question awaits for her choice?

And i certainly not telling about epilogue, that leaving fate of the 95% characters and places behind.

 

[CTPhipps]

The problem with the situation in Nilfgaard is being Empress is not something Ciri expects to survive as she currently is. To become Empress, Ciri is going to have to discard all of her previous emotional attachments. If Yennefer and Geralt were in Nilfgaard, they would be constant targets for her enemies and subject to manipulations. It's really a "sacrifice" ending because Ciri is losing all chance at personal happiness to be in a nation she's going to be miserable in, in a countrey she hates, surrounded by people she despises, in a system she will spend the rest of her life trying to dismantle.
In a very real way, Ciri will hope Geralt stays FAR away.
It's poignant but sucks for her.

 

[Lesota]

.

First of all - she didn't say "Goodbye! We will not meet again" , it could say Geralt if you chose, then she suggest to take him with her, but he says something about too much politics. Allow me to cite myself -
"I think she sad because she has to leave him right now and he won't be near her all the time. GERALT don't want to go with her and be with her all the time. Come to her marriage? Sure! Come to her sometimes? Sure! But be near her when she's an empress? Nooope, too much politics for a poor witcher. She is not a small girl anymore, she has her own responsibilities, interests and etc. Sure she can have dinners with them, but she also has to have dinners with someone else as empress, as a young woman. I think it's sad for her and him mostly because they didn't have time as family when everyone lives in one house when parents have a lot of time with children and etc. If you every moved out from your parents I think you should get it, yes, you have much more freedom but you lost something and your parents lost it too. Geralt has with Cirir just a few years as his little daughter maybe even less and booom, she's an adult and moving out. "
I really think this is why she sad, not because sacrifice or something.

 

[ElvenNeko]

If Yennefer and Geralt were in Nilfgaard, they would be constant targets for her enemies and subject to manipulations.

But be near her when she's an empress? Nooope, too much politics for a poor witcher.

But Geralt is fine living with Triss, when she serving another king. And that's not too much politics for him. So why he cannot do the same with Ciri?

Ciri is losing all chance at personal happiness to be in a nation she's going to be miserable in, in a countrey she hates, surrounded by people she despises, in a system she will spend the rest of her life trying to dismantle.

So... why she even bothering doina that? She can just go away. Or put someone capable at the throne, if she wants to do better for this country that, as you say, she hates.

 

[Lesota]

But Geralt is fine living with Triss, when she serving another king. And that's not too much politics for him. So why he cannot do the same with Ciri?

I think there is a difference betwen been a lover/husband of an adviser of the king of relativity small kingdom and been a father of empress of huge Nilfgaard empire. I think Ciri would announce or royal court will find on it own that he is not just a freak-witcher but someone important to her

 

[Valkimedes]

Well, i was thinking to create a post about this ending. Personally, this was the worst i can imagine... I don't know the dialogs to make Ciri take this decision. But has no sense. Let's to compare Ciri with Cerys, two rude girls. Cerys has a Homeland and a desire to make it a better place to live. Ciri only has 2 things: Geralt and Yennefer. She doesn't has any love for Cintra and much less for Nilfgaard. Geralt and Yennefer pushed her to take this decision? I only can imagine Ciri accepting if only they are with her to support her. But that's not happen.

P.D. The other bad ending that i can imagine is if she accept to be a puppet of the Lodge...

 

[CTPhipps]

So... why she even bothering doina that? She can just go away. Or put someone capable at the throne, if she wants to do better for this country that, as you say, she hates.

Because her father (and Geralt by taking him to her) has convinced her that this is the "right" thing to do. It's a sad-sad ****ing day when being a WITCHER is a preferrable life for a woman over what she ends up doing.

Some girls long to be Princesses.

Ciri longs to be a monster hunter.

Funny that.

 

[Valkimedes]

Because her father (and Geralt by taking him to her) has convinced her that this is the "right" thing to do. It's a sad-sad ****ing day when being a WITCHER is a preferrable life for a woman over what she ends up doing.

Some girls long to be Princesses.

Ciri longs to be a monster hunter.

Funny that.

Some video with the conversations?

 

[CTPhipps]

You have to present her to her dad as one of the big ones.

 

[Valkimedes]

You have to present her to her dad as one of the big ones.

In this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bvZe8SoHWtA as you can see, Ciri doesn't look happy with the conversation. So, why she accept to be an Empress?

 

[DuranA]

"Goodbye! We will not meet again" - she says, or something like that. Why? WHY do you think so?

Where exactly? Screenshot, video or anything?

What she says, word for word, is "We don't need to say goodbye." Geralt then can answer that they do. In which cases Ciri begs Geralt to come with her with Geralt refusing to do so because that's simply not him or Geralt can answer that "of course we don't." in which case it ends with them planning to meet in the future.

Geralt however would never go to the Imperial Court with her, not just because he absolutely despises being involved in politics personally ( and unlike Triss he would be very involved here ) but as a matter of personal pride. Geralt has always wanted Ciri to become a witcher, because why wouldn't she right. It's such a great life what with all the monsters threatening to kill you, villagers spitting on as you pass, people trying to use you for their own ends.

So to him Ciri becoming anything else is very hard to stomach.

Ciri will hope Geralt stays FAR away.
It's poignant but sucks for her.

You've made it clear in other threads you haven't finished the game, let alone done this ending because your deep seated hatred of Nilfgaard, so how about you get informed before spouting nonsense that you don't know anything about.

She doesn't has any love for Cintra and much less for Nilfgaard. Geralt and Yennefer pushed her to take this decision? I only can imagine Ciri accepting if only they are with her to support her. But that's not happen.

It's not about a love of Cintra or Nilfgaard. Ciri's a selfless person unlike the very selfish people that both Geralt and Yennefer are. That's the difference between them.

No one pushes her to make this decision, not Emhyr, not Yennefer and certainly NOT Geralt, who has always wanted her to become a witcher. This is Ciri's choice through and through whereas the Witcher ending, the so called "happy ending" is Geralt's choice for her, because like so many other people in her life Geralt thinks he knows what's best for her in that ending whereas in the other Ciri's decided, as someone who won't just straddle the fence like Geralt has, that she will try and do as much good as she can as a ruler, far more then she would ever do as a witcher.

 

[CTPhipps]

You've made it clear in other threads you haven't finished the game, let alone done this ending because your deep seated hatred of Nilfgaard, so how about you get informed before spouting nonsense that you don't know anything about.

I finished the game a couple of days ago.

As for my hatred of Nilfgaard, I don't hate them. I just don't romanticize them either and note that it's hard to polish the turd of "unprovoked war of aggression."

If it's any consolation, I think Radovid is WORSE than Nilfgaard in many ways.

But that's not really a reason to choose to support them taking over the North either.

 

[DuranA]

As for my hatred of Nilfgaard, I don't hate them. I just don't romanticize them either and note that it's hard to polish the turd of "unprovoked war of aggression."

If it's any consolation, I think Radovid is WORSE than Nilfgaard in many ways.

But that's not really a reason to choose to support them taking over the North either.

Romanticizing? I ain't blind to what Nilfgaard has done I just find it ironic you mention that particular turd since I lay it down firmly at the doorstep of every Northern Realm and every major northern ruler including Dijkstra, who is not a saint, since they started their own large share of wars. Foltest conquering Flostam from Aedirn, Henselt trying to conquer the Pontar Valley, Aedirn trying to crush Dol Blathanna, Redannia trying to conquer all of the north.

I support Nilfgaard because I don't see it burning mages at the stake along with alchemists and pellars, and it is mentioned to happen elsewhere outside of Novigrad regardless of the choice at the conclave even if we don't see this. I don't see Nilfgaard slaughtering non-humans or throwing them in ghettos.

Nilfgaard is a more modern state with better rule of law, less discrimination, far less religious fanaticism and no witch hunters killing and torturing mages and all that are sympathetic to them.

Dijkstra might make it better in the long run, but the only thing he'd achieve is making it like Nilfgaard. I saw no valid reason to let two friends die and stand aside while a bloody war continues leading to thousands more dead on both sides when I can end the war there and then in Novigrad.

 

[CTPhipps]

Romanticizing? I ain't blind to what Nilfgaard has done I just find it ironic you mention that particular turd since I lay it down firmly at the doorstep of every Northern Realm and every major northern ruler including Dijkstra.

I don't disagree. There's no moral high ground with kings, North or South. They're scum, the Craich clan exempted.

Which is why if you side with the North, it should be for the PEOPLE because being conquered is never-ever good.

I'd do the same for a Northern Invasion of Nilfgaard.

 

[DuranA]

I don't disagree. There's no moral high ground with kings, North or South. They're scum, the Craich clan exempted.

Which is why if you side with the North, it should be for the PEOPLE because being conquered is never-ever good.

I'd do the same for a Northern Invasion of Nilfgaard.

As Ciri would it: Bollocks. You view conquest as some evil that always results in hardship for people, which is very historically inaccurate and you know what's real hardship? Having a war being waged in your home.

The only person of the Craich who isn't some warmongering fool is Cerys, Hjalmar is a war loving fool.

The choice is simple: You either end the war there and then with the North surrendering after Radovid and Dijkstra die or it continues for months on end with Temeria becoming far more devastated then it already was.

 

[CTPhipps]

The choice is simple: You either end the war there and then with the North surrendering after Radovid and Dijkstra die or it continues for months on end with Temeria becoming far more devastated then it already was.

*skeptical voice* Yes, the North is going to become completely assimilated to the Nilfgaard despite the racial, cultural, and national divides they practice. *end skeptical voice* Conquering the North just means there will be countless civil wars, rebellions, and ethnic strife in the future.

As history shows, conquering a land is easy, KEEPING a land is hard.

Emhyr may be Napoleon but his kingdom didn't last.

In the end, my Geralt prefers the North to remain as he remembers it: unbowed, unbent, unbroken.

But you know, the developers could say a canonical Empress Ciri made the lands sprout lolipops and kittens. I'm just calling it like I see it.

 

[DuranA]

Yes, the North is going to become completely assimilated to the Nilfgaard despite the racial, cultural, and national divides they practice. *end skeptical voice* Conquering the North just means there will be countless civil wars, rebellions, and ethnic strife in the future.

Any particular reason it would be different with Dijkstra's victory or Radovid's victory in the war? Assimilation would take time anyway. Easier with for Nilfgaard with Temeria being a vassal state as it is one of the most populated country in the North. Besides civil wars in the rest are not a certainty. Guerrila actions only occurred in Temeria because Roche's a stubborn son of a bitch and there were still plenty of people willing to accept Nilfgaard's rule, but there's no one left for Kaedwen, Aedirn, Lyria, or Redannia.

In the end, my Geralt prefers the North to remain as he remembers it: unbowed, unbent, unbroken.

No, you prefer to view it like that, not Geralt who walks away from a fight and lets two friends die. He's actually disgusted by Dijkstra.

the developers could say a canonical Empress Ciri made the lands sprout lolipops and kittens. I'm just calling it like I see it.

Yes kittens and lolipops, or they could be realistic and say that Cirilla Fiona Elen Riannon has a legitimate blood claim to every throne of every single major nation in the North and that would pacify the northern populations.

 

[CTPhipps]

No, you prefer to view it like that that, not Geralt who walks away from a fight and lets two friends die. He's actually disgusted by Dijkstra.

Eh, in the end, I chose Radovid over Dijkstra. Better to break his leg again for a second time than betray a friend.

Yes kittens and lolipops, or they could be realistic and say that Cirilla Fiona Elen Riannon has a legitimate blood claim to every throne of every single major nation in the North and that would pacify the northern populations.

As if that would make any difference to either Nilfgaard's nobility, who want the land for themselves or the Northern nobility who rejected Adda not because of her incestuous nature or curse but because she married a REDANIAN.

Take note, I highly respect your opinion and enjoy these sorts of debates.

I just disagree and hope you find this discussion as entertaining as I do.

 

[DuranA]

You don't need to break his leg to not do the assassination mission. Just don't go there or if you go there just say it's too risky.

As if that would make any difference to either Nilfgaard's nobility, who want the land for themselves or the Northern nobility who rejected Adda not because of her incestuous nature or curse but because she married a REDANIAN.

The Nilfgaardian nobility is cowed like little obedient kittens for daring to oppose Emhyr with only those loyalists left standing and with a good portion of Northern nobles dead during the war there's plenty of land to pass around for everyone. Besides plots against a ruler who just proved himself a great conqueror generally don't come too much, it is only when that ruler shows weakness that plots begin to hatch.

As for the Northern nobility, using Foltest's words as an example of anything is not an indicator of things of a grander scale. The Temerian nobility wasn't willing to accept a monster on throne that was born of incest and the wife of a foreign leader versus the child of one of the greatest noble houses in Temeria. That same house by the way who is quite comfortable being under Nilfgaard's protection, and they do accept being ruled by Radovid with Anais under his wing, forcefully but still.

Finally there's Maravel who quite willing to accept Nilfgaard's rule. Nobles aren't a hive mind, they're individuals, some wouldn't accept the situation but they would be crushed while others would be bought or convinced.

This is why Emhyr wants Ciri. She's the key to pacifying the North since the royal bloodlines have been mostly destroyed. Henselt had no heir, nor did Stennis, nor does Radovid.

 

[CTPhipps]

In the end, I couldn't go with the "greater good" of the North or the greater good of the South but had to play how I felt Geralt would do it. Geralt wouldn't betray Roche and he wouldn't assassinate Radovid knowing it would result in Nilfgaard winning. It was a choice of evils and Geralt said it best.

“Evil is evil, Stregobor,” said the witcher seriously as he got up. “Lesser, greater, middling, it's all the same. Proportions are negotiated, boundaries blurred. I’m not a pious hermit. I haven't done only good in my life. But if I’m to choose between one evil and another, then I prefer not to choose at all. Time for me to go. We'll see each other tomorrow.”

My Geralt will deal with Radovid when the time comes but after the war is won. This also has the helpful ending of getting Emhyr assassinated, which means Geralt just needs to get rid of Radovid and Phillipa Eilhart to guarantee Witcher Ciri's safety.

I think he can do it.