The more I ponder about Shani's appearance the more I get to the conclusion it would be fair to those players who decided for Shani when she doesn't show up in the sequel. In a bit exaggerated way poeple may think it wasn't the right decision to stay with Shani when eventually Triss makes it in the game and there is not a trace of Shani.
I hope she'll at least have a cameo! I loved Shani. I have a soft spot for redheads in the first place, probably just 'cause they're different (and the color is gorgeous if you ask me), making up only 2% of the population of the planet, but it was way more than that of course. She was so gentle, yet so fierce--and probably the most purely good-hearted character in the entire game. She was realistic and had flaws, but she didn't come across as either a weak sex kitten or a cold biatch, just as a kind intellectual. Hell, if she was a guy, I'd want to date her! 
I picked Shani for Geralt on my first playthrough because I didn't really see Triss's good side, whereas Shani's is very plainly laid out; I loved her straightforwardness. So although I really like Triss too, especially after reading the books, Shani is an awesome character in her own right, and her "normalness" only made her more appealing to me in ways. Especially since she fell for a guy who couldn't have children, even though she's not afflicted with the same condition as Geralt/Triss and could have kids of her own. I thought it was very un-shallow and independent of her to not reject him for that reason. I love that openness of character that she has; she doesn't throw someone away just because they don't fit a certain mold, she treats everyone who comes to her like a true doctor should, and when she loves Geralt she just goes with it instead of twisting her hands and wringing her hair about what can't be changed. Yeah, Shani's great, and I hope we see her pop up again somewhere.
I picked Shani for Geralt on my first playthrough because I didn't really see Triss's good side, whereas Shani's is very plainly laid out; I loved her straightforwardness. So although I really like Triss too, especially after reading the books, Shani is an awesome character in her own right, and her "normalness" only made her more appealing to me in ways. Especially since she fell for a guy who couldn't have children, even though she's not afflicted with the same condition as Geralt/Triss and could have kids of her own. I thought it was very un-shallow and independent of her to not reject him for that reason. I love that openness of character that she has; she doesn't throw someone away just because they don't fit a certain mold, she treats everyone who comes to her like a true doctor should, and when she loves Geralt she just goes with it instead of twisting her hands and wringing her hair about what can't be changed. Yeah, Shani's great, and I hope we see her pop up again somewhere.Agreed. Every point. She's a great person. I personally like her more than Triss. YET, if only one of the two was to be included in TW2 (as is likely), I'd go with Triss. As far as the story is concerned, her role was/is/will be far more vital. Assuming the two ladies will not get along(no wonder), having Triss in the party and not Shani makes more sense.As for the matter of continuity, not having Shani in TW2 would not create problems even for those who chose her in TW2. Remember in Act 4, when Alvin gets attacked by the wraith/devourer, a cutscene plays in which Geralt says he has no right to dream of a family by putting people he loved in the way of harm. Also, in the end of the game, another cutscene shows his leaving he city alone, no matter who he chose earlier.So, at the end of TW1, Geralt is not with either of them. He's still a lone wolf. It may well be that on his travels (*alone), he comes across Triss (who we already know is in TW2) and the TW2 adventure starts. As far as I know, they meet in a public execution of Dandelion and Zoltan. It may be both heard the news and rushed to save their friends, and met each other again. Lack of Shani in the plot can be explained thus.A cameo role for Shani is welcome though. However it may complicate the plot unnecessarily.Wynne said:I hope she'll at least have a cameo! I loved Shani. I have a soft spot for redheads in the first place, probably just 'cause they're different (and the color is gorgeous if you ask me), making up only 2% of the population of the planet, but it was way more than that of course. She was so gentle, yet so fierce--and probably the most purely good-hearted character in the entire game. She was realistic and had flaws, but she didn't come across as either a weak sex kitten or a cold biatch, just as a kind intellectual. Hell, if she was a guy, I'd want to date her!
I re-post a part for my previous post:
IF she's not included, don't be hard on the Devs. There IS a logical explanation for her exclusion even if you chose her in TW1.Vilgefortze said:
IF she's not been included already, it's a little too late to include her now, don't you think? All I'm saying is "IF" she's not included, there is a logical explanation why.e-ahmet said:
Yes, it may be late. All I'm doing is senseless Shani fan boying.Vilgefortze said:
If Shani is not included in TW2 in some form i will deduct one point from whatever score i give the game.There is no excuse for her not to be included in TW2 even if she is in the game for 10 minutes only.There is no way CDPR would make such a mistake, they are to good for that.Vilgefortze said:
10 minutes=cameo role?That's OK, I guess....I just want to know, out of personal curiosity, what exactly do you want to include in that 10 minutes of Shani time.....?
Ohhk...that's one way. And the other? You mentioned two ways.Though in TW2, the Lodge might have an important role to play. As such Triss will probably have to play a major part.fchopin said:
Allow me to remind you - as I did last time we argued about this - that in one (if not 2) of the endings sorcerers fall into disgrace (or at least fail to get the king's ear). If one followed this scenario, then Triss' presence at Geralt's side in TW2 doesn't make much sense to me, and I'm curious how will the developers justify it.Vilgefortze said:
True on all accounts. Yet after that - and in spite of it - in Act 5, Geralt and Shani still plan to reunite after the rebellion is quelled (assuming you choose the right dialogue option). Indeed Geralt leaves the city alone (a developer decision which was questioned/criticized by many fans, if you remember the old threads), but if he picked Shani in TW1 one would assume he's going to look for her sooner or later. Do you really see him (after the last scene in the hospital) leaving the city for good, meeting Triss and Zoltan accidentally and hooking up with Triss as if nothing happened between him and Shani? No matter how much you like sorcerers, you have to admit it's going to be far fetched and will put quite a lot of people off.Regarding the timeline, TW2 is supposed to become available Q1 next year, but if history has taught me anything, that means 25th of March more likely than 5th of Jan, so they still got almost 4-5 months. Some changes still can be done. As for a short (10 min) cameo appearance, I don't think that would do justice to her character.Vilgefortze said:
Remember also that there are 3 more characters to go .sooo maybe Shani maybe not but only time will tell.But with TW2 taking place only a couple of months from where TW1 left off the devs would be hard pressed to say why Shani wouldn`t make it in TW2 and i agree that it would put off more than a few Shani fans
@stanpapusa1. Yes. I do know about the endings where sorcerors fall from grace. But how is that related to Triss being at Geralt's side not making sense?2. Geralt running away from Shani even if he loved her makes perfect. Let me remind you neither Triss nor Shani were Geralt's true love in the saga, but Yennefer. And, on one occasion Geralt fled from her home in Vengerberg without telling. On more than one occasion, he's left people he loves behind because he believes in walking his path alone. There's ample precedent to justify him being alone at the end of TW1.3. You know how they team up in TW2, right? They meet at a public execution of Dandelion and Zoltan and save them from being hanged. In such a scenario, they need not be lovers to team up, but people with mutual friends, teaming up to save their friends' asses.4. 4-5 months is nothing. To include a whole new character will require rethinking of the entire plot, because the character is not any random person, but Shani. If they have not included her already, they wouldn't include her anymore, not because they hate her, but because there's no time left. They're probably at testing and debugging by now.5. We never argued. We discussed our differences of opinion. I would have argued if you suggested something outrageous . As you must remember from the last time we discussed it, even I prefer Shani over Triss. I don't WANT them to exclude her. I'm just saying that if they DO exclude her, we shouldn't make a big deal out of it, because it does not violate any logical arguement. In many ways, it'll probably be the more logical thing to do.
In your own words, 'her role was/is/will be far more vital' as far as the story is concerned. How and why would somebody's role be more vital if they just lost power/importance? Just because she can cast spells and gather magic mushrooms? Or because she had a 10 seconds secret conversation in Act 3 with somebody in a mirror? Last but not least, if TW2 starts with Geralt being trusted by Foltest with a mission of paramount importance, perhaps the king wouldn't want somebody he doesn't trust/like as Geralt's aide.Vilgefortze said:
Hmm... does 'pre-determined mindset' ring any bell? Please, let's not go there again, for the sake of this conversation at least. The developers themselves speak of the book(s) as an inspiration, not a game/movie script.Even ignoring that, if Geralt is one who 'believes in walking his path alone' then what is Triss doing there? Okay, they bump into each other and decide to save their friends, so be it. I give you that. But afterwards there's no excuse for Triss being around, especially since they never spoke much after Geralt turns her down.Vilgefortze said:
@stanpapusa1.Yes, you nailed it. It's because she can shoot spells and collect mushrooms. And because she had a secret conversation with the Lodge over a mirror. Why argue if you already know the answer? 2. Influence with the court has hardly anything to do with importance in the plot. Geralt is mostly on the wrong side of the law most of the time anyway.3. Geralt doesn't give a f*ck who Foltest think can be trusted. Geralt has dealt with more number of monarchs that the number of times Foltest screwed his sis.4. Yes. "pre-determined-mindset" does ring a bell. I recall it being an excuse for being too lazy to read the books or even bothering to try understand what's in them.5. From my "pre-determined-mindset", I think I can again recall Triss teaming up with Geralt on multiple occasions even when he chose another woman, especially when their friends were in trouble. I doubt saving two people from the noose by whisking them away amidst a confused riot really end the trouble for them . They need a lot more help to keep the noose away for good.6. I understand you're a big fan of Shani and all. Just don't take the heat out on me. I'm sure you'll understand when I say I have nothing to do with Shani not being included (we still do not know for sure) in TW2.Peace.
because it's still a poor case for Triss, as far as I am concerned at least.Vilgefortze said:
Though the protagonist of the story and arguably the most skilled fighter, Geralt has his station in life too. I don't even need to quote examples, I'm sure you're aware of them as well.Vilgefortze said:
Good for you for having read the books, but that doesn't make everybody who didn't lazy or ignorant. Equally you're making a mistake to assume that this lends more weight to your oppinion. For the 4th of 5th time, those books have been an inspiration, not a script on which the game is based word for word. It's not me stating that, it's the developers themselves and a good few players.Vilgefortze said:
Yes, I understand that much at leastVilgefortze said:
Still, your whole dissertation as to why it makes much more sense to include Triss instead of Shani doesn't convince me. Alas, it's not me you have to convince or dissuade.