(SPOILER) How to Get This Ending?

[busterr.273]

(SPOILER) How to Get This Ending?

So i finished the game mostly in good ending except that Radovid lives and keep going on witch hunts and so.

But i saw that it is possible to let Nilfgaard lose, or both Redenia and Nilfgaard lose and Dijkstra to become king of the North.

How do we achieve the Dijkstra ending without sacrificing the other endings -Ciri witcheress, Yennefer and Geralt reunited- ? And what's the logic of Nilfgaard's losing the war in Dijkstra ending?

 

[Willowhugger]

So i finished the game mostly in good ending except that Radovid lives and keep going on witch hunts and so.

But i saw that it is possible to let Nilfgaard lose, or both Redenia and Nilfgaard lose and Dijkstra to become king of the North.

How do we achieve the Dijkstra ending without sacrificing the other endings -Ciri witcheress, Yennefer and Geralt reunited- ? And what's the logic of Nilfgaard's losing the war in Dijkstra ending?

Dijkstra used to be Regent of Redania when Radovid was a boy. When Radovid is assassinated, he essentially just steps up and says that he's the best man for the job and his former cronies support him in taking over the Redanian war effort.

Nilfgaard was losing anyway and get smashed by a non-insane equally-genius commander.

The problem is this ending requires a seriously OOC element from Geralt.

 

[busterr.273]

Okay so what choices impact on Nilfgaard to win the war? In my ending Radovid was alive so he won and Nilfgaard lose ok. But let's say we helped assasinate Radovid, which choices decides if Nilfgaard wins the war or loses the war and Dijkstra becomes king?

And also like i said if we let Dijsktra become king how do we let Ciri become witcheress and not empress? Does it change if we take her to see Emhyr after the Battle of Kaer Morhen or does it not matter because Nilfgaard loses anyway?

 

[Willowhugger]

Ciri will become a Witcher if they win the war.

To get Nilfgaard to win the war, you have to promptly betray Dik after you assassinate Radovid.

Which is easy because Dik wants to kill Roche.

Roche will take over Temeria's war effort if Dik isn't sided with and will promptly screw the pooch royally.

 

[PiperHecht]

Basically, here's what happens if you kill Radovid.

You'll meet with Djikstra/Roche and Ves and co. Djikstra then reveals that he wants to take over control of Redania and kill Roche and Ves, which goes back on the original plan they made, where they said that they would submit to Nilfgaard and Temaria would be reinstated as a vassal state.

If you side with Djikstra, Roche and Ves die, the north regains it's freedom, and Emyhr goes back to Nilfgaard where he is deposed. Ciri becomes a witcher.

The other option, which is far better I think, is to side with Roche and Ves. Djikstra dies, and Temeria is made a vassal state of Nilfgaard. Nilfgaard wins the war, and Emyhr returns home to restore balance there. If you make some other choices, he then hands the throne to Ciri, who proceeds to pretty much be the most amazing ruler ever, and things are pretty happy ever after.

 

[uScared]

When freeing Philippa from Djikstra, there is a moment where you give up information on Nilfgaards war efforts in order to get Djikstra to let go of Philippa. Am I right in assuming that this decision decides wether Emhyr gets assassinated or not?

 

[Willowhugger]

The other option, which is far better I think, is to side with Roche and Ves. Djikstra dies, and Temeria is made a vassal state of Nilfgaard. Nilfgaard wins the war, and Emyhr returns home to restore balance there. If you make some other choices, he then hands the throne to Ciri, who proceeds to pretty much be the most amazing ruler ever, and things are pretty happy ever after.

Except, of course, Ciri is miserable for the rest of her life. In her Novigrad mission, Ciri makes it clear she wants a freedom from the immeasurable responsibility of her life which has been crushing her since adolescence.

She wants to travel, live free, and marry someone she loves (or take a lover).

None of which is possible as Empress. It's the ending where you say, "No, Ciri, saving the world isn't enough. You have to give the rest of your life too."

I can't do that.

It's part of why I like the Witcher. The games and books have a thoroughly unromantic view of monarchy.

---------- Updated at 06:18 AM ----------

When freeing Philippa from Djikstra, there is a moment where you give up information on Nilfgaards war efforts in order to get Djikstra to let go of Philippa. Am I right in assuming that this decision decides wether Emhyr gets assassinated or not?

It reveals that Emhyr is bankrupt, amusingly, enough. It means that he CAN'T continue prosecuting the war and is going to abdicate soon.

Which means the war is unsustainable.

It convinces Dikjstra that:

A. They can take down Radovid.
B. They can win the war.

If Emyrs doesn't win the war, then he's assassinated.

 

[uScared]

It reveals that Emhyr is bankrupt, amusingly, enough. It means that he CAN'T continue prosecuting the war and is going to abdicate soon.

Which means the war is unsustainable.

It convinces Dikjstra that:

A. They can take down Radovid.
B. They can win the war.

If Emyrs doesn't win the war, then he's assassinated.

Ah okay, thanks for clearing that up. So unless you decide to take down Radovid and install Roche as new leader, Emhyr will lose the war no matter what? Even if Djikstra doesnt know that Emhyr is bankrupt?

 

[PiperHecht]

Except, of course, Ciri is miserable for the rest of her life. In her Novigrad mission, Ciri makes it clear she wants a freedom from the immeasurable responsibility of her life which has been crushing her since adolescence.

She wants to travel, live free, and marry someone she loves (or take a lover).

None of which is possible as Empress. It's the ending where you say, "No, Ciri, saving the world isn't enough. You have to give the rest of your life too."

I can't do that.

It's part of why I like the Witcher. The games and books have a thoroughly unromantic view of monarchy.

---------- Updated at 06:18 AM ----------



It reveals that Emhyr is bankrupt, amusingly, enough. It means that he CAN'T continue prosecuting the war and is going to abdicate soon.

Which means the war is unsustainable.

It convinces Dikjstra that:

A. They can take down Radovid.
B. They can win the war.

If Emyrs doesn't win the war, then he's assassinated.

See, I disagree. When you meet with Ciri before she goes off to become empress, she states that she realizes the only way that the world she wants to live in will be possible is if she makes it so by becoming empress. Also, it's pretty obvious that she wants to become empress and that yes, it is truly her choice. Geralt would sniff it out no problem if she was lying. I see it as much more empowering for her to be like "fuck it, I can't change the world by killing drowners my whole life. I have all this power, and now I can use it to change the world for the best, so I'm going to do that" as opposed to "yeah Geralt, I'll just ignore all these problems that I could fix but don't want to so that we can kill some griffins together."

---------- Updated at 06:32 AM ----------

Ah okay, thanks for clearing that up. So unless you decide to take down Radovid and install Roche as new leader, Emhyr will lose the war no matter what? Even if Djikstra doesnt know that Emhyr is bankrupt?

No. If you side with Roche, Emhyr conquers the north and Nilfgaard conquers all. However, Temeria is reinstated as a vassal state, and Nilfgaard just pretty much lets them do whatever they want.

 

[Willowhugger]

See, I disagree. When you meet with Ciri before she goes off to become empress, she states that she realizes the only way that the world she wants to live in will be possible is if she makes it so by becoming empress. Also, it's pretty obvious that she wants to become empress and that yes, it is truly her choice. Geralt would sniff it out no problem if she was lying. I see it as much more empowering for her to be like "fuck it, I can't change the world by killing drowners my whole life. I have all this power, and now I can use it to change the world for the best, so I'm going to do that" as opposed to "yeah Geralt, I'll just ignore all these problems that I could fix but don't want to so that we can kill some griffins together."

That's not my impression given if you ask her, she says she doesn't want to meet with him.

But games are inherently subjective and so is your experience.

Thanks for sharing your opinion.

---------- Updated at 06:42 AM ----------

Ah okay, thanks for clearing that up. So unless you decide to take down Radovid and install Roche as new leader, Emhyr will lose the war no matter what? Even if Djikstra doesnt know that Emhyr is bankrupt?

Radovid is insane but "functional" and somehow still managing his campaign well (maybe he delegates). As a result, all Redania needs to do is keep fighting and Nilfgaard will eventually retreat.

 

[uScared]

Radovid is insane but "functional" and somehow still managing his campaign well (maybe he delegates). As a result, all Redania needs to do is keep fighting and Nilfgaard will eventually retreat.

Yeah, he may be insane but he IS a skilled tactician.

 

[Willowhugger]

Yeah, he may be insane but he IS a skilled tactician.

Given by his eye-bags, I'm getting the impression Radovid may not even be mentally ill, just severely sleep deprived and a racist/religious zealot on a god trip.

Which is worse, really.