[SPOILERS FOR TW1/2/3] Triss Merigold - master manipulator or a victim of circumstance?

[Zyvik]

Do you have proper evidence of that ?

No, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was intentional. The game heavily played up this weird rivarly between Triss and Sheala (wich came out of nowhere), so it would make sense that Triss didn't particularly care whether she assassinated Foltest or not.

 

[sv3672]

No, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was intentional. The game heavily played up this weird rivarly between Triss and Sheala (wich came out of nowhere), so it would make sense that Triss didn't particularly care whether she assassinated Foltest or not.

It is somewhat ironical to accuse someone of deliberately making an accusation without sufficient evidence without having sufficient evidence.

 

[Zyvik]

It is somewhat ironical to accuse someone of deliberately making an accusation without sufficient evidence without having sufficient evidence.

It doesn't really matter to me whether it was intentional or not tbh. It's still slander. If you don't have any evidence of someone murdering someone then you don't accuse them until you 100% sure.

 

[Guest 3847602]

Would Geralt have had a relationship with Triss if he had no amnesia?

According to book fans, the answer is probably "no", but in fact we cannot know for sure.

There is a book called Blood of Elves that answers if Geralt without the amnesia would be in a relationship with Triss. At that time he and Yennefer were not together. So yeah, we can know for sure...

 

[sv3672]

There is a book called Blood of Elves that answers if Geralt without the amnesia would be in a relationship with Triss. At that time he and Yennefer were not together. So yeah, we can know for sure...

There is a game called The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt that answers if Geralt without the amnesia can be in a relationship with Triss. So, what do we know for sure ? Geralt is not a robot that behaves in an entirely predictable and repeatable way forever. And if CDPR wanted such relationship in the first game without the amnesia, chances are they would still have written it into the game anyway.

 

[Zyvik]

There is a game called The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt that answers if Geralt without the amnesia can be in a relationship with Triss.

Not without the amnesia. After the amnesia.

 

[Guest 3847602]

There is a game called The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt that answers if Geralt without the amnesia can be in a relationship with Triss. So, what do we know for sure ? Geralt is not a robot that behaves in an entirely predictable and repeatable way forever. And if CDPR wanted such relationship in the first game without the amnesia, chances are they would still have written it into the game anyway.

The game called The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt happens after amnesia, therefore having amnesia already influenced Geralt. If one wishes to know what would have happened between them without the influence of amnesia there is only one place to look at and it's not in the games.

 

[zappy3]

There is a game called The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt that answers if Geralt without the amnesia can be in a relationship with Triss. So, what do we know for sure ? Geralt is not a robot that behaves in an entirely predictable and repeatable way forever. And if CDPR wanted such relationship in the first game without the amnesia, chances are they would still have written it into the game anyway.

There is a good reason as to why CDPR chose to write that amnesia thing : they wanted to write a new story for a character that in the books was already fully grown and had already made those choices.
I agree though : Geralt is not a robot, he can change his mind about things included his relationship with Yennefer, why not? But he surely wouldn't change his mind about something THAT important randomly without a good reason. Otherwise it makes no sense. If you don't find a good reason for Geralt to change then why would he? If the situation was the same he would do the same choices, simple as that. The reason CDPR chose to make the Geralt/Triss thing possible was the amnesia. Of course after the amnesia you can say that Geralt realized that Triss was is true love and that he still loves her even though he's got his memory back. Still if it wasn't for the amnesia, then you should have found another reason for that to happen, and maybe there could have been another reason. But some kind of explanation is still needed.

 

[sv3672]

The game called The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt happens after amnesia, therefore having amnesia already influenced Geralt. If one wishes to know what would have happened between them without the influence of amnesia there is only one place to look at and it's not in the games.

In the alternate universe where the games were made without the amnesia, they would still have been the games, made by different authors from the books. And again, if they wanted the relationship in the game (one where choice is an important aspect), they would have found the way to implement it.

Would Geralt have had a relationship with Triss if he had no amnesia? If the answer is that he would have slept with her then there can never be any manipulation as his own actions would have ended int he same result.

Another question is whether he would have had the relationship with the amnesia, but being told about Yennefer from the beginning - well, actually this happens in the second game, and the relationship can continue until the end. Because even then his feelings towards Yennefer would not have been the same as before until his memories are recovered. It is one thing being told that you were in love with someone in the past, as if talking about a third person, and another to actually remember what it was like. One can also easily choose Shani instead, maybe a master manipulator would have tried harder to prevent that ?

 

[Guest 3847602]

In the alternate universe where the games were made without the amnesia, they would still have been the games, made by different authors from the books. And again, if they wanted the relationship in the game (one where choice is an important aspect), they would have found the way to implement it.

I never thought we were discussing the alternate universes, but sure, in that case someone can create the game in which: Geralt can love anyone with or without the amnesia, Philippa can be his mother, Zoltan is his ugly half-sister, Dandelion his boyfriend, etc, etc... I don't see the point of this, tbh. In the game series CDPR created Geralt's amnesia was pretty big thing for him and everything that happened after TW1 began was influenced by it.

 

[Zyvik]

I never thought we were discussing the alternate universes, but sure, in that case someone can create the game in which: Geralt can love anyone with or without the amnesia, Philippa can be his mother, Zoltan is his ugly half-sister, Dandelion his boyfriend, etc, etc... I don't see the point of this, tbh. In the game series CDPR created Geralt's amnesia was pretty big thing for him and everything that happened after TW1 began was influenced by it.

Oh, this would be so awesome :lol:

I totally agree. I don't see a point in discussing some weird alternate universe. I'd argue that if in some alternate universe CDPR wanted to make a game without the amnesia angle they would've gone with Yennefer from the start. The games are what they are. They have the amnesia.

 

[Garrison72]

I would say that Triss was set on obtaining Geralt's affections. Even by TW3 she openly admits to seduction to Geralt. In the books she's of the same mold, trying to take advantage of the gap that widens between Geralt and Yennefer at various times.

Uhm, well yes. Much like real life, there's competition out there. This, however, touches superficially on her character development. She's not ever being malevolent. Misguided, yes, but not knowingly hurtful. And she comes round, admits everything and offers to set it all straight by helping him to find Yen. You don't get more reconciliation than that. This is of course at the end of TW2. Everything in TW3 is misguided writing and I honestly don't see it as part of her arc.

 

[Goodmongo]

Geralt without amnesia would have been aware of his past with a woman he had traded in his life for and with whom he had been, by all accounts, almost obsessively in love for almost two decades. I think it's fair to assume he would have gone looking for said woman instead of canoodling with another woman he had very clearly turned down before.

Then explain why he would sleep with Metz and all the other possible situations? Seems to me he's a horn dog and loves to "mess" around.

---------- Updated at 10:23 PM ----------

There is a book called Blood of Elves that answers if Geralt without the amnesia would be in a relationship with Triss. At that time he and Yennefer were not together. So yeah, we can know for sure...

Gosh I seem to recall that Geralt slept with someone other than Yen. It wasn't Triss but the point is if you are willing to sleep around then it's in his capability to do so.

Oh and Metz happens AFTER he meets Yen. It's a definite option along with a few other encounters.

One last important point about book vs. game. In a book the choices are made by the author. You are dictated to. Of course a book is no fun to play so games must give you choices. I can pick Shani in TW1, no one in TW2 and Triss in TW3. The games granted me these choices. Therefore they are valid outcomes according to the game designers.

Or let me put it this way. In the books I'm sure some of the things we did in TW1 and TW2 had very different outcomes. Does that invalidate the other choices and options?

 

[Guest 3847602]

Gosh I seem to recall that Geralt slept with someone other than Yen. It wasn't Triss but the point is if you are willing to sleep around then it's in his capability to do so.

In the books, the only woman Geralt was in the relationship beside Yennefer was Fringilla. Having casual sex with someone =/= being in the relationship with that person.

Oh and Metz happens AFTER he meets Yen. It's a definite option along with a few other encounters.

Keira Metz can happen in the game, she is one-night stand, therefore she's not the evidence against what I said.

One last important point about book vs. game. In a book the choices are made by the author. You are dictated to. Of course a book is no fun to play so games must give you choices. I can pick Shani in TW1, no one in TW2 and Triss in TW3. The games granted me these choices. Therefore they are valid outcomes according to the game designers.

I never claimed the choices made in game are not valid. The question you asked is this:

Would Geralt have had a relationship with Triss if he had no amnesia?

My answer to you is: no, he wouldn't, he didn't have the amnesia in the books - he refused Triss in the books. TW1 begins with amnesiac Geralt, anything that can happen from that point on is not the evidence for what would non-amnesiac Geralt do.

 

[StandardEpiphany]

Then explain why he would sleep with Metz and all the other possible situations? Seems to me he's a horn dog and loves to "mess" around.

---------- Updated at 10:23 PM ----------



Gosh I seem to recall that Geralt slept with someone other than Yen. It wasn't Triss but the point is if you are willing to sleep around then it's in his capability to do so.

Oh and Metz happens AFTER he meets Yen. It's a definite option along with a few other encounters.

One last important point about book vs. game. In a book the choices are made by the author. You are dictated to. Of course a book is no fun to play so games must give you choices. I can pick Shani in TW1, no one in TW2 and Triss in TW3. The games granted me these choices. Therefore they are valid outcomes according to the game designers.

Or let me put it this way. In the books I'm sure some of the things we did in TW1 and TW2 had very different outcomes. Does that invalidate the other choices and options?

Of course, it is not beyond the realm of possibility that Geralt would sleep with anyone. He could sleep with Vesemir too, just to try out new things.

The thing is, Keira Metz is not Triss. If the amnesia never happened, then we are talking about a Geralt who had full knowledge of his past with Triss, of his lack of romantic feelings for her and consequent rejection of her, and of how that had affected her. For him to fuck her, knowing only too well that he was going to leave her and pursue Yennefer (they were very much together and happy at that point, until the Wild Hunt kidnapped her and the exchange took place), seems like the kind of douchey move that Geralt would never pull on Triss.

PS: I can't tell if this discussion is still on topic. I guess if we'll keep going with these "what ifs" it's going to get off the rails completely, so I say let us agree to disagree and leave it at that.

 

[Riven-Twain]

PS: I can't tell if this discussion is still on topic.

It does appear to be wandering rather. I suggest everyone either head back towards the topic, please, or take a breather for a while. Thank you.

 

[sv3672]

Gosh I seem to recall that Geralt slept with someone other than Yen. It wasn't Triss but the point is if you are willing to sleep around then it's in his capability to do so.

Oh and Metz happens AFTER he meets Yen. It's a definite option along with a few other encounters.

One last important point about book vs. game. In a book the choices are made by the author. You are dictated to. Of course a book is no fun to play so games must give you choices. I can pick Shani in TW1, no one in TW2 and Triss in TW3. The games granted me these choices. Therefore they are valid outcomes according to the game designers.

There is no use trying to argue with the (in my opinion simplistic and elitist) view that in the games nothing can change compared to the books, and everything is expected to stay the same forever. But what would have happened without Geralt's amnesia is not relevant here anyway, what might be is what would have happened if he had amnesia but was told about his past from the beginning. That is not the same. Another question is if his fate would have been better in any way if he had amnesia, but never met Triss in the games ?

 

[Goodmongo]

what might be is what would have happened if he had amnesia but was told about his past from the beginning. That is not the same.

A very interesting question and hypothesis. So the writers for the game lay it out as follows:

Triss tells Geralt all about his past and yen. Triss still comes on to geralt and Geralt agrees.

It's been documented that people with amnesia feel nothing and can't recall past feelings even when introduced to their wife and children. Geralt would have knowledge about Yen but no feelings about Yen so it's very plausible he would go for a relationship with Triss. After all no one really knew if Yen was alive and all he knows is that he "had" (past tense) a relationship with Yen.

Under this scenario it is impossible to say Triss manipulated Geralt. He made the decision with full knowledge. Of course I still say since he made the decision to have a relationship even with triss not saying anything about Yen it was still his choices and therefore no manipulation.

 

[GuyNwah]

There is no use trying to argue with the (in my opinion simplistic and elitist) view

Moderator: This is exactly what the moderators meant when they prohibited posts purporting to state the opinions of others. You are entitled to your opinion, but to your opinion alone. You are NOT free to argue that any other member or class of players holds any opinion, especially not one that you set up as a straw man just to be knocked down.

 

[dragonbird]

A very interesting question and hypothesis. So the writers for the game lay it out as follows:

Triss tells Geralt all about his past and yen. Triss still comes on to geralt and Geralt agrees.

It's been documented that people with amnesia feel nothing and can't recall past feelings even when introduced to their wife and children. Geralt would have knowledge about Yen but no feelings about Yen so it's very plausible he would go for a relationship with Triss. After all no one really knew if Yen was alive and all he knows is that he "had" (past tense) a relationship with Yen.

Under this scenario it is impossible to say Triss manipulated Geralt. He made the decision with full knowledge.

I totally, 100% agree with this. If Triss had disclosed everything at the beginning of TW1, it would no longer have been manipulation, and Geralt may still have decided he preferred Triss. This is what actually happens in TW2 if the player chooses for Geralt to continue to love Triss after the disclosure en route to Flotsam.

Of course I still say since he made the decision to have a relationship even with triss not saying anything about Yen it was still his choices and therefore no manipulation.

This is where we disagree, as I'd consider Triss withholding that information to be manipulation. Even though he may subsequently have fallen in love with Triss, the initial decision to sleep with her at Kaer Morhen in TW1 was made based on a false understanding of the situation, an understanding that Triss knew to be false but made no attempt to correct.