(SPOILERS) Is Emhyr var Emreis a good emperor?

+
(SPOILERS) Is Emhyr var Emreis a good emperor?

I haven't read all of the books, but the Nilfgaardian emperor has always been described as a antagonist of sorts. However, the lore also says that he's respectful towards the elder race (elfs) and that his people are well fed/proud/etc. Besides, hes willing the reopen the Witcher schools on Nilfgard.

The northern kings are all around douchebags (Foltest was the probably the best one). Could good ol Emhyr be the best ruler for the northern kingdoms on the long run? Could anyone give me some help with the lore?
 
Emhyr is a strong and firm leader if that's what you mean.
Think of the Nilfgard as Roman Empire -- it's not necessarily evil, but it is totalitarian. The North Kingdoms although may seem corrupt and weak, symbolize independence and freedom.
 
Emhyr is definitely the most intelligent and strong willed ruler of the period. Well maybe except for King Esterad Thyssen of Kovir.

His policies though were at least strict.

What would be best, for the North, I can not tell. If Emhyr could force the North into submission and reorganize the Empire, I guess it would be good.

In my opinion if Esterad Thyssen, wanted to unite the North under his banner, that would be for the best of the people and the land. He is really charismatic and loved by his people.
 

Dizfy

Forum regular
After Foltest i don't believe in the Northern Kingdoms anymore (except for Saskia), that's why i didn't mind letting Letho go at the end of TW2..
 
In my opinion if Esterad Thyssen, wanted to unite the North under his banner, that would be for the best of the people and the land. He is really charismatic and loved by his people.

SPOILER: Sad that he is dead.

How do you make spoiler? I can't see any other options than icons in advanced replying.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
SPOILER: Sad that he is dead.

How do you make spoiler? I can't see any other options than icons in advanced replying.

He is not dead. Letho was supposed to kill him but due to change of plans he ended up killing Demawend instead.

Esterad Thyssen was later killed by assassins, though there are no references to the date of his death. He has not died until now though.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
we all have some BIG spoiler towards Emhyr, but it would be too cruel to spoil it , just read rest of books
 
Actually Kovir isn't really a part of the northern kingdoms. Officially Kovir is a neutral country.

Maybe Kovir would have become the new power in the north if Ciri really had married Tankred like the lodge of sorceresses planed. But with Ciri disappearing Kovir remained more or less neutral.

But Emhyr isn't really a "good" person. He is definitely a tragic character who acted morally damnable numerous times but who also feels remorse for doing so. We know too little about his domestic policies in Nilfgaard though to be able to assess properly whether he is a good ruler or not for the citizens during his rulership.
 
Last edited:
I'm so impressed I dare to venture into these threads with all these spoilers abound. Not the games mind, but the books, so spoiler tags people! Please! :X

On topic however I can say that the answer depend on whom you may ask. I think the view and definition of power and strong rulers are up to individual experiences. I'm sure in Nilfgaard he is loved by many, but surely not all, though this unhappiness isn't spoken out loud of course. I don't think it's a democratic empire he has forged. He's clearly a competent ruler, and seen as such, as he's been holding on to that power for some time. I've yet to get any clear picture of him(or his agenda) as I haven't read all the books, but what I've gotten from the people of the Northern Kingdoms is that he is a hated tyrant, and there must be a reason behind this hatred for them to join forces time and time again to prevent being swallowed by the empire. Surely a benevolent ruler that would improve life of all, rich or poor, wouldn't have any problems to sway people over to his side?

The 'Black Ones', as they're called, are seen with wariness and suspicion(at least directly after yet another foiled invasion). And in my experience this wariness is not unfounded(though I loved Declan Leuvarden in Witcher 1 and hope he returns in 3!). If you ask me, Emhyr has a one track mind, and that track goes straight north, no matter what lies in that path. Every peace treaty is but a postponement of the next invasion.

In one of my earliest posts I answered the question why Emhyr invaded. I answered that he(Emhyr) possibly couldn't slow down the machines of war or the gears of what he's set in motion anyway. Besides, why does anyone powerful want more power?

So do I see him as a good emperor? Well define good. Good at what he does, yes surely, but are the things he set in motion out of the good of his heart? Hell no. If nothing else war is a cheap(not in a economic sense of course) tactic and means to get your people concentrating their gaze on distant lands and conquests(prizes) instead of their gazes falling upon how bad things really are at home. And going by invasions alone it must be a really rotting and possibly sick empire indeed for him to try so hard for the Northern Kingdoms. So instead of starting anything at home soldiers get shipped away to glorious and 'justified' war.
But that's just my two orens....and that's orens people, not florens(yes I'm biased as hell). ;)

Then...there are the facts:

In the books(the two I've read) as well as in the two games, many schemes lead back to the Nilfgaardian emperor. Assassinations, weakening of alliances and softening up countries by spreading chaos and dismay always seem to be precursors for yet another invasion....and another....and another. How many has there been now? Three? When will it be enough?

Blame my individual experiences and interpretation but I cannot possibly see Emperor Emhyr var Emreis as anything else but an antagonist. Hell, he even set Letho, Serrit and Auckes(and another unkown witcher) upon the rulers of the Northern Kingdoms. As a ruler I see him as a bully. Someone who pushes people around, or outright kills them for not doing what he says. It will be very very interesting to see the devs add some...honour...to the character traits I've seen...as well as what they'll make him do for him to gain my trust in Witcher 3. I would be intrigued if he did a complete turnaround and proved to be a helpful and trustworthy ally, but then again he cannot really be trusted, as he has backstabbed allies before.

He pushed Letho, Serrit and Auckes, witchers created to protect humans and stay neutral, to become mere assassins(at least Geralt acted as a bodyguard). I don't think that they were ever going to get their Witcher Viper school anyway, I really don't, and someone as smart as Letho should have foreseen this.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, if His Imperial Majesty Emhyr var Emreis pushes my version of Geralt around, I'll push right back. Right back I tell you. With the tip of Geralt's sword at that, no matter which sword, as both are for monsters.
And having spared an outright bastard like Henselt I wouldn't even consider myself a kingslayer doing so.
 
Last edited:
Good as an emperor? Definitely.
Good as a person? Well, he's a complicated character who had done a lot of cruel things. But he can't be described just as a "bad" person at all (as well as a "good" guy) - everyone in saga makes choices of lesser evils and he just had made his own.
 
Emhyr could possibly described (among others like e.g. most sorcerers and sorceresses) as the complete opposite of Geralt in terms of morals. The White Wolf usually doesn't care about the greater good or prophecies or the greater picture. Geralt cares about immediate and direct effects and results and his morals are based on what he thinks is right in the respective direct situation without caring if he is pissing against the wind or if he acts against some greater plans. Emhyr on the other side mostly thinks that the end justify the means. He's a victim of his own social position and an offender at the same in his position as the leader of the Nilfgaardian empire. You could say that Emhyr is pretty much a product of his world and acting according to its rules, fighting for the bigger picture and for his personal power. It's doesn't make him a strictly bad person. He is to a great extend just what he is expected to be and he is quite good in what he does.
 
Emhyr is a very proud man. His family name means a lot to him. He had to return to Nilfgaard, to avenge his father, and take back the Throne. More like a victim of his own character then. But ones character is shaped by ones environment. :)
 
Last edited:
You really want Switzerland to conquer the world?



Almost everybody wants to rule...

Emhyr is not everybody. He is Emhyr, also Duny, also a man who only be loved by his parents and by Pavetta. He is a lonesome soul who wants to show to the world who is him: someone who cannot be manipulated or cursed.
 
Top Bottom