That's a good point, but for my Geralt it's enough evidence to know he did it. He's got the motive, the association, and the desire for her to die, so even if I am wrong (we'll find out in The Witcher 3) it's his fault for being a arrogant scumbag prick (lol). I still let him live though for a "fair trial".HenryBohun said:
To be clear, my favorite path involves Stennis being beaten to death and Saskia creating the free realm of the Pontar Valley - guilty or not, Stennis is an immature royal prick who doesn't deserve the throne. Given the license for chaos it creates, however, it's not the most stable - leaving Aedirn in flames, Temeria divided and mages incinerated on a mass scale.
Surely the strongest North option is siding with Roche, sparing Henselt and giving Anias to Radovid and killing Saskia. The Aedirnian Knight in chapter 3 says how Henselt is taking all of Aedirn under his control - which when combined with Radovid in control of Temeria, preferably with Natalis in some kind of command role, means there are two giant power blocks in the North to take on Nilfgaard rather than a slightly weakened Kaedwen, a Aedirn with no royal forces and undoubtedly Radovid losing some men to Temerians who don't like him moving in.
The best ending for me is curing saskia. Her ideas seem to be right and she seems to be an idealistic person. Well, maybe she could be a better monarch than every human could be. Even if the pontar valley wouldn't survive the war with nilfgard as long as saskia lives (dragons can live quite long, right?) her ideas survive. And over long term intellectual ideas and not swords rule the world.
PS:
To be honest I don't think the common folk would care if the northern kingdoms or nilfgard wins the war, as there is a reasonable peace agreement (probably there will be one like the one the war before), so they just pay taxes to a different king.
PS:
To be honest I don't think the common folk would care if the northern kingdoms or nilfgard wins the war, as there is a reasonable peace agreement (probably there will be one like the one the war before), so they just pay taxes to a different king.
I'm not sure of Saskia leading an independent state is going to be good for itself or the North. Her judgement seems a tad shot. She kills hundreds of Temerians at La Valette Castle, all to help Ayran in his "fight against tyranny". Yet how tyrannical is Foltest? He's hardly granting equal rights to the people but he gives power to the low born Roche and Thaler, who doesn't seem like a noble and takes outcasts like Geralt into his household. Compare to Aryan, who when told that the Blue Stripes are protecting his mother protests against it. Does he do this for understandable reason like the fact that they are loyal only to Foltest or that they are vicious and brutal? No he protests that ones of such low birth should not be allowed to guard his mother and it should be left to someone who is at least a Baronet.
The Northern leaders need to not be arguing over who owns what. They need to mount a united response now, with all the resources at their disposal, or they will be overrun in short order and making their first coordinated defense at the gates of Vizima or at the Pontar.
This means they need all their armies in the field, with the best war leaders in command, now and not after they settle their petty disputes. Their armies are not mere peasant levies or "lame drowners in colorful gambesons". They are veteran national armies who will fight with skill and discipline, who will fight to the death for the right commander. The Order, while not a national army, is a force of the same or better quality and can be counted on to ally with a united Northern front.
The Temerian army plays no small part in this. They are the best-positioned opposition between Nilfgaard and the Pontar. The core of the army, at least three thousand, is loyal to John Natalis; if Natalis commands them, they will fight, but otherwise they will many of them desert and disperse. Thus the strongest positions are those that preserve Natalis's command: either Anais goes to Radovid, and Temeria becomes, intact, a protectorate; or Anais goes to Natalis, and Temeria unites behind their girl-queen, if only united enough to fight for a while.
Where does Saskia fit in? She cannot count on the loyalty of the Aedirnian nobility or army, only her hayfoot-strawfoot militia and Iorveth's Scoia'tael. While they could defend a city, they would be useless in the open field. But that may be enough to hold a position in Upper Aedirn, especially if the nonhumans rally to her, and the Nilfgaardians refuse to be distracted into making war upon her.
It doesn't really matter in this context whether Saskia is freed of her spell or remains under control of the remnant of the Lodge. The mages need Saskia and an independent Upper Aedirn, and they're just practical enough to know it. Whether Saskia is a figurehead for the Lodge or a ruler in her own right, she's the best chance for keeping an independent state and place of refuge on the Pontar.
So I believe the "best" ending, in terms of being able to prepare for and resist a Nilfgaardian blitzkrieg that is surely coming, and coming fast, is:
Aryan LaVallette lives, so the LaVallettes remain loyal to Temeria. If the Baroness sells the LaVallettes out to Nilfgaard, it's a disaster. The Black Ones get a strategic position on the Pontar, Temeria is caught in the pincers, and Redania is invaded in short order.
I'd rather Loredo live long enough to make his deal with Kaedwen. As cruel as a Kaedweni garrison would be, it would be a professional army holding a strategic position. They'll hang Loredo as soon as he becomes expendable. Not possible on Roche's path, unfortunately.
Henselt lives, and Iorveth escapes the fall of Vergen. Henselt may be a skurwysynu, but he's the biggest, meanest skurwysynu the North has (and thanks to Geralt, he's got his mojo back).
Anais is delivered either to Radovid (and Radovid backs Natalis as war leader) or to Natalis (and the Temerian nobles back Natalis). This keeps Natalis in a strong position as war leader, and also Roche, the North's other leading skurwysynu, in the action.
Saskia lives; she, the remnant of the Lodge, and Iorveth will begin organizing a resistance movement in the upper Pontar. Henselt will have bigger problems to attend to than maintaining control of Lormark, giving them a fighting chance. Without a place of refuge for the nonhumans, Nilfgaardian propaganda will turn many of them against the North.
This means they need all their armies in the field, with the best war leaders in command, now and not after they settle their petty disputes. Their armies are not mere peasant levies or "lame drowners in colorful gambesons". They are veteran national armies who will fight with skill and discipline, who will fight to the death for the right commander. The Order, while not a national army, is a force of the same or better quality and can be counted on to ally with a united Northern front.
The Temerian army plays no small part in this. They are the best-positioned opposition between Nilfgaard and the Pontar. The core of the army, at least three thousand, is loyal to John Natalis; if Natalis commands them, they will fight, but otherwise they will many of them desert and disperse. Thus the strongest positions are those that preserve Natalis's command: either Anais goes to Radovid, and Temeria becomes, intact, a protectorate; or Anais goes to Natalis, and Temeria unites behind their girl-queen, if only united enough to fight for a while.
Where does Saskia fit in? She cannot count on the loyalty of the Aedirnian nobility or army, only her hayfoot-strawfoot militia and Iorveth's Scoia'tael. While they could defend a city, they would be useless in the open field. But that may be enough to hold a position in Upper Aedirn, especially if the nonhumans rally to her, and the Nilfgaardians refuse to be distracted into making war upon her.
It doesn't really matter in this context whether Saskia is freed of her spell or remains under control of the remnant of the Lodge. The mages need Saskia and an independent Upper Aedirn, and they're just practical enough to know it. Whether Saskia is a figurehead for the Lodge or a ruler in her own right, she's the best chance for keeping an independent state and place of refuge on the Pontar.
So I believe the "best" ending, in terms of being able to prepare for and resist a Nilfgaardian blitzkrieg that is surely coming, and coming fast, is:
Aryan LaVallette lives, so the LaVallettes remain loyal to Temeria. If the Baroness sells the LaVallettes out to Nilfgaard, it's a disaster. The Black Ones get a strategic position on the Pontar, Temeria is caught in the pincers, and Redania is invaded in short order.
I'd rather Loredo live long enough to make his deal with Kaedwen. As cruel as a Kaedweni garrison would be, it would be a professional army holding a strategic position. They'll hang Loredo as soon as he becomes expendable. Not possible on Roche's path, unfortunately.
Henselt lives, and Iorveth escapes the fall of Vergen. Henselt may be a skurwysynu, but he's the biggest, meanest skurwysynu the North has (and thanks to Geralt, he's got his mojo back).
Anais is delivered either to Radovid (and Radovid backs Natalis as war leader) or to Natalis (and the Temerian nobles back Natalis). This keeps Natalis in a strong position as war leader, and also Roche, the North's other leading skurwysynu, in the action.
Saskia lives; she, the remnant of the Lodge, and Iorveth will begin organizing a resistance movement in the upper Pontar. Henselt will have bigger problems to attend to than maintaining control of Lormark, giving them a fighting chance. Without a place of refuge for the nonhumans, Nilfgaardian propaganda will turn many of them against the North.
I need to do a straight up Temerian supremacy playthrough. For Temeria!
In my point of view, siding with Roche is slightly better than going with Iorveth(and it is the only way to secure Temeria's influence on Flotsam, as well as slaying the b*tch Loredo and the kaedweni spy ). Moreover, In act 2, I think that it would be better if you killed Henselt, as it is probable that he colludes with Nilfgard in the near future, and aside from that he was a scoundrel, who was hated by the very citizens of Kaedwen(as it is indicated by Roche who recently travelled there)and who also killed all of Roche's unit. He pretty much deserved it. In addition, even though my initial opinion about the choice of the player in act 3 was to save Triss, I reconsidered it and actually changed my mind, having taken into consideration that the future of Temeria depends on you. Aside from having the privilege of eradicating the rat Dethmold, you manage to save Anais. On the contrary to many people's opinions, my personal opinion is that you should hand over the child to Temeria, as you cannot be very confident in Radovid, and his plans. And let's not forget that Temeria is currently in dire need of a ruler, and not a filthy noble, but the king's very daughter!
Were you just describing the strongest north or the strongest Temeria?Redjohn said:In my point of view, siding with Roche is slightly better than going with Iorveth(and it is the only way to secure Temeria's influence on Flotsam, as well as slaying the b*tch Loredo and the kaedweni spy ). Moreover, In act 2, I think that it would be better if you killed Henselt, as it is probable that he colludes with Nilfgard in the near future, and aside from that he was a scoundrel, who was hated by the very citizens of Kaedwen(as it is indicated by Roche who recently travelled there)and who also killed all of Roche's unit. He pretty much deserved it. In addition, even though my initial opinion about the choice of the player in act 3 was to save Triss, I reconsidered it and actually changed my mind, having taken into consideration that the future of Temeria depends on you. Aside from having the privilege of eradicating the rat Dethmold, you manage to save Anais. On the contrary to many people's opinions, my personal opinion is that you should hand over the child to Temeria, as you cannot be very confident in Radovid, and his plans. And let's not forget that Temeria is currently in dire need of a ruler, and not a filthy noble, but the king's very daughter!
You could say that I was describing the strongest Temeria , yes. Come to think of it again, this is the most '' temerian friendly'' playthrough! XD. Although that does not necaisserily mean that I made all of these choices because of Temeria. Thing is, These are the choices I made on my main playthrough. I think that they are the most wise and definately the best options, though I respect other people's opinions as well. As for the strongest north, well, that's complicated. Suppose that I let Henselt live, for instance, what would the outcome of this decision be? Nobody can say for sure. It is indicated indirectly that he has plans to collude with Nilfgard, which is terribly worrying. But, what if this wasn't the case? What if he proved to be a good and faithfull ruler and fight to the end against the Nilfgardian invaders in TW3? For the reasons outlined in my previous post, I guess that most probably things will be better if you killed him. Also, having rescued Anais and having handed her over to the Temerians, you secure Temeria's dominance, if not its existence. So, in other words, this playthrough strengthens the north in general(despite my doubts about killing Henselt).
I must admit that I disagree with you when you say that the playthorugh strengthens the north. It leaves Aedirn without a ruler, Temeria with a child as queen and the north without a Council and Conclave, which means most of the mages are hunted to death.
There's no saving the council and conclave. Whatever your choices may be, it's impossible to prevent that from happening. As for Aedirn, well it's true that it is left without a ruler, but if you think about it, even if you help Iorveth, and therefore defend Vergen, he himself admits that it was all in vain. Besides, Iorveth intends to actually retake those lands so his kind can live there again. It has nothing to do with Aedirn in general. Aedirn is left without a ruler, regardless. Last but not least, would you rather Temeria stayed without a ruler at all? Or divided into provinces by some nobles? Of course not. On the other hand, Anais, despite beng a child, seems to be capable and responsible, and besides that, she has constable Natalis as a regent.
Before I make a reply, how many playthroughs do you have? Because a lot of your information is just plain wrongRedjohn said:There's no saving the council and conclave. Whatever your choices may be, it's impossible to prevent that from happening. As for Aedirn, well it's true that it is left without a ruler, but if you think about it, even if you help Iorveth, and therefore defend Vergen, he himself admits that it was all in vain. Besides, Iorveth intends to actually retake those lands so his kind can live there again. It has nothing to do with Aedirn in general. Aedirn is left without a ruler, regardless. Last but not least, would you rather Temeria stayed without a ruler at all? Or divided into provinces by some nobles? Of course not. On the other hand, Anais, despite beng a child, seems to be capable and responsible, and besides that, she has constable Natalis as a regent.
Partly untrue. Mostly depends on many decisions through ACT 2 and 3, like sparing\killing the dragon, Henselt and Stennis. But in fact we don't know whether Saskia will be able to rule the Lormark or not, and whether Stennis will be able strong enough to rule the country.Redjohn said:There's no saving the council and conclave. Whatever your choices may be, it's impossible to prevent that from happening. As for Aedirn, well it's true that it is left without a ruler, but if you think about it, even if you help Iorveth, and therefore defend Vergen, he himself admits that it was all in vain.
Where did you hear this?Besides, Iorveth intends to actually retake those lands so his kind can live there again.
You're missing major points of the plot here I'm afraid.It has nothing to do with Aedirn in general. Aedirn is left without a ruler, regardless. Last but not least, would you rather Temeria stayed without a ruler at all? Or divided into provinces by some nobles? Of course not. On the other hand, Anais, despite beng a child, seems to be capable and responsible, and besides that, she has constable Natalis as a regent.
If not misunderstanding you played both Roche's and Ioveth path, am I right? Killed Stennis, saved Anais, killed Henselt and gave the child o Natalis?
try changing these choices and you'll see.
4. No, they're not wrong. I have played the game 4 times. And I'm not blind. Unless you think I am. You either misunderstood me, or think me a typical ex- action player with little RPG experience. Witchever the case, you must understand the purpose of this thread, and the fact that we're talking about a game. And a great one at that. You just don't share my concepts and have different opinions. I can understand that. That's why there are lotsof options avaliable to the player.Bleor said:Before I make a reply, how many playthroughs do you have? Because a lot of your information is just plain wrong
Well, I have done multiple playthroughs and it's still impossible to save the conclave. I think that you misunderstood me, because I don't claim that there aren't any alternative choices(in general), but no matter your choices, it is indicated in the end of the game, that the people start hunting '' magic freaks''. Also, Iorveth clearly said that he intented to make Aedirn an elven state, where both humans and elves would be welcome. That being said, it will cease to be a typical northen kingdom with a king, it will be completely indepedent. I ''heard'' it in the game.It's totally obvious that you underestimate me. Besides, my choices are my choices. If you don't approove of them, so be it.secondchildren said:Partly untrue. Mostly depends on many decisions through ACT 2 and 3, like sparing\killing the dragon, Henselt and Stennis. But in fact we don't know whether Saskia will be able to rule the Lormark or not, and whether Stennis will be able strong enough to rule the country.
Where did you hear this?
You're missing major points of the plot here I'm afraid.
If not misunderstanding you played both Roche's and Ioveth path, am I right? Killed Stennis, saved Anais, killed Henselt and gave the child o Natalis?
try changing these choices and you'll see.
Firstly. If you save Triss, which you can do on both Roche's and Iorveth's path, you will prevent the massacre and the council and conclave will be restored.Redjohn said:4. No, they're not wrong. I have played the game 4 times. And I'm not blind. Unless you think I am. You either misunderstood me, or think me a typical ex- action player with little RPG experience. Witchever the case, you must understand the purpose of this thread, and the fact that we're talking about a game. And a great one at that. You just don't share my concepts and have different opinions. I can understand that. That's why there are lotsof options avaliable to the player.
Secondly. If you give Anais to Redania instead of Natalis, Radovid will take control of Temeria, and that will result in a much stronger Temeria than giving her to Natalis (basically because Radovid is a good politician and because he is supported by the Redanian army and the Order of the Flaming Rose). Also, if you go Iorveth path, Temeria will be split between Henselt and Radovid and not into provinces.
Lastly. It's great that you have your own opinions, I just felt like you lacked or had misunderstood some facts.
What you said about Triss, and preventing the massaccre, is this added to the enhanced edition? Cause in the original game when I saved Triss, from what I remember, there was a massacre as well. As for handing the child to Radovid, well, there's no guarantee that he will stop there. Actually, he will probably control Temeria from there on forever. It may be stronger indeed, but it will cease to be Temeria. It will be Redania. And in Iorveth's path, things go from bad to worse, as Radovid and Henselt officially split Temeria between themselves. Even if it becomes stronger, is it worth it? It will be the end of the Temeria we knew.Bleor said:Firstly. If you save Triss, which you can do on both Roche's and Iorveth's path, you will prevent the massacre and the council and conclave will be restored.
Secondly. If you give Anais to Redania instead of Natalis, Radovid will take control of Temeria, and that will result in a much stronger Temeria than giving her to Natalis (basically because Radovid is a good politician and because he is supported by the Redanian army and the Order of the Flaming Rose). Also, if you go Iorveth path, Temeria will be split between Henselt and Radovid and not into provinces.
Lastly. It's great that you have your own opinions, I just felt like you lacked or had misunderstood some facts.
It is made more explicit in the EE, but yes, saving Triss does yield action showing that there was not a massacre of the mages. You may have overlooked it; before the EE, it did not play such a large part.
Temeria ceasing to be an independent kingdom is not really a concern for the survival of the North. The greater concern is the continuity of John Natalis's command.
Temeria ceasing to be an independent kingdom is not really a concern for the survival of the North. The greater concern is the continuity of John Natalis's command.
Saskia said this but this doesn't mean that Aedirn is doom. As I said, it mostly depends on whether you kill\spare Stennis and Henselt.Redjohn said:Also, Iorveth clearly said that he intented to make Aedirn an elven state, where both humans and elves would be welcome.
This is what Saskia and Philippa actually would rather to. The Lodge especially would make the Lormark as a "fortress" to stand against the threat of Nilfgaard. And possibly giving more power to the Lodge itself.That being said, it will cease to be a typical northen kingdom with a king, it will be completely indepedent.
How about being less assuming and more listening? No one is saying anything against you, we're just trying to debate about your supposition and ours. We may even learn by each others, you know? Such as I've just learn that in the EE there is a way to save the Council.I ''heard'' it in the game.It's totally obvious that you underestimate me. Besides, my choices are my choices. If you don't approove of them, so be it.
But seems that you don't like being "discussed" at all instead. Good for you then.