I did not assume that
I was trying to say that Yen and Triss do not need Geralt to protect them, and if anything it is Geralt who needs them. Geralt was healed by sorceresses several times in the books; well except the unsuccessful attempt at the end
I get what you are saying, but I still feel such approach would indirectly take away from the independence and strength of their characters.
I still insist that it is cliche as well unless it is done masterfully.
Okay, then I must have slightly misinterpreted your point. I apologize. It wasn't my intention to misrepresent your statement.
The thing is, I'm not a particular fan of the damsel in distress trope myself. It's a cheap storytelling device that plays to male wishfulfilment power fantasies. However, I don't think it applies to the Witcher because of (at least) two things.
Firstly, every major character in the series, no matter his or her gender, is constantly in peril from someone or something. As I mentoned before, no amount of magic abilities or sword mastery can properly shield our protagonists from the perils of Sapkowski's world. Which is a good thing, not only humanizes it the persons in question but adds tension and suspense. I get that putting someone as skilled and witty as Yennefer in danger and then having her rescued by Geralt can break immersion and detract from her character if done poorly. And I'm not proposing that there necessarily has to be a scene in the game where Geralt takes the role of the knight in shining armor that comes to the rescue. On the other hand you don't want to present the sorceresses as untouchable since, as said before, not only are there a multitude of conceivable circumstances in which their lives could be at risk despite their innate proficiency at sensing threats, but there has to be conflict for dramatic purposes. So, in the end it's about striking the right balance between creating believable threats and providing reasonable behaviour in response to them that doesn't undermine established character traits.
Secondly, putting characters in dangers doesn't take away their independence or make them weak in and of itself. The strength of a good character has nothing to do with the power they wield. The women in the Witcher universe aren't accomplished fictional creations because they are mighty sorceresses, capable schemers and brilliant politicians or once-in-a-lifetime archers. Don't get me wrong, it's great to see female characters occupy roles that too often are solely reserved for their male counterparts, but what makes them actual strong is that they all have their own set of motivations on which they act on. These women are active particpants with defined arcs in the kind of story that, in the past, has simply presented them as tokens, plot devices without an own agenda whose existence only served to initiate certain story beats and that were seldom more than empty shells onto which male desires were projected.
Yennefer is a strong woman. Not because she can annihilate people in the blink of an eye with a spell but because she's an actual human being and not just a cipher or trophy for Geralt to obtain. She's a complex, multi-faceted character with her own goals and wishes. Yennefer's actions are determind by her personal wants.
In the end so much comes down to presentation and execution. You want to depict a scenario that feel organic and believable and that have been carefully build up. The examples I contrived yesterday might not properly illustrate this (again, I made them up on the fly), but the idea was that an unforseen or at least difficult to anticipate event arises out of prior actions and decisions done in good faith. And this could apply to all sorts of situations, both big and small, both world-shattering and intimate.
Edit: Lots of good points made here. I think, overall, we all are in agreement regarding the more problematic issues of the conversation.
