The Yennefer/Triss choice in TW3

+
Status
Not open for further replies.
Meanwhile Yennefer herself was trying to bang Auckes !
Oh the irony.

Let's not forget Istredd aka Val here, for all our die hard book lore fangurls here :p :p :p

Let us hope Triss doesnt share Auckes´s fate in the hands of Yennefer...

Well, i strongly assume that THIS will depend on our actions as Geralt here... and if we would step in.
 
You guys really think that Yen would go as far as hurting Triss or Geralt ?
Yen pretends to be cruel, but I think she'd never hurt Geralt nor Triss.
 
Well if Geralt doesnt stop killing gruesomely Yennefer´s exes I dont think even she can answer for what she will do for Geralt´s multiple banging partners.

Unluckily for Geralt, Yen has the advantage of mind reading in this particular field.:p
 
You guys really think that Yen would go as far as hurting Triss or Geralt ?
Yen pretends to be cruel, but I think she'd never hurt Geralt nor Triss.

Hm... you might be right... but by the start of TW3 i am not sure, as said before keep in mind that several years
have passed by. On the other hand i think you might be right... even though Yennefer and Triss are friends
even before Geralt "stepped" in.
 
Where exactly was this? I do not remember.

During the talk with Letho
He tells you what happen, after your JOIN the riders of the wild hunt. That they took care of Geralts "women"
She tried to seduce Auckes and drive a wedge between them... and so on...
 
You guys really think that Yen would go as far as hurting Triss or Geralt ?
Yen pretends to be cruel, but I think she'd never hurt Geralt nor Triss.

In the books, they never came to open blows partially because Yen could just yell at Triss, and that'd be enough to discourage her for a while. And that was before Triss could spend a few good months with Geralt, not to mention that she's grown up a little in the games. I don't think Yen being merely "upset" would make Triss fuck off now, especially if you support her.
That said, hurting Geralt wouldn't make a lot of sense, even for her. She'll probably sleep around (with half of Nilfgaard), but that's about it.
 
I thought for sure that this thread was created to encourage cdpr to give us a choice between triss or yennefer. However at this point im not to sure what the various arguments and debates are about. What im seeing is the pro-yennefer believes that being given a choice in romance is being unfaithful to books and shouldnt exist in the games? Or we just talking back and forth about out favorite choice. Also did cdpr ever confirm that we get to choose in the end?
 
Some CDPR guys said that it will not be a you or you choice but more complex and painful. I hope to find it very complex and surprising like chosing A instead for stay with T or Y makes her wounded or in danger 2 or 3 quests later.....
 
I thought for sure that this thread was created to encourage cdpr to give us a choice between triss or yennefer. However at this point im not to sure what the various arguments and debates are about. What im seeing is the pro-yennefer believes that being given a choice in romance is being unfaithful to books and shouldnt exist in the games? Or we just talking back and forth about out favorite choice. Also did cdpr ever confirm that we get to choose in the end?


To be honest with you, i think this discussion is circling the same agrument since page 100 or so :D
Nevertheless, it GOES back and forth Triss vs Yennefer X Yennefer vs Triss XX Geralt and so on.
Books, against games.... against whole picture of the story :D and so on and so on *smirk*

I also think it speaks for the forum quality to keep such a discussion alive over that amount of time.
Look at the first post and you see what i mean. Been years by now... even so this was one of the first threads
i wrote something in .... at my REAL join date :D

PS: Let' s hope the forum wont suffer to much of TW' s popularity now.
 
Some CDPR guys said that it will not be a you or you choice but more complex and painful. I hope to find it very complex and surprising like chosing A instead for stay with T or Y makes her wounded or in danger 2 or 3 quests later.....

I expressed the hope that "things" on the love front would hopefully be a bit more complicated and intricate than before in one of my first posts in this thread (at least I think I did). But yeah, I think apart from the whole "who should Geralt end up with" discussion which, I have to admit, spiralled a bit out of control and went off on some barely connected tangents, that it would be neat if the realtionship stuff wouldn't be solely dependent on concious decisions you can make (pick Triss/Yennefer) but closely connected to and interwoven with other, perhaps more story-related choices. I would definitedly prefer it if specific events were out of the players direct control, emphasising the fact that despite Geralt being the protagonist of the series and actively shaping certain events, in the end he's just a cog in the wheel of the more powerful forces.

I know that might not be to everyone's liking. Some people really relish the feeling of omnipotence in choice-driven RPGs, being able to anticipate and thus influence a story to a large degree. And there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. Personally though, I find the idea hugely exciting that the game might present situations which's outcome (or at least occurance) was caused by an earlier, at the time harmless appearing decision that didn't announce itself as having world-shattering consequences later on. Yennefer or Triss might suffer certain fates, not end up with Geralt or make important choices of their own* that might not align with the player's desires due to specific actions he took prior (or didn't take!) that seemed to have no correlation at the time. And as I have said before, there isn't as powerful a tragedy as one caused by good intentions. Being head-on confronated with a "who lives, who dies" scenario à la Mass Effect (Ashley/Kaiden) is dramatically boring and cheap. However, making a decision in good conscience that has grave implications the player might not have considered and that produces unforeseen repercussions throughout the remaining game, now that's compelling stuff. And if such a thing were not solely limited to, let's say, political machinations - the fall and rise of rulers and their kingdoms - but could affect Geralt's personal relationships, all the better.

*This would not only add a layer of realism and complexity to the proceedings, but also give the female characters their own set of agendas and motivations, making them not just passive participants and eye-candy.
 
Last edited:
It is a terrible idea to make a scenario where Geralt's choice between Yen/Triss puts Yen/Triss in danger. We are talking about two independent and powerful sorceresses that could turn Geralt into dust. Mages have annihilated the Witchers in Kaer Morhen before. It also would be so cliche.
 
I hope we won't get a Peter Parker Spiderman 1 movie situation. You know what I mean. In that movie he had to choose between a lot of civilians and Mary Jane. Now imagine that with Yennefer and Triss. Now THAT would be painful no matter what you choose.

I still don't know towards whom I am leaning. I mean Triss is very deceptive sometimes, with the Lodge and everything, even in the books. Same when she manipulated Geralt. She is also weaker willed in the books, while I quite like her more in the games, she changed there.

At the same time, what really turns me off about Yennefer sometimes is that she is so possessive and can be a real bitch sometimes, and I don't mean in the "insults Geralt" or "strong woman" kind of way but in a bad way kind of....

Idk....

Might just end up choosing Ciri, if you know what I mean. Get Ciri, let her tag along and leave them both standing. A man can dream right? Just father and daughter, walking towards the sunset......

Though the forest-witches/baba jaga prophecy in the latest trailer indicates a darker faith for her.... even though it is possible they were just talking nonesense...
 
Last edited:
I hope we won't get a Peter Parker Spiderman 1 movie situation. You know what I mean. In that movie he had to choose between a lot of civilians and Mary Jane. Now imagine that with Yennefer and Triss. Now THAT would be painful no matter what you choose.

I've a premonition we'll see trying choices rather like that one.
 
I hope we won't get a Peter Parker Spiderman 1 movie situation. You know what I mean. In that movie he had to choose between a lot of civilians and Mary Jane. Now imagine that with Yennefer and Triss. Now THAT would be painful no matter what you choose.

Choosing between some people you've never met, and will never meet again, and your friend /lover? Not that hard of a choice. Now imagine choosing between Ciri and the sorceresses.
Still, you're probably onto something there, even if that particular example is a bit crude. Though I wish the sorceresses would just get off my back and do something useful for once. Like casting a certain Hailstorm when the time is right.
 
It is a terrible idea to make a scenario where Geralt's choice between Yen/Triss puts Yen/Triss in danger. We are talking about two independent and powerful sorceresses that could turn Geralt into dust. Mages have annihilated the Witchers in Kaer Morhen before. It also would be so cliche.

I've never subscribed to the idea of "power levels" a.k.a. X being objectively stronger than Y and thus never in danger of being bettered by Y. There are so many different factors at play when two (or more) people fight each other: form of the day, terrain of the battle, prior injuries, preparations, ruses, weather or lighting conditions etc. pp.
The best, most powerful sorcerer can be brought down by treachery. The best fighter killed by a knife in the back or an arrow from afar, the best swordsman surprised by a pitchfork to the gut . ;)
Some of most crucial encounters in Sapkowski's books (especially Lade of the Lake) end with the weaker party walking away victorious because they had one crucial advantage over their otherwise better-equipped and overall superior adversary.

Also, I think you misunderstood the nature of the scenario I proposed. I wasn't suggesting that Geralt would kill one of the ladies or something akin to that. I was talking about unintentional repercussions of earlier decisions that might jeopardize certain characters if not lead to their demise.

Let's say - for the sake of the argument - that Geralt and Yennefer at one point during the game are at odds with each other. Yennefer is commited to supporting the North's war efforts against Nilfgaard (because reasons) and tries to convince Geralt to take up arms and join the fight. If you agree with her line of reasoning (whatever that might be) you are on good footing with her, making a reconciliation of your prior relationship more likely (though not necessary). However, if you are in opposition to that idea (because your priority is finding Ciri) you have an argument and part ways. At one point Yennefer, due to her involvement with the Northerners, gets ambushed and is injured by Nilfgaardian special forces. However, this wouldn't have happened if you were at her site. You would have dissuaded her (admittedly an unrealistic notion :D) from taking the trip on which she is attacked or at least accompanied her on it. Later, during the climax of the game (where, naturally, your paths cross again) you will have to fight the big baddy together. Yennefer, not completely healed, can't react quickly enough to evade/repel an attack and is critically hurt and succumbs to her wounds.

Another example: Geralt fights an important adversary midway-through the game, gets the upper hand and is ready to deal the final blow. Now you have the choice to let your opponent live or simply kill him. Since you sympathize with his cause and there's no real animosity between you - the duel being one of those unavoidable situations that sometimes simply arise between people with different agendas/wordviews - you mercifully decide to grant him his life. Then, towards the end of the story, that person, still fighting for his side, appears again during a crucial battle. Triss is also there because of another decision you made. She could have been occupied with saving Dandelion who has gotten himself in all sorts of trouble (naturally) but you wanted her at your site during those pivotal moments and told her to stay in your vicinity (you instead send Zoltan to rescue the bard). In the midst of the fight Triss incinerates the guy's comrades with a spell. He gets understandably pissed and approaches her from behind. You see this, try to come to her help, but because of an injury to your knee that you sustained earlier and haven't let heal properly (although Zoltan told you to seek treatment, two seperate times) you stumble - and have to watch as Triss is fatally stabbed.

Another scenario: You break up with Triss because of Yennefer. Triss is heartbroken but remains with you. During the end fight, both Yennefer and Ciri are incapacitated due to some strong magic that is employed by the bad guy. They are about to be killed and you only have time to save one of them (which could have been avoided if you had taken certain precautions, but you didn't since you were occupied otherwise). You rush to intervene and stop whatever is happening to Ciri thus basically sacrificing Yennefer. Triss, despite her hurt feelings, steps in and takes the blow directed at Yennefer. She dies.

This is obviously a pure thought experiment meant to illustrate the kind of gameplay mechanic I was thinking of. An interconnected chain of events that is influenced by - over the course of the game - a number of your decisions which might seem irrelevant to the larger picture at time but can potentially have far-reaching consequences. Please not that the situations decribed above most likely don't hold up to scrutiny and shouldn't be taken seriously, neither story nor character-wise. It's simply the first best thing I could come up with (at so late an hour).

Edit: Also, these are three variations of one possible scenario (a potential love interest dies). Of course this cause and effect/action-reaction principle could apply to a much smaller, less deadly range of situations. Who stays on or ascends a throne, what happens to the Lodge, the fate of the Scoia'tael and so on. All these things could be affected - to a reasonable degree - by several choices that have an cumulative impact. Whether Geralt ends up with Triss or Yennefer (or none of them) could be dependent on a number of minor decisions that have an influence on their behaviour towards him as well as on parts of the ongoing plot.
 
Last edited:
Also, I think you misunderstood the nature of the scenario I proposed. I wasn't suggesting that Geralt would kill one of the ladies or something akin to that. I was talking about unintentional repercussions of earlier decisions that might jeopardize certain characters if not lead to their demise.
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 :p
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.
 
@ what wichat said,( I can't quote right now) -- I remember that: "you've already made your decision". I'm not sure if this means whatever choices you've made in tw2 (it sounds like that to me) or a really vague choice made really early in tw3, but I think it's going to be much more complex than just "choose one vs saving innocents", " endanger relevant sorceress for emotional attachment purposes ". They're already prophesying 'if you find Ciri, she will die'. Doubt they'll try that twice.

I'll be honest, I don't know what they mean by 'already made your decision.'

EDIT: I misread wichat's comment NVM IGNORE ME.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom