Triss Merigold (all spoilers)

[saladin1701]

The 3rd.

Well if you break up with her in TW2, having Triss say (in TW3) that you broke up with her six months ago makes perfect sense. If you chose to remain in a relationship with her, rescue her then travel South to Nilfgaard to search for Yennefer then it doesn't. It's an inconsistency in the story.

Vesemir is perfect in the prologue, it's mainly necessary in order to put the player in the right mood at Kaer Morhen and how Geralt feels. Even him disturb you?

Not when viewed as part of a Trilogy. Here's the mistake a lot of you are making. You're looking at The Witcher 3's story as a stand alone story. It's not, it's a continuation and conclusion of a story that began in the first game. Vesemir did not feature in the previous game and if he was on the path, could be practically anywhere in the Northern Realms. If you play TW2 like I did, Letho tells you were to look for Yennefer - Nilfgaard, specifically the capital city, in other words, you're heading away from the Northern Kingdoms. When viewed in that context it makes sense that Triss would be the one Geralt had been on the road with for the last six months.

Remember, TW3 is set six months after TW2 and further remember that he explicitly says to Vesemir, "You know, we've been on the road six months now". Those two facts are a contradiction that is irreconcilable. There's a further contradiction in the codex which says "In the spring of 1272, when our story begins, Vesemir had joined Geralt on his search for Yennefer, trekking with him through a war-ravaged Temeria". When you arrive at Loc Muinne in TW2, it's Winter 1271.

Between the events of that ending and the beginning of the third game, Geralt has to have travelled to Nilfgaard to find Yennefer is no longer there and is travelling North at a break neck pace. There simply is not enough time to have found Vesemir and done that. It's a huge plot hole, unless they are suggesting he just so happens to run in to him around Loc Muinne in which case would make it the single most contrived set of circumstances in any writing since the dawn of time.

 

[FarrySquall]

Yeah, the tutorial clearly isn't going work with Triss but here's how it should have been.

Yennefer romance >> Triss romance/Yennefer romance >> Act 1: Velen >> Triss romance >> Yennefer romance >> Triss romance/Yennefer romance > >> Act 2: Ilse of Mists >> Triss romance/Yennefer romance > >> Act 3: Bald Mountain >> Triss romance/Yennefer romance >> Triss romance/Yennefer romance

Triss should have been in the prologue, not Vesemir, if you'd chosen to romance her in the previous game. It was a monumental cock up not doing that. In Act 2: Kaer Morhen, Triss should be there if you romance her and you should have the opportunity to go through scenes of romance with her like you can with Yen. She also needs to have that final scene in Act 3: Skellige. Just a short conversation about her fears for Geralt in the upcoming battle. Adding her to the prologue, Kaer Morhen at the beginning of Act 2 and a short scene before the final boss fight would address the issues of imbalance between the two romances and resolve a lot of the inconsistencies that exist between The Witcher 2 and The Witcher 3.

Love your analysis and suggestions

One thing bother me is Vesemir though, He and Triss can be with Geralt together to search for Yen, no need to remove him (IMO he like a father to Geralt). Still i never see the future for this one get in game

Maybe I'm confusing with the bath dialogue

Maybe, i am using the phone right now and don't want to check

I always give her a rose, have bath scene then the talk about running away to find Yen so don't know much about other choice s

 

[wichat]

Well if you break up with her in TW2, having Triss say (in TW3) that you broke up with her six months ago makes perfect sense. If you chose to remain in a relationship with her, rescue her then travel South to Nilfgaard to search for Yennefer then it doesn't. It's an inconsistency in the story.



Not when viewed as part of a Trilogy. Here's the mistake a lot of you are making. You're looking at The Witcher 3's story as a stand alone story. It's not, it's a continuation and conclusion of a story that began in the first game. Vesemir did not feature in the previous game and if he was on the path, could be practically anywhere in the Northern Realms. If you play TW2 like I did, Letho tells you were to look for Yennefer - Nilfgaard, specifically the capital city, in other words, you're heading away from the Northern Kingdoms. When viewed in that context it makes sense that Triss would be the one Geralt had been on the road with for the last six months.

Remember, TW3 is set six months after TW2 and further remember that he explicitly says to Vesemir, "You know, we've been on the road six months now". Those two facts are a contradiction that is irreconcilable. There's a further contradiction in the codex which says "In the spring of 1272, when our story begins, Vesemir had joined Geralt on his search for Yennefer, trekking with him through a war-ravaged Temeria". When you arrive at Loc Muinne in TW2, it's Winter 1271.

Between the events of that ending and the beginning of the third game, Geralt has to have travelled to Nilfgaard to find Yennefer is no longer there and is travelling North at a break neck pace. There simply is not enough time to have found Vesemir and done that. It's a huge plot hole, unless they are suggesting he just so happens to run in to him around Loc Muinne in which case would make it the single most contrived set of circumstances in any writing since the dawn of time.

Just, I'm wondreing why CDPR didn't hire you as one of the game dev... You have the plot and conception of CDPR's games clearer than them.

 

[saladin1701]

Love your analysis and suggestions

One thing bother me is Vesemir though, He and Triss can be with Geralt together to search for Yen, no need to remove him (IMO he like a father to Geralt).

He wouldn't be removed from the game, he'd still be in Act 2,

It's established in the third game that Vesemir Winters at Kaer Morhen. That's North of Loc Muinne. Geralt is heading to Nilfgaard (City) which is a long way South. They're in completely opposite directions. Even if you chose to break up with Triss in TW2, even if you chose not to rescue her, even if you did romance her and go in search of Yen and you decided to break up at some point during that six months, there is no reason why Vesemir would be with Geralt. He'd either be alone or with Triss.

It's contrived in order to fit him in to the story early on, to establish the emotional bond between him and the player, being portrayed as everyone's favourite Uncle, so that his death is more poignant later on but in doing so, completely undermines TW2 Triss romance.

 

[TrissMasterRace]

Just, I'm wondreing why CDPR didn't hire you as one of the game dev... You have the plot and conception of CDPR's games clearer than them.

Haha yeah I think @saladin1701 has a great grip on the plot and understanding of events, glad to have them in this thread

shame CDPR doesn't have someone like them D:

---------- Updated at 04:36 PM ----------

He wouldn't be removed from the game, he'd still be in Act 2,
there is no reason why Vesemir would be with Geralt. He'd either be alone or with Triss. It's contrived in order to fit him in to the story early on, to establish the emotional bond between him and Geralt so that his death is more poignant later on but in doing so, completely undermines TW2 Triss romance.

Honestly, they didn't even need to include that very short scene where he is travelling with Vesemir. The bond between him and Geralt is already established well enough in the prologue for his death to be significantly poignant. Having Triss travel with Geralt would have resulted in nothing but a positive effect on the overall game.

Thing is, it's way too much of a change for CDPR to implement. I just can't see them changing so much (as you said) to please some fans like us. The maximum I can see them doing is some dialogue changes, etc (but I could be wrong), mainly because of the amount of resources already dedicated to the current state of the game - I mean how many walkthroughs include "You'll find yourself on the road with Vesemir" or something of the like?

Then again, I'm not versed well enough in CDPR's attitude so I could be wrong.

 

[saladin1701]

Haha yeah I think @saladin1701 has a great grip on the plot and understanding of events, glad to have them in this thread

shame CDPR doesn't have someone like them D:

It's because I finished a playthrough of the second game late last night. Been about twelve hours since I finished so it's fresh in my mind

 

[Hazevamp]

Personally i don't mind Vesemir getting his moment in the sun in White Orchard but i can see your argument regarding it. The monumental C*** up for me was act 2 Kaer Morhen lack of Triss presence alongside Yen.

I agree, it may be a plot hole but I prefer having Vesemir at the start rather than Triss. To take him out and throw Triss in would just muck up the entire Triss in Novigrad storyline. There is no way CDPR could justify Triss heading to Novigrad and becoming the leader of the mages in a span of a few days. If anything I just see it as Triss probably parting from Geralt right after Loc Muine. Probably within the same month or so after the events of TW2. Considering the fact that we have no idea of the exact date Geralt and Vesemir met up again vs when Triss and Geralt split, it could have very well had been during the first month after TW2, leaving Geralt and Vesemir as traveling companions for that six months. Sure it's a bit of a stretch but I don't see it as a major plot hole.

I agree that the Triss romance fizzles when the player reaches Kaer Morhan. I was perfectly happy with the events of the romance up until that point. Triss is nowhere to be found, it's just Yen and the Witchers. I do like that I have the option to tell Lambert and Eskel that the relationship with Yen is done. But it would have been nice if Triss was there helping out even if it is just standing there assisting Yen, and the option for a second love scene could be there, the same as Yen.

This would probably be the best time to fit in giving Triss her earring and that wilted rose.

Then I hope she tells Geralt that she doesn't need it and throws it in the trash. :comeatmebro:


The rest of the game can play out the same as usual with more emphasis on Geralt and Ciri's father/daughter relationship in Act 3. As it should be. I just don't see why the game should focus on Geralt's romances during this time when establishing the relationship with Ciri is the primary focus. The game isn't about Yen and Triss or Yen and Triss's relationship with Ciri. It's about Geralt and Ciri. The only other thing that should be added in Act 3 is being able to let Triss wish us luck or something just before the final battle.

Other than that the Triss romance is well done, the scenes we have with her are perfect, and the scenes we have with the other characters are well done. I just don't see Geralt as being the type to run around telling everyone details of his personal life and plans. So I'm fine with Cerys and Phillipa not acknowledging Triss, and I'm okay with Geralt not spilling his emotions all over Lambert and Eskel, and giving details about his future plans to Emphyr of all people.

I'm not starting a war or trying to tell others what to think, I just want to add my feedback to the thread. The fact that CDPR is taking their time with this issue makes me feel good that they are looking for ways to do it right not just for us but for themselves as well, and I'll be willing to take or leave whatever they decide to do. But since they may be reading this thread, I figure adding my own two cents in the pot won't hurt.

 

[Pug.]

I haven't finished the second game, but haven't the devs said that between the end of The Witcher 2 and the beginning of Wild Hunt, Geralt recovered all of his memories, and Triss decided that they should go their separate ways so that Geralt could look for Yennefer and hash things out with her?

I don't see how them temporarily breaking up is a major inconsistency. It makes sense that, after two years of amnesia, regardless of whether Geralt was in love with Triss during the events of the first two games, he would want to track down his erstwhile lover Yennefer and at least see if he still has feelings for her. They were together for approximately twenty years and raised a child (Ciri) together. One of the running themes throughout Wild Hunt is Geralt's exploration of these relationships, and deciding which woman is best for him.

I think their little breakup adds depth to their relationship and makes Geralt and Triss getting back together all the more sweet. CDPR shouldn't mess with it, in my opinion. There are other more glaring problems to address.

 

[wright1978]

I haven't finished the second game, but haven't the devs said that between the end of The Witcher 2 and the beginning of Wild Hunt, Geralt recovered all of his memories, and Triss decided that they should go their separate ways so that Geralt could look for Yennefer and hash things out with her?

I don't see how them temporarily breaking up is a major inconsistency. It makes sense that, after two years of amnesia, regardless of whether Geralt was in love with Triss during the events of the first two games, he would want to track down his erstwhile lover Yennefer and at least see if he still has feelings for her. They were together for approximately twenty years and raised a child (Ciri) together. One of the running themes throughout Wild Hunt is Geralt's exploration of these relationships, and deciding which woman is best for him.

I think their little breakup adds depth to their relationship and makes Geralt and Triss getting back together all the more sweet. CDPR shouldn't mess with it, in my opinion. There are other more glaring problems to address.

Yep i've definitely come round to this interpretation, after i got past the immediate shock of finding out about the forced breakup in my first playthrough.
Yep acts 2 & 3 are where the glaring issues are imo.

 

[Riddlin]

If you're gonna do a car analogy for the romances. I'd say that Triss would also be a top quality sports car it just only works through half the journey and then you have to walk.

Tou- friggin -che! Well played my friend, well played

 

[saladin1701]

I agree, it may be a plot hole but I prefer having Vesemir at the start rather than Triss. To take him out and throw Triss in would just muck up the entire Triss in Novigrad storyline.

Not really. I suggested a few days ago, a scenario where if you romanced Triss in TW2, you start the prologue with her and when Yennefer turns up and asks you to accompany her to see the Emperor, Triss travels to Novigrad. Then when you arrive in Novigrad and you talk to her during the warehouse, she breaks up with you there because he's now found Yennefer and she feels she's been taking advantage of him.

Anyway, I'm not necessarily saying Vesemir needs to be thrown out, simply that it's a glaring plot hole that ignores the events of any romance in TW2. The problem, as i've said, is timing and it needs Triss material spread out throughout the game so that you always feel she's part of Geralt's life. That doesn't necessarily have to be the prologue, she could have a bigger part to play in Skellige during Act 3. Something like this:

Dream Sequence/tutorial >> Prologue >> Act 1: Velen >> Triss Romance >> Act 1: Skellige >> Triss Romance >> Act 2: Ilse of Mists >> Triss Romance >> Act 3: Bald Mountain >> Triss Romance >> Triss Romance

Yennefer's romance, it would look like this:

Yennefer Romance >> Yennefer Romance >> Act 1: Velen >> Act 1: Novigrad >> Yennefer Romance >> Yennefer Romance >> Act 2: Ilse of Mists >> Yennefer Romance>> Act 3: Bald Mountain >> Yennefer Romance>> Yennefer Romance

As you can see, both romances are paced throughout the game so both women would feel equally important to Geralt's life rather than how the game currently feels skewed towards Yennefer. Like I said, it's not a competition between them, it's just about improving the pacing of the romance.

 

[zbum]

You guys are... incredible.

First Triss should replace Yennefer. Then she should replace Vesemir. What's the next step ? She should replace Ciri ? Zoltan ? Dandelion ?

Your problem @saladin1710 is that all your analysis is base on YOUR playthrough. Thing is, we're in a video game and there are A LOT of other different playthrough.

---------- Updated at 04:46 PM ----------

Just, I'm wondreing why CDPR didn't hire you as one of the game dev... You have the plot and conception of CDPR's games clearer than them.

 

[TrissMasterRace]

First Triss should replace Yennefer. Then she should replace Vesemir. What's the next step ? She should replace Ciri ? Zoltan ? Dandelion ?

Well...I wouldn't mind Triss replacing most of the characters

 

[zbum]

Well...I wouldn't mind Triss replacing most of the characters

I know. And that's the worst part of this thread.

 

[Sarcen]

You guys are... incredible.

First Triss should replace Yennefer. Then she should replace Vesemir. What's the next step ? She should replace Ciri ? Zoltan ? Dandelion ?

You're problem @saladin1710 is that all your analysis is base on YOUR playthrough. Thing is, we're in a video game and there are A LOT of other different playthrough.

---------- Updated at 04:46 PM ----------

Nobody is suggesting that characters should always be replaced, but a lot of these replaces would be result of previous choices. It's not us wanting to remove characters, but simply proposing "low effort" changes. Preferable we would like tons more content with triss to make up for all those choices they blatantly ignore but that is never going to happen and would be unrealistic to propose.

 

[saladin1701]

You're problem @saladin1710 is that all your analysis is base on YOUR playthrough.

No, my analysis is based upon a playthrough. One that The Witcher 2 allows and one that is relevant to a thread about Triss romance. As for replacing Vesemir, I didn't say she should replace him, I said that from a continuity stand point he shouldn't have been there in the first place if you'd romanced Triss thoroughly in TW2. There's a difference. Perhaps spend more time reading and less time re-posting the same gif over and over again.

 

[LionOfVenice]

You seriously think that the devs are going to add Triss in the prologue of the game with Vesemir ?

It's fine to disagree with other people but let's not be disrespectful and spamming the same gif please. It doesn't make you bigger you know?

 

[zbum]

No, my analysis is based upon a playthrough. One that The Witcher 2 allows and one that is relevant to a thread about Triss romance. As for replacing Vesemir, I didn't say she should replace him, I said that from a continuity stand point he shouldn't have been there in the first place if you'd romanced Triss thoroughly in TW2. There's a difference. Perhaps spend more time reading and less time re-posting the same gif over and over again.

Absolutely, your analysis is base on A playthrough. And like I said, there's a lot of other playthrough. And the thing is : as long as the game is over, Geralt doesn't belong to the player anymore. What happen between the games are up to the devs. If they want to make Triss and Geralt split up, they have the right to do it, because they are the authors, not you.
Writting a story like this, with all the choices and consequences, the whole different kinds of playthrough, the necessity to introduce new characters require much more than pointing out a minor plot hole that appears in a certain way of seeing things but cannot be considered as an ultimate truth.

---------- Updated at 05:03 PM ----------

It's fine to disagree with other people but let's not be disrespectful and spamming the same gif please. It doesn't make you bigger you know?

Ok, maybe I was disrepectful. I apologize and I will not do that again.

But really, it's because all of this scares me a lot. I'm a real Triss lover, I'm on Team Triss since the beginning of the older thread, but what I red here the last few days make me want to be on the other Team. And I never thought that possible.

EDIT : I will just add one thing : the spilt up IS A GOOD THING. Because it produces all the build up in the Triss Romance. All of their story is driven by this painful decision and it's wonderful, it's why their story is so moving.

 

[dragonbird]

@zbum, yes, with courtesy please. And if you disagree, explain WHY you think it won't work.

 

[LionOfVenice]

Ok, maybe I was disrepectful. I apologize and I will not do that again.

But really, it's because all of this scares me a lot. I'm a real Triss lover, I'm on Team Triss since the beginning of the older thread, but what I red here the last few days make me want to be on the other Team. And I never thought that possible.

I get your points as i said before. But we can discuss without make fun of others.
Fair enough for me.