Triss Merigold of Maribor (All Spoilers) Resurgence

+
Maybe more Ciri/Yennefer scenes were simply not planned ? It does not look like something that was left half-finished in the game, with the amount of resources spent on those two characters, I find it hard to believe that almost no interaction between them over the entire game is anything other than a deliberate writing or design decision. Book readers may not like it, but for someone who only plays the game, there is no obvious problem. And I think the developers even said in an interview that the age difference between the books and the game allowed them more liberties regarding Ciri's character than that of the others.

Given that at one point they planned for Yennefer to imprison Geralt over her plans for Ciri, I don't think the sorts of scenes some want to see were planned, and it may be why there was more Lodge stuff originally. And why Ciri displays a distrust and lack of warmth towards Yennefer in some scenes.


I understand it matters to the book readers, but when I discuss the game with friends and colleagues, the whole family thing doesn't come up. They don't care, it's just stuff that slows the game down. They do care that romancing Triss still results in her vanishing for most of the rest of the game. They do care that the 3rd act feels messy. They do care that the final Wild Hunt battle is "kinda weak" and that after it you pretty much become a passive bystander whilst the end of the game plays out.
 
I understand it matters to the book readers, but when I discuss the game with friends and colleagues, the whole family thing doesn't come up. They don't care, it's just stuff that slows the game down.

I mostly agree with this. More "romance" or "family" content would be a waste of resources and not make the story more interesting. New plots involving the Lodge and the Empire, however, could make for a much more interesting story. In a squabble for who will control Ciri's future, Triss is somewhat neutral because she is leaving for Kovir. That means she could be the one discovering everyone's motives and agenda (like we see her do in the books). She's also has messy relationships with everyone involved- she is friends or allies to all of them, but she has also betrayed them all in the past (though they deserved it!)
 
I agree that Yennefer's character is more fleshed out, but I disagree that the game pushes us towards her. Lots of characters in the game tell Geralt how horrible and manipulative Yen is (even her own daughter distrusts her) , while praising Triss. Also Triss has an advantage of being the first girl, whom player really gets to know. While Yennefer's real introduction happens much later in Skellige.

By "pushing towards it" I simply mean the way she's more fleshed out, the flirting, the NPCs that comment on that romance even when it doesn't exist, all serve to make that romance feel more legitimate than the Triss romance.

As for Triss being the first girl the player gets to know, that depends upon how the player plays the game. You can quite easily do Skellige before Novigrad, in which case you'll meet Yen first. Even if you don't, Yen is introduced during the dream and again at the end of White Orchard. Triss doesn't appear for any significant time after that.

Look at it this way. Let's assume you play in a manner in which all three late comers to Kaer Morhen survive. You meet Keira relatively early in Act 1 and convince her to go to Kear Morhen. She teleports immediately. Giving the writers the benefit of the doubt and assuming she hasn't teleported to Kear Morhen, she presumably teleports beyond Novigrad to the forest she mentions having to travel through. Similarly, you meet up with Letho again and convince him to go to Kear Morhen to hide out for a while. He rides off there.

Remember, we're dealing with this with the assumption the player plays those quests as they're presented to him according to your level.

> Geralt then travels to Novigrad and searches for Ciri there, whilst helping out Triss and Dandelion.
> Geralt then travels to Skelliege and searches for Ciri there, whilst helping out the En Crates.
> Geralt then travels to Velen to collect Uma.
> Geralt then travels North, only to be intercepted and brought before the Emperor in Vizima, South of Velen.
> Geralt then travels from Vizima to Kaer Morhen and the game tells you it's one week later.

From Vizima to Kear Morhen is a week's ride on horse back. Yet despite the fact Triss teleports there immediately, and Letho and Keira set off at least weeks before Geralt, they all somehow manage to arrive later. Does that seem in any way reasonable? How is that good writing? It's not, it's a contrivance to provide more screen time for Yennefer who the player may have chosen not to romance. It's poorly written and breaks the flow of those character's stories. This is what I mean when I say the game pushes you towards Yen. throughout the game the writing contrives to make Yen the more legitimate romance of the two. Trust me when I say this that if the game did the same towards Triss at the expense of Yen, I'd be equally as vociferous in her thread.

Get rid of those contrivances and the story of Triss and Geralt suddenly becomes as natural as the story of Yennefer and Geralt.
 
From Vizima to Kear Morhen is a week's ride on horse back. Yet despite the fact Triss teleports there immediately, and Letho and Keira set off at least weeks before Geralt, they all somehow manage to arrive later. Does that seem in any way reasonable? How is that good writing? It's not, it's a contrivance to provide more screen time for Yennefer who the player may have chosen not to romance. It's poorly written and breaks the flow of those character's stories. This is what I mean when I say the game pushes you towards Yen. throughout the game the writing contrives to make Yen the more legitimate romance of the two. Trust me when I say this that if the game did the same towards Triss at the expense of Yen, I'd be equally as vociferous in her thread.

I don't think there was any agenda to give more screen time to Yen with the expence of Triss. The only reason why Triss, Keira and Letho are not at Kaer Morhen is because their quests can be played at ANY moment of the game. CDPR would've wasted resources on something that many players won't even see. That's it. Yennefer has nothing to do with it. And don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that this was a good choice and I'd definitely prefer to see those characters during the Kaer Morhen sequence.
 
But honestly, if Triss's cut content was of the same quality as the Lodge's cut content then we might be lucky that it got cut.

I doubt those unimplemented scenes in the epilogues would contain anything controversial, and it is hard to tell what the quality of the Lodge content would have been without having access to more than 95% of it.

The scene in the "Ciri dead" epilogue is deleted obviously because it is now in Velen instead of Kaer Morhen, and Geralt fights the last crone and (presumably) dies, alone. Maybe the original version of the ending in Kaer Morhen would have been different.

If the appearance of Triss or Yennefer in the inn in the witcheress epilogue was planned, but cut shortly before the release of the game, that may explain if those "awaits in Ellander" lines are not used. Either the full version of the scene could be implemented later, or the Ellander dialogue was added instead, but it is currently unused or just buggy.

Nobody deserves to be falsely accused of a murder.

Doesn't Sile admit the Demavend assassination (but not the others) ? If I recall correctly, she is the only one accused, and maybe Philippa, not the entire Lodge.
 
Last edited:
it is hard to tell what the quality of the Lodge content would have been without having access to more than 95% of it.

Doesn't Sile admit the Demavend assassination (but not the others) ? If I recall correctly, she is the only one accused, and maybe Philippa, not the entire Lodge.

Considering that the Lodge was treated horribly 99% of the time It definitely would not have been good :boredom:

Triss accuses Sheala of killing Demavend AND Foltest without any evidence.
 
Triss accuses Sheala of killing Demavend AND Foltest without any evidence.

Didn't she see Sile's conversation with Letho regarding the Demavend assassination on Sile's megascope ? I do not remember if she "officially" accused Sile of the Foltest assassination at the summit (need to watch those parts of the game again), or if it is something that she only told to Geralt as a guess. Not that being accused of assassinating one king or more makes much difference in the end.
 
Didn't she see Sile's conversation with Letho regarding the Demavend assassination on Sile's megascope ? I do not remember if she "officially" accused Sile of the Foltest assassination at the summit (need to watch those parts of the game again), or if it is something that she only told to Geralt as a guess. Not that being accused of assassinating one king or more makes much difference in the end.

Here's the video
[video=youtube;J-eN4QSMz0o]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-eN4QSMz0o[/video]
 
Here's the video

Well, the Demavend assassination alone would probably already have been enough for Sile to be sentenced to death anyway, so the Foltest accusation (which is incorrect, but not an intentional false accusation, it simply followed the logic "Letho killed Demavend and was hired by Sile, and he also killed Foltest, so Sile must have been behind that, too" - Triss was also fooled by the Nilfgaardian plot to assassinate the kings and frame the Lodge for it) did not really matter regarding her fate. But at least it cleared Geralt. :) And other members of the Lodge were not accused.
 
I mostly agree with this. More "romance" or "family" content would be a waste of resources and not make the story more interesting. New plots involving the Lodge and the Empire, however, could make for a much more interesting story. In a squabble for who will control Ciri's future, Triss is somewhat neutral because she is leaving for Kovir. That means she could be the one discovering everyone's motives and agenda (like we see her do in the books). She's also has messy relationships with everyone involved- she is friends or allies to all of them, but she has also betrayed them all in the past (though they deserved it!)

Oh, I would have found a storyline that pitched Geralt against Yennefer/the Lodge/Empire much more interesting. You could then have a two-pronged game where either Geralt rallies his friends and takes them on, or wins Yennefer back to battle the Lodge/Empire. But book fans would have shat themselves over that, even though it would be explained by the actions of Emhyr's mages when they "help" her recover from the Wild Hunt's amnesia and potentially given them that family thing they wanted - Geralt would have to restore Yennefer's memory properly, what they meant to each other, what Ciri means to them etc. The other storyline would be for those who want Triss or to remain single...

Hmm, I see to have left out the Wild Hunt. Well, that kinda happens anyway.
 
Well, the Demavend assassination alone would probably already have been enough for Sile to be sentenced to death anyway, so the Foltest accusation (which is incorrect, but not an intentional false accusation, it simply followed the logic "Letho killed Demavend and was hired by Sile, and he also killed Foltest, so Sile must have been behind that, too" - Triss was also fooled by the Nilfgaardian plot to assassinate the kings and frame the Lodge for it) did not really matter regarding her fate. But at least it cleared Geralt. :) And other members of the Lodge were not accused.

Triss still made it worse for her. Demavend was an incompetent king (well, at least in the game canon), while Foltest was well-liked. I also hate that Triss says "there are witnesses who will confirm it." What witnesses? Where the hell are they? Why nobody at the summit asks these questions? Why nobody accuses Triss of being part of the Lodge? It's a very poorly written scene.
 
Triss still made it worse for her. Demavend was an incompetent king (well, at least in the game canon), while Foltest was well-liked.

So, would Sile not have been sentenced to death for only assassinating an incompetent king ? And without the accusation by Triss, the entire Lodge would have been blamed for the murders anyway, just as the Nilfgaardians wanted (if I recall correctly from the Letho conversation, they even used some false "witnesses").

Why nobody at the summit asks these questions?

They do not have much time until the dragon attacks.
 
I don't remember where but Triss was cleared of involvement in the plot whether it was by virtue of being too close to Foltest or what not . Sile was doomed by either ending . Letho's naming of all the lodge was condemning the whole lodge seeing how the Emperor was technically behind it the plot , amnesty offered to the lodge was the right thing to do even if it was hollow .
 
They do not have much time until the dragon attacks.

After Triss accuses Sheala, she's immediately arrested, nobody even tries to interfere. The fact that everyone at the summit took the word of a young sorceress over the word of one of the most respected mages in the North (who was not known to interfere in politics) is laughable. It's even more ridicoulos in the situation with Letho.
 
Triss is a widely respected war hero, the Fourteenth of the Hill. Her word carries far more weight than just any young sorceress. It's not "laughable" at all.
 
Triss is a widely respected war hero, the Fourteenth of the Hill. Her word carries far more weight than just any young sorceress. It's not "laughable" at all.

She is. But it's still laughable that her word without any evidence is enough to arrest someone who was offered a position in the Council and the Conclave several times.
 
You begin the game in the dream with Yennefer, having presumably slept with her, which CDPR have stated is generally to create attachment to her character, you spend the game's inception searching for her with references to the unicorn and her specific scent (well-known within the books but still.) You have ballads for Yennefer and Geralt, everyone seems to want them to be together and assume them to be together (which is fair enough considering, but even more pressure to make Yen feel 'right'.) Triss tells you not to go with her again, even almost leaves, the Rose of Remembrance is withered, further implying that Triss is no longer the right choice, Yennefer gets a tonne more screentime with Geralt, playing in the prologue, in White Orchard, in Vizima, in Skellige, in Kaer Morhen, in Novigrad, in the final battle, in the epilogue. Triss is in Novigrad, albeit twice and gets perhaps 4 lines in all of her time in Kaer Morhen. Yennefer gets two love scenes compared to Triss' one, Triss physically looks uglier, as her forehead seems to have become a sanctuary for stray wrinkles and creases (thank the gods for mods), Yennefer gets a lot cuter dialogue with Geralt than Triss - I loved the exchange of puns during the Craven quest, the comment about being thrown off the unicorn, the way the lighthouse scene with Triss was 90% crates and a ship, with generic scenes identical to those from courtesans spliced in - although I guess the romance of the elven baths in tw2 is pretty damn hard to beat, I would have liked at least some magic, uniqueness and romance to be there. The drinking scene with Lambert and Eskel that towards the start includes Yennefer too, the fact that for Ciri's sake breaking up with Yen feels cruel, Philippa's comments to make you feel worse about it, the way Yen is nicer to you after going to the mountain with Ciri, whereas Triss reprimands you, Yen kissing you when you return with Ciri, Triss despite being like a sister to Ciri having no meaningful dialogue with her, the inability to talk about Triss in almost any circumstance, no way to say you're not with Yennefer, only replies not answering questions posed, you are quite literally forced to say romantic things to Yennefer, 'you look beautiful' 'splitting up instead of searching together not my preference', the only person who mentions Triss positively is Djikstra, and it's stated that's mostly for his own gain - Vesemir just goes 'ah, I see', when the penny drops, and you cannot defend Triss nor your love of Triss from Yennefer's accusations other than to blame memory loss or say you won't grovel, nor to Philippa. Triss is entirely absent from Kaer Morhen in a time when she really should be there, the small amount of extra Triss content, those being the statuettes, are severely underwhelming as anything other than small diversions. Triss gets tortured and you can either save her at the expense of Djikstra and having to do more before The Play's The Thing, or let her finger nails be ripped out whilst hearing her screams of pain. She doesn't seem at all grateful should you save her, nor can you explain anything even along the lines of 'I couldn't bear you getting hurt'. There's even a quite frankly stunning ballad played about Geralt and Yennefer. There's other stuff but I'm just tired and rambling.

Yennefer just feels completely thrust upon us, with Triss getting a little screentime and a lot less consistency. Yen's main role is fine due to her relationship with Ciri, but still, I didn't expect Triss to become so much of a side character, with almost every single thing about Yennfer being portrayed as better and more right, and so little content on Triss. I was very much disappointed, but I never really liked Yen in the books either, too cold and calculating for a long-term relationship in my mind, perhaps in small doses...
 
Last edited:
She is. But it's still laughable that her word without any evidence is enough to arrest someone who was offered a position in the Council and the Conclave several times.

Well, better arrest Sile and then release her if she is found innocent, than let her escape and the accusation to be proven true. Triss' word is at least enough to merit some investigation.

From Vizima to Kear Morhen is a week's ride on horse back. Yet despite the fact Triss teleports there immediately, and Letho and Keira set off at least weeks before Geralt, they all somehow manage to arrive later. Does that seem in any way reasonable? How is that good writing?

It is not, as my list of consequences post shows, the Triss choice is completely ignored during the Ugly Baby quest line. Based on how the quests are named internally, Ugly Baby (in part_1) may have been designed initially to be played before Now or Never and even Keira's quest as well (both in part_2). Because of how the quest levels are set in the final version of the game, that is normally not the case in an actual playthrough, so the lack of any consequences becomes an issue. At least in Keira's case an explanation is given later to her absence.
 
Top Bottom