Triss Merigold of Maribor (All Spoilers) Resurgence

[TreesAreCanon]

First, they come from Sapkowski´s books, that is not a very coherent author. For example, I´m pretty sure that when he first started writing about Duny in the first book, he didn´t know that in the last book she was going to be the emperor of Nilfgaard. The same happens with the characters. The Yennefer that in the second book cheats Geralt during two years with a mage, don´t gives a shit about Geralt´s feelings and don´t even wait to see if Geralt and the mage kill each other is not the Yennefer of later books, when she becomes in something like a guardian angel of Geralt, caring about if he´s tricked with the money in his contracts, even when they are no more a couple and they haven´t met each other in a long time. The Triss that is so deeply in love with Geralt in the third book and considers Ciri as a sister is not the same Triss that later puts the interest of the Loggia over the interest of Geralt and Ciri.

It´s not evolution in the characters, it´s that the author sometimes don´t know what he actually wants to say. There is no "unity" of characters and plot along the books. The proof is that he writes a lot of books about the destiny of Ciri and the prophecy, and at the end of the books, we don´t know what is really that destiny of Ciri and what is the prophecy real meaning, we have to wait until TW3. The books is a saga finished in false, as if the writer becomed tired and finished the books anyway. That´s my opinion.

And here I thought that twisting the plot is what makes an author interesting and pleasant to read. How is that incoherent?

The examples you mentioned are mostly pointless. You dislike his writing, I get it, but your points aren't compelling either.

First thing was about Emhyr, how does his character developement make Sapkowski's writing bad? You said you are sure that Sapkowski didn't know how he would treat the character from the beginning and even if that was the case, then what?

Second thing was about love - nothing wrong with such a plot, as it is not only a common trope, but also something most of us experienced / will experience in life. If you find their love story unreasonable, then good for you, since "such things" usually aren't within reason, so your perception isn't completely wrong. But your take on the topic isn't corresponding with the story written by Sapkowski. There has been a lot of talk about Shard of Ice in Yennefer's topic lately, if you want you can read about it and/or discuss it there. I don't want to discuss it now, just going to say that Geralt is also to be blamed.

Third thing you mentioned was Triss and her character development. If you've read the books AFTER playing the games, then I honestly can't blame you at all. I suppose it can really come as a surprise to you that she had a difficult past, first and foremost being rejected, then making mistakes such as trusting "wrong" people and picking "wrong" sides. For her it didn't seem as a "bad" choice back then, because she was just maturing and trying to find her place in life - imagine how hard it must've been for her if you take her mental scars into account. Sometimes she stumbled and sometimes she fell, but in the end she always got up, which is what makes her character believable and relatable... Triss overcame her inner demons towards the end of the saga or at least took the very first important step. And that's what I missed in the games, she was a different character there lacking the aftermath of her past and the crucial character refinement point from LotL.

The worst mistake was making Triss a relationship option for Geralt in The Witcher 1. That was never meant to be, which is what she had to deal with in the books, soak up the pain, get over it and move on (she did). When you decide to cross that border, it's obvious that her portrayal is going to suck in the games. So yeah, it can be hard to process her character with all its pros and cons, especially after experiencing that dull romance to please the masses. It's sad that it works tbh.

If you've read the books first and then played the games... I don't know what to say lol... In my opinion Sapkowski nailed Triss perfectly, as a very tempting Freudian bait for Geralt and the opposite of Yennefer, also the type of fantasy woman that the author himself dislikes. He shaped her character step by step, which is enjoyable to read. Very much like Geralt.

Anyway it just saddens me greatly that some people truly find Sapkowski's way of writing poor, as if he didn't know what he wanted to say. Do you want characters who are easy to predict? You really want to know what happens next? How is that interesting to read at all? It was the unexpected development of characters that kept me reading. No unsuitable plot twisting or deus ex machina. Everything important usually made sense (except for Vilgefortz, not that he was any important though).

I'm kinda glad that you've mentioned destiny... You want it to make perfect sense? All the prophecies and destiny itself? Let me ask you a question: what would be the point of it then? It's a working trope which shouldn't be clear and we aren't supposed to know its "real" meaning. Again, it makes the reading more interesting. Which is where TW3 failed miserably.

 

[bartekarioch]

In TW I - Triss
In TW II - Triss
In TW III - Next I want Triss, more Triss
In this topic we had support Triss content. I have nothing against criticism, but in this way nothing will change on the positive.
Everyone has their own opinion. I respect the opinion of everyone. In this topic we should try to change this problem to positive solution.
Everyone has different tastes and opinions on this topic. It's very good and I'm glad that can be discussed.
But I think that for some should add some new content to Triss Merigold romance.
But those who don't want pick Triss will not see this content.
They may want expansions for other topics but not necessarily writing it here.
I respect also the movement of artist - patch 1.10, but we can still ask for more and developers can agree with this and finally make next good, positive changes.
Everyone look at the game from a different perspective. Similarly, the books. I think that there is nothing to argue. I agree with every sentences and I think Triss content should give a chance. It will introduce a lot of good for those who want it and it doesn't hurt others.
Only small, enjoying changes - maybe before the end of game ? maybe in new DLC ? - doesn't metter. They can give more joy than 1.10 patch and it isn't difficult to do. They don't screw up, and can help. Dialogue, a couple of nice, explanatory scenes as the end of the Geralt heart fate. Nobody require big changes. Only small threads. - If the creators of the game want it. We continue to be for and against, but we want changes and we think they are introduced. For example listed above or in other Triss lovers posts. They could do a great patch 1.10. They can also do more. But it is still only will players. I hope to RED's take good steps for us.
Grettings and words full of respects to all

 

[TreesAreBliss]

happy dreaming and god bless

 

[Trireme]

The worst mistake was making Triss a relationship option for Geralt in The Witcher 1. That was never meant to be, which is what she had to deal with in the books, soak up the pain, get over it and move on (she did).

"Never meant to be" is a statement that requires a belief in a fixed destiny. That's something that is always in doubt throughout the books and especially the games. The games' emphasis on choice and consequences almost promises that there is no fixed destiny. There are several instances in the books where things might have gone differently for Geralt if he had shake off his obsession with Yennefer. Considering the women in the books, Triss is one with lots of potential for a game story- the writers obviously made use of that potential. There is a big difference between "I would never choose X" and "No player should ever be allowed to choose X."

then making mistakes such as trusting "wrong" people and picking "wrong" sides. For her it didn't seem as a "bad" choice back then

Am I the only one who thinks the Lodge and its plan for Ciri was not that bad of a choice in the books? For Triss, who cares for Ciri, the only ways to keep her safe are to hide her from the world (which is the plan she sticks to until Yen and Tissaia screw it up at Thanedd), or to put her in a position where she will be protected by powerful allies. Ciri is a princess, with a political marriage her likely future if Cintra had not been destroyed, so marrying her to the Koviri prince is not so strange or shocking a fate for a girl of Ciri's position. The Koviri state and the Lodge would keep Ciri safe, and give her an important and influential position. She might be a "puppet" at first, but the idea was for her to grow into a co-equal member of the Lodge one day. From Triss's perspective, this is not an unreasonable plan. Yennefer's plan (if there even was one) would mean Ciri was forever on the run and hiding from powerful political entities. If Triss is considering the "lesser evil," then Ciri living under Sheala de Tancarville's direction seems like a better fate than Ciri on the run looking over her shoulder for assassins.

Triss's character in the books represents the arguments for choosing the lesser evil. She argues with Geralt about this in Blood of Elves, with him asserting disinterested neutrality. Geralt's story shows the consequences of neutrality, and Triss's story shows the consequences of choosing a side. Her choice means the ruin of her friendship with Yennefer and the sacrifice of Ciri's happiness for safety and a higher cause. At the end of the saga it seems she is going to repeat the Blood of Elves argument with Geralt, and try to convince him to accept the lesser evil. Whether Geralt would have agreed is up for debate, but his last living act was to abandon neutrality and take up his sword to defend the nonhumans of Rivia, so perhaps he would have seen Triss's point.

In the games Triss is still a character urging Geralt to abandon neutrality and make "lesser evil" sorts of choices. This is why I was disappointed she was not involved in Reasons of State, and that there was no follow-up with the Lodge. In theory Geralt is joining the plot against Radovid for the sake of Triss and the mages, but Triss is not involved at all in that story line. Similarly, there are lots of people with plans for Ciri, and Act 3 is begging for a lesser-evil type of choice where Triss is the ideal character to be involved.

 

[xxRENEGADExx]

This is why I was disappointed she was not involved in Reasons of State, and that there was no follow-up with the Lodge. In theory Geralt is joining the plot against Radovid for the sake of Triss and the mages, but Triss is not involved at all in that story line.

Yes. She even has no reaction on Radovid's death. That was so strange.

 

[sv3672]

I like them. Especially I like conversation with Ciri and Triss before final battle. At least it a bit improves situation with damn "Well" and not being her only statue during "third act".

Some of those dialogues could have been better written and acted, such as the one in Kaer Morhen (that scene still feels awkward, and considering how long time is passed since Now or Never if it is played at the recommended level before even going to Skellige, one could have expected a conversation with somewhat more substance), and on the boat in Battle Preparations. It somehow feels as if the developers really wanted to save costs when implementing these tweaks, and as a result their quality ended up suffering somewhat.

I agree that there is no need only romance content with Triss, but still I think some dialogues should be changed, or, simply, more variation of dialogues added, depending on Geralt's LI choice. Like with Cerys or Yen, if Geralt fulfilled "Now or Never" and stayed with Triss before Skellige to avoid "awkwardness".

Yes, some of those changes would not even require new content, just conditionally skipping a few scenes/dialogue lines that make it look as if the player romanced Yennefer even if the opposite is the case. And I also found some oddities that could be considered "bugs", for example in the conversation with Emhyr in the witcheress ending, the game always seems to assume that Geralt settles down with someone (Yennefer in the "lone wolf" ending, and Triss with the "threesome" choice), simply because the conditions are not checked correctly.

Yes. She even has no reaction on Radovid's death. That was so strange.

No one cares about Radovid's death. Except in HoS.

---------- Updated at 07:38 PM ----------

Considering the women in the books, Triss is one with lots of potential for a game story- the writers obviously made use of that potential. There is a big difference between "I would never choose X" and "No player should ever be allowed to choose X."

Indeed, the games are not movie adaptations of the books (although for those looking for one, a movie is already in production), rather than just copying everything from the books unchanged, it is more interesting to explore what could have been with different choices. Overall, I think the games made fundamentally good decisions so far, they are just not always executed very well.

In the games Triss is still a character urging Geralt to abandon neutrality and make "lesser evil" sorts of choices. This is why I was disappointed she was not involved in Reasons of State, and that there was no follow-up with the Lodge. In theory Geralt is joining the plot against Radovid for the sake of Triss and the mages, but Triss is not involved at all in that story line. Similarly, there are lots of people with plans for Ciri, and Act 3 is begging for a lesser-evil type of choice where Triss is the ideal character to be involved.

As discussed earlier, there are signs in the game files that she was planned to be present in The Sunstone quest, which could have allowed for some interesting conversation with Philippa also being there. Not to mention that quest really feels cut down and uninteresting in its current state. And then there is that deleted scene about the fate of the Lodge, so a follow-up to the Lodge was indeed planned, but cut from the game. Also, Now or Never could have been moved into Act 2 (where it was originally designed to be), and in its place another quest added in the first act, involving Radovid, the king of beggars, or other under-developed characters. Although people already complain about too much Novigrad content.

 

[Guest 3847602]

Am I the only one who thinks the Lodge and its plan for Ciri was not that bad of a choice in the books? For Triss, who cares for Ciri, the only ways to keep her safe are to hide her from the world (which is the plan she sticks to until Yen and Tissaia screw it up at Thanedd), or to put her in a position where she will be protected by powerful allies. Ciri is a princess, with a political marriage her likely future if Cintra had not been destroyed, so marrying her to the Koviri prince is not so strange or shocking a fate for a girl of Ciri's position. The Koviri state and the Lodge would keep Ciri safe, and give her an important and influential position. She might be a "puppet" at first, but the idea was for her to grow into a co-equal member of the Lodge one day. From Triss's perspective, this is not an unreasonable plan. Yennefer's plan (if there even was one) would mean Ciri was forever on the run and hiding from powerful political entities. If Triss is considering the "lesser evil," then Ciri living under Sheala de Tancarville's direction seems like a better fate than Ciri on the run looking over her shoulder for assassins.

Not entirely true, she wasn't suppose to marry Tancred but to become his mistress and get pregnant with him:

Ciri was beginning to understand and rolled her eyes. Lady Owl did not miss that detail.

‘Yes,’ she confirmed. ‘First of all you must impress prince Tancred. because you are going to
become his lover and give him a child.’

‘If you were still Cirilla of Cintra,’ Philippa continued after a long pause, ‘still the daughter of
Pavetta and granddaughter of Calanthe, you would become Prince Tancred’s legal wife. You’d be the
princess and later the queen of Poviss and Kovir. Unfortunately, and I tell you with genuine regret,
fate has deprived you of everything. Including your future. You will only be his mistress. His
favourite.’

 

[xxRENEGADExx]

No one cares about Radovid's death.

Meh!


p.s.
:revenge: "Triss! Me, Roche and Philippa participated in Radovid's assasination. We succeeded. You safe. Triss? Triss?!...Say something..."

:faith:"Well?"

:teeth:

 

[sv3672]

As I already said before, the canon or non-canon discussion has no ending to be honest. It's up to everyone to choose if they consider the games to be canon to the books or not.

It can sometimes feel like discussing religion. But ultimately both the games and the books are just fiction. I guess the writers at CDPR do not mind moving on from the Witcher series to Cyberpunk 2077, which is not based on books, so they have greater creative freedom and need not worry as much about being attacked for "breaking lore".

Guys I said above, just scene in the last mission. And will be beautiful end of story.

Some scenes were apparently planned in the epilogues, but ended up being cut. There are also these unused lines (in bold) in the witcheress epilogue:

Spoiler

Cirilla: Is it done?
Geralt: Yes.
Cirilla: Did he believe you?
Geralt: I have no idea.
Cirilla: For the cockatrice. And we've a new contract. It won't pay much, but I think it worth the toil.
Geralt: You've been busy.
Geralt: It's yours.


(q505_zirael_sword == false)

Cirilla: A witcher's silver sword…
Geralt: Like it?
Cirilla: It's beautiful. May I?
Geralt: Not here. You'll have ample opportunity soon enough, witcher.
Cirilla: What's this inscription?
Geralt: An old witchers' motto. Had a sword like this once myself. But this one's better… much better.

(q505_zirael_sword == true)

Cirilla: A witcher's sword… Swallow.
Cirilla: Oooooo.
Cirilla: Beautiful. May I?
Geralt: Not here. You'll have ample opportunity soon enough, witcher.


Cirilla: Let's try it out, then.


Geralt: Triss awaits in Ellander.
Cirilla: We can meet her in two days if we hurry.

Geralt: Yen awaits in Ellander.
Cirilla: We can meet her in two days if we hurry.

Cirilla: Let's try it out, then.
Cirilla: The Path awaits. Come on.

These could easily be enabled if the voice recording has already been done for them. They are just not correctly linked into the dialogue (although I am not sure where they would fit best).

By the way, this scene also references a fact named "q208_yen_lover" (instead of the usual sq202_yen_girlfriend, sq202 is The Last Wish side-quest). q208 is the King's Gambit quest and coronation in Skellige, I wonder if the Yennefer romance choice was planned to be implemented differently at first, and The Last Wish with the djinn was only added later for some reason.

 

[bartekarioch]

We don't want weak planes. Need strong things.

 

[Zyvik]

Am I the only one who thinks the Lodge and its plan for Ciri was not that bad of a choice in the books? For Triss, who cares for Ciri, the only ways to keep her safe are to hide her from the world (which is the plan she sticks to until Yen and Tissaia screw it up at Thanedd), or to put her in a position where she will be protected by powerful allies. Ciri is a princess, with a political marriage her likely future if Cintra had not been destroyed, so marrying her to the Koviri prince is not so strange or shocking a fate for a girl of Ciri's position. The Koviri state and the Lodge would keep Ciri safe, and give her an important and influential position. She might be a "puppet" at first, but the idea was for her to grow into a co-equal member of the Lodge one day. From Triss's perspective, this is not an unreasonable plan. Yennefer's plan (if there even was one) would mean Ciri was forever on the run and hiding from powerful political entities. If Triss is considering the "lesser evil," then Ciri living under Sheala de Tancarville's direction seems like a better fate than Ciri on the run looking over her shoulder for assassins.

I personally don't think that the Lodge's plans for her were terrible, but I'm biased here, since I'm the Lodge's fanboy Still, they wanted to use her, just like Vilgefortz, Emhyr and everyone else. They didn't care about what Ciri wanted.

 

[ajiehb]

Third thing you mentioned was Triss and her character development. If you've read the books AFTER playing the games, then I honestly can't blame you at all. I suppose it can really come as a surprise to you that she had a difficult past, first and foremost being rejected, then making mistakes such as trusting "wrong" people and picking "wrong" sides. For her it didn't seem as a "bad" choice back then, because she was just maturing and trying to find her place in life - imagine how hard it must've been for her if you take her mental scars into account. Sometimes she stumbled and sometimes she fell, but in the end she always got up, which is what makes her character believable and relatable... Triss overcame her inner demons towards the end of the saga or at least took the very first important step. And that's what I missed in the games, she was a different character there lacking the aftermath of her past and the crucial character refinement point from LotL.

If we are talking about books I don't see how Triss always got up. Until the end she didn't even tried to change something. And what exactly are her mental scars? Sodden battle? But it's her nature... when it became hard she scares and run away. Again only in the end of books she overcome this and help her friends. And you can't blame her - she isn't strong willed character she is more soft one and that's why many people love her. And that's why it's easier for her to follow the Lodge instead of helping Yennefer or Geralt. That's why she give up with Ciri at Kaer Morhen and tells Geralt to call other sorceress. But even she has her limits. When Lodge refuse to help Yennefer she finally run away to investigate on her own. I think it's the turning point of her character. She understand that she can't always run away betray and lie... and she start her own path.

And if you will look at the games she develops in the same way. First two games she is loyal to the Lodge and don't tell Geralt all truth and only in the 3rd game she finds herself and fights for the mages and her friends. It's quite funny

 

[Trireme]

Not entirely true, she wasn't suppose to marry Tancred but to become his mistress and get pregnant with him:

The original plan was to make her queen- when the emperor married fake Ciri that plan went to hell.

 

[Sephira]

Am I the only one who thinks the Lodge and its plan for Ciri was not that bad of a choice in the books? For Triss, who cares for Ciri, the only ways to keep her safe are to hide her from the world (which is the plan she sticks to until Yen and Tissaia screw it up at Thanedd), or to put her in a position where she will be protected by powerful allies. Ciri is a princess, with a political marriage her likely future if Cintra had not been destroyed, so marrying her to the Koviri prince is not so strange or shocking a fate for a girl of Ciri's position. The Koviri state and the Lodge would keep Ciri safe, and give her an important and influential position. She might be a "puppet" at first, but the idea was for her to grow into a co-equal member of the Lodge one day. From Triss's perspective, this is not an unreasonable plan. Yennefer's plan (if there even was one) would mean Ciri was forever on the run and hiding from powerful political entities. If Triss is considering the "lesser evil," then Ciri living under Sheala de Tancarville's direction seems like a better fate than Ciri on the run looking over her shoulder for assassins.

*ahem*

Ciri was completely free from politics because fake Ciri picked her seat at Emhyr's court as his wife and at Cintra court as queen. So no political entities or assassins or whatsoever chasing the real Ciri.

About Thanedd. Keep in mind that hiding her from the world was the choice all wanted (from Triss, to the other sorceresses, to Yennefer), and showing her only to the Council (iirc). Then Tissaia, when coup started, told Yennefer to bring the girl in front of all the mages at Garstang, trying to cool off everything.
Both were neutral. No plans. Both however realized too late that having Ciri exposed like that, delivering also a prophecy from trance suddenly, wasn't the best idea. Too late.

And the Lodge's plan...yeah well not that bad, better than Vilge's and Emhyr's, maybe she would have lived a comfortable life in Kovir, with lot of privileges for being the prince's favourite (not wife!) but... heh that was all. Then she would have joined the Lodge, maybe even if she sticked with Geralt's and Yennefer's plan, that is, living all together, she is a precious source and she would have been a good member, also with Triss there, as a further guide.

Needed to nitpick on some facts, you know.

 

[Trireme]

Ciri was completely free from politics because fake Ciri picked her seat at Emhyr's court as his wife and at Cintra court as queen. So no political entities or assassins or whatsoever chasing the real Ciri.

This was only in the last few weeks of the last book, after the emperor announced the marriage.

 

[Sephira]

This was only in the last few weeks of the last book, after the emperor announced the marriage.

Yeah, but all believed (especially at Emhyr's court) already that fake Ciri was the real one, and the nilfgardiaans and people who knew the truth were dead or... you know, at Emhyr's court. In Tower of the Swallow, when the emperor marriage with Cirilla from Cintra news was spreading all over the continent, the real Ciri fleed from the Rats with the idiot thought of claiming her place, at the beginning, but then... she realized...and then... we know what happened.

And the Lodge had no clue about how fixing that before, they were planning for sure, Sheala and Zuleyka dreams yeah... but in fact, good thing they were listening during the Cintra peace treaty.

 

[mecha_fish]

@Trireme Wait, didn't the Lodge want to use Ciri for her womb? As in, for her special ability? I dunno, Lodge is ambitious, not sure if I'd let them take over the universe though imo.

Actually, how does the Lodge's plan differ from that of Vilgefortz? I'm pretty sure that was the point of their whole meeting at the end at Montecalvo. I'll have to look it up, but to my memory, they're as bad as Vilgefortz and that's the whole point...

 

[TreesAreCanon]

@Trireme

Uhm I don't see any difference between ending up in Vilgefortz's laboratory and becoming Philippa's and Tancred's whore. Vilgy was at least honest about his intentions, whereas the Lodge was just a bunch of treacherous hags lusting for power.
She knew what was on the table - I don't find partaking in such a plan reasonable at all if you care for the person involved.

Cirilla, Lady of the Lake Chapter Eleven:

I have to try and convince Geralt that what you ladies want to do with me differs substantially from what Vilgefortz wanted to do with his glass tube. I will try to explain him the differences between castle Montecalvo and castle Stygga, despite the fact that Vilgefortz thought what he was doing was for the good of the world and you ladies also think it is for the good of the world. I know it is not going to be easy to convince an old wolf like Geralt. He will say that I am a brat and can easily be fooled into doing noble things. But I have to try. It is important that he understands it, that he accepts it.
It is very important. Also for you ladies.

 

[Vigilance.492]

Just a reminder to try and keep things here about Triss. Just because the Lodge is being discussed doesn't automatically make that relevant to Triss, and especially Ciri-heavy posts are absolutely off-topic. There's a Lodge thread, and Ciri can kind of just get woven in where necessary (As I don't know if there's really a dedicated thread any more).

Also I'm going to start clamping down on the, "Triss still needs more content" posts. There's a suggestion sub-forum if you want to suggest/beg/demand more Triss content, hence why there was those romance changes in 1.10 and this isn't the thread to attempt to obtain more from that situation. Feel free to criticize/discuss vanilla and recently added Triss content, but enough with the, "We need more ending slides", "Triss needs another scene in the Epilogue before Kovir", style stuff.

 

[bartekarioch]

Feel free to criticize/discuss/fellate over vanilla and recently added Triss content, but enough with the, "We need more ending slides", "Triss needs another scene in the Epilogue before Kovir", style stuff.

There is no chance for a change ?
It's suggesting ?
Patch 1.10 was the last ?
I think we might want changes though patch 1.10 ?
Not all posts are useless and off-topic.
It's not up to us to introduce them.