Were you able to follow the political plots?

[c69]

Were you able to follow the political plots?

I just got to chapter 2 and am having a hard time wrapping my mind around the full cast of characters, the politcal plots, and Geralt's role in all this. I did not play witcher 1. Would playing this make everything clear? Will lacking a firm understanding impact my ability to make good choices?

I chose the Roche path.

From a practical standpoint, it seems like there are a few concrete things that need to be done: 1) Rescue Triss 2) Regain memory 3) Help the king Haltest(?) overcome the demon army standing in the way of his conquest 4) Find and bring to justice the kingkiller.

Its not clear to me exactly why I am helping the king, other than the fact I defended him (was this a game choice?) or what the ramification of this choice are from a political standpoint. Who is he fighting? Why?

As far as the kingdoms, politics, and explanation of all the magic involved and the sorcerers, I am lost.

 

[dragonbird]

I just got to chapter 2 and am having a hard time wrapping my mind around the full cast of characters, the politcal plots, and Geralt's role in all this. I did not play witcher 1. Would playing this make everything clear? Will lacking a firm understanding impact my ability to make good choices?

I chose the Roche path.

From a practical standpoint, it seems like there are a few concrete things that need to be done: 1) Rescue Triss 2) Regain memory 3) Help the king Haltest(?) overcome the demon army standing in the way of his conquest 4) Find and bring to justice the kingkiller.

Its not clear to me exactly why I am helping the king, other than the fact I defended him (was this a game choice?) or what the ramification of this choice are from a political standpoint. Who is he fighting? Why?

As far as the kingdoms, politics, and explanation of all the magic involved and the sorcerers, I am lost.

There's an excellent summary at http://en.thewitcher.com/forum/index.php?/topic/22234-the-politics-of-the-witcher-2-part-1-factions-overview-spoilers but unfortunately it contains spoilers, so it may not be a good idea to read it yet.

Witcher 1 wouldn't make a lot of difference. It tells you about Temeria and explains why you were with Foltest at the beginning, but that's about all.

Regarding your questions:
1. As an absolute minimum, you're helping the king because the mist on the battefield and the curse affecting Henselt are Witcher problems. This is what you do for a living, regardless of the political issues. So you didn't get a choice in that, and it doesn't necessarily reflect any political belief.

2. He's fighting for control of this region, which is on the border of his own country (Kaedwen) and which has changed hands a few times in the past. The region has significant strategic and economic value, and he wants it. He also has other reasons for wanting it, which will be explained later - Geralt (and you) don't know them yet.

3. Henselt's opponent is Saskia the Dragonslayer, who is leading the defenders in Vergen. Before the game started, she was leading a rebel force fighting for independence for the region, but she has now combined forces with the nobles to fight off the outside threat. The king of Aedirn (Demavend) was killed by the kingslayers. His son, Stennis, was with Saskia in Vergen and present at that meeting at the start of the chapter, but he was killed in the mist.

The other countries with relevance in the game are Temeria, Redania and Nilfgaard.
Temeria you probably know about, as this was Foltest's country, and is also where Roche is from.
Redania won't have been mentioned yet much. You'll find out more later.
Nilfgaard is the large empire to the south. They've attempted to take over the North before (stopped at the Battle of Brenna), and everyone treats them with suspicion.

 

[blakeocity]

His son, Stennis, was with Saskia in Vergen and present at that meeting at the start of the chapter, but he was killed in the mist.

Stennis? The prince? No he isn't.

 

[dragonbird]

Stennis? The prince? No he isn't.

He is on Roche path.

 

[GuyNwah]

Stennis? The prince? No he isn't.

Yes, he is. Both he and Saskia are at the meeting with Henselt. On Roche's path, he doesn't make it back.

It is possible to miss him on Roche's path, because [1] Saskia does all the talking; and [2] you'll miss his corpse if you're not watching the ground.

The immediate reason Geralt is willing to aid Henselt is that he needs to cross the mist himself, to pursue the kingslayer and rescue Triss. Geralt doesn't have political motivations, but he needs Henselt's help to do what he came to do.

Some of what is going on will be explained in the course of Act II, and the rest will be explained in Act III.

 

[drunknmunkey666]

I also have a hard time understanding all the political areas of the game.. :/

I get so much information all the time, in cutscenes and dialogs, and really can't combine all that info into a bigger picture.. I know, I probably suck, but when there's lots of characters with their own agendas etc., I tend to get lost.. Had a really hard time in Witcher 1 too, in the "detective" questline (so much info)..
Normally in games I just pick up quests, read the objective and carries it out, while trying to get an overview of the main story But in this game, it seems like every bit of information is somewhat important, so I struggle with piecing it all together... I'm only in chapter 1, so maybe it gets "easier" further into the game?
But the problem is with me, not the game. I got issues concerning memory and structuring of large information flows, so to speak, and this is worse when done in a language not native to me.. CDPR, do a danish translation hahaha Even worse, politics are so boring to me, so that doesn't help either (information that isn't appealing to someone tends to get harder to remember and piece together).

 

[Garrison72]

It can be a tough story to follow, I admit.

 

[songlian]

Yep. I've also got entire patches of story that are not crystal clear. Granted, I did only one walkthrough so far, so I'm staying away from spoilers. All in all, the plot is very thick. (Which is excellent, imo.)

 

[yuikami]

Aye, at chapter two on my first run-through was really confusing to me too, but when I got to the end, everything became understandable... like enlightenment XD

 

[M4xw0lf.978]

Were you able to follow the political plots?

Yes.

 

[dragonbird]

It'll really make sense after the second playthrough

 

[blakeocity]

Yeah you either need to take the time to understand all the terms and locations being thrown around every sentence, or play the game again.

 

[brownybrown]

I found the explanations clearer and politics much easier to follow on the Ivorth path.

 

[wolfie690]

You can choose paths?

 

[c69]

Seems like there are a bunch of people in the same boat.

It almost seems as if the complexity is partly wrought because of the multiple paths through the game. Its like they are trying to describe something complex with little snippets that (will) change based on the route you choose.

I think part of it also may come from the modern "epic fantasy" genre in literature, where political intrigue and supporting characters are heaped on the plot to make it seem more immersive. Characters discuss things/people/events matter of factly even though the reader has never encountered them before. I haven't read the original series, but this technique is common in the genre, and not one I am particularly fond of. Oh well.

 

[original182]

Yes I agree that it was difficult to follow political plots. It was overwhelming for me at the start.

 

[phamvan94]

Take your time and think about it, read the journal, etc. After a few playthroughs you will understand it perfectly.

 

[Kindo.824]

I can't stress enough how much it helps to always keep yourself updated by reading the journal entries (all of which are given extra entertainment value by Dandelion's own little spin on things).

1. As an absolute minimum, you're helping the king because the mist on the battefield and the curse affecting Henselt are Witcher problems. This is what you do for a living, regardless of the political issues. So you didn't get a choice in that, and it doesn't necessarily reflect any political belief.

Just a small correction, here (excuse the nerd in me).

The reason Geralt is helping Henselt is because he, in turn, requires Henselt's help (more precisely, Dethmold's help) in order to lift the curse on the battlefield. Geralt doesn't want to do this simply because it's a curse - as we all know how much witchers love lifting curses - but also, and possibly mainly, depending on the player's personal beliefs and impact on Geralt's choices, because it's Geralt's latest clue in recovering more of his memory. This he learns from Cedric at the end of Chapter 1. It is quickly made clear that Henselt will not freely lend his help, however, unless Geralt first lifts the King's personal curse. Basically, King Henselt ceases the opportunity to rid himself of two of his problems; two curses with one witcher, so to speak. Still, it is as you say, if you play Geralt more neutral, it's obviously a witcher's job to do this, anyway; not to mention that not even witchers make a habit of denying a ruling king his "request."

 

[M4xw0lf.978]

You can choose paths?

Three letters: L-O-L

 

[KnightofPhoenix]

I think it's necessary to play the two paths to grasp it clearly.

It's convoluted and certainly more complex in terms of politics than any game I played (which is how it's supposed to be). But ultimately, it is also simple.

Once you're finished with the game, or if you don't mind spoilers, check out my blogs.