Your Political Side in The Witcher 3.

[shawn_kh]

I respect Emhyr, because he is a man of his words.

Book spoilers:

Spoiler

After Geralt and Yennefer surrendered he treated them with respect, and he let them commit suicide by slitting their wrists in a warm bath on their own accord. He promised them that he would not let a tear come to Ciri's eyes and he kept his word. When he saw Ciri crying because Geralt and Yen were going to commit suicide, he kept his promise and returned Ciri and let Geralt and Yen go.

But under no circumstance I will let him touch Ciri even if it means Geralt, Ciri, or both would die. Being forced into an incestuous relationship is worse than death.

 

[Ljesnjanin]

Being forced into an incestuous relationship is worse than death.

I don't think that is the option anymore...I have a feeling Emhyr's plans are different now.

 

[Klavi]

Mmmmm I see where you're coming from, but I still think regardless of the actions the sorceresses took after the Thanedd Coup, Nilfgaard instigated the instability that separated the magical from the state. That coup is what broke down the council and whatever logical structures the sorcerers and the monarchs had in place. This is what leads to Eilhart forming the Lodge and subsequently attempting to ensure the interests of magically endowed (and elves, by extension, hence the murder of Demavend). Poltical instability caused by a foreign agent (Nilfgaard) leads to the minority poltical groups going out of wack -- they had a lot of power and now they don't. Naturally they'll be in a chaotic power struggle. Nilfgaard does understand that the sorcerers are what make the Northern Kingdoms so strong and in the interests of creating havoc, they go about removing the most stable political groups.

Of course, Nilfgaard were behind the Conclave's fall and the sorceresses getting stupid ideas. It's a solid strategy that worked really well, even better than anyone could've predicted. But that doesn't excuse Phili's or other sorceresses' actions afterwards.
And I still think that Phili used the "interests of magically endowed" only as a convenient excuse that others would rally behind. She probably cares about the other magic users, but the Lodge was mainly about advancing Phili's own ambitions. And elves never figured into that - Demavend was chosen because of the Pontar Valley and the fact that he was easily one of the weaker kings. The squirrels would gladly kill any king, anyway.

Spoiler

Indeed, Emhyr saw her as a tool for the longest time, but, when the time came, he didn't go through with it. Despite his overarching plan and the Prophecy, he still realized that Ciri's his daughter above all. I felt like he did care about Pavetta and Ciri, at least as much as he could, being the Emperor and all.
He also wasn't going to give her to Vilgefortz, that'd be a terrible idea and Vilgefortz realized it at some point, deciding to capture Ciri himself.

Being forced into an incestuous relationship is worse than death.

He's a handsome Emperor.
She's a 10 /10 girl.
It works for both sides, really!

Anyway, I don't think CDPR will straight up reuse such a massive plot thread from the books. Emhyr must have some other plans for her.

 

[BlackWolf500.298]

He's a handsome Emperor.
She's a 10 /10 girl.
It works for both sides, really!

Big Spoilers

Spoiler

If he wouldn't be her damn father!!

 

[StormKorp]

I'll try to be neutral as much as possible however when I cannot be then I'll stick with the faction that appear to be the most honest of the two, presenting their issues and goals without shadows. Backstabbing people will end up with my Geralt blade right inside their chests.

In the end I want to ride away with Triss so I'll side with whomever let me do that.

 

[Lieste]

I respect Emhyr, because he is a man of his words.

Book spoilers:

Spoiler

After Geralt and Yennefer surrendered he treated them with respect, and he let them commit suicide by slitting their wrists in a warm bath on their own accord. He promised them that he would not let a tear come to Ciri's eyes and he kept his word. When he saw Ciri crying because Geralt and Yen were going to commit suicide, he kept his promise and returned Ciri and let Geralt and Yen go.

But under no circumstance I will let him touch Ciri even if it means Geralt, Ciri, or both would die. Being forced into an incestuous relationship is worse than death.

Well, while less than ideal it quite obviously isn't worse than death.

 

[Klavi]

Big Spoilers

I've read the books and that was supposed to be a joke. :hmm:

 

[Lieste]

I don't want to take sides especially, but remembering the time around the battle of Brenna, I'd choose Nilfgaard over the Northern Realms if the justice of the individual situation is balanced.

Nilfgaard was trying for peaceful occupation and integration of settlers into hereto barren lands, while the Northern Kingdoms were killing and raping and displacing people, despite the wishes of their own peasants...

We don't know the current situation, what Emhyr's intentions are, or what Yennefer's involvement has been. Until we know more we don't know who our allies in high places are. I strongly suspect we share common ground with Emhyr, and not as much with Radovid the Stern (who I dislike on principle ~ angry, cynical & fanatical).

 

[PrinceParadox.372]

I was thinking about this last night and to be honest I don't like the thought of helping Nilfgaard, so I'll be in favor of the Northern Kingdoms.

I think...I will go neutral if the quest design allow me to choice in this way.
Even in TW2, I chose Iorveth instead of Roche, because the motivation with Iorveth was to find Triss.

That was my exact reasoning for siding with Iorveth too

 

[SerJaimeLannister]

I understand that neutral is "lore friendly" but IMO you guys seem to be playing these games wrong if you're already going in with the choice to play everything neutral.

If I'm going to be straight up however concerning which side I prefer it's The North but I'm waiting until I play the game and see the choice places before me.

 

[Bellator Pius Gratus]

Okay, so I've not read the most recent posts, because I take spoiler tags seriously at this point. Seriously, thank you for including them. ^_^

Also, I've only read two books, and have another two I will read shortly. Then I guess it's fan translations since the stalling of translations to English is ridiculous. My point being, I've not the extensive knowledge regarding Emhyr's character. So I can only go by the little I know of him, and that is still quite enough for making up my mind. What you learn in Witcher 2, forget about it, I can't understand how anyone can sympathise with him or the empire.

No one can deny Emhyr being a savvy and skillful politician and ruler. No doubt about it. But it's the way he constantly bangs his damnable head and sun against the Northern borders(I assume he's calling it the spreading of enlightenment and civilisation). I mean, what hasn't he tried? The only thing that hasn't crossed his mind is giving up this ambition. From my perspective, I can't really disregard all they've done, and that I see through all these schemes.

Already in White Orchard Geralt comments that Nilfgaardians can be quite nice. He receives the answer "Don't get accustomed Nordling." That's not very nice is it? Sure, he called them Black Ones, but where is that civilised manner and understanding they bring?

And what of that commander, Captain Peter Saar Gwynleve. He's only(!) to demand thirty bushels from the village, because "look at my callouses. They're the hands of a farmer. 'I'm no excellency." I'm one of you is basically what he's saying. I see through that. How can I not to?

To hell with what they´re selling, I see through that for what it is = dictatorship.

The plots, the scheming, the invasions and the "we're the good guys" rhetoric.

I will love to hear Charles Dance as Emhyr, but I doubt Emhyr will top this fellow:

Spoiler

Whatever he had done in the past, at least he was likeable.

But you know what, I'll give good-natured and kind Nilfgaardians a chance. I actually liked Declan Leuvaarden for instance. I'll even help if I can. But Emhyr, and for all that he's done...nah, I won't let his scheming ways hurt anyone if I can help it.

 

[Arclavum]

For me that's a question that shouldn't be answered by anyone yet, the game will show us that Nilfgaard can be more humane than what the previous games have taught us, and that the North will be more savage now that it's struggling to survive, in the end despite of what we know and what we will know when we play the game, the Witcher universe is well known for it's realism even if it's set in a fantasy universe, and that for me means that there will be good people and bad people (if we can call someone that at all) on both sides.

On a more personal opinion though I think a lot of people who haven't read the books (yet) might change their opinions after playing the game. It's rumored that this game will be closer to the books than any of the previous ones, and that means that some facts from the books will be shown to the people that haven't read them, and that can change your perspective completely.

 

[Klavi]

I understand that neutral is "lore friendly" but IMO you guys seem to be playing these games wrong if you're already going in with the choice to play everything neutral.

Some people get a weird hard-on when they can act like the book-Geralt, whether it concerns neutrality, politics, Yen or what have you.
Though I think that going neutral is justified in this case - neither side is clearly better than the other. In the Nilfgaard, you have prejudice against the mages (which will cause trouble to your magical friends) and plenty of bad blood. While if you support the North... well, supporting the losing side is hardly the brightest idea.

 

[Mgec]

I'll be in slight favor for the North just because I like it. There are of course many problems with it but aiding an invader kill them won't help them get any better. United, the kingdoms will see who the true enemy is so nonsense like Henselt invading Aerdin happen no more.

 

[BlackWolf500.298]

I'll be in slight favor for the North just because I like it. There are of course many problems with it but aiding an invader kill them won't help them get any better. United, the kingdoms will see who the true enemy is so nonsense like Henselt invading Aerdin happen no more.

Wut...? Emhyr is for the North? Somethin's foul here folks, like an apple rotten to the core....

 

[Mgec]

Wut...? Emhyr is for the North? Somethin's foul here folks, like an apple rotten to the core....

:ermm: I thought Nilfgaard was invading the North. At least that's the last thing I saw in the Witcher 2.


EDIT:
lol I finally understood... I like my avatar though.

 

[CostinRaz]

Glory to the Empire!

 

[IronsteffL]

One of my fondest memories of The Witcher 2 was rescuing Triss after facing "the might of the Nilfgaardian Empire". I'll gladly stomp every black-clad oxhead I come across into the mud if Emhyr doesn't give me a good reason not to in the beginning of the game - which isn't very likely.

I hate the notion of Nilfgaard constantly invading the North. The Empire is so friggin' huge, warm and fertile; there can't be any plausible reason to invade the cold, plague-ridden and quarreling Northern Kingdoms, except of "Me, me, me; Mine, mine, mine; Now, now, now!". Well, of course there can, but chances are that I won't have it. Children like that need a slap on the head and be sent to their rooms. Empires like that need a slice through the chest and be pushed into the Jaruga.

 

[Lieste]

Actually Emhyr has more particular and specific reasons for looking to the north. I get the distinct feeling that conquest and occupation of lands are far from the most important aspect of his intentions, though they are "necessary evils" given who he is and what is at stake.

His "conquest" aims are more than satisfied with free trade and Finlandisation, with Nilfgaard being an economic powerhouse compared to the petty & squabbling northern kingdoms.

Not entirely sure his choices are necessary or even the best of a range of options, but I think they are perceived as such.

 

[IronsteffL]

Actually Emhyr has more particular and specific reasons for looking to the north. I get the distinct feeling that conquest and occupation of lands are far from the most important aspect of his intentions, though they are "necessary evils" given who he is and what is at stake.

You are right, that's absolutely possible. When I think about parallel dimensions with elves standing triumphantly on piles of human bones, there could even be a conflict coming that couldn't be won without the help and order of Nilfgaard. Yet, it may be won by using magic, which wouldn't be an option if Nilfgaard gained the upper hand. We probably won't know until we are in the thick of it! O.O