13812 réponses à ce sujet

[Mr.House]

Dunny, Vattier and Letho planned the whole operation to spread chaos in the north. To say Dunny does not trust no one is, well dumb. Vattier is his right hand pretty much and he trusted a witcher(whatever he was going to live up to his promise is a debate) to not only know many secrets but Dunny gave him full support he could give to avoid suspicion from the North. So yes, Dunny has trust in certain people, people he knows will get results and won't backfire.

Only reason why Letho tells Geralt everything because Letho has nothing to lose and Letho had already won. Chaos was spread.

Modifié par Mr.House, 09 juillet 2012 - 05:48 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

I am really excited to see Vattier personally. Wouldn't it be awesome if he was like the Roche / Iorveth of a pro-Emhyr path?

[Costin_Razvan]

Quite frankly if TW3 can end with Emhyr enjoying a cup of wine as he celebrates his conquest of the north along with Geralt, Letho and Vattier it would be epic.

I would love it if the Imperial path would have you murdering Saskia/Stennis, Natalis, Henselt and Radovid with the Radovid mission being the final one. Facing off Roche there if he joined Radovid or when you kill Natalis if you gave Anais to Natalis or saved Triss. Iorveth would be protecting Saskia and Siegfried Radovid.

Before people scream bloody murder, the reason I would like it like this is because these are all characters who are well written and their reasons are understood. It would add a lot to the game if it occured like that.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 09 juillet 2012 - 06:18 .

[Mr.House]

Vattier sounds very interesting. Let's just hope he's not like Roderick de Wett XD

[Jamie9]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

Quite frankly if TW3 can end with Emhyr enjoying a cup of wine as he celebrates his conquest of the north along with Geralt, Letho and Vattier it would be epic.

I would love it if the Imperial path would have you murdering Saskia/Stennis, Natalis, Henselt and Radovid with the Radovid mission being the final one. Facing off Roche there if he joined Radovid or when you kill Natalis if you gave Anais to Natalis or saved Triss. Iorveth would be protecting Saskia and Siegfried Radovid.

Before people scream bloody murder, the reason I would like it like this is because these are all characters who are well written and their reasons are understood. It would add a lot to the game if it occured like that.

I agree with you.

I'd rather TW3 be slightly shorter than TW2, but include all the options you made in TW2, which determines the state of the North.

I'm really curious to see what role Aryan la Valette will play in TW3, since that is one of the 4 major choices according to CDProjectRED.

[KnightofPhoenix]

I highly doubt that will happen. The paths would be way too different.
It's more likely that we could side with the opposition to Emhyr or with loyalists and fight either, rather than go on an assassination spree in the North.

Plus, I cannot think of a reason why Geralt would commit that much. He might be willing to help Emhyr if he has something immediate to gain, but not to the point where he'd be doing what Letho did.

[Jamie9]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I highly doubt that will happen. The paths would be way too different.
It's more likely that we could side with the opposition to Emhyr or with loyalists and fight either, rather than go on an assassination spree in the North.

Plus, I cannot think of a reason why Geralt would commit that much. He might be willing to help Emhyr if he has something immediate to gain, but not to the point where he'd be doing what Letho did.

I don't know, if Emhyr knows where Yennefer is, Geralt might be willing to do quite a lot.

I think it'd be really good if, depending on choices in TW2 and TW3, the war was decided. So, if Nilfgaard's plan in TW2 succeeds, Niflgaard will likely win.

That way, if you choose to support the North, you still lose. Would be pretty epic.

[Costin_Razvan]

I highly doubt that will happen. The paths would be way too different.
It's more likely that we could side with the opposition to Emhyr or with loyalists and fight either, rather than go on an assassination spree in the North.

I'd rather have them vastly different then just the same locations but only altered as they are in TW2. Besides you would only need a few castles and perhaps one, two fields camps to pull it off.

As to what CDPR will do, well we dunno.

Plus, I cannot think of a reason why Geralt would commit that much. He might be willing to help Emhyr if he has something immediate to gain, but not to the point where he'd be doing what Letho did.

Simple. Emhyr could offer him the same deal he offered Letho, but with the school of wolf this time, I don't see it that far fetched that Geralt would agree. Then there's Yennefer.

The mission would be to eliminate the heads of state and Geralt does not really care about ANY of them except Saskia perhaps ( and even then he is doing it for Zoltan and Yarpen's sake ). Of course Roche, Siegfried, Iorveth would get in the way.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 09 juillet 2012 - 06:50 .

[Jamie9]

I have compiled a... theory.

I honestly think Letho was manipulating Geralt, even in that final encounter. Ideally, for Letho, you didn't save Triss. That way the mages are called out, and killed.

Letho then saves Triss and gives her to you. He then tells you your past, which just happens to tell you Yennefer is in Nilfgaard, and was last with Emhyr.

Where is Geralt going to go? Straight to Emhyr. I think that was the final part of the plan.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

Simple. Emhyr could offer him the same deal he offered Letho, but with the school of wolf this time, I don't see it that far fetched that Geralt would agree.

I don't think he would.
He is accepting of the fact that the Witchers are no more or cannot be what they once were.

He can sympathize with Letho, but I don't think he'd ever want to be like Letho.

[Costin_Razvan]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Costin_Razvan wrote...

Simple. Emhyr could offer him the same deal he offered Letho, but with the school of wolf this time, I don't see it that far fetched that Geralt would agree.

I don't think he would.
He is accepting of the fact that the Witchers are no more or cannot be what they once were.

He can sympathize with Letho, but I don't think he'd ever want to be like Letho.

He never stated that the witchers are no more. In the Witcher 1 during the conversation with Zoltan he was wondering what role should the witchers have in the world now that monsters are no more and the real "monsters" are now men.

When Zoltan argued that witchers will always be needed in the world Geralt could say he was not convinced or he could agree with Zoltan, but even if he was not convinced I do not see that as Geralt accepting that the witcher are no more or cannot be what they once were.

Furthermoore, Emhyr is the first head of state Geralt encounters who made such an offer as rebuilding Witcher schools, that would change something in the way Geralt sees his role in the world I think.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 09 juillet 2012 - 08:01 .

[Damariel]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

Because they must be doing it right? <_<

I'd imagine they are under orders to not stop their march for such things. A blitzkreig is not effective is they stop at every village to rape and plunder.

I don't said all army is stoping to do this.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

He never stated that the witchers are no more. In the Witcher 1 during the conversation with Zoltan he was wondering what role should the witchers have in the world now that monsters are no more and the real "monsters" are now men.

Yea, which is why I do not see Geralt accepting the Witchers to be in the service of politicians.

But I do not mind having the choice if it's developped well and if the story allows Geralt to acquire a new perspective gradually.

[Jamie9]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Yea, which is why I do not see Geralt accepting the Witchers to be in the service of politicians.

But I do not mind having the choice if it's developped well and if the story allows Geralt to acquire a new perspective gradually.

Geralt fought for Foltest. Indeed, it was for the eventual coin, but he still did so.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Jamie9 wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Yea, which is why I do not see Geralt accepting the Witchers to be in the service of politicians.

But I do not mind having the choice if it's developped well and if the story allows Geralt to acquire a new perspective gradually.

Geralt fought for Foltest. Indeed, it was for the eventual coin, but he still did so.

Yes, but he hated it and it was more or less for protection after a Witcher tried to assassinate him. Assassinating monarchs is on an entirely different scale and one Geralt would not take lightly.

[Costin_Razvan]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Costin_Razvan wrote...

He never stated that the witchers are no more. In the Witcher 1 during the conversation with Zoltan he was wondering what role should the witchers have in the world now that monsters are no more and the real "monsters" are now men.

Yea, which is why I do not see Geralt accepting the Witchers to be in the service of politicians.

But I do not mind having the choice if it's developped well and if the story allows Geralt to acquire a new perspective gradually.

I think both TW1 and TW2 do that about Geralt acquiring a new perspective on things. Now obviously it goes without saying that Emhyr has to present a hell an argument for Geralt to accept.

[Mr.House]

There is four witchers of the school of the wolf alive, we know their HQ is not in ruin because of what Triss says in TW2, we also know they can make Witchers again because of the ending of TW. The only way I can see Geralt agreeing to something like that is if it involved Yen. The school of the Wolf is simply not in that bad or in total ruin like the Viper was.

Also keep in mind, Geralt has and still hates politics.

Modifié par Mr.House, 09 juillet 2012 - 08:09 .

[Dave of Canada]

Ultimately, it depends on how much of Geralt's memory is restored and where Ciri is. Ciri could influence TW3 drastically and considering we know it'll involve Emhyr, there's the whole prophecy bit which they'll gave to (unfortunately) cover.

Besides, Geralt has no true loyalties to anyone except the order and his friends.

[Seboist]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Ultimately, it depends on how much of Geralt's memory is restored and where Ciri is. Ciri could influence TW3 drastically and considering we know it'll involve Emhyr, there's the whole prophecy bit which they'll gave to (unfortunately) cover.

Besides, Geralt has no true loyalties to anyone except the order and his friends.

True, Geralt's true to his homeboys like Siegfried.

[Costin_Razvan]

Mr.House wrote...

There is four witchers of the school of the wolf alive, we know their HQ is not in ruin because of what Triss says in TW2, we also know they can make Witchers again because of the ending of TW. The only way I can see Geralt agreeing to something like that is if it involved Yen. The school of the Wolf is simply not in that bad or in total ruin like the Viper was.

Also keep in mind, Geralt has and still hates politics.

Even with that knowledge they still can't make a witcher, because it involves magic. Ask Eskel about it in TW1 he'll tell you a mage is required and Vesemir doesn't trust Triss with that knowledge. Kaer Morhen is also in ruins.

As for Geralt hating politicians. Remember Geralt working for Henselt then potentially saving Anais for Radovid and let's not forget the whole episode with Maravel and Kimbolt. So Geralt is deep in politics, even siding with Saskia still has you involved.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

I think both TW1 and TW2 do that about Geralt acquiring a new perspective on things. Now obviously it goes without saying that Emhyr has to present a hell an argument for Geralt to accept.

I would prefer if it goes beyond just one argument before the choice is made. But a series of events, characters and quests that can lead him to this conclusion. While TW1 and 2 did develop his perspective, they did not make Geralt reach the point where he'd accept doing something like this.

[Jamie9]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Yes, but he hated it and it was more or less for protection after a Witcher tried to assassinate him. Assassinating monarchs is on an entirely different scale and one Geralt would not take lightly.

In TW2, Geralt can help Roche to kill Henselt just fine.

And that's without Yennefer as an insentive

[KnightofPhoenix]

Jamie9 wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Yes, but he hated it and it was more or less for protection after a Witcher tried to assassinate him. Assassinating monarchs is on an entirely different scale and one Geralt would not take lightly.

In TW2, Geralt can help Roche to kill Henselt just fine.

But he didn't do it for a political agenda. There's a huge difference between that and assassinating kings at another king's bidding.

[Seboist]

He can leave Stennis to die too.

[Costin_Razvan]

True it would be preferable. I think the best way to do it is if there was an Imperial Opposition to Emhyr and Geralt would be asked to deal with them, while dealing with them and interacting with Emhyr he could reach the point where he would accept such a deal.