[KnightofPhoenix]

dragonbird said:

Are you planning to do more on the La Valettes at any time? I think I've raised it in a couple of threads, but no-one's picking up on it.

I'd be interested to hear your views on what you think the future significance of their family is going to be, as CDPR included the Aryan decision as one of the major ones in TW2. ›››

I am not sure we have enough info for me to dedicate a blog about them. But maybe after replaying and seeing all the alternatives, I might be able to write something.

I do think it's an important issue, and I will certainly mention La Valettes when discussing the Pontar State.


@ Bloth
I do think they want to be led, they just want different rhetoric. But at the end of the day, even if the rebellion was egalitarian, the state will not be so.

I personally predict a phase when the rebellion will collapse in and on itself and a civil war erupt. That's usually what happens, unless Saskia is capable of handling it on her own, which I personally doubt. The tension in the Pontar State is rising and we had a taste of what might happen when Saskia was in a coma for a few days.

The state is lucky that Nilfgaard is attacking. It's a common enemy that can unite them. After the war however, assuming it survives? I am not that optimistic about it. But I do think that it will result in something positive and have a ripple effect on the region. Radovid gave it a backhanded compliment when he said that he never thought that peasants could fight like this and that the knighthood is in danger.

The Witcher universe seems to me to be slowly headed towards modernity, and a sense of nationalism (see Saskia's speech, very nationalist in rhetoric, when compared to what Stennis says). Even if the Pontar State fails, which is likely, I think the other polities will be inspired by it to some extent.

Indeed, Saskia resembles in many ways populist, charismatic leaders of modern times (as opposed to medieval).

[Bloth]

Could be the Pontar state becomes a Switzerland in the chaos of the northern kingdoms feuding. Neutral, well armed, profitable and of use to all the surrounding nations but as you say it's probably going to need some charismatic leader to arise when the rebellion falters as Napoleon did when the revolution overstretched itself who can master both sword and statecraft.

[dragonbird]

Blothulfur said:

Could be the Pontar state becomes a Switzerland in the chaos of the northern kingdoms feuding. Neutral, well armed, profitable and of use to all the surrounding nations but as you say it's probably going to need some charismatic leader to arise when the rebellion falters as Napoleon did when the revolution overstretched itself who can master both sword and statecraft. ›››

It could go either way. Switzerland had geographical advantages that helped it to maintain its independence. It didn't have the same strategic importance. The Pontar state has the disadvantage of being a country that everyone wants to own, both because of its rich resources and its strategic position. Add to that the possibility of internal strife because of the speciesism between the humans, elves and dwarves, and you have a very vulnerable state. I can't see it holding onto its independence for long unless Saskia's still in charge, and I haven't decided yet whether Philippa's continued control would help or hinder.

@KnightofPhoenix, my views on why I think the La Valettes are important.

From the vantage point of our "real world" clue from CDPR that Aryan's life or death is significant, I think that there is a high probability that Aryan, or his mother and uncle, could have a big impact on the war.

If Aryan dies, we know that Louisa cuts some kind of deal with the Nilfgaardians. We don't know what it is, but it's sufficiently unbalanced in Nilfgaard's favour to mean that she is able to ask them to throw in "helping Geralt" and Shilard agrees without demur. We're also told that the Uncle, who is now very powerful, is a self-serving weasel.

If you look at the map, the obvious thing that the La Valettes can give Nilfgaard would be unopposed access by sea to the Lower Pontar.

The La Valette lands are clearly in a strategic position, and if they don't oppose Nilfgaard, it would leave only the Redanian forts protecting this area. A second attack by Nilfgaard by sea up the Pontar would give them the option of a second front against Temeria, break the supply lines from Redania and Kaedwen to the battle front in the south, and/or allow the Nilfgaardians to strike directly at the Upper Pontar. And, as we're repeatedly told, he who controls the Upper Pontar controls the North.

On the other hand, if Aryan lives, we've been told that he opposes the Nilfgaardians, so none of this will happen. He's also shown signs of growing up fast, with his re-assessment of what it means to be honourable, and he's sufficiently important to have a major political influence on Temeria. He could easily be the factor that allows Temeria to stand firm against the invaders.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Yes, the La Valette lands are very strategically placed and I do not think it's out of pure altruism that Saskia sought to help Aryan. I believe she saw an ally. It is possible that Nilgaard seeks to project its influence in this area, to essentially isolate the rest Temeria from the North and East.

We know that in the previous war, the Pontar was vital and it seems that the Nilfgaardians neglected its importance, if I understood the wikia articles well enough. It seems they are learning from their mistake.

I am not sure I would go as far as to say that the outcome of the war is entirely dependent on the La Valettes, I think a choice like killing or sparing Henselt is more important. But it's definitely an important factor. Also IIRC, Aryan alive is appealing to Radovid for help. That's also significant.

But who do you mean by "uncle"? Louisa's brother? That doesn't sound familiar to me.

[dragonbird]

KnightofPhoenix said:

Yes, the La Valette lands are very strategically placed and I do not think it's out of pure altruism that Saskia sought to help Aryan. I believe she saw an ally. It is possible that Nilgaard seeks to project its influence in this area, to essentially isolate the rest Temeria from the North and East.

We know that in the previous war, the Pontar was vital and it seems that the Nilfgaardians neglected its importance, if I understood the wikia articles well enough. It seems they are learning from their mistake.

I am not sure I would go as far as to say that the outcome of the war is entirely dependent on the La Valettes, I think a choice like killing or sparing Henselt is more important. But it's definitely an important factor. Also IIRC, Aryan alive is appealing to Radovid for help. That's also significant.

But who do you mean by "uncle"? Louisa's brother? That doesn't sound familiar to me. ›››

I agree that it wouldn't be the only deciding factor, but it probably puts it on an equal status with the other two critical political decisions - Henselt or Stennis's death and the status of the Conclave.

I can't remember with absolute certainty the name of Lousia's uncle, but I think it was Baron Ramboldt (sp). He's mentioned in some of the "status update" conversations in acts 2 and 3, and identified in one of these as Louisa's uncle, which would mean he's the one who sent the children to Loc Muinne. He's definitely one of the senior bickering nobles, and not approved of by Roche/Triss.

Regarding the children, was it stated as a fact that it was the Nilfgaardians who kidnapped them en route and passed Anais to Dethmold, rather than direct kidnap by the Kaedwenis? There are so many variations on the relevant scenes in Act 3 that I've got confused about what was fact and what was speculation by Geralt or Roche, who wouldn't necessarily have accurate data. (And on whether or not there are differences depending on your actions). The Nilfgaardians are more likely to have kept Boussy alive than the Kaedwenis.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Oh Ramboldt is Louisa's uncle? I didn't know.

What exactly happened to the children was left ambiguous. But it is a fact that Nilfgaard gave Anais to Kaedwen, Dethmold said so. As to how the Nilfgaardians took them, well now that you mention it, I would not be surprised if Ramboldt gave them to Shilard in exchange for support. We know that when noble fight amongst each other, many approach Nilfgaard for support.

It's not clear what happened to Boussy. Either Nilfgaard killed him, or left him alive so they can put him as a puppet king once they conquer Temeria. As to why they gave Anais to Kaedwen, it was a bargaining ship most probably used to get the invitation to Loc Muinne (which was vital).

[dragonbird]

KnightofPhoenix said:

Oh Ramboldt is Louisa's uncle? I didn't know.

What exactly happened to the children was left ambiguous. But it is a fact that Nilfgaard gave Anais to Kaedwen, Dethmold said so. As to how the Nilfgaardians took them, well now that you mention it, I would not be surprised if Ramboldt gave them to Shilard in exchange for support. We know that when noble fight amongst each other, many approach Nilfgaard for support.

It's not clear what happened to Boussy. Either Nilfgaard killed him, or left him alive so they can put him as a puppet king once they conquer Temeria. As to why they gave Anais to Kaedwen, it was a bargaining ship most probably used to get the invitation to Loc Muinne (which was vital). ›››

Nope, don't think it's Kimbolt any more. (spelling corrected - I've just re-played the relevant prologue section). Louisa doesn't think much of him. I'll check the identity later when I get to that part of the game, as I'm pretty sure he's named at least once, not just as "Louisa's Uncle".

Thanks for the confirmation about the kidnapping - I can treat that now as a definite fact.

The problem(?) about the kidnapping is that we're depending a lot on rumours and speculation within the game itself. On one playthrough variant, Radovid tells you that Louisa and the children's uncle arranged for them to go to Loc Muinne to stake their claims to the throne, and that they were kidnapped en route. I don't think he identifies the kidnappers as the Nilfgaardians, but he probably didn't have the details. However, this implies that the La Valette people didn't deliberately hand the children over to Shilard, unless they're lying now.

I don't think that Nilfgaard would have deliberately killed Boussy, although an accidental death is possible. The Temerian laws of succession appear to give him precedence over Anais (Foltest's comments in the Prologue, Geralt and Roche's after meeting Radovid). Shilard would almost certainly have wanted to hold him as a future bargaining tool against Radovid or Henselt. There's a high chance he would have told Dethmold that Boussy was dead though, in order to increase Anais' value.

[KnightofPhoenix]

In my playthrough, Radovid just said that the Nilfgaardians captured the kids after the rebellion and gave Anais to Kaedwen. I do not recall him saying that Louisa and her uncle sent the kids to Loc Muinne. Do you have a vid about that?

And I agree that it would be wiser if the Nilfgaardians kept Boussy alive for their own purposes.

[dragonbird]

KnightofPhoenix said:

In my playthrough, Radovid just said that the Nilfgaardians captured the kids after the rebellion and gave Anais to Kaedwen. I do not recall him saying that Louisa and her uncle sent the kids to Loc Muinne. Do you have a vid about that?

And I agree that it would be wiser if the Nilfgaardians kept Boussy alive for their own purposes. ›››

I'm going to try to find an appropriate savegame and pick it up from there, failing which it will need to wait until I get to the right point on this playthrough. Will get back to you...

[KnightofPhoenix]

No need, I found it. This depends on what happened to Aryan, which makes sense. With Aryan alive, the Nilfgaardians were not able to bring the La Valettes under their influence, so resorted to kidnapping. And the uncle's name is Baron Orvel (spelling?).

What is curious is that Baron Orvel wanted to declare Anais Queen, hence sendign her to Loc Muinne, but there is no mention of Boussy. What happened to him? Did the Baron eliminate him as he saw him a potential threat (say he wants to marry off one of his sons to Anais)? Did he give him to Nilfgaard?

EDIT: and strangely, Dethmold does not mention Anais as a gift from Nilfgaard in this playthrough, while I am positive that he does if Aryan is dead (not sure now though). Hmmm.

[dragonbird]

Aww, and I'd just finished making the video
Here it is anyway if you want another look. I found a relevant savegame where I always keep them, in the recycle bin.

http://youtu.be/NKbG8L-jyIs

Yup. I'd just realised that it opens up a whole new set of unanswered questions about Boussy. So the Dethmold sequence is different too?

[KnightofPhoenix]

Oh sorry

I could be misremembering, but I am positive that if Aryan is killed, Dethmold refers to Anais as a gift from Nilfgaard. But he doesn't do so if Aryan is alive.

So it's not clear who kidnapped Anais on her way to Loc Muinne. Dethmold directly or Nilfgaard.

[dragonbird]

So we have a nice little mystery for the future

[KnightofPhoenix]

Radovid does say that Dethmold's business in Loc Muinne is "shrouded in mystery."

Was he colluding with Nifgaard? I find that unlikely considering that his brother was murdered by Nilfgaard's allies but who knows.

I doubt that TW3 will focus on politics in the Northern kingdoms (minus potentially Boussy), but an expansion for TW2 might shed light on these questions.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Yay I successfully uploaded images!

[RageGT]

Just great read! As usual!

One small correction if I may dare. You say the assassin from the end of TW1 is not mentioned at all. He is mentioned right at the start of the game when Triss says he's a witcher, from the autopsy. At least that much we know. He was a Witcher. Shouldn't he have a medallion on him though? She would have mentioned it, wouldn't she?

[dragonbird]

RageGT said:

Just great read! As usual!

One small correction if I may dare. You say the assassin from the end of TW1 is not mentioned at all. He is mentioned right at the start of the game when Triss says he's a witcher, from the autopsy. At least that much we know. He was a Witcher. Shouldn't he have a medallion on him though? She would have mentioned it, wouldn't she? ›››

He wasn't wearing a medallion. That comes up in the later conversation between Geralt and Foltest if you decide to tell Foltest the truth.

I wonder if this is another symptom of the difficult times for the Nilfgaardian witchers. There's also the fact that neither Serrit nor Auckes ever use signs, even though Letho does. Does this mean that it stopped being possible to learn signs? Absence of access to the power, or to sorceresses/mages who can channel magic? I don't know the lore regarding the signs, except as described in TW1.

[KnightofPhoenix]

"Very little is known of him and the game makes almost no mention of him at all barring the first scene"

I did say he was mentioned in the first scene.


My initial thought of Serrit and Auckes not using signs is a game mechanic, but there could be a reason behind it. Interesting.

[kOrd89]

As I said in the thread for part 1, awesome stuff here. Worth a read for anyone trying to piece together the game's lore.

[dmcaldw]

Great stuff !!!
The putting of everything together excellent . I am not trying to burst this conversations bubble but I think what needs to be looked at is why the Kingslayers plan was so effective and how indirectly it helped Saskia's rise to power . First thing you would have to back up to the first game and some of the problems there : plague , non - human conflict ,and even Salamandra it shows Foltest didn't have as much control of his kingdom that he would like . I think the last battle with Nilfgaard was the catalyst seeing how that battle probably ruined many families with the loss of their loved ones . Gleening what we know about our northern kings compassion for the people was furthest from their mind ,especially Henselt.
We know the Lodge had a hand in ending Henselt's first bid for Aedrin through Sabrina but he is dumb and is ready to do so three years later . We have to figure the army was already on the move before Demavend's assassination . Then you have Radovid to busy spying on Foltest . A great thing when your leaders are so busy they don't see trouble boiling . Foltest should have been more on guard after the assassination attempt . Is it any wonder why Saskia's ideals appealed to humans and non-humans alike ? Everything the kings were doing was coming at a cost to the people.
Besides there has to be something more going on Nilgaard is to simple .