[KnightofPhoenix]

I don't mind if the text is in Spanish I can read and understand it

There are no bad feelings on my part! Sorry if I'm giving that impression. I'm just normally....aggressive when in a debate, but I'm not offended, annoyed or anything. I certainly don't want to put you or anyone in their place...

[Wichat]

KnightofPhoenix said:

I don't mind if the text is in Spanish /> I can read and understand it

There are no bad feelings on my part! Sorry if I'm giving that impression. I'm just normally....aggressive when in a debate, but I'm not offended, annoyed or anything. I certainly don't want to put you or anyone in their place... ›››

No problem

[Kallelinski]

I can't remember that any special force was really instructed to initiate pogroms, but it is arguable how those progroms emerge.

Lady of the Lake

Quote

Later it was claimed that the tragic events in Rivia were an unfortunate coincidence that
was a spontaneous reaction, a sudden and unpredictable outburst of justified anger induced by
the hostility of the dwarves and elves towards the humans of the city. It was argued that is
was not the humans, but the dwarves that attacked first, that they provoked the violence. A
dwarfish heckler insulted the noble Lady Nadia Esposito, a war orphan and that he used
violence against her. Later when the nobles came to the defence of their friend, the dwarf
called upon his relatives. A fight ensued, which soon became a real battle that , in the
twinkling of an eye, engulfed the whole bazaar.
The battle degraded into a bloodbath, in a massive attack from the humans against the
districts occupied by the non-humans and the district of the Elms. In less than an hour, since
the incident at the bazaar to the intervention of the sorceresses, one hundred and seventy
people were killed, about half of which were women and children.
This version of events is reflected in the works of Professor Emmerich Gottschalk of
Oxenfurt.
But there are others who argue otherwise. How can this be spontaneous, this
unpredictable explosion, that within minutes of there were carts on the streets of the bazaar
handing out weapons among the humans? Where did the sudden righteous anger of this mob
come from, of who the most visible and active members at the time of the massacre, were
people whom nobody new, and who had only come to Rivia a few day s before the incident,
and they disappeared without a trace? why did the military intervene so late? And why with
such distaste?
Some scholars sought to interpret events in Rivia as a Nilfgaardian provocation, and there
were others who argued that everything had been hatched by dwarves in league with the
elves. Who were killing their own to discredit the humans.
Lost among the majority of scientific voices was a theory by a young, bold and eccentric
lawyer, who - until he was silenced - claimed that the incident in Rivia was not from secret
conspiracies, but ordinary and very common characteristics of the local population -
ignorance, xenophobia, violence and profound brutalisation.
Later, everyone grew board and stopped talking about the matter altogether.

[cmdr_silverbolt]

KnightofPhoenix said:

I probably will end up reading them eventually, but most certainly not before TW3. But yes a lot of comments are discouraging me, from trying to impose book Geralt, to how people say Nilfgaard and Emhyr are portrayed, to even the future of the continent being set in stone which I hope CDpR will ignore...etc

EDIT: oh special forces want half-elves? That's interesting. ›››

The problem is that two Geralts exist- book Geralt and inspired adaptation Geralt. Those who have read the books, and are interested in keeping Geralt faithful to the character in the stories, are naturally going to raise such issues. So yeah, they are imposing their interpretation of the book on the game, but not without reason.

What's important to note is that book Geralt is not necessarily the same as game Geralt, so as much as people (myself included) want to stress that such and such thing is OOC or cannot happen, it's ultimately a pointless venture- we don't know how exact the new authors' Geralt is to the book Geralt, so all we can do is make guesses.

I am certain that we will never get to experience a canon version of events from W2 or W3 because CDPR is not going to alienate its players. Unless they provide good reasons for why the non-canon choices were added in these games, other than to "trip" the player, any affirmation of a canon route will be ill received.

The games are inspired adaptations, and as such the new story may be subject to the new authors' creativity, so I wouldn't bet on everything happening exactly like it did in the books.

[Dalladrion]

Iorveth because let's be honest, elves are far more interesting than humans, and since I've tried Roche's path too, I can confirm that the Iorveth's path is far more interesting, confirming my suspicions.

[AnthonyF1227]

Ioveth's path is more of a dwarf path than elf path.

[Bloth]

Dalladrion said:

Iorveth because let's be honest, elves are far more interesting than humans, and since I've tried Roche's path too, I can confirm that the Iorveth's path is far more interesting, confirming my suspicions. ›››

You know i've seen this point raised a few times and i've never seen how elves in fantasy are interesting, even though the Witchers elves are one of the better presented, the species as a whole always seems a little lacking in variety of culture and philosophies, they seem to follow the same stereotype in almost every game and have no real breadth of approaches.

Whereas in good fantasy we can have civilisations based on the greeks, persians, norse, zulus, incans, chinese, mongols, japanese etcetera, etcetera, from almost any time period. Elves have to follow the route of holier than thou, posh, agile, poncey, pretty boy, tree fondling, arrow slingers usually stemming from a great fallen civilisation and either supplanted or destroyed by foolish, barbaric and uncouth man or the ugly dwarves.

To be honest I wouldn't mind a game where we had only humans, but were immersed in a variety of different cultures, philosophies and looks that were as in depth as their real world equivalent.

[cmdr_silverbolt]

Blothulfur: you could play the Game of Thrones game, I haven't played it but it sounds similar to what you're describing.

[Kindo]

Glaroug said:

I remember finding a wounded Siegfried in the swamp. I remember the aid he gave me in the sewers. In repaying a debt, I led his force to victory against the Squirrels. I remember the blood of innocents at Vivaldi's Bank, the crazed, thirsty look in Yaevinn's eyes. I remember the folk of the river town, surrounded by the Elven bandits. I felt only sadness as I cut them down.

But I also remember Vizima, the hell on earth as it burned. Nonhumans slaughtered out of fear and hate. Zoltan's pain and anger as we looked at what I had done. I was ashamed. I was angry. I didn't have a choice, did I?

He was like Yaevinn: arrogant, angry and massive prick. I remembered Vizima. Behind his hate I saw love. Beneath his pride I saw humility. I gained his trust and returned mine in kind. He was no Mother of Melitele, but he was not a monster.

--Glaroug in Geralts Boots, a truly riveting tale

›››

I love this so much. Please, let there be more to read!

[arkblazer]

i chose iorveth, mainly because i think geralt would be more worried with saving triss than staying in flotsam and playing some BS political game.

[nolirion]

cmdr_flashheart said:

The problem is that two Geralts exist- book Geralt and inspired adaptation Geralt. Those who have read the books, and are interested in keeping Geralt faithful to the character in the stories, are naturally going to raise such issues. So yeah, they are imposing their interpretation of the book on the game, but not without reason.

What's important to note is that book Geralt is not necessarily the same as game Geralt, so as much as people (myself included) want to stress that such and such thing is OOC or cannot happen, it's ultimately a pointless venture- we don't know how exact the new authors' Geralt is to the book Geralt, so all we can do is make guesses.

I am certain that we will never get to experience a canon version of events from W2 or W3 because CDPR is not going to alienate its players. Unless they provide good reasons for why the non-canon choices were added in these games, other than to "trip" the player, any affirmation of a canon route will be ill received.

The games are inspired adaptations, and as such the new story may be subject to the new authors' creativity, so I wouldn't bet on everything happening exactly like it did in the books. ›››

Isn't the whole point of Geralt having amnesia , to make him different than the Geralt from the book ? Until he recover all his memory I see little point in making him an exact copy of the "original" Geralt , even then he can't be the same as he was before .

[Kindo]

nolirion said:

Isn't the whole point of Geralt having amnesia , to make him different than the Geralt from the book ? Until he recover all his memory I see little point in making him an exact copy of the "original" Geralt , even then he can't be the same as he was before . ›››

Exactly. It's a sort of cheap method, to have the protagonist suffer from memory loss, but in this case it was quite a clever trick to allow the players to shape their own Geralt throughout the course of the games.