[cmdr_silverbolt]

Ward Dragon said:

Roche is his friend and has already gone out of his way to save Geralt's life, so it makes more sense for Geralt to stick with Roche instead of joining up with a group of terrorists. ›››

Roche and Geralt were not friends in Flotsam. Roche wanted to use Geralt like a sword against the Kingslayer, and he may have admired or respected Geralt to an extent, but at that time Geralt had no reason to consider him as a friend. Roche's bro-ness does not come to light till Vergen on Iorveth's path.

Ward Dragon said:

Iorveth's path is much more politically oriented and idealistic, whereas Roche's path is more practical and doing normal witcher's work lifting the curse. ›››

Geralt could not have predicted that he would be lifting curses by following Roche- all he knew was that he had to get to Aedern. Geralt does not subscribe to the moral agendas on his society, so with respect to his own code, Iorveth is not necessarily a terrorist. I also read somewhere that Roche's boat might be faster than the prison barge, but there's just too much guess work and too little evidence to support that claim.

Also, if I am remembering the dialogue correctly, Iorveth never explicitly tells Geralt that the witcher has to help him and Saskia if he wants the ride. As far as I remember, Geralt only asked him "what it was all about?", just to get a measure of this elf. This is important to note.

Ward Dragon said:

And even if Triss is Geralt's #1 priority, Roche's path is just as reasonable. Geralt had no way of knowing that the mist would appear, and Henselt's camp is within walking distance of Vergen, so both options would put him near where Triss went. Plus it makes sense to assume that Letho is going after Henselt and therefore Geralt could wait near Henselt, catch Letho, and ask where Triss went. ›››

The choice between Roche and Iorveth translates to a choice between the Kingslayer and Triss, but we only know this to be true in hindsight. In Flotsam, both Roche and Iorveth had a beef with Letho, so no matter which path Geralt could choose, at that point in time he could see Letho in both of them. Why would Geralt waste time fighting battles for Roche, when he could be trying to save his friend; I don't think Geralt dislikes Triss to the point of leaving her to possible harm or death.

Ward Dragon said:

Anyhow, this is what I meant about none of the choices really being out-of-character, especially considering Geralt's amnesia. The game limits the choices to things that Geralt might actually do depending on what information he has available at the time and which characters he trusts. There aren't any blatantly out-of-character choices, like having Geralt kill innocent people. ›››

No, I don't think the game is that simple- it's like Guy N said, the player has to work to get inside Geralt's head and try to do those things which he or she think Geralt would reasonably do (or at least, that's one way to play the game). It's the same situation as when Geralt was shown to have maintained his neutrality in the default game-cannon despite different game play choices in W1.

We can easily argue that Iorveth's path is less taxing on Geralt, and does not explicitly request his assistance, and is therefore relatively neutral.

[Ward Dragon]

cmdr_flashheart said:

Roche and Geralt were not friends in Flotsam. Roche wanted to use Geralt like a sword against the Kingslayer, and he may have admired or respected Geralt to an extent, but at that time Geralt had no reason to consider him as a friend. Roche's bro-ness does not come to light till Vergen on Iorveth's path.

In my opinion, Geralt was friends with the Blue Stripes (especially if the Hangover quest was completed )

cmdr_flashheart said:

Geralt does not subscribe to the moral agendas on his society, so with respect to his own code, Iorveth is not necessarily a terrorist.

Geralt definitely considered the Scoia'tael to be terrorists in the books and wanted nothing to do with them. True he has amnesia in the games, but after having seen what the Scoia'tael were capable of I think he'd come to the same conclusion that he did in the books.

cmdr_flashheart said:

In Flotsam, both Roche and Iorveth had a beef with Letho, so no matter which path Geralt could choose, at that point in time he could see Letho in both of them. Why would Geralt waste time fighting battles for Roche, when he could be trying to save his friend; I don't think Geralt dislikes Triss to the point of leaving her to possible harm or death.

It's an equal waste of time to free the terrorists on the prison barge. There's no real difference in terms of one path being faster than the other (both in actuality and according to what Geralt could have reasonably known before making the choice).

Also, taking Loredo out does serve a tactical purpose by preventing him from chasing the Blue Stripes or attacking their ship as they leave. And Geralt has no problem killing murders, especially murderers who pose a threat to him.

cmdr_flashheart said:

No, I don't think the game is that simple- it's like Guy N said, the player has to work to get inside Geralt's head and try to do those things which he or she think Geralt would reasonably do (or at least, that's one way to play the game). It's the same situation as when Geralt was shown to have maintained his neutrality in the default game-cannon despite different game play choices in W1.

We can easily argue that Iorveth's path is less taxing on Geralt, and does not explicitly request his assistance, and is therefore relatively neutral. ›››

I believe Geralt from the books would have chosen Roche's path for the reasons I explained. Geralt is a complex character and none of the game choices are blatantly against his character, so people can find reasonable in-character explanations for why Geralt might plausibly choose any of the given options

[cmdr_silverbolt]

Ward Dragon said:

In my opinion, Geralt was friends with the Blue Stripes (especially if the Hangover quest was completed />) ›››

It's entirely possible, but it's important to stress that Roche asked too much of Geralt by asking him to help depose Loredo, while Iorveth only asked to hunt down Letho. Geralt doesn't like to get involved in politics.

Ward Dragon said:

Geralt definitely considered the Scoia'tael to be terrorists in the books and wanted nothing to do with them. True he has amnesia in the games, but after having seen what the Scoia'tael were capable of I think he'd come to the same conclusion that he did in the books. ›››

Situations change things. Given that he needed to rescue his friend, he wouldn't care about much else in that situation.

Ward Dragon said:

It's an equal waste of time to free the terrorists on the prison barge. There's no real difference in terms of one path being faster than the other (both in actuality and according to what Geralt could have reasonably known before making the choice). ›››

No, it's not, the barge was necessary for transport.

Ward Dragon said:

Also, taking Loredo out does serve a tactical purpose by preventing him from chasing the Blue Stripes or attacking their ship as they leave. And Geralt has no problem killing murders, especially murderers who pose a threat to him. ›››

That doesn't make sense. Why would Loredo attack their ship or prevent them leaving- he wants them gone.

Ward Dragon said:

I believe Geralt from the books would have chosen Roche's path for the reasons I explained. Geralt is a complex character and none of the game choices are blatantly against his character, so people can find reasonable in-character explanations for why Geralt might plausibly choose any of the given options /> ›››

Looking at it from just a game play perspective, there's a lack of detail, effort and exposition in Roche's path which makes me think that Iorveth's path may become cannon. I certainly hope that's the case because that path is more favorable for Geralt, personally- he saves Skalen and Cecil Burdon from the gallows, and the rest of his dwarf friends also get a free Vergen.

[Ward Dragon]

cmdr_flashheart said:

It's entirely possible, but it's important to stress that Roche asked too much of Geralt by asking him to help depose Loredo, while Iorveth only asked to hunt down Letho. Geralt doesn't like to get involved in politics.

Iorveth's path is all about politics though. He wants to create a new country ruled by Saskia. Sticking with the Blue Stripes is the less politically-oriented choice since Geralt already has ties to them and they've promised to help him with his personal goal of clearing his name.

cmdr_flashheart said:

That doesn't make sense. Why would Loredo attack their ship or prevent them leaving- he wants them gone.

No he doesn't, he wants them dead. Loredo decided to secretly switch sides and work for Henselt, so he can't afford to let Roche leave and report back to Thaler or whoever is running things in Temeria right now. Loredo has a choke-hold over the port and won't allow anyone to leave without permission. If Roche didn't kill him, then he'd attack their ship as they were leaving.

cmdr_flashheart said:

Looking at it from just a game play perspective, there's a lack of detail, effort and exposition in Roche's path which makes me think that Iorveth's path may become cannon. I certainly hope that's the case because that path is more favorable for Geralt, personally- he saves Skalen and Cecil Burdon from the gallows, and the rest of his dwarf friends also get a free Vergen. ›››

I feel the opposite way. I think Roche's path has more convincing reasons for choosing it, and the path itself feels a lot more in line with the books in terms of atmosphere and the types of quests involved.

Geralt is actually acting like a Witcher on Roche's path, trying to lift curses. Plus he demonstrates his knowledge and experience by telling the other characters what he needs and what they have to do to lift the curse.

On the other hand, on Iorveth's path he's knee-deep in politics and he acts like Philippa's errand boy. He doesn't seem to know anything himself and he just runs around doing whatever Philippa tells him.

[cmdr_silverbolt]

Ward Dragon said:

Iorveth's path is all about politics though. He wants to create a new country ruled by Saskia. Sticking with the Blue Stripes is the less politically-oriented choice since Geralt already has ties to them and they've promised to help him with his personal goal of clearing his name. ›››

If I remember the dialogue correctly, then Iorveth only asks Geralt to accompany him to Aedern- he does not ask directly for help with making Saskia a queen, implying that Geralt could have a choice in the matter. Roche, on the other hand, directly asks for help getting rid of Loredo. So if Geralt chooses the path that requires the least amount of effort from him for a third party (Iorveth or Roche), then that's a "hidden way" to maintain neutrality.

It's true that Geralt has history with the Stripes, but is it worth the same against his friend's life? Let's not look at events in hindsight- all Geralt knew before his decision at the Crossroads was that Triss was stuck with a murderer.

We have seen that Geralt likes to put himself out there when his friends are on the line, and he would not leave Triss in the hands of a murderer for a prolonged period of time. It's not accurate to say that the initial stages of both paths take an equal amount of time, as far as Geralt could have foreseen. We know in hindsight, that Roche's path takes longer to leave Flotsam, but there's no way Geralt could have known that for certain.

But there is something Geralt tells Dandelion in Vergen, "just because I chose Triss doesn't mean I've forgotten about the Kingslayer". This implies that Geralt realizes somewhere along the line that Iorveth vs. Roche meant Triss vs. Letho, however the manner in which this realization dawns on him is not explicit in the game, or at least I don't remember it.

Ward Dragon said:

No he doesn't, he wants them dead. Loredo decided to secretly switch sides and work for Henselt, so he can't afford to let Roche leave and report back to Thaler or whoever is running things in Temeria right now. Loredo has a choke-hold over the port and won't allow anyone to leave without permission. If Roche didn't kill him, then he'd attack their ship as they were leaving. ›››

This is assuming that Geralt told the Stripes about his treachery. Actually, how could he have when he don't see the incriminating letter till after his mansion is raided? Please correct me if I am wrong, I may not be remembering correctly.

Ward Dragon said:

I feel the opposite way. I think Roche's path has more convincing reasons for choosing it, and the path itself feels a lot more in line with the books in terms of atmosphere and the types of quests involved. ›››

I think there's a lot of subjectivity in these claims, so let's steer away from this. If you're interested, however, try to evaluate both paths without personal preferences.

Ward Dragon said:

Geralt is actually acting like a Witcher on Roche's path, trying to lift curses. Plus he demonstrates his knowledge and experience by telling the other characters what he needs and what they have to do to lift the curse. ›››

He does the same in the other path.

Ward Dragon said:

On the other hand, on Iorveth's path he's knee-deep in politics and he acts like Philippa's errand boy. He doesn't seem to know anything himself and he just runs around doing whatever Philippa tells him. ›››

I have heard the "phillpa's errand boy" term before, and I don't understand why some people get that feeling. He works in conjunction with her, but she's not in charge of his quests.

I am not particularly fond of either Roche or Iorveth, I am only concerned with Geralt's interests, and Triss's safety would count among them. So that's where I am coming from in this whole...thingy.

[Ward Dragon]

cmdr_flashheart said:

If I remember the dialogue correctly, then Iorveth only asks Geralt to accompany him to Aedern- he does not ask directly for help with making Saskia a queen, implying that Geralt could have a choice in the matter.

Iorveth makes it clear that he's going to aid Saskia (assuming that you ask him all possible questions when you get the chance) so it's obvious that choosing Iorveth's path means that Geralt will get caught up in Saskia's rebellion.

The way the game sets it up, Roche's path comes across like Geralt helping his friends (Roche saved Geralt's life, and the Hangover quest was a real bonding moment between Geralt and the other Blue Stripes members), while Iorveth's path is more along the lines of Geralt being an idealist who wants to work towards equality (Iorveth hasn't been at all friendly in Act 1, and the Scoia'tael have actively tried to kill Geralt for most of the Act, so main reason to join them would be due to wanting to learn more about Saskia or else because Zoltan asked it).

cmdr_flashheart said:

We know in hindsight, that Roche's path takes longer to leave Flotsam, but there's no way Geralt could have known that for certain.

I think both paths take roughly the same amount of time to leave Flotsam (depending on play style I guess). And based purely on what Geralt knew at the time, he has no reason to think that killing Loredo would take longer than freeing a prison barge.

And since he had no way of predicting that the mist would appear, not to mention the dialogue saying Triss didn't have precise coordinates, I don't think it would factor into the decision whether he starts off at Henselt's camp or Vergen. They're only a few minutes' walking distance from each other (or at least they would be if not for the mist).

That's why I think Geralt would make the decision mainly based upon who he felt he could trust to help him, and by that point in the game the Blue Stripes definitely seemed more trustworthy and eager to help since they wanted to find Letho as well.

cmdr_flashheart said:

This is assuming that Geralt told the Stripes about his treachery. Actually, how could he have when he don't see the incriminating letter till after his mansion is raided? Please correct me if I am wrong, I may not be remembering correctly.

You can listen to the mission briefings for both missions before you decide whether to choose Roche or Iorveth. In Roche's mission briefing, his main reason for killing Loredo is that Loredo has made a deal with Kaedwen and needs to be killed for being a traitor. Roche discovered that on his own regardless of whether Geralt found out independently.

And earlier in the game before this discovery Roche makes a comment about how Loredo won't let anyone leave the port. I'm sure everyone disabled the ballista at Roche's urging, but that can't be the only weapon that Loredo has at his disposal to attack ships. I also vaguely remember some dialogue on Iorveth's path saying that the Blue Stripes ship had been nearly sunk by Loredo even though I destroyed the ballista, but I'm not 100% sure of that.

In any case I still think it made sense to kill Loredo before leaving the port, and the Scoia'tael probably should have done that too before they freed the prison barge.

cmdr_flashheart said:

I think there's a lot of subjectivity in these claims, so let's steer away from this. If you're interested, however, try to evaluate both paths without personal preferences.

That's impossible The game does a good job putting supporting reasons for both sides, so people are obviously going to feel that a stronger case was made for one side or the other depending on which reasons they think are most important.

Trying to be as objective as possible, I don't think there's any good reason for Geralt to choose Iorveth considering only what he knows in Act 1. However I think in terms of long-term consequences things probably work out better on Iorveth's path freeing Saskia.

I originally intended to import my Iorveth save into TW3, but then I replayed the game on both paths after the Enhanced Edition came out and I realized that I kept thinking of the Roche path as "what actually happened" because it was darker and it seemed more fitting to me, like it's more authentic to the general atmosphere and lore of the Witcher universe.

cmdr_flashheart said:

I have heard the "phillpa's errand boy" term before, and I don't understand why some people get that feeling. He works in conjunction with her, but she's not in charge of his quests.

She is in charge though. On Iorveth's path, Act 2 starts off with Geralt having a few-minute long conversation with her followed by a fuck-ton of quest updates because of all the things she asked him to do

On Roche's path he has to do some investigating and discover on his own how to lift the mist curse (he already knows the general idea but needs to talk to people and find out what the specific symbols of war are). And for lifting the curse on Henselt Geralt is indisputably in charge, explaining to Dethmold what needs to be done and telling Dethmold what to do in order to help.

But on Iorveth's path, he doesn't do any of that. Philippa tells him which two items he needs to lift the mist curse (and finds the other two herself), and for curing Saskia (which is equivalent to lifting the curse from Henselt) she just tells Geralt which items to fetch for her. Geralt doesn't have the same authority or a chance to display his own knowledge and experience.

Geralt simply feels a lot more autonomous on Roche's path, investigating things at his own pace with Dethmold and Henselt looking up to his expertise and respecting his judgment. But Philippa looks down on him as a convenient tool who will do what she says without questioning it. That fits her personality of course, but I prefer to see Geralt in his element where he knows what he's doing and can make his own decisions about how to accomplish his goals.

cmdr_flashheart said:

I am not particularly fond of either Roche or Iorveth, I am only concerned with Geralt's interests, and Triss's safety would count among them. So that's where I am coming from in this whole...thingy. ›››

I understand that However I don't personally think that either path is more likely to find Triss based on what Geralt knows at the time (and in actuality too). There's no evidence in Act 1 indicating that Letho and Triss split up, so no reason to think that the choice came down to following Letho on one path or Triss on the other.

On my first play-through I figured that Henselt was Letho's target so I assumed that Henselt's camp was where he actually wanted to go. And since I knew Letho and Triss went through the same portal I figured I'd find Triss wherever Letho was. (Although my primary motive was simply that I trusted Roche more and thought he'd be more helpful finding Triss and Letho.) It never occurred to me that Letho would simply let Triss go. I thought he'd keep her prisoner in case he needed her to teleport him away after killing Henselt.

[cmdr_silverbolt]

Forget everything*- I just watched a Crossroads video, and Geralt knew that Letho took Triss to Vergen. Therefore, it makes sense to go with Iorveth since he plans to go to Vergen. Roche, who also plans to tail Letho, plainly tells Geralt that he's not leaving till he deals with Henselt's spy and Loredo. Iorveth, on the other hand, mentions "leaving immediately".

That's why if you want to get out of Flotsam sooner, you should go with Iorveth. Sorry, this whole back and forth would have been shorter if I had remembered the game correctly.

Here's the Letho is in Vergen video: https://www.youtube....h?v=k3vo4CywfOU (start at 6:12)
Here's the leaving immediately video: https://www.youtube....h?v=o1AaENAdBvc ( start at 3:08)

I don't think canon Geralt would waste time while his friend was in danger. If one doesn't bother over analyzing the two sides, and simply views them as means to get to Triss, then the individual characteristics or goals of either side don't matter. And we also can't expect everything that happens to Geralt to be in his comfort zone.

*sorry for the brusqueness

[vivaxardas]

Canon Gerald did not like squirrels, and also he had some sense of an obligation. It took only one evening to take out Loredo. Roche and my Gerald had a sort of an unspoken agreement - Roche sprang him out of the dungeon, and Gerald incurred an obligation to help. Just to use a guy to get to Flotsam, then to say - See ya, and to join the elves Roche was hunting for many years felt like a betrayal. Neutrality does not mean not to have any freaking obligations toward anybody.

[Glaroug]

I'm in the middle of TW2 now. I choose Iorveth.

Just killed Shilard's goons. It makes me sick that I can't pull some unstoppable witcher's trick out of my ass and rip his face off when he plays dumb about Triss's. I also wish I remembered Triss was inside that figurine and "seen" if I could give it to Phillipa. Doubt that game would allow that. That stupid arrest warrant blinded my senses I guess

. Its all about "your" Geralt. This puts the "roleplaying" in RPG KnightofPhoenix said it well in a similar thread:

Quote

Wichat said: "Do anybody remember how many months Geralt needed to trust Cahir?"

KoP said: "I couldn't care less. If my Geralt trusts Roche in a shorter amount of time, then that's what happened."

Since I knelt beside her broken body in Kaer Morhen, I realized there was something special about this women. She cared for me when I was wounded, aided me in my time of need. she loved me without asking fo rnaything in return. It's so cheesy I know. but I knew she'd always be there. That she loved me. Before long I began to do the same, slowly, shakily.

I need to puke, go do something manly. Lift something heavy.

At last it looked as if my imprisonment service under Foltest was up. We could go away together, alone. The Kingslayer changed all that.

I'll run barefoot up a volcano, do anything to get her back. Iorveth was leaving immediately. I didn't have time to worry about Lorado. Who cares about Lorado and this cruddy little town what Triss was in danger? Who knows what that Letho was going to do with her. First I had to get Triss. Then I'd kill the kingslayer.

--Glaroug in Geralt's boot.

[vivaxardas]

That's what I love about the game. It allows a lot of different people, with many different backgrounds and preferences, to have their own version of a story, close to them. Even though we all have the same Gerald, and not some customized character, role-playing aspect of TW2 is much better then in Skyrim. I pretty much despise Saskia, so I always turn her into heaps of meat and scales, I do not care about Triss, I like Roche and Shilard, I really regret I can't kill Iorweth and I am glad that I can leave Sile to die. Other people see it very differently, and it is really great. So I guess to argue what path is better is pretty much nonsensical, it is all just a matter of personal preferences and values.

[Pikohchu]

LOL this is like Skyrim all over again. I think this situation is like the Stormcloaks and the Imperials, the Stormcloaks drawing parallels to the Iorveth path and the Imperials similar to Roche's path. Iorveth and the Schoi'tael are rebels who are fighting for their freedom and the land that was originally theirs, but only really care about their own race. The Stormcloaks were rebels fighting for freedom and their homeland, while also favoring Nords and showing prejudice towards others. Roche is from the government of Temeria and is trying to keep order...I don't know much about his path since I haven't played through it yet. He is similar to the Imperials. Those who stood for the Stormcloaks in Skyrim will probably prefer Iorveth's path, while the Imperials of last year will prefer Roche.

TL;DR
Iorveth=Stormcloaks=Morals but racist
Roche=Imperials=Official and governmenty people, negatively viewed from the commoner's point of view

[cmdr_silverbolt]

I will reiterate one last thing: both Iorveth and Roche are a means to an end- you don't know them, owe them*, or even like them that much. If the primary objective is to save Triss, then it doesn't matter who takes you there, as long as they do it fast. If the situation was that Roche left Flotsam sooner, then Geralt should be in Roche's corner. This game has the potential to polarize the player, but that shouldn't keep them from losing perspective.

*If you believe a life debt can only be repaid by a life debt, then remember that Geralt saved Roche from the squirrel attack in the beginning of CH 1. So really, Roche and Geralt are even, but Roche owes Geralt for being on the trail of the real killer.

[vivaxardas]

Well, it was my point. I do not really care about Triss that much, for me to find her is to get closer to finding Letho. She is my temporary friend with benefits, nothing more. But I like Roche simply because of my personal life experience I can relate to him, and exactly by the same reason I hate that S.O.B. Iorweth. I feel I owe Roche because I kind of like to go on living, and he helped me out with it, but others may feel different. None of it is wrong.

[chanva]

I chose Iorveth's path.

The truth is that you are not really on anyone's "side." That is what some people here miss. Geralt himself made it clear to both Iorveth and Roche that his priority is his goal in capturing/killing Letho in order to clear his name.

So even though roche is a much more dependable and trustworthy partner, I would say that the more intelligent choice(from a story standpoint) is to hand Iorveth his sword and not betray him and make enemies of him off the bat. This way, you have both the opportunity to work on a common interest with Iorveth and his elves while still on somewhat on good terms with Roche given the fact that he likely understands your situation and intention the most. Not to mention you get more glymps of possibly his true colors etc.. "my desire is for elves to walk freely into dwoilne inns, and humans to walk into the woods feeling safe - something of the that nature, forgive me if I misquoted it.

[vivaxardas]

Well, the only time I played Iorweth path I was OK till the moment when Iorweth comments on people in Flotsam - killing them is like pulling weeds. My first impulse was to grab a knife and slash his throat, because it would make the world a better place. Does not matter how cool, smart, or sexy he is in somebody's eyes. Unfortunately the game did not allow it. After that the only thing I care about Iorweth was if I eventually could kill this S.O.B. I never actually re-played Iorweth path, just made saves along the way to try different choices.

On Roche's path in Vergen, when dwarves ask me to save Iorweth, I know exactly where not to go. Doubt that the devs would count him as killed in TW3. I guess I'll have to deal with him in YW3 as well.

[Glaroug]

Quote

Well, the only time I played Iorweth path I was OK till the moment when Iorweth comments on people in Flotsam - killing them is like pulling weeds. My first impulse was to grab a knife and slash his throat, because it would make the world a better place. Does not matter how cool, smart, or sexy he is in somebody's eyes. Unfortunately the game did not allow it. After that the only thing I care about Iorweth was if I eventually could kill this S.O.B. I never actually re-played Iorweth path, just made saves along the way to try different choices.<br style="color: rgb(218, 218, 218); font-size: 13px; line-height: 19px; background-color: rgb(51, 51, 51);">
On Roche's path in Vergen, when dwarves ask me to save Iorweth, I know exactly where not to go. Doubt that the devs would count him as killed in TW3. I guess I'll have to deal with him in YW3 as well.

You may have already seen this but...he-he-he-heeee! Maybe this will give you some much needed retribution

This is for you vivaxardas

http://steamcommunit...s/?id=130160940

[vivaxardas]

Thank you. Excellent! I'll save this screen as a background for my netbook. I do not usually get all riled up about fictional characters, but this Iorweth really rubbed me a wrong way.

[rageface]

I played 3 playthroughs.

I first picked Roche, thinking of Iorveth as an annoying elf clouding his ideals with his frustration.

Then I picked Iorveth to see his side of the story. I was very surprised at how different the game goes.

On my last playthrough I picked Roche because I'd like that choice to be in my TW3 save.

Roche and I we're both friends with King Foltest. The king was a good man to both of us. We were alike in that matter. He believes my story, unites me with Triss, and brings me along on his adventure to find the kingslayer. He also has a wonderful team of Temerian agents who were very open and friendly to me. Roche, being a Temerian agent, did perform some operations during the story in Temeria's interest but never got in Geralt's way or wasted any time. In the final chapter, he relates to Geralt if he saves Triss. He also listens to Triss' and accepts her plan. Triss was king Foltest's adviser after all. He loses a lot of things in this game, and as a player I was able to choose whether to be there for him, and guide him through it or not. Geralt really makes him a better man and ultimately prepares him for the responsibility he'll have depending on your end-game choice.

Iorveth is very arrogant and very annoying. I was able to stand him throughout the playthrough, but I believe his way of thinking to be closed-minded and prejudicial. I live in the Philippines. There's this really stupid sultan in the south who's claiming lost land in Malaysian territory in Borneo. He's sending a private army that no one knew existed there and he's making all the Filipinos in Borneo look bad. Iorveth's kind of like that in my opinion. Saskia's the more interesting character in this playthrough, but I prefer to hopefully save her in Witcher 3, after siding with Roche. In Roche's playthrough, I saved Iorveth at Vergen because Zoltan's my bud and I think Vergen's a good city.

[mariobros777]

Very difficult choice. Both persons are cool, ice cold. Both have their own rights, on their own accords. Both have an ideology and struggle to stay true to it no matter what. If only there was a way to prevent Temeria's destruction in Iorveth's path, then this would undoubtedly be my best, and my first, choice! Plus, by selecting the "right choices" during it, you can save all realms, kings/princes AND mages! Well, except for Demavend (but you can save his son) and Foltest of course. You can even save the Dragon or let it go, to escape like Sile and Philippa.

Also, at the end of chapter 2, you are either 34 or 35 level. Which is great. On the other hand though, as a downside, you have few quests in act 3, even fewer places to access (you are attacked on sight), and more or less a smaller final chapter. Ah, almost forgot. In Iorveth's path, you can also get the Golem Trophy, which is arguably the best one in game. A lot of people prefer it over the Draug one.

As a bonus, in this path, you get a lot more info about Nilfgaard's schemes, Vrans' history, city's secrets and the Wild Hunt. But the real treat, is the battle at Vergen. And the lord of the rings easter eggs. Overall, it is a much more preferred path. If you are not playing in Dark, that is, since all good, normal swords can be found a lot earlier than in Roche's path. Another bonus. And, since after one patch update the Forgotten Vran Sword is lootable in his path too, all the better.

[CSM101]

i selected the scoatel path cos i did it in the witcher 1 as well. i realy dont like getting in to politic stuff but when you choose roche path you do lot of it. besides its nice to have the ending that you get when you select the iorvath path in chapter 2.