It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like:Chrome,Firefox,Internet Explorer orOpera

×
arrow-down2arrowcart2close4fat-arrow-leftfat-arrow-rightfeedbackfriends2happy-facelogo-gognotificationnotifications-emptyownedremove-menusad-facesearch2wishlist-menuwishlisted2own_thingsheartstartick
avatar
Kitako: I still think that Henselt is a great character, even after raping Ves. That fact isn't just for the sake of it, in chapter 1 is explained clearly that Henselt is disperately looking for an heir (Sila needed Kayran components for a "fertility potion", even if that wasn't the main reason for her to be in Flotsam).

Henselt is really what I imagine the real kings of middle ages to be. Also, "every woman dream is to be ploughed by a king"... what he did was not rape in his eyes, and probably in the eyes of a lot of people around him.
I'd agree that his voice actor was arguably one of the best in the game, but I still hold the opinion that Henselt was an incredible prick.

I really REALLY liked him at first, and constantly wanted to curry favour with him with the swordfights, and saving him from the assassins. But the moment that he jeered about having raped Ves (It was definitely rape in HER opinion, which counts the most, as well as Roche's and Geralt's. Though maybe that bastard Henselt didn't consider it rape) and declared his intentions to kill Geralt, even though he'd saved his life and had never directly associated himself with Roche's conspiracy, I knew that he was an utter bastard. And that just made the game all the bleaker.
Post edited June 07, 2011 by yagha
avatar
Kitako: I still think that Henselt is a great character, even after raping Ves. That fact isn't just for the sake of it, in chapter 1 is explained clearly that Henselt is disperately looking for an heir (Sila needed Kayran components for a "fertility potion", even if that wasn't the main reason for her to be in Flotsam).

Henselt is really what I imagine the real kings of middle ages to be. Also, "every woman dream is to be ploughed by a king"... what he did was not rape in his eyes, and probably in the eyes of a lot of people around him.
avatar
yagha: I'd agree that his voice actor was arguably one of the best in the game, but I still hold the opinion that Henselt was an incredible prick.

I really REALLY liked him at first, and constantly wanted to curry favour with him with the swordfights, and saving him from the assassins. But the moment that he jeered about having raped Ves (It was definitely rape in HER opinion, which counts the most, as well as Roche's and Geralt's) and declared his intentions to kill Geralt, even though he'd saved his life and had never directly associated himself with Roche's conspiracy, I knew that he was an utter bastard. And that just made the game all the bleaker.
Well, I think all the Ves affair was aimed to give you strong feelings against him, which made the later choice to kill or save Henselt much more difficult, for me.
Follow your emotions and your rage and let Roche have his way with Henselt, or go for logic and avoid committing regicide? I doubt that without the Ves rape (and how Henselt talked about it) that choice would have been so difficult.

Even if I opted for most logical choices during the game over the emotional ones (a good example is going or not to save Triss), I totally had Henselt killed for how he treated Ves... even if I totally regretted it with cold mind.
avatar
Kitako: I still think that Henselt is a great character, even after raping Ves. That fact isn't just for the sake of it, in chapter 1 is explained clearly that Henselt is disperately looking for an heir (Sila needed Kayran components for a "fertility potion", even if that wasn't the main reason for her to be in Flotsam).

Henselt is really what I imagine the real kings of middle ages to be. Also, "every woman dream is to be ploughed by a king"... what he did was not rape in his eyes, and probably in the eyes of a lot of people around him.
I hope you are not rationalize such a horrendous act as violence against women and rape. It does not matter how he or his men perceived it - the fact is that he dared to hurt your friend and ally is enough reason to me to let Roche kill him. I would argue if he was a good king and the one who could stand against Nilfgaard. Let's keep in mind that during the second war with Nilfgaard he invaded Aedirn and shared its territories with Nilfgaard behind his allies back. It was Foltest who commanded the Northern Kingdom armies and won against the Emperor.
Post edited June 07, 2011 by Germanicanus
avatar
Germanicanus: I hope you are not rationalize such a horrendous act as violence against women and rape.
Not me, but "my Geralt" tried to rationalize.
*I* really enjoyed seeing him killed by Roche, second only to see Demavend die.
avatar
Germanicanus: I hope you are not rationalize such a horrendous act as violence against women and rape.
avatar
Kitako: Not me, but "my Geralt" tried to rationalize.
*I* really enjoyed seeing him killed by Roche, second only to see Demavend die.
But even when you rationalize and use cold logic, Henselt will only make things worse. He is willing to challenge Adda's claim to Temeria (If she lived through the first game) due to her previous affliction by the Striga curse, and he would thus come into direct conflict, and possibly all-out war, with Redania-Temeria, the only other kingdom(s) capable of standing up against Nilfgaard. I'm thinking that an interregnum is better than such a huge war. He'll also make searching for Yennefer, and life thereafter, harder by having a personal bounty on Geralt's head.

Also, he's far more violent against the non-humans than any of the other kings. It said so in one of the game's trailers.
Post edited June 07, 2011 by yagha
avatar
Kitako: Not me, but "my Geralt" tried to rationalize.
*I* really enjoyed seeing him killed by Roche, second only to see Demavend die.
avatar
yagha: But even when you rationalize and use cold logic, Henselt will only make things worse. He is willing to challenge Adda's claim to Temeria (If she lived through the first game) due to her previous affliction by the Striga curse, and he would thus come into direct conflict, and possibly all-out war, with Redania-Temeria, the only other kingdom(s) capable of standing up against Nilfgaard. I'm thinking that an interregnum is better than such a huge war. He'll also make searching for Yennefer, and life thereafter, harder by having a personal bounty on Geralt's head.

Also, he's far more violent against the non-humans than any of the other kings. It said so in one of the game's trailers.
Yup, that is what I wanted to say. Henselt is too hot-headed and impulsive to make a great king, similarly to Radovid. When a king is more violent and prone to anger than his men that is not a good sign at all. He could be easily provoke by Nilfgaard to clash with other Northern Kingdoms or to make a strategically mistake that would led to his and his kingdom downfall. TNK needs a man who could unite them and be a counterbalance to the Emperor. I wish Foltest could live, since he was a perfect match, but since he is gone I am going with a very risky yet reasonable decision - Saskia. The Lodge's plan were not ridiculous, in fact they make far more sense than any of the rulers' ideas how to prevent Nilfgaard from using their own version of Blitzkrieg. A strong army in the Pontar Valley with a ruler capable of commanding the armies and inspiring people, from common folk to nonhumans. Perfect!
avatar
rascatar: Wait, seriously??? How???
avatar
Raye: Be nice to Iorveth, and NEVER betray his trust, even if you don't side with him, whenever the opportunity arises. He returns trust and respect shown to him to him with interest.
Could you post a screenshot from the beginning of Chapter 3 with both Roche and Iorveth present?
If this is true, I'm definitely doing another playthrough, but I haven't found any confirmation for this on the web so far.
avatar
Raye: Be nice to Iorveth, and NEVER betray his trust, even if you don't side with him, whenever the opportunity arises. He returns trust and respect shown to him to him with interest.
avatar
hvis: Could you post a screenshot from the beginning of Chapter 3 with both Roche and Iorveth present?
If this is true, I'm definitely doing another playthrough, but I haven't found any confirmation for this on the web so far.
Forget the web, I played quite a few different ways and I never had gameplay encounter like the above.

I have listed out the ways I have completed the game here -> HAS MAJOR SPOILERS, do not read until you have completed the game many ways

*Spoiler in Spoiler starts*
The only thing I have missed out(haven't done is) is handing Iorveth the sword during Lethos first encounter at the Elven runes, as Roche ambushes the gathering...(as a results Flotsam burns)...and then help Roche.
*Spoiler in Spoiler ends*
Post edited June 07, 2011 by Anarki_Hunter
hmm looking back killing Henselt was probably a bad idea. Sure he was a prick but he kept the Kaedwenis in line.

And as much as they bicker amongst each other, the other Northern kingdoms still need Kaedwen as an ally against the Empire. They can't have that if there's no one at the throne..
Yes, Henselt isn't the best choice for a king around. But, as Philippa said, his dead can only bring civil war to Kaedwen, and instability... all to advantage to Nilfgaarde.

Now, speaking from a out of game and all-knowing point of view, now that Nilfgaard is crossing the Yoruga who will lead the defense?

Saskia (if we let her alive, and maybe, uncrontrolled) would be the first choice, but she has no army. Defending Vergen with a volounteer army is not the same as defending the Northern Kingdom from the empire.

Temeria has a good general, able in war, but volatile power over an army with all the barons eating each other.

Radovid seems the only one with a good army and good control over it, but he's a selfish prick.

In this picture I still think that the stronger figure against the empire would be Henselt. He know war very well, has a good army at his command, and I think is not so stupid to attack Redania or Temeria while the empire is happy marching over them.

That's my logical reasoning why Henselt is better alive than dead for the political picture that you have at the end of the game.
avatar
Kitako: Yes, Henselt isn't the best choice for a king around. But, as Philippa said, his dead can only bring civil war to Kaedwen, and instability... all to advantage to Nilfgaarde.

Now, speaking from a out of game and all-knowing point of view, now that Nilfgaard is crossing the Yoruga who will lead the defense?

Saskia (if we let her alive, and maybe, uncrontrolled) would be the first choice, but she has no army. Defending Vergen with a volounteer army is not the same as defending the Northern Kingdom from the empire.

Temeria has a good general, able in war, but volatile power over an army with all the barons eating each other.

Radovid seems the only one with a good army and good control over it, but he's a selfish prick.

In this picture I still think that the stronger figure against the empire would be Henselt. He know war very well, has a good army at his command, and I think is not so stupid to attack Redania or Temeria while the empire is happy marching over them.

That's my logical reasoning why Henselt is better alive than dead for the political picture that you have at the end of the game.
Agreed. Could not have said it better myself. :)
Kitako and Mukhlisz, have you read my post? I clearly explained why Henselt would be the worst choice as the leading commander. He betrayed his allies once in the very same situation (Nilfgaard was marching at them too) - what would stop him from seizing more power, now when Temeria is in crisis?
Saskia or Jan Natalis. Seems like the Witcher world is in need for great commanders whose heads are not crowned. To me, that is more than perfect :)
I am sure that Kovir will play a role in next Witcher 3. Maybe it will help TNK again and saved them from being defeated and seized by Nilfgaard empire?
Post edited June 07, 2011 by Germanicanus
avatar
Germanicanus: Henselt would be the worst choice as the leading commander. He betrayed his allies once in the very same situation (Nilfgaard was marching at them too) - what would stop him from seizing more power, now when Temeria is in crisis?
did that really happen? I'm kinda terrible with history. I don't remember that part in the game.. :-S

anyways I still believe that killing him would not solve anything. :)
avatar
Germanicanus: Kitako and Mukhlisz, have you read my post? I clearly explained why Henselt would be the worst choice as the leading commander. He betrayed his allies once in the very same situation (Nilfgaard was marching at them too) - what would stop him from seizing more power, now when Temeria is in crisis?
Saskia or Jan Natalis. Seems like the Witcher world is in need for great commanders whose heads are not crowned. To me, that is more than perfect :)
I am sure that Kovir will play a role in next Witcher 3. Maybe it will help TNK again and saved them from being defeated and seized by Nilfgaard empire?
Yep, and I see your reasong, but I still think that she wouldn't have the resources. Who will lend her an army? Sure not Radovid or Stennis. Prolly Natalis would side with her, but I doubt he has the power to lend Temerian army to a non-noble lass.
Henselt is backstabbing prick, Keadwen don`t share no border with Nilfgaard, he betrayed
his allies once and will do it again in the name of greater good. IMO he is far worse then Nilfgaard

No one knows what Nilfgaard goals now, previous wars goal was to get Ciri.
Now after they got Yennifer and interrogated her who knows...
Besides Emperor himself has strong opposition of old houses in Nilfgaard
Post edited June 07, 2011 by BiggusD1