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 or Opera

endtherapture: Roche's personal story is one of a tragic fall from grace, he's lost all his friends and men, in my game Geralt abandoned him to save Triss, and his country is in ruins and he is fugitive. So sad, because he is a good man at heart.
I'm not sure I agree. I mean, I felt that way initially, but the more I played through his story the more I started to see Roche as the kind of person who feels that anything, including torture and murder, is justified so long as it is done "for the good of the state". In short, the guy is a fascist.

I sided with Roche initially because I remembered just how dirty the Scoia'tael played in TW1; basically they were terrorists who were no better than the racists they fought against, and I wasn't about to get mixed up in that mess again. But the more he talked, the more I realized that he was someone Geralt probably wouldn't get along with. The final straw was finding him leading the secret plot against Henselt. Not that I have any fondness for Henselt (and in fact I let Roche kill him), but both Geralt and I were beyond sick and tired of all the politics and scheming at that point. Everyone is working an angle, but all Geralt wants to do is run off with Triss and get back to the Path.

But anyways, my Iorveth playthrough felt like it fit with Geralt's character much more organically, particularly after Iorveth's comment about fighting for a free state where humans and nonhumans could coexist peacefully. At that point it's no longer about choosing between two groups who are equally terrible, as was the case in TW1. And given that Geralt ultimately went out trying to defend a bunch of nonhumans from persecution I don't think it's hugely out of place to find him on the side of Saskia's rebels.
Post edited June 20, 2011 by aroth
my favorite bit with iorveth is when he says yaevinn was a delusional asshole. i thought "now this is an elf i can tolerate".
On Iorveth's path I have two endings and a save where I can have a third. In one game I went with Iorveth and removed the curse of Saskia. I saved Sile in that one and did not fight Letho. I did this for a number of reasons. With Saskia free of the curse she will be the leader that helps fight of Nilfgaard. Sile owes me for my favor as does Letho, or at least his promise to disappear. Philippa has no control over Saskia and will be hunted and never trusted again. So this ending has a free Aedrin and a dragon to fight against the invaders.

The other saved ending was where I went for Triss. I let Sile die so this helps Triss gain power with the remaining mages. Yes Philippa probably escaped (we aren't certain of this however), but we know what she did. I let Saskia live even if Philippa might maintain control. With Triss now firmly back in good graces with the remaining mages they might be able to lift the curse or hunt down Philippa. After all if she and Sile are dead then no one controls Saskia anyway. But since I can't depened 100% on Saskia I killed Letho just to be sure he wouldn't betray me once again and appear in the fight on the side of Nilfgaard. I did do a save right before to let him live if needed.

So the only things that won't be easily undone is letting Saskia live and my letting Sile die in the trap. I probably should have let her die in the other paythrough as well but this way I can see come WE3 if she has any bearing.

As for WE3 it looks like it will be the search for Yennifer in Nilfgaard while the the war against the north rages on. My guess is they will either end it with a final battle against the Wild Hunt or leave that to WE4. The other big choice will naturally be Triss or Yennifer.
Super bump.

I'm finally playing Iorveth's side and I don't like it nearly as much. First off the main characters you interact with just aren't as well written and voice acted. Henselt and Deathmold were terrible people, but great characters. Shila and Saskia are, compared, pretty bland.

Secondly the story gets way too muddled. The plot goes from being about catching up to Letho and finding Triss to being more about fighting for Saskia's rebellion, which while morally pleasing isn't really well designed or well paced. In Henselt's camp the plot about Letho never really gets lost, and releasing the curse is more about doing Witcher's work in the meantime rather than randomly joining a rebellion in the middle of other things going on.

Also Iorveth is a total ruthless terrorist who kills innocents in chapter one, so siding with him really makes no sense there. Yes he gets nicer in chapter two, and Saskia is doing good work, but there's no reason to expect that from backing Iorveth in chapter one. That decision still makes me uneasy despite it being well behind me. I hated making it just to see the different content.

I had only done Iorveth's path previously and tried going through Roche's.

I just finished going through Roche's path and didn't enjoy it as much. This is for similar reasons that I preferred siding with non-humans in the first game. The non-humans are generally better people. Even Iorveth who is a terrorist and killer does not rape people.

Most humans seem to be fairly loathsome in the game. They plot, kill, rape, drink, and murder without repercussion. They also treat the Witcher fairly poorly in most cases.

For those who say Roche is a better person than Iorveth, I have to disagree. Roche seems only concerned with Temeria. This is suggested a number of times in the game. Roche can also be seen asking if he should kill Geralt on Iorveth's path during Cinthia's quest. Roche is also a bit incompetent as he gets his men killed and Ves raped.

When talking to Iorveth you can tell he is filled with hatred, but it is understandable. The humans have killed Elves mercilessly and raped their women for many years. Even a killer like Iorveth has higher standards than most of the human guards and kings. If you talk to him you learn quickly he is fighting for a place where humans and non-humans can coexist in the world. He becomes nicer and loses his hatred as the game moves along if you befriend him and show him he can trust you. On his path you can get a crystal that shows he just want's to settle down and relax to a normal life.

I think a lot of peoples vision today is clouded by the idea of terrorism. They forget countries like America used terrorist attacks and Guerilla warfare to fight and defeat the British. Iorveth is not a dictator. He isn't trying to force religion on people. Saskia isn't either. They are just trying to make a place where everyone can coexist.

Vergen has a lot more enjoyable quests to me. You are welcomed to the city right away. Saskia and the dwarfs are very friendly towards you. Your friends both seem very happy with the choice you made. Zoltan because he want's to fight for his people and Dandelion because he feels the non-humans and Saskia are better people. The quests here are a lot of fun. They are often humorous in some way. You get to have the crystals quest which shows you the dreams of a few people that are either interesting or amusing. You get to help Saskia, Zoltan, and Iorveth save Vergen. Overall there are a lot of pluses. Geralt also can free Saskia from Philippa which IMO is great. I feel she is more worth saving that Anias.

The only good thing about Roche's path is that you learn more about the WItcher's that are killing kings. Other than that things actually go worse in most cases. Vergen falls, Roche's men die, and Ves gets rapped. It is implied this doesn't happen on Iorveth's path.

In the end, I can't imagine Geralt would ditch Zoltan. I also can't believe he wouldn't listen to Iorveth's ideals. Despite his neutrality, he always seems to help those in need and try to do the right thing. I believe the right thing is helping non-humans over his own personal issues. He also would likely choose to go with Iorveth for no other reason than to get to Triss faster IMO.

I think humans in these games are portrayed a little overboard on the side of evil. I don't think armies would be allowed their soldiers to get drunk and sleep with prostitutes. For instance, the Roman armies were very strict about such things. I realize this is an army from the north, but it still seems like the humans are just overboard bad unintelligent in most cases.