Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
For more game lore you can read further here:
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2629323201
Alright, on one hand you have nilfgard who claims to be order and peace yet every single invasion was from Nilfgard. Emyrh literally was the cause of all 3 of his attempts to invade and take over the other countries.
theres nothing like a country that claims to respect order and law but yet is the very cause of 3 wars all with the goal of taking over other countries.
Thats not order. Nilfgard and its leader is authoritative, scheming and about power vastly more then they are about order.
the main Reason Democracy became a prominent form of government in real life was the idea that government shouldnt be allowed to grow so big and have so much reach into absolutely everything. this is why democracies often have two different parties. and multiple systems in place to prevent the government, the people in power from growing to big and taking over peoples lives.
But nilfgard emryh literally wants to take everything over. and all be under his rule. that would literally be the perfect example of a authoritative government with to much power that has grown to big and has to much reach into absolutely everything.
Then theres Radovid. He is also trying to gain power. However he chooses different means of obtaining it. He allies himself with the church of eternal fire. and persecutes sorcerers, mages, alchemist, anyone related to magic, basically anyone non human. He is doing so mainly for 3 reasons. 1. because of poor treatment from philippa Eileheart (probably horribly misspelled.) who he hates and resents.2 due to the lodge of sorceresses scheming. and 3. to gain money and power.
both sides are frankly crap. Here is a some quotes from killing monsters trailer that pretty much fits my thoughts on both sides.
" Evil is Evil. Lesser ,greater, middleling. makes no difference. The degree is arbitrary. Its definition is blurred. If Im to choose between one evil and another. Id rather not choose at all."
"If I Have To Choose Between One Evil And Another, Then I Prefer Not To Choose At All."
Second is what happens if they win the war. Judging from what we see of Toussaint in B&W, life in one of Nilfgaard's vassal states doesn't seem to be too bad, and that's the fate that awaits the North if Emhyr wins. But what happens if Radovid wins? We see in-game who he shifts his persecution to after the mages escape, so where does that end? So we've got an absolute ruler who's insane, backed up by a cult of personality, and is always persecuting individuals who don't fit into society? IRL history is filled with so many examples of how dangerous a combination that is that it's not even funny.
IMO, as bad as he is, Emhyr's the lesser evil in this choice.
What do you think?
Nilfgaards main drawback that kept me from supporting them was their...strategy, during the first two wars. Kind of hard to support a "superior civilized nation" that slaughters every living being from the dandelions on upwards, and burns everything flammable leaving the ear behind you looking like the literal depiction of hell. Not to mention they pulled a massive dickmove to the sco'atel at the end of the second war.
The Northern kingdoms on the other hand did not do the aforementioned, there are quite a lot of sympathetic figures with them as well. However, they did start a race-war with the elves, and later the dwarves for essentially no reason but to keep the common folk distracted.
And in the games you see both sides being ♥♥♥♥♥ to equal degrees yet again, just the details are different now. So more and the same...
However I'm kind of compelled to side with nilfgard this time, since they've stop the aforementioned scorched earth policy. And honestly, emhyr would be a much better ruler overall compared to Radovid.
Support from others such as himself granted him the opportunity he needed (that's one of the reasons why Maeve of Lyria managed to win an earlier war against Nilfgaard, for example). And so did betrayal from his right hand (Philippa).
It's funny how the people of the north never learned anything about Jacques de Aldersberg, though. His plans died with Geralt, were revived - and twisted beyond reason - by Radovid.
If they knew about it then Radovid wouldn't be able to merge the Church of Eternal Fire with the Order of the Flaming Rose with CHARISMA alone.
Oh, he would still manage to get what he wants just fine, believe it. But by force. And force is not what he can fathom given the circunstances of the present war with Nilfgaard.
Fear and faith is what grounds and unites his people. The only reason why Nilfgaard couldn't break the north, in the past. They're far too arrogant to notice the simple things - they disdain it - and that's why they failed, time and again, in their northern conquests. "Barbarians"...
Radovid is literally Hitler, though.
Emhyr, on the other hand, is actually the same thing. He's just more subtle and less in your face about it.
Emhyr is more inclined to lay back and rest after the conquest ends, though, yeah. Put an end to the "scorched earth policy" as Sabaithal wrote above. Radovid keeps it going until the end of times.
Obviously not a perfect example but yeah, Nilfgaard is just a bunch of crazy fanatical freaks except in this world, to my understanding, Nilfgaard isn't necessarily doing it for the good of the world and I don't believe their nation is supposed to be particularly utopian, either.
I feel like if you weren't a person of power in this world, you would more or less have to side with Nilfgaard if they decide to sweep through your home. Some random shmuck peasant or soldier stands no chance to a giant army waging war against a bunch of stupid smaller nations that are constantly suffering from in-fighting. Either way, I don't believe for a second that Nilfgaard is supposed to be a good guy at all. Even if you choose a certain ending where someone becomes the new leader... There's still lots of chances for manipulation and exploitation. I suppose Toussaint is an example of how some nations can benefit but I also believe the understanding is that Toussaint was *already* a well-off nation, it just didn't get destroyed by Nilfgaard and rather decided to join their overall empire.
In all my playthroughs I have focused on modeling the empires subtly to my will because Redania's problem is Radovid and the church. Seriously now scapegoating was never good. We've learned from history that denying ones own responsibility leads to disaster. Fear gives the illusion of power and trust. But mages nor people are innocent either. Both are selfish on a strong majority, and few (as per usual) use their magic and ability to help what can be helped and build for the future.
As for Nilfgaard, Emhyr is a clear problem, I like the order Nilfgaard brings but usually a few emperors ruled with order and didn't turn towards abusing its own people. Emhyr did just that, and Nilfgaard will slowly decay in the hands of Emhyr because its greatness comes from the wars it wages. It's a highly unstable and very national faction that brings order at the cost of human life, and that alone is not how empires are built to stand. Although as the lore is concerned and I've seen, Nilfgaard is also a consequence as they were not as great before and were not different than the ''barbarians'' they conquer. It's a pitiful war to prove themselves that they are mighty just to return home and be just like them.
As for Dijkstra, he's too radical, killing your own valuable allies if they simply disagree with you is just something a great leader does not do. But he wanted to do just that when trying to gain the throne of Redania, and I could not stand for it.
Temerians are also very xenophobic, Foltest made a war out of a reason only a kid could make, it really needs more than just a leader, the people are the problem too. Them and the environment in which they find themselves. During Redanian rule, Temerian's jealousy and pride made them sell and scapegoat on non-humans such as dwarves, halflings and elves. You find books throughout the game as well spreading vile propaganda about how horrible, miserable and MONSTROUS these other races are. They accuse their own neighbors as being witches with no proof, just to get rid of them (this you find out in a mission from Reason of State).
But my GOD is the whole thing well written, it brings joy to me despite the potential the game could've had, that it's so deep and impactful on so many levels still, with subtle details and all.