Vercingetorix kill or spare?

[eves_faith]

So is there any difference for your game depending on what you do with him? I was torn between kill him as a warrior and spare him, this whole take him to Rome never met my mind. But I wonder if its an actual consequence behind it or not.

[Yasahi]

It changes the end story just like some other choices like that.

[OutlawedDrifter]

If you drag Vercingetorix to Rome he testifies against Lurco before he's executed if you disband the legion before going back to Rome.

[raphoux69]

To be perfectly honest with you, it only matters for 2 things.
One line in the ending cinematic and a scene where he testify if you disband. In both cases it's not really relevant i'm afraid, since he dies anyways and if you play the game to the end you will understand my comment.

[eves_faith]

Originally posted by OutlawedDrifter:

If you drag Vercingetorix to Rome he testifies against Lurco before he's executed if you disband the legion before going back to Rome.

Originally posted by raphoux69:

To be perfectly honest with you, it only matters for 2 things.
One line in the ending cinematic and a scene where he testify if you disband. In both cases it's not really relevant i'm afraid, since he dies anyways and if you play the game to the end you will understand my comment.

Thank you both. I really want to get Lurco by the balls, so I was afraid I might cut myself short of this opportunity, as I don't trust this Felix guy. But I have a feeling it won't work like that anyway. I am torn to reload if he won't surive in his retirement anyway, as I'd rather grant him a viking death as warrior.

[=DeadShot=]

Does Vercingtorix survive if you become Emperor?

[raphoux69]

Originally posted by =DeadShot=:

Does Vercingtorix survive if you become Emperor?

He survives if you set him free. I'm afraid if you take captive, he dies anyways. So you can become an emperor and have him being alive, but not if you capture him or execute him.

[eves_faith]

Originally posted by raphoux69:

Originally posted by =DeadShot=:

Does Vercingtorix survive if you become Emperor?

He survives if you set him free. I'm afraid if you take captive, he dies anyways. So you can become an emperor and have him being alive, but not if you capture him or execute him.

so if you let him live and free he will survive? I understood your first comment like he'd die anyway.

[raphoux69]

Basicly you've 3 options.
Set him free.
Set him in chains.
Kill him.

The first one will make him reappear in the end cutscene.
The second one will make him reappear in the last act but he's doomed for the triumph anyways.
The third one is pretty much clear.

[rodgark77]

eves_faith: He's not a viking

[Thorley23]

Originally posted by eves_faith:

Originally posted by OutlawedDrifter:

If you drag Vercingetorix to Rome he testifies against Lurco before he's executed if you disband the legion before going back to Rome.

Originally posted by raphoux69:

To be perfectly honest with you, it only matters for 2 things.
One line in the ending cinematic and a scene where he testify if you disband. In both cases it's not really relevant i'm afraid, since he dies anyways and if you play the game to the end you will understand my comment.

Thank you both. I really want to get Lurco by the balls, so I was afraid I might cut myself short of this opportunity, as I don't trust this Felix guy. But I have a feeling it won't work like that anyway. I am torn to reload if he won't surive in his retirement anyway, as I'd rather grant him a viking death as warrior.

I'm actually not surprised this particular situation is controversial. One thing I liked about these games is that they attempted to present history properly so people could understand things in context. That historical time was not a nice place, and Vercingetorix was both a figurehead for the Gauls, and a dangerous military threat. Keeping him alive is simply put irresponsible for your own people, and the idea is to break the Gauls as a potential threat so you don't have to face them again. All modern humanitarian principles and the idea of "treating enemy leaders with respect" aside, it doesn't make much sense in that time and price which is why historically Caesar had him brought back to Rome, humiliated in front of the crowds, and then strangled to death with a Garrote so everyone could see him die a slow, and pitiful death.... including his own people, making it clear no matter how strong you thought you were, this was what was going to happen if you went up against Rome. It also worked, it totally broke the Gauls and saved lives.

Let's say we had taken your idea and let him fight you in some kind of dual. There would have been no real benefit to doing this. It would have encouraged the Gauls to fight on if they saw their leader go out like a beast and made it look like they might have a chance. Worse yet, if you had lost that fight then that would have encouraged them like nobody's business and made an even bigger mess of things.

I'm not speaking for modern morality here, I understand why in the mostly civilized world we don't do things like this any more, but it was appropriate to the times it was going on, and like everything context matters. Many more people would have died if The Gauls were not demoralized.