10 Choices Geralt Would NEVER Make | Witcher 3 

😂😂😂😂

Best comment of the section ! 10/10

"[Shove Dijkstra forcefully]"

@@imthedude2351 came to this comment to comment that

😂😂😂😂😂

🤣, Geralt is not a Selfish guy

One of my friends actually picked the don't follow Ciri. I was like wtf

@@Kratos-dy4sz That's not Egoistic, It's Selfish

@@layzey9340 sorry my bad🤣

@@notsosecretsnacker5218 I think you mean ex-friend 💀

I got so confused. I don't know what was wrong with me at the time, but I was under the impression that she's gonna use the plague research to become a plague spreading supervillain. Not sure where that came from.

@@lipov7083 haha yes! I didn't know much about Keira at that point so I assumed she was doing something bad at the time

@@lipov7083 same thought.. damn

I made the same mistake (playing though currently). I’m also currently reading the books. Trying to go through it choosing options that seemed to match his character in book. The Keira thing is so deceptive. I freaked out when I had to kill her. Did not expect it. The way it was going was for sure Kiera potentially spreading a plague to enemies and Geralt would not have that. Really dumb they dramatically turned it into killing her. Oh well. Lol

I accidentally saved her, sent her to Kaer Morhan. Went on RU-vid to see if I made the correct decision, and realised that there was a kill option.

Hi. I was the 69th like. I just tried recruiting everyone (first playthrough) and discovered who said no. Emiir. And djikstra. Mainly because geralt refused to betray his friends and family. How tf would that be a dumbass witch hunters plan let alone djikstra in return?

@@212mochaman yeah, Dijkstra is actually kind of hard to figure out how to get in the first place since it specifically forces you to let Triss be tortured long enough to learn where his treasure is. Even then, he only gives you 1000 gold at a point in the game where you probably have 10-20k anyway. Its really not worth it

I picked the betrayal option by accident and totally freaked out when I realized it, some time later Needless to say, I immediately reloaded even though I lost some progress. Let Nilfgaard take the North, screw it. Roche and Ves won't die on my watch.

It's actually a brutal choice, cause Roche's solution with selling North to Nilf's is unbelievably stupid. There's pure loyalty against reason situation

you should play witcher 2, more character development for ves and roche, even more reason why geralt would never let them be killed

Same. There are quests you have to Stick to the real geralt no matter what

Haha same here

Same, the reason why i always pick yen

I've decided to use random generated number for most choices to get myself to do some things I've never done before (I only didn't use it to reject doing quests unless rejecting on its own brought a consequence) Felt like a total dick after ending up in Velen killing last witch so I've reloaded and got happy ending lol. But I can't complain in general, got some dialogues and situations I haven't seen yet.

Lol It’s tough. I always say I’m gonna do a playthrough of being good and then being an ass and I always end up trying to be what geralt would be

in fact it would be better if Djikstra was a doppler, and something out of scene happened and that was the plan, another incident similar to Dudu's in the books.

It was probably on late development that they decided to change it, Keep in mind Reason Of State was supposed to happen before you met Ciri

Agreed, this one never sat well with me. I get that the idea of a culturally progressive, economically capitalistic country beat an empire and a religious extremist nation, and it put the player in a tough situation. But Djikstra is supposedly one of the smartest men in the Witcher universe, and he knows Geralt doesn’t care about politics. He had to know that he was goading him into a fight to the death.

That's one of the few issues I have with the writing for Witcher 3. It was so unbelievably stupid for me on two counts. 1. Geralt just wouldn't walk away and let his friends get murdered. Especially after they had gone to Kaer Morhen and helped defend Ciri against the wild hunt. 2. Its so wildly out of character for Dijkstra, he's basically a genius. He would know very well that Geralt would easily kill him and any goons he had with him.

@@BM-wf9uf absolutely. Djikstra is way smarter than Geralt ever will be. He would've known better.

Personally, I played TW3 before reading the books and looking back I made many mistakes. Geralt is too much of a passive person for a majority of the situations he's put into.

@@Soot_38 thats the problem clown, you played only witcher 3 and that's trilogy with non linear world and different choices where player makes Geralt choices not some books, in Witcher 2 you making friends who saving your Life imagine being passive and not saving them? Just casual clown

@@user-vv3zc9il9k actually reading the books after the fact like I just said means I know Geralt the Witcher far better than most. Yes the player makes choices in the third game for Geralt but like I was saying, and this goes for most people in their first play throughs, mistakes were made by choosing these incorrect choices that don’t follow the Witcher order or Geralts moral code. The books, the first installation into the Witcher world which sets in stone much of the lore, tell and explain all of Geralts personality and very clearly shows his opinions on many affairs and what he would and would not choose to do. Playing the Witcher 3 where you are playing a set character that already has mountains of lore and much story build up behind him you are playing that character only and do what that character would do, you don’t just make any choice you want. The books literally depict what he will do and say and how he does it. And when I said he was passive this was referring to how Geralt and many Witcher’s stay away and don’t involve themselves in unnecessary situations that have no business involving a Witcher. Such as politics, war, land disputes so on an so forth. Geralt himself is not passive at all when it comes to saving anyone he deems a friend. He makes it very clear that anyone close to him he is the most loyal to and would protect them at any cost. Given many of these friends also saved Geralt at one point or another which solidifies their bond. Friendships that you get to see spark and flourish in the books. Especially triss which explains that their relationship was a more friends with benefits situation and not actual lovers, a love interest option they give you in the W3 that shouldn’t be there. You my friend are the clown

@@Soot_38 you mentally slow, people change after events and time so Geralt moral code too, Geralt changes with time, with your choices so THERES NO BAD CHOICES cos every Geralt different play first and 2st game you clown

@@user-vv3zc9il9k you’re just wrong, you’re incredibly dense. Geralt never strays from the Witcher and his personal moral code unless an exception is made due to destiny. Destiny which plays a huge part of Geralts character delusion, doubt that you knew anything about that. There are set in stone opinions that geralt would rather die then go against it. There are many bad choices to make that wouldn’t make any sense following the story and following Geralts previous actions and statements. There is no way around anything I’ve said, it’s all correct and backed up throughly with two previous games and 8 fully fleshed books.

Lol I felt bad when Keira said I'll tell Yennefer about what we did 🤣

@@sebastianc2077 Keira was a bad bitch for that one.

Hang on...I didn't let her leave with the scroll and didn't fight with her either. I even invited her to Kaer Mohren 🤔

​@@aleksandarpolak maybe cause u destroyed the notes nd lab

For some reason I thought that if I let her go she would give a bio weapon to Radovid, and that I would be locked out of certain quests cause the peasants to the south of the map would be plagued, but now I see that would be an insane amount of work for a decision to entail

or Djiksta could just have told the others from the start that there is no way Nilfgaard was going to honor their part of the deal and instead suggest his own plan.

Yes. I could live with Dijkstra's idea of ruling the North, but not at that price. Roche and company continue to fight for a free Temeria after you save them or whatever.

@@countluke2334 No, ''Temeria'' becomes Nilfgaard's whore, because Roche sold it to them, his country and his people, while the rest of the North suffers under Nilfgaard. Roche's incredible selfishness and betrayal of anything that doesn't involve his Temeria is why leaving him to die was a fairly easy choice. Though for Geralt himself, is more a of decision to save Roche, a supposed ally in arms, a soldier or side with Dijkstra who helped save his friends. Tough choices either way, but it always amuses me how people get blinded by emotion and quick to kill, when Dijkstra has done more for Geralt than Roche ever has and will do a lot for the North as whole.

@@Kristers_K Yes, I completely agree. I was suggesting that would happen after you side with Dijkstra at first but then he doesn't immediately kill them, but imprison them, from which you could free them again - then they continue to fight for Temeria or whatever.

@@countluke2334 I never actually thought about it, you never see them being killed. But In my own headcanon i want to believe they were captured, they are patriots after all, in reality we don't know what happens to Roche, Ves and Thaler and i think it's done so for a reason by the game devs. Also, i find it odd that Roche and the rest would be against Dijkstra, because Dijkstra seeks to liberate all of the North, not just Temeria, so technically Roche should be on his side, despite the ''betrayal'', if you can even call it that. Roche's stance further shows his biases, he wants free Temeria, but condemns the rest.

Totally agree

I killed her under the pretense she was going to sell a plague to Nilfgard, I'd never thought I'd made the wrong decision until she could have helped at Kaer Morhen. The murdering was a real surprise.

Does she fight back? Or can you lose against her?

You can kill Keira? Wtf

Same i was trying to peacefully resolve and suddenly she was attacking me, had to reload

The emotion on her face says it all

@@TH_Zireael2077 truly a masterpiece this game

Some of them are quite misleading tho. You are under time pressure to respond and the short text does often not reflect what you actually end up doing. It's easy to mess up on a first time play through simply by accidentally making a choice you wouldn't have given more time and info.

Of the 5 pivotal decisions that determine her fate, you need at least 3 for the "best" ending and by pure luck I got 3

@boomerix I especially dislike the one at the laboratory. It doesn't make any sense - why is encouraging someone supposed to be a bad choice? And being with Ciri and the Lodge - out of context it doesn't look like surpressing her or something, it's just being there - doesn't make any sense to me either.

It's traumatizing, I couldn't either.

i was so glad that the game made that choice to help djikstra he is my second favourite in the books i had to support him

True. But I just cannot allow Nilfgaard to win.

The whole quest is poorly written and the whole plot felt like an afterthought in the writing room, book Dijkstra would never do something so stupid in front of Geralt. They really needed to do the whole political plot line better in addition to expanding it.

@@MountAverage28 I had no problem to break his second leg when he stood in my way. Some things are just fun to do. I don't remember how the coup went on after that. I don't think Deikstra participated after taht.

I had to let Djikstra win.

Not the card! D:

So does it affect ur final ending in some sort ??? Cuz I also accidentally killed her.

@@shaikahamed3575 There are different endings, but as the video says, they kind of just ignore that decision if it happens.

@@shaikahamed3575 It does change one relatively minor thing. But I wouldn't say it's worth replaying the entire game to fix.

Never missed a card in my life because there was no shot I was leaving that party without playing a round of gwent

Trollolo 😂 It's one of my favorite and he didn't kill anyone he just eat them after they kill each other because he was hungry And his songs are great

It's really an easter egg, Geralt already breaks Dijkstra's leg in the books, that's why he has a crutch around his left shin

It was also one of the weird options. The option said "Roughly Push Dijkstra aside" Which seems like it would be a case of knock him to the floor or shoulder check him or something. Not punch him in the face and break his good leg.

Well...Geralt totally did that in the books with the first leg

@@Ranadinn Ye I was so shook when Gerald fucking destroyed Djikstra when I just wanted to shove him aside lol

Given how massive of a cunt Dijkstra is to Geralt in the books and given that has already done that once, this is in fact very much the in-character option, quite satisfying I must admit.

even leaving geralt out of it, dijkstra wouldn't trust his future plans for the continent to his personal fighting skills against two elite special forces veterans. he'd have them killed indirectly, preferably in a way geralt wouldn't trace back to him.

@@joshridinger3407 True

Getting the trollslayer achievement hurt

Dijkstra in the game was also really smart UNTIL that stupid ass ending of the request.

@@arkarmoethouk2445 for him to not drop his game plan until Radovid is dead or decree a far cleverer scheme. It literally could have been re written for another quest later where you learn of a threat to Ves and Roche and can choose to intervene or not. Investigating further reveals the perpetrator to be djkstra and can lead to a confrontation. Spitballing here but splitting the quests could have provided the necessary material.

Ciri: immediately buys 10000 shares of Nilfgaard

I felt like a goof after choosing that option recently. But I needed the money for grandmaster gear lol.

@@josiah_4241 😂 exactly. I went to hell trying to find you can I atleast get paid? Damn Ciri.

@@dazcrypto Ciri don't want Geralt to make that bread. Like chill girl, even witchers need to eat like everyone else.

But why exactly? Does xLetalis like to sell Ciri to Emhyr?

@@countluke2334 It’s a running gag on his channel where he sells Ciri in basically every video

I think the Kiera quest was part of cut content. There was supposed to be whole plot line with the plague and a better Radovid plot line that got cut. Which is why you have many references to the plague with barely any impact and that wonky assassination quest.

Keira is a bit self serving in the books so this checks out. She still cares about u and Ciri a lot so she's good overall

yeah same here i dont like beeing betrayed and used thats why i was like " give me that notes and leave as long as i let you " and she was like "naha i just attack you" ...."well then you choose death !"

i'd rather have preferred a solution where Djikstra persuades the three temerians to not trust Emhyr, this would have caused a rift between them, and then Geralt is given the choice, leave after this or see this through till the end, then you do an additional side quest.

It's funny because I was extremely annoyed and disappointed by Dijkstra's sudden stupidity. I would have been much happier with the original plan. Sometimes your choices have consequences you didn't predict. You are not in control of the world. Sacrificing Dijkstra's character to give us unnecessary agency was entirely a bad choice

Well the solution to that would be to have a way for Geralt to discover Dijskstra's plan before hand. Like through a note or an npc that showed up throughout the quest line. Imagine if Philipa mentioned she read Dijskstra's mind during their brief meeting. This prompts a dialogue choice to dig further or ignore Philipa with some snide comment. If you inquire further then she says something like, "I saw the wheels turing in his head once you mentioned the emperor, and got a vague impression of the plot and something about needing to 'tie up loose ends'." Now Geralt can be skeptical about it because its PHILIPA who's telling him this, but it could lead to an optional objective later on of searching Dijskstra's headquarters or alerting Roche who, being a master spy himself, would be able to foil Dijskstra's plan off screen. And that's just one possibility. There's probably a dozen more scenarios you could think of that wouldn't lead to supposed mastermind that is Dijskstra being so stupid as to gamble on Geralt letting his friends and allies die for no reason.

I peak Dijkstra any time: he is one of my favorite character from the books. However, Roach, ves and Tyler are no one for me.

The assassination plotline in general is one that has been said to have been massively shortened by time constraints.

And then there's me, killing everything on sight. I played Skyrim before Wither 3 and because I came into the game with a dragonborne mindset, anyone who pissed and ticked me off was bound to lose his head.

@@DARTH-R3VAN finally someone playing the game right.

Killing Keira was a very unexpected result of asking her for the notes. I was totally shocked and surprised and this wasn’t even my first play-through, and even though it was sort of an “experimental” play-through where I was making different choices than I did with the first in many cases, I still couldn’t go with this result, so I reloaded the game.

I completely agree they are cute in their own way, they have an innocence almost childlike. I don't see how anyone could kill Trollololo as he has a very important job to guard the boatsis. I love his ingenious plan to protect the boats by using the boats to make a wall, now that is some next level master planning 🤣 no peasant would ever suspect the wall to actually be the boats they want to steal

@@DARTH-R3VAN personally I think Skyrim was the best game I have ever played, the size of the map and amount of quests is unreal. Also liked the fact you could go anywhere, your objective is the other side of a mountain, do you walk round the mountain? Hell no you just jump up and over the mountain 🤣🤣 plus all the titles you can get in that game. OK I think I need to crack Skyrim out again as its been awhile.

It's 2022, we all have low attention spans.

Mythbuster busted that years ago, Goldfish have a memory.

@@myopicautisticmetal9035 they do indeed, up to a year if im recalling correctly, however i am mentioning attention span, which they have about 9 seconds of

Its just a facade. He likes to look like it, sometimes he may even believe it himself. But he would rather starve than killing innocents. The books are full of him declining contracts.

😂😂😂

I mean that's how I played it I thought that was his character...

It's lierally wrtten in the back cover of the books...A COLD BLOODED ASSASSIN AND A RUTHLESS KILLER

​@@535phobos In one of the short stories "A Little Sacrifice", he and Dandelion actually did starve for several days because of his scruples.

Same

I remember thinking I made mostly decent choices...until I sold Ciri. That felt awful.

Have you read the books since then? If not, I highly recommend them if you loved the game.

First playthrough is the real one.

I didn't played any games or read the books but I felt the need to watch a nutshell recap of the lore to actually play the game near to right. And it matterd very mucu because I did very good almost every aspect of the game. I made geralt a littlebit aggresive to strangers but it was me, not how you should roleplay as him.

@@laszlonagy02 as a huge fan of the books I'd say having Geralt a bit aggressive to strangers is within his character. He has a good heart but by no means is a nice guy. In the books he's rude, cynical and often threatens people (mostly as scare tactics as he only pulls the blade out on real evil bastards or in defence). That's how RP him too in games.

I dunno man. The wiki states this; "Originally, Geralt was convicted, enthusiastic, incentive and held faith that he was needed in a world full of monsters and beasts to protect the innocent, although Vesemir greatly advised him not to play at being a knight errand or uphold the law. After travelling about 50 miles after leaving Kaer Morhen, Geralt was anxious to kill his first monster. He encountered a bald man with rotten teeth, who stopped a peasant's cart and pulled out a young girl whilst his companions held down her father as the bald man tore off her dress yelling it was time for her to meet a real man and attempted to rape her. Geralt rode up and told him the time had come for him to meet one too, The thug released the girl and charged at him with an axe, Geralt managed to strike him twice with his blade and killed him. The young witcher turned expecting gratitude, however the father fled with the attackers and the girl who was drenched in the man's blood vomited, became hysterical and fainted in fear when Geralt approached her. This event caused Geralt to rarely interfere with such matters.[2]"

@@levicarney1162 That's from one of the books where he's explaining his dispassion, and goes on to contract himself many times in his adventuring.

@@levicarney1162 in the most recent book, he goes out of his way to save someone in this same situation because of his “scruples”

@@jayspeidell he actually says to that mute girl in the first book how he tends to avoid those situations. He has still gotten involved of course, but there's no doubt that he's looked the other way before.

@@randomfactsthatdontmatter3466 I think in between Levi's comment and the Blakiven incident is when he turned his head the other way the most.

She attacks him. Geralt did nothing wrong.

@@The_Custos I disagree, you might fight but Geralt doesn't have to kill her. It's just not in his nature.

@@tobiasL1991 accidents can happen, she died of bleed when I killed her recently. Teleport, zap zap zap, gets cut a few times, teleports, insults, dies of bloodloss.

So, in your mind bioweapon is bad unless Keira has to die? Then it's good?

@@miloradowicz What? No. I'm just saying Geralt can just incapacitate Keira and destroy the notes, he doesn't have to outright kill her.

oh and yes to a blood and wine version!

Right.. my solution to this was that Roche was not my real friend, as I didn't sided with him in Witcher 2. And as for Vess - I didn't "manage" to save her during the village ambush. Was my only failed quest. However the game decided one death is not enough for her, so she appeared again just to be killed again by Dijkstra... The game intentinally pushes you to one of bad choices... Radovid is clear no-go due to his violent xenophobia, I hate Nilfgaard to the core since their first mention in the book... so if I have to choose, there is no real choice from both mine and Geralt point of view as I understand it.

If you are trying yo get this achievement make sure you don't have any decooctions active or mutagens equipped because they also count against it

Yes but of you cared about Keira a little bit, you know that she do any dumb thing she decides so you have to be careful to not anger her. I did it first try and was so confused how other decisions would turn out because I couldn't understan why would Geralt choose those answeres. She is the best tutorial character for roleplay because going straight to the point is not always the best decision. And you can f*ck up if you not emerge into the character of Geralt. This game is not something you can rush.

Cómo describirías a Gerald.../? Porque debo matar al súcubo?

@@jissjily857 Geralt does not kill sentient monsters if they aren't harming anyone. The succubus wasn't doing anything bad, so when the choice came to help the druid kill her or to let her live in peace, I knew Geralt would choose not to attack.

Exactly :D I was scared at that moment, how she attacked me and I was supposed to kill her... Wohooo calm down your tits, just give me the papers and go away woman!

same for me 🤧

Same. All the good answeres just came as the game gave me. It was logical if you made the right dicisons to reveal Kiras personality to Geralt.

Cool story bro

Same I was being silly and chose the FU dialog. Saved Lambert at least

Yup, I thought that maybe after defeating her, she´d just surrender. (There are some games like that.) After she died, I know I wanted to reload, but for whatever reason, I decided not to. (corrupted save? would lose too many hours?)

Yep. Didn't reload in this case because I don't generally like undoing major decisions unless they lock me in a significant way, but I certainly did not expect this to go the way it did.

Yeah, the same thing happend to me when I first played. Literally had no idea things could escalate into killing her. Only time I reloaded my save in the Witcher.

*second playthrough

🤐

Same I had to reload, lost about 10 hours of progress but it was worth it

@@VergilTheLegendaryDarkSlayer a normal person would simply learn and make different decisions in NG+

@@vhyles which is exactly what I did - two full playthroughs, another half playthrough on a new account, now onto my third full playthrough, second one on the second account - just can't stop :P

i don't remember anything about a family. just that the werewolf was scared

I guess Geralt has the right to kill all werewolves in W3

I felt bad for the werewolf, noticed you put an edit as I was going to say it doesn't mention the werewolf having a family just being scared 😔

there’s also a warewolf who he spared and became friends with in the books so it can go either way

Ha I agree, I thought the same thing. Too specific to be a coincidence.

This game has so many different options why would u wanna play the exact same choices every time

To be fair though, I could easily see Geralt walking away and letting olgierd die

@@griffinq8003 what was your reasoning for letting Gaunter kill Olgierd?

@@xscissor524 my personal reasoning is that olgierd is a horrible person and brought the entire shit show down on geralt to begin with. Say what you will about Gaunter, but he was very fair with Geralt and saved Geralt from the consequences of Olgierds own bad choices (cursing the prince, lying about it, etc). Olgierd made those wishes with gaunter on his own free will for his own benefit, and thinking he could out smart gaunter was a gamble he took and predictably lost, and roach needs a better saddle for ng+ As for canonical geralt, I think there is even less of a chance geralt makes that decision, for the reasons listed above and the fact that it would be a horrible idea to make an enemy out of such a powerful entity, especially for someone like olgierd. Not to mention, if he can't solve the riddle he'd lose his soul for olgierd? No way geralt does that.

@@griffinq8003 agreed.. My reason to let Gaunter kill Olgierd was that Gaunter didn't lie or cheat and didn't forcefully make that contract, I understand Olgierd lost his fortune but he got greedy with the wishes and his poor choice of words trapped him, Gaunter fulfilled his end of the bargain and Olgierd tried to outsmart him..