Plus, in terms of carrying over your save into the 3rd game the only thing that killing a character like that is going to do it seems is prevent you from accessing a certain quest. This is why I don't consider choosing to let someone live or die as being all that much of a choice, becuase I feel like the more interesting choice is always in letting people live so you can see how that affects the game later.
Like the elven girl that you get off despite leading those soldiers to their death in that cave, I mean you have the chance to condemn her twice, and the 2nd time she really deserved to die, but I let her live and look forward to seeing how that impacts future games or DLC. Ended up killing him on my first run. I sort of liked Foltest, and I didn't get to see more of Trish in the game because of him. I killed him, because, Triss. Also, I felt the game needed a action-packed ending, and not just dialogue.
And I had to prove myself after he whooped me earlier in the game. Rhaknar : Flaboere :. He actually did nothing to harm Triss. What happaned to her in chapter 2 happaned because Triss and Letho got seperated and she got caught by the empire's sorceress.
In fact Letho saves Triss in chapter 3 if you choose not to help her out yourself. I let him live I am hoping he appears in the Witcher 3 and fights along side me. As u recall, Geralt already saved his life once, and this is how he repaid? If he had any ounce of honor , Letho would never do anything against Geralt cuz he owed him his life.
He deserved to die, Geralt gave him a 2nd chance by saving his life once already and my Geralt doesn't give a 3rd chance. He also saved Triss. There's also a chance you killed henselt though, in which case you can't justify killing letho. In either case, killing him accomplishes nothing. There's justice perhaps, but even that is debatable. I killed him, he made me look like an incompetent bodyguard and nobody makes a witcher look stupid and lives to tell the tale.
Please Log In to post. This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:. Until you earn points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.
Spoilers 75 results 1 2. Besides, if you didn't run and save Triss, Letho does it for you. Granted, she wouldn't be in trouble if it wasn't for him in the first place, but he kind of makes up for it. Blothulfur Mentor 9 May 9, In my canon I let him walk, his methods may be suspect but he is not doing the Emperor's bidding for selfish reasons, he is seeking to avoid the extinction of his order and brethren.
Plus his intelligence and competence should be rewarded, he single handedly de-stabilised the north and achieved fairly much all of his objectives, with the bare minimum of spilled blood.
Unlike Geralt who broods and philosiphises on a Witchers purpose and seeks to cling on to the codes of the past, Letho chooses to do something about his fate and takes matters into his own hands.
In so doing he becomes a tool of a secular power, and thus any blame for Foltests, Demavends and any others deaths must rest with his master The White Flame Dancing on the Graves of his Foes.
Letho is a weapon, cleaned of the rust of disuse and pointless endeavour and given purpose in fresh hands. I blame the weilder. Chewin3 Rookie 11 May 9, I let him go, without hesitation. My Geralt fully understood what kind of influence Letho had had and actually made on the different events in the North, but I felt no grudge, nor revenge for Letho. His intentions and his agenda weren't evil, his goal was always to ensure the rebuildment of the Witchers of the Viper school.
He didn't have an idealistic view on the world, but rather a realistic one. While Geralt simply accepts that Witchers are relics, and will eventually 'go exctinct', Letho actually accepts what the world has come to, and actively wants to make a change on that. I doubt he cares who is the ruler, or who is the winner in the upcoming war. He simply has his own goals that he pursues and wants to achieve, and will take down almost anyone and 'aid' anyone if it strenghtens his goals, to some extent.
My Geralt respected what Letho motives were, and while I may not have approved of Letho's so called "interference" on the stability of the North, his involvement could have ultimately made --as Geralt himself states-- the North even stronger and more united than ever though it depends a large part on the different choices made in the game, and a lot if it is actually up to speculations in the end.
Another part to why I let him go is that I feel a certain amount of respect for him, and I believe Letho does this as well to Geralt.
This can easily be seen when Letho offers Geralt Vodka which, if chosen, Geralt drinks from. Those who only played The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt or watched the Netflix series will likely not know a lot about Letho's background. He has had a large role, playing both antihero, adversary, and even ally, to Geralt. His past is a complicated one and the following list reveals some intriguing facts you might not have known about the witcher. For those who have never played a game in The Witcher universe before, you might miss out on your chance to meet Letho altogether.
The same goes for when you're questioned early in the game, if you say you didn't spare Letho, then he won't appear. Depending on how much knowledge you have about the overall franchise, you might not be aware that Letho is one of the few remaining witchers in existence alongside Geralt himself, Vesemir , and a few others.
If you manage to kill Letho in the game, then that makes the numbers dwindle down even lower. You can also get the ending in the game that will allow Ciri to go on and become a fully trained Witcher herself, she'll be the first new one in a long time. Did you know that Letho has a somewhat familiar nickname? The comparisons mostly stop there but it's interesting to see two very popular fantasy franchises both have notable characters who have made a reputation for themselves by murdering a couple of kings.
That said, "kingslayer" is actually a fairly common term in fantasy but there is a lot of overlap between the two fandoms and they like to compare and contrast Letho and Jaime. Thing is, even if I'm thinking as myself and not Geralt, I can't come up with a valid reason to kill Letho.
Geralt just wants to clear his name. Well Roche can do that. Letho framed Geralt. I don't think that was his intention but even if it was, he let Geralt live when they fought in the elven ruins and kept Triss safe depending on player choice. Plus, the damage is done. He killed the kings, and Nilfgaard is invading.
Killing Letho seems like a needless choice to me. From what I understand about Witchers, they don't care about politics. What does anybody gain from killing Letho? Let Roche do it. My Geralt is just happy to have the woman he loves back and safe. More topics from this board
0コメント