Should You KILL Radovid In The Witcher 3? - Reasons of State

Share on facebook
Share on twitter

Should You KILL Radovid In The Witcher 3? - Reasons of State

187 036 views | 16 Aug. 2020
187 036 views | 16 Aug. 2020

The quest 'Reasons of State' in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt presents the player with a difficult choice - kill Radovid and doom the North to Nilfgaardian invasion, or spare the mad King of Redania. I also discuss Dijkstra - specifically, whether or not you should let him kill Vernon Roche and become Redania's chancellor.

Check out Avarti merch here: https://teespring.com/stores/avartis-store

jellydamgood

Will Sigi really be better than Ciri?

Gustavo Silveira

4:25 what armor is that?

Quicoboy Reyna

...so, to hell with Goofy...USA comes first...

weetabixharry

I agree. The right decision is the toughest decision. Sorry, Broche.

Sean Sterling

You gotta have 0 loyalty and 0 morality to let Roche and Ves die. Snake in the grass.

Luckiller 01

to be honest, after killing Radovid and Henselt you cant never kill Letho. You are as much as assassin of kings as him

LidiaLeeSun

Yes

Eduardo Bráulio

take as much information out of Emhyr before the reunion between Djikstra and his EX, use the information about emhyr wishing to put Cirilla on the throne to make a deal with Dijkstra to let his EX go, kill Radovid, let dijkstra kill roche and make cirilla ascend the throne.
just a thought, didnt try it myself but after playing the first time I intended to play again doing all that and see what happens

(yes, forgive me for my bad english)

General Grievous

If you have to pick between one evil and another you should simply make a greater evil

Andreas D

Radovid dies! EVERY! SINGLE! TIME!

John Babin

"Evil is evil. Lesser. Greater. Middling. It's all the same."

Chameleon1616

The choice to allow Nilfgaurd to rule is completely changed by the empress Ciri ending. Ciri holds the key to changing the whole empire, ending slavery (a natural assumption for her character) and could arguably offer an entire unified continent something that neither Djikstra nor Radovid could provide the North. I’m pretty happy with my choice.

desh jack

Pretty sure you can break Djikstra's leg and still follow this questline

rutger5000

In my head canon Gerald is a squ'atel, he's just not admitting it. I've played all the games and always sided with the elves and dwarves. Roche seems to be a top bloke, but he isn't Gerald's friend in my book. Couldn't do it if I first got Roche to fight at Kear Moren though.

SurrealScotsman

It's pretty easy to answer - Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but during playing through the game, as to whether you let Dijkstra kill Roche or not it's a very simple & plan no, Geralt names his horses after then man for heavens sake - to let Roche die and not fight with him is simply not 'being Geralt'.

So Yes, you should kill Radovid and then kill Dijkstra, as without hindsight, those are the 'correct' decisions to take.

fapnawb

Seeing people being burned alive in Novigrad, I happily helped kill Radovid when given the chance.

The Ebony Warrior Jr.

I feel as though Djistkra although he may be good for keeping the north as The North, eventually with this rapid industrialization it will probably end up as something akin to the U.S.S.R as Djistkra once he dies I feel like their will probably be a huge election problem resulting in a more totalitarian dictatorship instead of a true north. Where as Nilfgard is much better in the long run as even though it may bring slavery it still brings prosperity to the land, and should the empire continue to remain its more then likely slavery will fizzle out like it has in our time especially if Ciri becomes empress as she will probably commit to reforms for the betterment of the people. If these reforms will happen and will stick is a chance I’m more willing to take then having a manipulative, corruptible snake as the chancellor. Even if Djistkra remains true and truly creates an everlasting northern empire that he believes in doesn’t mean that it will continue to flourish once he dies. Where as Nilfgard although not great is strong enough to keep order. TL;DR I think Djistkra’ rule is to weak to last very long without becoming a dictatorship. Where as Nilfgard in my opinion would be the better option as a stronger presence (Also Roche doesn’t die, with is also a plus)

Mikhail Burke

The lesser evil? Evil is evil, “Evil is Evil. Lesser, greater, middling… Makes no difference. The degree is arbitary. The definition’s blurred. If I’m to choose between one evil and another… I’d rather not choose at all.”

Luís Costa

I trusted Ciri, she will break the wheel

Reshy

I wouldn't say it's the worse than Djikstra if Ciri becomes empress, as she can temper much of Nilfgaard's ambitions due to her upbringing in Skelliege and the North.

Linden Stromberg

I trust Roche more than Dikstra. If Diskstra will kill Roche, then Diskstra is unfit to rule anywhere.
I also don't agree that Nilfgaard would enslave or genocide the North. Why would they be more likely to do this than someone of the low moral character of Dikstra?
Radovid was the one we know for certain was bent on genocide.

George Thomas

Like so many people think Roach is a good friend to Geralt but seem to forget that depending on how you play The Witcher 2 he first imprisoned Geralt and then tries to execute him or have Ves kill him in cold blood with a crossbow. So fuck him I say.

M M

Bro your missing one massive piece to why actually the Nilfgard ending is better; when you get the Furi empress ending, she will be the heir to become empress after her biological father and so the slavery point you mentioned will not be an issue with Ciri in power

Supreme Sith Darth Sidious

Only a fool would kill Radovid.

SebasUlgc

Already killed him, imma watch anyways

Ventrue Himself

2:26 Dijkstra's actor: I think the script said I should be doing something here but I completely forgot what it was



oh right bark orders at my dimwit lackeys, that's it

Tait Fraser

I think the "best" option for the fate of the people in the world of The Witcher is a Free Temeria and Nilfgaard under the rule of Ciri. It's unfortunate because I hate Nilfgaard and want to support an independent North, and I think Dijkstra would be a great ruler, Nilfgaard ruling the continent is the greatest chance for a lasting peace. A strong North means more wars with the South are inevitable.

I do love the Free Temeria ending, as it feels like a moment of redemption for the failings of Geralt in the previous games. Geralt let Foltest die, which is the major linchpin for the fall of Temeria and the Nilfgaardian invasion. In my games I always feel that Geralt has a connection to Temeria.

clan

Cant kill Roche bro

MrToxicSausage

I just couldn't let Radovid live, not after seeing all the shit he was doing. One of the most irredeemable characters in the game. Roche and Ves came to aid in the Battle of Kaer Morhen, there's no way Geralt would abandon them to die.

Robert Speedwagon Explains the joke

actualy......... kill Dijkstra have Tamaria vassal kingdom and let Ciri become empres. She grew up in the north. she know their customs. Who knows meaby Ciri will give all the Northen provinces vassel status like Tamaria and Tousant.

this is the better ending. And our boy Roche gets to live

Jon Ander Irureta

Radovid is based.

Hampus Baaz

I didnt trust djikstra to win. I thought it would end in massive failure loosing everything including tamaria and it being a loose of trust. Radovid we knew was a good strategist, nothing I knew of djikstra would give me hope. I was happy with my choice of tamaria since it was taking the best option out of possibly having nothing

Trathien

Short answer: Yes

Long answer: YEEEEEEEEEEES

Daniel Mcleod

I like letting nilfgard win. They seem the strongest.

Lars Price

Did you know in White Orchard, that Dijkstra let's his men do the following things?

1: his men rob the poor people blind
2: his men destroy wheat fields of the poor people, looking for treasure that most likely isn't even there
3: he doubles taxes not just for the rich, but the poor too
4: his men arrest a citizen who most likely got set up without looking for any evidence whatsoever

I found these things when I explored Dijkstra's ending in White Orchard. I think Dijkstra uses his tactics he used as part of the Novigrad underworld in his ruling. In my opinion he just acts like a mafia boss

Cosmic Nobody

Still the best game ever...

Bartek Racki

"It's the lesser evil"
Evil is evil. Lesser, greater, middling… Makes no difference. The degree is arbitary. The definition’s blurred. If I’m to choose between one evil and another… I’d rather not choose at all.

Prince Equalizer

For me I didn't know what's going on, and I was like : yeah let's kill him.

Sorry witcher fans, I just played witcher 3 and I didn't understand the plot well.

Wolf Lord

"Evil is Evil. Lesser, greater, middling… Makes no difference. The degree is arbitary. The definition’s blurred. If I’m to choose between one evil and another… I’d rather not choose at all. "

Edmar Souza

When I first met Dijikstra in the game, o googled right away “The Witcher III how to kill Dijikstra”. I was sad to know that I would have to kill this guy Radovid to get my sword on his throat. Then I learned that Radovid was threatening my Triss and the other sorcerers. Well... you can imagine what happened after that...

Roxel Santos

cant let djikstra be dead i need a card from him.. gwent is life

matias 1

WAIT WAIT is Thaler killed if sigi kill Roche??? cus Thaler is like one of my favorite characters

jonh stonk

i dont think you should kill radovid, he is a tactical genius and hes right about magic users and non humans: they have a history of trying to kill and opress normal humans,its undeniable that if they had the oportunity the non humans would kill all humans (as represented by the sco'tael bands),while mages wield powers that are too great to be controled and that only serve themselves,djikstra would be a good ruler sure but kiling a friend is out of character for geralt and he would never do it, i belive that radovid would eventually be topled anyways as any tyrant is however his rule is necessary to preserve the north and its people

Navid 313

I think the best choice is to let nilfgaard take over and then make sure you get the empress ciri ending. Under her wise and kind rule, nilfgaardian empire will flourish without the northern folk having to suffer

Mike of Rivia l

I hate Nilfgard, a lot. But, I hate even more Radovid, The Eternal Fire Church, and the Witch Hunters

abcdef ghijlkmn

I expected this to be a 10 second video intro and outro being 9 seconds and 1 second thats left over would just be "yes"

DragonRage61

Radovid Sucks Venom and Acid!

Johnny Downhill

when forced to choose between evils, id rather not choose at all

CYKA BLYAT95

In the end if you dont kill radovid temeria is "free" but it says that people would rather be enslaved than have this kind of "freedom", besides he tried to kill geralt just because he didnt like him like wtf and i would take niflgard slavery anytime over the "kill anyone with more than 2 braincells in the name of religion" atitude of radovid or killing ma man roche who saved my ass from prison in witcher 2

KaiDie KaiDie

I hate Phillipa Eilhart!

Thomas takes a toll for the dark

Hmm so it's either let fantasy Hitler die and get one of two endings that doesn't end in the genocide of innocents or let him live and let genocide happen..
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

renifer rr

Radovid is the Rightful ruler of the North!

Hornet Guy

This is more tough stuff from the writers

Dijkstra isn’t exactly a friend, but he’s not an enemy. OTOH, roche is a friend.

Dijkstra promises something better, though. While one could argue he’s just trying to be the Emhyr of the North and that it would be Redanian-dominated, he seeks to preserve the north’s superior culture to the Nilfgaardian south. Roche is willing to sell the north out in order to benefit Temeria.

In the end, I think it’s more consistent for Geralt to save Roche. Even though yes, a Witcher remains neutral, he also remains neutral politically. Geralt doesn’t actually care about Redania, Temeria, etc. But Roche has always done us solid, so we’d want to support him.

Dan

Avarti, a couple of months later: best ending is Ciri becoming Emperess which is contrary to his conclusion here

Jan

I disagree between Dijsktra and Nilfgaard. I surely believe that Ciri would end the slavery in Nilfgaard...

besides - I might be wrong, but I don't think that Nilfgaardians use that many slaves, especially those born in Nilfgaard's realms...they appear to use captives as slaves (judged by the captives digging holes and such in Velen)

Benashley Connell

What are all the best choices that make sense for Geralt in this game? All quests and side quests

Redbear77

I think this discussion is cool because I agree completely that dijkstra is the best ending, but I feel like nilfgaard is the most in character ending. Because one of Geralt's defining features is his loyalty to his friends and I mean Roche is definitely a good friend he fought beside you at Kaer Morhen and saved your life multiple times. Letting Roche die seems very out of character and I like to roleplay in roleplaying games so I chose nilfgaard. Now I know what you're going to say "Radovid is actually the most in character ending because Geralt hates politics(even though he is constantly involved in them)", and I agree somewhat but Geralt has been seen getting involved in politics for his friends/family/lovers, and Radovid is a threat to all of those. Radovid would have Yennefer/Triss/Probably Zoltan/a lot more people killed, and Geralt has gotten in to politics for less(slightly). That's why I think Nilfgaard is the most in character ending reply if you disagree.

Kamil Krupiński

This was the most difficult choice for me: not about killing Radovid, I hated his guts, but either to kill Dijkstra and let Emhyr rule the North or let let Dijkstra slaughter Roche and his people.

Sajed Abu Lileh

If I have to choose between two evils I'd rather not choose at all

martin sharrett

I'm not saying radovid shouldn't die. I always kill him. But what in the game actually indicates he is mentally unstable other than people who don't like him saying so?

reavenMAG

But he was such a nice kid in Witcher 1!

aiden

i always kill the king, the impasse i always find myself in however is whether Dijstkra's wise rule over the north is worth letting my boy Vernon Roche get butchered as part of the coup.

Daniel Mcleod

You show me a single Empire that wasn't built on a pile of corpses.

The_Fetus_run

come on who would let that asshole live anyway

Niklas Nordbäck

No one who played Witcher 2 will let Roche die considering all he did for Geralt the choice would have been far more interesting if they presented the problem as a philosophical dilemma rather than just save your friend or walk away especially since the epilogue says that the people is disappointed that not much changed under Djikstras rule.

Danijel Turina

I had 3 major goals in the game:
- kill Radovid, because most bad things I was seeing were due to him personally, or war in general
- get rid of Yen, because I'm incredibly not into bitches
- help Ciri survive and take over as the empress of Nilfgard
Dijkstra basically killed himself with his choices, and my choice consolidated most of the known world under Nilfgard, and if Toussand is an example of what it's like to be Nilfgard's vassal state, it's absolutely the best option available, especially if Ciri is in charge and rules reasonably and moderately.

Ssp ssp

How could u kill roche .
Very bad

Seeker Found

eilhart severely abused young radovid. it's in one the history books in game

Sam B

Disagree, in the words of my my boy Thaler: ‘The silver lilies shall bloom ‘neath the rays of the great sun’

Ben Alexander

So to be fair: a lot of people get killed by Nilfgaard as well, its just that Radovid kills different innocent people. Emyr kills traders and bankers and citizens who fought against him, Radovid kills witches and nonhumans. Take your pick.

Henry Braun

I honestly don’t think Roche is necessarily a “good man” he’s certainly good to Geralt but it’s at least implied, if not outright stated in Witcher 2, that he’s a borderline genocidal racist towards elves. Obviously the conflict with the scoiateal is complicated but Roche is a fanatic and commits war crimes like executing prisoners.

Angelcity1345

Nah, I'd still go with Nilfgard, especially if Ciri becomes empress. With temeria as vassal state along with Cintra seeing as Ciri is still the rightful heir to the throne there, not to mention being a Princess of Brugge, she can foster peace in the North and might be able to abolish slavery(although this is just speculation, the slavery part). And with Either Cerys or Hjalmar as king/Queen of Skilege , Ciri's relationship with the An Craites Along with being the Heiress to Inis Ard Skellig and Inis An Skellig, further peace with Skellige is much more possible.

Dijkstra's dream of ruling is a pipe dream. The only reason Novigrad hasn't been conquered was because of Radovid. And a lot of the Northern Nobilities will Never accept his rule seeing as he has no claims to any throne.

Gary The Stormtrooper

In my playthrough, I stayed uninvolved with the plotting and Radovid won the war. Sure that isn’t a very good ending but I think it suits Geralt for he wouldn’t get involved anyway

Commander Shepard

I wouldn't let Roche die, my man helped alongside Ves and her cleavage to fight against the Wild Hunt

Dave

If you have to do evil for the greater good, it isn't the greater good.

tomsbrown1

It’s crazy how in every video you make you are 100% right, how do you do it?

Josh Williams

Thing is, the North is a bunch of warring kingdoms. There isn't any unity between them, save for a few frayed alliances that are cut more often than not. Roche's deal with nilfgaard allows Temeria to retain its independence and governance. Djikstra, going against that and wanting an entirely free north, is literally in it for the power. To become King of it all, which means conquering it all after beating nilfgaard, bringing about more war, more chaos.

Mark Mascarenhas

I didn't even see the video...but i can still tell you...radovid must die.

Edda233

While Radovid was strategically brilliant, I don't believed he could ever have made a Northern Empire. He was paranoid and mentally unstable, King's like that have a short shelf life, no matter how good they are at war. In my opinion it is far better to let Radovid hold off Nillfgaard, and then have his fragile coalition fall apart after his inevitable assassination or overthrow. By then the Emperor will be dead and Nillfgaard either fractured itself or in no state to carry on highly involved invasions.

Radovid's pogroms are not good, but do we REALLY want the Lodge of Sorceresses back again under Phillipa? They started half this mess to begin with, and her designs are just as Machivelian as Radovid's.

VenomCold

i agree with some comments that the best choice as geralts character is ignoring the quest. however i have ocd and i CANNOT have a single failed quest and unfortunately there is no way to outright complete the quest without having to kill radovid and the ensuing choice

Surturs Schmiede

It pissed me of so much that despite killing radovid the whole of novigrad is still swarming with radovids soldier, witch hunters and the church of the eternal fire. I mean, come on, why couldnt they have at least explain that? It makes 0 sense.

Chris Bennett

I always kill him. He's a pretty detestable character

Alpaka

3:30 As a German Guy why reminds me this of Hitler??

Citywide 10

You think logically, I think morally, I'm not gonna let my bro Roche die

Yavuz Incekul

Recently finished my first play through. I was wondering why this quest didn't appear in my until I found out breaking Dikstra's leg cancels it. I couldn't resist lmao

joe nuts

Yes

ForYourViewingPleasure

Short answer yes.
Long answer yes.

Common Sense

evil is evil lesser or greater

Edda233

As a completonist, this quest infuriates me, as it's the one I'm convinced Geralt would actually ignore and just refuse to get involved with all together. I do love that CGPR put so much time and dedication into their quests, but for something of this magnitude story wise we really did need more options.

Sergio Lourenço

I have to disagree, the forced industrialization of the north is just as bad as slavery, either way the north is f*cked under Nilfgardian rule, that's the point

Pithata PEETAWAN

Loyalty. That's what makes Geralt amazing. fighting for the innocent, the downtrodden and his friends despite all odds.

Tim van der Leeuw

What's most disappointing about this quest, to me, is not that you have to kill either Roche or Dijkstra but that you will not see or feel any difference in the world regardless of your choices.
You only get a different card at end of the game.
But all the guards will still shout "Long live Kind Radovid!" long after he's dead. The purge of the mages still continues. Nothing changed, really.

(That is in general one of my major gripes with TW3: lack of real consequences to choices in important quests. Even if you get a bad ending where Ciri dies: what consequences does that have on the world? The only time I really felt consequences was after Anna Henrietta dying and the whole city being under a gloom, mist and sadness penetrating the streets).

G O D

I always kill Radovid and make Djikstra as a king of North.
I Just can't let Djikstra die, he's one of my favourite characters in the entire game. And he's a great ruler at the end.

But it was hard to See Thaler die.

Luís Matos

Witcher 3 players: have an opinion
Witcher book readers: NOOoOoOo!!! That's not what Gerald would do!!!

M N

In my opinion killing Dikstra (idk how to type his name in english) is the better choice because letting him leave continues the war and war is never a good choice because of innocent people dying on both sides no mather who wins

zolikoff

Very disappointed in this quest. For such an important element of the story it is far too short, simplistic and appears to be written with much less skill than most of the rest of the game. Killing Radovid should not be as simple as lying to him and making him walk to his death. Both Radovid and Dijkstra are victims of huge plot induced stupidity in this quest.

Yuri Nikolai Leonhard

Yes

Iangtang

I'm going the Dijkstra route on new game plus after having Witcher Ciri + Yen + Radovid ending. I think Witcher Ciri + Yen + Dijkstra are the most honest (to me) ending states I can get and I'll be whole then.

Pance Mancev

I still don't get it why people would support Emhyr and Nilfgaard or even Dijkstra himself...

Not only did the Nilfgaardians invaded the north, slaughtering thousands of people on their path of conquest and enslaving people to contribute to their war effort but they even used assassins and witches to kill and manipulate northern leaders and put their kingdoms in disarray.
And sniveling Dijkstra even tho a Redanian patriot is trying to backstab the only northern king who had the will and mind to fight the invaders on his own terms, albeit some of them questionable.

Many of the witches and non-humans Radovid burned were guilty of the crimes they were accused of. They aided the invaders in many ways, like the witches with their assassins and politics and the scoia'tael with their arrows. Many of them were not guilty and they were still burned. Consequence at to what Nilfgaard started in the first place (remember the whole Loc Muinne summit debacle).

By being a northern kingdoms supporter myself and by knowing what the Nilfgaardians did to the people they conquered, I would never allow myself to side with the invaders. And I figured Radovid is the king that the north needs.

Ricky Andreou

I definitely choose kill Radovid. He was a genocidal psycho. Nilfgard winning & Ciri as Empress I find to be the best outcome. She would do so much more good as Empress than the total waste of traipsing around the countryside killing drowners for the rest of her days.