Too bad Anna is way to swayed with her emotions. Makes me angry that she's ready to let her citizens be killed just because she wants to protect her sister. Also, the good ending is stupid because you get the feeling that with Dettlaff's death, her sins are just washed away.
Not really, she is still punished by being sent to jail,plus you chose to make her sentence the same as of any other citizen plotting to kill the duchess, What you actually do is help syanna see the error of her ways and make up to anna henrietta
But Regis suffers as a result. He disagrees with letting Syanna be put on house arrest. He wanted her to pay for what she did to Detlaff by judging by the courts rather than the duchess. That’s why he chose to not go to the ceremony with Geralt. He does not see any reason to celebrate his vampire brother’s death.
@@isaiasvalladares4210 Ofc he doesnt want detlaff to die and wishes he would have never attacked the city,but regis also says: " Myabe he is too dangerous to be left alive". If my brother was killed possibly thousands of people and then was killed, I would be devastated, both by his actions and by his death and i would still mourn him; but I would also be able to see how this was possibly a good thing. Plus i dont see why you would proritize regis over an entire city of people.Regis is arguably the best character in the blood and wine dlc, but and entire city is more important
Fr, in that ending, he was forced to kill his best friend and someone whom he owed his life to. And now he's facing the consequences of killing another of his species.
@AB-fr2ei that would be cool, and I thought because geralt got bit by the elder vampire he was to become a vampire himself, so he would be able to kill Dettlaff.
@@xvor_tex8577 there is no such thing as that in the witcher universe Vampires are just a species like another Otherwise a lot of witchers would become vampires when they fight vampires For the special weapon to perma kill higher vampires, they talk about that in gwent
@@AB-fr2ei when I completed it I was hoping I finish him as it wouldn't be permanent. In another twenty or fifty years Detlaff would be back and Regis can continue his work with him
I was willing to forgive Dettlaff until he conjured up and sicced his army of brutal vampires upon the innocent city and its people. That was well beyond forgivable.
Yep same. I would be totally fine even with him killing Syanna, she had it coming. But he slaughtered a whole city of innocent people due to the actions of one person, and that's when he becomes the true Beast of Beauclaire. At that point he needed to die.
@@mcmew3427 but you can also say as an argument to that that if Anna Henrietta would not have locked her sister up to 'protect' her even though she knew the threat it would not have happened. She literally LET people die. The people she is supposed to help Protect as the ruler. It's not like Dettlaff just did it without warning. He gave fair warning the actions of the people in regards to that warning is what lead to deaths of other people. You can't hold Dettlaff to the same standard as you would a human cause as mentioned in another comment he is a VAMPIRE humans are food to vampires so the fact that he even gave a warning gave that chance is better than what he really had to do. He could have just slaughtered everyone instantly.
@@mistytorres6047 you raise a valid point. Anna was just as complicit in this! However that didn't make it okay for Detlaff to slaughter her people over her own selfishness...but she indeed could have saved them. And this is what makes Witcher 3 so great. No one in this story was truly innocent. They all had blood on their hands, directly or indirectly. There is no truly happy ending! Even in the "happy" version, Syanna basically gets away with four murders and Regis gets the short end of the stick and has to leave...not completely satisfying.
@@mistytorres6047 Anna Henrietta is not perfect but you can't blame her for protecting her sister and not knowing that Dettlaf will go so far as destroying the city if she doesnt hand Syanna to him.
@@Romano2018 she suffered a lot and can found redemption, she can pay for her crimes and have a better life, Dettlaff is going to kill someone when he needs to wait to get his shoes cleaned
@@MiguelSanchezDelVillar she did suffered but so did a lot of people through the game only syanna became a sociopath. Maybe the black sun curse is real. I don't see her asking for forgiveness for her crimes anywhere in the game.
@@Romano2018 the black sun prophecy is most probably a lie, i still believe that Sienna can be redeemed but Dettlaff literally could have go to the Dutchess, reveal himself as a vampire and threatened to kill them all if thry didnt bring him Sienna to pay for what she did to him, instead he decided to start a genocide, he kills first and ask later, that is far worse than what Sienna did
@@Romano2018 1:26 I don't subscribe to the idea that the darkest ending is always the best but in this case it is, it feels like the story actually came to a close, and it feels like you're an actual human that fucked up in a very human way. Use ribbon Kill Detlaff, don't give Syanna any leniency at her trial, get both sisters killed. Having everyone that suffered and caused suffering the most now able to do neither is extremely poetic. The Kingdom got the full lesson Syanna was trying to teach it but she and Detlaff both paid for what they did.
Syanna was acting in evil manners from her youth. She made a boy believe his brother will kill him, thus making him kill his brother before that were to happen. Absolutely cruel.
I agree completely. I never understood how so many Witcher fans could just consider Syanna as a child no more mischievous than Anna Henrietta after hearing Anna bring the story of Cedric and his brother up. And if Anna Henrietta is just as cruel and malicious to be compared to such behaviour, that just makes both sisters callous b****es, only difference is Anna is in the seat of power in Toussaint. Even the 'Curse of the Black Sun' excuse doesn't hold up in this period in her life, as her father also gifted her a gem whilst just believing she was simply an unruly child, before her real personality started to show as she aged.
I mean he is badly wounded and geralt could have just chopped him up further igni him into a hot and sour soup and kept him in a jar for the rest of his existence.
@@frettchen1498 He had to be stopped either way. Regis points out that he can't really be reasoned with due to his rage. Syanna doesn't deserve much sympathy though, not as much as Detlaff anyway.
@@65firered Yeah. But I think you can argue that letting dettlaff go also is a way of stopping him. I think that dettlaff himself knows exactly what kind of impact humans can have in him, as he said he will stay away from them now.
@@frettchen1498 I find that to be wishful thinking. But I think the innocents that have been killed should be avenged, of course, in turn Syanna should be either killed by Detlaff or imprisoned. From a gameplay standpoint, you also get to have one of the best if not the best boss fight in the series.
"Witchers were made to kill monsters. It doesn't matter who posted the notice, the coin has to be right, that's all. Witchers don't debate. Their conscience plays no part. They just get on with it then pick up the coin pouch tossed at their feet and set off on their way. Folk don't expect witchers to save them from themselves."
I was on Dettlaff's side right up until he set a horde of vampires on Beauclair. The murders he committed were beyond his control, but condemning an entire city to violent death because of one woman is too far.
Regis, man. Nobody thinks about Regis. He will be hunted down for all eternity. And he has to kill his own brother. I couldn't do that to him, after reading the books. Detlaff, whatever. I assume Regis goes with him to ensure he won't rampage again. But you should think about the consequences killing Detlaff has on Regis. If you consider him a friend, you can't do that to him.
Same bro. He died just to save Yennefer, and I won't let him become an outcast even among his kind. I mean if he does, he won't be able to go home right :( I believe Detlaff won't go rampage anymore he said it himself. In fact, before all this mess, he even made friends with humans, De La Croix for example.
@@roro8783 Murder is murder no matter the motivation. Self mutilation doesn't change that. And you can shift blame around and say that Syanna was only like she was because of what happened to her. She's still a murderer too, but she only wanted revenge on the people who raped and beat her and the sister she felt abandoned her. Where they become very different is when Detlaff decides to attack a entire city of innocents behind his hurt feelings.
Deatlaff's character note even says after you have killed him that he had nothing to live for in this world in the end, but my opinion is that he didn't even have to permanently die, Geralt could have just completly destroyed his body with igni or smth and leave him for 50 or more years to regenerate until syanna and the duchess were dead, even better in that time he could meditate on his decizions that he made.
It wasn't up to Geralt if he regenerates or not. Regis struck the final blow killing him...When he could of helped him regenerate instead. Obviously Regis himself saw that Dettlaff could never redeem or improve himself or at least wasn't going to risk it.
@@65firered Geralt can't kill OR regenerate OR imprison Dettlaff...What we saw beating him in a fight is the BEST a Witcher could ever do and in fact is a miracle that he could even pull it off. You NEED Regis to kill him and other Vampires in order to pull off anything beyond that. Also nope even Yen wouldn't be able to pull it off.
@@flamesofchaos13 Exactly. One of the strongest if not the strongest sorcerer in the world turned Regis into a smear and that took nearly everything he had and Detlaff was able to bring Regis back.
Originally in my first playthrough before I read the books, I killed Dettlaff and reconciled Syanna and Henrietta's relationship. However, I then deiced I wasnt happy with that. I now feel like Geralt wouldnt care what Henrietta wants and would help Regis to help Dettlaff, as Regis helps Geralt no matter what, regardless of the morals. Syanna is the manipulator and admits she used Dettlaff's feelings in order to murder people for her own revenge. You can say Dettlaff should face justice for the actual act of the murders however, you have to consider that Dettlaff is a higher vampire, normal human 'justice' doesnt particularly apply. You cant exactly put him on trial and send him to prison for his crimes, he's capable of transforming into mist. You cant exactly put him on trial and execute him, he will regenerate. You either have to accept he only killed because he was manipulated and let him go or refuse to allow him to go free and ultimately kill him for good and also accept that this will make Regis an outcast among other vampires. After reading the books and understanding more about Geralts character and how he reacts, I felt like Geralt would let him go and would ultimately agree to Regis' arguments that Dettlaff is capable of change. The reasons being; Geralt himself admits he would kill anyone that would get in his way when it concerns Yenn and Ciri or even some of his other close friends, regardless of laws. He would understand Dettlaff was killing, not out of bloodlust or just because he could, he was doing it because the women he loved had manipulated him into believing her life had been threatened and he must do these things to save her. We also have to take into consideration that Detlaff is an emotionally different being to Regis, as Regis suggests Detlaff doesn't understand human feeling and relationships yet, as vampire he is an inexperienced being in comparison to Regis, he also has more impulsive emotions. Yes Detlaff kills Syanna for her betrayal but he is true to his word that once she meets him and she pays for toying with his emotions, all vampires leave the city be and Detlaff commits no further murders, because fundamentally he is not a 'dangerous' monster. In addition the contract given to Geralt, as Regis points out didnt actually state he was to kill Detlaff, it was to find the murderer. Arguably it is Syanna who is the murderer, she was the mastermind, she pulled the strings, Detlaff was just the tool. It is only when Henrietta refuses to accept her sister is heavily involved that she demands Geralt kill 'the beast' and does everything in her power to ignore the fact Syanna is the culprit. Herietta is a petulant brat and Geralt wouldnt give a dam what she wanted. Even when presented with the evidence that Syanna was the mastermind and Herietta was to be the final target, she refuses to believe it and does not even thank Geralt for the fact that even if Syanna dies, he saved her skin from being the final victim and actually fulfills the original contract in finding the murderer. Of course Henrietta atypical to her character, bends the facts to suit herself, puts her hands over her ears and goes la la la if Geralt doesnt execute Detlaff. The reason of course Henritta wants this so badly, is so she can pull the wool over the eyes of her subjects, exonerate her sister of wrongdoing and use Detlaff as the scapegoat.
Exellent summary on the topic! But I have two things to add. First about Henrietta. I would say that we must consider the fact that she, and almost every other citizen of Toussaint, knows almost nothing about vampires. And the tiny bit that they know is almost exclusivly taken up with myths, that have nothing to do with reality (In the lore, that is ^^). It is not untill Geralt talks to her, that she starts to get a glimpse of them. I don't think it is enough. She solely sees Detlaff as some dangerous creature(Let's not forget that Damien himself doesn't believe him until he is almost killed). She has no idea what she is involved into. And then the massive attack of vampires starts...I think many would think like her in that situation and believe that there is no way that her sister (that young women that was cast out and forgotten) could have meddled with such powers. And let us also not forget how easy it is to simply blame vampires for the bad things that happened. Not only are they nonhuman, they are also monsters! For the second point: People have been discussing who the villain in B&W is ever since the game came out. But maybe there is none? And this is the point? All three have had good reasons for the things they did and none can truly justify what they did. Nothing is ever black and white. And this franchise is coloured in gray. Excuse spelling mistakes. Writing on the phone is a pain.
You want some weed because you and I can be great friends. My ending was the best ending for the mains except Regis. The Duchess got a statue, Syanna got her own crypt and Dettlaff got his revenge.
I mean the reason he’s called the butcher is because he had to kill someone who was threatening a town to get revenge on some one so I think he would kill detlaf
Henrietta is the monarch. As such, she expects that you fulfill her orders and the contract you were hired to fulfill. Anything else would simply undermine her authority. It has nothing to do with being a petulant brat and everything with being the top of the heap in Toussaint. Whatever happens in Toussaint, happens under her authority. Your not doing what she hired you to do is a direct threat to that authority. Just like every one who died died because she was unable to guarantee their safety. So not bringing her the head of the "Beast" on a twofold level is a challenge to her status as Duchess. No monarch on the planet would let that slip. Add to that that while Syanna may have triggered Detlaff's rampage, the fact that he did engage in it was neither her intent nor her doing. He is solely and exclusively responsible for that. If he can't control himself, he's precisely the kind of creature you hire a Witcher for.
@@ohauss Good point about her authority being challenged. "...being the top of the heap in Toussaint.", that fits her precisly when considering the books (not that the games are against it, but they don't quite show it as clearly). About that last statement...what is a Witchers job? It used to be to make way for the human and human-like races, to secure their world against the monsters - or rather against anything that could be called so. I mention this because Geralt does not really fit into this scheme. There are many instances, in both the books and the games, where he takes the neutral path (~Skellige's most wanted. Just to give a good example). And there is another thing to consider: Almost all witchers would flee from Detlaff. Geralt mainly stays because of Regis (And what he told him about Detlaff and that he could be reasoned with. Which is true if we think of the meeting at Oriannas!) Lastly, most blame for the massacer in Beauclair is Detlaffs. But I don't think it is fair to solely blame him. The situation is not so simple and many people would have reacted somwhat similar...well sort of and on a totally different scalen. But again, he is not human either.
When Dettlaff attacked the city, I thought at first only soldiers were killed, but when I saw other civilians and those children slaughtered at the orphanage... Damn, it was death for Detllaff no matter the ending. I'm really surprised that nobody talks about those children being butchered. This was a crime that must be punished with no remorse or second thoughts. The only thing that bothers me about his death is that Geralt couldn't kill him, instead, Regis did it, and took all the burden of being hunted by other vampires. But I believe he will manage to escape any trouble. Good luck, Regis! And, farewell...
Geralt should have find a way to stop the body from regenerating The whole "only other HV can kill a HV for good" is just bullshit so that the player can feel bad for regis finishing detlaff
@@harsh_n208by that logic the teacher who refuse Hitler in art school is the evil one . We cannot control others actions only ours , it was detlaff that sent the vampires to the city and no other.
I probably sound psychotic for saying this, but my favorite ending is where everyone dies (well, the sisters at least, slightly less so Detlaff). All three are awful and/or dangerous people - Cyanna and Detlaff’s defects are obvious enough, while the Duchess is an exceptionally incompetent ruler, perhaps well-meaning but also criminally negligent, partially responsible for the chain of events that cause “Blood and Wine.” Such an ending also fits the with general theming of the Witcher series - lacking a clear lesser evil, the only result is that of a no-win scenario for all parties involved.
@@justagoose7741 I don't think she deserved death, but at the same time, Her favoring and blind trust of her sister wasn't gonna save her. She died in my ending and while I felt bad, at the same time, she wasn't acknowledging the threat that was her sister
@Pato Donald well right, they all did wrong at one point or another, that's the beauty of TW, most of its characters are morally gray, but what I don't understand and what I asked was how is the duchess in any way responsible for the whole conflict in B&W and why would she deserve to die. Even though she had an emotional bias toward her sister, that doesn't mean she's either responsible or even an incompetent ruler, it just means that she had more faith in her sister redeeming herself than in a random petty thief. And of course Syanna is probably to blame for most of these events, but we get to understand why she became that way and how in reality it wasn't really her fault (she's still responsible for her actions, of course). And then we have Dettlaf who, well, the video says it all. If you can save 2 out of 3 of these characters, allow8ng them to redeem themselves (since it's possible for Syanna to have genuine redemption, supposedly), I dont understand why anyone would prefer the ending where all of them died.
Well, by killing Anna you destablized Toussaint, which is the place where Geralt will live for the rest of his life in the Yen/Lone ending.(Triss ending has Geralt live in Kovir as well). Even from a self-beneficial persepective, it's better to keep her alive. Saying Anna incompetent is a stretch, basically she is facing a Gary Sue character out of no where(Power level wise Detlaff is exactly that, he has the means to destroy a city using an army that doesn't question and has no set backs to him what so ever). Also there is no lesser evil missing, not when there is a terrorist who threatens to do genocidal stuff and actually did it.
One think I haven't seen mentioned is Geralt's plea to the Unseen Elder: that Dettlaf poses a threat to the vampire's agenda. Dettlaf indirectly threatened the safety of the gateway to the vampire's home dimension due to his own comparatively selfish impulses, and as a result must be punished in some capacity, even if we find him sympathetic (which he is; he's a fantastic antagonist).
Considering Detlaff endangered and entire city filled with innocent people for his personnel revenge was a big red flag for me Detlaff is too dangerous to be left alive He is a Powerful Vampire with little to no disregard for Human life he is ready to potentially kill hundreds just for revenge The sole purpose of Witchers is to hunt down monsters Labelling higher vampires as Monsters might be a bit controversial But Detlaff proves himself to be one by the deeds he commit Its not the appearence but rather the deeds that earn you the title of a Monster
Regis makes the point that killing hundreds of innocents who have nothing to do with his rage makes him a monster, sympathetic one but a monster non the less.
This is exactly what I was thinking as I hunted him too. Although my opinion of vampires was still mainstream before the DLC, by the end I'd accepted them as people. But this man still made himself into a monster. And thus my contract had to be upheld.
I agree. I was sympathetic to Dettlaff because he was threatened into murdering people and ultimately he was played. But the minute he unleashes his horde of vampires on Beauclair, I went from feeling bad for him to just saying 'fuck Dettlafff, he dies'. The problem is higher vampires are nigh unstoppable. If Dettlaff wants Syanna, he could go straight to the Duchess and put a knife to her throat. He doesn't have to endanger people who aren't involved in this. It's like he suddenly forgot his power level. And I think choosing whether to fight Dettlaff to protect the Duchess or to help him get Syanna to end all this would have been a harder choice than 'give a mass murderer killing innocents what he wants or not' because it's one life for one life, and in protecting Syanna from justice, Anna Henrietta is arguably guilty as well. It feels like maybe they wanted the big action set piece of Beauclair under attack, and it was a good action set piece, but it mangled Dettlaff's character.
@@meko98743 Agreed. I honestly didnt expect him to make good on that, just slip in and kidnap the Duchess or something. The straight up vampire incursion made me go "Ok, even if she deserves to get drained, this dude just became a threat on par with the Wild Hunt. "
There is a mistake in regards to the ending. The ending where Detlaff is summoned by the Elder can't lead to the sisters reconciling, since you have to have read some diary entries about their childhood in order to convince Syanna not to kill her sister.
arent you forgetting the ribbon ending? if you help Syanna in the land of fables in one gwent related sidequest you get this red ribbon, this ribbon has some impact on the ending...
@@hopelessedgelord never use the Monster deck, it's weak shit when used against Frost. There was once an accumulated 50+ number but I dropped a Frost and they went straight to 13, passed and I dropped Geralt, an immediate 15 and immune to elements.
@@hopelessedgelord Agreed. Best spy cards, draws on victory, and can save a free Clear weather card from the deck for something more useful. What the Skellige deck needed were spy cards and it'd be good. Svanrige and Lugos are good choices since they are traitors. Maybe Donar too since he's old.
Detlaff really seemed like a cool guy when you encounter him at the party. An ending where you empathise with him seemed perfectly obtainable and the best one by far at that point. But when he starts the masacre, it all turned around, even Raegis that said he won't kill without reason and that he is not evil and such kind of completely changed his mind. I wish there was a path were the masacre doesn't happen and Detlaff keeps the nice atitude you encounter at the party, but probably CDPR made the story this way so that your choice has even more impact and meaning. And it leads to an epic showdown.
I've yet to experience for myself all endings even though I know what happens but to me the the turning and decisive point to not let syanna get killed was when she explained her reasoning for blackmailing Dettlaff. She wanted revenge on those "soldiers with chivalric virtues". They abused/raped/beat her. If you ever talked to lady who has experienced that in real life, you know how sensitive this is. Not a excuse to plot all this killing and drama, sure, but ultimately she is way easier to convince of her wrongdoings unlike Dettlaff. Then Dettlaff sends swarms of vampires, he couldn't care less. The only bad outcome for the reconciliation ending is that Regis is forced to leave, that chap deserved better, especially if you search his lair only to find a note: "I believe Dettlaff is going to die. I am sad". Regis knows damn well only a higher vampire can kill a higher vampire which means he deep down knows he will be forced to kill his friend Dettlaff, the only one who cared for him and saved his life. This DLC is a pure masterpiece.
Very good point. Both of them were victims in their own right and had a right to be angry, but Syanna, while being manipulative to people, only sought to take the lives of those who abused her. Dettlaff was willing to send vampires to snack on orphans to get back at one woman.
Syanna wasn't raped, she was mocked and beat but never sexually assaulted, she claims that she thought that the bandits she encountered would rape and kill her but they didn't they took her in
This game is just a masterpiece! Just look at all the comments - all with different but legitimate opinions about what's right and wrong here! Imho: Dettlaff crossed the line by killing innocent people in town.. Yeah, Syanna abused his love and killed (disgusting) knights and mercenaries - rebuke needed - and the duchess being to stubborn to save her people - rebuke needed - .. But in the end the townspeople didn't do Dettlaff any wrong and they suffered the most under his vicious attack. Having a crush on Regis I feel most sorry for him - feeling forced to kill his friend for the greater good, being send into exil and living in a world where everyone hates him as a person (vampires) or for his true nature as a vampire (humans). Btw, I wonder how people would judge over Syanna if she were a male character.. There are many male characters with a sad background story doing evil and I often find people finding more excuses or being more lenient with it (e.g. Dettlaff). Syanna had her reason to take revenge on those abusive knights and I won't believe that anyone feels pity for them. Furthermore we know very little about her relationship with Dettlaff - were they happy, were her feelings true in the beginning, was Dettlaff impulsive in a scaring or violently way in their relationship, too? Just something to think about..
I think the reason people care for Detlaff more would be because of Regis(not because he is a male). Regis was a companion to Geralt in the Novels. BOOK SPOILER!!! And he "died" fighting to save Ciri. Considering that, the player feels much more sympathy for Detlaff than Syana because of Geralt's bond with Regis. This is what swayed me to get the Detlaf lives ending. I felt as though I could not have my good friend who died fighting for me and ciri be an outcast for his eternity.
I don’t believe the male sympathy thing is affecting any decision making but I can only speak for myself. If it’s really a thing I feel it’s really fucked up mentality
this comment is so old but i have to butt in and say that the reason i dislike syanna is definitely not due to gender, its because i dont feel like she actually changes at the end of the game -- even with the good ending. she still feels cunning, like shes going to backstab you if you do her wrong and the only reason she decides not to straight up murder her sister (who had little to do with her being banished) is because geralt convinces her to let go off it. if theres anything i wish baw had done better it would be that. you spend so much time with syanna in the fairytale world and the only choice that matter in there is whether you get a ribbon or not, along with getting her backstory i guess. she spends most of it being full on woe me and she never reflects on her actions, never second-guesses if she could have gone about it differently. she has every right to be pissed about her situation but like... youre still in charge of your actions, regardless of what fuels them. this goes for detlaff as well. there have been plenty of female characters out there who get to seek revenge against their abusers and theyre mainly cheered on or their revenge is considered a positive plot point for their character, but alas they are the ones doing the revenge part. a little bit of doubt, some reflecting or empathy from her side really wouldnt have hurt to sell her redemption at the end. she has the right to be angry but she does not have the right to use someone else to seek revenge, thats low.
If Syanna was a male they'd be praising him for the cool and epic revenge on four child abusers probably lol imo manipulation was her only crime, the rest was no issue
Oh yeah, because people were so forgiving of whoreson... Spare me the gender card, plenty of male characters were hated. She is disliked because of her lack of redeeming qualities. M.o.r.o.n.
What I love about the DLC’s is that the “bad endings” are still awesome. The trip to the elder vampire and that ending fight with Detlaff was simply amazing
This is why I LOVE Witcher 3. The "Good Ending" wasn't always good as it seems. It perfectly mimics the real life, the complexity of our reality and human interaction despite being a fantasy.
I like how people care so much about Regis they are willing to let mass murder slide as a minor offense just so he isn't fucked over. That's the mark of a great character. (And also the fact that the world is so unbelievably fucked that mass murder seems normal in the context of the series lol.)
@@thespanishinquisition4078 The second point isn't very correct because the world is fucked, but a real mass murderer in a real world never gets much empathy from anyone...
@@thespanishinquisition4078 it's Anna who let the mass murder happen Syanna said it's a serious ultimatum yet Anna didn't take it seriously She even wanted to have a war with the vampires
@Real Majd that’s why you don’t simp! This is a major lesson for gamers . Don’t simp. Be like Regis . Be rational. Be kind but don’t blindly simp for a woman or man
Dettlaff never reached out to humanity, he never bothered or cared for humans until one reached out to him. A woman he trusted and loved forced him to kill for her own selfish gain. Dettlaff is emotionally unstable because he is broken. If he couldn't trust someone who he trusted and loved so dearly then could he trust anyone? He has no will to live anymore because he is broken and no longer trusting of anyone even Regis.
Which makes him even more dangerous given no one in the world could appeal to him to stop killing. It also makes him more empathetic and pitiful too though so if someone spared him that's understandable but still ultimately misguided.
Well that's the point of the whole quest, and many others in TW3. You get to learn why people are the way they are but it does not necessarily justify their actions. Dettlaf might not be to blame for what he became but he is responsible for what he's done, and that's why he should still die imo.
Does Detlaff even understand what love means? I'd highly doubt it. The whole lifespan of that woman is but a moment to him. He makes no effort whatsoever to understand her people. It takes regis to nudge him towards that direction, and it takes near-incessant nudging for that. Given how little control he has of himself, there's no telling he wouldn't have slipped into a rage against all of humanity for no other reason than being mortal had she died of old age. Detlaff is by far the older one. He could and should have known better. At the end of the day, his attitude is little different from the early days of vampires we've seen in Tesham Mutna. Humans are cattle and pets to him. Some of them he likes to pet, but not enough to balk at the very notion of killing them.
@@ohauss Well, Regis does say that Detlaff is somewhat naive, emotional and idealistic. Like a teen almost. Considering how he's portrayed in that light throughout the DLC I do believe he experienced, if not love, some serious attachment to Syanna. Even a pet is capable of becoming "family" of sorts. If she were to die from old age then it would be expected, it would be akin to raging at an ocean wave for sweeping your sand castle if Detlaff were to do something similar to the ending of Blood and Wine.
But Regis promised he'll be protecting Syanna... She got the ribbon, fought Dettlaff, figured out Anna Henrietta would be the last target, and got the "happy ending". But still, I am disappointed that there's no way that I could save both Dettlaff and Syanna...
@@crafterisland9949 detlaff is immortal and had a lifetime to learn how not to be an emo simp over a girl. Regis being an immortal has a lifetime to get over this also. Detlaff has no self control with that much power unlike the unseen elder who is more powerful.
I killed him and felt kinda bad for Regis having to be Anathema and leave society forever, as well as Syanna murdering the Duchess. I didn't really think it was worth it.
Syanna can be imprisoned,punished or something, but Dettlaff will destroy another city when someone hurts his feelings and you can't stop him. Death is only way to stop Dettlaff while Syanna can be stopped without being killed.
Syanna manipulated Dettlaff into committing all of his actions. Dettlaff after all is just an inexperienced individual concerning human society, and while that makes him especially dangerous, it is with a very high probability only momentarily. Regis (Who possibly knows him better than anyone else) states that he believes Dettlaff will be able to adapt to human emotions and culture and thus pose much less of a threat than Syanna would, if she is left alive. She manipulates everyone around her to achieve what she wants and can be very ruthless in not only that regard. Even if she proceeds to forgive Anna Henrietta (Who is pretty much objectively a terrible ruler, due to her incapability of accepting and comprehending the more than obvious danger that her own sister poses to the Duchy), there is no guarantee that she wouldn’t just mov on like that, especially due to her not even getting punished for her actions. It is very unlikely that she will simply stop abusing others in order to achieve her will. In my opinion that serves a much greater threat to a society than even thousands of deaths could. However, that being said it said, her manipulations do not in any way justify Dettlaff basically mass murdering people due to his feelings behing hurt. Even so I still believe that letting Dettlaff kill Syanna and proceeding to let him leave is the lesser evil in a situation like that, since it is much more likely for him to change to the better than it is for Syanna.
Actually you need to talk to Syanna and be nice to her in Land of thousand Fables to get her not to kill her sister. Finding the 5th culprit isn't enough. For me the option where you kill him and both sisters reconcile is the "best" ending initially but after I found out on youtube that Anrietta sends Geralt to jail even if he killed Detlaff if Syanna dies then I thought to myself that letting all 3 die is the best ending. Syanna even if her vengeance is justified was still irresponsible and caused the tragedy and she was cruel to blackmail Detalff. Henrietta is also cruel and nepotising and a horribel ruler for willing to have her whole country destroyed in exchange for protecting her murderous sister. Detlaff is the one I smypathize with the most, his death is necessary but sad as he only wanted a peaceful life but killing so many people in rage is just too much to let it slide. The worst thing is that Regis gets ostracized by his kind. If there was an ending where the sisters die but Detalff lives i would take it.
I remember playing this and fully agreeing if there was an ending where only Detlaff lived I would take that almost every time lmao I loved his character and felt so bad for him but then again the boss fight was fucking amazing so it was worth it in the end
you have to talk to syanna so she reveals her past, THEN you have to find the 5th victim and talk to syanna, asking her to forgive anna henrietta because she had no part in syanna's banishment and couldn't do anything about it. If you ask syanna to move on without knowing her past from the land of a thousand fable, they both die, if you find about her past and don't tell her to forgive her sister or just don't talk to her at all, they both die.
Regis is right that Syanna is a git in this situation. If Detlaff had just killed her I would've understood that. Anna Henrietta really just put her sisters safety above the lives of her entire nation. If she had just let Syanna go to Dettlaff _like she wanted to_ this might've been avoided. Syanna didn't want anyone uninvolved in her vengeance to come to harm, but she apparently disregarded the fire she was playing with. Dettlaff is right to feel betrayed, but saying "You made me kill people I have no quarrel with, so I'm going to kill thousands more until you give the person I do have a quarrel with." is clearly insane. Dracula in netflix's castlevania has a very similar situation going on and he claims in his last moments he hadn't been sane since his wife died.
Not only Dettlaff is a danger, but every vampire in general. Regis is an exception of course, but he's a part of few honorable vampires, most of them are just cruel (Orianna, Dettlaff, Unseen, all lower vampires, ecc). What a shame we cannot kill them with a silver sword (higher vampires).
i just let everyone die because I doubt that syanna would get any punishment for what she did and the duchess was a pain in the ass and she let the vampires attack because she wanted to save her sister and ignored geralts warnings thinking they could kill the vampires
@@jperro845 When she was young, she knew Cedric de Coulbert's brother had a crush on Anarietta, and thus she convinced Cedric that she could see the future in her dreams and one of them showed that he would die at his brother's hands. With this, Cedric stole his father's sword and killed his brother, hurting both families. She conspired against her sister, Toussaint's ruler, trying to kill her. She was treacherous, envious and power-hungry. Her actions, direct or indirect, has been caused hundreds of victims.
Wow... Finished my first B&W playthrough today, got Detlaf killed, and siblings reunited. No remorse. As you said. Detlaf is emotionally unstable, and being a high vampire he is too powerful to be left roaming around. However I disagree that Detlaf deserves more empatjy than Syanna, because over the course of B&W Detlaf is getting worse and worse, where Syanna stars getting her redemption arc. Yes, she will be sentenced for plotting assasinations, but the main reason behind her revenge is gone. She is no longer a castaway, and has her sisters love back. Syanna from this point can only get onward into better life. Detlaf doesn't seem to have any kind of willpower or desire to get better.
Agreed. In the game, despite her horrible deeds, Syanna actually works to make herself better after the right interactions. That in itself is a huge sign of worthiness, while Detlav descends so far that even the other Vampires dont wanna touch him. I would not mark him as a villain, but he threw away his chance. And that debt is ours to collect.
Syanna plans to killed the dutchess all the way to the very end, changes her mind at last minute. That's not true redemption Detlaff always showed traits of goodness and he's a better friend to Regis than the sisters are to each other
@@zgramadan Yet she still chose not to. Detlaf could have not sent an army of vampires and just played the low life cost espionage game, but he chose to effectively declare war on humans. Actions speak louder than words. I could plan to kill my brother all day, then we meet and I falter. The follow through with an action speaks far louder than the creation of the plot.
@@zgramadan I never said Syanna's redemption story ends within blood and wine. It only starts. The thing is, that she commited half of her life to executing it, and all she needed to leave it is just somebody to understand what she feels like. To be shown that there is still some empathy in this world (little, but still something).
@@MrMaro1995 true, redemption and lesser evils are the Witcher themes. Syanna and Olgierd vs Detlaff and Guanter is there good or lesser evil. Love the Witcher 5 years later!
I fully supported Dettlaff and was going to spare him up until he attacked the entire city for one person. That single move made me lose all my respect for him
An unfortunate situation, but either way Dettlaff had to be stopped. He might have been manipulated, but his unstable emotions... Sometimes, a creature's nature is so destructive that they must be put down. Let us not forget the diplomatic lesson back in Skellige's Most Wanted: "We kill dangerous monsters, so the thinking ones can live in peace."
@@Vlad_-_-_ He'd be on the run - escaping his kind for the rest of his life. His own race will not stop hunting him until he is DEAD. He will live the life of a fugitive for hundreds of years. That is the fate Geralt decides for him by killing Dettlaff - which is precisely the reason I can never bring myself to do so.
@@celticbabs3105 Regis himself said he would be by Geralt's side anyways, so he was ready to accept this. Plus he doesn't seem to agitated to me when he told Geralt his plans to go to Nilfgaard. Also the fact that he chose to stay and drink some more also suggests he was not that disturbed. So I guess it's the end of the world for Regis.
Celtic Babs Regis himself says they go by "out of sight, out of mind." As long as he didnt show his face to any other vampires, he'd be fine. They wouldn't hunt him. He'd still be an outcast though unfortunately so it's still a difficult choice.
@@celticbabs3105 Shouldnt Unseen Elder give him protection? Why isnt Unseen Elder also viable to the rule since in his route he straight up calls Dettlaff to a clear ambush meant to kill him?
If you get the ribbon from the match girl for Syanna, she'll survive detlaff's attack by being transported back to the fable land. You'll have to fight him and he'll claim that you tricked him.
4-th ending: you bring Syanna with enchanted ribbon (you can buy it or win it in land of 1000 fables from girl drug-dealer) then Detlaff tries to kill her, but she gets teleported back to fairy tail and you have to fight vampire
A tough choice but I chose to reconciliation of the sisters. Dettlaff ,although blackmailed, is an over emotional killing machine who would wipe of towns on a whim.
I considered it a crime of passion. Albeit an over the top one by including the citizens of Beauclair in his transgression. It was Detlaff's form of blackmail to respond to what Syanna did to him. The outcome for Regis is what tipped the scales for me however. If my Geralt's punishment is to be a persona non grata in Beauclair then I would rather him pay that price instead of Regis.
Who kills 1000 of innocents? A monster from whom you don't expect shit, but still was kind enough to offer a warning? Or the ruler of the whole land, whose job is literally to protect her people and land, and that having the option to save her people both before and after the events took place, decides to think only of herself?
@@tashvinjonathan6882 Look at the big picture. Detlaff is a non human entity, and not subject of human laws or morals. Try to consider him as a natural disaster. Ana Hanrietta had on her hands the option to avoid the killings and protect her people, and she willingly chose not to. Who is the real killer here?
If dettlaf had send some vampires to attack just the palace to kill her guards, and threaten the duchess forcing her to give up Syanna, I would had been ok with that... but doing a full scale assoult on the entire city, killing hundreds of innocents was too much...
Remember that he is a vampire though, human standards cannot be compared to that of vampires. If you were detlaff you probably would have done the same thing due to the way vampires naturally are. Its still a very difficult choice though and iam left indecisive
It's not actually a random attack out of heartbreak, Dettlaff wasn't a drunk guy at a bar swinging around a broken bottle at anyone who passes because his girlfriend dumped him. He made an ultimatum to force a betrayer to meet him. When his ultimatum was ignored he followed through on it to show he was serious. The goal was never to butcher the entire city, it was to force them to hand her over. It did work in at least one ending. Dettlaff was always a vampire of his word and called off the attack once he killed her. And to answer the question. Who would follow through on an ultimatum to hurt people, even people caught in the crossfire, to get to a criminal/traitor/personal enemy... A very large part of the Witcher world population. The difference between them and Dettlaff is simply he has the means to follow through on his threats at a greater scale than most. A small gang of thugs might threaten a family to get beaten up if they don't hand over their relative who owes them money. Kings can threaten war if a criminal that fled to a foreign nation doesn't get handed over to them. The only difference is the scale.
Hmm. I'm not sure what a villain is if it's not someone like Dettlaff. Being sympathetic makes him a well written villain, but it doesn't change the fundamental evil of his actions. It's the actions that make the villain. Regarding Syanna, remember, she didn't directly cause the death of any innocent person. The victims of the Beast of Beauclair were all her abusers, tormentors, and though I'm grateful they didn't go into detail, presumably rapists as well. They all had it coming. Frankly, I'm far more sympathetic to her than anyone else in that mess. But I think what makes the story so well done is how it deconstructs power structures. To Dettlaff, and even to Duchess Annarietta, the victims of the vampire attack weren't all that important. Annarietta put her pride before their lives, ignoring Geralt's advice to negotiate with Dettlaff. Why? Because she was a duchess, and saw even a higher vampire as below her. I think Dettlaff felt the same way. He felt used, not just by another person, but by a mortal. And even players often fault Syanna's lies as the real reason behind Dettlaff's massacre. But this is the "She made me do it" excuse that abusers always fall back on. His violence is his responsibility. He could have just killed her on the spot, or gone to the castle himself to find her. He WANTED a massacre. The game reinforces the theme of Annarietta's power over commoners in many subplots, from her flagrant disregard of decorum when it suited her to her total lack of empathy for her royal vintner when she finds out he's been selling her private wine. This is reflected in the way vampires treat humans, as seen in Geralt and Regis's exploration of Tesha Mutna. Even Regis's kindly dismissal of Dettlaff's dark side tells of his vampiric sense of superiority over humans. Remember, no matter how much Regis protests Dettlaff's fundamental goodness, his friend proves him wrong in the end. Which should call into question his judgement from the beginning. Of course Regis thinks Dettlaff a decent fellow deep down. He's never been on the receiving end of the vampire's wrath. And as a vampire, he doesn't think Dettlaff's murder spree nearly as upsetting as Geralt would. It's only human lives. Compare this with the people of Beauclair, who had no part in this whole affair, but watched it all unfold helplessly, until they became its ultimate victims. And if you think about it, Syanna's life was largely the same. She grew up in the seat of power, but watched helplessly as her life and her future were torn away because of some prophecy she had no control over. She was exiled, abused, and left with nothing. In a way, she's the least powerful person in this story. Can you blame her for doing whatever it took to regain some semblance of control over her life? I don't. What's so incredible about this story, as the final DLC to the series, which itself was a sequel to the books, is that it bookends the entire Geralt tales with two stories about the Curse of the Black Sun. In the very first Witcher short story, Geralt tries to stay out of the situation, so as to avoid having to choose between two evils. But in trying to stand above, he ends up empowering a sorcerer determined to persecute and murder all children who happen to be born under an eclipse. One might call this the greater evil, not the lesser. That sorcerer saw to it that Princess Renfri was exiled, and hunted by assassins her entire life. To survive, she became a ruthless killer herself, determined to avenge herself on him. And he held this as proof that he was right all along. But was he? In that story, Geralt makes the wrong choice, and it haunts him for the rest of his days. This final Witcher tale gives him the opportunity to have that choice over again. Or really, it gives the player that choice, to decide for yourself if Syanna's choices make her evil, or if she deserves, this one time, the compassion she'd been denied since birth. It's up to you.
Syanna was playing with fire by manipulating dettlaff, i blame her fully for dettlaff going out of control. If someone forced the Unseen elder (for instance) out of his cave into a city, I'd hold them fully responsible for whatever shit happens because of that.
@@xignum Or that Annarietta was fully responsible for not negotiating immediately with Dettlaff. There's a lot of blame to go around. The only difference with Syanna is that she fits people's profile of the "sexually manipulative woman." And some folks take that very personally, like it's being done specifically to them.
@@rottensquid True but not a single one of the problems would happen if syanna didn't bring dettlaff into the city. Syanna had a bad past true, but it was she herself that decided to come back for vengeance bringing a vampire into the whole mess when she could just live peacefully
I think Detlaff needed more screen time, though I do agree. Detlaff is too unstable to trust that the situation wouldn't happen all over again elsewhere. Syanna, meanwhile, is only human. I just wanted more of him breaking down. Like, letters you can find, addressed to Regis, or a journal, something that showed his fraying state.
One thing that many people forget about Detlaff: He is not a human. Yet they judge him after human standards, which is nonsense. That does not mean that I want to justify things he has done, but one should never forget it.
Agree with this, you simply can't judge a species by the standards of another, regardless of how similiar they are. Vampires especially deems loyalty and kinship very highly, Syanna's treason against him is probably enough for the other vampires to think 'alright, go fucking kill her now'. For the human point of view, Syanna was the one who brought him into this whole goddamn mess, from Regis we know Dettlaff has never been this unstable. The whole thing is because of syanna manipulating him.
That is absolutely ridiculous. Detlaff is not human, he's a monster. To not judge him by human standards is to abdicate away all responsibility for his actions. Well, he's not human so killing the entire city of Beauclair is ok... That sounds great until it's your blood he's draining from your neck. No, the only way you can judge someone is by human standards, for you are human and it's all you know, all you have. Indeed to be outside of human standards is to be a monster.
@@rogue109 Let me correct that: Detlaff is not a human, he's a vampire. Do you really mean to tell me that if someone is of a somewhat intelligent species, yet not human, (not only talking about vampires here) is automatically branded a monster? That is how you get race progroms. If I may get so drastic to say this: "...for you are human and it's all you know, all you have..." If a species can't even manage to attempt understanding another species, then it is not an intelligent species. Note: "That does not mean that I want to justify things he has done, but one should never forget it."
@@rogue109 Syanna herself committed crimes against dettlaff's vampiric values. your rigid way of thinking will ensure that humans and monsters never understand each other. I'm not saying he doesn't have any faults, but all his bad deeds are directly because of syanna
I beat the DLC for the very first time today and didn’t even know you could spare him. The final fight with him is one of the best in the game though imo
Agreed. I knew I could spare him, but his crimes and my contract to eliminate him meant there was only one real option. Unfortunate, for sure, but ultimately he decided his fate. We simply enacted it.
"Detlaff is indefferent to human lives and has no problem killing when he believes it's necessary" Detlaff: literally cuts of his own hand after being forced to slay a man he knew personally
I don't think Dettlaff lacks morals but I do think those morals aren't exactly like ours. To me it seems he has a code of paying back every good or ill you do to him. If you give him an apple he will kill a dangerous monster to avenge his death to name a positive example. I think one of the reasons he took Syanna's actions so harshly wasn't only because she betrayed him but also because he had broken his own code in order to save her by killing a man who was nice to him and became his friend. He could have easily killed Syanna the moment they discovered she was the mastermind and considering his temper I'm very surprised he didn't. I think he gave the 3 day ultimatum to give himself time to process everything. Since he now had no faith in her, he threatened her to make sure she showed up. When she didn't... well, Dettlaff is a vampire of his word. Had she shown up I 100% believe he wouldn't have killed anyone other than Syanna. Once he's killed her he calls of his vampire army. As such, when he says he will go far away from men I also believe him. He doesn't need blood to live and wasn't a big drinker to begin with so I don't think it will be difficult for him. As once burned, I doubt he'll fall in love and be used like this again. Anna Henrietta basically sacrifices her city for her sister by criminally underestimating Dettlaff despite Geralt's advice. She brought him in because he knows more about monsters but refuses to listen to him about what they can do. I can understand why. Love for her missing sister and guilt for her own part in Syanna's tragic backstory. I also feel that Syanna's "imprisonment" in the "happy" end is a cushy white collar prison at worst. She'll probably have a cell that most hotels would be jealous of, fine food, entertainment and so on. She would only lack the freedom to move around as she wishes. As for Syanna, I can sympathise with her reasons for murder. I can't excuse her for bringing in Dettlaff though. She knew exactly what he was, she knew what he could do and she knew he didn't think like humans do. She basically took a nuclear weapon to kill ants and then she's surprised something went wrong and more people than she expected died. And why exactly? Given that she's a good fighter and runs a gang I think she's perfectly able to assassinate those men without Dettlaff. What she can't do is make it as mystical or as easy as he does. So she brings him in for convenience basically. Whatever she said afterward, her conversation in the fairy tale realm implied she was fine with "everything burning" if it got her what she wanted. They're all guilty. Except for Rergis. I don't think any ending is wrong.
i fully agree that Detlaff should die for the simple reason that Geralt is a witcher, and witcher kills monster, though calling higher vampires monsters may be wrong, Detlaff proved that he was a monster when he attacked the innocent people of Beauclair
I fought detlaff in my first run (because I had given syanna the ribbon without knowing what it does) but had I been given the choice, I 100% would have sided with detlaff. Syanna failed to strike sympathy in me because I feel that she knew this was a definite possibility, and did it anyway. Syanna using Detlaff would be like strapping 5 people to an armed atomic weapon, and hoping they die of radiation poisoning. There are SO MANY WAYS that could go wrong, and if any one of them occurs, it's genocide. Sure, technically Detlaff isn't an atomic weapon, he's sentient, after all. Yet Syanna spent years with him. She knew he was impulsive, rash and he would feel this betrayal immensely (Detlaff feels like he's on the spectrum ngl). She knew exactly what would happen if she was caught, she knew that Detlaff was no assasin she could dispose of once she was done (to the point where I wonder what the plan was if Geralt hadn't shown up) The real question is comparing their crimes here. Syanna black mailed detlaff into killing 4 people, Blackmailed and emotionally manipulated a monster she couldn't control and unleashed him on Beauclair, attempted (or suceeded) to kill her sister and a queen, and Detlaff was blackmailed into killing 4 people, And whilst in a rage unleashed an army on Beauclair. Seems to me Syanna's crimes are far more morally reprehensible. Now the argument that we've rid the world of someone as dangerous as Detlaff is a compelling one, but Syanna is arguably just as, if not more dangerous. She's one assasination attempt from being duchess of a major country. You could argue that if she lives she probably wouldn't hurt anyone anymore, but the same argument can be made for Detlaff if you let him leave. Final argument, and hear me out now.... Detlaff is SO MUCH COOLER than Syanna. Like, black trenchcoat vampire vs annoying arrogant princess. Hand me the vampire any day of the week.
Syanna's crimes are nowhere as bad as his. Using one innocent is bad, but *massacring* hundreds of innocents are far worse, no matter how you slice it. "more dangerous" Literally senseless. She has no supernatural powers, she has no one left to take vengeance on (the 4 abusers are buried) and will live only a few more decades. Incelaff is completely uncontrollable, can use other vampires, is presumably very angry at humans and will live forever. "but he's le cool" Yeah that sums up like 90% of arguments in his favour, I know.. Does not matter what he does is 100 times worse, he's le cool sad vampire and teens with unbalanced hormones love cool sad vampires.
Idk it wasn’t so hard for me, he literally summoned a vampire army to attack a city and wound and injure hundreds if not thousands of innocents. I know Syanna was pretty bad, but Dettlaff didn’t need to bring that kinda threat to the city. I try not to kill as a punishment in games as I disagree with it, I would never kill anyone even if they did something awful, however Dettlaff was as you put was a ‘danger to humanity’ that is too say he has no remorse and will kill again, I only killed Dettlaff, because if I hadn’t he would have killed more people. I wouldn’t say he deserves it, more that he *has* too because he poses a threat to literally thousands of innocent people if he is not eliminated
It boils down to this; Who walks away? It's a wide scale survival scenario where one walking away leads to many deaths on one or the other's side. It isnt so much justice as ending the conflict at that point.
@@Silmerano I get detailed cause there's a LOT of folks who are going with the "But higher vampires aren't monsters in Witcher" without considering Detlaff made himself into a monster, separate from others of his kind. However you are 100% correct that it is that simple.
Is it even a dilemma? Detlaff, for living for many more centuries than a normal humor, has retained his childlike behavior. Which is destructive to say the least.
I spared Syanna and killed Detlaff on my first playthrough but on the next... when I looked at it a bit further... I let Detlaff go. Here's why. ~ Syanna is a truly evil woman. She felt she was justified in manipulating Detlaff, a Higher Vampire, into killing people who had wronged her but felt profound regret at doing so. She expresses no remorse for the deeds she has done through proxy, and shows no alarm at the fact Detlaff (who she knew was emotionally fragile) snapped and set a horde of Vampires on Beauclair. She's completely evil. ~ Anna Henrietta is an insanely incompetent ruler and let her own emotions sway her. She will learn a very serious lesson from not recognising the danger a Higher Vampire poses, despite both Geralt and Regis warning her. If word ever got out that she let her people be slaughtered because she refused to listen to council from a famed Witcher on the very real threat Beauclair was facing she would without a doubt be overthrown by the populace. Her late husband Raymund was also hated by the people, she seems to have not learned from this episode. ~ If Anna Henrietta is not overthrown by her own people then Toussaint, which is still a vassal state of Nilfgaard, would be put under direct rule by Emhyr/Cirilla. They absolutely would not stand for such utter incomptence and arrogance leading to the slaughter of imperial subjects. ~ Depending on the choices made by Geralt he could be in good standing with Emhyr and Cirilla (if she assumes the throne). Anna Henrietta throwing Geralt, whose council she shunned, in prison because he did what she couldn't and stopped the assault on Beauclair, could irk Emhyr and absolutely would enrage Cirilla. Again, her position is untenable. Rather than risk a full-scale revolution it is likely that Nilfgaard would depose Anna Henrietta for gross negligence. ~ Detlaff sic'ing a horde of Vampires on the city was going way too far but Geralt doesn't spare him because he felt sorry for him (he might have, hard to tell), he spares him because he knows what it would do to Regis. Regis once stood directly between Yennefer and Vilgefortz to save her from the mad sorcerer; paying dearly. Frankly, Geralt owes Regis big time and it's time he returned the favor by not condeming him to eternity as a pariah. ~ Regis would stay with Detlaff for quite some time, to console him but above all make sure he doesn't fly off the handle that badly again. I let Detlaff go.
He isn’t a bad man, but when he found out who Rhenna really was, he died in Dun Tynne. Regis didn’t kill him; he was helping a corpse escape purgatory.
gonçalo Baia Syanna’s light burned with fury, Dettlaff’s simply snuffed out. Syanna was alive because of her rage, whereas Dettlaff’s rage was the byproduct of his demise.
@@goncalobaia1574 I can't agree to you saying that Syanna died at (this) one point. Time and other things made her into the person she became. I would far rather say that she died ever since the curse of the black sun was cast above her. Weither that is an actual curse or not does not matter at all.
Since you're doing Blood and Wine content, you should do a video on the quest "The Warble of a Smitten Knight," should you transfer the curse from Viviennne to Guillaume or perform the Egg Ritual. I chose the Egg Ritual because I just did not like Guillaume as a character and he got but kicked in the very first boss from Blood and Wine
I would enjoy that too! Every time I do that quest I don't know what to think of Guillaume... I mean, he doesn't really care if Vivienne likes him back, he seems to view her only as a price. He doesn't even know her. But, I don't think he means anything ill by it, he's raised in a culture that says men has to brave and ready to kill monsters and even sacrifice themselves and they will get the girl. Maybe he's just naive boy with a huge crush, and ultimately it's great what he's willing to do for her. But then again... Not respecting her wishes or her privacy... I just keep flip flopping on this issue 😄 Someone help me!
I’ll go with where syanna, anna,and dettlaff dies because although its a bad ending , it’s also a true justice ending, anna dies for letting her people die just to protect her sister and refusing to see the truth ,syanna dies for her crimes and plot to kill the Dutchess , and Dettlaff dies for committing a genocide on the innocent people of the city. Like Willis said “Harsh punishments, but deserved.” That’s why I like this game, no one is truly innocent, neither royalty nor Monster, No authority is above justice
It is indeed the best ending. And not to mention that you actually don't kill neither of them from your own free will. Dettlaff dies because he attacked you, Anna because of being too damn trusty to her sister, and Syanna of course for killing the monarch
I think you got Dettlaff wrong, especially when you say that "Dettlaff is a danger to humanity". Dettlaff doesn't wanna have anything to do with humanity, in fact he wants to be separate from it. He was dragged into human affairs by a human, but that will likely never happen again (unless another Syanna comes along). He wants to mind his own business and not be bothered by humans. When he says he wants to stay away from people (which he does), you can trust him, whereas you can't really trust Syanna, you never know what she might be planning. She's the real danger. We don''t need to worry about Dettlaff as he leaves at the end because he's not gonna try anything.
I can understand why people would want to spare detlaff, Anna and Syanna aren't exactly the most likable people and Syanna played with Detlaff emotions. But he had to die after he let his army attack the city and killed innocent people :/ Like i would of spared him still if he would have just attacked the castle and killed everyone in there but to unleash your army on innocent lives and after seeing those kids killed at the orphanage i knew he had to die.
I killed detlaff by going to the elder, talked to the boy, learned the final victim, talked to syanna but they still kill each other in the end... so...
I really don't get all the sympathy Detlaff gets, it's only Regis telling me all the time how good he is. But every time you meet him before that he fails to get any sympathy from me. Then he attacks the city -> he's too dangerous, so kill him. Syanna also must be brought to justice, I didn't care how. It seems to me that most players want to save Detlaff because of Regis, I thought about that too, but there were too many lines crossed. Also Regis being shunned in Touisant ist not as bad as many people make it out to be, he says himself that it's not a problem when he's "out of sight, out of mind". So that's the good ending for me, everyone being brought to justice.
Some may argue that killing him is mercy. Detlaff as well as his fellow vampires were forced to be in an unfamilar world with equally unfamiliar residents and beings overall. He felt like a stranger unless he was in the company of his bretheren. Hence, he shunned the company of humans as a result. Should you decide to kill Detlaff, he will look at his old friend one last time as his body begins to regenerate from his wounds. However, he does not look at him with anger but with sadness and acceptance. The facf of the matter is... Detlaff wanted to die. He didnt want to be in an unfamilar world any longer, watching everyone he had even a remotely stable connection to perish or decieve him. Its as if all of his experiences left him in disappointment if not temporary happiness. No longer having anything left to live for after the Betrayal of his former lover, death would be his salvation. Hence, killing detlaff is only the right choice.
I agree with you, not only killing innocent people that got to me, but when Geralt went to the Orphanage, all the children but one survived. That did it for me, hated that Geralt did'nt kill the vampire who was feasting on the orphans.
It wasn't just that Syanna was mischievous. She was also one of those born under 'The Curse of the Black Sun'. That was a major factor in why she was treated like she was when she was young. Just like Renfri/Shrike in the short story "The Lesser Evil".
I don't see much of a dilemma. For me the answer was obvious. Syanna made it clear that none of the people she had killed were innocent, and they were all corrupt knights. Detlaff on the other hand raised an army of vampires to prey on the innocent because of his wrath. He is the villain, not Syanna.
I wish there was a way to save dettlaff but since he started a massacre in beauclair, there was no way to justify his innocence. He was just a tragic victim of betrayal but it turned him truly into a monster. And the real monster Syanna stopped being a monster the moment she realized that she wasnt alone and forgotten all the time. They were both Victims and Murderers by Circumstance and the only lesson is that Vengeance leads to suffering. Dettlaff deserved redemption from his suffering so killing him was the only way to redeem him from the eternal pain.
If I am not mistaken there were more ending you did not mention elders path , plus when i played this story for first time I could not believe that Witcher 3 had so mush good stories like this you could combine both Bethesda and ubisoft games and yet they don't come close to what CD project red achieve .
@Pato Donald a friend of mine spoiled me that oriana was a vampire I was shocked and pissid at same time who new when they were sitting on table that there were 3 vampire and the Queen thought it's was immature of Gerald to bring vampire to dinner if she only knew her so called friend was also one of them.
I didn't willingly kill Dettlaff, but I did accept it as my "canon" playthrough. I got the ribbon and it saved Syanna from her death. It also fulfilled Regis' wish of trying to talk with Dettlaff by bringing Syanna to him and trying to keep her safe. I don't want to deny Regis his wish of saving Dettlaff, but this way I don't have to let a mass murderer go and force Regis into a moral dilemma and subsequent guilt he might experience. When Dettlaff was going rampant because he thought he was set up there was no doubt that Regis had to fight and didn't have as much as an option to choose sides in the matter. Granted he WOULD have sided with Geralt if he had a choice (as proven in that he actually does when given the choice). I understand Dettlaff's rage, but he caused misery and sorrow in his wake. Even if it was his own personal trait of herd and love, it doesn't excuse what he did. It's like saying it's okay to kill because it is simply your nature to fight. However once more I am glad my accidentially coming across the ribbon forced our hand to kill Dettlaff and save Regis from the choice. He DID choose to kill Dettlaff for good, but he didn't instigate the fight to begin with. Allows Regis some peace of mind in the ages to come.
I killed Dettlaff twice (once with both sisters dying, the other as they live) because he's the world's most dangerous SIMP. His 'love' for Syanna caused thousands of innocent deaths just to get back with Syanna or get revenge. PS. He's acting like a child that fell in love with a woman but she dupes him. So he rages on and kills half of Toussaint just to get what he wants.
he also starts a war with humanity, one he doesn't actually plan to fight. he forces other vampires to go to war against their will. putting the portal to their homeland at risk. dooming his own race then leaves them to die.
Aregsh Yumul, he´s definitely not a Simp (Syanna mentions how sex with him is like), but his Whiteknighting, is really bad, if it wasnt for Geralt´s investigation, he would save Syanna not realize she´s Rhena and kill the wrong person, labelled as Blackmailer by Syanna, Geralt even says it later that had it not been for Syanna´s personal grudge to get the Toussaint jewel, she would´ve gotten away with it.
The first time, I killed Detlaff and saved Anna and Syanna. I found that ending to be entirely unsatisfying, considering just what the two ladies had done/allowed, the amount of blood that had been shed because of their decisions. So, I replayed that mission... knowing what happens if you don't reconcile the two which I didn't. I won't say it brought me joy to see them die, because it didn't, but it felt more fitting for atmosphere and themes that the Witcher 3 had been going for so far. There needed to be some drastic consequences to finish it all of. I didn't like that Geralt brought the flowers. I wanted there to be an option where both of them are told that what happened was due to their doing, but oh well. After that, in my mind, Geralt left Toussaint and would never return again. The place is just.. yikes!
When Detlaff attacked the city he crossed a line. And I don't believe he wanted to live anyway. Syanna went through some fucked up shit and I don't blame her for wanting revenge or find her irredeemable. I prefer the Ribbon ending with a dead Detlaff and Syanna forgiving her sister.
Actually, he wanted to live because when you choose to let him go there is a character note that says that he appreciated what Geralt did. Also, why would he want to fight when you choose to fight him if he did not want to live.
With the first ending you can also save Syanna by acquiring the ribbon from the girl who sells flint stone in the land of a thousand fables. You will be forced to fight Dettlaff in that case
Bro, you missed one option to fight Dettlaff, in the Land of Fables you can win the red ribbon of the little girl who is dealing fistech there, if you give the ribbon to Syanna, when Dettlaff attacks her, ribbon protects here and transports her back to the Land of Fables :) after this, you dont have choice to let him go, because he attacks you right away
For me, Blood and Wine doesn't have any good endings- in all of them someone either has to die who I wouldn't kill or duchess will be mad at Gerald. Syanna should die and there is no ending where Syanna dies and the duchess is happy. Dettlaff should die only because he promised not to kill Syanna and he only wanted to talk- then he kills Syanna (unless you get the red ribbon). Gerald bent over backward to deal with Dettlaff non violently, plus Dettlaff says himself he doesn't want to kill- but in the end, his emotions get better of him and he needs to die.
yes its a shitstorm and the best thin gerald can do is try to disove the situation while avoiding the shit smearing on him, and in this side the duches and siter happy vampire is death is the best for gerald
In my opinion the good ending is also the morally best one. A lot of people misinterpret B&W as some sort of blame game, whereby everyone can play favorite by shifting the blame of one person's actions entirely onto another. You could certainly blame Syanna for bringing Dettlaff into this, but it was his choice and his choice alone to attack an entire city in retaliation. If one was to accuse her of all the results of his actions, one should also coherently blame all of Syanna's actions onto her parents and the knights, and blame theirs on someone else until you shift the blame 10 generations back, and as we know that is not very productive nor leads nowhere. Rather, the story is about a seemingly endless cycle of rage, revenge, hatred and spite which keeps sucking people in, and these people in turn from victims become perpetrators of other crimes. Both characters are meant to mirror one another. Both tragic antagonists, both made to suffer and both developed (at first, rightfully) a sense of rage and revenge, which they both then pushed too far, essentially becoming the monster they were made out to be. We know that Syanna was ostracized since day 1, blamed for everything, stripped of her birthright and vanished for a prank she did not even committ, abused, beaten, starved and left to die as a child by four knights meant to protect her. Yet we know she also chose to exploit her lover's feelings to get revenge on those four knights. We know Dettlaff has been used to kill four men, one of which he was at least in amicable terms with, by the one he loved the most, and that he has done good deeds in the past. Yet we also know he chooses to attack an entire city and massacre innocents over his spite with one woman. In short, as one bad action does not cancel a good one, and an injury you did does not cancel one you received , both characters are, until the final showdown, deserving of both a punishment and another chance. The reason why I think the good ending is also the best ending, i.e. why I kill Detlaff and spare Syanna, is not just because I think Syanna endured more evil and did far less of her own, although that is a factor, but rather because of the main difference between the two: Namely, Syanna shows she is able to break free of this cycle and redeem herself. She chooses to take her responsabilities and to willfully put her life on the line to meet Dettlaff at Tesham Mutna to convince him to spare innocents in the city. If one does as little as talking to her heart to heart and trying to understand her plight, she can be convinced to forgive her sister (as if she was never completely hellbent on killing her and just needed a push in the right direction) and chooses to undergo trial for her crimes (that is, both what she had to endure and both what she did will be taken into account). The game makes it pretty clear she is still salvageable. Dettlaff does no such thing. He agrees to meet Syanna at Tesham Mutna, but once she is there, he attempts to cut her down almost immediately, without even attempting to hear her out. I was not completely expecting him to forgive her, but I was expecting him to LISTEN at the very least, because that is what the meeting was supposed to be about. What did he even need 3 days and an attack on the city and all the bloodshed that came with it, if he could have just done the same at Dun Tynne castle and be done with it, without innocents getting involved? Not only that, but when the ribbon teleports Syanna away, he lashes out so violently that he attacks directly Geralt who had nothing to do with it, and will attack Regis himself if he tries to defend Geralt. He is so far gone that he can not climb out of this cycle and only blood can sate him at this point, and even if we let him go, he will get away completely scott-free and will not even have to face the courtesy of a mock trial. And that is why I think the good ending is the morally best ending (also for Geralt who gets to make peace with the ghosts of his past) and I was quite happy to see Syanna and Annarietta alive and well in the anniversary video which I think is the closest thing to a canon ending the team will ever give us.
This comment I can’t help but agree with the most because originally I sided with dettlaff but after careful consideration and contemplating I decided to save Syana instead because of her upbringing and the fact she reminded me of Renfri
I tried to save everyone, the only reason I got the ribbon was because of gwent. I didn’t want to kill detlaff, or syanna. Syanna only wanted to kill 5 people. Detlaff wanted to kill no one, but when he failed to kill syanna he attacked Regis for no reason? I like the ending that I got, but I just feel bad for Regis
Syanna is a sociopath of no fault of her own and Detlaff an extremely unstable mind who blindly trusted an anonymous entity, killed a bunch of people (even a friend) over very dubious claims on bad evidence and then went ahead and executed a brain control genocide when he felt betrayed by his ex. I think the save both sisters kill Detlaff ending was pretty much optimal. I don't believe in retributive justice and Syanna showed signs of possibly being rehabilitated, while Detlaff was way too unstable and extremely powerful to be let roaming free after what he's done.
Can you really "justify murder of innocent men, women, and children (the whole orphanage) killed by vampires summon by Dettlaff, who was used by his ex lover to do her evil bidding?? He couldn't handle the truth, so he slaughters a city?...who would have thunk? Is this his reaction whenever something doesn't go his way. Yup, I nipped it in the bud....no more vampires. No more Dettlaff.
He was a disgrace to higher vampires. Imagine one of the most powerful and intelligent creatures to exist being toyed with by some spoiled brat. Detlaffs stupidity is what makes him dangerous
I got the ending where both sisters died because I warned the bodyguard and the duchess and they both ignored me. Honestly serves the Duchess right I didn't even feel bad. Especially how her whole city was coming undone and she put one person over her own people that rely on her to make the choices to protect them. Smh.
The "canon" Blood and Wine ending is probably the most unambiguous happy ending in the game. Of course Detlaff had to die, look at what he did to Beauclair
![[TF2] The Russian Bear Trap](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YFNSwz2_rOA/mqdefault.jpg)
Too bad Anna is way to swayed with her emotions. Makes me angry that she's ready to let her citizens be killed just because she wants to protect her sister. Also, the good ending is stupid because you get the feeling that with Dettlaff's death, her sins are just washed away.
Not really, she is still punished by being sent to jail,plus you chose to make her sentence the same as of any other citizen plotting to kill the duchess, What you actually do is help syanna see the error of her ways and make up to anna henrietta
But Regis suffers as a result. He disagrees with letting Syanna be put on house arrest. He wanted her to pay for what she did to Detlaff by judging by the courts rather than the duchess. That’s why he chose to not go to the ceremony with Geralt. He does not see any reason to celebrate his vampire brother’s death.
@@isaiasvalladares4210 Ofc he doesnt want detlaff to die and wishes he would have never attacked the city,but regis also says: " Myabe he is too dangerous to be left alive". If my brother was killed possibly thousands of people and then was killed, I would be devastated, both by his actions and by his death and i would still mourn him; but I would also be able to see how this was possibly a good thing. Plus i dont see why you would proritize regis over an entire city of people.Regis is arguably the best character in the blood and wine dlc, but and entire city is more important
@@georgegriniatsos4462 fuck all those humans vampires are better. Regis is better than any human in the witcherverse
I didn’t feel bad for killing dettlaf he is mad and can’t control himself killing him is logical
just finished blood and wine and tbh, just felt sorry for Regis, lovely bloke
I wish they would give us a special weapon to finish Detlaff by ourselves instead of letting Regis do the dirty work
Fr, in that ending, he was forced to kill his best friend and someone whom he owed his life to. And now he's facing the consequences of killing another of his species.
@AB-fr2ei that would be cool, and I thought because geralt got bit by the elder vampire he was to become a vampire himself, so he would be able to kill Dettlaff.
@@xvor_tex8577 there is no such thing as that in the witcher universe
Vampires are just a species like another
Otherwise a lot of witchers would become vampires when they fight vampires
For the special weapon to perma kill higher vampires, they talk about that in gwent
@@AB-fr2ei when I completed it I was hoping I finish him as it wouldn't be permanent. In another twenty or fifty years Detlaff would be back and Regis can continue his work with him
I was willing to forgive Dettlaff until he conjured up and sicced his army of brutal vampires upon the innocent city and its people. That was well beyond forgivable.
Yep same. I would be totally fine even with him killing Syanna, she had it coming.
But he slaughtered a whole city of innocent people due to the actions of one person, and that's when he becomes the true Beast of Beauclaire. At that point he needed to die.
My thoughts exactly!
@@mcmew3427 but you can also say as an argument to that that if Anna Henrietta would not have locked her sister up to 'protect' her even though she knew the threat it would not have happened. She literally LET people die. The people she is supposed to help Protect as the ruler. It's not like Dettlaff just did it without warning. He gave fair warning the actions of the people in regards to that warning is what lead to deaths of other people. You can't hold Dettlaff to the same standard as you would a human cause as mentioned in another comment he is a VAMPIRE humans are food to vampires so the fact that he even gave a warning gave that chance is better than what he really had to do. He could have just slaughtered everyone instantly.
@@mistytorres6047 you raise a valid point. Anna was just as complicit in this! However that didn't make it okay for Detlaff to slaughter her people over her own selfishness...but she indeed could have saved them.
And this is what makes Witcher 3 so great. No one in this story was truly innocent. They all had blood on their hands, directly or indirectly. There is no truly happy ending! Even in the "happy" version, Syanna basically gets away with four murders and Regis gets the short end of the stick and has to leave...not completely satisfying.
@@mistytorres6047 Anna Henrietta is not perfect but you can't blame her for protecting her sister and not knowing that Dettlaf will go so far as destroying the city if she doesnt hand Syanna to him.
He doesn't kill Syanna brutally, that's a very swift kill; brutally is what Menge does to mages and non-humans in Novigrad.
I understand Dettlaff, but Regis is right, he is too dangerous to be let alone with his casual genocide
So is syanna. I think both dead is a fair ending even though is a dark ending
@@Romano2018 she suffered a lot and can found redemption, she can pay for her crimes and have a better life, Dettlaff is going to kill someone when he needs to wait to get his shoes cleaned
@@MiguelSanchezDelVillar she did suffered but so did a lot of people through the game only syanna became a sociopath. Maybe the black sun curse is real. I don't see her asking for forgiveness for her crimes anywhere in the game.
@@Romano2018 the black sun prophecy is most probably a lie, i still believe that Sienna can be redeemed but Dettlaff literally could have go to the Dutchess, reveal himself as a vampire and threatened to kill them all if thry didnt bring him Sienna to pay for what she did to him, instead he decided to start a genocide, he kills first and ask later, that is far worse than what Sienna did
@@Romano2018 1:26 I don't subscribe to the idea that the darkest ending is always the best but in this case it is, it feels like the story actually came to a close, and it feels like you're an actual human that fucked up in a very human way. Use ribbon Kill Detlaff, don't give Syanna any leniency at her trial, get both sisters killed. Having everyone that suffered and caused suffering the most now able to do neither is extremely poetic. The Kingdom got the full lesson Syanna was trying to teach it but she and Detlaff both paid for what they did.
Syanna was acting in evil manners from her youth. She made a boy believe his brother will kill him, thus making him kill his brother before that were to happen. Absolutely cruel.
I agree completely. I never understood how so many Witcher fans could just consider Syanna as a child no more mischievous than Anna Henrietta after hearing Anna bring the story of Cedric and his brother up. And if Anna Henrietta is just as cruel and malicious to be compared to such behaviour, that just makes both sisters callous b****es, only difference is Anna is in the seat of power in Toussaint. Even the 'Curse of the Black Sun' excuse doesn't hold up in this period in her life, as her father also gifted her a gem whilst just believing she was simply an unruly child, before her real personality started to show as she aged.
I can't agree to the "kill Detlaff" ending because you don't kill him, Regis does.
That was understood from the very beginning that were it to happen, it would be that way
I mean he is badly wounded and geralt could have just chopped him up further igni him into a hot and sour soup and kept him in a jar for the rest of his existence.
@@yazi7790 multiple jars preferably made out of silver
@@yazi7790this
He does mention a way to finish them for good if i remember well
@@AB-fr2ei That's another higher vampire (Regis) consuming all of his blood.
I let dettlaff live, because there is a note in regis lair, showing his thoughts. The last one is "I belive dettlaff is going to die. I am sad."
I sympathize with Detlaff but killing hundreds of innocent people who have nothing to do with his revenge makes him a major threat.
@@65firered To be fair, he warned them and if I had the choice, I would have given him syanna no regrets within a day.
@@frettchen1498 He had to be stopped either way. Regis points out that he can't really be reasoned with due to his rage. Syanna doesn't deserve much sympathy though, not as much as Detlaff anyway.
@@65firered Yeah. But I think you can argue that letting dettlaff go also is a way of stopping him. I think that dettlaff himself knows exactly what kind of impact humans can have in him, as he said he will stay away from them now.
@@frettchen1498 I find that to be wishful thinking. But I think the innocents that have been killed should be avenged, of course, in turn Syanna should be either killed by Detlaff or imprisoned. From a gameplay standpoint, you also get to have one of the best if not the best boss fight in the series.
"Witchers were made to kill monsters. It doesn't matter who posted the notice, the coin has to be right, that's all. Witchers don't debate. Their conscience plays no part. They just get on with it then pick up the coin pouch tossed at their feet and set off on their way. Folk don't expect witchers to save them from themselves."
Toss a coin to your Witcher, oooooh valley of plenty....
I was on Dettlaff's side right up until he set a horde of vampires on Beauclair. The murders he committed were beyond his control, but condemning an entire city to violent death because of one woman is too far.
Regis, man. Nobody thinks about Regis. He will be hunted down for all eternity. And he has to kill his own brother. I couldn't do that to him, after reading the books. Detlaff, whatever. I assume Regis goes with him to ensure he won't rampage again. But you should think about the consequences killing Detlaff has on Regis. If you consider him a friend, you can't do that to him.
He didn't stop his rampage this time and wouldn't stop it next time. And there would definitely be a next time.
Same bro. He died just to save Yennefer, and I won't let him become an outcast even among his kind. I mean if he does, he won't be able to go home right :(
I believe Detlaff won't go rampage anymore he said it himself. In fact, before all this mess, he even made friends with humans, De La Croix for example.
@@roro8783 Yes he made friends with DLC he also murdered him.
@@Silmerano Because Syanna made him to. He didn't want to kill DLC, he even cut his hand as sign of remorse.
@@roro8783 Murder is murder no matter the motivation. Self mutilation doesn't change that. And you can shift blame around and say that Syanna was only like she was because of what happened to her. She's still a murderer too, but she only wanted revenge on the people who raped and beat her and the sister she felt abandoned her. Where they become very different is when Detlaff decides to attack a entire city of innocents behind his hurt feelings.
Deatlaff's character note even says after you have killed him that he had nothing to live for in this world in the end, but my opinion is that he didn't even have to permanently die, Geralt could have just completly destroyed his body with igni or smth and leave him for 50 or more years to regenerate until syanna and the duchess were dead, even better in that time he could meditate on his decizions that he made.
It wasn't up to Geralt if he regenerates or not. Regis struck the final blow killing him...When he could of helped him regenerate instead. Obviously Regis himself saw that Dettlaff could never redeem or improve himself or at least wasn't going to risk it.
Geralt isn't that strong, he would need a witch like Yennifer to do it. At most, Geralt would knock him unconscious for a day or two.
@@65firered Geralt can't kill OR regenerate OR imprison Dettlaff...What we saw beating him in a fight is the BEST a Witcher could ever do and in fact is a miracle that he could even pull it off. You NEED Regis to kill him and other Vampires in order to pull off anything beyond that. Also nope even Yen wouldn't be able to pull it off.
@@flamesofchaos13 Exactly. One of the strongest if not the strongest sorcerer in the world turned Regis into a smear and that took nearly everything he had and Detlaff was able to bring Regis back.
Why not put him in That cage
Originally in my first playthrough before I read the books, I killed Dettlaff and reconciled Syanna and Henrietta's relationship. However, I then deiced I wasnt happy with that. I now feel like Geralt wouldnt care what Henrietta wants and would help Regis to help Dettlaff, as Regis helps Geralt no matter what, regardless of the morals.
Syanna is the manipulator and admits she used Dettlaff's feelings in order to murder people for her own revenge. You can say Dettlaff should face justice for the actual act of the murders however, you have to consider that Dettlaff is a higher vampire, normal human 'justice' doesnt particularly apply. You cant exactly put him on trial and send him to prison for his crimes, he's capable of transforming into mist. You cant exactly put him on trial and execute him, he will regenerate. You either have to accept he only killed because he was manipulated and let him go or refuse to allow him to go free and ultimately kill him for good and also accept that this will make Regis an outcast among other vampires.
After reading the books and understanding more about Geralts character and how he reacts, I felt like Geralt would let him go and would ultimately agree to Regis' arguments that Dettlaff is capable of change. The reasons being; Geralt himself admits he would kill anyone that would get in his way when it concerns Yenn and Ciri or even some of his other close friends, regardless of laws. He would understand Dettlaff was killing, not out of bloodlust or just because he could, he was doing it because the women he loved had manipulated him into believing her life had been threatened and he must do these things to save her. We also have to take into consideration that Detlaff is an emotionally different being to Regis, as Regis suggests Detlaff doesn't understand human feeling and relationships yet, as vampire he is an inexperienced being in comparison to Regis, he also has more impulsive emotions. Yes Detlaff kills Syanna for her betrayal but he is true to his word that once she meets him and she pays for toying with his emotions, all vampires leave the city be and Detlaff commits no further murders, because fundamentally he is not a 'dangerous' monster.
In addition the contract given to Geralt, as Regis points out didnt actually state he was to kill Detlaff, it was to find the murderer. Arguably it is Syanna who is the murderer, she was the mastermind, she pulled the strings, Detlaff was just the tool. It is only when Henrietta refuses to accept her sister is heavily involved that she demands Geralt kill 'the beast' and does everything in her power to ignore the fact Syanna is the culprit. Herietta is a petulant brat and Geralt wouldnt give a dam what she wanted. Even when presented with the evidence that Syanna was the mastermind and Herietta was to be the final target, she refuses to believe it and does not even thank Geralt for the fact that even if Syanna dies, he saved her skin from being the final victim and actually fulfills the original contract in finding the murderer. Of course Henrietta atypical to her character, bends the facts to suit herself, puts her hands over her ears and goes la la la if Geralt doesnt execute Detlaff. The reason of course Henritta wants this so badly, is so she can pull the wool over the eyes of her subjects, exonerate her sister of wrongdoing and use Detlaff as the scapegoat.
Exellent summary on the topic!
But I have two things to add. First about Henrietta. I would say that we must consider the fact that she, and almost every other citizen of Toussaint, knows almost nothing about vampires. And the tiny bit that they know is almost exclusivly taken up with myths, that have nothing to do with reality (In the lore, that is ^^). It is not untill Geralt talks to her, that she starts to get a glimpse of them. I don't think it is enough. She solely sees Detlaff as some dangerous creature(Let's not forget that Damien himself doesn't believe him until he is almost killed). She has no idea what she is involved into. And then the massive attack of vampires starts...I think many would think like her in that situation and believe that there is no way that her sister (that young women that was cast out and forgotten) could have meddled with such powers. And let us also not forget how easy it is to simply blame vampires for the bad things that happened. Not only are they nonhuman, they are also monsters!
For the second point: People have been discussing who the villain in B&W is ever since the game came out. But maybe there is none? And this is the point? All three have had good reasons for the things they did and none can truly justify what they did. Nothing is ever black and white. And this franchise is coloured in gray.
Excuse spelling mistakes. Writing on the phone is a pain.
You want some weed because you and I can be great friends. My ending was the best ending for the mains except Regis. The Duchess got a statue, Syanna got her own crypt and Dettlaff got his revenge.
I mean the reason he’s called the butcher is because he had to kill someone who was threatening a town to get revenge on some one so I think he would kill detlaf
Henrietta is the monarch. As such, she expects that you fulfill her orders and the contract you were hired to fulfill. Anything else would simply undermine her authority. It has nothing to do with being a petulant brat and everything with being the top of the heap in Toussaint. Whatever happens in Toussaint, happens under her authority. Your not doing what she hired you to do is a direct threat to that authority. Just like every one who died died because she was unable to guarantee their safety. So not bringing her the head of the "Beast" on a twofold level is a challenge to her status as Duchess. No monarch on the planet would let that slip.
Add to that that while Syanna may have triggered Detlaff's rampage, the fact that he did engage in it was neither her intent nor her doing. He is solely and exclusively responsible for that. If he can't control himself, he's precisely the kind of creature you hire a Witcher for.
@@ohauss Good point about her authority being challenged. "...being the top of the heap in Toussaint.", that fits her precisly when considering the books (not that the games are against it, but they don't quite show it as clearly).
About that last statement...what is a Witchers job? It used to be to make way for the human and human-like races, to secure their world against the monsters - or rather against anything that could be called so. I mention this because Geralt does not really fit into this scheme. There are many instances, in both the books and the games, where he takes the neutral path (~Skellige's most wanted. Just to give a good example). And there is another thing to consider: Almost all witchers would flee from Detlaff. Geralt mainly stays because of Regis (And what he told him about Detlaff and that he could be reasoned with. Which is true if we think of the meeting at Oriannas!)
Lastly, most blame for the massacer in Beauclair is Detlaffs. But I don't think it is fair to solely blame him. The situation is not so simple and many people would have reacted somwhat similar...well sort of and on a totally different scalen. But again, he is not human either.
When Dettlaff attacked the city, I thought at first only soldiers were killed, but when I saw other civilians and those children slaughtered at the orphanage... Damn, it was death for Detllaff no matter the ending. I'm really surprised that nobody talks about those children being butchered. This was a crime that must be punished with no remorse or second thoughts. The only thing that bothers me about his death is that Geralt couldn't kill him, instead, Regis did it, and took all the burden of being hunted by other vampires. But I believe he will manage to escape any trouble. Good luck, Regis! And, farewell...
Well the attacks by dettlaf were caused by Anna indirectly as she didn't gave him syanna
I believe she was a complete douch in the whole game.
Exactly what i thought. Mercy aint a option for him.
Geralt should have find a way to stop the body from regenerating
The whole "only other HV can kill a HV for good" is just bullshit so that the player can feel bad for regis finishing detlaff
@@harsh_n208by that logic the teacher who refuse Hitler in art school is the evil one
. We cannot control others actions only ours , it was detlaff that sent the vampires to the city and no other.
I probably sound psychotic for saying this, but my favorite ending is where everyone dies (well, the sisters at least, slightly less so Detlaff).
All three are awful and/or dangerous people - Cyanna and Detlaff’s defects are obvious enough, while the Duchess is an exceptionally incompetent ruler, perhaps well-meaning but also criminally negligent, partially responsible for the chain of events that cause “Blood and Wine.”
Such an ending also fits the with general theming of the Witcher series - lacking a clear lesser evil, the only result is that of a no-win scenario for all parties involved.
How is the duchess responsible and how does this alleged negligence justify her death?
@@justagoose7741 I don't think she deserved death, but at the same time, Her favoring and blind trust of her sister wasn't gonna save her. She died in my ending and while I felt bad, at the same time, she wasn't acknowledging the threat that was her sister
@Pato Donald well right, they all did wrong at one point or another, that's the beauty of TW, most of its characters are morally gray, but what I don't understand and what I asked was how is the duchess in any way responsible for the whole conflict in B&W and why would she deserve to die. Even though she had an emotional bias toward her sister, that doesn't mean she's either responsible or even an incompetent ruler, it just means that she had more faith in her sister redeeming herself than in a random petty thief. And of course Syanna is probably to blame for most of these events, but we get to understand why she became that way and how in reality it wasn't really her fault (she's still responsible for her actions, of course). And then we have Dettlaf who, well, the video says it all. If you can save 2 out of 3 of these characters, allow8ng them to redeem themselves (since it's possible for Syanna to have genuine redemption, supposedly), I dont understand why anyone would prefer the ending where all of them died.
Remember there are no happy ending in blood and wine
Well, by killing Anna you destablized Toussaint, which is the place where Geralt will live for the rest of his life in the Yen/Lone ending.(Triss ending has Geralt live in Kovir as well). Even from a self-beneficial persepective, it's better to keep her alive.
Saying Anna incompetent is a stretch, basically she is facing a Gary Sue character out of no where(Power level wise Detlaff is exactly that, he has the means to destroy a city using an army that doesn't question and has no set backs to him what so ever).
Also there is no lesser evil missing, not when there is a terrorist who threatens to do genocidal stuff and actually did it.
One think I haven't seen mentioned is Geralt's plea to the Unseen Elder: that Dettlaf poses a threat to the vampire's agenda. Dettlaf indirectly threatened the safety of the gateway to the vampire's home dimension due to his own comparatively selfish impulses, and as a result must be punished in some capacity, even if we find him sympathetic (which he is; he's a fantastic antagonist).
But that gateway is bs only a very old mad vampire cares about
@@alinazhidil9817 That very old vampire is the Unseen Elder of Toussaint, the de-facto leader of all vampires in the region.
First playthrough I killed him but now imma let him live just caus it’s the best ending for my homie Regis
Considering Detlaff endangered and entire city filled with innocent people for his personnel revenge was a big red flag for me
Detlaff is too dangerous to be left alive
He is a Powerful Vampire with little to no disregard for Human life
he is ready to potentially kill hundreds just for revenge
The sole purpose of Witchers is to hunt down monsters
Labelling higher vampires as Monsters might be a bit controversial
But Detlaff proves himself to be one by the deeds he commit
Its not the appearence but rather the deeds that earn you the title of a Monster
I agree after all the devil can make himself out to be the most handsome man in the world but everyone knows hes a monster
Regis makes the point that killing hundreds of innocents who have nothing to do with his rage makes him a monster, sympathetic one but a monster non the less.
This is exactly what I was thinking as I hunted him too. Although my opinion of vampires was still mainstream before the DLC, by the end I'd accepted them as people. But this man still made himself into a monster. And thus my contract had to be upheld.
I agree.
I was sympathetic to Dettlaff because he was threatened into murdering people and ultimately he was played.
But the minute he unleashes his horde of vampires on Beauclair, I went from feeling bad for him to just saying 'fuck Dettlafff, he dies'.
The problem is higher vampires are nigh unstoppable. If Dettlaff wants Syanna, he could go straight to the Duchess and put a knife to her throat. He doesn't have to endanger people who aren't involved in this. It's like he suddenly forgot his power level. And I think choosing whether to fight Dettlaff to protect the Duchess or to help him get Syanna to end all this would have been a harder choice than 'give a mass murderer killing innocents what he wants or not' because it's one life for one life, and in protecting Syanna from justice, Anna Henrietta is arguably guilty as well.
It feels like maybe they wanted the big action set piece of Beauclair under attack, and it was a good action set piece, but it mangled Dettlaff's character.
@@meko98743
Agreed. I honestly didnt expect him to make good on that, just slip in and kidnap the Duchess or something. The straight up vampire incursion made me go "Ok, even if she deserves to get drained, this dude just became a threat on par with the Wild Hunt. "
Sometimes the hardest decisions are the ones that make us to question our own morality
Hardest choices require the strongest will
Bruh why did you do that. Both Annarietta and Syanna deserved to die
Shut up
@@UAGoWSuplexer make me
@@geraltofrivia7448 Already made you years ago🤡
There is a mistake in regards to the ending. The ending where Detlaff is summoned by the Elder can't lead to the sisters reconciling, since you have to have read some diary entries about their childhood in order to convince Syanna not to kill her sister.
arent you forgetting the ribbon ending?
if you help Syanna in the land of fables in one gwent related sidequest you get this red ribbon, this ribbon has some impact on the ending...
He mentioned it in passing but didn't show it.
I did that one on my first playthrough as I fancied playing some Gwent
@@hopelessedgelord never use the Monster deck, it's weak shit when used against Frost. There was once an accumulated 50+ number but I dropped a Frost and they went straight to 13, passed and I dropped Geralt, an immediate 15 and immune to elements.
@@thesixthkid7689 northern relems all the way.
@@hopelessedgelord Agreed. Best spy cards, draws on victory, and can save a free Clear weather card from the deck for something more useful. What the Skellige deck needed were spy cards and it'd be good. Svanrige and Lugos are good choices since they are traitors. Maybe Donar too since he's old.
“It was wrong for him to send vampires into he city
Moments later
“He could’ve threatened the ditches herself”
That’s Plan A, but with less steps.
Hahah true
Duchess*
Are you forgetting he can just fly right up to the duchess with zero resistance? he killed hundreds of people for zero reason
@@Webi like I said it’s Plan A, with less steps
She's no innocent
Detlaff really seemed like a cool guy when you encounter him at the party. An ending where you empathise with him seemed perfectly obtainable and the best one by far at that point. But when he starts the masacre, it all turned around, even Raegis that said he won't kill without reason and that he is not evil and such kind of completely changed his mind. I wish there was a path were the masacre doesn't happen and Detlaff keeps the nice atitude you encounter at the party, but probably CDPR made the story this way so that your choice has even more impact and meaning. And it leads to an epic showdown.
I've yet to experience for myself all endings even though I know what happens but to me the the turning and decisive point to not let syanna get killed was when she explained her reasoning for blackmailing Dettlaff. She wanted revenge on those "soldiers with chivalric virtues". They abused/raped/beat her. If you ever talked to lady who has experienced that in real life, you know how sensitive this is. Not a excuse to plot all this killing and drama, sure, but ultimately she is way easier to convince of her wrongdoings unlike Dettlaff. Then Dettlaff sends swarms of vampires, he couldn't care less. The only bad outcome for the reconciliation ending is that Regis is forced to leave, that chap deserved better, especially if you search his lair only to find a note: "I believe Dettlaff is going to die. I am sad". Regis knows damn well only a higher vampire can kill a higher vampire which means he deep down knows he will be forced to kill his friend Dettlaff, the only one who cared for him and saved his life.
This DLC is a pure masterpiece.
Very good point. Both of them were victims in their own right and had a right to be angry, but Syanna, while being manipulative to people, only sought to take the lives of those who abused her. Dettlaff was willing to send vampires to snack on orphans to get back at one woman.
Syanna wasn't raped, she was mocked and beat but never sexually assaulted, she claims that she thought that the bandits she encountered would rape and kill her but they didn't they took her in
I let detlaff go for one simple reason. I’d died 15 times in a row and got tired
Edit: finally beat him
Sad because you get 0 crowns
LOL !
@@finmat95 what does 5000 crowns do, my armor alone is worth more than 15k lol.
you could have turned the difficulty down like me ...
@@Ryan-gc3sdweak😂
This game is just a masterpiece! Just look at all the comments - all with different but legitimate opinions about what's right and wrong here!
Imho: Dettlaff crossed the line by killing innocent people in town.. Yeah, Syanna abused his love and killed (disgusting) knights and mercenaries - rebuke needed - and the duchess being to stubborn to save her people - rebuke needed - .. But in the end the townspeople didn't do Dettlaff any wrong and they suffered the most under his vicious attack. Having a crush on Regis I feel most sorry for him - feeling forced to kill his friend for the greater good, being send into exil and living in a world where everyone hates him as a person (vampires) or for his true nature as a vampire (humans).
Btw, I wonder how people would judge over Syanna if she were a male character.. There are many male characters with a sad background story doing evil and I often find people finding more excuses or being more lenient with it (e.g. Dettlaff). Syanna had her reason to take revenge on those abusive knights and I won't believe that anyone feels pity for them. Furthermore we know very little about her relationship with Dettlaff - were they happy, were her feelings true in the beginning, was Dettlaff impulsive in a scaring or violently way in their relationship, too? Just something to think about..
I think the reason people care for Detlaff more would be because of Regis(not because he is a male). Regis was a companion to Geralt in the Novels.
BOOK SPOILER!!!
And he "died" fighting to save Ciri. Considering that, the player feels much more sympathy for Detlaff than Syana because of Geralt's bond with Regis. This is what swayed me to get the Detlaf lives ending. I felt as though I could not have my good friend who died fighting for me and ciri be an outcast for his eternity.
I don’t believe the male sympathy thing is affecting any decision making but I can only speak for myself. If it’s really a thing I feel it’s really fucked up mentality
this comment is so old but i have to butt in and say that the reason i dislike syanna is definitely not due to gender, its because i dont feel like she actually changes at the end of the game -- even with the good ending. she still feels cunning, like shes going to backstab you if you do her wrong and the only reason she decides not to straight up murder her sister (who had little to do with her being banished) is because geralt convinces her to let go off it. if theres anything i wish baw had done better it would be that. you spend so much time with syanna in the fairytale world and the only choice that matter in there is whether you get a ribbon or not, along with getting her backstory i guess. she spends most of it being full on woe me and she never reflects on her actions, never second-guesses if she could have gone about it differently. she has every right to be pissed about her situation but like... youre still in charge of your actions, regardless of what fuels them. this goes for detlaff as well. there have been plenty of female characters out there who get to seek revenge against their abusers and theyre mainly cheered on or their revenge is considered a positive plot point for their character, but alas they are the ones doing the revenge part. a little bit of doubt, some reflecting or empathy from her side really wouldnt have hurt to sell her redemption at the end. she has the right to be angry but she does not have the right to use someone else to seek revenge, thats low.
If Syanna was a male they'd be praising him for the cool and epic revenge on four child abusers probably lol
imo manipulation was her only crime, the rest was no issue
Oh yeah, because people were so forgiving of whoreson... Spare me the gender card, plenty of male characters were hated. She is disliked because of her lack of redeeming qualities. M.o.r.o.n.
What I love about the DLC’s is that the “bad endings” are still awesome. The trip to the elder vampire and that ending fight with Detlaff was simply amazing
Agree. Land of thousand fables might look beautiful on the eyes, but I've always found the elder choice much more interesting
This is why I LOVE Witcher 3. The "Good Ending" wasn't always good as it seems. It perfectly mimics the real life, the complexity of our reality and human interaction despite being a fantasy.
Nah i like Detlaff and killing detlaff also destroys Regis
I like how people care so much about Regis they are willing to let mass murder slide as a minor offense just so he isn't fucked over. That's the mark of a great character. (And also the fact that the world is so unbelievably fucked that mass murder seems normal in the context of the series lol.)
@@thespanishinquisition4078 The second point isn't very correct because the world is fucked, but a real mass murderer in a real world never gets much empathy from anyone...
@@thespanishinquisition4078 it's Anna who let the mass murder happen
Syanna said it's a serious ultimatum yet Anna didn't take it seriously
She even wanted to have a war with the vampires
@@thespanishinquisition4078 but he also doesnt deserve to suffer in sheer terror for all of eternity. How can that be justified?
@Real Majd that’s why you don’t simp! This is a major lesson for gamers . Don’t simp. Be like Regis . Be rational. Be kind but don’t blindly simp for a woman or man
Dettlaff never reached out to humanity, he never bothered or cared for humans until one reached out to him. A woman he trusted and loved forced him to kill for her own selfish gain. Dettlaff is emotionally unstable because he is broken. If he couldn't trust someone who he trusted and loved so dearly then could he trust anyone? He has no will to live anymore because he is broken and no longer trusting of anyone even Regis.
Which makes him even more dangerous given no one in the world could appeal to him to stop killing. It also makes him more empathetic and pitiful too though so if someone spared him that's understandable but still ultimately misguided.
Well that's the point of the whole quest, and many others in TW3. You get to learn why people are the way they are but it does not necessarily justify their actions. Dettlaf might not be to blame for what he became but he is responsible for what he's done, and that's why he should still die imo.
Does Detlaff even understand what love means? I'd highly doubt it. The whole lifespan of that woman is but a moment to him. He makes no effort whatsoever to understand her people. It takes regis to nudge him towards that direction, and it takes near-incessant nudging for that. Given how little control he has of himself, there's no telling he wouldn't have slipped into a rage against all of humanity for no other reason than being mortal had she died of old age.
Detlaff is by far the older one. He could and should have known better. At the end of the day, his attitude is little different from the early days of vampires we've seen in Tesham Mutna. Humans are cattle and pets to him. Some of them he likes to pet, but not enough to balk at the very notion of killing them.
@@ohauss Well, Regis does say that Detlaff is somewhat naive, emotional and idealistic. Like a teen almost. Considering how he's portrayed in that light throughout the DLC I do believe he experienced, if not love, some serious attachment to Syanna. Even a pet is capable of becoming "family" of sorts. If she were to die from old age then it would be expected, it would be akin to raging at an ocean wave for sweeping your sand castle if Detlaff were to do something similar to the ending of Blood and Wine.
VivaOliva 235
So Def is medieval Jon Snow.
But Regis promised he'll be protecting Syanna... She got the ribbon, fought Dettlaff, figured out Anna Henrietta would be the last target, and got the "happy ending". But still, I am disappointed that there's no way that I could save both Dettlaff and Syanna...
Detlaff just took it too far, didn't have to think about it.
The only reason i feel slighlty bad when killing detlaff is how hard it is on regis but it has to be done
@@crafterisland9949 detlaff is immortal and had a lifetime to learn how not to be an emo simp over a girl. Regis being an immortal has a lifetime to get over this also. Detlaff has no self control with that much power unlike the unseen elder who is more powerful.
I killed him and felt kinda bad for Regis having to be Anathema and leave society forever, as well as Syanna murdering the Duchess. I didn't really think it was worth it.
Syanna deserves death just as much as Dettlaff. If you decide one deserves death and the other doesn’t it’s showing a large amount of bias.
Nah All the knight errand who treats syanna harshly deserves to die
Syanna and dettlaff both deserve to die, but anna doesnt. I would be fine with anna dying if that didnt make an entire vassal state depressed.
Syanna can be imprisoned,punished or something, but Dettlaff will destroy another city when someone hurts his feelings and you can't stop him.
Death is only way to stop Dettlaff while Syanna can be stopped without being killed.
Syanna manipulated Dettlaff into committing all of his actions. Dettlaff after all is just an inexperienced individual concerning human society, and while that makes him especially dangerous, it is with a very high probability only momentarily. Regis (Who possibly knows him better than anyone else) states that he believes Dettlaff will be able to adapt to human emotions and culture and thus pose much less of a threat than Syanna would, if she is left alive. She manipulates everyone around her to achieve what she wants and can be very ruthless in not only that regard. Even if she proceeds to forgive Anna Henrietta (Who is pretty much objectively a terrible ruler, due to her incapability of accepting and comprehending the more than obvious danger that her own sister poses to the Duchy), there is no guarantee that she wouldn’t just mov on like that, especially due to her not even getting punished for her actions. It is very unlikely that she will simply stop abusing others in order to achieve her will. In my opinion that serves a much greater threat to a society than even thousands of deaths could.
However, that being said it said, her manipulations do not in any way justify Dettlaff basically mass murdering people due to his feelings behing hurt.
Even so I still believe that letting Dettlaff kill Syanna and proceeding to let him leave is the lesser evil in a situation like that, since it is much more likely for him to change to the better than it is for Syanna.
"Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement."
am I part of the few that got the sisters alive by the end of it all on their first go?
Actually you need to talk to Syanna and be nice to her in Land of thousand Fables to get her not to kill her sister. Finding the 5th culprit isn't enough.
For me the option where you kill him and both sisters reconcile is the "best" ending initially but after I found out on youtube that Anrietta sends Geralt to jail even if he killed Detlaff if Syanna dies then I thought to myself that letting all 3 die is the best ending.
Syanna even if her vengeance is justified was still irresponsible and caused the tragedy and she was cruel to blackmail Detalff. Henrietta is also cruel and nepotising and a horribel ruler for willing to have her whole country destroyed in exchange for protecting her murderous sister. Detlaff is the one I smypathize with the most, his death is necessary but sad as he only wanted a peaceful life but killing so many people in rage is just too much to let it slide. The worst thing is that Regis gets ostracized by his kind. If there was an ending where the sisters die but Detalff lives i would take it.
You don’t need to be nice. You have to get her ribbon, which will save her. In the end tell her that it was not Anna’s fault she was banished.
I remember playing this and fully agreeing if there was an ending where only Detlaff lived I would take that almost every time lmao I loved his character and felt so bad for him but then again the boss fight was fucking amazing so it was worth it in the end
O I was nice to her alright ;)
you have to talk to syanna so she reveals her past, THEN you have to find the 5th victim and talk to syanna, asking her to forgive anna henrietta because she had no part in syanna's banishment and couldn't do anything about it. If you ask syanna to move on without knowing her past from the land of a thousand fable, they both die, if you find about her past and don't tell her to forgive her sister or just don't talk to her at all, they both die.
Regis is right that Syanna is a git in this situation. If Detlaff had just killed her I would've understood that.
Anna Henrietta really just put her sisters safety above the lives of her entire nation. If she had just let Syanna go to Dettlaff _like she wanted to_ this might've been avoided.
Syanna didn't want anyone uninvolved in her vengeance to come to harm, but she apparently disregarded the fire she was playing with.
Dettlaff is right to feel betrayed, but saying "You made me kill people I have no quarrel with, so I'm going to kill thousands more until you give the person I do have a quarrel with." is clearly insane. Dracula in netflix's castlevania has a very similar situation going on and he claims in his last moments he hadn't been sane since his wife died.
Not only Dettlaff is a danger, but every vampire in general. Regis is an exception of course, but he's a part of few honorable vampires, most of them are just cruel (Orianna, Dettlaff, Unseen, all lower vampires, ecc). What a shame we cannot kill them with a silver sword (higher vampires).
Probably a way to destroy their body
The gwent lore talk about a special blade that might kill them for good
The DLC retcon was just very dumb
Yeah unlike humans who are not dangerous and cruel
"Hell hath no fury, like a lover scorned."
Regis is trying to convince you that Detlaff is good and the queen 👑 is trying to convince you Syanna is good.
i just let everyone die because I doubt that syanna would get any punishment for what she did and the duchess was a pain in the ass and she let the vampires attack because she wanted to save her sister and ignored geralts warnings thinking they could kill the vampires
The only thing Syanna did was use a higher vampire to kill 4 knights that abuse her when she was a kid, she is not that bad wtf
@@jperro845 When she was young, she knew Cedric de Coulbert's brother had a crush on Anarietta, and thus she convinced Cedric that she could see the future in her dreams and one of them showed that he would die at his brother's hands. With this, Cedric stole his father's sword and killed his brother, hurting both families. She conspired against her sister, Toussaint's ruler, trying to kill her. She was treacherous, envious and power-hungry. Her actions, direct or indirect, has been caused hundreds of victims.
@@finmat95 best ending is when detlaff and both crazy sisters die period
Wow... Finished my first B&W playthrough today, got Detlaf killed, and siblings reunited. No remorse.
As you said. Detlaf is emotionally unstable, and being a high vampire he is too powerful to be left roaming around.
However I disagree that Detlaf deserves more empatjy than Syanna, because over the course of B&W Detlaf is getting worse and worse, where Syanna stars getting her redemption arc. Yes, she will be sentenced for plotting assasinations, but the main reason behind her revenge is gone. She is no longer a castaway, and has her sisters love back. Syanna from this point can only get onward into better life. Detlaf doesn't seem to have any kind of willpower or desire to get better.
Agreed. In the game, despite her horrible deeds, Syanna actually works to make herself better after the right interactions. That in itself is a huge sign of worthiness, while Detlav descends so far that even the other Vampires dont wanna touch him. I would not mark him as a villain, but he threw away his chance. And that debt is ours to collect.
Syanna plans to killed the dutchess all the way to the very end, changes her mind at last minute. That's not true redemption Detlaff always showed traits of goodness and he's a better friend to Regis than the sisters are to each other
@@zgramadan
Yet she still chose not to. Detlaf could have not sent an army of vampires and just played the low life cost espionage game, but he chose to effectively declare war on humans.
Actions speak louder than words. I could plan to kill my brother all day, then we meet and I falter. The follow through with an action speaks far louder than the creation of the plot.
@@zgramadan I never said Syanna's redemption story ends within blood and wine. It only starts. The thing is, that she commited half of her life to executing it, and all she needed to leave it is just somebody to understand what she feels like. To be shown that there is still some empathy in this world (little, but still something).
@@MrMaro1995 true, redemption and lesser evils are the Witcher themes. Syanna and Olgierd vs Detlaff and Guanter is there good or lesser evil. Love the Witcher 5 years later!
I fully supported Dettlaff and was going to spare him up until he attacked the entire city for one person. That single move made me lose all my respect for him
An unfortunate situation, but either way Dettlaff had to be stopped. He might have been manipulated, but his unstable emotions...
Sometimes, a creature's nature is so destructive that they must be put down.
Let us not forget the diplomatic lesson back in Skellige's Most Wanted: "We kill dangerous monsters, so the thinking ones can live in peace."
Question: what deserves to happen to Regis? You kill Detlaf you decide his fate as well.
He simply says he will go to Niflguard, since that is a very modern and non supersticious society he says that is the best place for him.
@@Vlad_-_-_ He'd be on the run - escaping his kind for the rest of his life. His own race will not stop hunting him until he is DEAD. He will live the life of a fugitive for hundreds of years. That is the fate Geralt decides for him by killing Dettlaff - which is precisely the reason I can never bring myself to do so.
@@celticbabs3105 Regis himself said he would be by Geralt's side anyways, so he was ready to accept this. Plus he doesn't seem to agitated to me when he told Geralt his plans to go to Nilfgaard. Also the fact that he chose to stay and drink some more also suggests he was not that disturbed. So I guess it's the end of the world for Regis.
Celtic Babs Regis himself says they go by "out of sight, out of mind." As long as he didnt show his face to any other vampires, he'd be fine. They wouldn't hunt him. He'd still be an outcast though unfortunately so it's still a difficult choice.
@@celticbabs3105 Shouldnt Unseen Elder give him protection? Why isnt Unseen Elder also viable to the rule since in his route he straight up calls Dettlaff to a clear ambush meant to kill him?
If you get the ribbon from the match girl for Syanna, she'll survive detlaff's attack by being transported back to the fable land. You'll have to fight him and he'll claim that you tricked him.
4-th ending: you bring Syanna with enchanted ribbon (you can buy it or win it in land of 1000 fables from girl drug-dealer) then Detlaff tries to kill her, but she gets teleported back to fairy tail and you have to fight vampire
A tough choice but I chose to reconciliation of the sisters. Dettlaff ,although blackmailed, is an over emotional killing machine who would wipe of towns on a whim.
Me too. Both him and Syanna are tragic villains, but at least Syanna can be convinced to forgive and face trial.
I considered it a crime of passion. Albeit an over the top one by including the citizens of Beauclair in his transgression. It was Detlaff's form of blackmail to respond to what Syanna did to him. The outcome for Regis is what tipped the scales for me however. If my Geralt's punishment is to be a persona non grata in Beauclair then I would rather him pay that price instead of Regis.
It was a crime of passion, Syanna used him
Dettlaff's a bro, but killing 1000+ innocents? Yea, that's crossing a line.
One death is a tragedy, a million deaths a statistic.
@@finmat95 yeah and you being one among those included in that statistic makes it less of a tragedy :)
Who kills 1000 of innocents? A monster from whom you don't expect shit, but still was kind enough to offer a warning? Or the ruler of the whole land, whose job is literally to protect her people and land, and that having the option to save her people both before and after the events took place, decides to think only of herself?
@@gabrielh5105 The ruler didn't kill anyone, Detlaff did, he chose to do it, it was his choice not the duchesse's choice
@@tashvinjonathan6882 Look at the big picture. Detlaff is a non human entity, and not subject of human laws or morals. Try to consider him as a natural disaster. Ana Hanrietta had on her hands the option to avoid the killings and protect her people, and she willingly chose not to. Who is the real killer here?
If dettlaf had send some vampires to attack just the palace to kill her guards, and threaten the duchess forcing her to give up Syanna, I would had been ok with that... but doing a full scale assoult on the entire city, killing hundreds of innocents was too much...
Just imagine how many guys around are like Dettlaff, ingenuous and impulsive despite being sensitive and goodwilling.
Dettlaff is too dangerous to be left alive what kind of man slaughters so many just because he is mad because of one woman
Like you wouldn't have done the same thing if someone had your Yen/Triss captured.
Remember that he is a vampire though, human standards cannot be compared to that of vampires. If you were detlaff you probably would have done the same thing due to the way vampires naturally are. Its still a very difficult choice though and iam left indecisive
It's not actually a random attack out of heartbreak, Dettlaff wasn't a drunk guy at a bar swinging around a broken bottle at anyone who passes because his girlfriend dumped him.
He made an ultimatum to force a betrayer to meet him. When his ultimatum was ignored he followed through on it to show he was serious. The goal was never to butcher the entire city, it was to force them to hand her over. It did work in at least one ending. Dettlaff was always a vampire of his word and called off the attack once he killed her.
And to answer the question. Who would follow through on an ultimatum to hurt people, even people caught in the crossfire, to get to a criminal/traitor/personal enemy... A very large part of the Witcher world population. The difference between them and Dettlaff is simply he has the means to follow through on his threats at a greater scale than most. A small gang of thugs might threaten a family to get beaten up if they don't hand over their relative who owes them money. Kings can threaten war if a criminal that fled to a foreign nation doesn't get handed over to them. The only difference is the scale.
@@burakozdemir3157not an excuse
Hmm. I'm not sure what a villain is if it's not someone like Dettlaff. Being sympathetic makes him a well written villain, but it doesn't change the fundamental evil of his actions. It's the actions that make the villain.
Regarding Syanna, remember, she didn't directly cause the death of any innocent person. The victims of the Beast of Beauclair were all her abusers, tormentors, and though I'm grateful they didn't go into detail, presumably rapists as well. They all had it coming. Frankly, I'm far more sympathetic to her than anyone else in that mess.
But I think what makes the story so well done is how it deconstructs power structures. To Dettlaff, and even to Duchess Annarietta, the victims of the vampire attack weren't all that important. Annarietta put her pride before their lives, ignoring Geralt's advice to negotiate with Dettlaff. Why? Because she was a duchess, and saw even a higher vampire as below her. I think Dettlaff felt the same way. He felt used, not just by another person, but by a mortal. And even players often fault Syanna's lies as the real reason behind Dettlaff's massacre. But this is the "She made me do it" excuse that abusers always fall back on. His violence is his responsibility. He could have just killed her on the spot, or gone to the castle himself to find her. He WANTED a massacre.
The game reinforces the theme of Annarietta's power over commoners in many subplots, from her flagrant disregard of decorum when it suited her to her total lack of empathy for her royal vintner when she finds out he's been selling her private wine. This is reflected in the way vampires treat humans, as seen in Geralt and Regis's exploration of Tesha Mutna. Even Regis's kindly dismissal of Dettlaff's dark side tells of his vampiric sense of superiority over humans. Remember, no matter how much Regis protests Dettlaff's fundamental goodness, his friend proves him wrong in the end. Which should call into question his judgement from the beginning. Of course Regis thinks Dettlaff a decent fellow deep down. He's never been on the receiving end of the vampire's wrath. And as a vampire, he doesn't think Dettlaff's murder spree nearly as upsetting as Geralt would. It's only human lives.
Compare this with the people of Beauclair, who had no part in this whole affair, but watched it all unfold helplessly, until they became its ultimate victims. And if you think about it, Syanna's life was largely the same. She grew up in the seat of power, but watched helplessly as her life and her future were torn away because of some prophecy she had no control over. She was exiled, abused, and left with nothing. In a way, she's the least powerful person in this story. Can you blame her for doing whatever it took to regain some semblance of control over her life? I don't.
What's so incredible about this story, as the final DLC to the series, which itself was a sequel to the books, is that it bookends the entire Geralt tales with two stories about the Curse of the Black Sun. In the very first Witcher short story, Geralt tries to stay out of the situation, so as to avoid having to choose between two evils. But in trying to stand above, he ends up empowering a sorcerer determined to persecute and murder all children who happen to be born under an eclipse. One might call this the greater evil, not the lesser. That sorcerer saw to it that Princess Renfri was exiled, and hunted by assassins her entire life. To survive, she became a ruthless killer herself, determined to avenge herself on him. And he held this as proof that he was right all along. But was he?
In that story, Geralt makes the wrong choice, and it haunts him for the rest of his days. This final Witcher tale gives him the opportunity to have that choice over again. Or really, it gives the player that choice, to decide for yourself if Syanna's choices make her evil, or if she deserves, this one time, the compassion she'd been denied since birth. It's up to you.
Syanna was playing with fire by manipulating dettlaff, i blame her fully for dettlaff going out of control. If someone forced the Unseen elder (for instance) out of his cave into a city, I'd hold them fully responsible for whatever shit happens because of that.
@@xignum That argument doesn't hold water. You could just as easily say Syanna's parents are fully responsible for everything she does by exiling her.
@@xignum Or that Annarietta was fully responsible for not negotiating immediately with Dettlaff.
There's a lot of blame to go around. The only difference with Syanna is that she fits people's profile of the "sexually manipulative woman." And some folks take that very personally, like it's being done specifically to them.
@@rottensquid True but not a single one of the problems would happen if syanna didn't bring dettlaff into the city. Syanna had a bad past true, but it was she herself that decided to come back for vengeance bringing a vampire into the whole mess when she could just live peacefully
This should be top comment, excellently put
I think Detlaff needed more screen time, though I do agree. Detlaff is too unstable to trust that the situation wouldn't happen all over again elsewhere. Syanna, meanwhile, is only human. I just wanted more of him breaking down. Like, letters you can find, addressed to Regis, or a journal, something that showed his fraying state.
One thing that many people forget about Detlaff: He is not a human. Yet they judge him after human standards, which is nonsense.
That does not mean that I want to justify things he has done, but one should never forget it.
Agree with this, you simply can't judge a species by the standards of another, regardless of how similiar they are. Vampires especially deems loyalty and kinship very highly, Syanna's treason against him is probably enough for the other vampires to think 'alright, go fucking kill her now'.
For the human point of view, Syanna was the one who brought him into this whole goddamn mess, from Regis we know Dettlaff has never been this unstable. The whole thing is because of syanna manipulating him.
That is absolutely ridiculous. Detlaff is not human, he's a monster. To not judge him by human standards is to abdicate away all responsibility for his actions. Well, he's not human so killing the entire city of Beauclair is ok... That sounds great until it's your blood he's draining from your neck. No, the only way you can judge someone is by human standards, for you are human and it's all you know, all you have. Indeed to be outside of human standards is to be a monster.
@@rogue109 Let me correct that: Detlaff is not a human, he's a vampire. Do you really mean to tell me that if someone is of a somewhat intelligent species, yet not human, (not only talking about vampires here) is automatically branded a monster? That is how you get race progroms. If I may get so drastic to say this: "...for you are human and it's all you know, all you have..." If a species can't even manage to attempt understanding another species, then it is not an intelligent species.
Note: "That does not mean that I want to justify things he has done, but one should never forget it."
@@rogue109 Syanna herself committed crimes against dettlaff's vampiric values. your rigid way of thinking will ensure that humans and monsters never understand each other. I'm not saying he doesn't have any faults, but all his bad deeds are directly because of syanna
@@romanpipkin5573 "He"? Who is "he"?
I beat the DLC for the very first time today and didn’t even know you could spare him. The final fight with him is one of the best in the game though imo
Agreed. I knew I could spare him, but his crimes and my contract to eliminate him meant there was only one real option. Unfortunate, for sure, but ultimately he decided his fate. We simply enacted it.
"Detlaff is indefferent to human lives and has no problem killing when he believes it's necessary"
Detlaff: literally cuts of his own hand after being forced to slay a man he knew personally
Stiil, only thing he was suffering from was heartache, you think that's a necessity to murder a whole city? Just my two cents Kim.
ah okay so you forget about the whole city incident
If anything that implies he fully understands what murder entails and decides to do it to an a tire city
I don't think Dettlaff lacks morals but I do think those morals aren't exactly like ours. To me it seems he has a code of paying back every good or ill you do to him. If you give him an apple he will kill a dangerous monster to avenge his death to name a positive example. I think one of the reasons he took Syanna's actions so harshly wasn't only because she betrayed him but also because he had broken his own code in order to save her by killing a man who was nice to him and became his friend. He could have easily killed Syanna the moment they discovered she was the mastermind and considering his temper I'm very surprised he didn't. I think he gave the 3 day ultimatum to give himself time to process everything. Since he now had no faith in her, he threatened her to make sure she showed up. When she didn't... well, Dettlaff is a vampire of his word.
Had she shown up I 100% believe he wouldn't have killed anyone other than Syanna. Once he's killed her he calls of his vampire army. As such, when he says he will go far away from men I also believe him. He doesn't need blood to live and wasn't a big drinker to begin with so I don't think it will be difficult for him. As once burned, I doubt he'll fall in love and be used like this again.
Anna Henrietta basically sacrifices her city for her sister by criminally underestimating Dettlaff despite Geralt's advice. She brought him in because he knows more about monsters but refuses to listen to him about what they can do. I can understand why. Love for her missing sister and guilt for her own part in Syanna's tragic backstory. I also feel that Syanna's "imprisonment" in the "happy" end is a cushy white collar prison at worst. She'll probably have a cell that most hotels would be jealous of, fine food, entertainment and so on. She would only lack the freedom to move around as she wishes.
As for Syanna, I can sympathise with her reasons for murder. I can't excuse her for bringing in Dettlaff though. She knew exactly what he was, she knew what he could do and she knew he didn't think like humans do. She basically took a nuclear weapon to kill ants and then she's surprised something went wrong and more people than she expected died. And why exactly? Given that she's a good fighter and runs a gang I think she's perfectly able to assassinate those men without Dettlaff. What she can't do is make it as mystical or as easy as he does. So she brings him in for convenience basically. Whatever she said afterward, her conversation in the fairy tale realm implied she was fine with "everything burning" if it got her what she wanted.
They're all guilty. Except for Rergis. I don't think any ending is wrong.
i fully agree that Detlaff should die for the simple reason that Geralt is a witcher, and witcher kills monster, though calling higher vampires monsters may be wrong, Detlaff proved that he was a monster when he attacked the innocent people of Beauclair
I fought detlaff in my first run (because I had given syanna the ribbon without knowing what it does) but had I been given the choice, I 100% would have sided with detlaff. Syanna failed to strike sympathy in me because I feel that she knew this was a definite possibility, and did it anyway. Syanna using Detlaff would be like strapping 5 people to an armed atomic weapon, and hoping they die of radiation poisoning. There are SO MANY WAYS that could go wrong, and if any one of them occurs, it's genocide.
Sure, technically Detlaff isn't an atomic weapon, he's sentient, after all. Yet Syanna spent years with him. She knew he was impulsive, rash and he would feel this betrayal immensely (Detlaff feels like he's on the spectrum ngl). She knew exactly what would happen if she was caught, she knew that Detlaff was no assasin she could dispose of once she was done (to the point where I wonder what the plan was if Geralt hadn't shown up) The real question is comparing their crimes here.
Syanna black mailed detlaff into killing 4 people, Blackmailed and emotionally manipulated a monster she couldn't control and unleashed him on Beauclair, attempted (or suceeded) to kill her sister and a queen, and
Detlaff was blackmailed into killing 4 people, And whilst in a rage unleashed an army on Beauclair.
Seems to me Syanna's crimes are far more morally reprehensible.
Now the argument that we've rid the world of someone as dangerous as Detlaff is a compelling one, but Syanna is arguably just as, if not more dangerous. She's one assasination attempt from being duchess of a major country. You could argue that if she lives she probably wouldn't hurt anyone anymore, but the same argument can be made for Detlaff if you let him leave.
Final argument, and hear me out now.... Detlaff is SO MUCH COOLER than Syanna. Like, black trenchcoat vampire vs annoying arrogant princess. Hand me the vampire any day of the week.
Syanna's crimes are nowhere as bad as his.
Using one innocent is bad, but *massacring* hundreds of innocents are far worse, no matter how you slice it.
"more dangerous"
Literally senseless. She has no supernatural powers, she has no one left to take vengeance on (the 4 abusers are buried) and will live only a few more decades. Incelaff is completely uncontrollable, can use other vampires, is presumably very angry at humans and will live forever.
"but he's le cool" Yeah that sums up like 90% of arguments in his favour, I know.. Does not matter what he does is 100 times worse, he's le cool sad vampire and teens with unbalanced hormones love cool sad vampires.
Idk it wasn’t so hard for me, he literally summoned a vampire army to attack a city and wound and injure hundreds if not thousands of innocents. I know Syanna was pretty bad, but Dettlaff didn’t need to bring that kinda threat to the city. I try not to kill as a punishment in games as I disagree with it, I would never kill anyone even if they did something awful, however Dettlaff was as you put was a ‘danger to humanity’ that is too say he has no remorse and will kill again, I only killed Dettlaff, because if I hadn’t he would have killed more people. I wouldn’t say he deserves it, more that he *has* too because he poses a threat to literally thousands of innocent people if he is not eliminated
It boils down to this; Who walks away? It's a wide scale survival scenario where one walking away leads to many deaths on one or the other's side. It isnt so much justice as ending the conflict at that point.
It's even simpler. Witchers kill dangerous monsters. Detlaff was one.
@@Silmerano
I get detailed cause there's a LOT of folks who are going with the "But higher vampires aren't monsters in Witcher" without considering Detlaff made himself into a monster, separate from others of his kind.
However you are 100% correct that it is that simple.
@@clayxros576 same logic aply with the gangster dude on main quest is bether have dudu taking his shit
Is it even a dilemma? Detlaff, for living for many more centuries than a normal humor, has retained his childlike behavior. Which is destructive to say the least.
I got Syanna her ribbon so she was automatically transported away back to the fairy tale world at the beginning of the confrontation
Anna and Syanna's parents are the root of this mess
I spared Syanna and killed Detlaff on my first playthrough but on the next... when I looked at it a bit further... I let Detlaff go. Here's why.
~ Syanna is a truly evil woman. She felt she was justified in manipulating Detlaff, a Higher Vampire, into killing people who had wronged her but felt profound regret at doing so. She expresses no remorse for the deeds she has done through proxy, and shows no alarm at the fact Detlaff (who she knew was emotionally fragile) snapped and set a horde of Vampires on Beauclair. She's completely evil.
~ Anna Henrietta is an insanely incompetent ruler and let her own emotions sway her. She will learn a very serious lesson from not recognising the danger a Higher Vampire poses, despite both Geralt and Regis warning her. If word ever got out that she let her people be slaughtered because she refused to listen to council from a famed Witcher on the very real threat Beauclair was facing she would without a doubt be overthrown by the populace. Her late husband Raymund was also hated by the people, she seems to have not learned from this episode.
~ If Anna Henrietta is not overthrown by her own people then Toussaint, which is still a vassal state of Nilfgaard, would be put under direct rule by Emhyr/Cirilla. They absolutely would not stand for such utter incomptence and arrogance leading to the slaughter of imperial subjects.
~ Depending on the choices made by Geralt he could be in good standing with Emhyr and Cirilla (if she assumes the throne). Anna Henrietta throwing Geralt, whose council she shunned, in prison because he did what she couldn't and stopped the assault on Beauclair, could irk Emhyr and absolutely would enrage Cirilla. Again, her position is untenable. Rather than risk a full-scale revolution it is likely that Nilfgaard would depose Anna Henrietta for gross negligence.
~ Detlaff sic'ing a horde of Vampires on the city was going way too far but Geralt doesn't spare him because he felt sorry for him (he might have, hard to tell), he spares him because he knows what it would do to Regis. Regis once stood directly between Yennefer and Vilgefortz to save her from the mad sorcerer; paying dearly. Frankly, Geralt owes Regis big time and it's time he returned the favor by not condeming him to eternity as a pariah.
~ Regis would stay with Detlaff for quite some time, to console him but above all make sure he doesn't fly off the handle that badly again.
I let Detlaff go.
I saved both sisters and killed dettlaff on mine and got yennefer to live with me best ending imo
He isn’t a bad man, but when he found out who Rhenna really was, he died in Dun Tynne. Regis didn’t kill him; he was helping a corpse escape purgatory.
Well if you go there then you can also say that syanna died when she was abused and raped
Which is kind of true
gonçalo Baia
Syanna’s light burned with fury, Dettlaff’s simply snuffed out. Syanna was alive because of her rage, whereas Dettlaff’s rage was the byproduct of his demise.
@@goncalobaia1574 I can't agree to you saying that Syanna died at (this) one point. Time and other things made her into the person she became. I would far rather say that she died ever since the curse of the black sun was cast above her. Weither that is an actual curse or not does not matter at all.
metaphors contribute absolutely nothing
Nab il
reality’s boring mate. Metaphors contribute to it’s intrigue.
Since you're doing Blood and Wine content, you should do a video on the quest "The Warble of a Smitten Knight," should you transfer the curse from Viviennne to Guillaume or perform the Egg Ritual.
I chose the Egg Ritual because I just did not like Guillaume as a character and he got but kicked in the very first boss from Blood and Wine
Good idea!
I would enjoy that too! Every time I do that quest I don't know what to think of Guillaume... I mean, he doesn't really care if Vivienne likes him back, he seems to view her only as a price. He doesn't even know her.
But, I don't think he means anything ill by it, he's raised in a culture that says men has to brave and ready to kill monsters and even sacrifice themselves and they will get the girl. Maybe he's just naive boy with a huge crush, and ultimately it's great what he's willing to do for her. But then again... Not respecting her wishes or her privacy... I just keep flip flopping on this issue 😄 Someone help me!
I’ll go with where syanna, anna,and dettlaff dies because although its a bad ending , it’s also a true justice ending, anna dies for letting her people die just to protect her sister and refusing to see the truth ,syanna dies for her crimes and plot to kill the Dutchess , and Dettlaff dies for committing a genocide on the innocent people of the city. Like Willis said “Harsh punishments, but deserved.” That’s why I like this game, no one is truly innocent, neither royalty nor Monster, No authority is above justice
It is indeed the best ending. And not to mention that you actually don't kill neither of them from your own free will. Dettlaff dies because he attacked you, Anna because of being too damn trusty to her sister, and Syanna of course for killing the monarch
@Avarti there is also ending with ribbon. When Syanna lives and you did not go to jail
I think you got Dettlaff wrong, especially when you say that "Dettlaff is a danger to humanity". Dettlaff doesn't wanna have anything to do with humanity, in fact he wants to be separate from it. He was dragged into human affairs by a human, but that will likely never happen again (unless another Syanna comes along). He wants to mind his own business and not be bothered by humans. When he says he wants to stay away from people (which he does), you can trust him, whereas you can't really trust Syanna, you never know what she might be planning. She's the real danger. We don''t need to worry about Dettlaff as he leaves at the end because he's not gonna try anything.
I can understand why people would want to spare detlaff, Anna and Syanna aren't exactly the most likable people and Syanna played with Detlaff emotions.
But he had to die after he let his army attack the city and killed innocent people :/
Like i would of spared him still if he would have just attacked the castle and killed everyone in there but to unleash your army on innocent lives and after seeing those kids killed at the orphanage i knew he had to die.
Anna Hanrietta could have stopped the attacks, and she didn't want to
@@gabrielh5105 yeah that's why my true ending is letting the 2 sister's die and killing dettlaff
I killed detlaff by going to the elder, talked to the boy, learned the final victim, talked to syanna but they still kill each other in the end... so...
If you read dettlaffs bio after killing him you realize he’s glad this happened as he had nothing else to live for
I really don't get all the sympathy Detlaff gets, it's only Regis telling me all the time how good he is. But every time you meet him before that he fails to get any sympathy from me. Then he attacks the city -> he's too dangerous, so kill him. Syanna also must be brought to justice, I didn't care how. It seems to me that most players want to save Detlaff because of Regis, I thought about that too, but there were too many lines crossed. Also Regis being shunned in Touisant ist not as bad as many people make it out to be, he says himself that it's not a problem when he's "out of sight, out of mind". So that's the good ending for me, everyone being brought to justice.
This
Both Detlaff and Syanna need to die
All the sympathy for detlaff only exist because of Regis
Some may argue that killing him is mercy. Detlaff as well as his fellow vampires were forced to be in an unfamilar world with equally unfamiliar residents and beings overall. He felt like a stranger unless he was in the company of his bretheren. Hence, he shunned the company of humans as a result. Should you decide to kill Detlaff, he will look at his old friend one last time as his body begins to regenerate from his wounds. However, he does not look at him with anger but with sadness and acceptance. The facf of the matter is... Detlaff wanted to die. He didnt want to be in an unfamilar world any longer, watching everyone he had even a remotely stable connection to perish or decieve him. Its as if all of his experiences left him in disappointment if not temporary happiness. No longer having anything left to live for after the Betrayal of his former lover, death would be his salvation. Hence, killing detlaff is only the right choice.
I agree with you, not only killing innocent people that got to me, but when Geralt went to the Orphanage, all the children but one survived. That did it for me, hated that Geralt did'nt kill the vampire who was feasting on the orphans.
It wasn't just that Syanna was mischievous. She was also one of those born under 'The Curse of the Black Sun'. That was a major factor in why she was treated like she was when she was young.
Just like Renfri/Shrike in the short story "The Lesser Evil".
I don't see much of a dilemma. For me the answer was obvious. Syanna made it clear that none of the people she had killed were innocent, and they were all corrupt knights. Detlaff on the other hand raised an army of vampires to prey on the innocent because of his wrath. He is the villain, not Syanna.
You forgot the third villain: Annarietta chose her sister who appeared 3 days ago, instead of the whole kingdom who had served him since she was born
I was completely on detlaffs side until he attacked beauclair and that’s when I decided he had to be put down
He already gave his warning, but Anna didn't take him seriously. She kinda let the attack happen.
Humans are worthless
I wish there was a way to save dettlaff but since he started a massacre in beauclair, there was no way to justify his innocence. He was just a tragic victim of betrayal but it turned him truly into a monster. And the real monster Syanna stopped being a monster the moment she realized that she wasnt alone and forgotten all the time. They were both Victims and Murderers by Circumstance and the only lesson is that Vengeance leads to suffering. Dettlaff deserved redemption from his suffering so killing him was the only way to redeem him from the eternal pain.
If I am not mistaken there were more ending you did not mention elders path , plus when i played this story for first time I could not believe that Witcher 3 had so mush good stories like this you could combine both Bethesda and ubisoft games and yet they don't come close to what CD project red achieve .
@Pato Donald thanks I didn't know that I always thought I Will tackle it when I replay blood and wine always went to fable world.
@Pato Donald a friend of mine spoiled me that oriana was a vampire I was shocked and pissid at same time who new when they were sitting on table that there were 3 vampire and the Queen thought it's was immature of Gerald to bring vampire to dinner if she only knew her so called friend was also one of them.
I didn't willingly kill Dettlaff, but I did accept it as my "canon" playthrough. I got the ribbon and it saved Syanna from her death. It also fulfilled Regis' wish of trying to talk with Dettlaff by bringing Syanna to him and trying to keep her safe. I don't want to deny Regis his wish of saving Dettlaff, but this way I don't have to let a mass murderer go and force Regis into a moral dilemma and subsequent guilt he might experience. When Dettlaff was going rampant because he thought he was set up there was no doubt that Regis had to fight and didn't have as much as an option to choose sides in the matter. Granted he WOULD have sided with Geralt if he had a choice (as proven in that he actually does when given the choice).
I understand Dettlaff's rage, but he caused misery and sorrow in his wake. Even if it was his own personal trait of herd and love, it doesn't excuse what he did. It's like saying it's okay to kill because it is simply your nature to fight. However once more I am glad my accidentially coming across the ribbon forced our hand to kill Dettlaff and save Regis from the choice. He DID choose to kill Dettlaff for good, but he didn't instigate the fight to begin with. Allows Regis some peace of mind in the ages to come.
I killed Dettlaff twice (once with both sisters dying, the other as they live) because he's the world's most dangerous SIMP. His 'love' for Syanna caused thousands of innocent deaths just to get back with Syanna or get revenge.
PS. He's acting like a child that fell in love with a woman but she dupes him. So he rages on and kills half of Toussaint just to get what he wants.
he also starts a war with humanity, one he doesn't actually plan to fight. he forces other vampires to go to war against their will. putting the portal to their homeland at risk. dooming his own race then leaves them to die.
Aregsh Yumul, he´s definitely not a Simp (Syanna mentions how sex with him is like), but his Whiteknighting, is really bad, if it wasnt for Geralt´s investigation, he would save Syanna not realize she´s Rhena and kill the wrong person, labelled as Blackmailer by Syanna, Geralt even says it later that had it not been for Syanna´s personal grudge to get the Toussaint jewel, she would´ve gotten away with it.
Another factor is that Geralt has accepted a contract to kill the monster and even got paid handsomely in advance.
The first time, I killed Detlaff and saved Anna and Syanna. I found that ending to be entirely unsatisfying, considering just what the two ladies had done/allowed, the amount of blood that had been shed because of their decisions.
So, I replayed that mission... knowing what happens if you don't reconcile the two which I didn't. I won't say it brought me joy to see them die, because it didn't, but it felt more fitting for atmosphere and themes that the Witcher 3 had been going for so far. There needed to be some drastic consequences to finish it all of.
I didn't like that Geralt brought the flowers. I wanted there to be an option where both of them are told that what happened was due to their doing, but oh well.
After that, in my mind, Geralt left Toussaint and would never return again. The place is just.. yikes!
They deserve to die
When Detlaff attacked the city he crossed a line. And I don't believe he wanted to live anyway. Syanna went through some fucked up shit and I don't blame her for wanting revenge or find her irredeemable. I prefer the Ribbon ending with a dead Detlaff and Syanna forgiving her sister.
Actually, he wanted to live because when you choose to let him go there is a character note that says that he appreciated what Geralt did. Also, why would he want to fight when you choose to fight him if he did not want to live.
I killed Dethlaff, I don't care how Syanna made him feel.
With the first ending you can also save Syanna by acquiring the ribbon from the girl who sells flint stone in the land of a thousand fables. You will be forced to fight Dettlaff in that case
Bro, you missed one option to fight Dettlaff, in the Land of Fables you can win the red ribbon of the little girl who is dealing fistech there, if you give the ribbon to Syanna, when Dettlaff attacks her, ribbon protects here and transports her back to the Land of Fables :) after this, you dont have choice to let him go, because he attacks you right away
For me, Blood and Wine doesn't have any good endings- in all of them someone either has to die who I wouldn't kill or duchess will be mad at Gerald. Syanna should die and there is no ending where Syanna dies and the duchess is happy. Dettlaff should die only because he promised not to kill Syanna and he only wanted to talk- then he kills Syanna (unless you get the red ribbon). Gerald bent over backward to deal with Dettlaff non violently, plus Dettlaff says himself he doesn't want to kill- but in the end, his emotions get better of him and he needs to die.
yes its a shitstorm and the best thin gerald can do is try to disove the situation while avoiding the shit smearing on him, and in this side the duches and siter happy vampire is death is the best for gerald
No wonder he says the case is complicated.
In my opinion the good ending is also the morally best one.
A lot of people misinterpret B&W as some sort of blame game, whereby everyone can play favorite by shifting the blame of one person's actions entirely onto another.
You could certainly blame Syanna for bringing Dettlaff into this, but it was his choice and his choice alone to attack an entire city in retaliation. If one was to accuse her of all the results of his actions, one should also coherently blame all of Syanna's actions onto her parents and the knights, and blame theirs on someone else until you shift the blame 10 generations back, and as we know that is not very productive nor leads nowhere.
Rather, the story is about a seemingly endless cycle of rage, revenge, hatred and spite which keeps sucking people in, and these people in turn from victims become perpetrators of other crimes. Both characters are meant to mirror one another. Both tragic antagonists, both made to suffer and both developed (at first, rightfully) a sense of rage and revenge, which they both then pushed too far, essentially becoming the monster they were made out to be.
We know that Syanna was ostracized since day 1, blamed for everything, stripped of her birthright and vanished for a prank she did not even committ, abused, beaten, starved and left to die as a child by four knights meant to protect her. Yet we know she also chose to exploit her lover's feelings to get revenge on those four knights.
We know Dettlaff has been used to kill four men, one of which he was at least in amicable terms with, by the one he loved the most, and that he has done good deeds in the past. Yet we also know he chooses to attack an entire city and massacre innocents over his spite with one woman.
In short, as one bad action does not cancel a good one, and an injury you did does not cancel one you received , both characters are, until the final showdown, deserving of both a punishment and another chance.
The reason why I think the good ending is also the best ending, i.e. why I kill Detlaff and spare Syanna, is not just because I think Syanna endured more evil and did far less of her own, although that is a factor, but rather because of the main difference between the two:
Namely, Syanna shows she is able to break free of this cycle and redeem herself. She chooses to take her responsabilities and to willfully put her life on the line to meet Dettlaff at Tesham Mutna to convince him to spare innocents in the city. If one does as little as talking to her heart to heart and trying to understand her plight, she can be convinced to forgive her sister (as if she was never completely hellbent on killing her and just needed a push in the right direction) and chooses to undergo trial for her crimes (that is, both what she had to endure and both what she did will be taken into account). The game makes it pretty clear she is still salvageable.
Dettlaff does no such thing. He agrees to meet Syanna at Tesham Mutna, but once she is there, he attempts to cut her down almost immediately, without even attempting to hear her out. I was not completely expecting him to forgive her, but I was expecting him to LISTEN at the very least, because that is what the meeting was supposed to be about. What did he even need 3 days and an attack on the city and all the bloodshed that came with it, if he could have just done the same at Dun Tynne castle and be done with it, without innocents getting involved?
Not only that, but when the ribbon teleports Syanna away, he lashes out so violently that he attacks directly Geralt who had nothing to do with it, and will attack Regis himself if he tries to defend Geralt. He is so far gone that he can not climb out of this cycle and only blood can sate him at this point, and even if we let him go, he will get away completely scott-free and will not even have to face the courtesy of a mock trial.
And that is why I think the good ending is the morally best ending (also for Geralt who gets to make peace with the ghosts of his past) and I was quite happy to see Syanna and Annarietta alive and well in the anniversary video which I think is the closest thing to a canon ending the team will ever give us.
This comment I can’t help but agree with the most because originally I sided with dettlaff but after careful consideration and contemplating I decided to save Syana instead because of her upbringing and the fact she reminded me of Renfri
I tried to save everyone, the only reason I got the ribbon was because of gwent. I didn’t want to kill detlaff, or syanna. Syanna only wanted to kill 5 people. Detlaff wanted to kill no one, but when he failed to kill syanna he attacked Regis for no reason? I like the ending that I got, but I just feel bad for Regis
Syanna is a sociopath of no fault of her own and Detlaff an extremely unstable mind who blindly trusted an anonymous entity, killed a bunch of people (even a friend) over very dubious claims on bad evidence and then went ahead and executed a brain control genocide when he felt betrayed by his ex.
I think the save both sisters kill Detlaff ending was pretty much optimal. I don't believe in retributive justice and Syanna showed signs of possibly being rehabilitated, while Detlaff was way too unstable and extremely powerful to be let roaming free after what he's done.
Can you really "justify murder of innocent men, women, and children (the whole orphanage) killed by vampires summon by Dettlaff, who was used by his ex lover to do her evil bidding?? He couldn't handle the truth, so he slaughters a city?...who would have thunk? Is this his reaction whenever something doesn't go his way. Yup, I nipped it in the bud....no more vampires. No more Dettlaff.
He was a disgrace to higher vampires. Imagine one of the most powerful and intelligent creatures to exist being toyed with by some spoiled brat. Detlaffs stupidity is what makes him dangerous
True
Other vampires all have an IQ in 40s besides Regis tbb
I'm having trouble killing him at the moment. It's really frustrating.
I got the ending where both sisters died because I warned the bodyguard and the duchess and they both ignored me. Honestly serves the Duchess right I didn't even feel bad. Especially how her whole city was coming undone and she put one person over her own people that rely on her to make the choices to protect them. Smh.
The "canon" Blood and Wine ending is probably the most unambiguous happy ending in the game. Of course Detlaff had to die, look at what he did to Beauclair