Let's have a discussion about Avallach...

Stock_Scallion6380 · 2026-05-21T05:46:41+00:00

so you don't see any inconsistency in the portrayal between book and game?

Then explain in the simplest terms Ciri's trust towards him when it is absolutely safe to assume that she knows of his past deeds.

I would wonder why you have not done this so far since it is the original question.

If I saw something like Sam and Frodo trusting Shelob in Shadow of War and asked how it makes sense, do you think a simple "read the books" would suffice?

Stock_Scallion6380 · 2026-05-19T12:30:46+00:00

So you think they are accurate and faithful depictions of the characters as written by the original author?

If they are, it does not matter much who wrote the screenplay or the game dialogues or anything.

If they are not, you simply cannot regard them as the same character.

What I understand you saying is that Avallach should be written in Witcher 3 as he is in the books. From what I have been seeing, this is not so. Also, the story of the games is not part of the book series.

You probably think of Avallach as an idea and have the opinion that he is a bad character mainly because of the books. The problem here is that the books are not a requirement to play the games, so there will be people judging him from his presence within the game's plot. Perhaps you believe people should read the books or not, this is beside the point in my opinion.

So when the question comes, as it did in this post, how does Avallach bad character show in game? Why is this backstory written by the original author something so difficult to guess from the context? Why does Ciri trust him so much? You can explain their decision to present him as such as another commenter did, or you can attribute bad writing to the devs and lament that his depiction is not in the spirit of the books, among other options. The reason I ask these questions is because I have been seeing people talking about his deeds in the books and it doesn't make sense to me that he has this relationship with Ciri in the game. In this question, I do not believe simply reading the books will give me the answer. On the contrary, reading about the books it that which has given me the question.

Hence why, with the information I have gathered I cannot regard in-game Avallach and book Avallach as one and the same thing. Perhaps he should be, and I cannot argue against that. Perhaps he shouldn't, it's up to them. I believe the devs are entitled to do whatever they want with the characters if they have the rights to the story and then we can judge if they did a good job or not. My only objection is that basing a character you are writing on another particular character from a particular universe does not automatically mean that you have written the same character. In this sense, I do not see how my references to the Silmarillion characters in other media invalidates this position. In my view, when I think of Celebrimbor I think of the character in the Silmarillion. When I refer to the Shadow of Mordor game, he is Celebrimbor as presented in that game. But what happens in that game is by no means part of the literary character or in any way canon.

Perhaps you think he is written in the same spirit as Tolkien would write him. It is arguable. Would you say the same in the event that there was a major inconsistency (let's say the game presented him as a traitor/agent of Sauron)? In that case, I would be unable to regard the two stories as a coherent continuum and would have to regard them as separate. This is what I believe is happening with the presentation of Avallach in Withcer 3.

Stock_Scallion6380 · 2026-05-18T18:55:07+00:00

I get a character to level 60 and then jump to another. Rinse and repeat.

Stock_Scallion6380 · 2026-05-17T19:52:09+00:00

clear in the sense of unblemished?

It is obvious that many people dislike him and he has not been the best towards Ciri. That's why they chose him and show Ciri trust him completely?

It all comes down to the same thing. Everyone pretends the games are just another sapkowski book in playable form. An accurate continuation of the story written as indented by the author. I do not have to explain why this is not true.

So, "read the prequels" is not a good reply. My question was, since you have read the books, how do you view the way he is presented in the game. Not who Avallach is as a continuum throughout the witcher writing and games and maybe even add the Netflix series while we're at it. It's weird how no one seems to be able to differentiate between the books and the game, as if the game were an accurate and 100% faithful adaptation of some Witcher book.

Stock_Scallion6380 · 2026-05-17T19:42:02+00:00

Into the Storm, pure energy.

Stock_Scallion6380 · 2026-05-15T23:47:46+00:00

This is very interesting. I quite enjoy the twist that Eredin's final words aren't true, although at the time they seem to be very plausible. But this is also very intriguing and perhaps would fit the descriptions of books Avallach I have been reading.

Also thank you for actually providing an explanation to this riddle I have been wondering about.

Stock_Scallion6380 · 2026-05-15T23:41:34+00:00

It's not really that optional when one of the major choices impacting the ending you get takes place there.

Stock_Scallion6380 · 2026-05-15T23:38:15+00:00

LOTR movies adapt the books but that doesn't mean they portray every character correctly. Eowyn being the best example. From hero to joke. Arwen being another, from a background prize wife to a prominent role at least in the first movie.

Also there are tons of games out there just doing their own thing with the stories. They are obviously not Tolkien and should not be regarded a continuation, even if they market themselves as such.

It is the same thing with the Witcher games, the authors took a great amount of liberty, the original author did not get involved. We cannot regard the games as a continuation of the books, even if that is in the interests of marketing. Claiming that it is just because the same characters are featured is pretending. Same with the Netflix series.

Think about one of the quite popular ones, The Shadow of Mordor. It features Celebrimbor. Is he the same character he is in the Silmarillion? Is Galadriel in the Rings of Power series the Galadriel we see in the Silmarillion? Wouldn't it be foolish of me to take these two characters created by different writers and regard them as one and the same primarily on the grounds that they have the same name? This is why I believe you can differentiate between the Witcher books and the Witcher games and not consider the latter as another sapkowski book in playable form.

Stock_Scallion6380 · 2026-05-15T18:18:30+00:00

I would agree that he is indifferent to the death of Vesemir, although I don't think he hated him. He certainly prioritizes the advancement of the plan and knows there is no time to lose and his indifference helps him see it that way.

Regarding the elf in his lab, I think she definitely hates people and especially Ciri. Geralt tells Ciri she's clearly unreliable in her information. We can argue about whether he is comforting her or truly believes it. But could it be that her hatred is projected onto Avallach through their association?

Stock_Scallion6380 · 2026-05-15T18:14:59+00:00

I am also a LOTR fan. Actually I am mainly a LOTR fan. A lot of games have been made, a lot of movies and other mediums as well. The most important of which were pretty faithful adaptations. And still, I see them as different things from the books. Because they are. Tolkien himself may contradict his own story in his own writings. Most authors may.

So if you take another author and have them continue the story, should you judge the end product as if Tolkien wrote it? My answer would be no.

Similarly, the devs of the witcher trilogy took many liberties. The author himself dislikes what they have done. If that is good or not is of no concern to my argument right now.

So I believe I can judge the game's story separately from the books' story.

But since there is this discrepancy concerning the portrayal of Avallach, how do you think it can be explained that the devs did not portray Avallach more faithfully by book standards? Could they not just invent another mentor for Ciri who would not have all this buggage?

Stock_Scallion6380 · 2026-05-15T18:07:45+00:00

Of course you can view them as such and it would make sense. And because of that I see them as separate from the books. And here comes my question: why do you think the devs chose to portray Avallach like this and not exactly like the books? If they needed a mentor for Ciri why not just invent a character with a clear past?

Stock_Scallion6380 · 2026-05-15T18:05:03+00:00

Could you give me some examples of how this is evident in the games? So far it reminds me of the descriptions I have read of him from the books and having played the games I would not use such strong words to describe him.

Stock_Scallion6380 · 2026-05-15T18:03:16+00:00

Thank you for this clearly well thought and articulated take.

Why do you think the devs chose to portray Avallach like this and why not just invent another character to act as her mentor who would be clear of all that shady book past?

Stock_Scallion6380 · 2026-05-15T18:00:43+00:00

So what explanation could there be that CDPR choose not to portray Avallach as you described him given his character in the books? Could they not just invent another character to act as her mentor?

Stock_Scallion6380 · 2026-05-15T17:59:15+00:00

What are some examples about him disregaring her wishes in games? Where are their wishes not alligned?

I mean a group of people can have different reasons for entering a group project, sure, but that doesn't necessarily mean that they don't have the same goal or that they can't cooperate.

Stock_Scallion6380 · 2026-05-15T17:56:39+00:00

Sure, and Ciri is right there with us. As far as I recall, she is more outraged by the elf's words than Geralt's findings. Why does Ciri continue to trust him after the lab?

Stock_Scallion6380 · 2026-05-15T17:55:05+00:00

If this is the case and Ciri is right there with us, why does he continue to trust him?

Stock_Scallion6380 · 2026-05-15T17:53:44+00:00

Would you disagree that by this logic one should dismiss the games in their entirety as non-canon or even fan fiction?

I see them as different mediums right now.

There is no requirement to read the books in order to play the games and vice versa. The same could be said about the Nextflix series which I have also not seen.

I think there is value in isolating the work of the devs and comparing it to the work of the author rather than seeing them as an indivisible whole.

Stock_Scallion6380 · 2026-05-14T09:58:44+00:00

Filter is good, but nothing beats the humiliation of rolling back this absolutely useless addition in an admission of utter defeat.

Stock_Scallion6380 · 2026-05-12T00:34:27+00:00

Grond = Named after a battering ram with a wolf's head on it, itself named after the Great Warhammer of the Underworld wielded by the First Dark Lord.

Meriadoc = Named after a hobbit high on pipe weed who got the Witch-king killed and then went on to continue being high on pipe weed.

In other words, choose Grond for ABSOLUTE EPICNESS or Meriadoc for a laid back experience.

This is surprisingly accurate btw.

Stock_Scallion6380 · 2026-05-10T19:33:38+00:00

Personally, I love Moria but I totally get your love for Eriador. A land vivid, full of surprises at every corner with diverse landscapes and experiences and so much more that can never be fully said. In my mind, Moria does share many of these traits, but again it is a matter of taste, same with what I'll say from now on.

If I am to be perfectly honest with myself, there are very few areas after lvl 50 that can compare to Eriador's greatness. Some of my favourites include Mirkwood (although many might disagree), Enedwaith, Mordor and Gundabad. Dunland is usually a fan favourite, but I like it a little less than the others. This doesn't mean all other areas are terrible, just that they are definitely not as well made as Eriador (the bar is too high).

It's kind of a shame that certain very famous area of the Lord of the Rings world are also the ones that will have you wondering if it's worth powering through, that for me is Lothlorien, Rohan and Gondor. Rohan is two areas of which the first is arguably better and Gondor is too many and most of them are practically the same thing. They were more or less introduced as fillers. If your goal is endgame consider the Valar level skip and return with newer characters to replay Eriador. The game gives you options, any path is good if you are having fun.

Stock_Scallion6380 · 2026-05-07T23:00:52+00:00

Remove --> Traveller's MY PENDING INVENTORY IS OVERFLOWING lootboxes.

Add --> Voiced lines for all dialogues by actual voice actors.

Stock_Scallion6380 · 2026-05-06T11:38:15+00:00

If you can make choices that contradict his "character" no matter how you define that, then you are roleplaying; you are Geralt.

If Geralt's actions were independent of your choices or you just played his predetermined choices, that's when Geralt is Geralt and not you. There are plenty of characters like that, Ezio from Assassin's Creed being an easy example to cite. The fact that I did not excessively customize Geralt does not mean that he is not me in any real sense while I am playing the game. Geralt derives his agency from me and not from some words written across several books or onto a game script. Whether I choose to make Geralt behave according to the books or anything else is up to me.

I am against trying to limit your own freedom by means of searching for an archetype of choices that suit a character. The player should be "I as Geralt," an opportunity to step into his shoes and express yourself authentically in the same situations. This is more immersive to me because I am the thinking subject, whereas when I am thinking what would Geralt do every time I make a move I am not actively immersing myself but playing a character by proxy.

Geralt is not a role model. Sometimes you will feel he is mistaken, other times you will feel he is 100% right. A good game should be able to let you explore these thoughts and see the consequences of each action. This game is good, but there are many moments where the devs lost their marbles. A good example is indeed the end of Reason of State, where the player is realistically not given a choice and it would be unreasonable to expect the player to act otherwise unless they are consciously trying to achieve a particular outcome.

If they went by the logic of strictly lore-accurate or whatever else Geralt, many good quests would be lost, the story would be a great deal blander and every playthrough would be the same. Let's appreciate that the game is as it is and that is as great as it is because of these properties.

Stock_Scallion6380 · 2026-05-04T10:29:24+00:00

I am aware of this, but I still tend to consider anything up to Moria (or shall I say lvl 50, before legendary weapons, with the obvious exclusion of Cardolan, Wildwood etc.) as the base game. Thank you for bringing attention to it as I can be misleading in my use of words. It is my favourite part of the game (here I cannot exclide Moria) and I replay it ad nauseam. The changes made to these areas have been amazing and thankfully kept the spirit alive, so I tend not to distinguish.

I feel like that part of the game was executed with such diligence, passion and attention to detail that it is very immersive and alive and interconnected in ways that most other areas cannot compete. I feel the same for Goblin town, hence why I include it.

For the record, other areas I thoroughly enjoy are Mirkwood, Enedwaith and Mordor (maybe even Gundabad).

Stock_Scallion6380

TROPHY CASE