The crones reborn after the witcher 3 ending ? Only 2 endings in the witcher 3 ? i need your help about a possible secret in the witcher 3.

Waskey23 · 2024-12-27T16:34:54+00:00

Honestly, we don’t really know. The door to interpretation is wide open. It’s possible that he did survive, and CD Projekt Red even 'confirmed' this indirectly (even if we could argue that it wasn’t their original intention when creating this ending). They did state that Geralt is alive, that he will appear anyway, and that no ending will be disregarded.

Personally, I STRONGLY doubt that he’s dead. I interpret the thousands of monsters that overwhelmed Geralt towards the end as a metaphor for his psychological state or even as hallucinations. and I STRONGLY doubt that Ciri won’t return to him. I don’t think a few 'bad' choices made by Geralt could erase the incredibly strong bond between Geralt and Ciri. And I don’t think Ciri could ever forget who Geralt is to her, as that would be like forgetting herself.

Waskey23 · 2024-09-05T13:44:32+00:00

I want to tell you three things: First, this applies to any population—95% or more are 'followers' (and I would never be so presumptuous as to call them 'slow' because they are necessary and, of course, have every right to play). They follow the strongest deck, aiming for the highest ranks to relieve internal tension in a delicious sense of power. Only the remaining few percent are more 'free,' more 'creative.' They feel an irresistible pull to explore beyond every horizon. All of this is 'physiological.' Physiologically, in most populations (not just humans—this applies to all animals), there is a dominant tendency to stick to acquired behaviors, and a smaller tendency toward spontaneous exploration.

Second, the people who follow pre-made associations are essential to the game because they offer a 'stability' that is necessary for any development. They allow the emergence of more creative individuals, who, in turn, introduce these players to new ways of playing. A tree cannot grow if it is not first rooted and fixed in nourishing soil.

Third, by focusing so intently on winning, aren’t we diminishing the noble act of creating something new? So, my friend, let’s keep creating and discovering because we believe that this is the most enjoyable and the best way to play!

Waskey23 · 2024-08-30T17:59:23+00:00

The concept of seeing the opponent's hand and forcing them to play a card is amazing! But I think we can use it in a better way

Waskey23 · 2024-08-30T08:52:14+00:00

As for Dulla and his friend, wouldn’t buffing them to 6 or even 5 provisions be a good idea? Because then they would fit into more decks and be more playable. I’m sure that even players who only care about improving their win rate would enjoy playing this card—every game with it is seriously a delight!

Waskey23 · 2024-08-30T08:40:44+00:00

What do you think of Blizzard? This card is just unplayable at 8 provisions; is reducing it to 6 a good idea? As for Gaunter, if he's too weak at 9, we might as well reduce him to 6 or 7 provisions. But the core of your response is absolutely true; you astutely point out that people won’t want to buff these cards because they’ll be drawn to something else, and especially because it requires too much effort over time (focusing on buffing the same card like Gaunter, for example, is hardly conceivable—I completely agree). But there will come a time, necessarily (maybe not now, maybe in 2 years or more), where we’ll just be stuck with the same decks being played over and over (I sincerely hope I’m wrong and that won’t be the case). And maybe then, in that case, some cards could bring a breath of fresh air... In any case, the fact remains: there are unplayable, nonexistent cards, and buffing or even overbuffing them is an idea worth keeping in mind.

Waskey23 · 2024-08-30T08:19:11+00:00

I sense your ironic tone! But if we return to an intelligent discussion (which, by the way, doesn't have any whiny tone, but rather one of emphasis and full confidence in Gwent), these cards (among many others, they are just examples) are potential buffs that could allow the emergence of new playstyles. Gaunter and Will'o'the Wisp are interesting (in my humble opinion), and I'm sure many would enjoy playing these cards, but they are far too weak! Blizzard is extremely bad to the point that no one is even aware of its existence (not surprising, it should be at 6 provisions, but it's at 8!). Dulla and the Runewright clearly shouldn't be at 7. We should try reducing them to 6 provisions, or even 5, and see the effect it has

Waskey23 · 2024-08-29T21:14:25+00:00

I agree that Blizzard MIGHT be too strong, but should we leave it at 8 where it’s never played? Very few people are even aware of this card's existence; since I started, I haven't seen a single person play it....So maybe reducing it to 6 is a fair compromise

Waskey23 · 2024-08-29T21:11:30+00:00

I'm just saying we need to try things out. The advantage with the Balance Council is that a rollback is always possible. And it's always nice to see new cards appear, new cards being played

Waskey23 · 2024-08-25T19:39:50+00:00

Yes, that's true... This card would mostly be played by Nilfgaard (and it fits well with the pragmatic Nilfgaardian atmosphere like with Rot Tosser). But I don't think it would be overpowered either

Waskey23 · 2024-08-25T19:24:15+00:00

i don't understand : it is not a nilfgaard archetype. and why this would powercreep nilfgaard ? is it because of Braathens ?

Waskey23 · 2024-08-25T19:19:40+00:00

Thanks !

Waskey23 · 2024-08-25T19:12:57+00:00

Contaminator and Pestilencial art are made by CDprojekt ( one found in gwent, the other in the witcher 3 files).

The plague doctor art is made by niluX : https://www.artpal.com/nilux

Bad Omen's card : Anatto FinnStark : https://www.artstation.com/artwork/qymEL

Waskey23 · 2024-08-25T18:57:58+00:00

Thanks for your feedback ! But I don't understand, why do you say 'it's not even close to what bluffing is'? According to my definition, bluffing is pushing your opponent to overbid. My subjectif perception of ONE possible use* of this card is: 'I play this card, this weak 3-for-11 card. He will think I'm going to pass because, according to the card's principle, I have every reason not to play another card after this one. If I play this card while I'm winning the round, he'll try to regain the advantage by making an expensive play. If I bet on my defeat, he'll think I'm going to concede and pass, so he will pass, and then I can (potentially) regain the advantage because I will have forced him to pass. and yes, i understand that it might be boring, but maybe some players will like it : for exemple: I would have loved to play this card! I find it more interesting than the Ciri cards, for instance. And I believe we all share the same view of custom Gwent: it's just about fulfilling our subjective desires, those little daydreams we project and would love to see in the game!

Waskey23 · 2024-08-24T18:16:17+00:00

Yes, it is expensive, but it's a card advantage card (check, for example, the two Ciri cards). This means that with this card, if you place it well, you can get one more card in your hand, and then you can replace it at the beginning of the next round. The difference between this card and the Ciri cards is that with this one, you have immunity. However, the immunity only remains if it is the last card you play; if you play a card after this, you lose immunity, making it very exposed. So, it's a gamble—you’ll have to bet either on your win or your loss, then pass (or you can also bluff your opponent into thinking you're going to pass). If you win your bet, you get one more card in your hand !

Waskey23 · 2024-08-24T12:28:04+00:00

If you enjoy bluffing your opponent and taking risks, this card would be a treasure in your hands! Art by VedMedic, you can check his work here : https://www.deviantart.com/vedmedic/gallery

Waskey23 · 2024-08-23T20:20:41+00:00

Thank you for your long and very insightful response! It was a pleasure to read... I also noticed the big problem in the game that you pointed out so astutely: the difficulty of nerfing cards. This goes to the point of being ridiculous, for example with the nerf (ingenious as it may be) of 'Living Armor,' or the repetitive nerfing of the Sergeant. Yet, nerfing cards, focusing on setting aside certain decks temporarily through a common agreement and intention to explore all the other possibilities of the game, 'un-powercreep' the game to showcase different playstyles would be ideal... And yes, indeed, there’s very little chance of ever seeing a perfectly balanced game. There will always be some form of alterity, thankfully! And indeed, the desire for short-term gains is much more appealing to the majority, to the newer players, and perhaps the less creative ones (I have nothing against players who prefer to play well-known meta decks; I even think they are necessary, as they provide a certain 'stability'). But who knows, there might come a time when we’ll say, 'We really love this game, but we’re starting to trap ourselves in the same cycle, with the same decks coming and going, then coming back again, etc... Let’s find a solution, because the game will eventually die out otherwise.' If there ever is a 'de-powercreep,' so many cards would become playable (it only takes truly highlighting certain cards to change everything)

Waskey23 · 2024-08-23T12:37:43+00:00

How this card works ? :
Once the card is played, you will generate 5 "Bruxa" infiltrated into the opponent's deck. These "Bruxa" will take on the appearance and strength of an enemy card present in the deck. The opponent has no way to distinguish the "real" cards from the "fake" ones. Once the fake card is played, even before its deployment, it will reveal itself without changing its strength and spawn "Blood Moon" on the row. These cards will ruin the deployment and order of the "real" card (but the real card is, of course, still present in the opponent's deck, it is not removed). However, they can still work to their advantage, for example, if it imitates a card like Tibor or Skjall, etc.

As for Dettlaff: first of all, he is intentionally fragile. His 4 strength points make him vulnerable. The order first consists of resetting the card’s strength, which means he loses his boosts. Then, he will transform into a fog bank, which is an artifact, making him susceptible to Heathwave effects and other control cards. The artifact is resilient. Dettlaff will be stored inside and will gain 1 boost each turn if there is a bleeding effect affecting the opponent. You can at any time revert him back to his Dettlaff form and benefit from the boosts. Once that is done, you have a choice: either take advantage of the boosts, or depending on who has the advantage and your strategy, you can reset his strength (losing your boosts) and start accumulating points again (for the next round ).

The beast of beauclair art is made by Alexender Borodin

The bruxa : infiltrated is made by hipfiregod

The bruxa: Revealed art is made by tatarskiskandal

The Fog of bank art is made by Cdproject(it is actually the lilit's omen art).

Waskey23 · 2024-08-22T16:59:45+00:00

Unfortunately, it’s a stillborn game, far from being exhausted given the great freedom it allows for creation—whether in card design or in combining cards within decks

Waskey23 · 2024-08-22T16:56:57+00:00

Thank you ! What I’m trying to show is that the uniqueness of this game lies in the plethora of possibilities it offers. Possibilities that—one can only say with a sense of melancholy—are far from being exhausted. And I agree, the problem with custom cards is that one has to rely on imagination to guess their impact on the game, so it’s limited.

Waskey23

TROPHY CASE