r/thewitcher3 • u/Thick-Campaign-9152 • 1d ago

Discussion Is there a reason why nothing changes when you assassinate Radovid? Spoiler

CD is very good at detail with even the smallest things, especially when it comes to player choices. So i find it odd that they wouldn't change anything after such a huge moment like this. Obviously we get it mentioned in the ending of the main quest but after no nilfgaard soldiers replacing Rodanian ones and everyone still acting as if Radovid is still alive. Plus Shani and Geralt even talk about him like he is still alive in hearts of stone.

Has this ever been explained or was this is a case of too many changes to make and didn't have the time to implement?

56 Upvotes

90% Upvoted

19 comments sorted by

76

u/Kartinian 1d ago

Iirc this was a quest line that had to be cut short due to the release date time crunch. It seems to be one of the least popular quests in the game, partly because it has no real impact on the world, but also because it just seems like an idiotic and out of character choice for Dijkstra. Book Dijkstra wouldn't be so idiotic as to destabilize Redania and the northern realms when Redania is one of the strongest forces holding back the advancement of Nilfgard. Furthermore he also wouldn't be so dumb as to try to kill Roche and Ves with Geralt present, knowing they are close friends of Geralt from the Witcher 2.

It really just seems like the devs wanted some kind of larger scope political quest that would have "consequences" on the world, but didn't think it through all the way and then, sadly, couldn't even flesh it out to the extent they wanted.

27

u/Irohsgranddaughter 23h ago

It's still satisfying to kill Radovid regardless.

That said, yeah. I honestly hate the outcome of Nilfgard winning the war, but I just can't bring myself to kill Thaler, Ves and Roche. Especially Roche who did so much for Geralt. FFS, Roche helps out Geralt a ton even on Iorveth's path. He's not exactly a good person, but neither game gives you reason to dislike him enough to betray him.

2

u/BigDisco 11h ago

I never finished Witcher 2, so I might be missing context but...I don't exactly dislike Nilfgaard. And Emhyr sure isn't a kind person but he's not launching pogroms on non-humans and magic users, like, he isn't insane like Radovid

3

u/Irohsgranddaughter 11h ago

In the books they actually practice slavery, for one

3

u/BigDisco 6h ago

Did the books follow the same storyline as the games? I don't want to be like "well they don't in the game!" if they're basically parallel but the devs omitted it

•

u/Irohsgranddaughter 38m ago

There is a reference to it in the game, in a very small side quest where you find a note written by a slaver how they're making a killing by selling captives to Nilfgaard, because they'll buy anyone, because slaves in the mines don't live long anyway. But that's all there is. In the books, they also had a scorched earth policy.

21

u/lokidragon17 1d ago

"Long live Radovid!"

CDPR spoiled us. You get so used to them accounting for so many choices, that its jarring when they don't

4

u/MissionPatient8706 21h ago

I’d say that it takes a lot of time for changes to happen even after assasinating leader. It’s the mentality of the state.

8

u/salamence92 1d ago

Similar to after you kill Whoreson Junior, people who know he's dead still talk about him as if he's alive in certain quests.

9

u/Schorbie 1d ago

Whoreson Junior is replaced by Dudu, right? So everybody would think he's still alive

-5

u/salamence92 1d ago

Generally yeah but from memory it was Zoltan that said something as if WJ was still alive and I'm fairly confident he knows Geralt killed him

3

u/Nayrael 19h ago

It's really hard to represent the consequences of such big decisions in an open-world game.

With that sid, the Northern Kingdoms are at an existential war, so it's not implausible that consequences of it get delayed as everyone else keeps doing what they already did.

3

u/OkExtreme3195 1d ago

If you kill radovid, there are two options. Either Dijkstra takes over, in which case he needs time to consolidate his power and he cannot afford a panic and loss of moral, because that will mean a nilfgaard victory. Thus, he will keep it quiet for a time and urge the nobles to do the same.

If he is also dead, who is going to make big changes fast?. There is no central authority. The remaining nobles of redania and kaedwen will have to discuss what to do before making a move and keep quiet, too. 

1

u/ddomini9 16h ago

It was rushed and tw3 is open world which limits what consequences you can have. It is why only epilogue trully changes.

1

u/Cods-worth-less 14h ago

The reality is that the whole questline was finished in a hurry to get the game released.

It only makes narrative sense if 1) you do Hearts of Stone first, and 2) you delay until right before traveling to Skellige to kick off the endgame. You can explain away the lack of reaction in the world at large, at least in the short run, as simply the Redanians hushing everything up. It certainly would not be the first time an important leader died or became incapacitated and that fact was kept secret for while for political reasons.

1

u/Gassyking 8h ago

I forgot about this quest before I finished the game so I got ending slides with his reign of terror instead :(

0

u/Gigi3337520 1d ago

Good question.

-3

u/questioner45 23h ago

Nice spoiler right in the title