It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Join gamers keeping classics aliveJoin gamers keeping classics alive Become GOG Patron
Community
The Witcher 2A symbolic kill(12 posts)(12 posts)
(12 posts)
Pages:
1
This is my favourite topic
Posted April 18, 2014
Well, when I fought Loredo, I decided to fight him using the silver sword to symbolize the fact that even though he is human he is more monstrous than the endregas and nekkers fought in Chapter I.

I was wondering if anyone else enjoyed using the "wrong" weapon to give some deeper meaning to the fight, for example fighting trolls with steel swords (since they seem more humane than most humans in the game) or figting humans or elves with the silver sword.
Post edited April 18, 2014 by LeonardoCornejo
Posted April 18, 2014
I like this idea very much, and I sure as hell am going to put it to practice on my next play through!

It had never crossed my mind, but it makes perfect sense, and I was never a guy to care about "perfect builds" and "min maxing" and all that crap, to me, RPGs are about playing a role, not being excellent at something, and your twist on the game play mechanics sounds really interesting to me, because it's obvious that some human characters are more monstrous in nature than some monsters, and the other way around.
Posted April 18, 2014
To tell the truth I got the idea from one of the possible endings of the first game.
Posted April 21, 2014
They are both for monsters.

The only reason(s) to use the silver sword are because the steel sword is unavailable (e.g. at the start of The Witcher, Act II, from the first game where you only have the silver), or because the monster has silver sensitivity and will be pained or otherwise damaged more by the silver.

Both swords have a steel core, but the softer silver blade would be less suitable for retaining an edge against other steel swords, or for piercing steel armours.

Loredo is merely an unscrupulous and self-serving man, far from the worst in the Lore though without redeeming qualities of any kind, I consider his death to be the best choice whichever path I choose, but he is not an archetypal monster worth hunting down at all costs, nor something fell that would shrug off the effects of a steel blade.
Posted April 21, 2014
avatar
Lieste: They are both for monsters.

The only reason(s) to use the silver sword are because the steel sword is unavailable (e.g. at the start of The Witcher, Act II, from the first game where you only have the silver), or because the monster has silver sensitivity and will be pained or otherwise damaged more by the silver.

Both swords have a steel core, but the softer silver blade would be less suitable for retaining an edge against other steel swords, or for piercing steel armours.

Loredo is merely an unscrupulous and self-serving man, far from the worst in the Lore though without redeeming qualities of any kind, I consider his death to be the best choice whichever path I choose, but he is not an archetypal monster worth hunting down at all costs, nor something fell that would shrug off the effects of a steel blade.
Dude he kidnaped an elf and raped her, much likely constantly, until she got pregnant, his mother is a drug adict, and he was selling Floatsam to Dethmold, if that does not make him worth hunting down then I am a superb witcher.
Post edited April 21, 2014 by LeonardoCornejo
Posted April 21, 2014
Riiight, and I always choose to eliminate him for those reasons. No choice on Roche's Path and the three additional elvish women on Iorveth's are the lesser evil compared to permitting his control of Flotsam to continue.

But he is only a man, and not the most wicked possible. Steel will suffice for eliminating this type of monster, and both swords are for monsters, and neither are for honourable or sentient races who are not causing harm.

To use silver on humans is unnecessary, as they are not immune to steel, and not sensitive to silver.
Posted April 27, 2014
for some odd reason, on the grand master in the witcher 1 silver proved more damaging

could be a bug or developer inteneded that way?
Posted April 27, 2014
avatar
noamlol2: for some odd reason, on the grand master in the witcher 1 silver proved more damaging

could be a bug or developer inteneded that way?
Not, as far as I remember in FCR 1.6a, which is all I played to that stage... I suppose it may have been in vanilla game...

Neither was terribly effective, especially since he repeatedly heals himself... Silver was better for the fight, as it was more effective at removing Ifrits... until it was only "Jacques" left... but I think I did switch to steel to bring the fight to an end as it was doing around 2x the damage, and had a different (more useful) oil applied to it.

The Silver still had Spectre Oil for the Wild Hunt battle to follow as well, rather than finding myself "out"... because I'd replaced the Silver's oil with something more suited to killing Human Monsters.
Posted April 28, 2014
avatar
noamlol2: for some odd reason, on the grand master in the witcher 1 silver proved more damaging

could be a bug or developer inteneded that way?
avatar
Lieste: Not, as far as I remember in FCR 1.6a, which is all I played to that stage... I suppose it may have been in vanilla game...

Neither was terribly effective, especially since he repeatedly heals himself... Silver was better for the fight, as it was more effective at removing Ifrits... until it was only "Jacques" left... but I think I did switch to steel to bring the fight to an end as it was doing around 2x the damage, and had a different (more useful) oil applied to it.

The Silver still had Spectre Oil for the Wild Hunt battle to follow as well, rather than finding myself "out"... because I'd replaced the Silver's oil with something more suited to killing Human Monsters.
i've played the vanilla game

so it could be developer intended
Posted May 01, 2014
avatar
noamlol2: for some odd reason, on the grand master in the witcher 1 silver proved more damaging

could be a bug or developer inteneded that way?
Remember what he says when he is killed by Geralt, that proves my point, in universe, silver swords are known as designed for monsters, therefore killing a human with a silver sword makes it a monster.

I never noticed the silver sword eas more damaging to him, He came down quite quickly for a final boss.
Posted May 01, 2014
Yet the cutscene has him blasting the sword (steel) from Geralt's hand, so the Silver is drawn and used for the killing blow instead, unless I mis-remember completely.

This makes me think that the intent was for steel to be the effective weapon, and silver the killing sword for the 'moral hook'.
Posted May 02, 2014
avatar
Lieste: Yet the cutscene has him blasting the sword (steel) from Geralt's hand, so the Silver is drawn and used for the killing blow instead, unless I mis-remember completely.

This makes me think that the intent was for steel to be the effective weapon, and silver the killing sword for the 'moral hook'.
[Big spoiler]


Actualy it looks like The Grand Master thought Geralt would not kill him with a silver sword as if he was a disgusting drowner and so he says "But that sword is for monsters". Geralt hesitated for a few seconds (for a few seconds he just gives the guy a cold hearted stare as if saying "exactly") not because he was not going to kill him but because he found the idea of killing a human with a sword coloquially known as "for monsters" as something amusing.
[End of spoiler]
Pages:
1
This is my favourite topic
Community
The Witcher 2A symbolic kill(12 posts)(12 posts)
(12 posts)