Depends on how you look at it. Geralt learns that he can save Saskia early on when arriving in the city of Loc Muinne. From the political point of view, I can argue that saving Saskia would have a more significant impact, whereas saving Anais regardless still lead to a very uncertain political future for Temeria.

While he knows that only Philippa could break the spell on Saskia, it's a long jump from that to "if we get Philippa out of jail, she will actually help us break the spell, rather than lead us into a trap and get away".

Geralt is not a political animal. I think he would leave how Temeria orders its future under Natalis or the Redanians to Roche and the politicians. But I don't think he'd pass on rescuing a child.

Hmmm, that's a good point. It is easier for me, but not easier for Geralt to choose Saskia. Although I'm not sure in this case if Geralt would prioritize saving a children who is more valuable alive than dead, or prioritize saving his loved one who is under torture and under the threat of possibly getting her eyes gouged out (note that Geralt has no idea beforehand that Letho would say Triss in the former's stead).

A difficult decision, but given that Geralt is apathetic to politics and care more about his loved ones, I think the more canon path is to save Triss.

I agree with this. I didn't think twice about saving Triss instead of going after Philippa just as I wouldn't think twice about saving a child. Those paths just seem more 'natural', even though my 'official' one is going to be the one in which I free Saskia from the spell.

It could also depend on how "your" Geralt feels about Triss.

I take Dandelion's notes as a gospel. I.e. when he says that Triss wants to be the only woman in Geralt's life, would give up the glam and glory of a sorceress' life and even go to Kaer Morhen with him - Buttfuck, Nebraska basically - I take it that she actually DOES feel that way.

Now how Geralt feels about it is another thing. He could be a shameless cunt-chaser and view her as a hot, but clingy piece of ass (which is dangerous to piss off to boot). Or he could be paranoid (as an amnesiac should be) and secretly mistrust her. Or he's fixated on Yennefer as both a lover and a key to his past. Or he's actually now in love with Triss, which will be interesting when he finally finds Yen.

Well, gotta keep in mind that Geralt, as a mutant, is somewhat...limited...or actually disabled in his ability of having feelings.

Love...seems to be strong enough to actually come true to him. But maybe it's just fascination. Anyway, it is mentioned in the books at one point that Geralt is not able to feel any kind of sympathy for a grieving person. In that scene he felt...nothing. Before that point I was unclear as how much Geralts mutations influence his mind, but then it got very clear.

I'm thinking though that it is not a general condition of his mind. He was hardened against any kind of pain. There is physical pain and there is psychic pain. So this could be connected. As he was trained not to feel pain, fear or grieve he might not be able to be sensitive for other people having these feelings. And on the other hand he seems to feel positive emotions. He's proud of his work, he laughtes at jokes, he can be funny himself, he is loyal to his friends and has a strong moral code which is surely not simply "programmed" into him...so yeah...maybe love is possible after all.

I'd like to think that. :)

There are several references that his mutation process has been "botched" such that he still retains his feelings (at least part of it), his "inability" to feel probably stems from his witcher training.

Reading the books, he seems to be capable of fear, anger, and grief. He once nearly duelled with a wizard out of jealousy/anger, or at least he felt somewhat hurt when he found out that Yennefer "cheated" on him.

Adda was Foltest's daughter too and she was more manipulating than the whole platoon of Triss, as a matter of fact everyone is or has manipulated Geralt in the game at one time or another (including Roche, Iorveth, Foltest and so forth) and they will continue to do so.

So don’t feed me all that protagonist centred morality crap statements (they may work on teenage players base and they belong in BioWare games and on BioWare forums), Witcher is a game for intelligent player one that understands that the universe, surprisingly enough, does NOT evolve around the main character.

This whole thing reminds me of the retarded conversations on BioWare forums condemning Bastila for falling to the dark side (even though she does redeem herself) from the point of view of the protagonist. Of course all those high and mighty and holier than thou comments were being made from Revan’s point of view... who on a scale of things did much worst. Protagonist, in this case, have had much more to atone for than his companions…

Sure looks like some people play some games and interpret their stories in a way that makes them feel good about themselves, which quite often differs from the actual facts and circumstances of the story. Yeah, sure you can act as you want (its your gaming experience after all)… just please do not pretend you are holding a moral high ground when you are actually as far from the high ground as one can be…

As far as Nilfgaard is concerned… just how exactly do you think the emperor is going to find out Letho has helped Triss? Everyone who knew that is dead (with the exception of Triss and Geralt)… furthermore there is no You Tube or e-mail here, no proof, only hearsay (it’s not like someone filmed the whole thing on the iPhone).

At best he may end up hearing a rumour and since Letho (if he lives) decides to go south (essentially giving up the work on restoring the Viper’s school) it is largely irrelevant. Furthermore it really is no different from Geralt wandering into the camp and butchering everyone as he can/did, you know the emperor’s wrath in a normal world would be of the same intensity regardless if you are a hero of the story or not...

Yes, I remember. But when I read that story it felt like Geralt is doing this out of a feeling that a normal human being would do it so he feels entitled to do it aswell.

And there are many situations I felt the same about Geralt. Like he's just mimicing normal human behaviour, to fit in and to make it easier to communicate and walk among humans...

But you're right, there is a human left in him, it's just not clear all the time how much of it.

To be honest, at that point I haven chosen to save "greater" things than Triss. Its not your real lover anyway. Just because you have amnesia,..:P Never mind.

Its still a tough decision to choose. Not knowing that you really love Yennefer, or not, is she alive or not. Because here is Triss, in reality, with her full devotion and beauty.

I really hated Triss in TW2 and I think Yennefer >>>>> everyone, but the Act 3 decision shouldn't be taken lightly. Even though my 'official' playthrough will be the one in which I definitely save Saskia :)