The bloody Baron or orphans? (The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt)
No matter how much I play the Witcher, can't decide whom to save in this situation - Anna or orphans? What do you think about this choice?Baron. What the hell orphans, generally useless dummy. And the Baron was a cool character
The Baron and his wife do a little business done and their they lived, what kind of moral monster would sacrifice children to the joy of the witches, for the sake of what old man (although a cool character) and the old crazy woman was still alive
Met somewhere in the guide passage, you and the kids to save the wife of a Baron. It is only necessary missions in a certain order to pass! As they say, and the sheep are safe and wolves are fed))
The choice is yours. I always saved Anna, or the Baron will hang. And the children are useless, they do not mind, in fact.
adam0670
It. Me and Tamara in this sense does not like ugly she is. Maybe she's actually the daughter of the man with whom Anna's husband cheated? Because the father is not like.
Well, the choice is complicated because we do not know whether to return to Anna's mind? And even if they succeed - maybe it will still continue to hate her husband after what happened? Then it turns out that kids ate nothing...
Crra
no) I'm pereprodajut the game, and just today finished with this quest. I have children, and Anna are alive
Let the drunk dries
And the third is just a bug that the developers clumsily tried to make a feature.
NightHawkreal
3rd method at first, and had of it, but Reda campaign cut it (though not completely)
Any sane person would've tried to save children from a horrible death, without hesitation, hearing that someone is cooking human flesh in the boilers... in addition, the hero himself does not know what and how can happen in case it is not his fault to be.
People who say here that the children they do not care and let them guzzle, just soulless, or plainly ignoramus.
The commentators forgot the words in the title If I have to choose between one evil and another, I prefer not to choose at all
1 - Near the Whispering of the Hill the corpse of the child who was killed. evil which is embodied in it and which witch was imprisoned because it will be more terrible witch.
and Save the children we liberate the SPIRIT that will begin to bear evil men
2 - Anna received a deserved punishment for the child as the Baron, who until the end of days will be forced to care about Anna.
Rescuing children we free EVIL and Anna will turn into a swamp witch will have to kill for her same. And children just unlucky....and the parents themselves refused them. The choice is obvious and no need to get choked up.
Children usless shield,orphans of the living in this anal Velen as their chances of further survival ranging between zero and infinity,the Baron still steward and manage it went to the deserters who without him will begin to do bad things and arrange the lawlessness of the peasants
What is the true. Doing here the choice is not between children and the Baron, it's just a canvas problem. You release( or not) at the will of insane evil. This type of is to save the 1st child and ruin, his act, millions. The children and the Baron in order to hide the essence. ( The doctor forbade the patient to eat apples, because they will lead to the death of the patient, but the patient wants and prays to give him the Apple. Here you go( not knowing the instruction of the doctor) and heeding the voice of the suffering, with all my heart wishing it, doing a good deed, give him the Apple. The patient ottopyrivaetsya, are you proud of leaving, making a good thing). In the Witcher the choices are not between bad and good but between bad and very bad.