I forgot Radovid is supposed to be younger than Ciri, in the books that seems natural because he's just a child, but in the games he always appears as a competent (morals notwithstanding) and experienced ruler. And it could've been such an interesting thing to have a cruel genius child on the throne, but CDPR didn't take the opportunity.
I feel like him looking older has a lot to do with a mistake in the Witcher 1 when it comes to the time line, as I believe that they made a mistake which would place the games a few years further than the years they say they are in in the games. It is something they seem to have tried to go back on in the Witcher 2 and 3, but certain designs and some timeline stuff stayed a bit messed up because of that. But I guess they aged up radovid a bit because a quest to assassinate a child might have been a bit to far for them.
@@Yavinius I'd love a quest to slay children. There should have been an option to kill all the kids of Crookback Bog. And I'm also still hoping to get a Star Wars game where we play through all six movies as Anakin Skywalker, there would be so much replayability for the quest to slaughter younglings at the Jedi Temple. But indeed most games don't go so far, not even CDPR games, which are generally not very held-back. And technically, with Ciri being a time-traveller she could be 19 and go to that world 30 years into the future, so at the time we'd expect her to be 46 (counting from the end of the books), though they didn't take such an opportunity either.
@@Arthurwellesley12 No one said he wasn't smart, but that he is a cruel evil bastard. Hitler was also smart, doesn't mean he doesn't deserve to rot in hell for 150 million years or something like that.
@@michakoniecpolski5677 can see how it came of that way so not gonna get pissed even if it was misunderstood. Might rephrase it later. But yeah i left a comment in the main threat u can read if u like. Dont agree with his methods cause mass genocide is never right just think he was also justified in his anger. Only thing he took it way too far & so many innocent people lost their lives due to it. Will still say i love his character & he is one of my favourites cause while he is abit of a facist nutjob i still cannot deny the impressive accomplishments the lad did and apart from his genocidal views i really like his character. Guess i kinda cleared up my comment here abit.
Radovid in Witcher 2: arrest Sile we don't need massacres Radovid in Witcher 3: boo-hoo burn all witchers! i'm so edgy! Damn Bitcher 3 is the biggest nilfgaardian propaganda and Geralt sounds like an edgy sarcastic teen in that game comapred to the first and the second part of its trilogy. nilfs have so much problems in the books yet the game doesn't show them on purpose.
Nicely presented, will subscribe. Just going from the game I always thought little of radovid but you describing how he yearned for glory for his family name gives him some respect to me at least
He is the best ruler in witcher history. Military and political genius. I always let him live. If i had a chance i would give philippa to him. Also his victory is canon according to iron judgement.
One of the problems with a Radovid victory is that it is not completely compatible with the books due to Emhyr getting assassinated (but to be fair, the with hunt parts are kind of compatible, but none of the endings fit perfectly.), while he is supposed to rule until around 1290 in the books. I see the iron judgment lore bits as an 'in case he survived' situation. the same goes for Gascon with his new band of colorful men and women, the iron falcons. And while Radovid is great on the military aspects, I'm not so sure if he is the best ruler ever, there have been some kings that were way bellow him of course in how capable they were, but there have been a decent amount that showed other qualities or accomplished deeds that might have made them better kings.
@@Yavinius Radovid is not only good at military. He is also good at politics. He took a nearly divided country and in 2 year he made it a country which can defeat the Nilfgaard alone. He took Novigrad without single sword. He took ofiri support against the nilfgaard. And he started the hunt after he learn the sorceresses behind the assassination of three northern kings. Also he establishes the council and the conclave of mages if you choose triss in w2
He did do several impressive things, they just did a few things that were a little bit to far towards being a mad ruler in the Witcher 3. Also him being presented as a threat to many of Geralt's friends didn't make him beloved by most as he is made out to be a man who kills his subjects for the smallest things.
How ironic that the leader of the Lodge of Sorceresses, a sisterhood dedicated to protecting the interests of magic, ended up having an indirect but still undeniably major role in creating one of the worst enemies of magic in the Witcher video games. (Not on purpose, but still…)
Redovid might both be cruel & sadistic & borderline facist but he is prob one of my favourite the witcher characters. I admire his character & do half sympathize with his actions as i do think that they are justified to some extent although dont agree with the mass killings of everybody else that wasnt sorcerers & elves. Many sorcerers & elves was innocent but i also think they brought it upon themselves. But the rest of the non-humans was 100% innocent & so going after them was wrong. But while cruel he was a strong & very capable ruler. & a strategic mastermind knowing how to manouver through schemes & politics while also being a brilliant commander. Leading his men to Victory against a much stronger foe. But all in all even if his character has some dark sides to him i love his character & in the war between emyr & radovid i am 100% camp radovid even if i dont agree with all the killing he is doing even if i think some made their own bed
It is kinda sad to see what CDPR did to him in Witcher 3. But still he is better choice than Nilfgaard and Dijkstra. Shame third game only presents him in bad light. He was likeable in Witcher 1 and 2.
They do, but due to the first game making a mistake in their timeline where they said the game was in 1270 and also 5 years after a war that took place in 1268, there is some discussion about what the true year is for the games.
Depends, the games messed up in the Witcher 1 but seeing how they kept going with the Witcher 2 being in 1271 and Witcher 3 in 1272 it seems that they might have decided to just forget about that time issue altogether, but no matter what, radovid was way younger in the Witcher 3 than you would expect based on his looks
The Witcher 3 says that Ciri was born in 1251 (in the quest where you investigate the bomb used to rob Dijkstra's vault), that would make her around 21 in the Witcher 3, in the books she should be born around 1252-1253, so that would make her Still around 19-20 years old. So according to the Witcher 3 she is about 21. However blood and wine takes place 3 years later in 1275, which means that ciri is about 24 during the expansion.
I forgot Radovid is supposed to be younger than Ciri, in the books that seems natural because he's just a child, but in the games he always appears as a competent (morals notwithstanding) and experienced ruler. And it could've been such an interesting thing to have a cruel genius child on the throne, but CDPR didn't take the opportunity.
I feel like him looking older has a lot to do with a mistake in the Witcher 1 when it comes to the time line, as I believe that they made a mistake which would place the games a few years further than the years they say they are in in the games. It is something they seem to have tried to go back on in the Witcher 2 and 3, but certain designs and some timeline stuff stayed a bit messed up because of that. But I guess they aged up radovid a bit because a quest to assassinate a child might have been a bit to far for them.
@@Yavinius I'd love a quest to slay children. There should have been an option to kill all the kids of Crookback Bog.
And I'm also still hoping to get a Star Wars game where we play through all six movies as Anakin Skywalker, there would be so much replayability for the quest to slaughter younglings at the Jedi Temple.
But indeed most games don't go so far, not even CDPR games, which are generally not very held-back.
And technically, with Ciri being a time-traveller she could be 19 and go to that world 30 years into the future, so at the time we'd expect her to be 46 (counting from the end of the books), though they didn't take such an opportunity either.
@@Voxdalian very late but you are really messed up and I think you should see a doctor
@@alexmercer6585 I believe you might have missed the point, and the context, of my comment.
he is literally 17
I like and i understand that he is not a complete madman but a genius . He created the eternal fire to win the war . Which he does.
He did not create the eternal fire. The eternal fire existed before him and he took advantage from them
@@Arthurwellesley12 No one said he wasn't smart, but that he is a cruel evil bastard. Hitler was also smart, doesn't mean he doesn't deserve to rot in hell for 150 million years or something like that.
@@Arthurwellesley12fAscIsT
@@michakoniecpolski5677 can see how it came of that way so not gonna get pissed even if it was misunderstood. Might rephrase it later. But yeah i left a comment in the main threat u can read if u like. Dont agree with his methods cause mass genocide is never right just think he was also justified in his anger. Only thing he took it way too far & so many innocent people lost their lives due to it. Will still say i love his character & he is one of my favourites cause while he is abit of a facist nutjob i still cannot deny the impressive accomplishments the lad did and apart from his genocidal views i really like his character. Guess i kinda cleared up my comment here abit.
One True King!! I love his character and how he smashes Nilfgaard.
Those sorceresses honestly cause more problems than they solve
Radovid in Witcher 2: arrest Sile we don't need massacres
Radovid in Witcher 3: boo-hoo burn all witchers! i'm so edgy!
Damn Bitcher 3 is the biggest nilfgaardian propaganda and Geralt sounds like an edgy sarcastic teen in that game comapred to the first and the second part of its trilogy. nilfs have so much problems in the books yet the game doesn't show them on purpose.
To Radovid!
The Young King who won back the North!
Nicely presented, will subscribe. Just going from the game I always thought little of radovid but you describing how he yearned for glory for his family name gives him some respect to me at least
He is the best ruler in witcher history. Military and political genius. I always let him live. If i had a chance i would give philippa to him.
Also his victory is canon according to iron judgement.
One of the problems with a Radovid victory is that it is not completely compatible with the books due to Emhyr getting assassinated (but to be fair, the with hunt parts are kind of compatible, but none of the endings fit perfectly.), while he is supposed to rule until around 1290 in the books. I see the iron judgment lore bits as an 'in case he survived' situation. the same goes for Gascon with his new band of colorful men and women, the iron falcons. And while Radovid is great on the military aspects, I'm not so sure if he is the best ruler ever, there have been some kings that were way bellow him of course in how capable they were, but there have been a decent amount that showed other qualities or accomplished deeds that might have made them better kings.
@@Yavinius Radovid is not only good at military. He is also good at politics. He took a nearly divided country and in 2 year he made it a country which can defeat the Nilfgaard alone. He took Novigrad without single sword. He took ofiri support against the nilfgaard. And he started the hunt after he learn the sorceresses behind the assassination of three northern kings.
Also he establishes the council and the conclave of mages if you choose triss in w2
He did do several impressive things, they just did a few things that were a little bit to far towards being a mad ruler in the Witcher 3. Also him being presented as a threat to many of Geralt's friends didn't make him beloved by most as he is made out to be a man who kills his subjects for the smallest things.
@@Yavinius in the books it is said that emhyr will be assinated in 1290s in the game it just happens earlier
@@jacquesdealdersberg2452
Radovid is the best King!
How ironic that the leader of the Lodge of Sorceresses, a sisterhood dedicated to protecting the interests of magic, ended up having an indirect but still undeniably major role in creating one of the worst enemies of magic in the Witcher video games. (Not on purpose, but still…)
Great video😍!!!
Thank you!
Redovid might both be cruel & sadistic & borderline facist but he is prob one of my favourite the witcher characters. I admire his character & do half sympathize with his actions as i do think that they are justified to some extent although dont agree with the mass killings of everybody else that wasnt sorcerers & elves. Many sorcerers & elves was innocent but i also think they brought it upon themselves. But the rest of the non-humans was 100% innocent & so going after them was wrong. But while cruel he was a strong & very capable ruler. & a strategic mastermind knowing how to manouver through schemes & politics while also being a brilliant commander. Leading his men to Victory against a much stronger foe. But all in all even if his character has some dark sides to him i love his character & in the war between emyr & radovid i am 100% camp radovid even if i dont agree with all the killing he is doing even if i think some made their own bed
It is kinda sad to see what CDPR did to him in Witcher 3. But still he is better choice than Nilfgaard and Dijkstra. Shame third game only presents him in bad light. He was likeable in Witcher 1 and 2.
Long Live Radovid!
The Saviour of The North!
What a great, smart and strong character... shame on netflix
Actually, by CDPR/Game's timeline he was 20 in 1275 (Witcher 2 was in 1274, 3 is in 75)
Thought the wild hunt happens in 1272 and blood and wine happens in 1275
They do, but due to the first game making a mistake in their timeline where they said the game was in 1270 and also 5 years after a war that took place in 1268, there is some discussion about what the true year is for the games.
i can not even think of him like this since they have now made him gay or bi in the tv show,ha ha ha,thank god for the books and game
She could have became a salamander
HOLY shit Radovid is only 17 years old O_O
19/20 by Game's timeline (Foltest died in 1274 then, and Radovid is in Oxenfurt in 1275)
Depends, the games messed up in the Witcher 1 but seeing how they kept going with the Witcher 2 being in 1271 and Witcher 3 in 1272 it seems that they might have decided to just forget about that time issue altogether, but no matter what, radovid was way younger in the Witcher 3 than you would expect based on his looks
@@Yavinius I think it was stated that Ciri was already 26 in the Witcher 3. I always assumed Radovid was already in his 20s like Ciri.
The Witcher 3 says that Ciri was born in 1251 (in the quest where you investigate the bomb used to rob Dijkstra's vault), that would make her around 21 in the Witcher 3, in the books she should be born around 1252-1253, so that would make her Still around 19-20 years old. So according to the Witcher 3 she is about 21.
However blood and wine takes place 3 years later in 1275, which means that ciri is about 24 during the expansion.
Why does he look 40 if he’s 19 ahaha
Second half of the 13th century but their version of the century