The Witcher

[veronus]

I'm playing "The Witcher" on PC right now and I can't help but feel while I play it that it should (or maybe already has) be made into a tabletop RPG. Great world, awesome character (build a monster hunter anyone?), awesome use of magic and potions (alchemy would be fun on paper) and the story is wicked.

 

[lastbesthope]

According to wiki, there was a Polish RPG of the book series on which the game is based.

LBH

 

[SnowDog]

I really liked the translated book and hope that it was a success enough to warrant more translations in near future. It was just the kind of world that I would like to run.

On the other hand Witchers are loners as far as I can tell and the monsters are getting scarcer all the time. These two factors are big negatives for me when thinking about having an RPG based on those books and still retain the correct feel. Having said that there is a way round that. That is to set the time period before the books when there were more monsters and more Witchers. Maybe beginning Witchers gang up and only certain bad ass Witchers work alone. That way I can justify why Judge Dredd RPG works although JD himself works mainly alone.

 

[SnowDog]

I just had to bring this back to life since there is a new Witcher book translated to English (Blood of Elves).

 

[xeoran]

Seeing as the books mention that Witchers used to take apprentices something close to Dark Heresy might work: the PC's are apprentice Witchers being set tasks by their master. It would explain levelling, parties etc.

 

[broken serenity]

i wonder how much the licence for the witcher rpg would cost? maye mongoose could look into that if theres enough interest?

 

[SnowDog]

Seeing as the books mention that Witchers used to take apprentices something close to Dark Heresy might work: the PC's are apprentice Witchers being set tasks by their master. It would explain levelling, parties etc.

I think there was a whole guild of Witchers before, when monsters etc. were more common than in the books. What is an interesting aspect is the fact that Witchers actually drink potions to enhance themselves and are quite good at creating them, IIRC but the best part of that is that they sort of mutate during their apprentice due to use of potions. Sadly, only portion of apprentices survive those potions etc.

 

[SnowDog]

i wonder how much the licence for the witcher rpg would cost? maye mongoose could look into that if theres enough interest?

No idea about the license cost but I would think that two translated book and a computer RPG would generate enough interest to make the idea at least worth to look at (hopefully).

 

[Pietia]

I think there was a whole guild of Witchers before, when monsters etc. were more common than in the books.

Well, it wasn't exactly a guild - simply Kaer Morhen was "running at full capacity", instead of being home to the last few witchers and no more than handful of apprentices.
When it comes to RPG potential - not everyone in a party has to be a Witcher ;-) - they may be wizards, mercenaries, bards... I'd even say that having several killing machines in the party could ruin the game.

 

[SnowDog]

I think there was a whole guild of Witchers before, when monsters etc. were more common than in the books.

Well, it wasn't exactly a guild - simply Kaer Morhen was "running at full capacity", instead of being home to the last few witchers and no more than handful of apprentices.
When it comes to RPG potential - not everyone in a party has to be a Witcher ;-) - they may be wizards, mercenaries, bards... I'd even say that having several killing machines in the party could ruin the game.

Really? Well, that's how I remember it but I can be wrong (nothing unusual ).

You are probably right that unless it's a really small party, Witcher characters could be potentially unbalancing. That is if all Witchers are as powerful as Geralt. On the other hand if Geralt is to other Witchers like Judge Dredd is to other Judges, then I can see no problems.

I see you are from Poland. How many Witcher books there are? I just want to know how many books I can expect (hope) to see after these two translated ones.

Thanks!

 

[Pietia]

There are two books composed of short stories (for a total of fifteen short stories) - The Last Wish and Sword of Destiny, as well as five novels - Blood of the Elves, Time of Scorn, Baptism of Fire, Tower of Swallow and Lady of The Lake. IMO the later novels are, well, not really good - especially if compared to the short stories and earlier novels. There was also a movie and TV series - but they were really bad, and six comic books based on the short stories - quite good...

As for Geralt compared to other Witchers - it is rather difficult to get a good comparison, since there are so few of them left . He's very experienced, so the Judge Dredd comparison may be quite accurate here

 

[SnowDog]

The Last Wish was very good compilation of short stories, I especially loved to spot the old fairy tale behind the story

It's good to know that there are more books and hopefully they will be translated, too. It's sad if the quality goes down but then again that is often the case with long series.

I have understood that Geralt is not the only Witcher, even at the time when the books are set and there were more Witchers before. Do I remember correctly? If so, then it could be thought that a Witcher character even if rare, could still be a viable option for a PC.

Of course I don't think that you must absolutely have to be able to play a Witcher but then again it's a Witcher RPG :wink:

 

[Pietia]

There are more Witchers - Eskel, Lambert, Vesemir and Coën are mentioned or appear in short stories and books, there probably are some that were not mentioned by the author. Before that time there were many more Witchers - when the world was less civilized, their services were much more necessary.

As for the quality of later novels -there was a reason for it, the author had some problems with alcohol .

 

[SnowDog]

There are more Witchers - Eskel, Lambert, Vesemir and Coën are mentioned or appear in short stories and books, there probably are some that were not mentioned by the author. Before that time there were many more Witchers - when the world was less civilized, their services were much more necessary.

So yes, if the supposed RPG was set to the past then a Witcher character would be more believable choice. On the other hand the world in the stories is quite engaging and if used with a system brutal enough, would be very nice even if actual Witcher characters would not be ... encouraged.

Lastbesthope wrote that there was a Polish RPG based on the books. Have you read it? If so, how they handled Witchers and what other things you can tell about that game? Thanks!

As for the quality of later novels -there was a reason for it, the author had some problems with alcohol .

It seems to be a pretty common problem with writers, at least around here Sad, really...

 

[Pietia]

The Witcher RPG was quite ok. You could play pretty much any character - including a Witcher. The rules were quite "light", big emphasis was put on skills of your character. Combat system was very bloody and deadly - if you were hit in the arm, you were in trouble. Hit in the head - out or dead... The combat was maneuver-based: you declared combat maneuvers (feint, block...), each of them had different effects, their availability was based on your skills. That's what I remember - I may dig up the rules and try to give you more info.

 

[SnowDog]

Sounds like an okay system to me. Was it a percentile system or something else? Combat maneuvers being skill level based reminds me of Fading Suns but that system was not particularly bloody or deadly (on the other hand combat was not the focus of the game in any way).

If you have time and energy, please dig up the rules. It would be nice to know how it works and especially how Witchers were done compared to other characters (mundanes and Wizards alike).

Thanks again!

 

[Pietia]

Characters:
Stats and skills have values between 1 (poor) and 5 (legendary), although some beings may have higher levels
Six body stats: constitution, movement, strength, senses, dexterity and agility
Three spirit stats: intellect, charisma and will
Additionally, some derived stats like hit points, movement speed and defense modifiers.
Personality - what is most important for the character, three aspects: honour, adventure or reputation
Skills - a lot , each bound with a particular stat.
Destiny - either randomized or chosen by the storyteller - e.g. the hero may be destined to become very rich, or to live in infamy
Races - human, elf, dwarf, gnome, halfling and witcher (yes, witchers are treated as a separate race). Races have different min and max stat levels, as well as different starting skills
The stats and skill levels are purchased with points (although there is a die-rolling method for generating stats available), separate pools for skills and stats, the skill pool is dependent on intelligence and will.
No levels - instead the character gathers experience points and may purchase new skill and stat levels with them.


Tests - roll as many dice, as the value of tested stat. One die is a fate die - 6 on it means an extraordinary success, 1 is a complete FUBAR. 4+ is a success, anything else is a failure. You need a number of successes (between 1 and 7) determined by the storyteller to do something. Skill level reduces the required number of successes. In the case of "head to head" tests (trying to be better than someone else), the required number of successes is raised by the amount of successes by which the other person has exceeded his goal.


Combat:
To hit someone, you have to make a successful test of a combat skill. The test difficulty (required number of successes) is equal to enemy's defence (his defence modifier + his weapon skill for close combat, defence modifier + his shield in the case of ranged combat) .

Combat Points (one of the derived stats) allow you to increase your odds of success - before the roll you may declare to spend a few CPs, each of them allows you to raise result on one die by one point. You can't spend two CPs on the same die. CPs may be regenerated by sleep or meditation. Witchers have another stat called Power Points, which allows you to do the same.

Combat Is divided into rounds, in each the characters act in initiative order (initiative is decided by D6+senses). Characters may declare delaying their actions instead of acting when they're supposed to.

Wounds increase the difficulty level of skill tests. The location of a wound is randomized (although you may aim at a body part - it raises the difficulty), you track both the health of the character and health of his hit locations. If a location is damaged too much, it will be useless (disabled arm) or the character may even lose it. The amount of wounds a character may survive is determined by its constitution, on which the derived stat for hit points is based. A character may have between 23 (poor constitution) and 35 (legendary constitution) hit points. It's not much - a sword will cause D6+2xStrength+other modifiers damage, two-handed weapons even more (2D6+2xStrength+modifiers), so a character will be able to survive only a few hits. Each "surplus" success on attack test adds +3 to the damage. "6" on the fate die is a critical strike - damage is doubled. Hit in the head - damage is doubled, tripled in the case of critical strike.
Armor and shields protect from some damage - between 1 (for leather armor) and 3 (plate armor, tower shield) points but may reduce some stats and skills.

Combat maneuvers - you have to buy most of them as if you were buying skills (although a few were available for free), and have to spend Combat Points to use them in a fight. They may modify the defence of both the character and its opponent (as they may require more fancy maneuvering or simply be difficult) and provide "special effects" - e.g. a Painful Strike (used in unarmed combat) will add +1 to the damage caused by the strike and also will stun the enemy for D6 rounds if he doesn't pass a Vigour (skill) test with the difficulty equal to caused damage (all that for the price of 5 CPs), while the Feint (for armed combat) maneuver will cost you 2 CPs and will simply lower the enemy's Defence by 1.

Magic - wizards, priests and witchers may use it. They have different sources of magic (witchers use their amulets, wizards - amulets and elements, priests - their gods). The various spells are used just like skills, but they of course require spending power points to use them.

As for "how Witchers compare to other characters" - since you had to spend skill points just like everyone else, they were not "better" . They have high minimum stat levels, good set of starting skills for a combat-oriented character and the ability to use magic and drink elixirs. If you selected a small set of skills and stats and focused on them, you could easily create a killing machine. If you tried to develop everything at once... well, no witcher lives forever.

 

[SnowDog]

Characters:
Stats and skills have values between 1 (poor) and 5 (legendary), although some beings may have higher levels
Six body stats: constitution, movement, strength, senses, dexterity and agility
Three spirit stats: intellect, charisma and will
Additionally, some derived stats like hit points, movement speed and defense modifiers.
Personality - what is most important for the character, three aspects: honour, adventure or reputation
Skills - a lot , each bound with a particular stat.
Destiny - either randomized or chosen by the storyteller - e.g. the hero may be destined to become very rich, or to live in infamy
Races - human, elf, dwarf, gnome, halfling and witcher (yes, witchers are treated as a separate race). Races have different min and max stat levels, as well as different starting skills
The stats and skill levels are purchased with points (although there is a die-rolling method for generating stats available), separate pools for skills and stats, the skill pool is dependent on intelligence and will.
No levels - instead the character gathers experience points and may purchase new skill and stat levels with them.

So far it sounds pretty good. As I have read only the Last Wish, it strikes me a bit odd to have such a great variety of playable races considering how general (human) population takes a dim view of them (to my understanding). Granted, I liked very much that not too good half-elf in one of the short stories

I have understood that Witchers are actually some kind of mutants, so having them put to a race of their own actually makes sense.

I like games without levels but having a huge list of skills doesn't sound too good.

Tests - roll as many dice, as the value of tested stat. One die is a fate die - 6 on it means an extraordinary success, 1 is a complete FUBAR. 4+ is a success, anything else is a failure. You need a number of successes (between 1 and 7) determined by the storyteller to do something. Skill level reduces the required number of successes. In the case of "head to head" tests (trying to be better than someone else), the required number of successes is raised by the amount of successes by which the other person has exceeded his goal.

Pretty interesting way to handle skill rolls.

Combat:
To hit someone, you have to make a successful test of a combat skill. The test difficulty (required number of successes) is equal to enemy's defence (his defence modifier + his weapon skill for close combat, defence modifier + his shield in the case of ranged combat) .

Combat Points (one of the derived stats) allow you to increase your odds of success - before the roll you may declare to spend a few CPs, each of them allows you to raise result on one die by one point. You can't spend two CPs on the same die. CPs may be regenerated by sleep or meditation. Witchers have another stat called Power Points, which allows you to do the same.

Combat Is divided into rounds, in each the characters act in initiative order (initiative is decided by D6+senses). Characters may declare delaying their actions instead of acting when they're supposed to.

So far pretty standard and well proven way to handle the combat. Can you declare that you raise, say 3 dice by one point using 3 CPs even if you roll 5 die and after rolling the dice you allocate those "raises" to the dice that benefit from the raises most?

Do you mean that Witchers use Power Points as CPs or that they can regenerate CPs using PPs or ...?

Wounds increase the difficulty level of skill tests. The location of a wound is randomized (although you may aim at a body part - it raises the difficulty), you track both the health of the character and health of his hit locations. If a location is damaged too much, it will be useless (disabled arm) or the character may even lose it. The amount of wounds a character may survive is determined by its constitution, on which the derived stat for hit points is based. A character may have between 23 (poor constitution) and 35 (legendary constitution) hit points. It's not much - a sword will cause D6+2xStrength+other modifiers damage, two-handed weapons even more (2D6+2xStrength+modifiers), so a character will be able to survive only a few hits. Each "surplus" success on attack test adds +3 to the damage. "6" on the fate die is a critical strike - damage is doubled. Hit in the head - damage is doubled, tripled in the case of critical strike.

Ouch! Anyway, this is how I would imagine the combat to work in Witcher RPG. If you could just keep on taking damage the feeling of grittiness would be reduced considerably.

Armor and shields protect from some damage - between 1 (for leather armor) and 3 (plate armor, tower shield) points but may reduce some stats and skills.

So, armor is not much use or at least it doesn't make you invincible. Since the system is pretty light I can take this but otherwise I would rate plate male to a much higher and at the same time almost make it mandatory for the wearer to be a cavalryman. At the same time leave lighter armor to footmen with those lower armor points. But this is just a personal preference.

Combat maneuvers - you have to buy most of them as if you were buying skills (although a few were available for free), and have to spend Combat Points to use them in a fight. They may modify the defence of both the character and its opponent (as they may require more fancy maneuvering or simply be difficult) and provide "special effects" - e.g. a Painful Strike (used in unarmed combat) will add +1 to the damage caused by the strike and also will stun the enemy for D6 rounds if he doesn't pass a Vigour (skill) test with the difficulty equal to caused damage (all that for the price of 5 CPs), while the Feint (for armed combat) maneuver will cost you 2 CPs and will simply lower the enemy's Defence by 1.

Sounds pretty cool by me. With maneuvers being like skills do you mean that you have to make a skill test using that maneuver instead of a normal attack skill?

I like the aspect of maneuvers as they bring more to combat than simple "okay, I attack". I take it that you don't have to script your maneuvers in advance, only round by round (unlike in Burning Wheel) so this actually is playable system even with multiple combatants.

As cool as the system seems, it feels almost a shame that those maneuvers are restricted by the total pool of CPs that the characters have. I don't know how fast they will burn through their CPs and the combat is once again reduced basic "I attack" type of dice rolling. Then again it can simulate combatants getting tired pretty good without having to keep track of separate fatigue pool. But then the CPs should be regained a bit faster than by sleeping, IMHO.

Magic - wizards, priests and witchers may use it. They have different sources of magic (witchers use their amulets, wizards - amulets and elements, priests - their gods). The various spells are used just like skills, but they of course require spending power points to use them.

Okay, spells as skills can really limit how many (powerful) spells you have. That is not necessarily a bad thing at all. How many spells various spell users usually have?

As for "how Witchers compare to other characters" - since you had to spend skill points just like everyone else, they were not "better" . They have high minimum stat levels, good set of starting skills for a combat-oriented character and the ability to use magic and drink elixirs. If you selected a small set of skills and stats and focused on them, you could easily create a killing machine. If you tried to develop everything at once... well, no witcher lives forever.

So, they are pretty well balanced in that game? That's good. So it would be possible to have one in the party without having problems.

 

[Pietia]

So far it sounds pretty good. As I have read only the Last Wish, it strikes me a bit odd to have such a great variety of playable races considering how general (human) population takes a dim view of them (to my understanding). Granted, I liked very much that not too good half-elf in one of the short stories

Well, the players may want to play e.g. a Scotia'el commando group - so why limit them?

I like games without levels but having a huge list of skills doesn't sound too good.

In reality it is not so bad - after all a typical character won't have them all at once . Lock picking for the thieves, performing for bards...

So far pretty standard and well proven way to handle the combat. Can you declare that you raise, say 3 dice by one point using 3 CPs even if you roll 5 die and after rolling the dice you allocate those "raises" to the dice that benefit from the raises most?

Yes

Do you mean that Witchers use Power Points as CPs or that they can regenerate CPs using PPs or ...?

Witchers have both Combat Points and Power Points. When they e.g. run out of CPs, they may use PPs to get raises or perform combat maneuvers instead of using them to cast the Signs.

So, armor is not much use or at least it doesn't make you invincible. Since the system is pretty light I can take this but otherwise I would rate plate male to a much higher and at the same time almost make it mandatory for the wearer to be a cavalryman. At the same time leave lighter armor to footmen with those lower armor points. But this is just a personal preference.

Armor does not make you invincible, but it stacks - you'll usually wear some light armor (leather, padded or something like this) under your plate or chainmail. If you use enough armor - say, light armor, chainmail and a shield, you're reducing the damage you take by 5 points. A person using sword with decent (3) strength will cause between 7 and 12 points of damage (9.5 on average) - this will make you last twice as long in combat. With full plate and light armor plus tower shield you'll reduce the damage by 7 points - that's not bad at all.
BTW - it is actually quite easy to fight in full plate on foot. I'd even say that it is easier than fighting in chain mail.

Sounds pretty cool by me. With maneuvers being like skills do you mean that you have to make a skill test using that maneuver instead of a normal attack skill?

No, you simply have to know that maneuver (in the case of maneuvers and spells you just buy them as if you were buying new skills, but there is no "level" for them). You make a normal attack roll and spend the appropriate amount of CPs - that's all.

I like the aspect of maneuvers as they bring more to combat than simple "okay, I attack". I take it that you don't have to script your maneuvers in advance, only round by round (unlike in Burning Wheel) so this actually is playable system even with multiple combatants.

You definitely don't script them in advance.

As cool as the system seems, it feels almost a shame that those maneuvers are restricted by the total pool of CPs that the characters have. I don't know how fast they will burn through their CPs and the combat is once again reduced basic "I attack" type of dice rolling. Then again it can simulate combatants getting tired pretty good without having to keep track of separate fatigue pool. But then the CPs should be regained a bit faster than by sleeping, IMHO.

A warrior will usually have 15 (an average one) to 25 (a very experienced one) CPs. Most maneuvers cost between 1 and 3 CPs, with a few costing up to 15 CPs (they are mostly "instant kill" maneuvers or really heroic feats, and only very good warriors with high CP pools will know them, most of them were introduced in one of the expansions). Typically you'll have enough CPs to last you through a few fights, unless you're burning them very fast (e.g. raising a lot of dice at the same time etc).

Okay, spells as skills can really limit how many (powerful) spells you have. That is not necessarily a bad thing at all. How many spells various spell users usually have?

Well, it depends - mostly on what spells the spell user will buy. Very powerfull spells (e.g. Ball of Lightning) cost roughly as much, as raising a skill from very good (4) to legendary (5) level. Cheap spells may cost as little as learning a new skill (to the starting level 1). 3-4 spells for a beginning character will be a typical number, over time a character may learn a few new ones.
The really useful spells are rather expensive, but very powerful. A spellcaster will be quite limited in the number of spells he may cast before he runs out of Power - e.g. even a very strong wizard will be able to cast only one strong or two weak Balls of Lightning, but it is possible to recharge those points quite fast in some situations.
Witchers regain power slowly - their amulets (which provide them with power) recharge over time. Priests have to pray and meditate, which takes some time. Wizards may take power from their surroundings - as they use the power of elements, they may take power from earth, water, fire or air. The amount of power they get will depend on the strength of the element - e.g. you'll get more power from a raging inferno than from a torch. A lucky and powerful wizard in a burning city may throw fireballs almost like a machinegun.

And yes, spellcasters and witchers were well balanced - at least usually. They could become very powerful, but usually they did not live long enough - learning took a long time for them, as they had more things to spend experience on.

 

[SnowDog]

Well, the players may want to play e.g. a Scotia'el commando group - so why limit them?

On the other hand, why not? If players (and GM) are having more fun if they can choose from multiple races then why not? Personally I got an impression that demi-humans were not usually all that welcome to human lands. So I would discourage having multiple races in the party unless there was a good reason. But then again that's just how I run my games and it really might be a good idea to have those races as options for those who like to have a more traditional games.

Or is my take on the world totally wrong on this aspect?

In reality it is not so bad - after all a typical character won't have them all at once . Lock picking for the thieves, performing for bards...

I just remember in fear how daunting the full skill list in Rolemaster (or GURPS) is. In the end I learned the essential skills in RM and after that it was quite easy to pick up the skills. I suppose the same applies here.

Do you mean that Witchers use Power Points as CPs or that they can regenerate CPs using PPs or ...?

Witchers have both Combat Points and Power Points. When they e.g. run out of CPs, they may use PPs to get raises or perform combat maneuvers instead of using them to cast the Signs.

Ah, so Witchers can be really bitches in the combat because they can sustain maneuvers and roll enhancing longer than mundane warriors of the same caliber.

Armor does not make you invincible, but it stacks - you'll usually wear some light armor (leather, padded or something like this) under your plate or chainmail. If you use enough armor - say, light armor, chainmail and a shield, you're reducing the damage you take by 5 points. A person using sword with decent (3) strength will cause between 7 and 12 points of damage (9.5 on average) - this will make you last twice as long in combat. With full plate and light armor plus tower shield you'll reduce the damage by 7 points - that's not bad at all.
BTW - it is actually quite easy to fight in full plate on foot. I'd even say that it is easier than fighting in chain mail.

Ah, armor stacking. I didn't take that into account (I should have thought about that). Yes, in that light it makes sense.

As I really don't know about moving in plate mail I just have to take your word for it

Sounds pretty cool by me. With maneuvers being like skills do you mean that you have to make a skill test using that maneuver instead of a normal attack skill?

No, you simply have to know that maneuver (in the case of maneuvers and spells you just buy them as if you were buying new skills, but there is no "level" for them). You make a normal attack roll and spend the appropriate amount of CPs - that's all.

Okay, that's how it went in Fading Suns, too. Pretty good way to handle it, IMHO.

A warrior will usually have 15 (an average one) to 25 (a very experienced one) CPs. Most maneuvers cost between 1 and 3 CPs, with a few costing up to 15 CPs (they are mostly "instant kill" maneuvers or really heroic feats, and only very good warriors with high CP pools will know them, most of them were introduced in one of the expansions). Typically you'll have enough CPs to last you through a few fights, unless you're burning them very fast (e.g. raising a lot of dice at the same time etc).

OK, if they last for a few fights on average then it's no problem if you have to sleep before recovering them.

Well, it depends - mostly on what spells the spell user will buy. Very powerfull spells (e.g. Ball of Lightning) cost roughly as much, as raising a skill from very good (4) to legendary (5) level. Cheap spells may cost as little as learning a new skill (to the starting level 1). 3-4 spells for a beginning character will be a typical number, over time a character may learn a few new ones.
The really useful spells are rather expensive, but very powerful. A spellcaster will be quite limited in the number of spells he may cast before he runs out of Power - e.g. even a very strong wizard will be able to cast only one strong or two weak Balls of Lightning, but it is possible to recharge those points quite fast in some situations.
Witchers regain power slowly - their amulets (which provide them with power) recharge over time. Priests have to pray and meditate, which takes some time. Wizards may take power from their surroundings - as they use the power of elements, they may take power from earth, water, fire or air. The amount of power they get will depend on the strength of the element - e.g. you'll get more power from a raging inferno than from a torch. A lucky and powerful wizard in a burning city may throw fireballs almost like a machinegun.

Interesting, especially how wizards got their PPs back.

And yes, spellcasters and witchers were well balanced - at least usually. They could become very powerful, but usually they did not live long enough - learning took a long time for them, as they had more things to spend experience on.

I think that almost the same thing applied to Rolemaster. Full spellcasters got pretty good at casting spells (quite fast) but semi spellusers (like warrior mages, rangers, bards and night blades) really had to think how much they wanted to invest in spells as they were pretty expensive for them.

In general, even if you manage to keep your character alive despite bad luck and/or bad choices it is often that the campaign ends before really hard to learn stuff can be learned by characters and thus before they can attain the same status as heroes of the books (like Geralt, if you can really call him a hero).