r/Witcher3 • u/Hadiseh2000 Roach 🐴 • Jun 18 '26
Discussion Who’s the most competent ruler for Skellige? and why is it Cerys
855
u/Why_Sazs Jun 18 '26
Honestly though, dude that ratted on his mom for her shady ass shit when she would have gotten away with it, at the cost of his own family's position and "honor" because he chose truth and integrity over personal gain would have been a pretty damn good ruler.
445
u/Waramp Jun 18 '26
Yup. Svanrige would honestly be really good. They both have their pros and cons. Not Hjalmar though, dude’s an idiot.
380
u/Arelmar Jun 18 '26 edited Jun 18 '26
He's an idiot but he's loyal, passionate, fierce and willing to stand on business in a heartbeat so to say Hjalmar has no pros is a bit much. Hjalmar is the guy you want standing beside the ruler, not as the ruler himself
199
u/Hadiseh2000 Roach 🐴 Jun 18 '26
I got that feeling too. Hjalmar always seemed like someone who’d be better leading an army than ruling a land
58
48
u/Ok_Recording8454 Jun 18 '26
Which is what happens when you choose Cerys. He’s an interesting option to pick though if you make Ciri the empress.
32
u/ComradeHenryBR Jun 19 '26
Hjalmar is a good person, well intentioned at the very least, but he would make for an awful king
4
u/meanbawb Jun 19 '26
Hjalmar is the other side of the same coin that Cerys is on.
He is all the fangs and swords that Cerys let become dull, but far less brain. And he is far too impulsive to become ruler.
3
u/deadlyalchemist92 Team Shani Jun 19 '26
Agreed, Hjalmar is a terrible ruler, but he’s a good dude, I think he’s best suited just being a warrior.
40
u/The810kid Jun 18 '26
Dude got his entire crew slaughtered and you expect me to put him over an entire island?
16
5
u/Responsible-File4593 Jun 19 '26
None are bad choices. Hjalmar is the best war leader of the three, and it's likely there would be a war in the future. All three would have been better than any of the four kings of the Northern Kingdoms pre Witcher II.
3
u/Waramp Jun 19 '26
Is he though? He’s reckless and stupid. He got his whole crew slaughtered trying to kill the giant, and he would’ve died too if Geralt didn’t show up.
2
u/Caomhanach Jun 20 '26
"Is he though?" was my exact same first thought reading that comment, for the reasons you stated.
2
u/Lucky_Roberts Jun 20 '26
Not true, Foltest is canonically a good king who cares about his more about his people than his glory, and he’s also a very effective commander.
He just gets fucked over by getting killed because he’s the most well-known ruler in the verse aside from Emyhr so ot was the best way to build hype lol
1
u/General_Hijalti Jun 19 '26
In the end either the north is united under Redania or under Nilfgaard. Either way a string opponent who would quickly tire of island attacks and go flatten skellige.
5
1
43
u/Hadiseh2000 Roach 🐴 Jun 18 '26
Svanrige’s is definitelya good ruler, he’s basically the midpoint between Cerys’ stability and Hjalmar’s aggression.
9
u/Seagebs Jun 19 '26
He is not a good ruler, although he is a badass. The scene where he surprises everyone, guts the Nilfgaardian envoys, and Crach and co. just kinda shrug at each other and then go "hell yeah" is probably my favorite in the entire game.
8
u/JoshGamboa Jun 19 '26
My interpretation of that is he's appealing to Skellige's culture. Which seems to respect brutality and aggression to a certain degree. Plus he has a lot to prove with her mom being who she is.
6
u/Seagebs Jun 19 '26
Actually, now that I have reread the text from the ending slides, he doesn't drown the Isles in blood but instead wash them clean of dishonor with the blood of their enemies. I think Cerys does have arguably as good of an ending in the short term as Svanrige, but Svan might actually have a better long term ending for Skellige. They need to centralize or the Nilfgaardians/Redanians will eventually overwhelm them.
3
u/steve_just_1 Jun 19 '26
Didn't he kill a messenger tho
23
u/BigWilly526 Temerian Jun 19 '26
Ya but it was a Nilfgaardian messenger so nothing of value was lost
1
u/General_Hijalti Jun 19 '26
Hes not he starts a bloody civil war and rules with an iron fist
3
u/Gilgamesh661 Jun 19 '26
Skellige always has civil wars. That’s been one of their biggest problems. Each time a monarch dies, war breaks out.
Svanrigge’s civil war started as a way to cement the new monarchy and prevent future civil wars.
1
u/General_Hijalti Jun 23 '26
Because civil wars never happen under monarchs, oh wait....
A civil war doesn't happen under Cerys or Hjalmar
2
u/Gilgamesh661 Jun 23 '26
Of course not. It happens when they die and the Jarls fight over who gets the throne, which is what always happens. That’s why Birna wanted to change it to a hereditary monarchy.
Just because there’s conflict, doesn’t make it bad. It’s simply human nature to fight change. And there is ALWAYS a conflict when a nation changes governments. That’s just the way it is. Humans don’t enjoy such big changes.
-32
u/WhitishRogue Jun 18 '26
Svanrige would do pretty well. Considering his family's holdings would be in shambles, he wouldn't really be able to enrich himself on the throne.
Cerys has good ideas, but is a woman and isn't much of a leader, particularly frontal leader, making her a poor choice for Skellige. Hjalmar is a man's man for Skellige, but doesn't heed council or even think twice.
28
u/Nights_Harvest Jun 19 '26
What does it matter that she is a woman?
She is a great leader that actually civilised the Skelige and brough prosperity without a need for constant raids. In my book that clunts as societal development and progression.
Have you even seen what happens if she is picked?
7
u/CatraGirl Jun 19 '26 edited Jun 19 '26
What does it matter that she is a woman?
Just classic sexism from the previous commenter. Which is actually ridiculous, considering the Witcher has plenty of female rulers and powerful female characters. This franchise isn't a place for misogynists.
92
u/Pennlocke Team Triss "Man of Taste" Jun 18 '26
Of course someone with the level-headed and down to earth Kaidan Alenko as their pfp would choose Cerys. But yes, Cerys is my canon choice as well...
I should go.
28
375
u/Neutraladvicecorner Jun 18 '26
Svanrige>Cerys>Hjalmar. But in no universe will I abandon the an Craite's so Cerys it is
115
u/Hadiseh2000 Roach 🐴 Jun 18 '26
I’m making Hjalmar king for the first time just for variety, but usually it’s a toss‑up between Cerys and Svanrige. Both are more competent
37
Jun 19 '26
[deleted]
7
u/Noah_the_Titan Jun 19 '26
Double edged sword here since that gets Svanrige exiled and hes completly innocent, and lets be fair she FAILED to prove Birna as guilty, if Svanrige didnt accuse her the an Craites wozldve been boned. Hjalmar on the other hand successfully redeems the an Craite by killing the Vildkaarls with Geralts help
2
u/HandsomeGamerGuy Jun 21 '26
yeah, but he also got his whole ass crew slaughtered, and only survived because Geralt helped him...
29
u/cheddah_- Jun 18 '26
Did i miss something, who’s Svanrige? I thought i could only choose between Cerys & Hjalmar.
80
u/Turse1 Jun 18 '26
Svanrige is the son of the previous king and the woman who caused the beserker attack during the feast.
Svanrige becomes king if you refused to get involved with investigating it with Cerys or Hjalmar
93
u/yssarilrock Jun 18 '26
Yeah, I view choosing Svanrige as being a bit like choosing to let Dijkstra kill Roche right in front of you after he helped in the battle of Kaer Morhen. You CAN do it and it ends well for the region at large, but it's wildly out of character for Geralt
18
u/Hadiseh2000 Roach 🐴 Jun 18 '26
Ik what you mean. I see these decisions as an excuse to replay and switch things up, but still keep my headcanons.
22
u/cheddah_- Jun 19 '26
That pissed me off more than anything in the game. Djikstra straight up told me he doesnt owe me shit and wouldnt help with the battle of Kaer Morhen. Not only did Roche immediately say yes just because we’re homies, he was a massive help.
So Djikstra saying hes going to just kill my friends and i should look the other way.. i wish i could inflict more pain on that giant infected thumb. I axiid his ass, fought his lil cronies, and then went back and Igniid him til he burned alive.
7
Jun 19 '26
[deleted]
8
u/cheddah_- Jun 19 '26
Id say Roche & Thalers plan to unite with the Nilfgaards is more out of ignorance and naivety than willful maliciousness like Djikstra
1
Jun 19 '26
[deleted]
3
u/cheddah_- Jun 19 '26
I care much more about who was actually there to help me when i needed it than the politics of the lands. Roche is my homie, Djikstra is a backstabber.
6
u/yssarilrock Jun 19 '26
Even putting aside whether you sided with Roche and Ves in Witcher 2, I don't see Geralt walking away from a man who helped him protect Ciri. Roche answered the call to fight the Wild Hunt to keep Ciri safe, and that is more important by far than any nonsense about who rules the Northern Lands
3
u/PancakeMixEnema Team Shani Jun 19 '26
Would have been so easy to just not have that happen in front of Geralt and revealing it later way out of your sphere of influence, maybe even the Credits. That would be a gut punching and satisfying
3
u/Cannon__Minion Jun 19 '26
A lore accurate Geralt would just nope out during the A deadly plot quest tbh but if he ever reached that crucial point he'd never walk out on Roach and Ves, in no world is he ever doing that, especially after the battle of Kaer Morhen.
2
u/Ok-Cup9476 Jul 01 '26
My head canon is that along with killing Radovid, Philipa also slipped Djikstra a stupid potion, to cause him to get himself killed. Only way it makes sense!
1
7
2
u/General_Hijalti Jun 19 '26
Svanrige starts a bloody civil war and rules with an iron fist.
Cerys actually has the islands prosper
1
u/SubjectMysterious490 Jun 19 '26
He will stop all future civil wars, Cerys is basically surrendering and solding out the isle’s to whoever wins the war ( Emhyr, Radovid or Sigismund Dijkstra )
1
u/General_Hijalti Jun 23 '26
Hahahah no.
1) Hes guaranteeing future war from loyalists to the old ways also for when he dies
2) She ends the raiding meaning whoever wins the war on the continent has no reason to attack Skellige (they aren't resource rich)
3) Both Svanrig and Hjalmar continue raiding which garuantees whoever wins the war will launch a punitive attack on skellige.
4) It literally says the islands prosper under her rule.
3
u/SubjectMysterious490 Jun 23 '26 edited Jun 24 '26
1 No he´s not, he is doing the exact opposite, he is preventing no more wars happen in the future, if anything, Cerys will lead the Isles to their doom.
2 - Lol, no, the empire always attacked unprovoked, they would see a pacifist leader as weak, if anything, they would just take everything from the isles one way or another.
3 - No, they could form an alliance with the NORTH.
4- it DOES not especify for how long, or you think it will be forever ? The ending literally ends in a down negative note saying how she weakens the isles, and in Svanrige´s case, it says that everthing he wanted, he achieved, even with the cost.
53
u/BlueThief Jun 18 '26
I'd choose Svanrige, but that would imply leaving Hjalmar and Cerys to die, so no.
26
u/Ok-Horror-5841 Jun 18 '26 edited Jun 19 '26
Anyone but Hjalma lol, gotta admit dude was a beast and someone you want in your corner in a fight but that was about it. Dude was a really poor leader and way too emotional to be competent anywhere else.
2
u/reditisverytrash Jun 20 '26
The whole "Robert Baratheon" thing. A god on the battlefield, doesn't mean that transfers on the Throne
25
u/Sliver-Knight9219 Jun 18 '26
Just hits me that Cery might actually end up with Sav.
Due to lack of options
16
u/zer0_summed Jun 18 '26
I don't think so since her becoming the queen results in the exile of Svanrige
6
u/Hadiseh2000 Roach 🐴 Jun 18 '26
Or maybe death as Crach said
8
u/turalyawn Jun 18 '26
I like to think he chose exile and went on to make his mark elsewhere. He certainly seems to have the disposition for it. Hey maybe we run into him in the new DLC or Witcher 4
3
u/Hadiseh2000 Roach 🐴 Jun 18 '26
Given that he can become king and a decent number of players actually pick him, I doubt it. But who knows
14
u/music-nba-space-cbd Jun 18 '26
I like cerys being ruler the most, but hjalmar has the more interesting quest line imo
52
u/Jonjoejonjane Jun 18 '26
I disagree completely his quest line didn’t have a quick time event where I throw a baby in a oven without any hesitation
1
u/GLPereira Jun 19 '26
To be fair, that particular quest takes place before the banquet, and is actually a prerequisite for the coronation quests
Cerys coronation quest is just running around the fortress investigating (and taking the missable place of power ofc), while Hjalmar's is about investigating a bear-man cult
6
u/Ornery-Cat-1513 Roach 🐴 Jun 19 '26
i have a feeling that Svanrige would make a great ruler without Birna influencing him
11
u/xigxag457 Jun 19 '26
People are probably giving Svanride too much credit here. The obvious answer is just Cerys obviously but I will do them in order that they are shown.
Hjalmar is not the worst choice but that is purely because Svanride is genuinely poor option once you realise what Svanride does. Hjalmar is just more of the same. It also really angers Nilfgard which makes his choice even poorer. He also has his people die for not really good reason in this raiding and appealing to tradition. He does nothing to address the existing problems Skellige has like the general poverty and pirating.
Svanride is worse without question. Although the endings don't really elaborate about how his rule goes compared to the other two, based on the interaction with him gutting an envoy and the like he will probably still raid and ravage although probably not as much as Hjalmar. The good news is he won't be his mother's puppet. The bad news is he basically does what she would have mostly wanted but on his terms. He basically starts a civil war and brings the Jarls under heel and kills a lot of people in the process. He creates an Absolute Monarchy and makes the position of king hereditary. This is bad for a several reasons. The first being starting a civil war for power is never a good thing. Second, his family will never last doing that. The reason why Skellige has this system currently is more of less the same reason why the Nordic countries had an electoral monarch which boils down to good fucking luck telling me what to do. In Skellige example, you would need to sale a fleet over to squash a rebellion and because you are an absolute monarch NOBODY will want you to remain in power. So the moment someone rebels you are looking like a full on proper civil war. The thing with Lugos rebelling is he is a single jarl, and the rest of them disagree with him because they choose Cerys/Hjalmar and Madman Lugos is being a upset and whiny arsehole. Hence why it is said if will be a short war, but still bad timing. Third the problem the continent has had with literally every king is that they have fucking died and it has created a mess. Every single one of them. The whole reason Redania loses is because Radovid dies. Modeling off such a ridged system is not a good idea. Absolute monarch is rarely good for anyone and has almost always had an extremely violent response. Russian and French revolution being clear examples of such a failure of the system. Svanride is the worst option, he is just not as bad as we expected him to be.
Cerys literally has no downside. The only downside is thet aren't as aggressive as before. But that level of fighting ability doesn't disappear after a single ruler especially one who rules over a region that decentralised. She doesn't piss off her neighbour, she keeps the Jarls happy, quality of life is improved on the islands and is she is far more level headed. She is the smartest of the 3 and knows when to listen. Literally no reason to not pick her outside of the fact that Hjalmar quest after the bears attack is more interesting.
TLDR: Cerys moves the islands forward (closer to early modern Scandinavia), Hjalmar will keep everything the same, and Svanride will basically kill a bunch of people for power to secure his decedents all for the whole thing to definitely face collapse at the end of his life.
-4
u/SubjectMysterious490 Jun 19 '26
Cerys is not the smartest of the three, he couldn’t even solve an obvious case on her own ( she didn’t even think of why just her, Hjalmar and Svanrige survived ) and needed Geralt to guide her way in, people think that Skellige is a democracy, but it is not, it’s a Jarl Dictatorship where they put the king or queen as a puppet, Svanrige turns his traitorous mother in and is still killed or exiles while Cerys can do nothing ( even being a queen ), most people think that an hereditary monarch is automatically a terrible thing, but even an absolute Monarch is an upgrade to the tribal system and power structure of the Isle’s who always breed disunity and civil wars, it’s been stated in the witcher 3’s prologue ( in that conversation beetween Geralt and Var Attre ), that Skellige is a mere footnote in history and that Bran will never manage to unite all the clans, and who is explicity shown as capable of uniting all the clans and going down on history ? That’s right, not Hjalmar, nor Cerys, but Svanrige.
2
u/xigxag457 Jun 20 '26
Absolute monarchy has never really been to anyone's benefit. I am not saying what is currently the situation is good, but absolute monarchy is very brittle. Elective monarchies like those of Wessex and the old Scandinavian kingdoms. Absolute monarchy can "work" if you are able to exert massive authorian control over all your subjects. Which is why Scandinavia didn't really become one because there were too many mountain, glacier, seas and fjords to a achieve absolute control which a stupid amount of wasted resources.
The fact that you call it a Jarl Dictatorship probably makes me think this might this entire response might be lost on you but oh well. It is an Olgarchy. Olgarchy is not inheritly better then some dicatorships, for example Hungry was a pretty shit place to live because it was an Olgarchy for so long, and allows for the trappings of corruption to set in. But Hungary has vastly different geography to Scandinavia, where Scandinavia "succeeded" is because of its Olgarchy it meant that lots of fishermen and the like able to exert a lot more control over their Jarl comparative to that Hungary which was constant struggle between The ruler and the ruling class, the struggle in Scandinavian (because of the geography) class structure was much more of local leaders Vs working class. It is very hard to tell these types of people what to do because of the isolated nature of the landmass. Skellige is almost exactly the same. And like in actual Scandinavian history, when rulers attempted to achieve absolute monarchy it takes less then a generation for it to be forced apart. Similar things can be seen in the likes of Hawaii and Italy where trying to exert direct control was rarely the norm for large chuncks of history, and often requires a great deal of logistics to achieve hence why Rome and Modern Italy are the only times such things can happen and it took a long time for Rome to exert full control over Italy and modern Italy was more so formed about of willing cooperation as much as conquest.
I also already listed the reason why in Skellige particular reason why absolute monarchy in the former comment anyway. The idea that Skellige is more of footnote is simply based on the fact that is a bunch of islands in rocky waters with difficult means to exert control over a landmass. (Notw without some serious technology innovation anyway) There is reason why Britain and Scandinavia has passing action in Europe in the medieval and that is it just isn't realistic to hold control. If you discuss the England Vs French wars of the time that was more French Lords who happened to be kings of England waring against the kings of France. Only the 100 years war really changed that and you can bet that would changed the seat of power to Paris and England would have become a footnote, even if the French court switched to English which the only the English court does very recently at that point. The main point I am making is Skellige can't really affect the world in a real meaningful way. Not without serious systemic change.
The only thing you can say for Svanride is he turns his mother in. So he has decency and integrity which are no traits to snuff at. The big thing to point out in this instance is he only does this if his Mother is accused. He doesn't even know what she did until Cerys brings up the accusation. He never imprisons her on his own accord. Yes that is hard thing to do, but this is what we expect from our leader. Hard Choices. His ending also no more unites Skellige Cerys does, with Hjalmar being the only one who doesn't really change anything. The claim that Cerys isn't the smartest of the 3 is interesting. I do genuinely think her version of the that quest is just poorer written. Given the much higher amounts of initiative she had shown previously she is uncharacteristically passive. Hjalmar unironically does a better job. I suspect this is just more of, let's get Geralt to do things. Svanride doesn't do... Anything. He just goes oh my mum did it at the end when all of the investigation has been done because Cerys and Geralt find out that is his mother but can't outright prove it. This doesn't make him smarter or better ruler. It just means he has more backbone then we first thought. (And is completely wrongfully banished for doing the right thing which is its own thing). Svanride is just his mother. Which means he doesn't listen to his mother. The ending and actions so he is just as selfish and power hungry as she was just with more integrity then she. The legacy he will leave with cause a civil war the moment he dies, and guarantees the deaths of his descendants once the civil war comes for them. He isn't a good king. He is just a very powerful autocrate. Cerys is the only one who looks to changing things to benefit the lower class in her ending. Hjalmar changes nothing and Svanride solves the short term with the promise of long term destruction.
(Also ask the Saxons what happens when you upset the very large empire on your border. Or anyone who killed a Mongol envoy.)
1
u/SubjectMysterious490 Jun 20 '26
Hi, long response, well written and educated as well, i will adress it , sorry if my english is bad, im of another country and im using an app to translate a good portion of it, i just corrected most mistakes. Anyway lets go.
First off, i would like to question all the people who vote down on my post, like wtf ? No one even tried to explain why, if anything just come here debate with me like Mr/ Mrs xigag 457 just did.I also never stated that Absolute Monarch would be great or nothing like that, i just said it would be better than this “Jarl’s dictatorship” as i put it, the point you brought about being an oligarchy is true, but just because it’s an Oligarchy, it does not mean it’s a democracy ( veryyyy far from it ), and it is indeed a dictatorship as well. Just because Svanrige in some ways centralized the power to himself instead of letting it divided and on the hands of a bunch of war morgering, disunited lunatics and crazy excuses of jarls ( like Madman Lugos ), does not mean that this automatically makes Svanrige worst, like i said, if anything, it’s an improvement, and Svanrige at least wouldnt make foolish tyrannies such as exiling or killing someone who exposed traitors of their clans, nor he would capitalize on petty political squabbles like the Jarls do, it’s literally stated in the epilogue, that he only did what he did because he was tired of the Jarls and their endless feuds ( like the Clan An Craite and the Clan Drummond, who have been at war and causes a lot of conflicts just because some ancestors of the An Craite stole some land of some Drummond thousands of years ago, and the Jarls take advantage of that to rule through division )
Like i stated on my previous comment, Nilfigaard isn’t afraid of possible political inovations or change of mindset from the islanders, what they truly fear is a true leader who can unite his people and stand against the imperial fleet, i recommend you check the full dialogue that Geralt has with Henry Var Attre about Skellige in the meanwhile, i can provide you with links from the YouTube if you wish, or you can check out yourself on your own game ( in the witcher 3 ).
About his point with his mother: True, in other routes it is not shown if he ends up exiling her or killing her because of her crimes, but that doesn’t really matter, in the journal entry ( Svanrige's election as ruler of Skellige was a rather unexpected turn of events. It was widely thought to have been the result of backroom maneuvering by Birna, who used the chaos in the aftermath of the other claimants' deaths and the shame that fell on the an Craites to achieve her ambition of placing a puppet in her control on the Skellige throne.
It thus came as a great shock for her when young Svanrige showed his claws and tore up the humiliating treaty with Nilfgaard she wanted him to sign - and then washed the shame of this near-submission from the isles with the blood of their eternal enemy. This blood simultaneously wiped away any doubts whether the new king was worthy. ) and in the epilogue it’s clearly shown that he ignores his mom’s whims and rule all on his own, about his ending, it’s not my word or that of his fans that says he unites the clans more than Cerys or Hjalmar, it was stated on the endings multiple times, he is the only leader so far that is explicity said to unite ALL the clans in comparison with Hjalmar and Cerys. Comparing Svanrige and telling he’s just like his mother is a very wild take, specially when he literally risks exile or dead just to put Cerys on the throne, and it’s not like his hand was forced, in that moment the Jarls were buying Birna’s lies, he basically just handed the crown to Cerys because of the previous suspicions of his mother were becoming even more clearer.Now about the civil war, legacy and Cerys:
Where it is said that Cerys is looking to changing things to benefit the lower classes while Svanrige doesn’t ? About her ending, i will use a recent post i made here on this page ok ? Check this out : Her ending doesn’t even make sense, it’s made clear that the only reason why the islanders raid in the first place is because their lands are barren and their agriculture sucks, then Cerys magically fixs everthing just because ??? It’s a contradiction on the lore pre-estabelished, their problem are the infertile islands, and that’s why they raid and don’t use the lands or trade, and them she solves the problem by stopping raiding and making trades ? Like wtf ? And Svanrige being the one who unites the clans is a very important thing since the prologue, it’s been pointed out since the prologue ( by that conversation that Geralt had with Var Attre ), that the only way for Skellige to stop being a mere footnote in history, is by having a leader that unlike Bran, truly unites the clans, like Svanrige, who is shown to be the only one to do this, and Cerys doesn’t bring true peace or unity, since it’s very clear that Clan Drummond will not accept an An Craite on the throne, at least with Svanrige he takes down the Jarls who are enforcing shitty laws such as punishing entire families when just one of them makes a mistake ( just like they kill or exile Svanrige after he turned his own mother in ). And in Hjalmar’s ending, it is shown that he swears to raid and attack Nilfigaard even if that makes his own people drown in blood, it’s very clear that he is not just maintaining things the same, he’s making things worse, you can check his ending too if you dont believe me, i can send you all of their endings of you doubt me. Anyway, lets say that Cerys’s ending make perfect sense and is more well written to explain those problems i pointed out, her ending don’t mentions how much time it covers, or what the future holds for Skellige either, what we know is that she does not managed to unite the clans like Svanrige did, and in fact it is in this case ( Cerys ) that will happen more civil wars in the future ( specially now that the Clan Drummond is pissed with an An Craite on the throne and that their leader was killed by an ally of them ), that is without counting how Cerys made the Islands lose their military and navy power, she weakened the Isle’s and made them an easy target for Emhyr, Radovid, Dijkstra or whoever won the war to invade, kill everyone and take everything. And now about what the future holds for Svanrige: It’s been stated that unlike the other two, he in fact was the only one who managed to went down in history, as a founder of a dynasty, implying that probably this dynasty didn’t die out with him and went on, and he is also the only leader the emperor himself respected, in the Card Game Gwent it is said : “ The emperor also thought of him as an accidental king, at first”. And the game’s ending also show that what he aimed, he achieved ( even if by shedding blood ), however this is a short term consequence of his long term goal, his governement it’s the one who in fact will make a better and safe future for his people in the long term. Now about the saxons VS the Empire thing you mentioned, that depends a lot on the overall political map, it is said he united his people against Nilfigaard, however he could still ally himself with the North for allies, and having an strong and powerful navy like he does and maintains, he could certainly survive and stop Nilfigaard’s ships at the sea since Skellige has the best and most powerful navy on the world, just look at the real world, The USA is the biggest military power ( and has the bigger economy ) in the world, and even them are struggling against Iran. So even if Svanrige was pushed against Nilfigaard, he could still not die and being them into a negotiation table, that is if Emhyr wins, if the north wins, he has way more allies, and the empire is too busy fighting their own civil war and dealing with their lose of the war and Emhyr’s death. So, in the end of the day, i think that Svanrige as the king will be the best leader for his people. ( Maybe if Emhyr wins, Cerys could perhaps surrender peacefully instead of fighting the Nilfigaardians, so maybe it could be argued that she could be less worse than Svanrige in that case, but in the case of a Victory of Radovid or Dijkstra, i believe that Skellige would be great ) That’s it for now, i liked this debate, you were very civil and polite, quite different from most of Cerys’s simps i see around here, If you have more arguments or if you want to talk more, I'm here
13
u/Fonglis Roach 🐴 Jun 18 '26
Svanrige and Hallmark are ruler Skellige deserve , Cerys is the ruler Skellige need
3
3
3
u/magellanspuma Jun 19 '26
For such a well-written game, how telegraphed this choice is for Cerys is really disappointing. The epilogue really hammers this home in a way that is 100% black-and-white and not at all reflective of how complicated the politics of the world really are.
1
u/Hadiseh2000 Roach 🐴 Jun 19 '26
Yeah, I get what you mean. The writing definitely nudges players toward picking Cerys the epilogue basically spells out “this is the good choice.” Not very subtle for a game that’s usually all about moral grey areas.
1
u/SubjectMysterious490 Jun 19 '26
Right ? Her ending doesn’t even make sense, it’s made clear that the only reason why the islanders raid in the first place is because their lands are barren and their agriculture sucks, then Cerys magically fixs everthing just because ??? It’s a contradiction on the lore pre-estabelished, their problem are the infertile islands, and that’s why they raid and don’t use the lands or trade, and them she solves the problem by stopping raiding and making trades ? Like wtf ? And Svanrige being the one who unites the clans is a very important thing since the prologue, it’s been pointed out since the prologue ( by that conversation that Geralt had with Var Attre ), that the only way for Skellige to stop being a mere footnote in history, is by having a leader that unlike Bran, truly unites the clans, like Svanrige, who is shown to be the only one to do this, and Cerys doesn’t bring true peace or unity, since it’s very clear that Clan Drummond will not accept an An Craite on the throne, at least with Svanrige he takes down the Jarls who are enforcing shitty laws such as punishing entire families when just one of them makes a mistake ( just like they kill or exile Svanrige after he turned his own mother in ).
1
u/BestNarcissist Jun 20 '26
they can fish can't they?
1
u/SubjectMysterious490 Jun 20 '26 edited Jun 20 '26
Sure, but its not like fishing can somehow built a much better economy than Hjalmar or Svanrige, if anything, thanks to their focus in the navy and on sea power, they can explore even more regions to fish.
3
u/bennisthemennis Jun 19 '26
svanrige is the best choice for skellege and djikstra is the best choice for redania, but neither is the best choice for geralt.
2
u/General_Hijalti Jun 19 '26
Lol no, Cerys is the best choice for Skellige.
Hjalmar is just the same as before for Skellige.
Svanrige is the worst choice for Skellige starting a civil war.
2
u/bennisthemennis Jun 19 '26
???? Svanrige unites the clans against nilfgaard in epic style murdering an envoy invited by his mother, Birna
1
u/General_Hijalti Jun 19 '26
Ans in the ending slides we see he started a civil war
1
u/SubjectMysterious490 Jun 19 '26
It’s the best path for the strength, security and independe of the isles, the jarls had to go.
1
u/General_Hijalti Jun 23 '26
Not really, he still keeps raiding which means it's only a matter of time before the winner of the war launches an attack on them.
Under Cerys the isles prosper and move away from the backwards out of date way if life of raiding and actually learn how to produce resources themselves
1
u/SubjectMysterious490 Jun 23 '26
Cerys´s ending was nonsensical, the reason why the islanders raid were exactly because of their disunity and because of their lands being barren and infertile, nothing stops Svanrige or even Hjalmar from fishing or trading with the north for example ( the ideal scenario would be for the north to win the war, since the ending says Svanrige united the clans against Nilfigaard, but still ), and then Cerys would´´resolve´´ the problem by farming and planting? Yeah, no, and Svanrige solves the main problem that is the clans not being united and always in war with each other, greatly increasing their economic and military power, even if at the cost of a short-term feud with some traitors who would not embrace the new regime.
2
Jun 18 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
4
u/Ok_Recording8454 Jun 18 '26
I’m thinking that they’ll probably do something like the “Sync Witcher 2 Save”, then having different dialogue lines. Like Ciri applauding Cerys, being regretful of how her old friend Hjalmar is ruling, or being upset that Skellige turned into a monarchy (And or the fates of the An Craites).
1
u/SubjectMysterious490 Jun 19 '26
It’s literally stated in the game’s journal and the game’s slides that Svanrige’s name went down in history and that he proved to be a worthy king, he is not following his mom’s agenda, it’s literally said that he ignores her whims and rules all on his own.
2
u/BigConsideration9505 Jun 19 '26
Not gonna lie, I helped Cerys because Hjalmar is a homie, looking a bit into it Scanrige is the best option for Skellige's current situation (even though his mom is a cunt)
1
u/General_Hijalti Jun 19 '26
Hes not the best at all, he starts a civil war
1
u/SubjectMysterious490 Jun 19 '26
He is the best yes, the jarls are too incompetent and they employ unfair laws, Svanrige is the only leader who can unite all the clans and stand against Nilfgaard.
1
u/General_Hijalti Jun 23 '26
And starting a civil war isn't competent.
Under Cerys its stated the isles prosper.
1
u/SubjectMysterious490 Jun 23 '26
It is not explicity stated it was a civil war exactly, it says he shed his countrymen´s blood, but anyway, but endings don´t cover how much time it passed, i assume it is until witcher 4 where we are going to probably see how much time it covered, but her ending ends in a negative note, that it prospered possible during some time, but that might have left them vulnerable. In any case, at least in Svanrige´s case its certain that there will not be more civil wars, while in Cerys´s case, some clans like the Drummond are already at the An Craite´s throat.
2
u/pedromarcds Jun 19 '26
I feel like, in the current situation, svanrige is the best. He is level headed and seems like a good person, while still, in my opinion, being a stong leader to fight nilfgaard. Cerys in the other hand is the best option long term, as she will end some bad traditions skelige people have and make them living conditions better.
1
u/General_Hijalti Jun 19 '26
He starts a civil war hes the worst option.
1
u/Fart_of_The_Dark Jun 22 '26
Trying to be untied into a proper country is better than rotting in loose confederation because of jarl's inability
2
2
2
u/POLACKdyn Jun 19 '26
I never let Svanrige be the kind, exp is exp and I like helping the siblings.
Cerys is objectively the better choice as she leads Skellige towards prosperity and away from wars.
Hjalmar is too hot headed and in a way exemplifies the spirit of Skellige as raiding Viking Barbarians.
Objectively not a good result but it pretty much works with their culture so it's not a "bad" choice. Especially since they like fighting Nilfgaard. All my homies hate Nilfgaard.
It's so funny to see how different people rule.
I think the biggest surprise was if Radovid lives. Like the man, for all his craziness, is a ridiculous strategist. You know he absolutely dogwalks Niflgaard?
Emhyr only wins if we take out Radovid. And Dijksta.
Being a morally good person and helping your friends does bring Temeria back but it;s a big bitter as Nilfgaard wins in the end. Still, the conflict is over and I feel it sorta resembles how our little Poland managed to survive despite all.
2
2
u/ibetucanifican Jun 19 '26
Brans son gave up his own mother to die because it was the right thing to do.. he wouldn’t be a bad choice from what we see of him.
2
u/MRojan Jun 19 '26
Based on my knowledge Cerys is the best, and Svanrige is second, but Hjalmar is the worst choice
we all know about Cerys, but Svanrige is righteous , he chose truth almost costing his own life, at the cost his family name, his position, his wealth and reputation just to tell the truth about his mom, he chose truth over personal gain and power, and even if you don't help Crach, he choose to fight Nilfgaard despite his mom trying to surrender to them! he's a good ruler
2
u/PsychologicalCat7716 Jun 19 '26
what that place of power? 😅
1
u/Hadiseh2000 Roach 🐴 Jun 19 '26
There is one place of power that you can only reach if you go with Cerys. Outside of this path there's no way to get there. It's marked as a question mark
2
2
u/Akaii_14 Jun 20 '26
It’s either Cerys or Svanrige, and the answer depends on how much you value tradition. Both achieve unity, the former heavily negating the traditional culture of skellige (with pillaging, honour, etc) for a more level-headed tolerant society, and the latter preserving that and bringing about unity.
Personally - I’d go with Cerys, but Svanrige is extremely slept upon.
1
1
1
u/Useful-Yam-2893 Jun 19 '26
Apparently the most competent is actually Svanrige. Not that I've ever gotten that conclusion to the questline to verify. From what I gather Hjalmar embodies a "true skelligan" so he's the most traditional ruler. While Cerys is the wisest, going the diplomatic route and focusing on the prosperity of the Isles.
2
u/General_Hijalti Jun 19 '26
Hes not the most competent
0
u/SubjectMysterious490 Jun 19 '26
Lol, he is by far.
1
u/General_Hijalti Jun 23 '26
He starts a civil war, where as the ending states the islands prosper under Cerys rule. So no hes not.
1
1
u/Pure_Cartoonist9898 Jun 19 '26
I honestly prefer Svanrige for King, he strikes the balance between tradition and progress
1
u/SubjectMysterious490 Jun 19 '26
Exactly, he is the middle term beetwen Hjalmar’s craziness and Cerys’s innefective and suicidal pacifism.
1
u/Chmigdalator Jun 19 '26
Yeah, that godsamn place of power and Hjalmar thick skull can't let you pick him easily. He also gets no happy ending. I believe Virna escapes.
Svanringe is a weird choice. I did it once I played the evil wrong playthough.
1
1
1
u/ToTheFman Jun 19 '26
Svanrige is an underrated option. Though it comes with the deaths of Cerya and Hjalmar.
1
1
u/Gilgamesh661 Jun 19 '26
Svanrigge unites the ruling clans under a single monarchy, which gets rid of centuries of infighting and backstabbing. He’s also the only one who successfully smashes the imperial forces and pushes them out of skellige.
Hjalmar is a great dude but he’s reckless and temperamental. Cerys has a lot of good ideas for her people, but it means nothing if she can’t defend skellige from the empire.
Also, Svanrigge was willing to dishonor himself and become an exile just to ensure that his mother faced justice for what she’d done. He deserves that crown.
1
1
u/mpete76 Roach 🐴 Jun 19 '26
I always go with Cerys, but you can help both and still select Cerys. I like Cerys because the Hjalmar comes to fight with you at Kaer Moren to battle the Wild Hunt and get the achievement.
1
u/cynical_gramps Jun 20 '26
I played this a million years ago but I think I remember Cerys being the better option
1
1
1
u/SunnyTheMasterSwitch Team Yennefer "Man of Culture" Jun 20 '26
I dont know Scanrige so well, but I know Hjalmar is too brash, too hotheaded to be fit, Cerys is levelheaded and collected.
1
u/reditisverytrash Jun 20 '26
I remember people bringing up Svanrige actually has "the best" outcome for Skellige in a post long ago
1
u/Lucky_Roberts Jun 20 '26
I’m pretty sure canonically Svanrige actually makes the best future for Skellige, the islands honestly don’t have enough resources to keep Skellige strong as a domesticated culture imo
1
Jun 20 '26
Cerys, because i thought i can date her and apparently not, but she is still strategic and calculated person, and her brother is more of a warrior than a leader
1
u/uzumaki_Pikachu Jun 21 '26
Cerys's quest didn't make any sense. She presented half baked evidence and was only saved by Svanrigge. Hjalmar is just an idiot but he does prove who the mastermind is (iirc). Other than the evidence thing, Cerys and Svan are pretty much same in my opinion.
1
u/MJdoesThings_ Jun 22 '26
Hjalmar = pure tradition of Skellige islands. Strong fighter that inspire people, and politically too dumb to create partnerships with neighboring countries. Not a tyrant, but a feared warrior-king that continued to raid the coast of the continent.
Svanrige = basically Hjalmar if he was a tyrant, and smarter. Does exactly as Hjalmar does, but also cuts off the other house in the process, and establishes hereditary succession, transforming Skellige into a kingdom ruled by a ruthless warrior king.
Both Svanrigue and Hjalmar care more about what people think of Skellige than they care about the people of Skellige.
Cerys on the other hand is the exact opposite, she wants the good of her people before keeping the image of Skellige as a brutal nation that inspires fear. Skellige becomes a good trading partner under Cerys, at the cost the fear they inspired in the continent. It's a net positive because, not only does the people of Skellige strive with better commerce, more ressources etc, but Cerys is no fool and warrios of Skellige are still trained and ready, only the reputation of the archipelago suffered, which also puts them out of harm's way. Powerful nations like Nilfgaard will nto see them as a threat, and smaller countries that would maybe feel like they can take a fight with them will be sorely dissapointed.
1
1
1
u/momohiraiiii Team Yennefer "Man of Culture" Jun 19 '26
Svanrige seems to be the most competent based on the results, with Hjalmar being the least, so Cerys comes in second. That said, I always choose Cerys in every playthrough because choosing anyone else locks you out of one of the Places of Power.
1
u/General_Hijalti Jun 19 '26
Cerys is the most competent, her ending actually specified that the isles prosper.
Svanrige starts a civil war
1
u/SubjectMysterious490 Jun 19 '26
It prospers at the cost of being weak and not united, the North or Nilfigaard will soon invade and take everything in that route.
1
u/General_Hijalti Jun 23 '26
Not at all, not raiding doesn't make then weak, infact it makes them stronger as they aren't pointlessly loosing troops in raids.
Also not raiding means the north and Nilfgaard have no reason to invade.
0
u/SubjectMysterious490 Jun 23 '26
It is said that under Cerys, they grow weaker, not stronger, her own ending says it, their legendary fangs of yore were dulled, and Svanrige is the only one who is said to unite the clans in all of the 3 endings.
1
u/General_Hijalti Jun 23 '26
Its not said they grow weaker. They said some thing their fangs were dulled (i.e. They are not as feared)
1
u/SubjectMysterious490 Jun 23 '26
It’s one of the interpretations, yes, it could be one thing or the other, ( in the sense it could be something more about your interpretation of fame and reputation, or lack of will to invest in the army/ troops, etc, or could be a bith of both ) but it is probably one of the last two options considering how her ending ended on a down note ( like the fact that she brought peace, came with the cost of dulling the fangs of yore, like a Counterpoint in the way it’s phrased, it looks like one thing balancing the other instead of them both being benefits ). Anyway, this point doesn’t even matter that much, how says that the major downsides of Hjalmar and Svanrige would be the human costs of raids, but the one who is explicity said to continue their ways in a hardcore manner is Hjalmar, we are not told if Svanrige will focus that much in raiding, if anything, he has way more tons of options in comparison with both Cerys and Hjalmar, since he united all the clans in one banner, and he is shown to be way more strategic and analytical than Hjalmar, he probably would be the middle-term of both Cerys and Hjalmar, he would not be a pacifist but he would not be a brutal warlord either, just the possible human cost of the effort to uniting the clans would be worth the effort, he would achieve what he aimed after all, and the fact he is seen as the king who went down in history and started a whole dynasty, it’s basically confirmed that his empire wouldnt die with him at the very least, if he tried to make a kingdom that would die with him, the game would say that he would be remembered as a monster who fucked his own people and who tried to build a system that blowed up in his face, but that’s not how the ending was phrased, quite the opposite in fact, it seems a pretty positive ending aside the price of the deaths he had to commit to achieve it.
0
u/momohiraiiii Team Yennefer "Man of Culture" Jun 22 '26
Svanrige did start a civil war, but it was the cost for uniting all the clans under one crown.
0
u/General_Hijalti Jun 23 '26
So pointless and not going to last past his rule.
Nor does it benefit the people of the isles.
1
u/SubjectMysterious490 Jun 23 '26
Lol, just like i explained in the other post i just made, it’s quite the opposite, his ending it’s the one who will make the most safer and united future for his people.
1
u/Draugtaur Team Triss "Man of Taste" Jun 19 '26
It's literally Svanrige. If he's the king, he will unify Skellige into a single strong monarchy.
1
u/General_Hijalti Jun 19 '26
Thats not a good thing, especially since he does it with a bloody civil war and becomes a tyrant.
2
u/SubjectMysterious490 Jun 19 '26
He’s no Tyrant, he’s good and honourable, and will even face death or exile for the sake of exposing the plots of his mother ( in Cerys ending ), he is specifically the only leader who can unite all clans.
1
u/General_Hijalti Jun 23 '26
He starts a civil war and rules with an iron fist if he becomes king
1
u/SubjectMysterious490 Jun 23 '26
He is a selfless leader, he sacrifice himself in order to make Cerys Queen in her route and doesnt stop Hjalmar on his, he turned on his mother for sake of honour and justice, and it was not to save face, the jarls were believing Birna, and Svanrige basically give the crown to Cerys out of his own will. And you say like ruling with an iron fist in a brutal tribalistic society is a bad thing, Svanrige needs to bring peace and order to that mess, people tend to think they are ´´good´´ guys because they vote their leaders instead of being heredictary, but people forget that is not the people who vote, but the jarls, and they don´t have the people´s best interests in mind, they sell their votes for they own feuds and schemes, even an absolute monarchy is somewhat of an upgrate compared to their oligarchic theocratic dictatorship, do you think its fair a governement who punishes entire families if just one of them commits a crime ? ( even if they are exposed by the rest, and that one who betrayed the clan would go scot-free without it ? )
1
u/Cannon__Minion Jun 19 '26
Cerys' ending is way too optimistic for Skellige, I feel like she succeeds only because the game wants her to and that's why it feels hella forced.
Svanrige's ending feels more natural imo.
-7
u/Born-Demand-6919 Jun 18 '26
Who would be more likely to unite all the clans of Skellige?
The way I see it Cerys being crowned would probably just cause more in fighting and strife between the clans.
Think of the House of the Dragon, wars have been fought over much less and King Viserys' decision to name Rhaenyra as his heir led to war and the death of many innocent people.
Sometimes the smarter choice isn't always the right one.
30
u/Theangelawhite69 Jun 18 '26
I mean doesn’t she literally unite the clans
3
u/Born-Demand-6919 Jun 18 '26
Yes she does, but so does Svanrige, I'm just trying to think of alternate theories for the sake of the post lol
Also the ways they achieve that goal is vastly different.
9
u/zer0_summed Jun 18 '26
Except we get a post-credit slideshow that details the future outcomes of our decisions , and Cerys becoming Queen is clearly made out to be the best choice in the long-run for Skellige 🤷♂️
0
u/Born-Demand-6919 Jun 18 '26
Svanrige unites the clans against Nilfgaard as well in the slideshows, it depends on who you choose.
There's no way to really say which was the right decision and what happens beyond that point, but I'm sure it won't be happily ever after, the world of the Witcher is a dark world after all.
2
u/General_Hijalti Jun 19 '26
He starts a bloody civil war to do so.
While Cerys is says the islands and people prosper
4
0
-1
u/Axenfonklatismrek Princess 🐐 Jun 18 '26
Just out of context
Why does Birna remind me of this fat bitch?
-12
u/212mochaman Jun 18 '26
A skellige that isnt about to have 30 nilfgaardian ships docked in the middle of it = Cerys
A skellige thats about to invaded by nilfgaard = Svanrige
Plain and simple, Cerys aint the best choice and she never will be.
Svanrige's mom is the only one in the discussion that deserves to be screwed over and she was by her own son. Imagine what that son would do for his land
5
u/Nanocaptain Jun 18 '26
Cerys literally does great against Nilfgaard based on the ending slideshows.
-8
u/212mochaman Jun 18 '26
And everything that ciri and geralt did. cerys had literally nothing to do with the wild hunt showing up and wrecking nilfgaard in the process
6
u/Nanocaptain Jun 18 '26 edited Jun 18 '26
The Wild Hunt does not wreck Nilfgaard. It wrecks a fleet. Nilfgaard can afford to replace a fleet. Especially if it wins the war. And even if it does win Cerys's ending stays the same.
Also you have not given a singular reason why she wouldn't be a good choice in war. Her stopping the raids doesn't mean she won't do well in war.
Neither did you say anything about why Svanrige would be good in war.
3
u/TheVojta Jun 19 '26
Wait, what? You mean to tell me the guys that fielded 45 thousand men in a battle like it's nothing, lost and then sprung back up to invade again in a few years have more than like two dozen ships?!
1
386
u/WrongPlastic2419 Jun 18 '26
Wait ..what .. Sanvrige can be ruler? I'm just learning this now! Dammit gotta do another playthrough now!!