Let Dijkstra Kill Roche
In The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, players are frequently presented with morally complex decisions that can drastically alter the outcome of the story. One such moment occurs during the questline in Novigrad involving the character Sigismund Dijkstra, the cunning spymaster of Redania, and Vernon Roche, the head of the Temerian resistance. The decision to let Dijkstra kill Roche is one of the more emotionally charged choices in the game, and it carries significant narrative weight. Understanding the consequences, motivations, and context behind this event is essential for players aiming to explore every angle of Geralt’s journey through the Northern Kingdoms.
Background of the Conflict
The Politics of the North
The political landscape in The Witcher 3 is turbulent. Nilfgaard, the southern empire, has launched a full-scale invasion of the Northern Kingdoms. Amid the chaos, various factions rise to challenge each other for dominance. Redania, under the ruthless rule of King Radovid, becomes a major player. However, Radovid’s madness and intolerance create internal enemies, including Dijkstra and the former heads of intelligence and rebellion like Roche and Thaler.
Allies Turned Adversaries
Initially, Dijkstra, Roche, Thaler, and Geralt join forces in a plan to assassinate Radovid, believing that the North needs stability and leadership untainted by fanaticism. Despite their differing motivations Dijkstra for order, Roche for Temeria, Thaler for balance the group works together effectively. However, once Radovid is dead, a new struggle begins: who will control the North, and what role will Temeria play?
The Moment of Decision
The Offer to Share Power
Following Radovid’s death, Roche and Thaler propose a power-sharing agreement with Dijkstra, hoping to restore Temeria as a vassal state under Redania. Dijkstra, being a calculated realist, sees their proposal as weakness. He believes the only path to true peace and strength is absolute control. When Roche insists on the deal, Dijkstra makes his move and threatens to eliminate anyone who stands in his way.
Geralt’s Choice
This leads to the pivotal moment: Geralt can either intervene and protect Roche, or step aside and allow Dijkstra to carry out his plan. Letting Dijkstra kill Roche is not a decision to be made lightly. It means sacrificing an old friend and comrade-in-arms, but it also ensures Redania’s complete control of the North, potentially leading to a stronger resistance against Nilfgaard’s expansion.
Reasons to Let Dijkstra Kill Roche
Pragmatic Governance
From a purely political standpoint, Dijkstra is arguably the most competent leader left in the North. His understanding of intelligence, infrastructure, and diplomacy is unparalleled. Unlike Radovid, Dijkstra is not driven by blind hatred or religious zeal. Letting him kill Roche removes potential dissent and gives Redania a unified path forward.
Stability Over Sentiment
While Roche is undoubtedly a noble man, his cause is ultimately nostalgic. The Temerian resistance represents a bygone era. In a world as brutal as that of The Witcher, idealism can be a liability. Letting Dijkstra kill Roche is a cold, calculated decision that favors stability over sentimentality. For players roleplaying a Geralt who prioritizes the greater good over personal loyalty, this path may make the most sense.
Streamlined Power Structure
Power-sharing agreements rarely work in The Witcher universe. They breed mistrust, slow decision-making, and invite betrayal. By allowing Dijkstra to consolidate power, Geralt removes the possibility of future infighting among Northern leaders. This could result in more efficient governance and a unified front against future threats.
Consequences of Letting Dijkstra Kill Roche
Immediate Fallout
As Dijkstra executes Roche and Thaler, the scene is somber and impactful. Geralt’s inaction speaks volumes, and the relationship with these characters is severed permanently. Dijkstra expresses appreciation for Geralt’s pragmatism but makes it clear that they are not allies merely individuals with intersecting goals.
Political Landscape
Redania becomes the dominant force in the North. Dijkstra takes full control of its intelligence network and begins shaping the region with brutal efficiency. There is order, but it comes at a cost. Freedoms are curtailed, resistance is crushed, and dissent is silenced. Some players see this as a necessary evil, while others view it as a betrayal of everything Geralt once fought for.
No Happy Ending for Temeria
Temeria’s dream of autonomy dies with Roche and Thaler. The country is absorbed into Redania’s structure, and its people are denied the sovereignty they fought to preserve. For many fans, this is the most tragic consequence of the choice. However, it aligns with The Witcher’s theme of moral ambiguity and harsh realities.
Comparison with the Alternate Path
Saving Roche
If Geralt chooses to save Roche, Dijkstra is killed instead. This leads to Temeria being restored as a vassal state and Redania losing its most competent leader. While this choice preserves loyalty and friendship, it may lead to a more chaotic future. Redania under a weaker ruler could crumble, making it vulnerable to Nilfgaard’s influence.
Moral Implications
Choosing to let Dijkstra kill Roche reflects a darker Geralt, one who understands that war doesn’t reward kindness. Saving Roche, on the other hand, highlights Geralt’s human side and his loyalty to those who’ve stood by him. Each path reflects a different interpretation of Geralt’s character and worldview.
Is It Worth It?
Roleplaying Considerations
For players heavily invested in roleplaying, the decision can help shape Geralt’s identity. Is he a cynical mercenary who sees the world through the lens of power and survival? Or is he a loyal friend who believes in doing the right thing, even if it weakens the cause? Letting Dijkstra kill Roche is a defining moment that speaks to the kind of witcher Geralt has become.
Narrative Impact
This choice doesn’t drastically change the main storyline, but it deeply affects the political side of the world. It also alters the tone of the ending. A world ruled by Dijkstra feels colder, more authoritarian, and efficient. If that aligns with your view of the best path forward, then the sacrifice may seem justified.
Letting Dijkstra kill Roche in The Witcher 3 is one of the most difficult choices a player can make. It pits loyalty against logic, friendship against strategy, and heart against mind. There’s no clear right or wrong, only different visions for the future of the North. For players willing to embrace the complexities of this dark fantasy world, it offers a poignant reminder that even the best intentions can lead to bloodshed. Whether you choose to act or step aside, the consequences will linger, shaping your version of Geralt’s legacy forever.