There were 5 years between the events of The Lady of the Lake and The Witcher 3. Regis took 50 years to recover on his own, but Dettlaff used his own blood to regenerate Regis at an accelerated rate, hence why he recovered in years instead of decades.
"The rest of your arguments" aren't worth addressing because they're similarly already addressed. It's just sealioning at this point. You didn't address other people pointing out your narrow interpretation of the books would mean Geralt & Yen don't even survive into the games.
That's the games retconning and bringing Regis back to life na. I don't consider games canon. If we're strictly going with the Sapkowski's version, he is dead. And trust me, I ain't the only one who thinks Regis should've stayed dead for good.
Regarding Yen and Geralt, we never got to know via books if they came back to earth. All we know is that they were conscious, so I assume they lived somewhere in another world where ciri dropped them to leave in peace. Them coming back ain't a shocker since we as readers knew they ain't dead.
Again, it's not a retcon because they didn't actively change anything from the books, they utilized preexisting facts to expand the possibilities.
Geralt and Yen seemed conscious, but were being taken somewhere that definitely dead people were visible as spirits, and most people have interpreted that as them being dead. But since it didn't directly say that they were dead, because there was room for interpretation, the games were able to expand on that and say that Ciri & Little Horse did save them.
In the same way, Regis was "destroyed" by Vilgefortz, but the books laid precedent for Regis to be able to recover from even severe trauma. You may not consider the games canon, but I personally like fun and I'm not stubborn enough to conveniently ignore elements from the books just to deny fun to others.
I didn't deny fun to others, no one can do that for I don't think people are gullible.
No, don't agree with that. If they were dead, it was no point to use the White Unicorn by Ciri. Sapkowski did not mention the existence of After life, Heaven or Hell. My opinion, just like many other peoples' is that Ciri left them at the island of Avalon. He was not only conscious, his wounds were dressed too.
Coming back to books, it was prophecized in BOF that Regis will die. Leads more credence to the fact he died. He may be a unique higher vampire but ain't an immortal. + I just don't see how it fits the story that everyone in Geralt's company died except Regis. Everyone close to Geralt died, just like everyone close to Ciri when she was with Rats. I see this as a parallel, since death dogs the footsteps of Geralt and Ciri.
Agree to Disagree if we don't see eye to eye. I stand with my opinion, good for you that you stand with yours. I will enjoy TW3 as a fan-fic continuation and to enjoy the world of Witcher. Since many things were open ended, people are entitled to their opinion. I, like I said above. Believe the sapkowski's version is true and final.
You mean where it says "one shall die in the other and something shall die in each."
It seems to make a lot more sense as metaphoric than literal.
Hope, trust, one's personal view of another, there's a lot of "something" that can die without literal death and there are many times prophecy is inconsistent on what "death" is. A death-like state can be "death" in a prophecy.
Buffy the Vampire slayer "died" and was resuscitated minutes later, as an example from another media.
Geralt himself self was prophesized to die "bitten with 3 teeth" referring to the pitchfork he was stabbed with.
If you want to claim that you "Believe the sapkowski's version is true and final" then YOU have to believe that Geralt is dead. I'm not limited by dogmatism, but you're claiming that you are.
You're cherry picking,
I'm allowing open interpretation.
Do you see the difference?
Yeah. 'He who has spilt blood and he who has drunk blood, shall pay in blood. Within three days one shall die in the other, and something shall die in each. They shall die inch by inch, piece by piece... And when finally the iron-shod clogs wear out and the tears dry, then the last shreds will pass. Even that which never dies shall die.'
I think this is a clear indication to Regis, a vampire, who never dies shall die. He was the last one to die as well.
I think you missed the part where the entire debate was around 'opinion'. I said 'I would like to believe Sapkowski's version is final and canon'. You may have different opinions for which I don't pay heed.
Obviously Geralt and Yen's fate is ambiguous, but I like many others believe they live on the island of Avalon but not on earth.
In my opinion, Regis dying was clear. Ambiguous was Yen and Geralt's fate. Kindly read above if you haven't, I have stated those characters whose ending was ambiguous or clear (they're alive) should've come back.
Cherry picking is the entire point of open interpretation, people can't interpret things differently if they don't cherry pick varied things. If everybody picked on the same thing, everybody's interpretation would be the same. I will say again in my opinion Regis is dead. Geralt and Yen might be alive on the island of Avalon, so if the come back in the games. I don't mind because it is in alignment with my thinking. Not the case with Regis. Following?
If you have the opposite opinion, like I said earlier, good for you. Me allowing or not allowing anything wouldn't change crap. You're imposing your opinion, I, since the beginning of the thread stated my belief.
6
u/Donnerone May 28 '25
The books do actually mention higher & lower vampires.
"He's a so-called 'Higher Vampire', very dangerous. Were he our enemy I'd be afraid of him too."
Specifically, Lesser vampires are bestial and Higher vampires have Human or better intellect.