From Witcher to Lord of the Empire

                                      But how to say, every time I take a look at the book circle after chasing the latest chapter, I will always see many readers quarreling. There are many reasons for the quarrel. I have read most of them and sorted them out. The first thing that comes to mind is why the protagonist wants to be a witcher. How should I put it, because the book is called a witcher? So the main character is a witcher. This is just like the system novel that says there is no need for a system, the harem novel that says there is no need for a heroine, the lily novel that asks the protagonist to get married, and so on. They are all chaotic and happy people who don't know what is said. They are not making comments for the good of the author, but just for the sake of trolling. There are some that are not so radical. One supports the protagonist becoming a witcher but does not support the protagonist's mutation. The other gives reasons why the protagonist has no human rights after becoming a witcher and why he should not be a warlock.                                                                                                                                                                                                             but also the inability to have children after mutation is indeed a disadvantage. The latter is outrageous. The so-called lack of human rights comes from the weak environment of the witchers, and the protagonist's main mission, in addition to restoring the country, is to restore the glory of the witchers and reshuffle the environment. This can be seen from the meeting of the kings in the north. After the protagonist showed the power of the witchers, many kings began to re-examine the power of the witchers. Some book friends put forward views that were completely contrary to what the author wrote. I couldn't understand it. Another reason why the protagonist is not a warlock is because the author does not have that much development time for the protagonist, and the ultimate "villain" Mirror Master is behind it. The protagonist has no choice, and the title is a witcher! The title is The Witcher! The title is The Witcher! Then there is the second big question. The protagonist is a noble. Why should he become a witcher instead of a king? This is outrageous. I don't know how much the book friend who raised this question knows about the national power in the Witcher series. But in the protagonist's country, normally unless the protagonist marries Shirley, he will definitely not be able to become the king before the country is destroyed. Moreover, the main plot of the book is the restoration of the country, the restoration of the country! What should I do if I become a witcher but am discriminated against and not allowed to become a king? Have you read a book? Where does the delusion come from? The country is gone and there is still discrimination. When the country revives, it will be a new feudal regime. How the new feudal regime will be is not up to the protagonist? I don't even know if the readers who ask this kind of question understand the so-called politics or not. What I'm most afraid of is that they don't think about it before saying it even though they don't understand it. And the protagonist is a time traveler and has a wide range of ideas. There are many ways to be a king. If it's traditional, he should be the regent. If it's legitimate and his background suits him, he should marry Xili. If he's strong enough, he can directly conquer the North. I don't know why he can criticize the author on this point. Finally, a few book friends complained that the plot was sometimes too fast and too tight, and there were problems with the connection. I actually didn't understand this paragraph at all at the time. I thought the readers were saying that the author was advancing the plot too quickly. After thinking about it carefully, I realized that it was because I was currently playing the second game of the next-generation version of The Witcher 3. The background story of the Witcher series is very comprehensive, from countries to races to wars to finance to humanities, so many settings are familiar to me. Just like the author writing articles, I skipped over the details that I couldn't see at all without realizing it. But what about book lovers who haven't played the Witcher series for a while? Or are you a book lover who knows the Witcher series through other literary works? This does have these problems for them. I can't refute these book friends just because I don't have these problems now, so I choose to agree with this shortcoming, but this is a problem of the author's writing power. The author can only solve this problem by improving his writing power. Rome was not built in a day. I hope the author can work hard. I don't expect that I can convince other book friends. I just come out and look at the problem from the perspective of a reader, to prevent the author from being influenced by the book club circle. Some book friend novels are so offensive that they are quite speechless after only reading a few pages.

Regarding the debate about the identity of the protagonist of this book, I feel that it is filled with a lot of generalizations, partial generalizations, and selective pretending to be blind, whether it is flattering or negative. As for the noble status of the protagonist, everyone is boasting: member of the royal family, Tianhu starting, heir to the throne, top nobles, there are many choices. But the fact is that Cintra is severely suppressed by the four major countries in the north. It is not considered a top power. There are many with the same power. In the game, the most functional SRs have SSR or UR on top, and the country is about to be destroyed. Is choosing a witcher really a disgrace to yourself? As for warlocks, everyone focuses on Alzu, portals, and research types, but they forget that many of the five managers of the Wizarding Council were stabbed to death with daggers and spears during the coup. In The Witcher 3, warlocks were publicly executed in large numbers, and were chased by the mortal army into street rats and lost dogs. And warlocks can't have children, so being a warlock is easier to accept? Those who belittle witchers say that the people at the bottom look down on witchers, that witchers cannot hit a pitchfork, and that witchers must be crushed to death if they are made by warlocks. But the witcher has killed fewer warlocks? The common people at the bottom reject not demon hunters but all demi-human races including elves and dwarves. Intellectuals and high-ranking people are friendly to demon hunters. Those with some brains in the warlock sect are afraid of demon hunters instead of looking down upon them. I don't know why everyone thinks witchers are so miserable? Do they all think that the average combat power of a witcher is a pitchfork, while the minimum combat power of a warlock is Vigo or Yennefer? Can even a warlock apprentice master a hundred-year-old demon hunter alone? The demon hunters also had a cult period, but they were deliberately smeared and targeted by the warlocks and those in power who were afraid of them, and they became what they are today. Why do I feel that the readers have become the common people in the book, calmly accepted the smeared image of the witchers, and loudly praised the warlocks and nobles?

First of all, the author has worked hard and the reading experience is very good. But there is one thing that makes me a little... Dumbfounded. What is it? It means excessively explaining one's "good deeds" and "good results". We say that when a leader/ruler encounters problems, he must be able to deal with things calmly, be able to weigh the pros and cons, and be brave and resourceful. So, without threatening the "foundation", can this leader/ruler have his own conscience Author, you use the system to "reward" and the behavior to be "self-interested", and establish a so-called rationality behind every good deed Maybe the original intention is good, but in terms of perception, it seems that the protagonist has thought deeply, but what is revealed is a "twisted" feeling (In other words, I have read Chapter 173 so far, and this feeling continues to this day) Here, borrowing a popular meme some time ago, called "the pattern opens" The protagonist is a leader, that is, the supreme leader of the people! This is his position and his class! Just showing one's strong strength in front of the masses at the right time is not called a leader, that is called a manor owner. Similarly, many views in Xiaomin's thoughts are not applicable to the protagonist (Xiaomin's thought does not mean in a derogatory sense, because I am also an ordinary citizen. It refers specifically to the protagonists of different classes. If you want to wear the crown, you must bear the weight.) The leader must have a variety of extraordinary spiritual qualities, including tenacity, bravery, honesty, kindness, and even coldness, etc. But in the current "wrong" state, it can be said that the protagonist's spiritual shaping is still lacking. I also hope that the author can go further and make the protagonist more and more perfect. (ps: There is a saying in Lannister saying: Lannister must pay its debts)

To be honest, it is unlikely that a witcher will become the emperor. First of all, there is a lot of pressure from public opinion in the north. Secondly, witchers are sterile and have a long lifespan, which may lead to unrest among their subordinates (after all, no one wants an eternal emperor, and having no heir is a huge damage to the inheritance of the legal system, and the bloodline is extinct). And since there are system panels and general skills that can be developed as warlocks. After all, in the game, spells can regenerate limbs and open portals. To be honest, witchers are super soldiers made by mages.

Everyone says they don't want the protagonist to become a witcher, but when you control Geralt, don't you yearn for the life of a witcher? When you enter Red Dead Redemption, don't you want to be as lawless and fearless as Arthur? I still hope that the author will write according to his own outline. Recommended monthly tickets will be greatly beneficial.

Do you think you are part of the ruling class and look down on witchers because you are a noble? Let's not talk about whether the witcher is strong or not. The life span of the witcher is long enough for many people to go crazy for it. And you are a modern thinker and are not a local aboriginal. How do you get so much sense of aristocratic superiority?

Why is the heroine not the three sisters in the forest😭

Here are some pictures for you

I think the strong point of the witcher is that he can both use magic seals and have a strong body. He is a dual practitioner of magic and martial arts. However, the magic of the original witcher is really weak, and the physical strength is only that much (after all, he can be killed by a pitchfork...). If the author can strengthen the type and intensity of the witcher's magic, as well as physical defense (just strengthening the protagonist), it would still be very impressive.

Another way to explain the demon hunter is actually much more high-end: The world's greatest mage and his master led a team of top warlocks in the world and worked hard to develop a human enhancement and transformation project. No one has been able to crack it so far, and many forces are plotting. Doesn't this sound much more high-end? I think the horizontal comparison is between Alice in Resident Evil and Captain America Plus in Marvel. I have seen many people say that it was made by a warlock, and it always reminds people of gargoyles and slimes. It is very low, okay? It is undeniable that demon hunters were very strong in the context of that time. In the war-torn Middle Ages, doesn't being able to roam the continent single-handedly and kill demons not show your strength? It's just that the back of the Demon Hunter was divided, and it lacked cohesion and became a mess. If it were during the Demon Hunter Order, it would be a force that no force could ignore. And the witcher itself has a minimum guarantee. The author's exclusive plug-in for witchers can increase the upper limit. What does it have to do with my protagonist if the upper limits of other witchers are low? If the protagonist becomes a warlock and cannot enable plug-ins, then he might as well become a witcher. Warlocks are also good and bad. Some of them died from the pain of soldiers who did not resist. Nilfgaard and the witch-hunting cult killed few warlocks. Members of the Supreme Council of Warlocks were hiding. As for the fertility problem, hasn't the author explained it and given at least three solutions? Why do you still pretend not to hear it?