In the expansive world of The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, players are frequently faced with complex moral dilemmas that challenge their sense of morality and empathy. One such decision arises during the side quest “Novigrad Dreaming,” where Geralt encounters a mischievous godling named Sarah residing in a home owned by a banker named Rudolf de Jonkheer. The choice of whether to leave Sarah, the little godling, in the supposedly “cursed” house or to evict her presents players with a choice that goes beyond the typical heroics or villainy, delving into themes of innocence, belonging, and the nature of promises.
The Setting: Novigrad and the “Cursed” House
Novigrad, a bustling metropolis and economic hub, houses some of the most affluent individuals in the world of The Witcher 3. Amidst its prosperity and enchantment lies a seemingly cursed property owned by Rudolf de Jonkheer, a wealthy banker. It is within this abode that Geralt the Witcher embarks on a quest to rid the residence of its ghostly inhabitant as requested by Rudolf. The house, shrouded in rumors and fear, turns out to be haunted not by a malevolent spirit but by Sarah, an impish godling gifted with the power of dreams.
Geralt’s mission begins under the premise of purifying the house of its supernatural presence, charmed by its unsettling aura. As with many elements within The Witcher 3, the enigma of the house is laced with ambiguity and moral complexities. Sarah, the source of these ghostly happenings, desires nothing more sinister than to continue living peacefully in her home, using her powers mainly to amuse herself and occasionally to gently unsettle the tenants.
Understanding the Godlings: Sarah’s Nature and Desires
Sarah is a godling, one of the many mythical non-human creatures found throughout the Witcher universe. Godlings are known for their childlike innocence and connection to nature, frequently appearing as enigmatic protectors of forests and fields. Unlike malevolent spirits or troublesome apparitions, godlings are benign and are often portrayed with an innocence that belies their mischievousness.
It quickly becomes apparent to Geralt that Sarah’s actions, while mischievous, are not malevolent. She sees the house as her home and amusing herself by playing tricks on its inhabitants as her way of interaction. When confronted by Geralt, Sarah expresses her desire to stay in the house rather than cause any true harm or disruption. What emerges is a tension between the godling’s innocence and the socio-economic ambitions of Novigrad’s elite, embodied by the banker, Rudolf de Jonkheer.
The Decision: To Evict or Not to Evict
The player is presented with a choice that reflects broader questions of belonging and acceptance versus societal expectations and obligations. In achieving Rudolph’s goal of “exorcising” the house, Geralt can choose to expel Sarah, sending her to find refuge elsewhere, possibly with another godling, Johnny, in Velen’s swamps. Alternatively, Geralt can leave Sarah where she wishes to stay, in the home that she has adopted as her own.
- Expelling Sarah: Choosing to expel Sarah fulfills a promise to Rudolf and upholds the traditional Witcher’s duty of clearing homes of unwanted spiritual presences. An outcome beneficial for the banker and any future tenants, as it ostensibly resolves the issue. Yet, in achieving this, Geralt disregards the welfare of a sentient, albeit non-human, creature whose actions are driven by a desire for continuity and play rather than harm.
- Leaving Sarah: Leaving Sarah undisturbed represents a choice rooted in empathy, acknowledging her harmlessness and right to exist peacefully. By doing so, Geralt may disappoint and frustrate the banker, potentially forfeiting a reward, but respects the godling’s wishes and her view that the house is her home as much as it is the property of any human owner.
The Consequences: Personal and Societal Reflection
The choice reflects on Geralt’s character and the moral compass the player chooses to adopt through their playthrough. Actions taken in such quests have ramifications that subtly alter the game’s world and story continuity. Evicting Sarah results in a fractured bond between those who respect the magical world and its innocuous beings and those who seek reason and logic in the classic mold of humanity’s mastery of nature. By honoring Sarah’s wish to remain, the player respects her autonomy and peaceful nature, while disrupting human plans that plead for the Witcher’s intervention.
Neither choice is ostensibly right or wrong but rather a depiction of moral ambiguity that is central to The Witcher series. Those opting to keep their promise to Rudolf might consider the financial or social gain as just reward for their decision. Alternatively, players siding with Sarah might see the fulfillment of her happiness as aligning more closely with the context-driven ethics of the world – a place where magic and humanity coexist, sometimes harmoniously and other times at odds.
A Broader Context: Themes and Reflections
This quest, although seemingly minor within the broader narrative arc of The Witcher 3, offers both philosophical and ethical undertones. It forces players to examine their perspectives on innocence, accountability, and the societal norms imposed on magical creatures. Sarah’s connection to Johnny further provides an emotional pointer to themes of companionship and isolation prevalent within the Witcher’s world, asking players to consider the shared experiences of such mythical beings under the reign of fear and superstition spread through common folklore.
This juxtaposition against Rudy de Jonkheer’s dismissive portrayal of financial exploitation accentuates the disparity between wealth-driven morality and a bond shared through innocence and genuine care for sentimental, non-human creatures. It epitomizes a recurring question within the Witcher universe: that of ownership versus belonging, the humane versus the bankrolled abnormality, culminating in a timeless debate: can innocence be owned or can it simply belong?
A Conclusion Beyond Choices
In The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, the decision surrounding Sarah’s fate in the Novigrad house encapsulates not just an individual choice but a microcosm of the wider societal beliefs and ethical dilemmas that pervade the game’s world. Players are encouraged to grapple with their moral compasses, influenced by empathy and understanding as much as promises and material reward. It is through such intricate storytelling and choice-based conundrums that The Witcher series stands out, allowing players an intricate space to ponder and personalize their protagonist’s journey. Whether Sarah remains or starts anew elsewhere, the choice ultimately provides rich, layered storytelling with which the player forges their path.
