Killing both Raedric and Kolsc

[Brimsurfer]

I know when we kill Raedric and leave Kolsc alive, our rep increases with GV and decreases with DB........and vice versa for opposite choice.

 

But what happens when I kill both of them? I was thinking that may be our protagonist or Eder becomes the lord of the keep but that doesn't happen, so may be something else happens......

 

I have been looking on internet about what happens when you kill both Raedric and Kolsc, but I haven't been able to find anything definitive......

 

Is there any benefit of killing them both? Does anyone know?

 

Thanks.

Edited April 11, 2015 by Brimsurfer

[dukefx]

You side with Raedric or you kill him twice. That's it! Kolsc is a nonfactor. It doesn't matter if you kill him or Raedric does. There are only 2 outcomes if you don't count ignoring the whole thing as a 3rd option.

[Brimsurfer]

You side with Raedric or you kill him twice. That's it! Kolsc is a nonfactor. It doesn't matter if you kill him or Raedric does. There are only 2 outcomes if you don't count ignoring the whole thing as a 3rd option.

What do you mean, you get different rep bonuses when you side with Kolsc, so how can he be a non-factor?

 

What actually happens when i kill them both? What makes it different from when I kill only one of them, thats what I want to find out..............

[dukefx]

There are only 3 endings (Technically 4, but 2 are almost the same). It's original Raedric ruling (side with Raedric or don't do the quest at all - minor variation: almost every or everyone dead in GV), fampyr Raedric ruling over nothing since everyone is dead (Kill Raedric once and ignore his challange later), and nobody ruling (kill Raedric and then kill fampyr Raedric). There is no ending with Kolsc on the throne. Killing them both is the same as killing only Raedric. Whether you kill Kolsc yourself or Raedric does when he returns as a fampyr... doesn't matter. Kolsc will never be on the throne in the end.

 

As for rep: I personally don't care and there are many bug reports for illogical +/-rep in this regard.

 

Feel free to read all the other 45698461 threads about this.

[gkathellar]

If you kill them both, Raedric still comes back to life as a vampire (I refuse to call him a "fampyr").

 

The reputation bonus and penalty to Gilded Vale cancel each other out, so you end up with a net bonus to your Defiance Bay rep for killing Kolsc and nothing else.

[thestigma]

Urgh - yea, off-topic but I just haaate that they chose to use "the same, but not same" names for a lot of the monsters. "Fampyr", "Guls", "Wichts" - really? ... REALLY? *facepalm*

I mean, what's the point. It can't be because of copyright issues (for all of them at least) because I'm pretty sure you can't copyright "vampire". If you want to be different just to be different then that's OK I guess, but at least make some effort to make a different creature if that's your goal. Taking a D&D creature and switching around 2 letters and going "LOOK - ITS ORIGINAL NOW!" just makes my head hurt (from all the facepalming).

 

Xaurips also to a lesser extent... They are so obviously just Kobolds under a different name. Same'ish looks, behaviour, culture ect.

For petes sake - if you want to use kobolds in your setting just use kobolds. If not, make something else.

 

I half expected to run into a creature name "lioon" or something of that nature after seeing this pattern go on and on...

 

Ok, sorry, rant over. Back on topic

-Stigma

[gkathellar]

Gul and wicht are better than some, being closer to their etymological roots (wicht is Dutch, and gul/ghul is Arabic).

 

Kobolds, from cobalt, are Germanic earth spirits. Besides that, they have a ton of D&D baggage. I can see wanting to avoid that. Besides, Xaurip vaguely suggests an etymological root of "yipping lizard," which is awesome.

 

Fampyr, on the other hand, is actively wrong.

 

And don't even get me started on Grefs and Thaynus.

Edited April 13, 2015 by gkathellar

[dukefx]

Fampyr is actually half kith, half vampire by definition. Not sure if this is the case in PoE

[Nanakamado]

Kobolds, from cobalt, are Germanic earth spirits. Besides that, they have a ton of D&D baggage. I can see wanting to avoid that. Besides, Xaurip vaguely suggests an etymological root of "yipping lizard," which is awesome.

 

Fampyr, on the other hand, is actively wrong.

 

 

Is Fampyr not like welsh or something?

 

And Xaurips... Heck they are obviously Kobolds, for everyone who played D&D...

[gkathellar]

 

 

Kobolds, from cobalt, are Germanic earth spirits. Besides that, they have a ton of D&D baggage. I can see wanting to avoid that. Besides, Xaurip vaguely suggests an etymological root of "yipping lizard," which is awesome.

 

Fampyr, on the other hand, is actively wrong.

 

Is Fampyr not like welsh or something?

 

And Xaurips... Heck they are obviously Kobolds, for everyone who played D&D...

Fampyr is not like Welsh or anything. You can tell by the lack of Ls and Ws.

 

They're obviously kobolds (and goblins and whatever), yes. Calling them that doesn't make sense for reasons, though, so ... eh.

[SparocheeDoom]

Raedric becomes a vampire that you can take with you?? Where? I just got that sucker by standing behind his throne with a tank on each side, 2 mages behind them, and them Durance. It was so easy that way. All at level 5!

Edited April 22, 2015 by MonarchX

[Tigranes]

A game that tries to derive its made-up words from real life languages shouldn't be punished for having a few words that aren't derived. 

 

Raedric never joins you MonarchX, he just comes back to bite you in the arse and call your mother mean things later on.

[Dadalama]

I don't know, the actual description of a Fampyr sounds more like a prettier lich then a vampire. Then again "Vampire" has been a bit of a nebulous term since twilight.

[gkathellar]

A game that tries to derive its made-up words from real life languages shouldn't be punished for having a few words that aren't derived.

 

No, but I feel totally within my rights for calling out a name that sounds stupid.

 

And fampyr sounds stupid.

[Elerond]

 

A game that tries to derive its made-up words from real life languages shouldn't be punished for having a few words that aren't derived.

 

No, but I feel totally within my rights for calling out a name that sounds stupid.

 

And fampyr sounds stupid.

 

 

Fampyr is actually only one of their made up monsters whose name don't sound stupid or weird in my ears, but that maybe that is because I am Finnish and it sounds about same as our word for vampire (vampyyri), if you drop final syllabe.

[Rumpelstilskin]

According to wikipedia, "vampire" most likely has origins in Slavic languages, where it sounds like "vampyr". And f and v are mechanically the same sound, v is just vocalized (in German, for instance, v is typically read as f)

[gkathellar]

According to wikipedia, "vampire" most likely has origins in Slavic languages, where it sounds like "vampyr". And f and v are mechanically the same sound, v is just vocalized (in German, for instance, v is typically read as f)

 

Well, apparently vocalization is the difference between a word sounding okay, and a word sounding like a a stupid attempt to be different for the sake of being different.

[Ineth]

I half expected to run into a creature name "lioon" or something of that nature after seeing this pattern go on and on...

 

You mean Staelgar? 

[613 The Evil]

If you kill them both, Raedric still comes back to life as a vampire (I refuse to call him a "fampyr").

 

The reputation bonus and penalty to Gilded Vale cancel each other out, so you end up with a net bonus to your Defiance Bay rep for killing Kolsc and nothing else.

Finally, that's what I was looking for in the forum, for hours. I will trust you, and continue with my save. I just killed everyone in the castle, and when Kolsc arrived, I killed him also. But, I will get the Champion of Berath quest and kill Raedric again, correct? Nice.