‘Witcher 2’ killed off a popular character, showrunner explains why

The second season of Netflix’s ‘The Witcher’ deviates from the books in major ways, and fans are divided.

Whenever Netflix adapts a popular IP, there’s always bound to be controversy. The first season of ‘The Witcher’ drew quite a bit of that for the questionable casting, which race-swapped many fan-favorite characters, and the extremely difficult-to-follow storytelling that kept inexplicably jumping between several distinct timelines. However, the overall impression of the first season seemed to be rather positive, as the show gained a 91 audience score on Rotten Tomatoes. 

But the second season, though much easier to follow in terms of storytelling, decided to make some substantial changes to the overall story, significantly deviating from the source material provided in Andrzej Sapkowski’s books. Some of the more shocking decisions, like killing off fan-favorite characters very early on, haven't gone down well with fans, who have given the second season of ‘The Witcher’ a 61 audience score.

Spoilers for 'The Witcher' Season 2 ahead

'The Witcher' Created by Lauren Schmidt Hissrich © Netflix

As early as the 2nd episode, Eskel – one of the central characters in the original books and the games – was significantly altered in terms of personality, and by the end of the episode he was unexpectedly killed off before getting any significant screen time. Eskel was Geralt’s fellow witcher, but, more importantly, he was his childhood friend and they shared a very close brotherly bond. They were also practically mirror images of each other, and Eskel had been shown to be honorable, brave, and reliable. He also played a crucial role in Ciri’s training.

In the show, however, Eskel was presented as a belligerent drunk, who invited whores into the witcher castle and acted like a spoiled brat, clashing with Geralt on several occasions. Later it was revealed that he had been infected by a ‘leshy,’ which caused him to transform and wreak havoc on the castle and his fellow witchers. At the end of the episode Geralt was left with no choice but to kill his close friend.

‘The Witcher’ showrunner Lauren Hissrich has since explained that she and her writing team felt they had to kill someone during the episode. They initially wrote in a brand new witcher to go through the leshy transformation and subsequent death, but they decided to change that, because they felt it did not have enough impact.

"We knew that we wanted a monster to enter Kaer Morhen and have something to do with Ciri, and both Geralt and Vesemir and the brothers realize that bringing this girl into their witcher keep is going to fundamentally change things. And, in all honesty, the very first version of the script that we wrote was a brand new witcher that we'd never met before, we'd never heard of, and all of a sudden we were like... Oh, our audience is going to meet Coen and Lambert and Eskel and, you know, John. And who's going to die? John is going to die. So we thought about it really hard and I know that there are fans who love Eskel and who feel like, why would we do that? But, honestly, his death is what changes everything for Geralt and I think it propels Geralt's need to figure out what's going on with Ciri and to do it fast, because he knows that he's going to risk losing her and his brothers if he doesn't. And we really just wanted to motivate that character journey for him." 

It’s unclear if this explanation will manage to satisfy the disappointed fans. Eskel’s death is not the only gripe fans have with the show, which also altered some storylines, introduced new subplots and changed some underlying relationships between characters such as Jennefer and Ciri. 

Despite the backlash, a third season of the Witcher is apparently already in the works. Henry Cavill, who plays Geralt of Rivia, has expressed his desire for the next season to be more faithful to the books, while showrunner Lauren Hissrich has stated the third season will focus heavily on her favorite book in the series – ‘The Time of Contempt.’