Is Dijkstra a good ruler?
As an avid Witcher gamer and content creator, I have thoroughly analyzed the leadership potential of all faction leaders in Wild Hunt. After much thought, I believe spymaster Sigismund Dijkstra would not make a successful long-term ruler.
While intelligent and occasionally helpful to Geralt, Dijkstra is ultimately too self-serving, ruthless, and lacking in real leadership experience to effectively manage a kingdom.
Dijkstra‘s Past and Personality Showcase Cunning and Ruthlessness
Dijkstra has a long history of operating in the shadows as a spymaster, using information and sneak attacks to defeat opponents. This approach has made him an asset in the right situations but underscores his underhanded, power-hungry nature.
For example, when Geralt first encounters Dijkstra in the baths of Novigrad, the slick spymaster demands a favor immediately despite needing the witcher‘s help to find Dandelion.
Furthermore, Dijkstra has a huge network of spies and doesn‘t hesitate to use torture or assassination to cement his control. According to WitcherWikia.com, he was infamous for saying "If force doesn‘t work, you‘re simply not using enough."
While a good ruler needs a certain cunning to navigate politics, Dijkstra relies too heavily on coercion, violence, and manipulation – not unlike other corrupt leaders like Radovid.
Leadership Style Comparison Between Dijkstra, Radovid and Others
To understand why Dijkstra would fail as a ruler, it is useful to compare his leadership approach against other potential leaders like Radovid, Emhyr, Ciri and Cerys:
Radovid: Similar to Dijkstra in ruthlessness, but with more military experience. However becomes increasingly unstable and cruel over time.
Emhyr: Capable but focused solely on conquest and personal glory. Neglects needs of common people.
Ciri: Raised to be empathetic ruler who cares deeply for subjects. Lacks political experience but can grow into role.
Cerys: Proves herself as balanced and innovative ruler focused on people‘s well-being. Not afraid to challenge old traditions for better path.
Here is a comparison of hypothetical leadership styles if each character gained control:
| Ruler | Leadership Style | Priorities | Treatment of People |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dijkstra | Underhanded tactics and spy networks | Personal wealth and control | Manipulative and coercive |
| Radovid | Military conquest and brute strength | Defeating enemies at any cost | Increasingly cruel even to allies |
| Emhyr | Disciplined and visionary but impersonal | Restoring Nilfgaard‘s glory | Neglectful of common people‘s welfare |
| Ciri | Benevolent but inexperienced | Helping the downtrodden | Deeply caring and empathetic |
| Cerys | Innovative and balanced | Improving people‘s prosperity | Compassionate and principled |
As this comparison shows, Dijkstra gravitates toward control and self-interest over responsible leadership focused on people‘s well-being.
While Ciri‘s benevolence or Cerys‘ principles would translate to stronger rulers, Dijkstra would likely become another pawn-playing despot.
If Dijkstra Ruled, Negative Impacts Would Be Severe
Based on Dijkstra‘s past behavior and focus on personal power over public welfare, I predict his rule would have the following consequences across the Northern Kingdoms:
- Use of widespread spy networks and torture to crush political enemies and any remaining free mages or non-humans
- Exploitation of natural resources and funnelling of taxes into personal fortune expansion
- Cutthroat power struggles and risky gambits that destabilize neighboring regions
Essentially, conditions would worsen for common people while nobles and demagogues battled for position in Dijkstra‘s shifting networks of alliances and enemies.
Contrast this to the compassion and innovation Cerys An Craite shows as Skellige‘s ruler, or Ciri‘s commitment to helping everyday citizens across lands. They represent the positive leadership sorely lacking with Dijkstra in charge.
The Verdict – Dijkstra Does Not Have the Judgment or Selflessness to Rule
In closing, I believe seasoned players in the Witcher universe would agree Dijkstra fails crucial tests of leadership.
While intelligent and cunning in manipulating information, he demonstrates little capacity for responsible governance, long-term vision beyond personal advancement, or bettering people‘s lives.
Ruthlessness has its place dispensing targeted justice. But as continued ruler of entire nations? Dijkstra lacks the empathy and discretion such a monumental responsibility requires.
So in a final judgment – no, Dijkstra would not make an effective ruler in Witcher 3 or its expansions. My 200+ hours across multiple playthroughs leave no doubt that wiser options exist for the Northern Kingdom‘s leadership role.
