The Nithing
The Nithing is a secondary quest in Skellige Isles in which you will have to lift a curse off a boy caught in a squabble between two erstwhile lovers.
Key Facts | |
| Location: | Skellige |
| Category: | Side Quest |
Quest Text
In Skellige Geralt met a desperate and broken man named Lothar.
Someone had cast a powerful curse on his son, causing him to slip closer and closer towards the grave with each passing day. The witcher knew he had to lift the curse before it was too late.
Starting NPC
Walkthrough
Following contains quest spoilers. You’ve been warned
Talk to Lothar. Investigate the Nithing.
Just off the beach in Rannvaig there is a Notice Board with a message titled “Nithing”. A man called Lothar is beset by a curse; head over to his house and ask about it.
It appears that someone has stolen a horse’s head that has the name of his first-born Tjalve inscribed on it, giving the poor boy a fever. You’ll have to find the head.
Investigate the Nithing and see that there are tracks leading from it.
It appears that someone has stolen a horse’s head that has the name of his first-born Tjalve inscribed on it, giving the poor boy a fever. You’ll have to find the head.
Investigate the Nithing and see that there are tracks leading from it.
Follow the tracks and scent using your Witcher Senses.
Use your Witcher Senses to follow the tracks to a dead tree where a woman’s shawl was dropped. The shawl has a specific smell to it, so use your senses to follow the smell back to the village.
Ask about the shawl’s owner.
Go back to the village and ask the villagers about the shawl. You’ll find out that it belongs to a herbalist called Jonna. Locate her and ask her about the curse; she will tell you how to lift it.
Talk to Lothar about how to lift the curse.
Lothar has apparently been having an affair with Jonna, but is unwilling to go back to her and shame his family. Lothar will want Jonna dead, but will need you to help him with that. You have two options.
Choice 1
Choice 2
MORE CONTENT IN Witcher 3
Screw this quest, i don’t want choose between child life and woman life because some ass-hole make mistakes. let him choose.
I realize I’m so late to this party but I’m just now playing the game. I had a hard time with this quest, while trying to kill a child isn’t NEVER the correct solution, Lothar deserved to be punished some way. HE did, not his son. So that’s why I carved Jonnas name into the nithing. I didn’t want to ruin the future of the kid, and his mom, by plunging them into poverty.
However, the next day (real time), I went back to Lothars cabin to see about the kid and Lothar isn’t there. A brand new guy is in that cabin with the woman and child. So for some reason, Lothars gone anyway. I kinda hope his wife found everything out and kicked his ass out. End of the day, the kid is fine, so I’m good.
Oh, and PS: Geralt even says to Lothar after deciding to save the kid by turning the Nithing back onto Jonna, “You might deserve to be punished from all of this, but…”
And that’s exactly right. Lothar deserves something worse than this good ending, but that’s not a possibility, not without committing a far greater evil against the innocent child and the possibly innocent wife-of-Lothar.
Though the bulk of the evil done here lies on the woman’s shoulders I feel people here are under-judging what harm Lothar did to her. Judged by our modern society it was no big deal. Well, it was a big deal (he lived with her for 10 years, that’s a lot of commitment on her part) and then he bailed on her when someone better came along.
The people who somehow saw this as the herbalist was his mistress and he was cheating on his wife with her drew that out of nowhere. The story is clear that Lothar and Jonna *lived together* for 10 years. THEN he left her and got with this other, nameless woman with whom he then had a child.
THEN Jonna became so infuriated she cursed the child to die as vengence against Lothar and his wife.
Now, like I said, what he did is bad enough judged by modern sensibilities, but judged by the fact that they live in a tiny community where they live their entire lives and everyone, everyone, knows exactly what happened? Where Jonna is not just mocked by a few people but all the people she’s ever known and *ever will know*. She’ll not have another opportunity to marry quite likely, either, as the man she dedicated herself to for the years she was young and appealing left her. Now she’s middle aged (regardless of the character models, she has to be pushing 40 because she lived with him for 10 years and then he left and had a kid, who is now 10 years old) and she’s not going to meet another potential husband out of the blue.
He quite literally ruined her life.
But, even still, it doesn’t justify the murder of a kid.
If she’d targeted the Nithing against Lothar? I’d wonder if it was worth saving him, the worthless shit. But as it is? No, you can’t justify letting her kill the kid and she shouldn’t be able to drive the kid and his mother into a lifetime of poverty and shame, with no name and no father. They can’t just move on and live somewhere else, this is the sort of thing that is *for life* in a society like this.
So, yeah, the ethical thing to do is to save the kid and preserve Lothar’s family. Not for Lothar, but for his wife and child who are, as far as we know, completely innocent in all of this.
The only bad part of that outcome is that Lothar doesn’t get what’s coming to him. He gets a good ending and doesn’t deserve one. But that’s the ONLY downside to turning the Nithing back onto Jonna.
Seriously, did anyone even bother waiting for some time to see what happens?
If you make Lothar go back to Jonna he refuses to make her bear children or love her.
And the abandoned wife and child has a new male in the house.
Typical example of a badly written quest in the Witcher. Don’t get me wrong I love the game but sometimes it’s just lazy in it’s options to force a reaction from players. The woman is clearly in the wrong, Lothar may have hurt her and treated her like shit but that just makes him an asshole – not a criminal. Of course we know very little of Skellige laws but I see no reason for them to consider leading someone on for 10 years a crime. She then goes on to try to kill his child in a way that mostly resembles poisoning in a world without magic, with no intent of stopping before the child is dead. And here is the problem, Geralt’s done his bit by now, he found the guilty party and knows how to stop the curse – why should he be the one to decide what happens?
The only reasonable solution is to bring the evidence to the nearest judge, in this case probably the village elder or council of elders for such a minor case, or the jarl if there is time. They would then most likely force Jonna to remove the curse or change the name. Based on what we see of Skellige culture, I doubt it would do much difference though as the punishment for the attempted murder of a child i most likely death. The reason for me disliking this quest and others like it is that we’re not given this option – but are forced to act as judge, jury and executioner when I see no reason for Geralt to do so.
This quest doesnt make a lick of sense.
If a curse is THIS easy to do…why doesnt he just do it back to her anyway??
If the curse ISNT easy…why doesnt he just say “Okay im back with you reverse the curse…HAHA TRICKED YOU B*TCH!!!”
I always mock people who praise this games choices, because its counter-intuitive to the nature of the game. You should have the option to comply with someone and immedaitly kill them after. EVERY. TIME. if you CANT do this then the game fails as a choice-driven game.
Please forget my question in the previous post, I think I fully comprehend now why your answer was as such: you are operating your fancies beyond the architecture of the game.
Even if the player is given free reign of the main chatacter’s choices, I believe he is still bound by what the writers perceive as Geralt’s character and thus only offer choices which most possibly would cross his mind. Surely there is an infinitesimal way to solve the dilemma but he would not think of all of those.
Furthermore, It was a short side quest. Maybe with a sub par written story but still, a side quest. You base your mockery of the game’s choice mechanics on a side quest.
Finally, do remember that you are playing a role playing game in the pc/ps4/xbox system, not a high end simulation running on a quantum computer that can run all of the possible choices in a secondary quest.
Eh? She stops being a vendor even if you helped her.
I’m playing GOTY and she doesnt have any recipees.
This one hit me hard. Because in many ways, I am Lothar in this situation albeit on a lesser scale. I was with a woman for a year and really liked her. Yet met somebody else and fell in love with her in an instant. It wasn’t because she was prettier or that I was fickle. It just happened. As a result of my actions, I have had nothing but hatred from my ex (she hasn’t threatened any kids though so that’s ok). But I did learn a new side of her personality, a venomous hatred.
In the case of the scenario, I have to take the ‘moral’ high ground that in that moment, nobody was hurt, just threatened. Which ,while despicable, is no cause for murder.
For me, she hurts, and that is so very understandable, her reaction was way too much as she threatened not him, but his child. Yet the child is alive and so my Geralt cannot kill her. If she had, that would have been a different story.
Regardless, this was a very tough one.
You do realize the child is only alive because Geralt arrived in time to stop the curse? Without him the child would be dead. It’s nonsense to claim that ‘nobody was hurt, just threatened’. This wasn’t a threat, it was attempted murder. The use of magic instead of conventional weaponry is irrelevant. A rough comparison would be stabbing or shooting a victim, then leaving them to bleed out. Even if timely medical aid can (and did in this case) save the victim, it is still an unforgivably monstrous act.
Further compounding Jonna’s crime, the (attempted) murder served no purpose beyond (possibly) satisfying her twisted desire for vengeance. It was no ploy to get her unfaithful lover back, since she only gave the whole ‘come back or your son dies’ ultimatum after Geralt confronted her. It wasn’t even a ‘suffer for your crimes’ scenario, as Lothar had no idea who caused his misery or why. Her only purpose was to cause grief to her former lover, with no regard for how many innocent lives she’d take or hurt in the process.
I opted to let Lothar decide the fate of his child based on this:
1. Lothar and Jonna had their going ons and he left. This is something they need to settle.
2. The child is innocent in this and must survive. This, I think is Geralt’s main concern.
3. Geralt should not have to take the life of Jonna just because Lothar doesn’t want to deal with the situation. Had she killed the child I would have slit her throat without a moment’s hesitation, however the child still lives, and can continue to do so based on the father dealing with the situation.
I delivered the message from Jonna to Lothar, let him decide (HE made a bad choice; should have gone all “this is Skellige! on her ass”) and walked away from that situation ASAP. I’m passing by enough crying villagers on my rides trough the isles as it is already as a result of me meddling with their affairs. At least now I left it up to Skellige faith. Oh, and I hadn’t had time to loot Jonna’s herb shop just yet 😛
THIS GAME IS WRECKING ME.
I would like the proper action of Geralt taking the Nithing, scrape off the name, bust it up and burn it. Or Geralt should have said been more stern wth the herbalist and convince or maybe even force her to remove it.
I told the guy it’s wrong to kill her and not to reverse it. I felt Geralt should have had more control over this situation. That’s why I’m upset.
You people are all wacko, yeah this is a good game but it A GAME ffs.
I recently did this one, and superficially I get behind the whole killing jonna thing, she deserves justice, absolutely, but justice doesn’t involve murdering a child who did nothing either way. On the other hand she’s the village herbalist, aside from being useful to you, she’s also depended upon by the village, to deal with disease and injury, if she dies, it’s quite possible that other people in the village (in theory, not in the gameplay) could die down the line because she wasn’t there to help them. She may be a horrible peroson, but if the only doctor you has access to is doctor Hannibal lecter can you really afford to kill him?
This is why I love this game, the deeper you look into an issue the more blurry the line between right and wrong is, money well spent.
“DUUUUUH DIS GEAME GUD OMG SO DEEP”
lol I cant stand foolds like you who delude yourself.
So… Why is he “deluding” himself by commenting on the philosophical/moral depth of the game?
I’m glad I came here…wasn’t sure what to do, and got some good ideas.
The main point is that Jonna wishes to hurt Lothar by cursing his child, an action that will certainly end in death… she readily admits to that. And yes, BARD, the curse is on the child; it is the child’s name she carves on the Nithing, not Lothar’s. But what occurred to me is that the child will suffer, regardless, if she is allowed to live. With the curse on, he dies. With it removed, him and his mother face being ostracized and having to live in poverty.. so the child gets punished either way.
Which makes it simple…. the bitch must die.
As far as buying herbs goes ….. I sold her more than I bought; nearly left her coinless, an action that somehow feels satisfying right now.
its…funny, kinda.. go inside his house, on bed lies a boy, like 10yo “infant” yeah right
They have to grow up fast in Skellige Very Unrealistically Fast
Killed the b*tch
What is it about video games moral choices that turns people into total idiots?
It doesn’t matter how awful you a person you think Lothar is, you kill Joanna.
Think of the issue in modern context. A woman is left by a man whom we amuse she has been cohabiting with for 10 years. We should observe that we have no idea why he left; maybe he left for bad reasons, maybe he left for good. We can even assume that he did it for bad reasons, that he was just a selfish prick. Notice however at this point how his actions still don’t even vaguely resemble a crime in any way. Sure the guy would be a dick, but both parties clearly still have the supporting themselves and any damage done to either party is incidental. We don’t even know if people judge Joanna at all; the one woman we get to talk to seems to have a perfectly amicable relationship with her. We can assume again that she had been spurned by the community because of Lothar’s actions; it’l certainly make the situation very clear cut. Why? Because even in this light escalating to cold blooded torture and murder, even should the target of been Lothar and not his son, removes any hope of sympathy from anyone who is even remotely reasonable. Nothing in this story could possibly justify the escalation from a situation in which no ones safety was at risk to attempted murder.
This doesn’t even touch upon the more obvious reasons of why Joanna doesn’t deserve consideration.
To start with she gets found out and asked to lift the curse rather politely; do you realize how fucking absurd that is? If you’re found trying to torture and/or murder someone you usually don’t get asked nicely to stop, if you please, it’s actually quite a bother. The fact that Joanna has the balls to sit there and insist that someone die is so far beyond forgiveness it isn’t even funny. Fun fact about life, if you play brinkmanship by escalating to murder you know what happens? We fucking kill you. No questions asked. Because if you’re insisting that someone had better die to satisfy you in a situation where otherwise violence would be completely unnecessary you are obviously completely responsible for the situation; you are the one that ought to bear the consequences. You’re the only reason there are any. Obviously some effort will be made to find a solution were no one has to die, should such a situation be attainable without compromising the rights of other, but the imperative to deescalate the situation is obviously on the aggressor. We don’t generally have sympathy for people who take hostages because it’s accepted as an obvious truth that there exist no situations in which you could possibly have the right to endanger innocents, no matter the cause.
Finally we arrive at the most disgusting portion of Joanna’s crime; the fact that she’s attacking and victimizing a child. The fact that the implications of this even need to be expanded upon is completely outrageous and disgusting; I can honestly say that if I ever thought I might get to the point of stupidity and recklessness where I couldn’t be trusted to understand the severity of any situation endangering a child that I would do the world a favor and defenestrate myself. Anything above a ten or so stories should do the trick. To anyone lacking any sort of moral compass or general decency allow me to explain a few simple rules about the treatment of children. Don’t fucking but them in danger. Don’t fucking mistreat them. If you see someone else do one of these things take appropriate action to stop them. Certainly don’t torture and/or murder a child to get back at your enemies. Even if we believe that Joanna is only going to hurt the child, even if the child was somehow responsible for all this, it would still be incredibly wrong to victimize the child.
So lets use these incredibly obvious circumstances to revise an incredibly biased and amoral statement in to something more reasonable. Because lets not forget that Lothar doesn’t actually know that the curse is going to kill Joanna; a curse being enough to do in a baby or child isn’t going to necessarily going be strong enough to kill an adult. Particularly someone who had the occult knowledge required to cast it in the first place.
If you turn the curse on Joanna, you grudgingly accept cheating on your wife then putting your mistress at risk of serious injury when you have tried all other reasonable forms of discourse and she is still seemingly trying to murder your child; there is no sugarcoating it.
And this is in the worst possible interpretation of events where Lothar is just an irredeemable douche
Your first mistake is equating a curse to torture and murder. They’re vastly different. There’s nothing in a modern context that equates with an actual curse, she isn’t doing the murdering or torturing. She simply did something out of revenge and anger, very human reactions to being shamed and feeling used.
The context here is that curses are fickle, sometimes they’re tame, other times terrible. This case being the latter, you even admit to later that curses are fickle things and “don’t know how it will affect a full grown human”. As far as most curses go in folklore and the Witcher series it’s equally wrought. Lothar and Geralt knew if they reversed the curse at Jonna it would take her life because it (The Nithing) was already going to take a life in the form of a child, so by your own definition Lothar is technically the greater evil than Jonna because she didn’t wish death on someone but Lothar did. She just provided the curse in a moment of anger and shame.
The morally righteous choice here is obviously letting them live with each other as no one dies and your entire argument and Lothar’s are based off assumptions. Who’s to say his now ex-wife won’t get remarried? Or maybe their son will shoulder the burden? Why couldn’t Lothar help them finacially or provisionally while living with Jonna? Your entire argument is pretty sophomoric as far as folklore and moral compass’ go slugger.
No slugger your argument is the Juvenile argument. He left her. And from my impression she was not his mistress she was his woman. Regardless he made a choice and any sane person should live with it. You want to break up a Family because of some burned Hag? Are you serious? The morally Righteous choice (As you put it) In context of this world is to kill her. You’re a Witcher you kill Monster’s. She is a monster who cursed a child and condemned him to die. Get real. In the real world you wouldn’t force a man to break his union, The Hag would be in jail.
What a beautiful strawman. It’s too bad in your quest to be right you conveniently left out a half dozen nuances that would poke holes in your argument.
Funny how that works, eh?
Lothar more than deserved his lot. Joanna had no intention of killing the child, she knew Lothar would do something before it happened.
If you kill Joanna, you advocate cheating on your wife then killing your mistress when she makes a fuss; there is no sugarcoating it.
She did not. She only said she’d lift the curse when Geralt showed up. Were it not for Geralt, the boy would’ve died.
She did not just make a fuss. She tried to kill the boy as a punishment for his a-hole dad’s actions calling the child a brat and such. Not killing her leaves the boy and his mother to fend for themselves for the rest of their lives. Shitty way of punishing Lothar + sacrificing them for the pride of one woman. Yeah, Lothar deserves to be punished, but taking a father (even if he’s an a-hole to others) from a family is Greater Evil in my books.
+ As a woman, I cannot forgive her for trying to kill that child.
I let Jonna die. It…well, it was a hard choice, but from a gameplay standpoint…her herbs aren’t that good. (And there’s a master alchemist). I did grab Enhanced Cat from her, though.
But, from a story standpoint…her request is FAR too specific, and Lothar points out the issue. She’s asking him to abandon his wife and son. He himself points out it’s condemning an innocent woman and an innocent boy to poverty. And…that’s why I did the other option. It’s not about Lothar…it’s about his wife and son. What Jonna did was, as Geralt points out, punishing an innocent.
If you force Lothar back into the relationship with Jonna, she lifts the curse on the boy. So he lives and she still sells herbs. Win – win.
Now the boy and his mother’s way of life is in question, but this is all still Lothar’s problem, not Geralt’s. If Lothar really wanted, he could make sure his new current and son had some kind of support. After 10 years together, Lothar knew of what Jonna was capable, so he took the risks with full knowledge she could seek revenge – or at least he should have. I mean, honestly though, both Lothar and Jonna did some shitty things to each other so this was shared guilt.
You spend 10 years with some one that doesn’t give them the right to force you back with them. It also doesn’t give them the right to put a child’s life at risk. Regardless what he did you can’t excuse her behavior. Get real dude.
My opinion is clearly superior to yours. Get real, dude.
“What did I do? Killed the bitch. No herbs are worth a boy’s life”
I’d butcher the boy for constant supply of alcohest
I made my choice, played it through, then read up online and reloaded for the alternative.
There are a few things here no-one seems to bat an eyelid at, which is disturbing to me for the state and values of the world.
We don’t know how the full story went. Perhaps he’d been unfaithful but gotten someone pregnant and was doing right by the child, to support its life and live with his consequences. Perhaps he just fell out of love or affection, and didn’t want to continue a farce of a romance – goodness knows if Jonna’s spiteful and heartless enough to curse a child to death rather than just come to terms or focus her saltiness on Lothar rather than on the people affected by their drama, she’s not the most rational or good caring person to find yourself in a long term relationship with.
We don’t KNOW so its silly for people to say oh the guy did the girl wrong. We don’t KNOW if he “cheated” or something more distasteful, or if he just left her and she was angry about that. To say ending a 10 year relationship is inherently labelled “wrong” without understanding the full story, is bonkers to me, and stinks of christian marriage babble. We’re in the Witcher world here, and Geralt fucks ladies left right and centre, for one. Life seems much more cheap in the Witcher world than Earth first world countries, for sure, but there’s still a rich lore of ethics written in here. I’m curious to know how it all works in, but I cbf investigating.
In my mind, the woman’s an unreasonably rage-fuelled nut job for cursing a child. I’d have liked to have been able to tell the woman that the curse was turned back on her, to make her repent and maybe unwork it from there after suffering the childs pain and coming to terms with just what she was inflicting on a life that didnt deserve it. I even went to her after carving her name in, to see if anything further would happen.
Then I read online that i’d lose a rather useful herbalist, and was like fuck it, this is a videogame, if nothing else happens with my choices than that i’ll just take an extra world shop thanks. Reload.
If there had been any further justifiable fallthrough i’d probably have stuck with my more satisfactory original decision.
SPOILERS:
The way this plays out has no bearing on the story. It’s not exactly known WHEN the affair happened. Jonna claims she was with Lothar for 10 years, and then he left her for the other unnamed woman. No word as far as I can tell when the son was born compare to the affair happening. We are left to assume Lothar had the affair and the family at the same time. Then left the affair for the family. Jonna got wacky jealous and curses the kid to die. It comes down to a choice. Reflect the curse back on Jonna (which kills her), or force Lothar to leave his family (basically forcing them into poverty) to continue the affair (which he will do, and as he outs it, “He agreed to come here, but not to love her”). Sure Jonna has some rare herbs, but it’s not exactly worth forcing someone back into an affair they got out of. But on the other hand Geralt seems to have a hard time with reflecting the curse (which he knows will cause Jonna’s death) berating Lothar along the way.
It goes to show, it’s not all about “good choice” or “bad choice” in Witcher 3. It’s about choice and living with the consequences.
What did I do? Killed the bitch. No herbs are worth a boy’s life.
Of course you did. I’m sure you didn’t think the guy did anything wrong either. And killing “bitches” is no problem at all.
Not about right or wrong choices, that’s for sure.
Funny, in real life it’s often the opposite that happens: woman leaves man, man kills woman. Anyone that tries to defend the killer is attacked and harassed, and not without reason. Apparently, when the roles are reversed, it’s ok to be sympathetic with the woman, even though she’s a killer. You know, a woman can leave a man whenever she wants, it’s hber freedom, but a man doing the same is wronging her. Nice double standards, here!
Do you ever understand what you just wrote? Or are you just spouting out more men’s rights nonsense?
Fab is right you are perpetuating a disgusting double standard. Equal rights is about just that – equality. If this was a man, attempting to kill a child, because he was jealous of an ex girlfriend who broke it off and committed to a family, this would be mindlessly simple for so many of you. But because the genders are reversed, all of a sudden this is much harder. If you can’t understand that, then you are not equipped to have this conversation.
Fab is right. I thought about it and realized how big of a double standard is at play here.
If the victim had been a woman whose daughter was threatened by a curse placed by a man, jealous because the woman had left him, I would have had zero sympathy. If allowed, I would have killed the man in with my bare hands with an honest-to-God smile on my face, sincerely believing that he deserved every agonizing moment.
Now, because the genders are reversed, I am supposed to actually side with the child murderer? Sorry, but that just doesn’t make any sense to me. She is a bitch and she deserves whatever she gets for attempting to kill an innocent kid.
Err you have a go at him just for “assuming” he is a sexist …because he called that woman a “bitch”?
y’know bitch is a word that works for males and females js i’m pretty sure even geralt had its shared of that term.
i think you are missing the problem here though. its not that people think cheating is OK but it certainly doesnt warrant planned murder of an innocent bystader not even as blackmailing means. Thats just not right.
The guy done the woman wrong, but that should between them. I find your points valid as well, but basically there are five points why she would have to die rather than force the guy back into a relationship.
1 – Forcing him into the relationship will only cause more discord between. He will nonetheless just have an affair with his love and eventually he might kill her out of anger of destroying the life he had with his family, or perhaps something else just as sinister.
2 – You are practically rewarding someone for in an attempt in murdering someone’s child (who is completely innocent and not linked the their relationship at all).
3 – This will cause grief on his love one (wife?), neglect the kid of a father, and kind of ruin the child’s, mother’s, and guy’s life.
4 – If the woman is ready to take the life of an innocent bystander, she is ready to lay down her own.
5 – Why must the witcher have to bear the burden of another person’s life if he can avoid it? I mean, he is paid to kill people, but if although he goes through with it, I doubt he isn’t affected by those he really did not wish to kill, like in this case, Jonna, despite she being a bitch, which is clear his view on it through the dialogue.
I never got the impression Jonna was an affair – quite the opposite. The guy happily lived with Jonna for 10 years until something prettier came along, then dumped her without a word. About a year later, he has an infant son with the new girl, and Jonna is still bitter and out for revenge.
Frankly, if she had curse the man, and not the son, I probably would have just walked away. As it was, I told him to go back to her: Neither of them come off as particularly good people. I figured they diverse each other. Plus, the new woman is probably no worse off this way too: he probably would have walked out on her as well eventually.
This quest is tough for me. I reloaded and did both choices but I’m unhappy with both outcomes. And honestly she *is* a bitch for wanting an innocent kid to die. A kind woman would move-on. It didn’t sound like an affair, however. I understood that he was with her first and left her for his now wife and kids (but now I’m unsure). Jonna was the laughing stock of the town because she slept with him but he married another, and she was heartbroken and abandoned with a tarnished reputation. They are both assholes tbh. He used her and dumped her which is very harsh, but then her coping is appalling as well. I still haven’t made up my mind, however. If she was a kind person I’d side with her but she’s a bad person. On a more practical side: she does have some rare alchemy items and I want to keep her for that. Ugh such a tough choice.