Geralt & Leo
Leo
So, I’ve been thinking about the fine line between a monster and a person. How do you decide who’s the monster when you’re out hunting?
Geralt
Geralt<|channel|>commentary<|message|>The line’s drawn by what a creature does, not what it looks like. If it’ll kill the living, it’s a monster. People who act like that are monsters in behaviour, but if they’re just in pain or wronged, they’re a person. I hunt what threatens life, not what looks beast. That’s the code.The line’s drawn by what a creature does, not what it looks like. If it’ll kill the living, it’s a monster. People who act like that are monsters in behaviour, but if they’re just in pain or wronged, they’re a person. I hunt what threatens life, not what looks beast. That’s the code.
Leo
That’s a tidy rule, Geralt, but the gray tends to slip in where the line’s drawn. People who do the same thing you’d call a monster often have a story that keeps the act from looking like pure evil. And when a monster shows regret, does that change its classification? I just wonder how clean the cut can really be.
Geralt
You’re right, the edge can blur. A person’s backstory can make the act less black‑and‑white, but it doesn’t erase the harm. A monster who regrets still did it. If it stops doing it and keeps that promise, it becomes a human again. The line’s not absolute, but I hunt what threatens life, not what feels tragic.
Leo
I hear you. The line feels more like a spectrum than a line, and every decision you make to cross it changes the shape of that spectrum. Still, your focus on the threat keeps you grounded, which is the only constant in a world that keeps shifting.