Plot details I don't understand

[ArchaicRaid]

Currently this is my third playthrough and I'm doing a ghost clean hands run (not mostly flesh because that is just too much). It's here that I realized something during the "Return to Dunwall Tower" mission.

After playing Burrows' confession, which incriminates him in a conspiracy to kill the Empress AND bring the plague to Dunwall, he is seen being arrested by his own City Watch and assumed sent to Coldridge. The confusing part for me is why this confession doesn't automatically exonerate Corvo, or at the very least cast serious doubt on whether or not he killed the Empress.

From what I know, Corvo was accused and sentenced with no trial or due process (which makes sense for a Monarchy), as this was a deliberate frame job and would be easy for the public to believe. But since there is no real evidence to link him to the murder, all Burrows' has is the presumption of guilt and him being at the scene. Wouldn't this confession cast doubt on the legitimacy of Corvo being the murderer?

Corvo is framed as a murderer who acted alone, with no mention of a conspiracy. By playing the audiograph it CONFIRMS that he didn't act alone even if he WAS the killer, and that multiple people were involved in a plot to kill the Empress. Hiram was the main instrument of this takeover, so he had to be the one who was able to convince the masses of this. I find it extremely hard to believe that this confession being broadcast to the entire city of Dunwall didn't somewhat cast a doubt on Corvo being the killer, as the man who was instrumental in maintaining that case was now considered illegitimate. Am I really expected to believe that nobody in the City Watch, or parliament, or in power who heard this over the loudspeakers didn't immediately question the legitimacy of Burrows' claim that Corvo killed her?

The ONLY problem with this is that the confession doesn't explicitly say who did it, but I feel like it doesn't have to. It still exposes a conspiracy to kill the Empress from what was originally made out to be a simple act of murder. We know the City Watch are aware of this as they arrest Burrows' on the spot, so why would they continue to assume Corvo guilty? We know they are incredibly corrupt and routinely abuse their authority, so who's to say they don't just interrogate Burrows' and find out more details. Also, many citizens never believed this to be true anyway (Sokolov for example).

The only logical conclusion I can come up with is that the all of Dunwall was forced to believe it under duress, which is why I find this confession not exonerating him to be incredibly confusing. For people who already don't believe it and are either doing it because it's their job (City Watch) or could be persecuted for saying otherwise, there seems to be no explanation as to why the entire City of Dunwall just ignored this key fact that their now ex Lord Regent has perpetuated for so long.

Another thing I don't get is why everyone seemingly forgot about Corvo not long after he escaped from prison. For a man who supposedly killed the Empress (and knows about the conspiracy) you think Burrows' would've made more of an effort to locate him after he escaped, especially when his political and financial supporters start turning up dead or missing shortly after. Is everyone just blind or stupid?

A better plot device would've been if instead Burrows' turned on his allies and had them killed off to tie up loose ends, especially after Sokolov was captured. If I was Burrows', I would've immediately killed off anyone involved in the conspiracy, which would include Campbell, the royal interrogator, any City Watch involved, as well as Daud. INSTEAD he records a confession, and I still don't understand why he did that other than guilt.

It honestly feels like it was planned to fail from the start, just to move the plot along. There seemed to be no effort on the Lord Regent's part to actually protect his reign, apart from increasing security in some areas and no effort on part of anyone else to actually investigate what happened. I feel like if this was all more looked into, there could've been more story opportunities and the chaos system could've been much more improved.

What do you guys think?

[Pafti]

I'm confused about the logistics of what you're asking for. First of all, there is no indication that there wasn't a movement to exonerate Corvo. As Corvo you go from getting the confession to being betrayed by the loyalists and having to save Emily in one drug induced nap, Corvo never makes an appeal or pays attention to the authorities from that point forward. His plan is to be exonerated once Emily is crowned Empress, if he fails to save her and put her on the throne then his life may as well be forfeit anyway.
But the people don't care what is going on with the royal family and their Bodyguard, there is a plague and everyone is dying, the top priority is to keep having a home and food for the foreseeable future. Ain't nobody got time to protest for the sake of the Royal Protector, who by the way broke out of prison and may or may not have left a trail of bodies through Dunwall.
The confession wouldn't be enough on its own anyway, it just means that there was a mastermind behind the murder, it doesn't say anything about who wielded the blade, and Corvo was the only one found with her body. Burrows making the Royal Protector do it makes perfect sense to anyone that doesn't know them personally.

I don't know why you think that the people forgot about Corvo, his wanted poster is plastered on every fourth wall. If you're seen by anyone with a weapon, chances are they're going to attack you. The city is keenly aware of his presence, but there are only so many resources you can put into finding and capturing one magic wielding ubermensch, the city is falling apart and order needs to be maintained as best as is possible. So protect high value targets with as much as you can, if Corvo comes for them then pray it's enough. I don't see what else could have been done really.

Burrows probably should have dealt with Campbell, but Campbell was also useful to control. The Royal Interrogator is evil and a mute, he's also very useful to control. Burrows wouldn't have been able to kill Daud, and Daud is a professional that wouldn't ordinarily have caused him any problems anyway. The confession came to be because of both guilt, and because he actually believes he was doing the right thing, his plan didn't work out, but he thought it was brilliant and people should understand and appreciate him for it. Part of him wanted everyone to know, but he obviously couldn't tell anyone so recording it must have been his compromise, and his chance of explaining "why" if the plot were revealed some other way. It doesn't make a lot of sense, but this is also the man that thought that the way to deal with poverty was to introduce a plague meant to kill all the poor people...

[PsychoDino]

Originally posted by TheBandyMan:

Currently this is my third playthrough and I'm doing a ghost clean hands run (not mostly flesh because that is just too much). It's here that I realized something during the "Return to Dunwall Tower" mission.

After playing Burrows' confession, which incriminates him in a conspiracy to kill the Empress AND bring the plague to Dunwall, he is seen being arrested by his own City Watch and assumed sent to Coldridge. The confusing part for me is why this confession doesn't automatically exonerate Corvo, or at the very least cast serious doubt on whether or not he killed the Empress.

From what I know, Corvo was accused and sentenced with no trial or due process (which makes sense for a Monarchy), as this was a deliberate frame job and would be easy for the public to believe. But since there is no real evidence to link him to the murder, all Burrows' has is the presumption of guilt and him being at the scene. Wouldn't this confession cast doubt on the legitimacy of Corvo being the murderer?

Corvo is framed as a murderer who acted alone, with no mention of a conspiracy. By playing the audiograph it CONFIRMS that he didn't act alone even if he WAS the killer, and that multiple people were involved in a plot to kill the Empress. Hiram was the main instrument of this takeover, so he had to be the one who was able to convince the masses of this. I find it extremely hard to believe that this confession being broadcast to the entire city of Dunwall didn't somewhat cast a doubt on Corvo being the killer, as the man who was instrumental in maintaining that case was now considered illegitimate. Am I really expected to believe that nobody in the City Watch, or parliament, or in power who heard this over the loudspeakers didn't immediately question the legitimacy of Burrows' claim that Corvo killed her?

The ONLY problem with this is that the confession doesn't explicitly say who did it, but I feel like it doesn't have to. It still exposes a conspiracy to kill the Empress from what was originally made out to be a simple act of murder. We know the City Watch are aware of this as they arrest Burrows' on the spot, so why would they continue to assume Corvo guilty? We know they are incredibly corrupt and routinely abuse their authority, so who's to say they don't just interrogate Burrows' and find out more details. Also, many citizens never believed this to be true anyway (Sokolov for example).

The only logical conclusion I can come up with is that the all of Dunwall was forced to believe it under duress, which is why I find this confession not exonerating him to be incredibly confusing. For people who already don't believe it and are either doing it because it's their job (City Watch) or could be persecuted for saying otherwise, there seems to be no explanation as to why the entire City of Dunwall just ignored this key fact that their now ex Lord Regent has perpetuated for so long.

Another thing I don't get is why everyone seemingly forgot about Corvo not long after he escaped from prison. For a man who supposedly killed the Empress (and knows about the conspiracy) you think Burrows' would've made more of an effort to locate him after he escaped, especially when his political and financial supporters start turning up dead or missing shortly after. Is everyone just blind or stupid?

A better plot device would've been if instead Burrows' turned on his allies and had them killed off to tie up loose ends, especially after Sokolov was captured. If I was Burrows', I would've immediately killed off anyone involved in the conspiracy, which would include Campbell, the royal interrogator, any City Watch involved, as well as Daud. INSTEAD he records a confession, and I still don't understand why he did that other than guilt.

It honestly feels like it was planned to fail from the start, just to move the plot along. There seemed to be no effort on the Lord Regent's part to actually protect his reign, apart from increasing security in some areas and no effort on part of anyone else to actually investigate what happened. I feel like if this was all more looked into, there could've been more story opportunities and the chaos system could've been much more improved.

What do you guys think?

it does

[MadBone12]

Couple of things wrong with your logic here. Firstly, listening to people talking and also the announcer's dialogue, the implication from the authorities is that death of the empress and the kidnapping of Emily was part of a conspiracy and not some lone murderer. Also, when you return to the Hounds' Pit after being betrayed, and you listen to some dialogue, the guards and stuff also imply that these conspirators were behind the events at the beginning of the game.

After the Lord Regent's confession is broadcast, why would there be a broad public belief in Corvo's innocence? I'm sure some people would come to that conclusion, but others could just become paranoid about the entire situation and not sure what is true, who is responsible for what, if there are multiple factions all lying about each other, etc. There is a rat plague, people are dying and panicky, and focused on survival, and I think demanding clear, logical thought processes is a big ask. Also, you actually don't really see many civilians before or after the confession. Guards will come for you as the authorities are still on the lookout for a masked murderer (some don't even know it's Corvo), so the masked Corvo is still going to be attacked by guards. I don't see that the confession really changes that.

Burrows was looking for Corvo. This is one of the reasons Martin is captured and held prisoner. The fact is that the guards were on the lookout (and Samuel even refers to the extensive searches going on for Corvo, although we never see them), but they were no match for Corvo who was a fearsome and competent warrior even before the Outsider's mark. Now he has magic powers, which makes him even harder to capture. Again, not everyone makes the connection that the masked murderer is Corvo - as far as they know, he is just underground and Burrows is not actually certain that his allies are falling to Corvo or a conspiracy. He confirms as much if you reveal yourself to him at the Tower.

As for why Burrows' confesses? A plot device used all the time, although it's pretty dumb that villains are always confessing their crimes on recording devices

[ArchaicRaid]

Originally posted by MadBone12:

Couple of things wrong with your logic here. Firstly, listening to people talking and also the announcer's dialogue, the implication from the authorities is that death of the empress and the kidnapping of Emily was part of a conspiracy and not some lone murderer. Also, when you return to the Hounds' Pit after being betrayed, and you listen to some dialogue, the guards and stuff also imply that these conspirators were behind the events at the beginning of the game.

After the Lord Regent's confession is broadcast, why would there be a broad public belief in Corvo's innocence? I'm sure some people would come to that conclusion, but others could just become paranoid about the entire situation and not sure what is true, who is responsible for what, if there are multiple factions all lying about each other, etc. There is a rat plague, people are dying and panicky, and focused on survival, and I think demanding clear, logical thought processes is a big ask. Also, you actually don't really see many civilians before or after the confession. Guards will come for you as the authorities are still on the lookout for a masked murderer (some don't even know it's Corvo), so the masked Corvo is still going to be attacked by guards. I don't see that the confession really changes that.

Burrows was looking for Corvo. This is one of the reasons Martin is captured and held prisoner. The fact is that the guards were on the lookout (and Samuel even refers to the extensive searches going on for Corvo, although we never see them), but they were no match for Corvo who was a fearsome and competent warrior even before the Outsider's mark. Now he has magic powers, which makes him even harder to capture. Again, not everyone makes the connection that the masked murderer is Corvo - as far as they know, he is just underground and Burrows is not actually certain that his allies are falling to Corvo or a conspiracy. He confirms as much if you reveal yourself to him at the Tower.

As for why Burrows' confesses? A plot device used all the time, although it's pretty dumb that villains are always confessing their crimes on recording devices :lunar2019grinningpig:

I'll admit that I did overlook the plague aspect when I wrote this which is really stupid of me. I'm not sure why I did given that it's a central plot point, but I can see how that would make framing Corvo as well as everything else easier for the Lord Regent.

I think my mistake was that I didn't actually list the original source of my confusion so I'll do that now.

The reason I went this deep into what I wrote above is because the part I REALLY don't get is why Havelock, Pendleton, and Martin betray you. I know I played this multiple times, and I know the game's "official" plot reasons for this: being your influence over Emily and them being treated as heros for bringing in the masked felon.

I guess I'm just confused because the loyalists got everything they wanted. Emily was rescued, the Regent and his allies were taken out, and they were ready to take back the throne. So what exactly made them suddenly decide to turn on Corvo? More importantly, why did they think this would a good idea in any aspect? They know he's a highly-skilled assassin from the beginning, and him helping their cause only proves this fact. He dealt with people much more skilled and hard to get close to than them, how in the world did they think they could outsmart him? Everything was perfectly set up for them (at least to my knowledge), and they just decided to throw it all away?

I guess the second betrayal is either genuinely a betrayal to me, or very predictable. From the moment I first played this and was introduced to them, I could tell something was off. It seemed to good to be true, especially since Corvo was admittedly doing all the hard work and actually removing people from power. Havelock and Pendleton clearly were hiding something, and low and behold. I guess this just seems like a really poor plot device for me, because you were already betrayed at the beginning of the game and are suddenly betrayed again? I don't know.

I think my original point was coming from the fact that the Loyalists betrayal made zero sense to me, and I suppose I was trying to find a hole in the game that would've voided that plot point entirely. I guess I failed there.

[MadBone12]

Originally posted by TheBandyMan:

...

I guess I'm just confused because the loyalists got everything they wanted. Emily was rescued, the Regent and his allies were taken out, and they were ready to take back the throne. So what exactly made them suddenly decide to turn on Corvo? More importantly, why did they think this would a good idea in any aspect? They know he's a highly-skilled assassin from the beginning, and him helping their cause only proves this fact. He dealt with people much more skilled and hard to get close to than them, how in the world did they think they could outsmart him? Everything was perfectly set up for them (at least to my knowledge), and they just decided to throw it all away?

I guess the second betrayal is either genuinely a betrayal to me, or very predictable. From the moment I first played this and was introduced to them, I could tell something was off. It seemed to good to be true, especially since Corvo was admittedly doing all the hard work and actually removing people from power. Havelock and Pendleton clearly were hiding something, and low and behold. I guess this just seems like a really poor plot device for me, because you were already betrayed at the beginning of the game and are suddenly betrayed again? I don't know.

I think my original point was coming from the fact that the Loyalists betrayal made zero sense to me, and I suppose I was trying to find a hole in the game that would've voided that plot point entirely. I guess I failed there.

With regard to questioning the betrayal, this is a fair point. At first, I found it less than convincing. But after playing a few times, I think the logic given by the characters does make some sense. Samuel points out that the Corvo would not have let the loyalists manipulate Emily into what they wanted - they were power hungry and wanted her to fall into line, which Corvo would not have allowed.

Another reason is given which I find less convincing, which is that they could not let people know the lengths they had gone to, in terms of murder, torture etc. They didn't trust Corvo to shut up about that, so they killed him. Maybe it's because their actions seem reasonable to me (in low chaos), so I think people wouldn't be too shocked, but maybe outside the context of the game, I would find it unacceptable and would not want to support a new government that used violence to get there, even if in the game, I have no problem with it.

Final reason given which makes no sense is that if they could turn Corvo in as the killer of empress, they would be seen as heroes. The reason this doesn't make sense is that they tell Samuel to get rid of the body so how where they going to take credit? Not sure, maybe there is a logic here but I don't get it.

[ArchaicRaid]

Originally posted by MadBone12:

Originally posted by TheBandyMan:

...

I guess I'm just confused because the loyalists got everything they wanted. Emily was rescued, the Regent and his allies were taken out, and they were ready to take back the throne. So what exactly made them suddenly decide to turn on Corvo? More importantly, why did they think this would a good idea in any aspect? They know he's a highly-skilled assassin from the beginning, and him helping their cause only proves this fact. He dealt with people much more skilled and hard to get close to than them, how in the world did they think they could outsmart him? Everything was perfectly set up for them (at least to my knowledge), and they just decided to throw it all away?

I guess the second betrayal is either genuinely a betrayal to me, or very predictable. From the moment I first played this and was introduced to them, I could tell something was off. It seemed to good to be true, especially since Corvo was admittedly doing all the hard work and actually removing people from power. Havelock and Pendleton clearly were hiding something, and low and behold. I guess this just seems like a really poor plot device for me, because you were already betrayed at the beginning of the game and are suddenly betrayed again? I don't know.

I think my original point was coming from the fact that the Loyalists betrayal made zero sense to me, and I suppose I was trying to find a hole in the game that would've voided that plot point entirely. I guess I failed there.

With regard to questioning the betrayal, this is a fair point. At first, I found it less than convincing. But after playing a few times, I think the logic given by the characters does make some sense. Samuel points out that the Corvo would not have let the loyalists manipulate Emily into what they wanted - they were power hungry and wanted her to fall into line, which Corvo would not have allowed.

Another reason is given which I find less convincing, which is that they could not let people know the lengths they had gone to, in terms of murder, torture etc. They didn't trust Corvo to shut up about that, so they killed him. Maybe it's because their actions seem reasonable to me (in low chaos), so I think people wouldn't be too shocked, but maybe outside the context of the game, I would find it unacceptable and would not want to support a new government that used violence to get there, even if in the game, I have no problem with it.

Final reason given which makes no sense is that if they could turn Corvo in as the killer of empress, they would be seen as heroes. The reason this doesn't make sense is that they tell Samuel to get rid of the body so how where they going to take credit? Not sure, maybe there is a logic here but I don't get it.

I agree, the only way I could make sense of the betrayal is that the loyalists themselves built up a lot of guilt for using violence and didn't want people to know. But if you go a low-chaos nonlethal path, then that's where the betrayal starts to make less sense. If you go a high chaos path, it's much more believable considering what happens in the game. I think this is where I see an example of a hole in the chaos system, I think they circumstances and outcomes of the betrayal should've been much more numerous but it happens no matter what you do.

Also, the other problem with this reasoning is that overthrowing any tyrannical government requires some use of violence. It may not have to be on a mass scale, but even if Corvo doesn't kill a single person he is still using force and violence and could just as well be shamed for this as he could for killing people. There is almost no legitimate way to get rid of a corrupt leader like the Lord Regent other than to overthrow him or forcefully remove him from power. After all, Dunwall is a constitutional monarchy so democracy isn't exactly something people care for with regards to the Empire.

[dotsynku]

I didn't read everyone's novel's, but I just wanted to say, and maybe someone else said it, but right at the start of the game when you go to get the bomb to get out of the prison, there is a note that exonerates Corvo right on the desk, basically stating that he didn't do it, and that he was just the fall guy and that there was a conspiracy to kill the empress. I just thought it funny that that couldn't have been used in some way to clear Corvo of the charges that were levied against him.