Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
In my playthroughs so far, I've chosen to lie/bluff her and pretend I couldn't remember anything about what happened and I just so happened to pass out and find myself in the far tower, to let her think she's got away with it. I don't actually know how the dialogue goes if I confront her, but on the next run I think I'll find out!
If she were to disappear at that point, she's pretty smart and would disappear the evidence, too... or "out" you to the guards. If you have NPCs act with too much common sense in games, they can quickly become too complicated and unbeatable, so in my own (possibly wrong) opinion, they all need a weakness or moment of stupidity so you can actually progress! :D
I agree in principle that it is a little bit clumsy, but I can't think of a way to improve it that wouldn't break the game or require a major re-write! Or at least, be required to put her lights out with a bottle to retrieve the evidence :P Because knowing what we know about her, there's no way she ought to let you take it without a fuss.