Why does no one question the High Overseer being branded? They know you're on the loose, the event is certainly not scheduled, and there is no proof at all that he actually is a heretic. You'd think they would call bullshit over this.
First, they're so indoctrinated they don't ask questions, they just follow orders (the order in question being "Don't associate with anyone with the heretic's brand under any circumstances"). Two, everyone hated Campbell. He was a farce of a High Overseer who intentionally committed sins daily, and only stayed in power due to blackmail. He deserved the mark, and everyone knew it.
Yeah, people didn't raise any questions because they didn't think the situation warranted any *being* raised. If Campbell didn't blackmail, lie and cheat then it would likely raise some eyebrows, but the Overseers were already looking for a legitimate way to remove him from power. You can even over-hear a couple of low level Overseers discussing trying to steal his journal (in his secret chamber, no less) to do so; extraordinarily dangerous if they weren't certain something fishy had been going on.
And after that mission, Martin quickly uses Campbell's journal to blackmail most of the church hierarchy. Even if there was an investigation, the person in charge of that investigation would likely be working for you.
More to the point, they CAN'T question it. If they admit that Campbell's branding wasn't legitimate, what's to stop any other person who has the brand from telling people, "oh no, I'm not REALLY a heretic, I was attacked, like the High Overseer, so please give me soup". Admitting the possibility completely destroys their authority, which means people are a lot less likely to listen to their bullshit.
Killing Weepers increases the Chaos
Why is it a considered to be a bad thing to put them out of their misery? Knocking them out only prolongs their suffering and it’s unlikely that someone who has turned into a rabid animal that attacks any non-weeper on sight has any chance of recovery. The Weepers that are cured by Piero and Sokolov in the Low Chaos ending aren’t hostile which means that these are the ones with their sanity still intact.
The point isn't whether or not it's a Mercy Kill. Chaos isn't measuring evil, it's measuring the city's health. And people dying freaks people out, which makes them panic and leads to an overall worse ending.
Perhaps the sight of ROTTING CORPSES IN THE STREET casues these issues.
It's more food for the rats.
And food for the rats means stronger rats which means bigger swarms, etc. It's not just about them being Weepers it's about turning them into food for what's destroying the city.
The problems with these justifications are still legion, particularly since the Chaos system really doesn't work consistently. The "it gives more food to the Weepers" argumentation falls apart with the realization that you can have a power that can burn corpses to a crisp or the ability to punt corpses through a Wall of Light (which opens up a related headscratching issue, but not for right now)-thus denying the rats anything to eat- while still having the Chaos increase by the same amount as it just being undiscovered; on top of this you can kill Wolfhounds willy nilly without dealing with the corpses (and while making sure the Overseers can't) without any increase in chaos whatsoever. It just doesn't add up.
Bit of a stretch here, but I think the issue with killing Weepers is that it causes long-term chaos. Remember that "chaos" in this case is anything that impacts Dunwall's long-term stability. The low-chaos ending shows Piero and Sokolov curing victims of the plague, including - going by the restrained man - Weepers. In killing these people, you're actually killing someone who could be saved later on. Not that you know it at the time, of course.
Haven't heard that one before, and it makes a whole lot more sense than a lot of the pad justifications. The real problem I see with it is that it's contingent on the Low Chaos ending being what you get (which is far from a sure thing to say the least) *and* Piero and Sokolov being around to cooperate (while you can conceivably off the latter and get Low Chaos).
When one plays Dishonored the game world starts as Low Chaos. Everything has gone to hell but at the start of your adventure the world is still in a stable decline. Corvo's actions choose whether that gets better or worse from that baseline. For the most part Weepers are in their own little areas, away from everyone else and hiding. They don't have very good perception, won't usually notice their own buddies lying unconscious a few feet away and are generally in their own little world. Killing them, as opposed to subduing them, is a matter of convenience for Corvo - he's taking a life just to make his job a bit easier and quicker. Even if they're a threat to him these are still civilians and, by and large, they're not responsible for their condition. Killing them is no different than offing a maid who keeps interrupting you as you search a house. As you spread a trail of death and destruction you're only going to give people yet more to worry about, guards to be more on edge (increased patrols) and just generally make the world a crappier place. So it makes sense even if it isn't the most obvious thing in the world.
Sorry, but that doesn't hold water, in case you didn't notice one of the Heart's stock quotes when actually dealing with maids: "....she will be mauled by Weepers and left for dead." A maid interrupting you when you're searching around doesn't spread a world-ending plague as she goes about her work. The maid interrupting you is just doing her job, and poses no real threat to anyone save you, and the fact that the fate of the Empire just so happens to hinge on your success doesn't change the fact that you can minimize the damage while doing so. The point about the Weepers being largely in their own little worlds and generally in small areas of the map is valid, but that doesn't change the fact that they're still literally bleeding a threat to humanity's existence in Dunwall, and who is keeping other people (who are also innocent like them and don't pose a threat to humanity, like those countless unfortunate servants who keep getting mauled by them on their days off). Secondly, if anything choosing to kill a Weeper makes Corvo's job harder, because it means you have to choose to deal with them rather than simply bypassing them, and it would understandably cause more guards to deploy into areas they previously couldn't because of the dangers of getting infected. As for spreading a trail of destruction, they cumulatively have done a far better job at that than Corvo ever has and ever can, as shown by the fact that anybody's willing to stomach the Lord Regent's justifications to quarantine them and the rats at all. I'm sorry, but there's a reason why you're allowed to eliminate plague carriers legally if they pose an obvious danger, and why you are allowed to kill civilians if they pose a threat to others. At least cutting down the number of plague carriers would help the non-infected part of humanity regain its' footing and possibly be able to reexpand into the previously abandoned areas.
Yes, Weepers are dangerous, but only really if you approach them. The occasional civilian is certainly falling to them but for the most part they're not a threat in and of themselves. Them carrying the plague is a threat but killing them won't stop that. They're plague infested blood will still be oozing out into the street. It might conceivably make it worse, as animals that don't normally carry the plague might eat the corpses and spread it. The sight of the bodies in the streets will still cause increased public disorder as well, since just by looking at a corpse it would be hard to tell the difference between a dead Weeper and a slightly decomposed normal person. As for reexpanding into previously abandoned areas, in the Low Chaos ending that is exactly what happens because, as has been noted, Weepers can be cured. And in the interests of Dunwalls long term survival the curing of people thought lost to the plague is much more useful than a pile of rotting corpses that will, let's not forget, spread an impressive range of more mundane illnesses.
First and foremost, "only if you approach them" is seriously underplaying the problem. Even factoring out the Heart saying that every maid we see will get mauled by Weepers (including a named character who *isn't*), it's still a clear indication that the problem is major. If the developers felt comfortable with the assumption that any given maid in each of the locales we see them is going to get mauled on her off day, the problem is far more than "the occasional civilian." That means that the Weepers are a serious drain on the most essential resource Dunwall has: human lives. Furthermore, we know at least some Weepers retain a semblance of higher thinking, and that some of *those* want to make the world burn, meaning that they're a lot more risky than just the average zombie you can cage up and forget because unlike those zombies there's a chance they can reason their way out. Furthermore, plague carriers (by definition of being plague carriers) are unlikely to be dangerous only if you get attacked and mauled by them; they carry a world-ender of a disease and even if we assume that the plague is transmitted through eating it (and to the best of my knowledge there is no confirmation it is) that doesn't remove the threat they pose. Finally, I am well aware of what happens in Low Chaos. I am also very well aware that the cure is developed in a very specific epilogue and that up to that point just about nobody believes it is possible to have it done in the immediate future (which in their defense they were right on without Sokolov and Piero working together). Up to that point, nobody even knew that Weepers could be cured and using knowledge that is impossible to obtain at the time to make judgement before you could get it is metagaming; there's nothing wrong with it but it's not something in-universe characters can justify themselves with.
There's two main issues with this debate so we'll tackle it one bit at a time.
With the hand crossbow and dedication you can easily murder huge groups of Weepers without breaking a sweat because they are a very minimal threat to you. They're just sick people. Killing them is the equivalent of going to a leper colony and killing everyone. One could easily make the argument that these people are not responsible for what they do due to illness making them less of a purposeful threat than guys like the Overseers and that's honestly a big part of what Dishonored is saying - killing is wrong. By and large these people do not deserve to die and, for the most part, when Corvo chooses to kill he's doing it because he's taking the easy way out. Even though the Heart may say mostly negative things about people, the game isn't about purging the land of criminals, it's about Corvo's quest to bring the corrupt leadership of the city to justice. He doesn't HAVE to kill the people in his way so doing so is just showing he doesn't care about life.
Sorry, but while humans might have thought Leprosy was a world ending threat in past centuries, it wasn't, and the comparison is insulting to actual Lepers (many of whom were killed on false grounds because of inane comparisons like this). Leprosy is a generally nonlethal, hellishly-hard-to-communicate disease that generally does not drive people out of their minds. When properly treated, the threat to anybody- including the Lepers- is just about nil. The Rat Plague is clearly none of these things except maybe the last one (depending on the problems Sokolov, Piero, and their help might or might not have had treating them), and the threat it poses to human existence without a cure is obvious and overwhelming. Regardless of what Dishonored was trying or trying not to say, it obviously bungled the delivery considerably. The problem here isn't that we don't agree that the Weepers cannot be fully blamed for their actions and spreading the plague, it's that doesn't change the threat they pose until a cure can be found. There's a reason why the Rat Plague is clearly not Leprosy and wringing ones' hands about killing these sick people (in situations of self-defense or defense of the community) is short sighted and might cause more deaths: the local Lazaretto isn't going to turn into a hive of pseudozombies attacking half the maids of Dunwall and spreading an inhumanly lethal and infectious disease.
When you kill those plague carriers you're just making more food for the rats. Any rats that happen to not have the plague and come across dead plague carriers are going to eat, get sick and now carry the plague onwards. It's very likely that this is exactly why there are more rats on a High Chaos playthrough - you're making more and more food for them. Rats are much harder to keep out of an area than Weepers and are a much bigger threat so helping make more of them, regardless of any justification, is really just making life more miserable for those innocents.
This is also short sighted, because the rats cannot eat a body that has been destroyed (nevermind the question of whether they would eat fallen Weepers in the first place). You can chuck them into Walls of Light or get a version of Shadow Kill that destroys bodies, and the rat population will still be far higher without reason (all other things being equal). Which just hammers home the sloppy and ham-handed way they implemented Chaos after promising they wouldn't do it like that; the world apparently operates on the morality of Corvo and Daud rather than any more realistic cause or effect.
Corvo's Secrety Identity
It's implied that none of the conspirators realise that Corvo and the mysterious masked assassin are the same man. How hard would it be to twig that the jail-break of the local Memetic Badass who has good reasons for wanting you all dead-or-worse, and the sudden appearance of a mysterious masked badass who swiftly sets about ensuring you are all dead-or-worse are likely to be connected? The only reason I could think of would be the fact that pre-assassin Corvo had no magic, so the reliance of the masked assassin on magic might throw them off. Of course this is dependent on player-choice.
It doesn't really make much of a difference if the Lord Regent and his allies knew it was Corvo who was taking them down anyway. They still couldn't kill/recapture him or find out where the Loyalists' hideout was. And it doesn't matter who is slashing your throat or selling you into slavery once its already happened... Its possible that they focused more on stopping the Masked Felon than worrying about his identity, though that was certainly a secondary goal.
Another issue is that they really didn't have time to find out who the Felon was. Less than a week passed between the break out and Burrow's death, anyone in a position to care about the Felon's identity was dead or worse within days.
They do know that the assassin is Corvo - at least, by the time you show up at Boyle's party. See what happens when you sign the guest book as yourself at Boyle's party. There's a report on the Lord Regent's desk that makes note that someone signed themselves in as the very assassin who killed/disappeared Lady Boyle.
The person who wrote the letter, however, believes that the guest book entry was just a cruel joke by one of the party guests and has nothing to do with the disappearance/death of Lady Boyle.
It's politics; they can't admit that the man they let escape is actually the man going around killing/neutralizing them. Would damn them twice over; best let it be some Outsider heretic than the former protector of the Queen.
Truth be told, 'a masked assassin using mystic powers to kill high-ranking targets' is a perfect description of Daud and his Whalers. According to best knowledge of conspirators, Corvo was not versed in dark arts (and getting them overnight is not something that can be assumed at the drop of the hat). So it makes a very possible scenario that conspirators assumed that it is Daud or his associate(s) and the real question was 'who hired them?'.
The Lord Regent's "Brilliant" Plan.
Hiram Burrows is a prudent man. According to the Heart and the notes found throughout the game, he has a severe case of OCD regarding order and efficiency. When he stole power, it wasn’t for personal luxury or privilege, but because he felt that he was truly the best leader for Dunwall. He was still an evil git for introducing the plague and murdering the empress, but why did he use the plague in the first place? Anyone with a rudimentary knowledge of statecraft would know that the lower class is essential to the wellbeing of a nation, and introducing uncontrollable factors like disease and feral rats is counterproductive if you want to keep things organized. Simply put, why would anyone obsessed with order and efficiency intentionally unleash chaos and cripple his own city? His methods are completely contrary to his goals.
This is actually a disturbingly common mindset in real life. Basically, he didn't see the poor as people, he saw them as rodents and vermin. Yes, rodents and vermin are important to the ecosystem, but you have rat catchers to keep them from breeding out of control. He just wanted to trim the numbers to a more manageable level. We don't know what his desired level was, but it went out of control when the rats proved smarter than his catchers. I imagine he also planned to use the "tragedy" of the rat plague as a propaganda tool to keep the survivors in line, as well.
We don't know that Burrows does have even a rudimentary knowledge of statecraft - in fact his secret confession pretty much proves he doesn't. Remember he's the jumped-up head of the secret police, not a politician of any kind. Killing people is his hammer and Dunwall is full of nails.
So what exactly do the Marked do with the runes that give them more powers, anyways? It must be something that expends them. Do they eat them? Are they physically absorbed into the hand? Suck power out of them then throw them back into the river?
I'm betting it's the last. The runes have all the old magic, prayers, and power that the early civilizations, and The Outsider, put into them. For most it probably does nothing but look weird, give headaches, or glow if they make an altar to The Outsider. But a Marked can get the juice that's within them, then it turns into just a fancy piece of bone.
According to one of the in game notes, the runes just disintegrate after being used.
How was the Lord Regent's reign harming Dunwall?
It’s stated numerous times throughout the game that the death of the empress made a bad situation many times worse, and that her successor (and murderer) was driving the city into the ground. (Even Daud mentions this in the Knife of Dunwall DLC.) However, the empress seemed unwilling to commit to drastic measures, and even referred to a blockade as “cowardly”. The sad reality is that harsh measures such as blockades, strictly enforced curfews, inhumane quarantines, and the systematic destruction of the sick are often the best methods to deal with an out-of-control plague that has the potential to wipe out the known world; methods that a "bleeding heart" like the empress (no pun intended) would have refused to condone. Although responsible for starting the plague, wouldn't a cold and pitiless ruler like the Lord Regent have been a better leader at that point in time?
There are multiple problems. Let's just ignore the fact that he was the cause of the plague in the first place, since no one knew that. He instituted absolutely brutal martial law, had political dissidents thrown in the plague quarter, and didn't make any real effort to find an actual cure. With Jessamine in charge, it presumably would have gone the way the Low Chaos ending went; she'd quarantine who she needed to, but since those were actual sick people, they would have obeyed her laws and cooperated with the researchers trying to find a cure. That's the big one; remember that the Lord Regent's punishment for evading quarantine, hiding the plague, so on and so forth, was all death...which meant the sick had nothing to lose in hiding and unintentionally spreading the plague.
I see. The cruel measures used by the Lord Regent cost him the faith, cooperation, and good will of his people. That makes sense; combating a plague effectively requires the combined efforts and cooperation of an entire community, and brutal crackdowns tend to encourage an “every-man-for-himself” mentality. It’s a bitter irony that by resorting to extreme measures to gain control, the Lord Regent lost it instead.
Keep in mind also that the Lord Regent didn't seem to get how people would react. His own private recorded rant indicates that he took every factor into account except the human one, and said that if everyone had simply "followed orders" then everything would be fine. But the human factor was exacerbated by the brutality and ruthlessness of his regime, which only made the plague worse.
Which is interesting in that it paints the Lord Regent as being more than just an extremist and potentially more along the lines of a full case of sociopathy (Antisocial personality disorder). His inability to understand other people, his arrogance and delusions of grandeur as well as his flagrant disregard for the damage done to anyone or anything all sound well in line with that. He "knows" how to save the city and if others won't do as he says then he'll just have to clear the way and do it himself.
The Current State of the Empire?
Is there any hint regarding the condition of the empire at large during the course of the game? Dunwall is the heart of Gristol and the capital of the empire, so the political upheaval caused by the city’s near destruction and the empress’s death should have been pretty spectacular.
The "empire" is actually more a confederacy at this point in its history, with each island semi-autonomous due to the institution of a constitutional monarchy that has divested the crown of more than a little power (hence why it's so important to get the Pendleton votes in the Parliament). The other islands are independent enough to effectively write off Dunwall as doomed and consider blockading the city to prevent the plague from spreading (Corvo's bad news at the beginning of the game), but they weren't quite prepared to actually overthrow everything. If Dunwall recovered, great! If it didn't, then the other islands were prepared to go their own way. The time span of the game (and the plague) wasn't really long enough for the other islands to completely throw off the empire, though, especially due to the lag in communications and the known general hostility of the world at large. Likely, in Low Chaos, Emily claimed the throne and Piero and Sokolov worked together just in time to restore confidence in the crown.
Knife of Dunwall Whale Eye as a kill?
After playing Knife of Dunwall on High Chaos, a loaded a new game and did the first mission, killing no-one except for the whale to get the Rune so I can get Blink Mk 2. I get to the mission complete screen... and the game tells me I killed someone. Can anyone confirm that the whale is a casualty, so I can go back and not kill it?
I've gotten zero kills on that mission while killing the whale. The whale does not count as a kill. An unconscious enemy probably took a bad fall or got eaten by rats.
Nuts, and I finally managed to save Lurk at the end without pissing off the Overseers. Whelp, thanks for the help.
Regarding Daud's assassins
So, the Outsider states in the Knife of Dunwall that there are only eight who bear the mark. His gifts include abilities to tap in to black magic, like, say, Blink, void gaze, what have you. How is it, then, that every single one of Daud's assassins can utilize this blink? Was that ever established? Or is that a case of segregation from story and gameplay?
It's stated outright in a few notes Corvo finds that one of Daud's powers is the ability to grant lesser versions of his own powers to those who are loyal to him.
Then a further headscratcher would be how can Billie can blink faster, and farther, without break, than Daud? This goes for his other assassins, as well.
Maybe Delilah was helping Billie, and with her donation of power added to Daud's own gift to her, it made Billie equal to someone who got Marked.
In Knife of Dunwall Daud specifically has an ability that lets him share his powers with his other assassins. It can even be increased to give them the ability to ignore the effects of Slow / Stop Time and to instantly ash any enemies that they kill as well as granting them a new power, Pull. So that's very well established in game. In regards to them being able to Blink so well I always assumed they were just downing potions as necessary. And a bit of Gameplay and Story Segregation.
I never noticed them Blinking any faster than it takes for the regen to recover their mana. as for the reason they do not seem to have the same distance restrictions is probably due to the training one can witness during the Whaling District level. As for why Daud loses his ability to Blink like that it is more likely for gameplay reasons, as one cannot visualize where they want to go in a first person game. As for why Billie has exceptionally gifted at blinking probbably comes down to practice. Personnally feel the reason Corvo did not have as many awesome powers was because he got them at the beginning of the week or so the game takes place in. Practice makes perfect.
Granny Rags' age
What is her real age, in Knife of Dunwall Billie Lurk says that rumors say that she's thousand years old, since it's a rumor it's likely not true. But as we know, she cannot be killed unless her cameo is destroyed, which means that it keeps her alive and exteends her life. And since we can find her portrait from younger days done by Sokolov during 'Lady Boyle's Last Party' that means that she's 60-70 years old, much less than what rumors say.
The only info we have besides the painting is the journal entry in her lair about how she was part of an expedition to Pandyssia, which is where she learned her rituals, plus the fact that she's the last of the Moray family. So 60-70 sounds about right (since organized expeditions are a recent thing), but it's impossible to know for sure. For all we know, she really is a thousand years old, but when she met Sokolov she used a ritual to dial her age back to her youth so he could paint her. Unlikely, but it's a possibility.
Huh? Billie says that she was rumoured to be a hundred years old, not a thousand.
Mistake on my part, so about hundred years should be it.
For the Knife of Dunwall DLC Just how was Billie Lurk planning on taking over Daud once he died? He’s the source of the Whalers’ powers, with him gone they are powerless. Billie solves her own by allying with Delilah and relying on her powers instead, but that doen’t change the rest of the Whalers would be screwed. Billie also believed she could command the Whalers better than Daud, yet her direct actions got several Whalers killed. She had the Overseers surprise attack the hideout and her fellow Whalers killed. In fact, Whaler casualties were supposed to be even greater than they turned out but Overseer Hume attacked before all the forces had been gathered. So Billie’s great plan was to command a bunch of dead, powerless Whalers after killing Daud?
Fairly certain it was Delilah's great plan, and all she cared about was that Daud died. See also:
Billie: I was a fool to listen to you!
It's been stated that Daud's power share is a permanent effect, not a constant fountain thing. When he dies, his assassins keep the powers they got.
I thought it was implied the opposite. Delilah's can share powers just like Daud and the witches have a conversation that their powers rely on Delilah and without her around they'll be cut off.
At any rate, if you kill Daud in the main game and then get into a fight with the assassins on your way out, they still have their powers, so for them it's permanent.
Given how whimsical The Outsider seems, Daud's power and Delilah's work different just because he finds it entertaining.
Inconsistent Brigmore Witches info
In the main game, early on you find a book that says the Brigmore Witches are allied with Daud, and in the DLC it is shown this is not the case. One can dismiss this as just in-universe unreliable narrator, except it's not, because later on in the main game after Corvo is captured by Daud, you find a note written by Daud to Rinaldo that "the leader of the Brigmore witches must pay for her betrayal" which by itself implies that they must have been allies once, if not at the present moment. In the DLC, however, there's no indication that they were ever allies. So if Delilah was never allied with Daud (Which she can't have ever been, since Daud has no idea who she is in the beginning of Ko D), what "betrayal" is his note talking about in the main game? It can't be Billie's, because the note the note seems pretty emphatic it's Delilah's betrayal.
It was Billie's betrayal. Delilah made Billie betray Daud. Hence, Billie's betrayal was Delilah's betrayal.
Yeah I always read that as saying "The leader of the Brigmore Witches must pay for [Billie's] betrayal.
Why are they all called the Ladies Boyle?
If only Waverly was actually married to Lord Boyle, why are they all called Lady Boyle? Wouldn't Esma and Lydia have a different name to go by? Or was Lord Boyle a cousin or something?
That last is a possibility. Another one suggested by the wiki is that the Boyle family was so influential, the three sisters insisted they all get to take the name, so that all three could benefit from the union. Aren't sisterly bonds just swell?
Another theory is that the girls are born Boyle's. Lord Boyle was the one who married up.
Given that there is a recording of Trevor Pendleton's Memoir, chapter 28. "Waverly, Waverly, Waverly. The very name sweeps one away. She came into our cold, marble halls and brought light and warmth. She changed our lives forever. It was only later I realized she was a traitorous little weasel, like all the Boyles." That made me think that she was Boyle from birth along with her sisters, but I'll admit it could be referencing that Pendleton and Boyles are competitors in the same industries or something...
In the Knife of Dunwall, the Outsider tells Daud that there are 8 Marked Men. Corvo Attano is included in that number. The problem? That conversation happens 6 months before Corvo is Marked.
The timeline is not precise, and it's not confirmed that Corvo is one of the Marked he was talking about. Corvo could easily be number nine.
The Outsider never says he included Corvo in that number. Nor is it clear when the conversation takes place. Daud only mentions he spent six months trying to forget about killing the empress, but not that he spent six months looking for Delilah. And we know that by the time he goes to Rothwild's whaling company, Corvo's already escaped (As its mentioned on the PA and there's wanted posters of him all over) - and since Corvo gets his marked the very same day, it's possible Corvo's marked by the time the Outsider speaks to Daud - assuming Daud's search for Delilah which led him to find the name of the ship only took a few days. (We know that by the time Delilah's doing the ritual at the end of the storyline, Emily's still in the Hounds Pit Pub so Havelock's betrayal hasn't happened yet).
Non-lethal takedown of Rothwild
In order to get rid of Rothwild without killing him, you can put it in a box which is scheduled to be shipped by boat to a distant place. It raises a number of questions:
How the hell is Rothwild supposed to survive the trip? The crate is mentioned to be specifically designed to keep people alive during transportation, but it is never explained how it achieves that miracle. In game it is just a coffin-like rectangular wooden box. We can assume there are breathing holes, but a trip to the far north with the game world's technology would take weeks, possibly months (which is the point of putting him in the box to begin with). Rothwild would have starved to death long before destination.
Even if the crate contains some water and food, being held in a tight unconfortable coffin for weeks would probably result in severe health problems.
Once he's on the ship and wakes up in his crate, why couldn't Rothwild simply shout for help ? He is likely the owner of the ship he's carried on, and in any case an extremely wealthy man. He should have no problem convincing the captaim to quickly bring him back to Dunwall or at very least to drop him somewhere when he can get a ride back for the city.
The only way that stupid idea could work is if the crate somehow keeps Rothwild both incapacitated (or at least quiet), fed and healthy during the whole trip. It is not very likely the technology for that exists at Dunwall, and even if it is the case (Rothwild was working with Sokolov after all) it would require a much more complicated system than the simple wooden box shown in game.
Surprisingly enough the second DLC actually confirms that yes, they do have technology of that level. The crate could potentially contain a simplified, older version of Trimble's medical technology.
Magic. Not Outsider magic, presumably, but some kind of whale oil powered super refrigerator to put him in suspended animation for the trip.
Firstly there is real-life precedent for locking people up in ships holds with a little water and food and simply assuming at least some of the people are left alive. As for why he doesn't shout? Well he's in a box, in a cargo-hold, surrounded by other boxes possibly filled with other people also shouting; do you really think the crew of the ship would be rewarded for investigating their cargo normally? Not very pleasant but considering some of the non-lethal take-downs in the main game, not too bad either.
Billie blinks in the first time you walk past the box (if you enter through the front door) and mentions that it's set up to carry "live cargo." Apparently Rothwild was planning to use it the same way Daud ends up using it.
Brigmore Witches plotline
The general plotline and story progression is much less credible than the one of the main game, or the previous DLC:
In the first misson Daud goes to great lengths to free Lizzie Stride. This is justified because he needs a ride to the Brigmore manor, and Lizzie is an extremely skilled captain and smuggler with a ship and a competent crew. This obviously supposes that navigating the Wrenhaven river is somehow dangerous and difficult (maybe it is technically difficult and you need a skilled captain, or maybe it is just that Daud and his men are wanted criminals and have to keep a low profile). Anyway, this is completely ruined by the fact that Lizzie is later killed before even sailing off, leaving Daud as the captain. If all Daud needed was a ship and a crew, for a man with his connections and influence there were certainly much simpler options than breaking in the Coleridge prison to free Lizzie Stride in the first place.
It would be completely ruined... if not for the fact that it is in fact quite possible to save Lizzie's life. As for why they wanted the Undine rather than any other vessel, it's the only ship allowed past the river patrols, thanks to Lizzie paying off the necessary officials.
The second mission is the most problematic. To sum up what happened: the Undine is not operational because the Hatters stole its engine coil because they needed it it fix their own engine because their watermill doesn't work because the Brigmore Witches sabotaged the water supply. Question: why did the Witches sabotage the water supply? If it is merely to set this whole chain of events into motion and to make the Undine unusable that would require an insane amount of intelligence (that the Undine and the hatters' engine have the same model of coil, and that the hatters would try to use their engine if their watermill was stopped) as well as a Batman Gambit (that the hatters would then try to steal the Undine's coil, and succeed). They could have achieved the same result much more easily by just sinking the Undine or maybe cutting a deal with Wakefield to sail away quickly before Daud or Stride can arrive.
The Witches were just playing with their powers, which happened to screw over the Hatters. Or maybe they were doing it on purpose to screw over the Hatters, but the point is that none of the gangs were their allies, so they didn't care what was happening to them.
I'm sorry but my Willing Suspension of Disbelief won't buy that one. The witches are under Delilah's firm management and seem to observe a rather strict policy of discretion. We barely hear of their existence at all in the main Dishonored campaign, and even in the DLC they only act to suport their leader or to protect her plans from Daud. So first they're not the kind of people to go "playing" with their powers, second they are hardly overactive and the fact that they are "playing" in exactly the same place as Daud at the same time and taking action against a gang who is directly involved in a war with the Dead Eels by happenstance is just as likely as the Outsider's eyes turning white. Especially since we directly witness them spying on the Eels a few blocks from there (likely because they heard of Daud's involvement, that piece of intelligence is plausible).
Part two of this plan can pretty much be justified by the discretion policy: they don't want to make too many enemies among the gang population before Delilah's in charge of the country, so they can't just sink the Undine - up until that surprise attack at the end of the second level. Plus, Wakefield's on the verge of a mutiny and not exactly the most competent of bosses, so rather than waste time gambling on Mr Soon-To-Have-A-Sword-Through-His-Eye cooperating with them, the witches go right to the source: sabotage Hatters' mill via cutting off the water, pay off flunky to "accidentally" let slip that the Dead Eels have an engine coil (in front of Trimble, say), then gather in the sewers to ambush Daud when the chain of deals finally leads him there. True, the plan's definitely not perfect - after all, it's quite possible to bypass the sewer trap by going along with the Geezer's suicide attempt - but it does make a certain degree of sense.
The third mission is quite straight, but we can just point out that Delilah's whole plan depends on the Loyalists eventually winning in order to succeed. This is quite optimistic and risky.
Not really. Emily was going to end up on the throne no matter what; both conspiracies wanted her as a puppet. They wouldn't have anticipated her (or rather, Delilah) having access to Outsider magic, so she could have offed them and taken real control without too much difficulty. It's only in the absolute worst ending that Emily dies.
Admiral Havelock's Betrayal
Admiral Havelock had to have been the shortest lived Lord Regent of Dunwall for some very good reasons. First, he gathers Pendelton, Martin and Samuel to plot against Corvo and then plan to pretend that they were the ones who found Emily which is exactly what Hiram Burrows and his court planned to do. So he sends Samuel to poison Corvo to get him out of the way while he,Pendleton and Martin deal with the lowly servants and attempt to frame Piero and Sokolov for being the main conspirators along with Corvo. But why Samuel? If he was planning on offing Samuel off afterwards then he shouldn't have trusted the boat guy to do it when he had his much more loyal nobleman and overseer at his beck and call. He could have even done it himself and nobody would be the wiser. Second, He murders the servants as potential witnesses.... why? If the loyalists had already killed off the most reviled and powerful members of Hiram's court then surely the influence they had from Campbell's blackmail along with doing the public and the city watch a service they could have just replaced them with no hassle? Third, Emily... he murders the people she lived with and almost killed Callista right in front of her and he expects her to do as she's told. Fourth, in the game's last few minutes you listen to Havelock rambling to himself about what he's going to do with his new found authority and power after he just killed Pendelton and Martin. Why would he kill off two of his biggest supporters and the ones probably given the important enough roles that they had to keep everything from collapsing? Fifth, on the off chance that Corvo did survive (Which Havelock knew as he blatantly stated in said rambling) he knew that he would have pissed Corvo,a badass ninja bodyguard to the empress something fierce. There's a reason why he sent him to take out the court's most high profile targets on their home turf. So why even bother? Sixth, Havelock overthrew Hiram's court for the very things that Havelock ended up imitating anyway except worse. In short: Havelock,Pendelton and Martin seriously didn't see that the whole thing would go badly for them?
Of course. Hell, they even go so far as to attempt to kill both Sokolov and Piero, the two geniuses responsible for creating potions that help stave the plague and whom just might be the ones to find a cure for it. This was never going to go well for them!
Remember that the lure of power and the temptation to abuse it is the central theme in the game. The Lord Regent killed the Empress for the power to save Dunwall from his own screw-ups, but only made things worse. All of Corvo’s targets make themselves vulnerable at key moments because of their corruption. If you listen to your supporter’s dialog, they say that Havlock, Martin, and Pendelton went over the edge the moment they succeeded in regaining control of Dunwall; that becoming leaders “changed them”. Corvo himself potentially ruins Dunwall beyond all hope of recovery by not using his power in a conscientious, responsible way. (High Chaos) The entire game is driven by mankind’s lust for power, and Havlock’s betrayal was intended to showcase how even normally sane, competent people aren’t immune to the madness it brings.
After using the Heart on the Loyalists I was under the impression that Havelock had always been morally bankrupt, so the Loyalist Conspiracy fits with the theme of self-serving aristocrats trying to grab power for themselves and trampling on the poor in the process. The Heart has mostly negative commentary on Pendleton and Havelock, and in Havelock's case even says outright that he has killed for pleasure and previously tried to lead some sort of coup against the Empire.
In fairness, the Heart has mostly negative commentary on pretty much everyone and everything except for Emily. It's pretty cynical, all things considered.
Another thing to remember is that, going by Havelock's journal, he and the other Loyalists are flat-out terrified of Corvo and what he can do, and are worried that he might turn on them. Remember that people often see their own sins and flaws in others; Havelock wants power, and he believes Corvo might want the same, so eliminating Corvo would be required at some point, in his eyes. Corvo's betrayal would be a necessity, not an opportunity, even without Emily.
Why is the Fugue Feast even a thing?
Sanctioned anarchy? Yeah, it sounds fun, but in a period of time where anyone can get away with ANYTHING, it's going to be every man for himself. People will be taking this opportunity to steal, kill, riot, loot and generally do some pretty awful things they've been itching to do all year — so people would have a lot of interest in making sure the Fugue Feast DOESN'T happen because it could put some people's lives, if not everybody's lives, in some serious danger. Sure, criminals are going to be criminals whether it's Fugue Feast time or not, but there would be a LOT of people who'd take advantage of the fact they wouldn't be brought to justice if they killed or seriously hurt someone or their property. How does Dunwall not fall apart during the Fugue Feast? Why is it even allowed?
I suspect the "anything goes" thing is only in theory. I would imagine if you commited murder, blew up a building or similar the Feast would not protect you, it's the little things that get let go and socail taboos are removed. As for why it's allowed, it's pressure valve. Dunwall is a very repressive society at the best of times, that creates serious social tensions. Giving the populace one day a year to just cut loose relieves those tensions somewhat. It's been done in real history, usually to a lesser degree but still.
If you could get away with anything in practice, people wouldn't wear masks for it... besides which, just because you can commit crimes without being prosecuted doesn't mean everyone in the city suddenly flips out and goes on a rampage. Wages paid during the period are going to be just as spendable after it ends - and private security probably get triple pay at this time of year. (Note also that physical security in Dunwall is pretty good - the Office of the High Overseer probably just enters lockdown for a week, and even common grocery shops have steel blast shutters.)
Slackjaw knowing Corvo?
At the beginning of House of Pleasures, Bottle Street Gang members will tell you that Slackjaw's asking to meet you. How? If you've been unseen during the two previous missions, how does Slackjaw even know to ask for you? Did he jusr randomly tell his men "Hey, if you see a Teleporty Guy with some sort of weird Skull Mark, send him over" and he just happened to be 100% correct? If you rescued Griff, he could've learned of you through him, but otherwise he's still aware of you even though he's got no reason or possibility to be. Even if he doesn't know the masked assassin is Corvo, how'd he know about the Mask Assassin when no one's seen him?
He's a criminal kingpin, he knows people who know people. News will make it back to him. It's even possible he's got contacts with the Loyalists.
So Criminal Kingpins are better informed than Spymasters now?
Basically, yeah. Check out the documents on Corvo you can find in the Overseers' headquarters. They predict that because of Corvo's long association with the most rich and powerful people of Dunwall he is most likely hiding somewhere amongst the nobility, and that's where they plan to concentrate their search for him. The antagonists in this game redefine the term Stupid Evil.
Well, technically, Corvo is hiding out among the nobility....
Criminals do tend to be well-informed when it comes to stuff happening on the streets. Maybe they don't know the specifics about Corvo, but they know some basic information about the Loyalists that they're never going to share with the Watch, especially when the Loyalists seem to have used criminal assistance to get Corvo out of the prison. Slackjaw didn't get to where he was by being a fool, and the fact that he knows of Corvo indicates that he's much more clued in than the usual thugs on the street.
So in the low chaos ending we see Corvo standing beside Emily without wearing gloves. In front of the court and Emily. Wouldn't somebody there recognize the Mark and accuse him (rightly) of witchcraft?
Well, in the low chaos ending he's a genuine hero who selflessly saved the very Empire that branded him a traitor and nearly executed him, all with minimal death and destruction. They could all just quietly ignore it. Plus, Outsider-worship is still more common than the Abbey would like to admit, so having that mark wouldn't be seen as an obvious mark of witchcraft.
Plus with Campbell followed by Martin the Abbey has probably taken a knock in power.