PDA

View Full Version : Charles Lee plot inconsistencies? (SPOILERS)



The Machine 407
11-16-2012, 10:37 AM
Okay, so 2 things in particular are bugging me about Charles Lee.

1. He was present at Connor's failed execution, and disappears after Connor escapes and kills Hickey. Did Washington know that Lee was in on that plot too? Afterwards, if you converse with Washington Connor will say "Any word on Lee?" to which Washington replies that no, he's been preoccupied with their missing supplies. This seems a little inconsistent, because later on it seems as if Charles Lee is still part of the Continental Army. Which brings me to my next point:

2. The Templars are supposedly sided with the patriots in an attempt to separate them from the British and place a Templar (Lee) as it's leader. So, why would Charles Lee get Connor's village to attack the Patriot encampment, and then ride to Monmouth to sell the patriots out? This doesn't make sense, and it's incredibly inconsistent.

Enlighten me, please!

InfectedNation
11-16-2012, 02:55 PM
1. Not too sure. Other characters appear to think that Hickey acted alone.

2. Charles Lee wanted the battle of Monmouth to screw up for the Patriots because Washington was leading the battle and Lee aimed to make it look like his fault and have him removed as Commander. However, Connor and Layfette both vouch that it was Lee who gave the misleading orders, so he is court-martialed.

And I think the whole thing about Connor's village people was an attempt to turn them against him so he no longer had any support or reason to fight.
"Even those men you sought to save have turned their backs on you. Yet you fight! You resist! Why?”

Krayus Korianis
11-16-2012, 03:31 PM
"Even those men you sought to save have turned their backs on you. Yet you fight! You resist! Why?”

"Because someone has to."

InfectedNation
11-16-2012, 04:36 PM
* "Because no one else will!"

The Machine 407
11-17-2012, 05:44 AM
Okay, I just completed the Battle of Monmouth, so that second point makes sense. However, the first part of the original post stands. Why would Connor ask "Any word on Lee?" It just doesn't make sense if Washington had thought Hickey was working alone.

Gianavel
11-17-2012, 07:46 AM
Washington was suspicious of Lee after the failed assassination attempt, and was looking for Lee could be questioned. However, he wasn't convinced that Lee was involved, and had other, more pressing matters like politicing to keep his position as Commander in Chief, not to mention trying to win a war.