FO: NV (General Discussion)

[Tale]

Yes, there was some communication. They didn't replace him because they decided it wasn't worth it. I don't think the Brotherhood was exactly prepared for civil war.

 

I don't see how a civil war would have been created by default. Send a new elder escorted by a dozen loyal paladins. 'sorry to inform you the bos leadership has decided because of your infractions against the codex you are being relieved'. Either the DC elder would have to abide by the rule of law (which I get the impression he prob would if push came to shove) or as you state start a fight with the west coast bos. I don't think he would risk killing any more bos members to start a civil war. In the end he was trying to save the BoS not annex his faction and just doing what he thought was best being so far away from the main group. I didn't get the impression he has a chip on his shoulder and a axe to grind against the main faction on the west coast.

Elder Lyons was not trying to help the Brotherhood survive. He took it as a moral imperative to help the people of the Wasteland. He wouldn't start a fight with the west coast, but he would be damned to stop protecting the people of the DC area. Some of his own men defected because of this and are actively hostile to him for it, including his former second in command. He's basically already in a small civil war over the isse.

Edited December 7, 2010 by Tale

[Amentep]

Yes, there was some communication. They didn't replace him because they decided it wasn't worth it. I don't think the Brotherhood was exactly prepared for civil war.

 

I don't see how a civil war would have been created by default. Send a new elder escorted by a dozen loyal paladins. 'sorry to inform you the bos leadership has decided because of your infractions against the codex you are being relieved'. Either the DC elder would have to abide by the rule of law (which I get the impression he prob would if push came to shove) or as you state start a fight with the west coast bos. I don't think he would risk killing any more bos members to start a civil war. In the end he was trying to save the BoS not annex his faction and just doing what he thought was best being so far away from the main group. I didn't get the impression he has a chip on his shoulder and a axe to grind against the main faction on the west coast.

 

I don't think the west coast Brotherhood had the manpower to go to DC and risk a fight, even if the elder would probably have given in. IIRC didn't the west coast leaders cut off supplies to the DC group? Easier to do an embargo than risk a war.

[Tale]

Not so much an embargo as a refusal to aid.

[TheHarlequin]

Yes, there was some communication. They didn't replace him because they decided it wasn't worth it. I don't think the Brotherhood was exactly prepared for civil war.

 

I don't see how a civil war would have been created by default. Send a new elder escorted by a dozen loyal paladins. 'sorry to inform you the bos leadership has decided because of your infractions against the codex you are being relieved'. Either the DC elder would have to abide by the rule of law (which I get the impression he prob would if push came to shove) or as you state start a fight with the west coast bos. I don't think he would risk killing any more bos members to start a civil war. In the end he was trying to save the BoS not annex his faction and just doing what he thought was best being so far away from the main group. I didn't get the impression he has a chip on his shoulder and a axe to grind against the main faction on the west coast.

Elder Lyons was not trying to help the Brotherhood survive. He took it as a moral imperative to help the people of the Wasteland. He wouldn't start a fight with the west coast, but he would be damned to stop protecting the people of the DC area. Some of his own men defected because of this and are actively hostile to him for it, including his former second in command. He's basically already in a small civil war over the isse.

 

Valid points. However I saw as him taking a semi-FotA route. If I befriend the DC civilians be helping protect them, I can recruit the best of them into the BoS to keep my own goals going. While he was certainly being altruistic I don't think his ENTIRE motivation was so. I think in the big picture he knew, he was cut off and even if still on good terms with the west coast what kind of realistic support could they give him due to sheer distance? He decided to kill 2 birds with one stone. Help the locals and as a result bring more much needed man power into the mix. Again I am not saying he wasn't a forward thinking, kind man. I am simply saying he also wanted to keep the BoS alive and made the best choice to get all his goals met.

[Tale]

He probably lost as many to the Outcasts as he gained from recruiting locals. Though I guess that's baseless speculation. There's no real numbers presented anywhere.

Edited December 7, 2010 by Tale

[WorstUsernameEver]

Valid points. However I saw as him taking a semi-FotA route. If I befriend the DC civilians be helping protect them, I can recruit the best of them into the BoS to keep my own goals going. While he was certainly being altruistic I don't think his ENTIRE motivation was so. I think in the big picture he knew, he was cut off and even if still on good terms with the west coast what kind of realistic support could they give him due to sheer distance? He decided to kill 2 birds with one stone. Help the locals and as a result bring more much needed man power into the mix. Again I am not saying he wasn't a forward thinking, kind man. I am simply saying he also wanted to keep the BoS alive and made the best choice to get all his goals met.

 

You got it backwards, he was cut off BECAUSE he helped the locals.

[TheHarlequin]

He probably lost as many to the Outcasts as he gained from recruiting locals. Though I guess that's baseless speculation. There's no real numbers presented anywhere.

 

Lets assume that's true (seemed to me there were at least 2x more recruits training at the citadel then there were outcasts however) its still better to break even then be at a loss, no?

[TheHarlequin]

Valid points. However I saw as him taking a semi-FotA route. If I befriend the DC civilians be helping protect them, I can recruit the best of them into the BoS to keep my own goals going. While he was certainly being altruistic I don't think his ENTIRE motivation was so. I think in the big picture he knew, he was cut off and even if still on good terms with the west coast what kind of realistic support could they give him due to sheer distance? He decided to kill 2 birds with one stone. Help the locals and as a result bring more much needed man power into the mix. Again I am not saying he wasn't a forward thinking, kind man. I am simply saying he also wanted to keep the BoS alive and made the best choice to get all his goals met.

 

You got it backwards, he was cut off BECAUSE he helped the locals.

 

I get that. I am simply speaking from a logistic point of view. From what NV has showed us the west coast BoS is in rough shape. My point is even if lyons was their golden child in still in their good graces how much 'support' could they really give him with 3000 miles between them? The trickle of support would seem moot considering their adversities in DC

 

I think lyons would HAVE to go grabbing local recruits and resources eventually no matter his standing with the west coast bos.

Edited December 7, 2010 by TheHarlequin

[Tale]

You kind of get to hoping that Veronica heads East. I think she'd be happy that way.

[TheHarlequin]

You kind of get to hoping that Veronica heads East. I think she'd be happy that way.

 

I would agree. I think shes resourceful enough to survive the trip if she stuck to major roadways.

[WorstUsernameEver]

The Brotherhood had already accomplished its mission though. There was really no need for protection in the first place.

[LadyCrimson]

So do you have to have played the other Fallouts to understand the whole BoS thing? I see people talk about them all the time, and to me they were very boring in NV. I don't find their motivations interesting at all.

[CoM_Solaufein]

You would understand them better by playing the first two Fallouts and even Tactics gives off some ideas on who they really are.

[sorophx]

ironic. one would expect Tactics to give the whole idea of who they are damn Micro Forte, couldn't they do a little bit more research?

[Starwars]

So do you have to have played the other Fallouts to understand the whole BoS thing? I see people talk about them all the time, and to me they were very boring in NV. I don't find their motivations interesting at all.

 

The first game is the one that really sets them up and features them fairly heavily in its "original iteration" so to speak. I enjoyed how they were portrayed in NV but it's hard to really "connect" with them so to speak since the fact remains that it's a small outpost that is representative of the faction but is still... well, cut off from the main faction. You don't really get to "dig into the faction", just this small outpost.

 

I always found the East Brotherhood to swallow in terms of how they supposedly trekked all across a dangerous post-apoc country while they were previously shown off as being very isolated and hestitant to even thoroughly explore the areas around them. One can make the argument that, oh, things change and so forth. But think I the main interesting point about the Brotherhood is that they could be a potentially very powerful player in the wasteland but they essentially doom themselves by how isolationist they are, and how hard it is for them to really get moving. I always thought it'd be a nice destiny for them to sort of just "fade away" into the wasteland, as a result of their own actions (or lack of actions) rather. And I really didn't like that the Lyon's part of it seems to basically be more of a version of the Followers, except with vast resources. I think it's gonna take a big writing effort to make East Coast Brotherhood an interesting faction if they decide to revisit them for upcoming games.

 

I think OEI did a good job in that sense when it comes to the Mojave chapter, because it really feels like they're struggling despite their extraordinary equipment. NCR managed to beat them back because they have been active in bolstering their numbers while the Brotherhood, while well trained, simply can't stand against the numbers.

[entrerix]

the only game i felt did a good job with the brotherhood was fallout 1.

 

so LC: if you're interested in the faction, play the original game. once you get the hang of how it works (READ THE MANUAL FIRST, start with 9-10 agility) the game is still very playable and enjoyable.

[LadyCrimson]

but they essentially doom themselves by how isolationist they are

I think that's why I find them dull. I'm not into serious isolationism in stories because I don't understand it. Individually I can understand introversion and a strong lack of desire to be face-to-face social very often, but isolationist is another matter. It's not interesting because it makes for a static/dull culture, and one that's likely doomed in the long run because of it, as you mention. Although I do realize in NV they were trying to lessen that aspect of themselves a bit.

Edited December 8, 2010 by LadyCrimson

[Cantousent]

What I find ridiculous is that the BoS in New Vegas is hellbent on being terminally moribund, but it's ridiculous within the story. I don't think that's bad design because there are organizations that seem hellbent on their own destruction. Not only that, but many of those organizations have come back from the brink to surge in power or influence. Sure, more often they just end up difting to the bottom of the 'trash heap of history,' but the fact that it's not unreasonable for someone to change the downward path after the culmination of the game gives future design teams enough flexibility.

 

As they've developed, the BoS deserves to die. I liked them, but if their attitude remains as it is, they are eventually going to be consumed or destroyed. Particularly egregious is McNamara's explicit admission that he realizes that his course spells the doom of the organization. Yes, they can survive a while longer by allying with other powers in the west, but they cannot survive in the long run without changing their ways. Political organisms that do not adpat to new situations die off.

[Tigranes]

Cant put it perfectly - they are ridiculous within the story. BOS were never meant to be the face of Fallout; they are not the heroes of the post-apocalyptic world, and arguably only barely a major player in the entire timeline. They are not meant to be like the NCR. I think it's perfectly suitable that they fade out due to their extreme isolationism - I think it would be ridiculous if in a postapocalyptic world every organisation had a classical trajectory of rise and fall. It makes a lot more sense that despite doing so many things right, some factions with good motives would fall apart and die out, leaving their work undone and adding to that wasteland setting.

 

I mean, the FO setting in a whole was never about giant robots and large armies in power armour marching around the wasteland. It's always been about the strange juxtaposition of vast populations without water or power intersecting with several organisations or individuals who at certain points would have access to amazing technology and power. I don't think the BOS 'prospering' in a general sense would do much to make the setting interesting.

[Orchomene]

but they essentially doom themselves by how isolationist they are

I think that's why I find them dull. I'm not into serious isolationism in stories because I don't understand it. Individually I can understand introversion and a strong lack of desire to be face-to-face social very often, but isolationist is another matter. It's not interesting because it makes for a static/dull culture, and one that's likely doomed in the long run because of it, as you mention. Although I do realize in NV they were trying to lessen that aspect of themselves a bit.

 

You need to play fallout 1 to understand more, I think. In fallout, the world is just about emerging from the war, less than a century before. There are small settlements and some are trying to organize and could be the begining of a new civilization, but only if you have a good imagination because those settlements are nothing but grains.

The BoS was created to be sure humanity would not lose the technology and knowledge that existed before the war. They had to be isolated to avoid influencing the new settlements with those technoogies because giving to much firepower to instable groups would just tranform the new world into an even more bloody battleground.

Strating from fallout 2 and onward, there are groups that seem to be large enough to give some stability and the BoS could thus change their point of views. It's a bit visible in fallout 2 with the small BoS outpost in major towns : they are here to observe and decide when it will be the good moment.

In fallout 3, the BoS attitude is strange because they are destabilizing the already too unstable settlements, but Lyons thinks it's a necessity because of the mutant threat.

In Fallout NV, the BoS has already missed he point the BoS could have changed and are just remants of the past surrounded by a state (the NCR). They have no more goals, they are just relics from the past and are dommed to disappear.

 

As you can see, there was ogic in the begining for the isolationism. But this isolationist should have evolved. The BoS was just too rigid to evolve and we could already have predicted it in fallout 1 : they needed to be rigid in the fallout 1 world to survive, but this rigidity would become a burden in the future.

[TheHarlequin]

but they essentially doom themselves by how isolationist they are

I think that's why I find them dull. I'm not into serious isolationism in stories because I don't understand it. Individually I can understand introversion and a strong lack of desire to be face-to-face social very often, but isolationist is another matter. It's not interesting because it makes for a static/dull culture, and one that's likely doomed in the long run because of it, as you mention. Although I do realize in NV they were trying to lessen that aspect of themselves a bit.

 

You need to play fallout 1 to understand more, I think. In fallout, the world is just about emerging from the war, less than a century before. There are small settlements and some are trying to organize and could be the begining of a new civilization, but only if you have a good imagination because those settlements are nothing but grains.

The BoS was created to be sure humanity would not lose the technology and knowledge that existed before the war. They had to be isolated to avoid influencing the new settlements with those technoogies because giving to much firepower to instable groups would just tranform the new world into an even more bloody battleground.

Strating from fallout 2 and onward, there are groups that seem to be large enough to give some stability and the BoS could thus change their point of views. It's a bit visible in fallout 2 with the small BoS outpost in major towns : they are here to observe and decide when it will be the good moment.

In fallout 3, the BoS attitude is strange because they are destabilizing the already too unstable settlements, but Lyons thinks it's a necessity because of the mutant threat.

In Fallout NV, the BoS has already missed he point the BoS could have changed and are just remants of the past surrounded by a state (the NCR). They have no more goals, they are just relics from the past and are dommed to disappear.

 

As you can see, there was ogic in the begining for the isolationism. But this isolationist should have evolved. The BoS was just too rigid to evolve and we could already have predicted it in fallout 1 : they needed to be rigid in the fallout 1 world to survive, but this rigidity would become a burden in the future.

 

QFT

 

Wow.. thats about the best synopsis of the BoS I think I have ever read. That is really well done!

 

It's hard to just jump into fo3 and 'get it' without playing fo1 and 2, at least when the BoS are concerned. As they have a very detailed and deep background. Much more so then you see in DC or NV and while they gave a basic overview you loose the context and their actions/reasoning's from the past games to give their current attitudes that very context. As he said above the BoS was almost like star fleet in ST and the prime directive back in fo1 and 2. They horded tech so to keep it out of the hands of those that would abuse it and cause another great war. They see themselves as pre-war technology's guardians. However again, as stated above they sadly have not evolved with their views as time marched on and they are now becoming a relic, and thus moot, of the past. As civilization is starting to take hold again and thus their entire point of existing is side lined.

[WorstUsernameEver]

This guy apparently did focus testing for Dead Money

 

He's obviously under NDA so he doesn't really spill much. I wouldn't too if I was posting in a forum where Josh Sawyer was likely to notice me spilling the beans.

 

EDIT: Emphasis, of course, on the "apparently".

Edited December 8, 2010 by WorstUsernameEver

[LadyCrimson]

I still don't agree with the isolationist thing. I can understand wanting to preserve the tech and not wanting to 'hand it out' willy nilly because it might be dangerous, but that doesn't have to equate to societal isolationism.

Edited December 8, 2010 by LadyCrimson

[Tale]

They view the abovegrounders as unwashed mutants. Their perspective is not dissimilar from the Enclave, just without the genocidal cleansing.

[TheHarlequin]

They view the abovegrounders as unwashed mutants. Their perspective is not dissimilar from the Enclave, just without the genocidal cleansing.

 

Indeed. In fact in FO1 doesn't one of the BoS for the most part call your PC such or something similar? They see themselves as the last vestige of pure old world breeding stock and thus the legit heirs to make these kind of decisions of who gets what from pre-war tech. As a result they see themselves as better then the masses in the wasteland. Hence why deal with them? they are dirty, inbreed, radioactive, uneducated trash in their view. Plus we have most of all the hi tech weapons so when you have the firepower you don't need to reach out to others, they need to fear you instead and get out of your way. (As least by their logic)

Edited December 8, 2010 by TheHarlequin