Lore inconsistencies

[Forbidden]

Elder: Hey there Initiate whatwasyourname, bring me a coffee!
Initiate: No can do, Sir, the Chain That Binds does not allow me taking your direct orders.

There's a very big difference between an order and "orders". What they're really talking about is more colloquially "assignments". It's about the chain of command. A general can give an order to anyone under his command to get him some coffee. But a general isn't supposed to find a captain and tell him to take a certain hill. The general is supposed to tell his colonel, who tells the major, who tells the captain. As a general rule, you're only supposed to get orders from your immediate commanding officer and only give orders to those immediately under your command.

Chain of command is there for several good reasons. It helps to prevent contradictory orders (i.e. general says one thing and major says another). Along those lines, it reinforces the authority of the individual commander of his immediate subordinates. It also keeps a certain distance between the higher ups and those they are directly ordering to do very dangerous things.

It wasn't made up for the BoS, but has been used in militaries for quite some time.

EDIT: The elder can give the courier or vault dweller direct orders because the courier/vault dweller is outside the chain of command. If the courier had been assigned to be under Paladin Hardin's command, then the elder would have to give Hardin the order.

EDIT2: Now that I think about it a bit more, I should really make it more clear. It's not as much about rank as the above might suggest. A general, for instance, might have a captain directly on his staff. That general would give orders directly to that captain. At the same time, it would be improper for a Colonel who isn't on the General's staff to give orders to that Captain.

 

[Nalano]

Canon is Fallout 3 took place in an alternate universe where everyone's Intelligence score was actually -57 and thus everything wrong about the game could be attributed to gross mental retardation amongst the entire populace.

Just because we hate it doesn't make it any less canon.

Star Wars Episodes 1-3 are canon, for example.

Return of the Jedi was the last Star Wars movie made and everything after Aliens never happened.

That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

But back on topic, my point still stands: If you accept FOT or FO3's depiction of the BoS having standing armies and openly going on the offensive, you can't reconcile that with FONV's taking the FO1 and FO2 route of secretive, small-numbered social recluses. Or, to put it another way, just because they were seen as cool doesn't give the writers carte blanche to make them the primary faction - especially when it doesn't work.

Sorta like the HVN problem.

 

[Stanislao Moulinsky]

Fire ants were created in FO3 by the experiments of doctor Lesko but somehow they are in NV.

 

[Ausir]

If you accept FOT or FO3's depiction of the BoS having standing armies and openly going on the offensive, you can't reconcile that with FONV's taking the FO1 and FO2 route of secretive, small-numbered social recluses.

You forgot about them having lost a war with the NCR.

 

[GreyViper]

Did they really lose it or are they still stalemate in California. Problem is, if BoS did indeed lose in California, then it would have been big news. Somehow I dont see BoS going out with out a big bang. Thats what I didn't like about NV, the NCR-BoS war. Since in VB it ended with another society collapse. My problem with this is that they dent expand on the subject NCR/BoS conflict back west. Part of me kind of hopes that the MidWestern BOS would come and cleans the slate clean there, eradicating both waring factions .

 

[Lexx]

I personally like the BoS <-> NCR war in Van Buren much more. The BoS lost at Hoover Dam and not in a punny fight of 'lil Helios One. The scale in VB just felt much bigger than in FNV, now I can't feel anything else than the New Vegas BoS is yet another splinter group of "the real" Broterhood in the west. It just gets so damn tired now for me. I bet the next Fallout game in whatever-town will have yet another BoS splinter group. One could start arguing then, if the BoS is really organized or if they just make everyone think they are.

 

[Forbidden]

But back on topic, my point still stands: If you accept FOT or FO3's depiction of the BoS having standing armies and openly going on the offensive, you can't reconcile that with FONV's taking the FO1 and FO2 route of secretive, small-numbered social recluses. Or, to put it another way, just because they were seen as cool doesn't give the writers carte blanche to make them the primary faction - especially when it doesn't work.

My understanding of this, and I perfectly admit that I am not an expert on this, it came about form this: After Fallout 1, the Brotherhood sent out troops to help clear out the remnants of the Master's army alongside the nascient NCR. Those combatants that had gone out and fought alongside the people in the wastes were no longer content to hide in bunkers anymore. To avoid the conflict, the BoS sent the active and liberal elements east.

 

[Stanislao Moulinsky]

To avoid the conflict, the BoS sent the active and liberal elements east.

A century later?

 

[Forbidden]

To avoid the conflict, the BoS sent the active and liberal elements east.

A century later?

Well, they're slow. Power armor is bloody heavy stuff.

Fallout2 is less than 20 years before fallout3. The brotherhood reached the capitol wasteland roughly 20 years before fallout3 (they got there before the lone wanderer was born). So that means the activist brotherhood elements had to have left california before the events of fallout2, but after the events of fallout1.

 

[Ausir]

I personally like the BoS <-> NCR war in Van Buren much more. The BoS lost at Hoover Dam and not in a punny fight of 'lil Helios One. The scale in VB just felt much bigger than in FNV, now I can't feel anything else than the New Vegas BoS is yet another splinter group of "the real" Broterhood in the west. It just gets so damn tired now for me. I bet the next Fallout game in whatever-town will have yet another BoS splinter group. One could start arguing then, if the BoS is really organized or if they just make everyone think they are.

Actually, the conflict in Mojave is just a small part of the BoS-NCR war. There are mentions of the war being on a much larger scale back west, with Colonel Moore being promoted so early to such post for her work during four tours of duty against the Brotherhood back in California. And the Mojave chapter is not a splinter faction, since they are only currently cut off from communication with Lost Hills, but they did not decide to disobey orders or split off like the Midwestern BOS or CW BOS did.

Fallout2 is less than 20 years before fallout3. The brotherhood reached the capitol wasteland roughly 20 years before fallout3 (they got there before the lone wanderer was born). So that means the activist brotherhood elements had to have left california before the events of fallout2, but after the events of fallout1.

Actually, FO3 is 36 years after FO2. They left Lost Hills in 2254, 13 years after FO2. And looks like you're confusing the story from FOT (which was between FO1 and 2, and featured an expedition comprising of more expansionist elements sent out to destroy the remnants of the Master's army) with the one from FO3, which was a completely different expedition, sent do DC to investigate the rumors about another breed of super mutants found there and to salvage tech.

 

[Forbidden]

Actually, FO3 is 36 years after FO2. They left Lost Hills in 2254, 13 years after FO2.

Ah, I see where I went wrong... I just looked up when F3 began on the wiki as 2258, but that's when the lone wanderer is born, not when he leaves the vault. My mistake. If the lone wanderer had left the vault in 2258, the time periods would have lined up quite nicely.

And looks like you're confusing the story from FOT (which was between FO1 and 2, and featured an expedition comprising of more expansionist elements sent out to destroy the remnants of the Master's army) with the one from FO3, which was a completely different expedition, sent do DC to investigate the rumors about another breed of super mutants found there and to salvage tech.

I thought they were the same expedition, just that the "midwest brotherhood" stopped there and the capitol wasteland brother had kept going. That's why they had somewhat similar tendencies.

 

[Ausir]

Nope, totally different expeditions, 100 years apart. According to the official guide, one of the Lyons expedition's goals was actually to re-establish contact with the Chicago chapter. However, the Midwestern BoS is considered "rogue" according to one of the FO3 scribes.

 

[darby70]

To all up in here who want fallout 3 not too be canon, or obsidian say "hey you know that fallout 3 thing? Never happened." I'm sorry to inform you that in interviews with the obsidian team, many who worked on New Vegas, those interviewed stated that the team loved fallout 3 and it's story. So Obsidian is sticking with this, I believe it was Chris Avellone who said that the fallout franchise doesn't belong to any one person or group, but to everyone who makes a fallout game or story.

 

[darby70]

Also I like the people in here who know that fallout 3's BOS is a different and separate sect from the rest of the BOS.

 

[KillerBee256]

How long after the end of fallout Tactics would Lyons's expedition have passed throught? How much would the midwestern botherhood have changed from what was shown in tactics's ending during that time.

 

[Hassknecht]

Fire ants were created in FO3 by the experiments of doctor Lesko but somehow they are in NV.

Well, there were giant ants and fire geckos in Fallout 2... Maybe they had a more intimate relationſhip and made cute little fire ants

 

[brfritos]

Just because we hate it doesn't make it any less canon.

Star Wars Episodes 1-3 are canon, for example.

That is technically true but I think at some point its the fans who then decide what they like and what they do not like.

(Its quite questionable if Fallout 3 fans are Fallout fans, they did not care about the franchise before.
Money may talk but it shows what kind of people the publishers are)

Also, Bethesda may have the IP rights but they are not the creative minds behind Fallout.
Heck they could not even come up with their own ideas, and their expanding of original ideas like the Vault Experiments and the Enclave was terrible.

Should the IP ever be bought by another company, Obsidian hopefully I hope they declare all Zenimax Bethesda created ideas to be non canon.

As for Star Wars, when George Lucas made those movies I think he pretty much lost all credibility with the Star Wars fans.

I think the opposite, Obsidian did a marvelous job wrap things up between FO 1/2/3, FT and BoS.
Of ocurse some inconsistences could happen, but in overall they put all the events of the game's universe in a coherent manner and created a robust timeline to follow.

I think this should be praised.

For those complaining about Fire Ants or Fire Geckos, take a look in the ecosystem of Australia and you will understand what happens when you introduce a species that don't have natural predators or procriate fast (like ants).

[ ]'s

 

[The Dutch Ghost]

Tastes differ, and I do not feel like praising Bethesda's Fallout 3.

 

[Ausir]

How long after the end of fallout Tactics would Lyons's expedition have passed throught? How much would the midwestern botherhood have changed from what was shown in tactics's ending during that time.

56 years.

 

[Stanislao Moulinsky]

For those complaining about Fire Ants or Fire Geckos, take a look in the ecosystem of Australia and you will understand what happens when you introduce a species that don't have natural predators or procriate fast (like ants).[ ]'s

In three years they moved from Washington DC to New Vegas? Mh... :S