|
Interesting tidbit from JE Sawyer's formspring that might answer some questions regarding the independent ending...Sawyer posted:Why'd you imply that Yes Man was going to take over in the Independent ending? After going to all the work to take Vegas over myself it was kind of a bummer to learn Dave Foley was going to take it all away. Edit: Also, all the discussions about the Legion, the White Legs, the whole situation in the Mojave... I'm loving just reading about it. Baron von der Loon fucked around with this message at 13:21 on Oct 11, 2011 |
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 13:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 18, 2024 01:38 |
|
|
J Bjelke-Postersen posted:I went in with Cass and used my terrifying presence to make them go "hmmm you probably could kill us all" then i started to chuck grenades everywhere before opening up with the grenade machine gun. I lost all the gear but it was fun to blow everything up. I just delivered Cass to them - she was burned into an ash pile by their energy weapons. Funny thing is that the only item left in the ashpile was an empty bottle of whiskey - seemed fitting 
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 15:09
|
|
|
Okay, really stupid question, but here goes. I'm on my third playthrough and I figured I might try some other companions than Boone and E-DE. Thing is: I'm really nervous what will happen when I tell Boone to go hang around in Novac. Will he disappear? And if so; when? Now? In a month? At all? I guess my fear comes from Fallout 1&2 when there were so many bugs, you never knew what the hell was gonna happen if you told Ian or Marcus to stay put. So please goons, tell me how the companion system works. I trust only you.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 17:09
|
|
|
Death by Cranes posted:I'm really nervous what will happen when I tell Boone to go hang around in Novac. Will he disappear? No. And why should you care if you're trying some non-Boone companions!
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 17:15
|
|
|
Death by Cranes posted:Okay, really stupid question, but here goes. I'll add another question... if I want a human companion to wield the unique Super Sledge I found, who would be best?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 17:17
|
|
|
Lily
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 17:20
|
|
|
That may not cover the "human companion" part.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 17:25
|
|
|
Happy Noodle Boy posted:That may not cover the "human companion" part. Enclave scum 
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 17:26
|
|
|
Lily is probably a bit to disturbing to be part of my company. Maybe I'll go with Boone instead. Do companion weapons deteriorate over time, or can I just give him the Gobi Campaign sniper rifle and forget about him?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 17:29
|
|
|
Death by Cranes posted:Okay, really stupid question, but here goes. He'll just wait in his T-Rex perch, if I remember correctly. "Is it time?"
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 17:30
|
|
|
MrL_JaKiri posted:Enclave scum I always put the enclave poison in the purifier.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 17:31
|
|
|
LLCoolJD posted:Lily is probably a bit to disturbing to be part of my company. Maybe I'll go with Boone instead. Do companion weapons deteriorate over time, or can I just give him the Gobi Campaign sniper rifle and forget about him? As long as you keep feeding him ammo he should be fine. Companion weapons never deteriorate. There's a fairly small chance he'll get the gun shot out of his hands, though, so be careful. edit: LLCoolJD posted:I'll add another question... if I want a human companion to wield the unique Super Sledge I found, who would be best? Cass, actually. She's got melee weapons as a tag skill so she should be fairly lethal with it. Also so does Boone. So basically either of them but not Veronica. She's unarmed and energy weapons only. Dush fucked around with this message at 17:36 on Oct 11, 2011 |
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 17:33
|
|
|
Eiba posted:I was killing people right and left so casually, that at first I didn't understand what Daniel was even saying... You're trying to end this in such a way that they... don't kill people? Why? How? The thing is, his way of achieving "the Sorrows don't have to kill people" is to have other people kill people for them. It's not that Daniel is going Ghandi on us suddenly and revealing that violence isn't the way, it's that he fully intends on forcing other people to kill other people so that one group of people who have not had to kill people don't have to as a whole. That's it. So, the Sorrow haven't had much need or call to kill people due to their isolation. War is largely alien to them at this point, yes. But I don't see how it is at all a moral response to a world where violence is a necessity to ultimately just redirect the burden of violence to someone else that you don't care about as much and act like you're accomplishing a great deed for humanity / religion through it. Daniel's system is entirely that the Sorrows won't need to kill because the New-Caananites will kill for them! And the Dead Horses! What, the Dead Horses are a tribe that they're trying to convert to Mormonism too? Daniel doesn't care, because the Sorrow are so innocent! Let them kill as many people as necessary to protect the Sorrows, so long as the Sorrows don't feel complicit.  Non-violence is all well and good, but the world of Fallout is currently in a state of ongoing anarchy. It's pretty much Dark Ages Europe when you get down to it, in terms of the factional splatter and current conflicts. It's possible for you to avoid war and violence if you're located within one of the few major governments (e.g., you're deep in NCR territory), but that's entirely because other people were violent before you came around and formed that fiefdom. The difference being that NCR doesn't have a single ethnic tribe or group they relegate for service, everyone can serve and maintain the protection, with benefits given to them. There is a level of personal choice in it. What Daniel is doing is sheltering the Sorrows as people, treating them as honorable savages that need total preservation, belittling them and their ways. Hell, look how he's been holding information from members of the Sorrows because he's afraid it'll "make them feel bad". Daniel I think the lady will be able to handle learning her husband died. Yes, that sucks, but stop attempting to be God and make decisions on what other people can choose. ... Which is really the core of it, when you get down to it. The three major figures in Honest Hearts, Daniel, Joshua, and the Survivalist, are all essentially out to make themselves God through their actions. They don't necessarily FEEL like they're being God, but it's them kind of struggling with their religion (well, for Daniel and Joshua) and finding a way to deal with it in a world of ultimate violence and depravity. Daniel attempts to shelter people from the world given to them and take back the "Fruit of Knowledge" so that they remain pure. He's trying to hide them from the world that he, and ostensibly his God, created. Meanwhile, Joshua wishes to exact revenge on those who have sinned against him and his family, and desires to make his wrath and judgment ultimate and unforgiving like the his image of his God. But he knows he isn't, and struggles with it. Rather neat though!
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 17:41
|
|
|
Fag Boy Jim posted:where's the mod that gives ED-E a little first recon beret to wear, that's the best mod ever 1st ED-Econ, my favorite mod http://www.newvegasnexus.com/downloads/file.php?id=36673
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 17:44
|
|
|
Dush posted:There's a fairly small chance he'll get the gun shot out of his hands, though, so be careful. That's actually one of the things that really, really annoy me about FNV. It's obviously more of an issue with melee / unarmed weapons. I stopped counting on how many occasions I've had to cheat myself a new Pushy or Oh, Baby! because Veronica / Lily dropped them when they've had their arms crippled in a battle, only for me to notice half an hour later. A simple pop-up or at least a message in the top-left corner of the screen saying "Your companion dropped their weapon" would go a long way to make this utter annoyance at least somewhat bearable.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 18:10
|
|
|
Zorak posted:Well, to stick with the Dark Ages analogy, monks were regarded as holy and a large amount of struggle and resources were put into sustaining them as a class because having a class of people who weren't constantly engaged in the dirty work of a sin-cursed world was considered an overall good. I mean the real situation was much more complex than that but the notion that we all are given hope if a few elect can aspire to the ideals the rest cannot reach is not one the dude just came up with (it's also why people are cool with billionaires). A democratic aspect to it might be nice I guess, but democratic ideals have pretty much (justifiably) been cast by the wayside in Fallout, and choosing the lifestyle or having it materially benefit the holy men themselves were never relevant concepts. Either you just naturally are something precious or you're not. Tubgirl Cosplay fucked around with this message at 18:53 on Oct 11, 2011 |
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 18:14
|
|
|
Death by Cranes posted:Okay, really stupid question, but here goes. As already said, he'll return to Novac but if you can't find him on the dino try his room. If you visited Lucky 38 you can tell all companions to go there too. Each companion returns to the place you first saw them except Raul. E-DE (Primm Moj. Express Office), Cass (Mojave Outpost North, at the bar), Lily (Jacobstown), Arcade (Mormon Fort), Rex (Freeside), Raul (to his shack, it will be marked on your map close to Nellis AFB), Veronica (Outpost 188).
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 18:34
|
|
|
Zorak posted:I don't think you're being entirely fair to Daniel there, he wasn't the one who brought the Dead Horses to Zion, and if he feels the New Canaanites should take the blow its because he believes that were it not for New Canaanites the Sorrows never would have drawn the attention of the White Legs at all. And I think its a little strange to say that Joshua, Daniel, and The Survivalist specifically are the ones that are out to make themselves God and not include the player in that - or for that matter anyone who ever tries to make a difference. If anything, I'd say they're all trying very specifically not to make themselves God but if there's anything the Logs show us its that such an attempt is futile.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 18:48
|
|
|
I read it as the Survivalist being an overall metaphor for (the presumably Christian) God, while Daniel and Joshua offer competing theological interpretations of the Bible. Joshua is the eye-for-an-eye Old Testament while Daniel is the turn-the-other-cheek New Testament. Significantly, neither offer an accurate interpretation of what the Survivalist wanted for Zion's inhabitants. Daniel and Joshua are at opposite ends of the spectrum - Daniel is the "love and kindness" and Joshua is the "righteous anger" - whereas the Survivalist/God is the spectrum. It's not enough to say that Joshua is correct because the Survivalist said to strike back with righteous anger against those who would do them harm, because what if striking back means the annihilation of the Innocents? Is that what God would have wanted? And it's not enough to say Daniel was correct because the Survivalist/the Father/God bequeathed them Zion and said it was theirs to protect and enjoy - in that case, would He want them to give it up so readily? It's significant 'God' died long before his theology would be tested, and that he isn't around to condemn or reward his disciples and their individual interpretations of his teachings. The Survivalist/God does not offer concrete, non-contradictory answers, and the best Joshua or Daniel can do is try to live up to his expectations with their limited information and without validation. HH is more clever than I initially gave it credit.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 19:11
|
|
|
I can't take Roxie out of X-8 and I don't want to live anymore 
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 19:14
|
|
|
AlmightyBob posted:I can't take Roxie out of X-8 and I don't want to live anymore You're not supposed to. Hey, if you go through an American High course with her, in the epilogue, it is revealed that she ends up building puppies with Rex.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 19:36
|
|
|
The reason the Survivalist views the Sorrows as so innocent is because he only interacted with them when they were literally children. When they arrived he says the oldest were probably 13 and then he dies a year later. I guess the values the Survivalist taught a bunch of children persisted to the values of their society. It's a sweet story, but the problem with Daniel is that he's a holier-than-thou rear end in a top hat racist (well the tribals arent different races but you know what I mean) who still sees tribals as children who need to be protected, when actually they're responsible adults and protecting them comes at their great detriment. If pretending the world's dangers don't exist isn't wrong enough now, what about later, when Daniel grows too old to protect them from all the nasty people out there? The world is a dangerous place with a lot of dangerous people in it. The high concept of "innocence" isn't enough of a reason to basically throw the tribals to the dogs after Daniel dies. Joshua's reasons aren't any less inappropriate than Daniel's but at least his actions help the tribals gain independence. Which is what I think the Survivalist was going for, had he lived longer. A couple quotes from his journal: "I tell them I'm giving them Zion as a gift to make up for all the sorrows of their lives so far and all the sorrows man has visited on man. I tell them to be kind to each other and modest. I tell them never to hurt each other but that if someone else comes along and tries to hurt them to strike back with righteous anger. Stuff like that ... Told them that it would be up to them to handle things on their own from now on, that I'd be silent but still watching and still caring." From these words I don't think he would have wanted them to remain as children for the rest of their lives, but to stand up and be responsible for themselves. You can do that with love and mercy, without being an rear end in a top hat, which is another thing he was trying to impart. I will say though that this discussion has made me rethink about a lot of HH, to the extent that I'm somehow actually looking forward to replaying it. And even though I didn't really like the DLC, you dont know how happy I am that the story is this ambiguous and discussable instead of the simple good vs evil story so many video games settle for. edit: About the characters and player acting as gods: That is a very interesting viewpoint. I thought it was a little frustrating from a narrative standpoint that I had to make a choice in the matter, and moreover that my fairly banal choice (I'm just trying to go home here, I have no real stake) would determine the future moral path of each tribe. Like if I help wipe out the White Legs the tribes start becoming more violent towards themselves and each other because I've suddenly shown them the horror of violence. I don't like feeling like God, in that sense. I just want to do what I think is right without my small choice having massive consequences for entire cultures. I know it's a video game and that video game characters have no self-determinism and no choice but to react to the player, but I feel I know what the characters in HH are talking about when they complain about being venerated like gods. I'm just a man. Lets Fuck Bro fucked around with this message at 19:50 on Oct 11, 2011 |
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 19:37
|
|
|
Since we're talking Honest Hearts and violence, did anyone else notice, if you took the "kill all White Legs" path, that the Dead Horses and Sorrows that attacked with you were straight-up executing White Legs prisoners? As in, kneeling hands-raised WL getting a .45 jammed upside his head and shot? Or the one kneeling on a cliff edge, that takes a fire bomb and demonstrates gravity? Maybe it was my Sneering Imperialist perk, but I don't recall seeing that poo poo during my first (night-time) final battle...
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 19:57
|
|
|
CommanderCoffee posted:You're not supposed to. Hey, if you go through an American High course with her, in the epilogue, it is revealed that she ends up building puppies with Rex. Awww... She didn't make it in my game
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 20:10
|
|
|
Dush posted:If you're on PC and Ulysses thinks you're with the wrong faction, you can always use the console to make your rep with NCR, Legion and Strip neutral. That'll give you the Independent dialogue, and you can fix it right back up afterwards. Actually I found this mod which also helps greatly
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 20:14
|
|
|
randombattle posted:Awww... She didn't make it in my game You can just make a new one 
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 20:24
|
|
|
Ygolonac posted:Since we're talking Honest Hearts and violence, did anyone else notice, if you took the "kill all White Legs" path, that the Dead Horses and Sorrows that attacked with you were straight-up executing White Legs prisoners? As in, kneeling hands-raised WL getting a .45 jammed upside his head and shot? Or the one kneeling on a cliff edge, that takes a fire bomb and demonstrates gravity?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 20:46
|
|
|
Zorak posted:The thing is, his way of achieving "the Sorrows don't have to kill people" is to have other people kill people for them. It's not that Daniel is going Ghandi on us suddenly and revealing that violence isn't the way, it's that he fully intends on forcing other people to kill other people so that one group of people who have not had to kill people don't have to as a whole. That's it. If Daniel was okay with wiping out the White Legs for the sake of the Sorrows so long as the Sorrows didn't get their hands dirty... there'd be an option to lead the Dead Horses alone in to exterminate the White Legs. And the whole DLC would be pointless. Daniel's an arrogant douchebag in a lot of ways, and his reasons for relocating are not necessarily mine, but he's not trying to put the sin on another group to save the Sorrow's purity. quote:Non-violence is all well and good, but the world of Fallout is currently in a state of ongoing anarchy. It's pretty much Dark Ages Europe when you get down to it, in terms of the factional splatter and current conflicts. There was a way out for the Sorrow without killing people. If there wasn't a convenient tunnel to escape through, I'm sure even Daniel would help them kill the White Legs in self defense. The issue here is that in the position where you can avoid killing people, but it's a bit harder... well, most people in the wasteland would say gently caress it, and kill the bastard. The idea that someone would try to... not do that, is a really positive one. (And folks in the NCR are conscripted- it's not a volunteer army in the Mojave, even though some people voluntarily join up. I don't think that really has anything to do with anything though.)
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 21:54
|
|
|
Eiba posted:If Daniel was okay with wiping out the White Legs for the sake of the Sorrows so long as the Sorrows didn't get their hands dirty... there'd be an option to lead the Dead Horses alone in to exterminate the White Legs. Except in all of the White Legs endings if you choose to take an Exodus, the Sorrows rely on the Dead Horses to defend them from threats, including fighting off the White Legs again. The Dead Horses become relegated as their defense. The Dead Horses "couldn't" fight the White Legs "alone" in the in-universe sense (even though they didn't really do poo poo), hence why the Sorrow had to be "complicit" for Joshua's plan to work. quote:Daniel's an arrogant douchebag in a lot of ways, and his reasons for relocating are not necessarily mine, but he's not trying to put the sin on another group to save the Sorrow's purity. And yet the Sorrows are relocated to a place where they still come under attack, but they're more easily defended by the Dead Horses and New-Canaanites. They're essentially treated as children who can't help or protect themselves. quote:There was a way out for the Sorrow without killing people. If there wasn't a convenient tunnel to escape through, I'm sure even Daniel would help them kill the White Legs in self defense. The issue here is that in the position where you can avoid killing people, but it's a bit harder... well, most people in the wasteland would say gently caress it, and kill the bastard. The idea that someone would try to... not do that, is a really positive one. If the New Caananites knew the White Legs were coming that night they were exterminated, and had the option to flee or fight back, when they knew they could have won in a fair fight and slaughtered the White Legs, would they have abandoned New Caanan, even with their high mindedness? It's not as simple as "Well we could just run away". There are practical considerations, for one, not to mention the fact that relocating out of a place of plenty can lead to functional suicide by abandoning defenses and resources. And the New Caananites had the will to fight if necessary. If there's one thing they mentioned, it's that the New-Caananites would kill you if you forced them to, but they really didn't want to. But Daniel clearly saw the Sorrows as special, even compared to him and his actual New-Caananites, because they never experienced man-on-man violence, they were "pure". Children. Untouched by evil, in his mind. So he sheltered them. Joshua's insanity isn't much better, to be sure, and his obsession with slaughter could certainly do bad, but it's not like the Sorrows are children who by being exposed to such things suddenly would become Joshua-clones. The Sorrows may be tribals, but they're not children. They are adults, they are human beings with the capacity of reason and thoughts. Essentially hiding them away from the realities of their world (one where violence is, unfortunately, necessary depending on the circumstance, a thing the New Caananites all too accept themselves) is a condescension of the highest degree, in my opinion. Furthermore, things aren't as bi-polar as "Well, either I kill him or I don't" in quite a few situations, and the non-lethal option here ultimately involved you killing a lot of White Legs in the process! And a lot of Sorrows and Dead Horses dying. And the Sorrows being displaced from a land that had the potential to support them for generations to one where their future is potentially grim. In the Fallout universe, taking such options constantly would result in a lot fewer people who would even consider peaceful solutions (because they'd be dead). GRIMDARK
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 22:12
|
|
|
Has anyone tried out the Badass Wasteland Restoration Mod for FO3? It looks like it would totally change the ambiance of FO3 in to something much different, I like the idea of fighting through a 'living' wasteland instead of a 'dead' wasteland. Does it look as good in-game as it does in the screenshots? I'd just download it and check it out but my copy of FO3 is on 360, though my recent re-playthrough of New Vegas is making me kind of want to pick it up on PC and mod it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 22:28
|
|
|
Zorak posted:Except in all of the White Legs endings if you choose to take an Exodus, the Sorrows rely on the Dead Horses to defend them from threats, including fighting off the White Legs again. The Dead Horses become relegated as their defense. The Dead Horses "couldn't" fight the White Legs "alone" in the in-universe sense (even though they didn't really do poo poo), hence why the Sorrow had to be "complicit" for Joshua's plan to work. Yeah, but I don't think its fair to say that that was Daniel's intent. Again, he wasn't the one to get the Dead Horses involved. The Dead Horses fight because Joshua fights, they cover the retreat because Joshua covers the retreat. Its not like Daniel is weighing it and deciding that its worth expending 7 Dead Horses to protect 1 Sorrow. Zorak posted:The Sorrows may be tribals, but they're not children. They are adults, they are human beings with the capacity of reason and thoughts. Essentially hiding them away from the realities of their world (one where violence is, unfortunately, necessary depending on the circumstance, a thing the New Caananites all too accept themselves) is a condescension of the highest degree, in my opinion. For that matter, they're adults who chose to defer the choice of whether to flee or fight to someone other than themselves. Shouldn't we, the player, respect their choice? There's nothing stopping them from following Joshua of their own accord, Daniel isn't hypnotizing them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 22:46
|
|
|
Joeslop posted:So I finished OWB last week and I can't get my Big Mountain Transportalponder to fire. I've tried it outside the Sink, I've fast traveled to various points in Big MT, and the gun keeps saying that I can't use it in an interior. I've tried it while over encumbered and while not, and it's pretty annoying since I can't leave otherwise. Any ideas? Alternatively, is there a console command to warp back and forth, and will it screw with my achievements?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 22:47
|
|
|
Joeslop posted:Any ideas? Alternatively, is there a console command to warp back and forth, and will it screw with my achievements?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 22:51
|
|
|
Zorak posted:But Daniel clearly saw the Sorrows as special, even compared to him and his actual New-Caananites, because they never experienced man-on-man violence, they were "pure". Children. Untouched by evil, in his mind. So he sheltered them. See what I think it comes down to is Daniel seeing the Sorrows as a way to make up for his mistakes with the New Caananities. He knew that Walking Cloud would be pissed that her husband died escorting everyone out of the valley but he chose not to tell her because he didn't want it to cause trouble for everyone else. It all came down to that I gotta save everyone I can even if it's not the best action. Now you can't tell me that absolutely no one else besides Walking Cloud could help lead people out. But in the end he doesn't cares more about what his religion tells him then what is actual best for the tribe. In all of his endings he is unsure of himself and his actions since in the end he doesn't think about them he just recites what the bible says. It comes back to what Joshua Graham says I think when you first talk to him. I don't remember the quote exactly but he talks about how it's important to take action because God won't magically swoop down to save you just because of what anyone believes. I think it's more about siding with Daniel is placing your hope in the belief that God will make everything right in the end if you believe and Graham is the belief that you need to forge your own path because blind faith will lead no where. In the ending wheres the Sorrows are forced to fight they don't turn out to be inhuman monsters or anything. They have troubles but they work past them. It's just unrealistic to assume that an entire society of people can be innocent and pure forever. Like with the ending to the survivalist eventually you need to back away and let the innocent children grow up. No one can stay an innocent child forever but Daniel wants to keep them there rather then letting them grow as a society and join the world, for good or for bad. Things won't always go the way he wants and if you let them stay innocent it eventually comes back to them as they are forced to rely on everyone else for protection.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 23:01
|
|
|
Zorak posted:Except in all of the White Legs endings if you choose to take an Exodus, the Sorrows rely on the Dead Horses to defend them from threats, including fighting off the White Legs again. The Dead Horses become relegated as their defense. The Dead Horses "couldn't" fight the White Legs "alone" in the in-universe sense (even though they didn't really do poo poo), hence why the Sorrow had to be "complicit" for Joshua's plan to work. There's a difference between "driving off" and "wiping out." And considering the White Legs never found the Sorrow again, it'd be kind of hard for the Sorrow to actually defend themselves from a threat they never faced. There's also the key point that the Sorrow would never have been in danger were it not for the New Canaanites. Daniel definitely leans more towards coddling them, but it's perfectly reasonable and fair and not patronizing at all to help them in return for the harm they caused them. And that's what's going on when the Dead Horses keep the White Legs from following. Practical aid. And there's no mention of threats to the Sorrow where they relocate. quote:If the New Caananites knew the White Legs were coming that night they were exterminated, and had the option to flee or fight back, when they knew they could have won in a fair fight and slaughtered the White Legs, would they have abandoned New Caanan, even with their high mindedness? It's not as simple as "Well we could just run away". There are practical considerations, for one, not to mention the fact that relocating out of a place of plenty can lead to functional suicide by abandoning defenses and resources. And the New Caananites had the will to fight if necessary. If there's one thing they mentioned, it's that the New-Caananites would kill you if you forced them to, but they really didn't want to. If the New Canaanites had an escape route they could block off, if they lived in a low enough profile way that they wouldn't be found in their new location, if they lived in such a way that infrastructure and trade was not vital to their way of life, if there was a third party able to dissuade the White Legs from continuing their search... then perhaps it would be the right thing to do to flee. ... But I do think I see what you're saying to an extent. The Sorrow's pacifism is from, well, inexperience interacting with hostile groups at the very least, rather than any sort of high ideal. I guess that's exactly why it's fetishized as 'innocence,' which is something I personally didn't value all that much. quote:But Daniel clearly saw the Sorrows as special, even compared to him and his actual New-Caananites, because they never experienced man-on-man violence, they were "pure". Children. Untouched by evil, in his mind. So he sheltered them. quote:Furthermore, things aren't as bi-polar as "Well, either I kill him or I don't" in quite a few situations, and the non-lethal option here ultimately involved you killing a lot of White Legs in the process! And a lot of Sorrows and Dead Horses dying. And the Sorrows being displaced from a land that had the potential to support them for generations to one where their future is potentially grim. In the Fallout universe, taking such options constantly would result in a lot fewer people who would even consider peaceful solutions (because they'd be dead). It's not a universally applicable value, but it's a value that, if more widely held, would make things a bit less lovely. I don't think the Sorrows fleeing confrontation forever is in their best interest. I think fleeing confrontation in this one particular instance is not particularly harmful to them, and would do some cultural good. Not just good for the Sorrows and the people they interact with, but for whoever hears the story of the Sorrows flight from Zion. With the religious nature of the game in mind, it's a parable. One with all the more weight because it's something that really happened.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 23:13
|
|
|
randombattle posted:See what I think it comes down to is Daniel seeing the Sorrows as a way to make up for his mistakes with the New Caananities. He knew that Walking Cloud would be pissed that her husband died escorting everyone out of the valley but he chose not to tell her because he didn't want it to cause trouble for everyone else. It all came down to that I gotta save everyone I can even if it's not the best action. Now you can't tell me that absolutely no one else besides Walking Cloud could help lead people out. But in the end he doesn't cares more about what his religion tells him then what is actual best for the tribe. I'm not sure which mistakes with the New Canaanites you're referring to, except maybe the choice to interfere at all? And I'm not sure what you're trying to say with respect to Daniel's lie - his basis for not to telling her wasn't that the bible told him to, he chose not to tell her because he can't bear to deliver bad news. Its not because he's religious, its because he doesn't want to add to her sorrows. randombattle posted:In all of his endings he is unsure of himself and his actions since in the end he doesn't think about them he just recites what the bible says. It comes back to what Joshua Graham says I think when you first talk to him. I don't remember the quote exactly but he talks about how it's important to take action because God won't magically swoop down to save you just because of what anyone believes. I'm not sure where you're getting the notion that Daniel is more prone to blind faith than Joshua, it certainly wasn't what I got out of my interactions with them. And I certainly didn't get the impression that he didn't think about his actions, hell he seemed as doubtful even as I spoke to him in the valley. You seem to be holding him up as a religious caricature, on the basis that he quotes the Bible now and again. randombattle posted:In the ending wheres the Sorrows are forced to fight they don't turn out to be inhuman monsters or anything. They have troubles but they work past them. It's just unrealistic to assume that an entire society of people can be innocent and pure forever. Like with the ending to the survivalist eventually you need to back away and let the innocent children grow up. No one can stay an innocent child forever but Daniel wants to keep them there rather then letting them grow as a society and join the world, for good or for bad. Things won't always go the way he wants and if you let them stay innocent it eventually comes back to them as they are forced to rely on everyone else for protection. Except that societies can grow themselves, they don't need to be taught like children. Nobody (except maybe Daniel) is claiming that the Sorrows will be innocent and pure forever, losing Zion is in and of itself a loss of innocence.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 23:24
|
|
|
I am not going to deny a man that can quote scripture and Boney M what he wants.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 23:31
|
|
|
I'm still exploring Vanilla and I just made a retired old vet who was trying to do the right thing commit suicide, now I feel like poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 23:39
|
|
|
Lets gently caress Bro posted:I'm still exploring Vanilla and I just made a retired old vet who was trying to do the right thing commit suicide, now I feel like poo poo. The rear end in a top hat options in New Vegas honestly make me feel really bad and I've never been able to play a dick character because of it I've played through like three or four times now and it's been a goody-goody character every time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 23:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 18, 2024 01:38 |
|
|
Blunt Force Trauma posted:The rear end in a top hat options in New Vegas honestly make me feel really bad and I've never been able to play a dick character because of it I can usually be a dick to anyone except Novak and Goodsprings. Dinosaurs yaaaaaaay  Also I just agreed to help the Powder Gangers get in with the Khans. Asked Papa Khan if he's down with this, they can offer bombs etc. Sure, tell them we can do this thing. I went back to Vault 19, told Cooke it was a go, quest complete. Then I went down in the basement and packed a shitload of C4 into the sulfur deposits, killing everyone and taking away the Khan's potential new source of weaponry  (I'm being silly and pretending my character was a former Khan. They took my eye, so I take their lives/gently caress with them constantly  ) And Powder Gangers are just chumps.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 23:45
|
|
