"But I had a point here. A lesson, if you will. There're other organizations out there. And, in time, I'm sure they're going to spoon-feed you their own patented form of bull(bleep). Ignore the verbage and look at what they're doing. What they're asking you to do. What sort of world they'd have you build and how they're going to pay for it." - Deacon

I would judge them by their current actions. He's like a gun, he's not a person, the person who pulls the trigger is dead, you can destroy the gun itself, but the new people who pull the trigger are not responsible for what the previous ones did. Their kidnapping and experimentation on humans are the crimes we should judge them by, not the crimes during the time they were not even born.

If a whole organization is deemed criminal, simple membership in that organization can make you complicit in the crimes the organization is committing. If nothing else you are accruing the benefits of other people's crimes - using synth labor from synths based on the DNA of a stolen infant, using power that is siphoned from above-ground settlements, using technology that is often derived from unethical experimentation on unknowing subjects. There are degrees of guilt in the Institute, but anybody who is of legal age and remains of their own free will doing nothing to resist Institute policies and benefiting from them shares some degree of responsibility.

It's not as much an organization as a "country", they grow up within it, indoctrinated by it, and never been exposed to other ideology. It's not like it's a voluntary thing. If you were born in there, you'd have done what the Institute had done to. I'm not gonna get into the synth labor thing since since it's just end up being personal opinion, something that if you were raised down there, you likely wouldn't have questioned. If it's a crime by association, all the children should share the guilts and be killed as well since they will grow up to be like their parents.

Then there are no such things as war crimes so long as they are committed by natives of that country indoctrinated by that country's regime. Either people have the capacity for moral thought independent of their upbringing or they don't. And if they don't, there is no point in talking in terms of morality anyway because everything just becomes a case of how genetics and environmental stimuli influence realpolitik.


Also the children don't share the guilt because guilt is dependent on understanding what you are doing. The advlts in the Institute know precisely what they are doing - they just think their own technological superiority justifies others' suffering.

You're bringing laws and morality to a post apocalypse world. There is nothing to understand because they never have been exposed to other points of view, none of them ever live on the surface, so basically, it's just 2 different groups with different moral and culture between the Institute and the surface world. If you want to judge them using your own sense of justice then go ahead. It's your game.

These are your words. Either you believe in judging them by a standard external to their own or you don't. If you can judge them for active modern crimes by an external standard, I see no reason you can't also judge them for continually benefiting from past crimes and doing 0 to redress them.

The bolded portion of your statement is incorrect. There are demonstrable examples of Institute Scientists going to the surface or having grown up on the surface.

Dr. Madison Li

Dr. TS Wallace

Dr. Enrico Thompson

The latter two are both in the mission "Pinned", where Enrico refers to being up above as 'field work' and implies that other scientists have also been to the surface because he's complaining about how they should have sent someone else that was more qualified for doing it. Dr. Li is very prominently previously seen in the Capital Wasteland during the events of Fallout 3 and works with James, the Lone Wanderer's father repeatedly. That she was first seen in the Capital Wasteland later in the Commonwealth displays that she's quite well traveled for a Wastelander.

At the beginning of FO4 she starts as the Division Head of Advanced Systems (and remains so unless convinced to leave - admitting that she's growing disillusioned and uncomfortable with the Institute's and Father's directives). So... one of the Institute Division Chiefs was not born within its walls, is well traveled, and has worked with the Brotherhood of Steel and other unaffiliated scientists in the past, one of whom -- James -- is noted for his adherence to strict ethics.

They most certainly have experienced other points of view.

I believe you need to reconstruct your argument.

At the end of the day, both sides are judging each other by their own moral and standard. Who's right or wrong is just depending on who wins. Even within the Institute, they have orders and laws that look down on barbaric actions like exile or kill people. I have my own moral and I judge people by their immediate crimes, not crime by association. It's just up to the player how the see the actions of the Institute.

Even if you judge them by their immediate crimes only, they have more than enough rope to hang themselves. Any conventional moral standard I know of besides "the end justifies the means" provides more than enough rope for them to hang themselves.

The protagonist grew up in a pre-Apocalypse world, so it's poor roleplay to do anything other than judge them by the standards he would have. But at the end of the day, sure, it's your game. Do what you want.

That's kinda poor logic though, some people would try to keep the pre-war attitude and ideology sure but some people would also embrace the new world or try to set up a new system they deem better then the pre-war. If I were to be frozen and thawed out 200 years later and did the same thing the Sole Survivor did and ended up either the leader of the Minutemen or the Institute or both I'd set up a more socialist society then capitalistic one. The wasteland can give a person a new perspective, they're not always going to stay the friendly neighbor next door.

There's every reason to judge the actors within the Fallout-verse of FO4 with modern(ish) day sensibilities. Our window into the world is a pre-war survivor, someone who is relatively close to an average American in their view of things. House in the 'burbs, spouse, child, a dog, a car, and day to day responsibilities (such as giving a speech at the veteran's hall or going to school for their degree).

The typical western player can connect with and identify with that, which makes them a fairly good window for our modern selves. The game is designed for someone to see it from our perspective and go 'what the hell is happening?'.

Granted, they did also live in an evil, totalitarian state, which could point them in many different directions. Nate, at least, has likely been party to fairly terrible things.

One that still existed under a veneer of Americana. If nothing else the Enclave corporations were superlative liars.

And we have no indication of Nate's performance in the war aside from the one bit of video of him on patrol in Alaska in his combat armor and a hint from the Faternal Order #114's terminal calling him a 'war hero' and finally at the USS Constitution they give the name/number of his unit. That's all.

He could have been the cannibal butcher of Anchorage, responsible for eating half a platoon of Chinese. He could have been the best combat medic the US Army had ever seen, never firing his rifle once in anger, but saving many lives. More likely he was a GI and did something that got him honored and honorably discharged at the end of his tour of duty -- but that's only speculation.

He's really meant as a self insert, as it is in all Bethesda games, and his backstory is so vague intentionally so you can fill in your own head canon.

I'd like to side with the BoS, I really would, but I just can't get past the fact that if they get their way Nick and Curie, as well as Danse, have to be destroyed.

Nick helped me find my son, at great risk to himself, and that's after he spent a lifetime helping the people of Diamond City. Curie's entire existence is dedicated to finding ways to help people (plus she's cute and has that accent).

I'm sorry, but as much as I might agree with a lot of the Brotherhood's aims I'll turn the Prydwyn into Hindenberg 2.0 before I let them hurt my friends.

They don't have to be destroyed. Nick and Curie have plot armor if nothing else and Danse can be explicitly spared by Maxson himself.

I'm proud of you. This was well written and concise.

And at the end Maxson himself explicitly states he has no orders for the Survivor (who is now Sentinel, 2nd highest rank in the organization) and is about to leave for the Capital Wasteland and states that the Survivor is now calling the shots on the Prydwen. That pretty much puts the kibosh on anything bad happening to Curie, Nick, or Danse (assuming he's not the betraying sort).

I know what you mean by "plot armor" but that really doesn't address my beef with the BoS. Yes, Danse can be spared but only at the expense of being expelled from the only life and family he knows. And while there's no quest in-game to destroy Nick and Curie it's clear that in the Brotherhood's conception of things they'd have to go. Curie would have to live in fear and Nick, looking the way he does, would be screwed because he can't hide.

They're innocent, they're my friends and the BoS wants them dead. That's why I won't support them.

When does Maxson say you are now calling the shots? I never remember hearing this. My take-away was more or less "I have no standing orders for you because I think you will do the most good as a more or less free agent" and not "okay, I'm going home and now you are in charge."

I don't agree with this assessment of their inevitable demise but given people are already going around in circles about this in every third thread here I will just leave it at that.

From Maxson's speech on the Prydwen after Nuclear Option is completed:

"From this moment forward, you decide which missions you undertake and how you will guide us."

My take from this was the implication that the Sentinel's actions are how the Brotherhood will be focusing their attention. Spend all your time fighting Supermutants, and that's the direction the BoS goes in. Etc. The game doesn't have the capability of handling direct orders from the player for the BoS, so he can't give them, but they're following his leadership now.

I guess I just don't see how that's a functional model so long as Maxson is in fact still present. There was no question that Sarah Lyons, Sentinel or not, still followed whatever policy was set by the Elder.

Honestly if bethesda does do post-war dlc I would love if Maxson left the commonwealth with "Ok so I need to go back to the Capital Wasteland and run my country but as Sentinel I leave you in control of this area as the de facto elder of the commonwealth" or just put in the original idea of Danse convincing the character to revolt against Maxson and take over the BoS.