"Brotherhood of Steel thinks ghouls are all monsters."

[Xenon The Noble]

Was Hancock right when he said the BOS thinks all ghouls are monsters?
https://youtu.be/iIkzFmtFVjs
Someone told me that the BOS was good with no feral ghouls.
This seems to show otherwise. Are there any examples of higher rank BOS correcting bad attitudes towards ghouls? Or BOS being nice to ghouls?

[The Inept European]

They don't kill Hancock on sight if you bring him on board the Prydwen. They're just rude about him.

Same with Nick. Or Strong for that matter.

[Von Faustien]

Lyons Brootherhood shot ghoul feral or otherwise on sight acourding to underworld gaurd and they were nicer than Maxson version.

Midwest branch aside the BOS does not like Ghouls or Mutants.

[The Inept European]

In the wild, FO4 BoS will attack ferals on sight and vice versa. They do not attack the non ferals at the Slog (and vice versa). Their hostile dialog mentions "ferals" not "ghouls".

[Bored Peon]

Originally posted by Xenon The Noble:

Are there any examples of higher rank BOS correcting bad attitudes towards ghouls? Or BOS being nice to ghouls?

Entire quest on it....
https://fallout.fandom.com/wiki/Duty_or_Dishonor

Every Fallout game has a ghoul town, well except Fallout 76 because there is not many of them around yet. Just like there is prejudice against the ghouls in every game, it aint just the BoS.

The institute replaced Mayor McDonough of Diamond City then threw the ghouls out of Diamond City.

Originally posted by Von Faustien:

Lyons Brootherhood shot ghoul feral or otherwise on sight acourding to underworld gaurd and they were nicer than Maxson version.

One guy being shot at by a patrol does not equal being shot on sight.
If they shot him on sight then how is he still alive to complain about it.

[Xenon The Noble]

Yes, but the YouTube video brought up interactions written into the game that show a lot of hostility towards non-feral ghouls.
I don't like companions and I didn't get past playing the BOS past the Fort Strong quest
I was wondering if this video is one sided - that there's another side to the story. I think there might be because of the way the Institute is presented, where there IS another side to the story: e.g. broken mask was not intentional; the Type 3 synth was a prototype who was NOT to be released to the commonwealth (think Synth shaun melting down in his cage when he meets SS)

[Bored Peon]

Originally posted by Xenon The Noble:

I was wondering if this video is one sided -

Someone makes a video to show the BoS is prejudice against ghouls. Of course it is one sided.

First of all the comments are NOT made by any of the leadership. They are all made by the "clutter background NPCs."

Second, just because a few make a prejudiced comment does not mean all of the BoS think the same way. Combine that with the limited repetitive dialogues

[Xenon The Noble]

Originally posted by Bored Peon:

Originally posted by Xenon The Noble:

I was wondering if this video is one sided -

Someone makes a video to show the BoS is prejudice against ghouls. Of course it is one sided.

Which is why I asked if there was another side to it.

Originally posted by Bored Peon:

First of all the comments are NOT made by any of the leadership. They are all made by the "clutter background NPCs."

Show where this behavior towards ghouls is discouraged by the leadership. If they allow it by not discouraging it, then they support it. That's kinda Army Leadership 101 stuff. Given that Elder Maxson is an absolute military authority and ruler of the BOS with no checks found in a legit military (no UCMJ, no Geneva Conventions e.g. "no survivors!") then if he didn't want this behavior he should have his subordinates discourage it. I guess there are scrolls somewhere that never come up in Fallout 4. Do they say anything about Ghoul acceptance or Ghoul pride?

Originally posted by Bored Peon:

Second, just because a few make a prejudiced comment does not mean all of the BoS think the same way. Combine that with the limited repetitive dialogues

Try this kind of behavior in today's regular Army and the leadership will kick your ass.

[Bored Peon]

Originally posted by Xenon The Noble:

Originally posted by Bored Peon:

First of all the comments are NOT made by any of the leadership. They are all made by the "clutter background NPCs."

Show where this behavior towards ghouls is discouraged by the leadership.

I did not say the leadership discouraged it. So you can stop with the accusations and implications otherwise you are just going turn another discussion into an argument.

Originally posted by Bored Peon:

If they allow it by not discouraging it, then they support it.

That logic right there is why so many of these discussion turn into arguments.

Someone makes a claim that something exists just because there is no proof that it does not exist. Which means there is no proof to disprove them claim either. If you cannot find proof something can be proven or disproved it should not even be brought up.

Originally posted by Xenon The Noble:

Originally posted by Bored Peon:

Second, just because a few make a prejudiced comment does not mean all of the BoS think the same way. Combine that with the limited repetitive dialogues

Try this kind of behavior in today's regular Army and the leadership will kick your ass.

Prejudice DOES exist in the Army. It ALWAYS has and ALWAYS will.
Every war ever fought by the US gave prejudiced nicknames to the enemy. They do this INTENTIONALLY to make you hate them and hope that hatred will remove the any hesitation to kill the enemy. This is because hesitation will get you or someone else killed.

[Von Faustien]

Originally posted by Bored Peon:

Originally posted by Xenon The Noble:

Are there any examples of higher rank BOS correcting bad attitudes towards ghouls? Or BOS being nice to ghouls?

Entire quest on it....
https://fallout.fandom.com/wiki/Duty_or_Dishonor

Every Fallout game has a ghoul town, well except Fallout 76 because there is not many of them around yet. Just like there is prejudice against the ghouls in every game, it aint just the BoS.

The institute replaced Mayor McDonough of Diamond City then threw the ghouls out of Diamond City.

Originally posted by Von Faustien:

Lyons Brootherhood shot ghoul feral or otherwise on sight acourding to underworld gaurd and they were nicer than Maxson version.

One guy being shot at by a patrol does not equal being shot on sight.
If they shot him on sight then how is he still alive to complain about it.

The BOS are terrible shots that's why. It's also why with they.never accomplish anything without either Prime or a players backing.

[DouglasGrave]

If the Brotherhood is prejudiced, they wouldn't be alone, as there is also widespread anti-ghoul prejudice in Diamond City, who elected Mayor McDonough based on his promise to evict all the ghoul citizens.

What a nice guy, and how sad the Institute replaced him after that.

[jerrypocalypse]

Originally posted by Xenon The Noble:

If they allow it by not discouraging it, then they support it. That's kinda Army Leadership 101 stuff. Given that Elder Maxson is an absolute military authority and ruler of the BOS with no checks found in a legit military (no UCMJ, no Geneva Conventions e.g. "no survivors!") then if he didn't want this behavior he should have his subordinates discourage it.

This is honestly the heart of it. If a group is aware their members are acting a certain way, and do nothing about, they are indicating that behavior is okay.

As a mundane comparison, if I went to my 9-5 office job and started calling everyone, including customers, a "♥♥♥♥-face" and management never said anything to me or did anything about it, they are indicating that is acceptable behavior.

[Bored Peon]

Post#4

Originally posted by Bored Peon:

The institute replaced Mayor McDonough of Diamond City then threw the ghouls out of Diamond City.

Post #11

Originally posted by DouglasGrave:

If the Brotherhood is prejudiced, they wouldn't be alone, as there is also widespread anti-ghoul prejudice in Diamond City, who elected Mayor McDonough based on his promise to evict all the ghoul citizens.

What a nice guy, and how sad the Institute replaced him after that.

There goes DouglasGrave trying to derail the topic to argue about when Mayor McDonough was replaced. Yet people insist I am the one to start the arguments.

[Bored Peon]

Originally posted by jerrypocalypse:

Originally posted by Xenon The Noble:

If they allow it by not discouraging it, then they support it. That's kinda Army Leadership 101 stuff. Given that Elder Maxson is an absolute military authority and ruler of the BOS with no checks found in a legit military (no UCMJ, no Geneva Conventions e.g. "no survivors!") then if he didn't want this behavior he should have his subordinates discourage it.

This is honestly the heart of it. If a group is aware their members are acting a certain way, and do nothing about, they are indicating that behavior is okay.

As a mundane comparison, if I went to my 9-5 office job and started calling everyone, including customers, a "♥♥♥♥-face" and management never said anything to me or did anything about it, they are indicating that is acceptable behavior.

We are not talking real life. We are talking about a written story. Writers cannot cover every possible conversation in a story.

Argumentative claims something exists simply because there is no evidence proving it does not exist are the reason why these topics keep turning into arguments. Find an actual dialogue line and prove your claim.

[DouglasGrave]

Originally posted by Bored Peon:

Post#4

Originally posted by Bored Peon:

The institute replaced Mayor McDonough of Diamond City then threw the ghouls out of Diamond City.

Post #11

Originally posted by DouglasGrave:

If the Brotherhood is prejudiced, they wouldn't be alone, as there is also widespread anti-ghoul prejudice in Diamond City, who elected Mayor McDonough based on his promise to evict all the ghoul citizens.

What a nice guy, and how sad the Institute replaced him after that.

There goes DouglasGrave trying to derail the topic to argue about when Mayor McDonough was replaced. Yet people insist I am the one to start the arguments.

Thanks for proving that it doesn't matter if I quote you or not, since you'll consider me to be starting an argument as long as I happen to disagree anywhere in the same topic.

Unless you've got some proof of when McDonough was replaced, I suggest you follow your own advice before stating when it happend:

Originally posted by Bored Peon:

If you cannot find proof something can be proven or disproved it should not even be brought up.

[jerrypocalypse]

Originally posted by Bored Peon:

Originally posted by jerrypocalypse:

This is honestly the heart of it. If a group is aware their members are acting a certain way, and do nothing about, they are indicating that behavior is okay.

As a mundane comparison, if I went to my 9-5 office job and started calling everyone, including customers, a "♥♥♥♥-face" and management never said anything to me or did anything about it, they are indicating that is acceptable behavior.

We are not talking real life. We are talking about a written story. Writers cannot cover every possible conversation in a story.

Argumentative claims something exists simply because there is no evidence proving it does not exist are the reason why these topics keep turning into arguments. Find an actual dialogue line and prove your claim.

You're turning this into an argument, not me. I'm discussing with another poster. Not you. Goodbye.