What on earth is this writing?! Spoilers of course....

[Gracey Face]

"Here lies the body of the man who ordered the attack on your convoy and the deaths of all of the rangers, including you. However it's still not clear if he is truly to blame!

What the ♥♥♥♥ do you have to do to be held responsible then? lmao. I think these lines slightly broke my damn mind... How can you write this? How can the editor not read this and demand changes?

[Radiac]

The rangers were hired by the Patriarch to do what is essentially mercenary work. It is the nature of mercenary work that you don't always work for the "good" guys. Buchannon screwed over some people years ago and they were after him for revenge since then. Then he hired you. You have no beef with the Dorseys, and they would have no beef with you, if you weren't currently working for your current employer, whom they were in fact wronged by in a big way. Its not a cut and dried case of Right and Wrong.

[Gracey Face]

I am not sure why you think this post means anything..?

Look, it doesn't matter who ordered you to perform an action, or their reasons for it. As long as you choose to do that action, you are responsible for it. So the idea of Dorsey not being to blame is insanity.

Also considering that Dorsey attacked you despite being ordered not to, that technically means he is the person most directly responsible.

[Boneyard Bob]

Originally posted by Radiac:

The rangers were hired by the Patriarch to do what is essentially mercenary work. It is the nature of mercenary work that you don't always work for the "good" guys. Buchannon screwed over some people years ago and they were after him for revenge since then. Then he hired you. You have no beef with the Dorseys, and they would have no beef with you, if you weren't currently working for your current employer, whom they were in fact wronged by in a big way. Its not a cut and dried case of Right and Wrong.

That takes an understanding of nuance. Some people don't do nuance.

[Gracey Face]

Originally posted by Boneyard Bob:

That takes an understanding of nuance. Some people don't do nuance.

There's no nuance involved. The only context in which this line is even coherent is that you believe that you have no responsibility for your own actions as long as they're in some way "justified", but that is lunacy.

"It's not clear if he is truly to blame" is the specific wording, and it is nonsense. Regardless of how just his actions are, he is still to blame for his own actions. What, I assume, the writer is trying to say is "It's not clear if he is solely to blame", as in do other parties also have some responsibility, but that itself is nonsensical as you already know he is not solely to blame as he just told you the attack was part of Liberty's efforts to overthrow her father, so there is at least one person you already know is also responsible.

Since the point of the line seems to be trying to say that you're not sure how much direct blame the Patriarch specifically has in the deaths (though even then you know he has some because you know he leaked the convoy route so...) the correct way putting it would have been "But it's still not clear how much blame rests at the feet of the Patriarch."

[Spamquisition]

I'm pretty sure the Dorseys are pretty much to blame yeah, I haven't reached the point to see what you saw but they did attack on their own so yeah F the Dorseys. Saved the Hoons instead of the Caravans just to shoot up some Dorseys.

[Gracey Face]

Originally posted by Spamquisition:

I'm pretty sure the Dorseys are pretty much to blame yeah, I haven't reached the point to see what you saw but they did attack on their own so yeah F the Dorseys. Saved the Hoons instead of the Caravans just to shoot up some Dorseys.

Not much of a spoiler I suppose as it was obvious they were going to, but they try to paint the Dorseys as the good guys forced into a bad situation by the crimes of others. Because, you know, what's a little mass murder when someone was mean to you a couple of decades ago, right?

[BigusDicus]

Originally posted by Gracey Face:

Originally posted by Spamquisition:

I'm pretty sure the Dorseys are pretty much to blame yeah, I haven't reached the point to see what you saw but they did attack on their own so yeah F the Dorseys. Saved the Hoons instead of the Caravans just to shoot up some Dorseys.

Not much of a spoiler I suppose as it was obvious they were going to, but they try to paint the Dorseys as the good guys forced into a bad situation by the crimes of others. Because, you know, what's a little mass murder when someone was mean to you a couple of decades ago, right?

It's asking the question of are these guys alone or just the means to someone elses plan. An example is this, sure the individual NKVD officer deserves the blame for killing someone in the purges, but he isn't responsible for the purges, Stalin is. Did the ambush occur because the dorseys squad leader at the site want to kill Rangers or did it occur because someone told him to? If it's the later, the one behind the ambush isn't dorsey, their just the triggermen, the one responsible for it occurring would be it's orchestrator, for he/she would be the cause and the ambush was his or hers effect. It's done to add mystery, nothing more. How is this concept to difficult for you?

[Turncloak]

I didn't really have an issue with that, at the same time it's revealed that the Patriarch and Percival Wesson, Lucia's father betrayed the Dorsey's because they wanted elections and such. The whole story was fixed around The Patriarch and how he's caused these conflicts in order to hold on to power and they came back to bite him.

Now a bad bit of writing in my opinion is the Angela Deth character being fine with Ironclad Cordite being free to raid and slave so long as it's away from Colorado and at the same time wanting to take down The Patriarch for doing essentially the same thing she's ok with.

Overall it's a great game and the writing is a hundred times better than most of the crap in games these days, I just wish they wouldn't continuously rehash the same ideas from wasteland 1 and 2

[Gracey Face]

Originally posted by BrotherSextusTheSexy:

It's asking the question of are these guys alone or just the means to someone elses plan. An example is this, sure the individual NKVD officer deserves the blame for killing someone in the purges, but he isn't responsible for the purges, Stalin is.

It's not, and the NKVD officer is also responsible for the purges. More than one person can be responsible for a thing. For example;

Originally posted by BrotherSextusTheSexy:

Did the ambush occur because the dorseys squad leader at the site want to kill Rangers or did it occur because someone told him to?

..? Both..? If the orders hadn't occurred, the ambush wouldn't have happened. If Jarrett Dorsey had refused to follow the orders, the ambush wouldn't have happened. Both the person giving the orders (Nelius) and the person following them (Jarrett) are responsible.

It's weird to me that you don't understand this, and that you seem to think that only one person is at fault for any event.

[Gracey Face]

Originally posted by Turncloak:

The whole story was fixed around The Patriarch and how he's caused these conflicts in order to hold on to power and they came back to bite him.

I get the impression that they're trying to play for this angle, but at least so far it isn't actually what they've managed. For example the plains gangs raiding are entirely because of Liberty goading them in to it which she did in her own words entirely because she is impatient and wants power right now. Patriarch is only to blame then due to how he raised Liberty and the type of person she became.

Maybe later on though they manage to firm up this narrative better.

Originally posted by Turncloak:

Now a bad bit of writing in my opinion is the Angela Deth character being fine with Ironclad Cordite being free to raid and slave so long as it's away from Colorado and at the same time wanting to take down The Patriarch for doing essentially the same thing she's ok with.

Overall it's a great game and the writing is a hundred times better than most of the crap in games these days, I just wish they wouldn't continuously rehash the same ideas from wasteland 1 and 2

I get the distinct impression her writing was also awful in W2 as well, though I genuinely don't remember much at all about that game. But the awfulness in her little side quest goes beyond her weird double standard. For example the way that everyone is shocked by the Patriarch giving tribute to the gangs, that stuff is normal throughout history and should be normal now, but everyone hates it and you as a player are not given any option but to respond negatively for some reason (you should have the ability to approve, disapprove, or remain neutral about it). Or the biggest problem with the quest, which I almost forgot to mention, which is that both of the prisoners he has in the bunker were uniformly ostracised from their respective communities due to submitting to the Patriarch and as such no longer have any kind of political leverage and can never be used to usurp the clans they came from. So there's no point keeping them alive as they serve as nothing other than liabilities.


Also the writing in this game really isn't that great. For example the "girls in trouble!" sidequest. A couple of no good thieves manipulate you into killing something like 10 innocent people because they don't want to pay their debts off. The innocent mercenaries you kill don't even think to try to explain the situation to you for some inexplicable reason and when you find out there's no option to directly force them into their creditor's custody you have to lie to them and tell them you're going to negotiate which then gives you the option to give them over. But even then while they're whining about how unjust it is you have no option to point out to these two women that the blood of 10 innocent men is on their hands. As if it doesn't even matter..?

[Turncloak]

Yeah I didn't care too much for that quest, I think the leader was a member of the 100 families also but because he was running with mercenaries you don't even lose rep with the 100 families if you kill them which seemed off. I had an option to pay off their debt something silly like 10000 which I didn't have, persuade them to take them into servitude or kill the mercenaries. I killed them all, but they didn't really do anything wrong.

[Dying pancake]

If i may, this is not the only line lacks logical or simple don't make sense. like the two sister who loan and steal money then run for it, still have the audacity to call the victim thug. And the whole robots community, wow, really opened my eyes. Also the driver i hired from Daisy's garbage can. Daisy did fired him for a really good reason, whom in my very own military base lecturing ranger recruits to "think" to "open eyes then decide loyal to whom". I can really use a bullet between his eyes.

[JonDonWayne]

Originally posted by Spamquisition:

I'm pretty sure the Dorseys are pretty much to blame yeah, I haven't reached the point to see what you saw but they did attack on their own so yeah F the Dorseys. Saved the Hoons instead of the Caravans just to shoot up some Dorseys.

Yeah the dorseys have become crazy as*holes but theres a reason that made them be like this.....wasteland 3 colorado is a sh*thole and everbody got some skeletons in the closet...even the rangers.

[Gracey Face]

Originally posted by Dying pancake:

If i may, this is not the only line lacks logical or simple don't make sense.

Deth: "Buchanan is evil because he supported the plains gangs and made them attack communities outside of colorado!!"
Player: "So what? What's your plan?"
Deth: "I am going to release Cordite, support the plains gangs and make them attack communities outside of colorado! At least that way we won't get any blood on us."
Lucia "Isn't that the exact same thing you just maligned Buchanan for?"
Deth: "It's different when we do it!!!"
Player: "You're too dangerous to Colorado. I am putting you down."
Deth "Nope!" *Walks off mid dialogue while your team stands there brainlessly and does nothing.*


This is an actual conversation that happens in this game... Holy crap. And the worst part is the writers recognised how bad the writing is and had Lucia comment on it. They had a character comment on it in game rather than re-writing it.

Holy crap.

[Arch]

Originally posted by Gracey Face:

Originally posted by Dying pancake:

If i may, this is not the only line lacks logical or simple don't make sense.

Deth: "Buchanan is evil because he supported the plains gangs and made them attack communities outside of colorado!!"
Player: "So what? What's your plan?"
Deth: "I am going to release Cordite, support the plains gangs and make them attack communities outside of colorado! At least that way we won't get any blood on us."
Lucia "Isn't that the exact same thing you just maligned Buchanan for?"
Deth: "It's different when we do it!!!"
Player: "You're too dangerous to Colorado. I am putting you down."
Deth "Nope!" *Walks off mid dialogue while your team stands there brainlessly and does nothing.*


This is an actual conversation that happens in this game... Holy crap. And the worst part is the writers recognised how bad the writing is and had Lucia comment on it. They had a character comment on it in game rather than re-writing it.

Holy crap.

HOLY CRAP you just helped me not waste money on this pile of diversity-hire-tier garbage, thanks man