Hello there! We are conducting a survey to better understand the user experience in making a first edit. If you have ever made an edit on Gamepedia, please fill out the survey. Thank you!

Talk:Eastern Brotherhood of Steel

From The Vault - Fallout Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Talkpage.png
This talk page is only for discussing improvements to the page "Eastern Brotherhood of Steel".
It is not the place for general discussion or sharing stories about the topic of this article. Please use the forums for these purposes.

Differenting "Brotherhoods"[edit source]

The Midwestern Brotherhood appears only in Fallout Tactics. The names "Midwestern Brotherhood of Steel" nor "Eastern Brotherhood of Steel" was never used in the game, but were made up by fans to diffrentiate it from the original Brotherhood. "Midwestern" is preferrable, as it distinguishes it from the Capital Wasteland Brotherhood of Steel from Fallout 3, active even further East, in the Washington, DC area.

  1. There was one canonic BoS with headquarters in Lost Hills Bunker and its chapter or division in the DC (semicanonic division at Maxson Bunker and strange faction led by king Arthur :)). Let's say Capital Wasteland BoS is almost corret name, but very informal.
  2. Midwestern or Eastern BoS is: (1) not a canon (obvious of course), (2) named informally. Fair proposition could be: BoS (splinted faction) present at Fallout Tactics (distinguished by game) or BoS (splinted faction present) on Middle-West and Chicago area (distinguished by location) - parenthesised text can be optional, geografical description can be shorted.

I do not care about FoT, but think about more exact naming the DC division.--dotz 09:56, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

I asked Emil Pagliarulo and he said the Capital Wasteland Brotherhood name is OK. And your proposed names are too long - current ones pretty much say the same but are much more concise. "Midwestern" and "Capital Wasteland" are geographical descriptions. Ausir 11:25, 13 January 2008 (UTC)


That suggests, that is more then one Brotherhood (three in fact). May be Fallout designer should be asked?:)--dotz 15:30, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, both the Midwestern and Capital Wasteland factions are pretty independent from the main Brotherhood forces. Ausir 16:10, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Fallout 3[edit source]

"As of 2277, the splinter faction consists only of a small detachment in Chicago. It has come into some contact with the original, West Coast Brotherhood, but it refused to accept the authority of the Lost Hills elders. Thus, they are considered to be rogue by the rest of the Brotherhood. "- Where did this come from? I thought Betehsda wasn't going to touch Fallout Tactics as canon at this point, and if they did just destroy the Calculator, there's no way for them to contact the original Brotherhood. --24.181.55.90 14:55, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Bethesda does not consider Tactics entirely canon, but according to Emil Pagliarulo they do accept most of the major events as more or less canon, just not the details that contradict Fallout and Fallout 2 (unlike Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel, which simply didn't happen). Also, the 80 years between Fallout Tactics and Fallout 3 is a lot of time, enough for them to come into contact somehow.
In Fallout 3, Scribe Rothchild mentions the Midwestern Brotherhood: "There's also a small detachment in Chicago, but they're off the radar. Gone rogue. Long story." It's possible that they were encountered by Lyons and his men on their way to Washington, DC. Ausir 14:59, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
That makes some sense. Still, shouldn't they have just joined Lyons Pride or the Outcasts? Odds are they'd fit in with ONE of them... --24.181.55.90 15:04, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
They probably encountered them on their way to Washington, DC, before the Outcasts split from Lyons' group. And the Outcasts simply follow the philosophy of the original Brotherhood, putting acquisition of technology first, while Lyons wants to save and protect the innocents. The Midwestern Brotherhood is different from both of these, since they were creating a quasi-fascist state, not just acquiring tech or protecting wastelanders. Ausir 15:07, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, I don't even know WHY I mentioned the Outcasts, they really are the original Brotherhood in every way, I guess it's the ridiculous paint job on their armor. I just hope that if Bethesda decides to use them again, they don't become the TOTALLY facist assholes they would have become in the aborted Fallout Tactics 2. I wonder if Emil will ever explain their armor, either? The Fallout 3 PA LOOKS similar enough to the T5-1b just in worse shape, but the Midwestern armor is really hard to figure out. --24.181.55.90 15:11, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
Seeing that Rothchild called them a small detachment, there's probably not much of their "empire" left. Maybe the people were fed up with their rule and rebelled? Ausir 15:24, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
Well, that sucks. That particular ending seemed to give some hope to that faction without being sickly-sweet like the ending where the 'good' Warrior joins with the Calculator. Ah well, such is life in the Wasteland. I'll miss their sweet-ass cars.--24.181.55.90 15:36, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

As far as their armor goes, everyone except me seems to be convinced that the Brotherhood is a bunch of unlearning stones and can't ever figure out how to manufacture their own Power Armor. I chalk up Tactics' power armor to a "midwestern redesign" due to their seperation. I, personally, think it's a superior aethestic design. I get tired of having Pompadours and Flash Gordon shoved in my face all damn day. --Killchain 23:02, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Uh-huh, you conveniently ignore that the Brotherhood would manufacure their own power armour, if they had the means. As it stands, the Brotherhood doesn't have the materials or necessary equipment to construct these suits of armour. TX-28 micro fusion packs and HiFlo hydraulic exoskeletons do not litter every street corner. http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/fallout/images/thumb/5/5c/Scribe.jpg/15px-Scribe.jpg Tagaziel (call!) 23:16, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
If they didn't get the materials and manufacture it, then where did they get it? The Brotherhood of Steel has to be a bunch of rock bashers if they haven't been able to reverse engineer something like Power Armor in 200 some odd years. And they got that "super weapon" Liberty Prime working. So, if they didn't come up with and make their unique looking Power Armor, then where did they find it? Although if you look at the art, it could be a hodge-podge of different types of suits. Killchain 12:28, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
It's not a problem of plans, it's a problem of materials and necessary technology to manufacture a suit of Power Armor. Micro fusion packs aren't exactly common, as are hydraulics, software and hardware, lightweight armour plating etc. needed to create it. FoT's armours are inconsistent with the setting, even the original developers admit it. Most likely, after stripping the non canon stuff, the armours would be standard T-51b's after a lot of modification and customization.
Additionally, for all we know, Liberty Prime was found in more or less the way he is operating in Fo3, Lyons' Retards only cleaned it up, changed wires and kept trying to start it up. http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/fallout/images/thumb/5/5c/Scribe.jpg/15px-Scribe.jpg Tagaziel (call!) 12:41, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
Yup, don't forget that most resources are depleted, and you would need massive factories for something like power armor. No one except the Enclave really has any resources to produce new PA suits. Ausir(talk) 12:57, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
I suppose you guys are right. Even with a bit of creative imagination it can make sense though, since the Brotherhood seems to be adept at finding caches of Power Armor, maybe they found an abandoned Enclave manufacturing plant (with armor intact) and assumed that it was pre-war tech. Ah well. I just try to stick up for Tactics is all. Also, Flash Gordons and Pompadours. :) Killchain 15:05, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Symbol[edit source]

I don't understand why you put this symbol for the Midwestern Brotherhood of Steel, he is seen almost nowhere (just on the elders I think).

The true symbol is the golden emblem, we can see in the cinematic. Itachou 18:35, October 20, 2009 (UTC)

I'd also keep the golden emblem. Ausir(talk) 19:13, October 20, 2009 (UTC)
You are wrong. The symbol of the MW Brotherhood is the blue coat of arms, not gold.
Blue. Blue. Blue. Blue. Blue. Blue.
The fact that the BLUE symbol on the cover of the book changes into gold in the ending cinematic is meaningless, as it's blue EVERYWHERE ELSE. Even in-game, look at the decal on the pauldron of the Power Armour or Environmental Armour. Or the standards in Epsilon Bunker. Or pretty much anything else where the emblem is displayed. http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/fallout/images/thumb/4/4a/Naglowaa_se.gif/11px-Naglowaa_se.gif Tagaziel (call!) 21:01, October 20, 2009 (UTC)

The pictures show me that you may be correct, it goes without say.

But, the fact of showing the gold symbol in a end cinematic has much more weight and wanted to show that it is precisely this symbol that differentiates it from others.

It's like Texas Brotherhood of Steel, on the notice and another, there is sometimes a symbol of true Brotherhood of Steel, but this is not good, the true symbol encompasses all other. Itachou 21:35, October 20, 2009 (UTC)

But the current symbol on the page is not even reverted. And pictures shown above are not from the actual game. They are promotional images. They could be published even before the game was finally designed. I'd vote for File:Bosgold.jpg veryblackravenTalk 14:41, May 31, 2011 (UTC)

Midwestern brotherhood in fallout 4?[edit source]

Ausir@ question is the midwestern brotherhood armour canon? did the enclave get inspiration from their armour? also if fallout 4 is indeed in the commonwealth do you think there is any chance we might see them i know its a bit away from chicago but i loved their facist nature and that they would execute anyone with out a thougt.kaminoman

They reached Oregon, Alaska, Canada, and Washington (state)?[edit source]

The article says they reached Alaska, Canada, Washington (state or Washington DC mostly state), and Oregon? Southern part of Canada is possible, but Alaska, Washington (state), and Oregon? I think they're too far away from Chicago. I don't have Fallout Tactics. So I want to ask someone that played it. --James Jr 05:12, March 6, 2011 (UTC)

Well... I would not say it's impossible. The Mid Western Brotherhood was a very large organization. They recruited many people, and were still expanding when the game finished. It is very much possible that they moved into Southern Canada ( I think you actually get to go to the southern most part of Canada in the game if you want ). As for the other states... I highly doubt it. If they did than they would easily become the Country's strongest and largest faction, and Bethesda would not be able to make the Mid Western Brothers canon if they did that. But since apparently the Mid Western Brothers are canon ( god damn Bethesda ) they probably aren't that large.
They weren't that large. The MW Brotherhood did not control large amounts of land, merely a network of bunkers and subjugated tribes/towns. They are, effectively, a feudal kingdom. http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/fallout/images/0/08/Personal_Sig_Image.gif Tagaziel (call!) 09:30, June 12, 2011 (UTC)

Is the statement about MW BOS reached Alaska is based on Fallout Extreme? Then this section should be marked with corresponding template saying it is not considered as canon. veryblackravenTalk 12:25, June 12, 2011 (UTC)

Warrior merged with Calculator?[edit source]

Eventually, the robots were defeated and in the course of the war, the Midwestern Brotherhood lost many of its men, and territory, but with the Warrior merged with the Calculator, the Midwestern Brotherhood was able to not only recover from what they lost, they became greater from it. Why is it stated that Warrior merged with Calculator. There is only one of three possible Fallout Tactics endings. veryblackravenTalk 12:49, June 12, 2011 (UTC)

I've removed that text from the article as it assumes and ending as canon. (with out evidence I may add). --LordVukodlak 07:33, June 15, 2011 (UTC)