So, Fallout has made a few Lore mess ups.

I'm trying to put together a compilation of lore inconsistant concepts. More or less, f*** ups.

*So, to begin with the one I noticed much too fast was ghouls in Fallout 3. They are pretty much just like people.
I have never seen a ghoul in armor before Fo3, weapons of course but never a radioactive knight in shining armor.
Now this may not be correct, but I have never seen a ghoul in any kind of armor in any of the first Fallouts. I would be more than happy to be proven wrong.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*This one is much more direct than the first one. GHOULS CAN RUN? And thier fast too!!! (Ferrels)

What the heck? In the second fallout, up in a small town called Gecko right above Vault City, it is nothing but ghouls. A whole town of ghouls. So, if you talk to a particular ghoul he will mention seeing your ancestor from Fo1 while he was in Necroplis. He says he remembers because He tells you they can't run. And also if you examine a ghoul it says "all of his limbs are crippled but he appears uninjured". Now that is just too wierd, and I've been wanting to see if anybody else noticed this. Because in the first games all they ever did was walk around, and now the ferrel are practically "28 Days Later" or "Left 4 Dead" infected, and civil ones can chase you down and beat the crap out of you. The ghouls used to bring a nice old school zombie feel to the game, and the nicer ones always had good stories. (I'm glad they still kept that)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
feel free to comment or post more strange lore concept screw ups

On the armour thing - So what, a ghoul wasnt seen spotting armour in FO1/2. doesnt mean they cant do it... I didnt see any eat either whilst you're at it.

As for the run thing - Dontcha think maybe you're taking it a bit TOO Literally. Do you perhaps think that white people REALLY cant jump?

Sure, I can move my legs in a motion thats faster than walking, and could technically be called a run, but I would describe myself as not being able to run due to my low relative speed and stamina. Dontcha think maybe, just maybe, he's suggesting that whilst ghouls can break into a faster pace, its not near the same sorts of speed a normal can - you know I think even saw Percy "Run" to catch up with me, admittedly a slow pathetic one.

Whenever I've examined a ghoul, I get the message "You see someone who's skin is badly burnt".

Out of all of the possible inconsistencies in FO3, you seem to have focused on things that are so incredibly minor as to turn this thread into a mere parody of its title.

Yeah maybe they couldnt 'run' but boy do I remember ghouls 'walking' after me pretty quick between turns in either F1 or F2.

Out of all the things Bethesda screwed up, this is the last thing I expected to see

It's true, a Ghoul in FO3 is nothing more than a different skin texture over the same generic human model, most of them don't even look like they're falling apart that much, just a bit dried out. I suppose in theory armour could be a problem, them not having the strength and dexterity to negotiate encumbering protective gear, but I've not seen many ghouls with any real armour, unless you're refering to giving Charon armour to wear, which is a whole other problem altogether, even if you leave ghouls out of the equation.

Yes ghouls would pretty much limp and gimp everywhere, they may have killer resistances and unparalleled immune system, but their bodies are completely destroyed. There's a chance you could get the odd exception, but ghouls as a rule are not mobile, ok Ferals are pretty kool, they give metros the extra edge, but they chould have been broken and limping and still retain that same edge.

I also don't know why Super Mutants would leave ghouls alone, this is arguably the worst inconsistency to lore in reference to ghouls, or probably more in reference to Super Mutants. The ghouls make the excuse that the the F.E.V process doesn't work on them, which is true, but the Mutants would still kick their ass, big time. Even if it was nothing more than target practise, or something to kick around, Super Mutants are volatile and brutal, and they believe themselves to be the next step in evolution, where the term 'human' is made as a derogatory remark. A ghoul is an insult of the highest degree and they would gladly erradicate them with extreme prejudice. Mutants may be in the business of increasing their own number, but they're also in the business of reducing others.

That's better. I can understand screwing up lore from another game, but from your own? :rolleyes: Ah well, nothing we can do about it.

Lenny in FO2 can wear any armor.

But he's still weak as a piece of bread ><

And everyone in FO3 can wear Power Armour without training. Except you, apparently.

No-one gets everything perfect. Lenny was the 1 exception, and was probably an oversight. It still doesn't justify anything that's wrong with ghoul lore in FO3.

Is there anything else that suggests that Ghouls Cant wear armour other than noone designing a texture for one? They seem to be okay in clothes and all, and are the right shape (as opposed to Supermutants, who cant as they're too big).

As for problems with "Ghoul Lore" other than the run thing, what exactly did you have in mind? bearing in mind they're a different stock altogether.

Not with a Gauss pistol he's not, levelled for two shots per turn. Dammit, I hate it when he "Ooops! Critical"-s Cassidy or poor Sulik
Speaking of Lenny, he wears armor, and, he also runs (to catch up with you if you stray too far).
The ghouls from the Unity patrol look like sporting some leather armor/MK IIs but it's hard to judge by appearences.

This is probably indeed the worst inconsistency spotted. If it was only running ghouls I'd be like "So... glad that's the only inconsistency. Any mods to fix it?"

But, the OP asked about other lore stuff, so here's one pain on the eyes: Enclave. So, oil rig went boom-boom, so did Navarro. WTH did the Enclave survivors come from? The 3-men or 6-men patrol random encounters? And that Navarro survivor... except the cook at the mess hall, who else survives?
Another: BoS collecting books. BoS installed the Overseer replacement machine in V13, had the AI in San Fran and... they're collecting books in Washington. Makes sense, no?

makes perfect sense. Sure, you they can build a computer, and program an AI, and maybe that AI could even write a book, but not the same ones that are in the library.

A data storage device is great, but where will the data come from?

A texture design wasn't made because one wasn't needed. NPCs dropped armour in FO1, I don't see any ghouls dropping armour in Necropolis. Texture or not, they never wore armour. They were under attack from the Masters army, they fought to a stalemate, and never an armour was donned. And Super Mutants can wear armour, they do in every game thus far. The Nightkin on FO1 evidently wore armour. Unity patrols in FO2 wore armour. And most Brutes and Masters wear armour in FO?, even if you can't pick it up afterward, it still provides protection from my experience, and is more than a simple aesthetic.

I didn't have anything in mind, lore is lore. I'm merely the messenger. Ghouls are ghouls, when the bombs dropped I don't think the wasteland was very discriminating as to how it mutated people in different area codes. There will always be exceptions to a rule, few at most. Not on the scale presented in FO?.

So, Ghouls dont wear armour because they dont drop it...
But Supermutants DO wear armour, in spite of them not dropping it.

Not all humans wearning armour drop it - I'm reasonably sure the BOS dont drop armour, and on some other people who's textures are wearing it, its not dropped (Combat armour is the big one I'm thinking of, I dont think I've ever seen that just drop). So despite their textures, are they not wearing armour too?

Is there a logical reason why a clothes-wearing ghoul cannot don armour?

Ah BOS, my favorite subject:

No argument here about wanting to collect books.

But Holotags? Why just bring back the Holotags of fallen soldiers? Would it not be more prudent and more in keeping with their original ideologies, if they asked volunteers to bring back the Power Armor and Energy Weapon of fallen brothers too? Whatever happened to the religious side of this techno-religious organization? I can understand wanting to put the original mission on hold to to help the wasteland, but scrapping a 200 year old belief system altogether? And aren't they always complaining about being outgunned and outmanned by Super Mutants? Then why ask for holotags and leave perfectly good tech to rot?

Their personality shift has also made them a bit -- stupid. They trust the Lone Wanderer on a whim, just because he's the son of a former friend. Did they not hear that I blew up Megaton? Do they not know what I'm capable of?

Aside from free access to their base, they give you Power Armor. Yup, you, an outsider, not even a member yet and they give you free Power Armor without so much as a quest to prove your trustworthiness. Apparently, Power Armor's a dime a dozen on the East Coast that they can afford to leave it behind or give it out to complete strangers. Not only that, but training as well. The once secretive organization is giving out tech and trade secrets like candy. Heck, the Vault Dweller was already an Initiate and he still wasn't allowed any Power Armor until he proved himself. They even held the pretense that they don't trade with outsiders until Lyons gives the go-ahead. A pointless delay since Lyons agrees without so much as a Speech check.

Also, why aren't the Enclave, Brotherhood, or Outcasts interested in Fort Constantine? And for that matter, after so many years, why haven't any of them muscled in on Megaton and commandeered that Nuke?

Thats a fair question. Bringing back the Power armour maybe can be argued out of by its weight, but the guns and ammo....

Ergh...If ghouls were to wear armour it would be relative to human armour. Super Mutants wear Super Mutant armour. If this is 'really' important then why don't you ask Bethesda why the Muties don't drop their armour?

BoS don't drop armour because the armour is completely destroyed. A great gaming mechanic that also prevented you from getting PA without having to gain access to the BoS bunker. As for combat armour I don't remember needing to kill anyone in combat armour in FO1. But the same argument can be applied, Combat Armour is the first armour in the high tier of armour in FO1, and just like BoS armour could easily give in before the wearer does, that's what real armour designed to do at least.

But let's keep on topic. We're talking about lore. As much as you enjoy pointlessly arguing with me, please stop.

Exactly, we are talking about lore... Tell me *exactly* where it says in the lore that ghouls cannot wear armour - Hint- it doesnt. By your arguments noone in Fallout ever eats anything because its never shown in game. Anything in game that shows you to be wrong, such as Percy wearing armour is an "inconsistency".

Its not possible that maybe ghoul armour isnt exactly attractive to the PC - Ghouls are known to sweat profusely, and smell bad - thats in lore, not some blind interpreatation based on game mechanics and limtied space for textures. Do you wanna be running around in very stinky armour? I think broken power armour parts and a kevlar suit of armour with a few bullet holes have a higher resale value than stinky ghoul clothes.

I'm not arguing with you for the sake of arguing - I'm arguing with you becuase I think you're wrong and arent making any logical sense with your contradictory arguments.

It doesn't say in the lore that ghouls can't wear armour. But ghouls don't wear armour. They didn't wear it in Necropolis, and they didn't wear it in Gecko. And both locations were under great scrutiny and pressure where a means of armament would have been greatly beneficial to their survival. If they could have worn it, they would have. The Fallout world is much like Torg - physics and natural laws are not the same as in our universe, but are based instead on 50s sensibilities and pulp era comics - the Fallout universe is what people in the 50s believed the future would be. There are some things that just don't need to be addressed. In almost every single game in exsistance, things like eating, sleeping, and defacating aren't addressed, neither do they need to be, unless you're playing The Sims. Lets see what else would you like to base my reasoning on.

Sometimes you can't avoid inconsistencies, and just choose the path that has as little of them as possible. I didn't make FO1 & 2, if you really want to know, head over to the Interplay forums and you can ask Chris Taylor yourself, he posts there on occasion.

Okay okay, to adress the eating thing right now, in Fo2, I think it was called the pit, it was east of klamath... Anyways in this drug infested town there is a place called moms and the owner, Mom, constantly asks you if you are HUNGRY and want some rat pies or something. Not to mention there are cheesy poofs and microwaveable meals everywhere. I don't know if you were just being facecious or something but it's quite obvious people eat in the Fallout Universe.

To others bring up the fact that Ghouls being able to run being a silly topic. Yes it is. It's good to discuss the silly things in life.
But I guess for the sake of sales the ferrel ghouls do make good subway monsters. :shrug:

Ghouls wearin armor has always bothered me, but I guess one explanation for this occurence of Armored Ghouls is mabye the less rotted ones can still be proficient with it, but for the most part every (except Fo3) Ghoul I have seen was a green zombie with muscles rotting off the bones. And to whoever brought up the fact that Necropolis and Geko were both oppressed areas, and that if the Ghouls could have worn armor they would have. I agree with you, that was a very good point. I'm pretty sure that out of all of the Ghouls in the world, considering most of thier current situations, they would be wearing armor if they could.

And as for the BoS, the idea of only bringing tags back pissed me off. In Fo1 the guards were boasting of how only members of the Brotherhood of Steel could ever wear Power Armor because they were super bad**s and even if you did kill a Knight the armor would be too damaged to be used. And how only the BoS has all the best technology and weapons. Yet, in Fallout 3 they just leave thier dead laying around with super awesome power armor just layin' around like it's nothing, not to mention thier weapons, but then again, they really did dumb down how big and bad the BoS is. I rarely saw any Knight without some kinda huge weapon of mass destruction, and now they're kinda' content with a combat shotty. I don't know, all my points are very nit picky but it's the little things that count. You know?

And why did someone bring up Oblivion? I don't get what you're sayin'.

super mutants probably left ghouls alone because they knew that the FEV wouldnt work on them

Yeah, that makes sense, since they make a big deal out of finding pure humans from vaults. A rotted one is probably like finding a car without an engine to them.

or a single mom :hubbahubba:

:hehe: I love people that can make me laugh at 2:35 in the morning. :hehe:

You know, all of that time you folks spend complaining about inconsistencies could be used to come up with simple explanations.

You don't even need to do that for this "inconstancy", though. As Ausir pointed out, Lenny (a ghoul) can be equipped with armor in Fallout 2. But Ghouls being able to wear armor has been around since the original game. Set, the leader of Necropolis, is clearly wearing some form of armor in his talking head. I think some of you put too much stock into what the sprites in the first two games display, the fact of the matter is that there's very few sprites for all characters. The ghouls have what, two sprites? One for normal Ghouls, and one for Glowing Ones. Judging an inconsistency based on the aesthetics of the first two games is silly since all they had were undetailed 2D images which were often inconsistent with the talking heads.

Ok, so the two exceptions are Lenny and Set. Though I wonder if actually killing set will drop some armour. Maybe on the flipside of aesthetics, you might be mislead by what you can see due to the talking head. If I had my copy of FO1, I'd gladly do the research myself.

Either way, the majority of ghouls can't wear armour, because they would if they could, and they don't. Even detracting from gameplay, a limping, peeling, hunching shell of what was once a man would hardly be able to benefit from any more encumbrance than their natural afflictions allow.

I still think the D.C mutants would grind gouls into a pulp. The mariposa mutants were on the whole more intelligent, and as a concequence alot more reasonable, yet they still saw the need to crush ghouls under their heel. Why would an even more discriminating, violent strain of mutant decide they were worthy to live.