As usual, there is no perfect good ending :sadvaultboy:

I choose to crush the white leg, and then spare Salt.

However I feel sorry to Daniel because "His failures haunted him for the rest of his days." is the worst for him. Besides that, I also feel sad that there will be violence conflict between tribes.

I evacuated, did all optionals, and spared Salt-Upon-Wounds (this being my decision, not Joshua's.)

I'm fairly satisfied with the ending. The Sorrows and Dead Horses are pretty much prospering, and the White Legs have crumbled into nothing but petty bands of raiders. I'm a little upset that nobody heard from Follows-Chalk again (Civilization must've been too much for him. I didn't mean to kill him. :[), and Daniel is more or less haunted by the fact that he left Zion, but lives happily enough. I'm also upset that they didn't have a Joshua ending slide if you evacuate. Why, Obsidian?

Well whooda thunk it? :facepalm:
I indeed agree. This is the best ending.
I knew there were two endings with two variations but I thought that releasing S-I-W in the Joshua Ending would bear the same consequences as in the Daniel Ending, so I never played it. Where it made the Daniel Ending worse, it made the Joshua Ending better—go figure.


Life is not perfect.

Daniel is one of those tortured souls who would not have been happy no matter which way things ended. (too many negatives in that sentence.)

Most see Daniel as the "good" guy and Joshua as the "bad" guy and therefor ascribe their chosen paths as "good" or "bad." It would do those folks well to remember the adage that, "the road to Hell is paved with good intentions." I can't understand how anyone choosing the Daniel Ending can sit and listen to the ensuing slide show and be proud of what they accomplished:

The Sorrows are decimated and driven from their homeland; they barely eke out a subsistence living in their new home. The Dead Horses (could the Devs have been a little subtler with those names? I'm suffering from blunt-force trauma. Enough already :shakehead: ) are continually pestered by bands of White-Leg raiders and the 80s gang. (It's even worse if S-I-W is let go.) They never manage to get a proper foothold without the symbiosis of the other tribe. Happy Trails Trading is in the same fix. Joshua is left to stew in his psychotic pool of pathos and Daniel is forced to live with the ever increasing burden as he realizes he was wrong.

Boy-Howdy, does it get any better than that? What a great ending.

That's not what the Daniel ending said. Also I guess you forgot that with the Graham ending tension was rising between the 2 tribes, eventually it could end in war.

Yeah, the evacuation trip only goes bad if you don't do all the optional quests, there's no word of what becomes of Graham, the Dead Horses are more peaceful and helpful, the Sorrows adapt to their new home, and Daniel simply misses Zion and wonders if he made the right choice.

I actually take it back about what I said regretting the evacuation decision. I did it the other way on another character and then returned to Zion; still felt like I didn't have closure. Nothing but nameless NPCs who can't tell me how things are going. So I don't think it's an evacuation issue, I think the closure of Honest Hearts in general just svcks.

Sorry guys. I'm not convinced.

"Their adjustment to their new home was not without difficulty. But eventually the Sorrows came to accept the loss of Zion" Is hardly cause for cheering and pats-on-the-back all 'round. Especially compared to the ending where they remain in Zion.

The White-Legs devolve into petty raiding bands and leave Zion Valley a polluted cistern.

The only ones coming off well at all are the Dead Horses because of Joshua's teachings and legend. But remember they are isolated in a small corner of Zion, the rest of which is left uninhabitable.

If you can be happy with that, more power to you. I'm sure you have reconciled yourself with the treatment of indigenous and aboriginal peoples since history has been recorded. You are certainly not in the minority.

As for the Joshua Ending the tensions between the tribes are a normal course of socialization between peoples that have learned to stand on their own. Conflict is inevitable. Both Daniel and Joshua and the New Canaanites work to mediate and in the "best" ending where S-I-W is spared, the tribes do not militarize.

If you don't want to replay the endings, they are all already up on TouTube. Pay particular attention to the Joshua Endings with the different treatments of S-I-W. (The Tribal corollary to Joshua, I might point out.)

No. There are several "bad" endings; two "Okay" endings; one "good" ending and one "Best" ending. Contrary to what many have proffered, there are no truly "Neutral" endings.

For those of you who are satisfied with making the best of a bad situation, that is a rationalization that has never advanced civilization— for good or ill.

And Zion is but a place.

You would put the condition of a place above the quality of human lives? Also, if you talk to Daniel, he's been telling the Sorrows for a while that he plans on moving them. They do not object (of course, Joshua will argue that surely some must disagree with the idea, though they do not voice it) and agree with the plan. Knowing this, I doubt it takes them that long to adapt.

He also tells you that the Sorrows are so compassionate that they even mourn the deaths of the White Legs, their enemies. The choice you're making is simple as black and white: preserve their homeland or preserve their culture.



The Dead Horses do not live in Zion. Zion is the home of the Sorrows. Joshua brought the Dead Horses you see there in attempt to protect the Sorrows and fight off the White Legs.




And I quote:

"For years after the defeat of the White Legs, Daniel did his best to minister to the Sorrows' spiritual needs. Try as he might, he could not hold back the tribe's increasing militancy and reverence of Joshua Graham. Demoralized, he returned to his family and Dead Horse Point. His failures haunted him for the rest of his days. "

"Having helped eradicate the White Legs from Zion, the Dead Horses returned to Dead Horse Point in triumph. They remained neutral toward the Sorrows, but as years went on, there were periods of competitive friction, even violence, between the tribes. The New Canaanites - Daniel especially - intervened regularly as mediators, but found it difficult to reconcile the tribes' conflicts. "

"The threat of the White Legs ended, Joshua Graham helped the Sorrows and Dead Horses tend to their fallen comrades and secure Zion. The Courier's words had stayed Joshua's wrath in his darkest hour, and in sparing Salt-Upon-Wounds, he was changed. While he continued to advocate militant opposition to the enemies of New Canaan, he sometimes showed quarter to those who crossed his family. Eventually this new spirit would diminish the myth of the Burned Man in distant lands - a small price for the peace it brought to Joshua Graham. "

"The defeat of the White Legs in Zion marked a turning point in the fortunes of the Happy Trails Caravan Company. Every two months, the caravan met with the New Canaanites in Zion Valley to trade. Happy Trails soon returned to prosperity. The vigilance of the Sorrows and Dead Horses in defending southwestern Utah, initially startling to Happy Trails caravans, soon proved a blessing. The tribes united against the 80s, driving them back from Highway 50, and thus opening yet another trading route for Happy Trails caravans. "

(Side Note regarding the 80s: "The 80s are a tribe of raiders that live in northern Nevada, near the shores of the Great Salt Lake. Their territories border with those of the White Legs. The 80s are known for raiding frontier towns for supplies and kidnapping people. They are rightly feared for their ability to cover large areas of land with very few men." )


They definitely do. That's four endings that suggest they do. That's like the majority of the DLC's endings right there. The Happy Trails ending even suggests they're expanding (or at least traveling and seeking war under the guide of Graham, similar to how the Dead Horses followed Graham to Zion), since the 80s are nowhere near Zion. Highway 50 cuts through the middle of Utah and Nevada horizontally; Zion is in the deep southwesternmost corner of Utah. Great Salt Lake and Northern Nevada aren't exactly close to Zion. The only change that sparing SIW makes is that it changes them into warriors who know mercy, but they are warriors nonetheless.

"The New Canaanites - Daniel especially - intervened regularly as mediators, but found it difficult to reconcile the tribes' conflicts. "
Wow they had disagreement and sometimes fought with each other. I sometimes fight my brother over stuff does that mean in some psychotic lets kill everything person... nope. Disagreements are bound to happen that's how the world works, Its nature.


"While he continued to advocate militant opposition to the enemies of New Canaan, he sometimes showed quarter to those who crossed his family."
"he sometimes showed quarter to those who crossed his family."
"showed quarter"
Sure Joshua did teach if someone tries to take your home fight them, but at the same time he showed that killing them all isn't the way and sometimes its best not to kill them.


"The vigilance of the Sorrows and Dead Horses in defending southwestern Utah, initially startling to Happy Trails caravans, soon proved a blessing. The tribes united against the 80s, driving them back from Highway 50, and thus opening yet another trading route for Happy Trails caravans. "
Uniting together to push back a big raider group that threatened the lives of many people. not seeing the bad side of this.


Sure The sorrows had to learn to fight thus losing their pacifist side. But guess what fighting is inevitable no matter how far you run or how long you run you WILL eventually have to fight people. If you convince Joshua to spare Salt-on-Wound, The Sorrows learn not to kill everything that threatens them and to sometimes let them go. They know what mercy is and frankly that's what matters.

One upside with the "Evacuate Zion" ending. It leaves the White Legs in Zion as a resource to be farmed for high end, and expensive for NPCs, equipment.

Yeah, I'd agree. It says they remained neutral but also said there was violence. I'd assume they fought here and there over issues but refused to let those issues turn into war out of respect for one another.




Sometimes showed quarter.



It's a matter of opinion. Of course I see how people can see this as a good thing. The "bad part" though is, go look up where the 80s live and where Highway 50 is. That's not anywhere near Zion. These tribes are traveling to wage this war: it's not a defensive war anymore. This to me implies that Joshua continues looking for war and continues calling on the tribes to help. This can be seen as good or bad: on the good side, they're going after the bad groups. On the bad side, an offensive war is, in my opinion, a step in the wrong direction and it's incredibly likely that Joshua is behind this, and do you really want the former Legate of the Legion running around looking for war, whether he's reformed or not? He'd still be running around playing the right hand of God (or if he's not involved, his "students" are playing the right hand of God), trying to purge the evil groups from the earth. That may be fine, but in the process they've learned to wage an offensive war rather than a defensive one. It's one thing to defend your homeland, it's another to invade anyone with morals or habits you don't agree with...



And thus is the story of Fallout. War never changes. Fallout presents this theme to you and you're supposed to think about it. And looking at Honest Hearts, what do I think most people will choose? Helping Joshua, of course. Why? Because some guys are attacking the Sorrows and Joshua claims he only wants to help defend their homeland. That makes perfect sense; nothing wrong with a defensive war. Daniel argues Graham wants more than that and if it's one thing to learn from Graham, it's that war got them into this mess. Violence begets violence and those that don't learn from the past are doomed to repeat it: it's time to try something new, according to Daniel. There's nothing wrong with being a peaceful pacifist either, in the same way it's not wrong to defend your home. But what's the issue? Why should the Sorrows have to move just because the White Legs are dikes? And we know for certain that the Sorrows can stay in Zion if the White Legs are gone, whereas Daniel may have a good plan, but there's no certainty that it'll put an end to the violence. A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush, as they say. Thus, everyone who plays doesn't have faith in Daniel's plan, whereas Grahams plan is nice and safe and isn't even an evil path; you're STILL a good guy if you follow Graham's advice.
And yet, when you actually follow through with the plans and see the endings, you see that Daniel's plan WOULD work and it would bring peace to all, and you see that Graham's path is a bit iffy.

In this sense, I give Honest Hearts credit for being well written. It makes you think. It basically presents a very iffy and non-promising solution to the player, then presents a sure-fire, non-evil solution. You pick the latter and think "yoohoo," you did good. Then you pick the former just for the sake of trying out everything, and when you see it's endings, you sorta see why war never changes: because the path that changes war and stops it involves a lot of risk, self-endangerment and no sense of revenge or satisfaction.

That is not what I said. I said it was preferable to leave them in their homeland and help them survive and thrive there. A homeland is not a mere place. Otherwise there would have been a lot less war in our history. Massive population relocation is a travesty.

Point taken but inconsequential. It is contiguous in the HH map—not hundreds of miles to the northeast. if the Dead Horses had actually returned home they would likely have little contact with the Sorrows. As far as the game world goes my comments stand.

Not germane to the issue. Int he "Best" ending the tribes and the New Canaanites wipe out the vestiges of the White-Legs and the 80s. This only proves that the fortitude given the Sorrows helped them survive and thrive. There is nothing to indicate that their culture suffered. Indeed their compassion and mercy may have been part of the friction with the more war-like Dead Horses.

Nonetheless there is also no indication that the strife was anything out of the ordinary and couldn't be mediated. There is less to hope for in the just "Okay" endings.

I think the telling point in your anolysis and our basic fundamental disagreement, is your first line, "And Zion is but a place."

The tribes of Israel and the Egyptians; Angles, Saxons, Gauls, Romans and Greeks; the Mongols, Hannibal, the Chinese, Koreans and Japanese; the Indigenous peoples of North and South America and the English, French Portuguese and Spanish... I have barely scratched the surface and all would tend to disagree with you.

The ages old answer to the question, "My place or yours?" is:

War

...and War never changes.

But that does not mean they are correct.

I'm not suggesting they should all go surrender their lands to any aggressive culture, but lemme put it this way.

The first time I did the Vault 34 quest where you decide between the Sharecropper's crops and the stranded Vault 34 dwellers, I went with the sharecroppers. Why? Because Vault 34 is old as dirt and there's no telling how long that distress signal has been there, so I'm sure as hell not risking the crops for the possibility of saving some people that may already be dead. Next playthrough, I wanted to do things different and see what happens if I do, and then I realized: Those dudes are actually alive. If you choose to save them, they show up in one of the refugee areas. They're actually alive. Ever since then, I always save the vault dwellers. Why? Because there's no risk; I know that they live, and in my personal opinion, I'd rather save some irreplaceable lives in exchange for some land and some crops being polluted and destroyed.

It's the same issue here. At first, I think why the hell risk an evacuation trip when we know that defending ourselves would solve the problem once and for all? Then I play it through a second time and realize that wait, Daniel's plan is a success and through it, every person and tribe can achieve peace. I seek as much peace as possible unless there's a huge backlash, and in this case the backlash is that the Sorrows have to change their home: a plan they've known about and agreed to, that Daniel has prepared for and they'll get all the help in the world from the Canaanites and the Dead Horses for. Normally I'd agree, ok but how do we know the White Legs won't invade again, but this is a game. A game with a definitive ending and a definitive result for our actions, and it's telling us that the White Legs basically give up on their hunt.

It's as simple as that really. I see the ending and I see a possibility for peace with the only loss being that of Zion, and Zion is but a place. Some people may prefer to have the tribes become militant and have them go on a crusade to purge all the raiders from the land, and if that's their opinion, more power to them. But the way I see it, evacuating is a move for peace with no backlashes, whereas fighting is a move for a crusade of sorts against the wrong-doers, with a little bit of backlash.

And herein lies our disagreement. This scenario perfectly illustrates that "right & wrong," "good & bad" are not black and white, but relative. It is where fundamentalists of every stripe fail when they rail against secular relativism and fail to see the reality of moral relativism.

It is also why this game has been so appealing since FO1.

Neither you nor I are "wrong" in our assessments. We differ in our moral world view. This difference has played out on the world stage since hominids became self aware and will continue through whatever post apocalyptic world eventually befalls us.

Yep. If I'd said that evacuating is the "good" ending (don't remember if I did), I didn't actually mean that it was superior or better, but rather that I generally associate the most peaceful or innocent solution with being the good ending. Why? Because it's kind of hard to argue that you're more good or innocent than an ending where no one freaking suffers or dies (at least as far as the game is concerned, considering that realistically, it's likely that other random travelers would suffer at the hands of the 80s if one chose to evacuate Zion).

It certainly sounds like it. Zion isn't "just a piece of land", it's the Sorrow's home....where they were born, what thier ancestors bequeathed to them, and where thier bones lie. If one's home, hearth and the bones of one's ancestors aren't worth drawing a sword in the defense of, then what is?

To be short, I see no upside of encouraging a gang of thieves, murderers, and bullies by giving them what they want. Especially since they can only survive by scavenging or taking what they want from innocent people....little wonder they wanted to join the Legion.

I find the irony that beating the White Legs and then allowing the survivors to flee actually makes the victory more complete while removing the onus of being responsible for the White Leg's inevitable extermination delicious, too.

My favorite ending is with the Sneering Imperialist Perk. Joshua Graham becomes even more vicious :twirl:

I somehow glossed over this earlier.

Yes. this mod is fraught with references, parallels, allegories and flat-out-rip-offs :whistling:

I an having great difficulty discussing the mod and staying within forum rules. :confused: it is obvious that the devs have no regard for them :disguise:

I voted for wiping out the White Legs. This was clearly IMO the best outcome for all. I thought the best ending would be to evacuate Zion. This ending would supposedly leave White Legs in Zion so you could return and do some battling with these White Legs raiding party's. However after evacuating the Sorrows, leaving Zion and then returning, I cannot find a White Leg to save my life. Plenty of Dead Horses still sneaking around and lots of animals, but not one single White Leg. Bummer. Because of this there is really no reason to choose one path over the other, so you might as well kill the White Legs, and offer prosperity for all involved.

Until a new threat from another tribe, or even the Legion, makes the Sorrows run away again.

I went with crush the white legs, but the final mission seemed kind of short. Looking at the wiki, it seems like evacuation provides for 3 additional combat quests, and you can still fight Salt at the end. I'm not really interested in the best finale, but rather the meatiest final quest. Can anyone elaborate on their experience?

Evacuating Zion basically makes Daniel gather the Sorrows and the supplies and head for the exit tunnel, saying he'll meet you there. Graham comes to you saying there's a couple issues that need to be taken care of first to ensure a safe trip out of Zion, which introduces a quest to free some prisoners, a quest to settle an issue with some Sorrows warriors wanting revenge for their burial grounds being desicrated and a quest to clear the road for the Sorrows. If you do these before reaching Daniel, the evacuation will be a complete success, there will be minimal loss of life and the Sorrows adapt to their new home well. If you don't do all of them, the evacuation goes horribly, many die or get picked off along the trip and the Sorrows need two full generations to adapt to their new home. So basically, you could kind of argue they're NOT so optional, unless you're a total ass and just don't give a damn, but I doubt a total ass would choose the evacuation path to begin with.

The prisoners have to be freed either by killing all the guards and opening the lock or you can try to sneak by (which with Graham in tow and his aggressive behavior, good luck). The burial grounds, you can either convince the Sorrows warriors to let it go, assist them in getting revenge on the White Legs or deal with the White Legs for them. Clearing the road for the Sorrows is really nothing special. You just kill all the White Legs near a bridge that you pretty much have to cross to meet Daniel anyways. Once you reach Daniel, you run into SIW and you can either battle and kill him, or talk to him, convincing him to leave in one of three ways. (I don't remember all three, but I remember I chose telling SIW that his tribe should seek worthy warriors to battle against, not innocents who don't even show any signs of resistance.)

That definitely sounds like the meatier experience. I'm replaying from a save before the big decision so I can explore zion while white legs are still around to fight (was bummed to find out they were gone when I went back to explore after completing the dlc) so looks like I'll definitely go that route this time. I'm a combat junkie so I thought crush the white legs would be the better choice for more action, surprising that it wasn't.

Well it's still not THAT much more action. It's comparable in size to the three quests you do with Waking Cloud where you gotta steal totems, disarm traps (or just kill in those two) and deal with the Yao Guai. But yeah, still meatier than walking to the enemy, watching rocks explode, going through a cave with an entire three enemies, then walking some more to a final battle you can easily skip out on.

Yeah, not sure why they made te meatier choice going with Daniel, when I'd wager most people would want to go with the much cooler Burned Man. Daniel was such a sad sack.