FANDOM


Icon nowrite
This forum page has been archived. Please do not make any further edits unless they are for maintenance purposes.
Forums: Index > Wiki discussion > Add A Karma Level To NPC Templates
 
Gametitle-Wiki
Gametitle-Wiki

I believe adding a Karma Level for NPC's would be useful. Most NPCs do not have written on their page if killing them is a good or bad thing. So I wonder if anyone here, and the sysops, if you/they would like that to be added to the NPC page. The Karma level for any NPC can be found with a GECK. The levels as previously said on the wiki are:
Very Good (-Karma)
Good (-Karma)
Neutral (-Karma)
Evil (No Karma)
Very Evil (+Karma)
Yumnarer 22:34, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Against. Fo3's karma system is utterly broken. That Furry Bastard 22:57, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
I Personally think this is a good idea, it would be really helpful for some *new* players to determine who is good and who is bad. I think it would be best to add it to the infobox, with a link to the Karma page.
But the entire point of Fallout is that there is no good/bad dichotomy. That Furry Bastard 22:19, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
So Mister Burke isn't evil? The Regulators aren't Good? you can't honestly say that. Sure, from a perspective, maybe "cleansing" the people of the wastes is a good deed, and helping them is bad, but if you look at it from a general stand point (or just the development, like the GECK) the karma levels are determined. Killing = Bad, Helping = Good.
Nice, use extremes to substantiate your point. Why don't you crawl over to BGSF, that's about their level. Point is, Beth ARBITRARILY marked certain groups as evil, for instance, the Outcasts. At worst, they are grey, at best, just a particularly gruff and rude bunch of professionals doing their job, that is, preserving humanity's progress. It gets even worse when you look into previous games, as the only evil faction is the Enclave and even there you can't be too sure, as Charles Curling DID understand the error of his ways quite fast. But, to be fair, let's look at Fo3 a bit more. Lyons' Brotherhood of Steel, a faction fighting a hopeless battle of attrition, sending poorly trained conscripts in poorly maintained T-45d power armor to certain death against the brutal supermutants. Are they good (trying to help the Capital Wasteland) or evil (sending poorly trained locals to their deaths just because they need cannon fodder to keep the mutants at bay, abandoning Project Purity because it didn't yield profit)? Colonel Autumn, an Enclave officer with a conscience, opposing genocide, preferring to activate the purifier and rebuild the United States in the traditional way? Is he good or evil? Rivet City, exploiting bastards that scoop up every piece of advanced tech from the hands of smaller towns and abuse their power as the sole supplier of pure food in the wastes, good or evil? Crowley, who wants three people dead as revenge for what he suffered - good or bad? I can list examples all night, but understand this - there is far, far more to the alignment of a person than a numerical value arbitrarily assigned to him by a developer. That Furry Bastard 22:44, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Alright, because I didn't say that before, open your eyes. I said from CERTAIN stand points some people can be labeled as evil who are portrayed as good, and vice versa, BUT WE'RE NOT TRYING TO DEAL WITH MORALS HERE. What Yum is insisting is that we put a karma rating to tell you what kind of karma you get for killing them, not if they can be considered good or evil from different perspectives. So learn to know what people are saying before you go spewing shit. --RockandRhyme 23:12, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
It's a simple commodity really. I mean, because of what Furry said that makes it difficult for a good player kill a seemingly evil character but doesn't want the negative Karma doing so. I'm not going to argue, Fallout 3 has a lot of things in it that make you think otherwise on situations. But the game doesn't adapt to your morals. Yumnarer 01:24, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
Then mention it inside the articles themselves. Actually, most articles have that already, so cluttering up a template is pointless. That Furry Bastard 08:44, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
I would hardly call it cluttering up. It's one line in the table, which I think would do good, as some noobs don't want to scan an article searching for it. Also, stop trying to act like an internet badass, I shot down your theory, just leave with that. --RockandRhyme 21:23, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.

Fandom may earn an affiliate commission on sales made from links on this page.

Stream the best stories.

Fandom may earn an affiliate commission on sales made from links on this page.

Get Disney+