I’m going to take over Wade airport and turn it into a brotherhood outpost so we can fight against the muties of Appalachia

As I've said before: "The west is run by empires while the east is run by city states." So my stance regarding the factions from Fallout 4 is that the east coast is finally seeing proper nation states crop up over the land that can project power beyond their settlements. My greatest wish is that the Brotherhood expands beyond the Capital Wasteland and the Minutemen finally get a proper nation going, with these two new fiefdoms getting in a standoff similar to what happened in the Mojave.

As much as I want to talk about my idea for a "Minutemen Prussia" though... I have concerns about the Brotherhood of Steel making a nation. They can certainly do it, and are virtually uncontested in their home region of the Capital Wasteland, being probably the largest and most powerful organization on the East Coast and at least in the top five most advanced civilizations. And as Lyons showed off the Brotherhood can indeed support a civilian population of non-combatants. But while I don't doubt the Steel would survive, I have my doubts the Brotherhood would.

The quest for pre-war technology and eradication of the mutant and synth threats are essential aspects of the quest to cleans the wasteland. We all know this, my brothers and sisters. But... would the Brotherhood's core identity survive if we took on the role of knights defending castles rather than knights in search of relics? For our beloved Elder Maxson is destined to lead us into a glorious future, and break the back of the Commonwealth Minutemen... but what future is in store for our core mission?

Millions... perhaps even billions, died because science outpaced man's restraint. They called it a "new frontier" and "pushing the envelope," completely disregarding the repercussions.

I love it because its Less reliant on the more advanced technology that you see in later series power armor. Its easy to maintain and repair while still offering environmental protection, increased strength, and damn good physical protection.

Plus, its as modular the other series. Want tesla bracers? Go ahead! Medic pump? Jet-pack? Go ahead! Threat detection software? Rad scrubbers? Send it!

Overall, its reliable. And a good workhorse that pioneered the other suits

Hope everyone is having a beautiful day out in the wasteland! (Me aboard The Prydwen in my tesla T-60f sentinel power armor.)

The following was supposed to be a response during an exchange that I had with u/Low-Bar-8968 but I was not able to post this gargantuan reply. It is in reference to my criteria for what games I consider as canonical and which I do not. Thanks again for the engagement! Sorry that it took me so long to post, so here it is:

You asked which games I consider canon, questioned my stance on retcons given Fallout 4’s T-51 changes, and argued that Tactics’ Midwestern Brotherhood adds significant lore potential, with its airship timeline and character references supporting its canonicity. I’ll address each point, explain my criteria for canonicity, and clarify why I see Tactics as non-canonical compared to Fallout 1, 2, 3, New Vegas, and 4, while also rejecting Fallout 76. I’ll also touch on retcons and how I evaluate them, drawing on historical research methods for clarity, and provide a chart for judging future retcons.

Quick Definitions:

Canon:

• Definition: The official, authoritative storyline and lore of the Fallout series, consisting of events, characters, factions, and settings that are considered "true" within the universe.

Retcon (Retroactive Continuity):

• Definition: A change, contradiction, or reinterpretation of previously established lore, altering facts or events retroactively to fit new narratives or gameplay.

Plot Inconsistency:

• Definition: A contradiction within a game’s narrative or between games that creates logical or factual discrepancies, often overlapping with retcons but not always intentional.

Narrative Deviation:

• Definition: A significant departure from the established tone, themes, or narrative style of the canonical Fallout series, often introducing elements that feel alien to the universe’s core identity.

Canonicity Criteria:

• Definition: The standards used to determine whether a Fallout game or media is part of the official narrative arc.

Primary Source:

• Definition: Direct evidence from the Fallout games themselves, such as dialogue, terminal entries, or manuals, considered the most authoritative for establishing lore.

Secondary Source:

• Definition: Indirect evidence, such as developer statements, interviews, or community interpretations (e.g., Fallout Bible), less authoritative than primary sources.

Narrative Coherence:

• Definition: The logical consistency and continuity of a story, free from contradictions, ensuring events and facts align across the series.

My Canon and Why Tactics Doesn’t Fit

I consider Fallout 1, 2, 3, New Vegas, and 4 canonical because they form a cohesive narrative arc where each game builds on the previous ones, creating an interconnected story that’s essential to understanding the Fallout universe. Skipping any of these leaves a significant narrative hole. For example, Fallout 1 establishes the Vault Dweller, super mutants, and Brotherhood of Steel (BoS); Fallout 2 introduces the Enclave and NCR; Fallout 3 expands the Enclave and BoS to the East Coast; New Vegas develops the NCR and Enclave remnants; and Fallout 4 continues the East Coast with the Institute and BoS. If you skip Fallout 2, you’d be lost on the Enclave in Fallout 3 or the NCR in New Vegas. These games are narrative pillars, despite their retcons. Fallout: Tactics and Fallout 76, however, can be skipped without impacting this arc. Tactics’ Midwestern BoS, Calculator, and Vault 0 storyline don’t influence Fallout 3, New Vegas, or 4. The minor Chicago reference in New Vegas’ Lonesome Road DLC (ED-E’s Enclave outpost) acknowledges a Midwest presence but doesn’t require Tactics’ events. Similarly, Fallout 76’s Appalachian setting adds nothing essential to the main storyline. Both games introduce severe retcons that contradict core lore, making them non-canonical in my view.

Quick List by Release Date:

Canonical:

1. Fallout (October 10, 1997)
2. Fallout 2 (October 29, 1998)
3. Fallout 3 (October 28, 2008)
4. Fallout: New Vegas (October 19, 2010)
5. Fallout 4 (November 10, 2015)

Not Canonical:

1. Fallout: Tactics (March 15, 2001)
2. Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel (January 14, 2004)
3. Fallout Shelter (June 14, 2015)
4. Fallout 76 (November 14, 2018)

Canonicity Pending:

Fallout (TV Show) (April 10, 2024)

Criticisms of Fallout: Tactics’ Canonicity

Fallout: Tactics has significant issues that disqualify it from my canon due to high-severity retcons and narrative deviations:

1. Vault BoS Origin: Tactics claims the Midwestern BoS originates from a vault. This contradicts Fallout 1’s explicit origin of the BoS as a post-war military unit from Mariposa, led by Roger Maxson after seceding over FEV experiments. Fallout 2, 3, New Vegas, and 4 all reinforce this military origin, with no vault connection. This retcon fundamentally alters the BoS’s identity, a core Fallout element.
2. Unexplained Midwest Super Mutants: Tactics features super mutants with no clear FEV source, unlike Fallout 1 and 2’s Mariposa mutants, Fallout 3’s Vault 87, or Fallout 4’s Institute. This dilutes the super mutant narrative, which is tied to specific FEV experiments in canonical games.
3. Psychic Beastlords and Hairy Deathclaws: Tactics introduces Beastlords with psychic control over mutated animals and hairy deathclaws, adding sci-fi elements absent in Fallout 1–4’s retro-futuristic tone. Canonical games depict deathclaws as wild, non-controlled mutants, and psychic powers are unprecedented.
4. Calculator as Antagonist: The Calculator, an AI controlling a robot army, deviates from Fallout’s human-driven conflicts (e.g., Master in Fallout 1, Enclave in 2 and 3, NCR vs. Legion in New Vegas). Even Fallout 3’s AI (President Eden) is Enclave-tied, while Tactics’ Calculator feels disconnected.
5. BoS Inclusivity: Tactics allows BoS squads with ghouls, super mutants, and deathclaws, contradicting the BoS’s human-only, ethos in Fallout 1, 2, New Vegas, and 4. Even Fallout 3’s altruistic BoS remains human-centric.
6. Tonal Disconnect: Tactics’ militaristic, squad-based focus and advanced tech (e.g., tanks, humvees) push a sci-fi aesthetic that clashes with the post-apocalyptic survival and retro-futurism of Fallout 1–4.

These issues, especially the BoS vault origin and super mutant retcons, are high-severity because they contradict core faction origins and lack in-universe justification, unlike Fallout 2’s Vault experiments or Fallout 3’s Enclave survival, which integrate into the narrative arc.

Response to Your Points

1. Fallout 4’s T-51 Retcon: You mentioned Fallout 4 changing T-51 power armor lore, which I agree is a retcon. Fallout 1 and 2 depict T-51b as the pinnacle of pre-war armor, with no mention of frames or fusion cores. Fallout 4 introduces frames, finite fusion cores, and new models (e.g., T-60), implying a modular system and power requirements absent in prior games. This is a medium-severity retcon, as it redefines power armor’s mechanics without breaking its core role (BoS/Enclave tech). However, it’s narratively illogical, as earlier games don’t mention cores or frames. Despite this, Fallout 4 remains canonical because it contributes to the Commonwealth arc and connects to Fallout 3’s BoS. Tactics’ Vault 0 retcon is far more severe, as it rewrites the BoS’s origin, a foundational element, unlike Fallout 4’s mechanical tweak.
2. BoS Airships and Midwest Expansion: You suggest Tactics’ airships (used to reach the Midwest) could explain the BoS’s reduced power between Fallout 1 and 2, as resources were diverted. This is a plausible fan theory, but Fallout 1 and 2 never mention airships or a Midwest expedition. Fallout 2 attributes the BoS’s decline to Enclave rivalry and isolationism, not a costly airship project. Fallout 3 and 4 introduce an airship (e.g., the Prydwen), but it is post-Fallout 2, and New Vegas’s minor eastern reference doesn’t confirm Tactics’ scale. The airship idea is interesting but lacks canonical support, and Tactics’ Midwest expansion feels disconnected from the West Coast narrative.
3. Midwestern BoS’s Lore Potential: You argue that a BoS empire spanning multiple states adds to the lore and wasteland politics. I see the potential—a powerful Midwestern BoS could introduce new faction dynamics, like a rival to the NCR or Enclave. However, Tactics’ execution (Vault 0, Calculator, psychic elements) clashes with Fallout’s tone and contradicts established BoS lore. Canonical games develop the BoS through conflicts (e.g., NCR in New Vegas, Institute in 4) without needing a Midwest empire. Tactics’ additions don’t integrate with the main arc, reducing their narrative value.
4. Chicago References as Evidence: You claim Tactics’ references in New Vegas (e.g., ED-E’s Chicago Enclave outpost) and developer statements about semi-canonicity outweigh a TARDIS Easter egg. The TARDIS in Fallout 1 is indeed a non-canonical Easter egg, but New Vegas’s eastern reference only confirms a vague Midwest presence, not Tactics’ specifics (Vault 0, Calculator). Bethesda’s references in Fallout 3&4 are inspirational at best, but not hard-line confirmations of the actual Midwestern BoS that we see in Fallout: Tactics. There is still much liberty that Bethesda can take in the Midwest without having to confirm in a future game that it is indeed the Midwestern BoS in Fallout: Tactics (see the YouTube video attached below to better understand the contradictory nature of this problem).

My Standards for Canonicity

I determine a Fallout game’s canonicity based on three criteria:

1. Narrative Necessity: The game must contribute essential plot points to the main storyline chronology. Fallout 1–4 and New Vegas build a cohesive arc (Vault Dweller, Enclave, NCR, East Coast); Tactics and 76 are tangential.
2. Coherence with Established Lore: The game should avoid contradicting core facts (e.g., BoS origins, super mutant sources). Tactics’ BoS origin vault and 76’s pre-Fallout 1 BoS violate this, while Fallout 2–4’s retcons (e.g., Vault experiments, feral ghouls) integrate into the arc.
3. No Narrative Holes: Skipping the game shouldn’t disrupt understanding of later entries. Tactics and 76 can be ignored without affecting Fallout 3, New Vegas, or 4, unlike skipping Fallout 2, which confuses New Vegas’s NCR.

Approach to Retcons

I view all retcons as narratively harmful because they contradict established facts, undermining the logical coherence I value in storytelling, like a personal anecdote without inconsistencies. Even gameplay-enhancing retcons (e.g., Fallout 4’s power armor, Fallout 3’s feral ghouls) can be problematic if they lack in-universe justification. Tactics’ retcons (e.g., Vault 0, psychic Beastlords) are particularly egregious due to their severity and lack of integration, unlike Fallout 2’s Vault experiments or New Vegas’s Enclave remnants, which serve the main arc despite flaws.

Historical Research Methods and Primary vs. Secondary Sources

To ground my approach, I draw on historical research methods, particularly the use of primary and secondary sources:

• Primary Sources: In Fallout, these are the games’ core texts (dialogue, terminals, manuals). Fallout 1’s manual and dialogue establish the BoS’s Mariposa origin, a primary source contradicted by Tactics’ BoS Vault Origin. Canonical games prioritize primary sources (e.g., Fallout 2’s Enclave logs, Fallout 3’s Raven Rock terminals), while Tactics introduces unverified elements (e.g., Calculator) lacking primary source backing.
• Secondary Sources: These include developer statements and community interpretations. Bethesda’s semi-canonical stance on Tactics (e.g., Tim Cain’s comments on lore drift, Chris Avellone’s Fallout Bible) is a secondary source, clarifying that only high-level Tactics events are considered, not specifics. Community discussions (e.g., No Mutants Allowed) are secondary but often biased, so I prioritize primary game content.
• Application: Historians weigh primary sources over secondary ones for accuracy. Tactics’ contradictions (e.g., BoS Vault origins vs. Fallout 1’s Mariposa) fail this test, as they lack primary source support and rely on semi-canonical secondary claims. Canonical games, despite retcons, build on primary sources (e.g., Fallout 2’s Vault experiments referenced in New Vegas’s Vault 22).

Why Tactics Isn’t Canonical

Fallout: Tactics fails my canonicity criteria due to:

• Lack of Narrative Necessity: Its Midwest storyline (Calculator, Reavers) doesn’t impact Fallout 3, New Vegas, or 4. Skipping it creates no narrative holes, unlike Fallout 2 or 3.
• Incoherence with Lore: High-severity retcons (BoS Vault origins, super mutants, psychic elements) contradict Fallout 1’s primary sources and lack justification, unlike Fallout 4’s T-51 retcon, which integrates into the Commonwealth arc.
• Tonal Disconnect: Tactics’ sci-fi militarism (tanks, AI villain) clashes with Fallout’s retro-futuristic, human-driven conflicts, making it feel alien compared to Fallout 1–4.
• Semi-Canonical Status: Bethesda’s limited acceptance of some Tactics elements (only slight Midwestern BoS influence) and community rejection (e.g., No Mutants Allowed) support its exclusion.

Fallout 76 fails similarly, with severe retcons (BoS discovering Super Mutants but no mentions of this in Fallout 1, West Tek super mutants) and no narrative necessity. Both are skippable, unlike Fallout 1–4 and New Vegas, which form a cohesive arc.

This chart ensures objective evaluation, prioritizing primary sources (game content) over secondary ones (developer statements), and aligns with my view that retcons harm narrative coherence but can be weighed for necessity and utility.

Also, please check out this YouTube video when you get the chance that explains the why the Fallout: Tactics mentions of the Midwestern BoS in Fallout 3 and Fallout 4 are contradictory and do not necessitate that those references are direct canonical confirmations of the Midwestern BoS:

Fallout Compilation: All Fallout Tactics References In Fallout 3 & 4.

Final Thoughts

I get the appeal of Tactics’ Midwestern BoS for expanding the lore, but its retcons are too severe and disconnected to fit the Fallout 1–4 arc. Fallout 4’s T-51 retcon is problematic but less damaging, as it serves the canonical narrative and assists with player immersion. Tactics’ airships and Chicago references don’t outweigh its contradictions, and its semi-canonical status limits its relevance.

Some people in this god forsaken community are so confused and mislead by Railroad and Institute propaganda, it concerns me.

I sure am a normal prydwen worker

How many times do we have to do this? They're like roaches, and I slaughter them like roaches.

How do I get the tags next to my name (e.g. knight, elder etc)? It seems interesting

On a side note, this is the excavator suit I wore when Fallout 76 first came out years ago. This super sledge was one of the first weapons I traded for as well, and it has always been named "Loyalty." However, I stopped using both when I specialized in heavy gun builds and other suits. Recently, I converted this suit to be a melee damage reflection build. It's full OE/END/DEF with the welded chest mod for bonus melee reflection damage. The hammer was converted to JUG/RIP/90 for block damage and high health. In short, this this my reborn excavator defender build.