Forum:A question about the story, Harold.

!!!A little warning, huge spoilers for one of the best and most interesting quests in the game!!!

So, I know that even though the game lets you pick several options in quests, the game's STORY (as in, for the next game) always has a set option picked. When it comes to Harold, what did the Lone Wanderer do? Make him grow, make him stop growing, kill him, or burn him? Or do we not know yet?

There haven't been any other games in the series yet, so we don't know the canon option. Broeman 21:43, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

I would say that the right thing to do is let him grow. Bad for the individual, best for everyone else. As Spock once said, "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one." Yes Trekkies, I know Kirk said part of the sentence for him, so no need to correct me.... LVTDUDE 22:48, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

--

I sped up his growth. Xdarkdragonx 03:03, 7 May 2009 (UTC) Dragon

I believe the "right" thing to do would have been to put him out of his misery since speeding up his growth would have him spread his greenery, I really doubt it would do anything to help the Wasteland in the long run. Besides, who wants FEV laced trees growing through the wasteland, with Harold's "eyes" always on you? I also admit this is one of those ambiguous quests where it's hard to determine the morality of the situation. Echelon 3 Talk to Me...I've got Candy.... 04:36, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't look at it that way. The "evil/neutral/morally challenging portion" of the quest is mercy killing Harold by destroying his heart, whereas the "Very evil" is to burn him down. The neutral part might be to apply the stuff that stops him from growing (Help hide Oasis from the Wasteland) and the good part is to apply the concoction that makes him grow even more (Share Oasis with the Wasteland).

If you look at the "canonity" of the Fallout games, the good parts of a quest is canon (As was the case for Fallout 1 mentioned in Fallout 2, where those who have survived that long talk about the Vault Dweller as he was a good guy). I don't know what rules they will follow in the games to come (or if they will mention Fallout 3 at all), but I don't think we've seen the last of Harold. Second to Vault Dwellers, Harold has been featured in several of the games so far.

I don't know how this will work out, but maybe the FEV infection "wears off" at a certain age, as like if what was left of his body finally managed to make antigenes? AngryNorwegianDude 06:19, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

I bet the tree would just keep growing around Harold anyway, whether he dies or not. 24.62.59.89 19:35, March 29, 2011 (UTC)Kaz

Having played the previous Fallout games, I elected to kill Harold as requested because I couldn't bear to see him that way. I found him much more sympathetic than the Treeminders due to the deeper connection to the character that I felt. I also figured that Bob the tree would either stay alive, or at least not mind (since he and Harold seem to be able to communicate on some level, and Harold wouldn't have wanted to harm Bob). The Treeminders didn't seem to mind after the fact either, as Bob had spread his seeds anyways. --HunterZ 04:12, April 12, 2011 (UTC)