Talk:Commander Shepard

Was Shepard born on April the 11th or the 4th of November?
In Canada, all three date formats are used in various contexts. I've never seen the date written in just numbers except for driver's licenses, which use year-month-day; the month is usually written either in full or its abbreviated. Anyone else come to the conclusion that Bioware is just screwing with us Yanks and Brits? - Pyro721 04:06, August 23, 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually, using just numbers to represent the date is very common practice amongst militaries worldwide, and last I heard, Shepard was in one of those! :P I use that format on a daily basis. I would also refer you to a more extensive discussion of that topic on this very talk page- Talk:Commander Shepard. SpartHawg948 04:09, August 23, 2010 (UTC)

While discussing this on the social bioware network, I came across two reasons that would speak for April 11th being Shepard's birthday. One of it being the launch of Apollo 13 on April 11th, 1970. Alan Shepard was supposed to command the Apollo 13 mission but he and his team switched with the Apollo 14 crew. Alan Shepard was also the first American (and the second human) in space (May 5th, 1961). The first one being Juri Gagarin (April 12, 1961). So I am all for April 11th being Shepard's birthdate since there are just too many references to an actual important event and a real 'Commander' Shepard in our time. J4N3 M3 19:39, September 22, 2010 (UTC)
 * That is a good set of references but we need canon evidence to say for certain. April 11 however does seem to have quite a number of things connected it related to Space travel, but again we need some form of canon proof to say for certain. Dev confirmation would be nice also. Lancer1289 19:49, September 22, 2010 (UTC)
 * The reason we were looking for this was that someone said, the Devs had said that the date was actually referring to something in history. I'll try to find it.J4N3 M3 19:57, September 22, 2010 (UTC)

Pre-Service History
Does anyone know if the morality bonuses still apply in ME2?Kalaong 14:05, August 26, 2010 (UTC)

Addition of generic ME1 and ME2 History
I find it odd that the main character of the Mass Effect story’s page only contains how the player creates their Shepard in ME1 and ME2. I realize that everyone’s game will be a little different but is it out of line to add the basic scripted events without putting the final player choices such as the liberator of Eden Prime, the prothean vision, the Ferros cipher, destruction of the Virmire facility, Ilos, etc from ME1 and work for Cerberus, Freedoms Progress, the collector ship, the Reaper corpse, etc from ME2. I mean all these things happen to all Shepards regardless of personal choice and could be written to not give away the choices (or spoiler warning could be placed to include the paragon/renegade choices). I figured I’d ask before going to work on it as it would take some time to write and I don’t want to waste my time if it’s just going to be deleted. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by.
 * I think that's a fantastic idea, personally. -- Dammej ( talk ) 15:55, August 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * Hmm that is a tricky subject and to be honest for it to be included there would have to be a write up somewhere first, and not in the article or on this talk page. A sandbox writeup perhaps would be a good idea first. Again this would be a trick subject and I don't know Spart's opinion here, nor can I predict it on this subject, but I would want to see a write up first in a sandbox before it gets added. Lancer1289 16:22, August 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * How about this, I’ll spend a few days doing a rework of the page adding the history and when I’m done I’ll post it in a blog or something (with the link to it posted here) and it can be evaluated from there. Nothing will be changed here and It will allow others to voice their opinion on the manner. Sound like a deal? NightsKnight 16:35, August 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * That probably sounds like the best way to go for now. Still, this will be tricky. Lancer1289 16:38, August 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * You should do it in a sandbox, though, as Lancer said. I can't see any reason to use a blog for something of this nature. SpartHawg948 21:29, August 29, 2010 (UTC)

More default info
Well, looks like LOTSB revealed a little more of the 'default' info for a new to ME2 Shepard (as opposed to one imported from the first game). In a bit of dialogue with Tela Vasir, Shep will attempt to spook Vasir by pointing out that the Commander let the Destiny Ascension get destroyed w/ the Council onboard (which is nothing new), and that the Commander personally killed the last rachni queen. So... looks like if you don't import a character from the first game, you probably won't be seeing the rachni in the third. Man, the default Shepard is ruthless... :P SpartHawg948 02:36, September 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * Wow ruthless indeed. Lancer1289 02:40, September 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * And this is why i truly hate Renegades.... Shadowhawk27 23:48, September 25, 2010 (UTC)

Indeed. Some people can't handle the sheer awesomeness, and need to take the nice and safe route. I, on the other hand, like going that route. It's not quite as fun as it is in other games like KOTOR/KOTOR II and Fable, but still. Renegade all the way! :) SpartHawg948 23:51, September 25, 2010 (UTC)
 * (shakes head) when you put it that way, it makes me hate it alot more. Paragons are way﻿ better then Renegades and that is the truth and nothing else. Anybody can start a fight.﻿ It takes a much better person to talk everyone out of it. They get﻿ a better reputation and a far better legacy, that's for sure. Shadowhawk27 00:20, September 26, 2010 (UTC)

No, it isn't the truth. It's your opinion. Nothing but. You're right, anyone can start a fight. And anyone can talk their way out of one. Many times, when dealing with nasty people, starting the fight is the better alternative. Just ask one of those "great Paragons of world history", Neville Chamberlain. Either way, stating that one or the other is "better" is pure fluff and opinion. And it doesn't really have a place on a talk page about the Commander Shepard article. SpartHawg948 00:32, September 26, 2010 (UTC)

I am more a pragmatist person. I let Destiny Ascension get destroyed (thus ensuring humanity's ascendancy), but I saved the rachni queen (compassion? or maybe a desire to have a powerful ally?). Guess what I did at the Collector Base :) — Pepoluan 11:19, September 29, 2010 (UTC)

Is Shepard a reference to Jesus?
Since there's alot of bibical references in Mass Effect. (Legion, Sovereign, Lazarus etc.)

Could Shepard's story as a whole be a reference to Jesus Christ.

Shepard has 12 squadmates in ME2, gets killed and is resurrected in ME2, and is called "Shepard" who is the Shepherd of humanity against the Reapers, like the bible says Jesus was supposedly the Shepherd of humanity. along with the default name being John. 12 September, 2010.
 * I'm pretty sure that this came up before and, being a Roman Catholic myself, I really don't see the connection. Don't forget there were only 10 initial squad members in ME2 and two were added with DLC. Also note that Shepard can only recruit six squad members in ME, so what about that? So I’d have to call that a big stretch. Also the Shepard being the Shepherd of humanity is also a bit of a stretch, actually kind of a big one. And how does the default name play a part in this? That is the biggest question I have as I can't even see how that plays a part. Lancer1289 16:49, September 12, 2010 (UTC)

Pretty sure Jesus didn't go around killing people and wiping out species. Just throwing that out there. So let's see here: It's true that Shepard has a max of 12 squad members, but there are actually 13 possible permanent squad members, plus two temporary squad members. Don't remember there being 15 apostles. Next, Shepard is spelled similarly to, but not the same as, Shepherd. I'll admit, it's plausible, but not plausible enough on its own to support it. And the default name is John. So? Pretty sure Jesus Christ's name was Jesus, not John. And John is a very common name. Word on the street is that, when they can't ID a man, they call him John. John Doe, anyone? And then there's the bit about even Paragon Shepard killing lots and lots and lots and lots of people. Wouldn't it be more appropriate for someone who is a Jesus reference try to save those people, rather than shooting them in the face, or crushing them with biotics? The evidence for this theory is circumstantial at best, and I just don't see it. SpartHawg948 19:35, September 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * Reference to Jesus? More like a reference to Ares (the ancient god of war) than Jesus. Thats really nonsense.SoulRipper 19:49, September 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * Jesus always said "Turn the Other Cheek", and I'm pretty sure that Shepard returns fire when people start shooting back. I figured I'd start with what was stated, but I figured that someone would bring up the killing before long. Overall it's a huge stretch. Lancer1289 19:58, September 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * I think he means the fact that Jesus could lead people based on his actions, just as Shepard can lead anyone as Miranda said, "through hell and back". But I do think this accusation is kinda a stretch. MEffect Fan 20:15, September 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah I got that too, but I completely agree, that is probably the biggest stretch. There are plenty of leaders in history, scifi, and everywhere. Stretch indeed. Lancer1289 20:21, September 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * If not Jesus (I agree that he's not a J-man reference) then how about a certain amount of messianic qualities; returning from the dead, saving mankind (and beyond)? 91.109.113.94 01:46, September 13, 2010 (UTC)

Well... saving mankind is an extremely common theme in sci-fi to begin with (about as common, if not more so, as robots and aliens), so I wouldn't count that as messianic, nor would I really consider Shepard being brought back to life via man-made technological means particularly messianic. SpartHawg948 01:49, September 13, 2010 (UTC)
 * Indeed, common and circumstances of the resurrection are completely different from what is described in the Bible. Lancer1289 01:51, September 13, 2010 (UTC)
 * Didn't mention the Bible, just playing Devil's (Reapers'?) Advocate. I think Shepard is just...Shepard. 91.109.113.94 01:53, September 13, 2010 (UTC)

You didn't mention the Bible, but you did inquire as to whether or not Shepard showed messianic qualities. Messianic is defined as "of or relating to a messiah", and messiah in turn is defined as "the expected king and deliverer of the Jews" and/or "Jesus". And Jesus quite obviously ties directly into the Bible. So, by extension, the case could easily be made that by using the term messianic, you were referencing the Bible, knowingly or otherwise. SpartHawg948 01:57, September 13, 2010 (UTC)
 * What a very narrow definition you looked up.

Thank Merriam Webster. It's their definition. I didn't cherry pick it or anything. Additionally, is there another messiah who came back from the dead that I'm not aware of? There must be if coming back from the dead is to be taken as a messianic quality without tacitly referencing the Bible. SpartHawg948 02:00, September 13, 2010 (UTC)

Ok...There are TOO MANY people who have returned from the dead. Why would Shepard be a reference to Jesus and not a reference to Lucio Fulci's zombies? Also Asclepius, Achilles and Heracles where brought back from the dead. Why would Shepard be a reference to Jesus and not a reference to them? Also Shepard was not resurrected like Jesus. On the other hand Cerberus defied Jesus/God and brought back Shepard (heheh just kidding). There are even MORE people who saved mankind. Why would Shepard be a reference to Jesus and not a reference to Super Man or Spider Man? 12 squadmates? Odin had 12 sons. Why would Shepard be a reference to Jesus and not a referenceto Odin? As I said earlier, that's really nonsense. SoulRipper 11:09, September 13, 2010 (UTC)

Also Son Goku died and brought back from the dead (multiple times), saved mankind (multiple times). Reference? NO. SoulRipper 11:27, September 13, 2010 (UTC)

Consider that Shepard's task is to stop the Reapers to save Humanity. Soverign refers to the Bible too "We are Legion" which is a reference too ""And Jesus asked him, saying, "What is thy name?" And he said, "Legion": because many devils were entered into him." Sound familiar? Reapers = Demons in that sense. Jesus fought Demons with his words to save Mankind in the Bible. Shepard fights Reapers with his guns to save Mankind. And Reapers are a reference to demons. And there's ALOT of Bible references in the game. Hell nobody has that much evidence that Shepard is a reference to Alan Shepard besides they have the same name and they both go to space yet that isn't flamed.
 * Because at least Commander Shepard and Alan Shepard have the same name. Some tangible, objective, non-opinion based link. No such link exists with Jesus. SpartHawg948 23:34, September 15, 2010 (UTC)

Four links exist with Jesus:

The name "Shepard".

The resurrection. Known as "Lazarus Project"

Saving mankind from the Reapers. Who refered to themselves as "We Are Legion" in ME1.

12 Squadmates in ME2.

How many links to Alan Shepard are there again? Oh, a name? Interesting last I check Alan Shepard and Commander Shepard aren't the only two people in existence with the name Shepard. And how many people in the world has heard of Alan Shepard? How many people in the world has heard of Jesus?


 * 1st: Its SHEPARD and not Shepherd. There is a BIG difference betwin those two.
 * 2nd: Lazarus Station may be NAMED after the know Lazarus but that has nothing to do with Jesus.
 * 3nd: Sovereing said "We are legion". Here you will see what a legion is. Thats the legion that Sovereing ment not the demon Legion.
 * 4th: Saving mankind is the most common thing in Sci-Fi, comic books and animes.
 * 5th: Untill the release of the the Zaeed DLC(January 28) he had 10 SqM and untill the release of the Kasumi DLC(April 6, 2010 ) he had 11 SqM. In the First game he had 6, what about that? Where is Judas? Did anyone betrayed Shepard? I don't think so.
 * 6th and most important: If someone doesn't knows Yuri Gagarin, Valentina Tereshkova and Alan Shepard (The two first mans and the first woman in space), then what can I say...SoulRipper 20:13, September 16, 2010 (UTC)
 * Shepard had more in common with Scifi than religion. I stated it earlier, but I am a Roman Catholic and I still don't see the connection. There is more connections between Shepard and scifi than Jesus. Also Lazarus could also mean the Lazarus Protocal from Red Alert 2. Still don't know what that is, but if I find a page on the EVA Database I'll post a link. Lancer1289 20:19, September 16, 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hey, don't forget Morinth. AKA the 13th squad member. Oh, and Wilson, he's in your squad too. 14. And, if you have LOTSB, Liara. 15. Not 12. Also, while it's been a while since I read the story of the Resurrection, IIRC there was a trial before-hand. And Jesus was unjustly sentenced to death. And the guy who did it washed his hands of the whole thing. No analogies there. And it took 3 days, not two years, and (as far as we can tell) no machines were involved. Oh, and Jesus' big goal wasn't saving man from some mincy little demon from Gerasene. Seems like his real goal was something to do with sin... And, as had been elaborated before, the name is not a common feature here. It's not Jesus Shepard, after all. And Jesus was a shepherd, not a Shepard. SpartHawg948 20:21, September 16, 2010 (UTC)
 * You do remember correctly, or at least the major parts and enough for the general idea. Pilate couldn't find a reason to sentence Jesus to death so he kept asking for one. The people brought false charges against Jesus, and in all four canonical Gospels, Pilate could not find a reason to convict. So he washed his hands of the incident and placed it squarely on the head of the people who brought the charges. Jesus died to save mankind from their sins, while Shepard was killed, probably to keep them out of the way. Again there are more differences than similarities between Jesus and Shepard. Lancer1289 20:28, September 16, 2010 (UTC)
 * I know. When I said that it had been a while, and if I recalled correctly, it was meant sardonically, not literally. SpartHawg948 20:31, September 16, 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry I just couldn't tell. I hate reading text sometimes. Lancer1289 20:34, September 16, 2010 (UTC)

Facial codes
Found this site where players can share the facial codes of their Shepards personally I usually use the default shep because my chars look realy crap, thought some were good (better than mine anyway) heres the link if any one wants to use it. .--92.24.194.190 16:26, September 21, 2010 (UTC)

Shepard's Melee Strength
Melee damage is just as relevant as the strength of any weapon, yet I haven't found it reported anywhere on the site (of course, I may have missed it). According to game developers (see entry labeled "General Combat"), Shep's base melee strength is 125. Adding this information makes the Wiki that much more complete. This would seem relevant either in the Shepard page, the Combat (Mass Effect 2) page, or perhaps as a note to the heavy muscle weave (in the Armor upgrades page). Thoughts? AnotherRho 04:01, October 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * I'd say the combat page would probably be the best way to go. Articles like this are usually reserved for bio information, and for listing powers/talents/weapons/etc. As such that kind of data just wouldn't fit here. Melee is a small part of combat, or at least I don't use it that much myself so I'll put that out there. Back on topic, for right now, I'd have to say that the Combat (Mass Effect 2) article would be the best place for it. At least until something better is proposed. Lancer1289 04:24, October 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * Good point about the Bio aspect of this page. I'll add it to the Combat page as a note, and if someone finds a better way to arrange things, so be it. AnotherRho 05:19, October 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * Good placement, but everything can always be improved. I have expaned the section and added some more details, could probably still use some more work. A second set of eyes is never a bad idea. Lancer1289 14:20, October 1, 2010 (UTC)

Vanderloo
I really think the referance to Vanderloo should be removed until we can actually link to a website that has a picture of him... without it it sounds random. It is a bit random, nevertheless... --75.27.146.157 23:00, October 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * So the fact that we link to his Wikipedia page, which in turn links to a page with a picture of him... doesn't cut it? Odd... SpartHawg948 23:09, October 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * It was hard to find on the page. Bringing that up, who put that on? He looks nothing like Vanderloo. Did some developer tell you that? Or is it random guessing? --75.27.146.157 00:26, October 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * No, it's definitely not random guessing. And while Vanderloo in that one picture may not look too much like Shepard, I can assure you it's not because Vanderloo doesn't resemble him, it's more a fault of the picture. Perhaps these pictures will serve as better examples. As for random guessing, I can assure you, nothing could be farther from the truth. Don't believe me? Then listen to what the Art Director for Mass Effect has to say 3:30 into this video. SpartHawg948 00:36, October 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * Perhaps the most relevant pic is this. Prismvg 07:13, October 2, 2010 (UTC)
 * How come the male shep gets the Mark Vanderloo look, while his female counterpart does not? I mean Bioware manage to get two adult models Alexandra "Alleykatze" Stein and Victoria (a.k.a. Victorria) Johnson looks for their Dragon Age charictors Leliana and Morrigan so why didn't they do the same for the Female Shep?. Shadowhawk27 23:00, October 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * I know it's not what you meant, but I was thoroughly amused when I read "How come the male shep gets the Mark Vanderloo look, while his female counterpart does not?" - picturing a femshep based on Vanderloo made me snort my coffee. Ev0lve 14:41, October 4, 2010 (UTC)

"killed" vs. "murdered"
In regards to: "The Ruthless character sent 3/4ths of his/her unit to its death and murdered surrendering batarians on Torfan."

Just saw this edit pop up, and I'd actually be inclined to change it to "killed," as well. Murder is currently defined as the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another. While one might assume that the word has expanded to encompass other sentient races in the ME universe, it is just that: an assumption. Using "killed" would be more precise, and allow people to draw their own moral conclusions. Ev0lve 13:17, October 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * I may be wrong, but I believe that's an in-game description. Prismvg 13:20, October 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * If that's the case, then that's how it should be. I'll check it out - from Spart's response to the edit, it seemed like an addition. Ev0lve 13:25, October 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I'm wrong. The part with the batarians isn't mentioned when constructing the profile. "Murdered" does sound a bit off, but "killed" lacks some emphasis. Prismvg 13:29, October 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, I'm not sure a ruthless Shepard would see it as "murder," either. Whether or not it was justifiable is a moral and legal decision. Since morality is an opinion and we don't know the legal circumstances, I think it's pretty clear that "killed" is a far more accurate representation. Ev0lve 13:41, October 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * Given the nature of the situation, murdered is far more accurate. If someone is surrendering, then if you kill them, it is murder because they surrendered. The killing of prisoners of war, POWs, or killing those who are surrendering, is seen as murder. Even then, I have to say that, given the circumstances, murder is far more accurate, which is why both Spart and myself have revered edtis on this matter. Lancer1289 13:46, October 4, 2010 (UTC)

I understand your point of view, but killing in cold blood is not the definition of murder. Given the nature of the situation, as you say, it would be considered murder if it happened in present times involving humans. However, we're talking about an instance in a fictional society and culture where we do not know either the legal or cultural ramifications of Shepard's actions. While it is obviously "ruthless," anything beyond that is an assumption. Although I didn't initially edit this article, based on what we (don't) know and the policy for speculation, murder is a wildly inaccurate term.

While this is just terminology, I feel that accuracy is important. This may help: "—Synonyms 1. slaughter, massacre, butcher; hang, electrocute, behead, guillotine, strangle, garrote; assassinate. Kill, execute, murder  all mean to deprive of life. KILL  is the general word, with no implication of the manner of killing, the agent or cause, or the nature of what is killed (whether human being, animal, or plant): to kill a person. EXECUTE is used with reference to the putting to death of one in accordance with a legal sentence, no matter what the means are: to execute a criminal. MURDER is used of killing a human being unlawfully: He murdered him for his money." Ev0lve 14:00, October 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict) However, murder is still more accurate because of the situation. Given human terms, it is more accurate in the current wording, and we haven't heard anything else to contradict that. Spart said it best yesterday, "killed surrendering combatants... i.e. "murdered" them." Murder is a much more accurate term to describe what happened based on the knowledge we have, and the context it is in, and changing it also changes the context of the matter, and that is much more important in this circumstance. Lancer1289 14:16, October 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * Now to address what I was edit conflicted on, that doesn't help as again the context of the matter is that he killed surrendering combatants, i.e. murdered them under human laws. And since this is analyzed from a human point of view, and based on current human laws, it is murder. Murder, don't forget was also used when Kolyat tried to kill Talid, Bailey called it "attempted murder" so I think the definition of murder would case evolved to one person killing another person. Under human laws, It would be murder, not killing, because they were surrendering combatants. Murder is much more accurate both in context and in the terms that it is used. Killed is less accurate given the context of the matter. Lancer1289 14:23, October 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * You make an excellent point with Bailey's comment. However, murder refers to an unlawful act, and there is no reason to assume that C-Sec's laws on the Citadel apply to the situation Shepard was in on Torfan. While it's a somewhat logical assumption, any assumption is not the most accurate representation of the facts. That said, in case I'm misrepresenting myself, I am in complete agreement that simply changing it to "killed" doesn't fully convey enough meaning. Perhaps we could use a more accurate synonym and add a reference to this earning him the name "the Butcher of Torfan." Ev0lve 14:36, October 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * And I still see no reason to change it. The Assumption in this case has backup in that the Alliance seems to have laws that follow most of the international treaties today. Under the Geneva Conventions, the killing of POWs and the killing of Surrendering combatants, is classified as Murder, not anything else. There are multiple things I can pull from history about this. There are also many other assumptions on this site, and all of them have backup as well. In this case Murder is more accurate and I see no reason to change the wording that both has backup, and in context, as more accurate to something that doesn't convey the meaning and will make the wording more confusing. Murder is more accurate. Also just food for thought, since this is written from a human perspective, while still in-universe, murder would also be more accurate than killed, and modification would make it more confusing and less accurate. Lancer1289 14:51, October 4, 2010 (UTC)