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)

im garethj717 i i hope he is born on november 4 becauae im born on the 17 of november
 * Unfotunatly we have canon information from BioWare that states Shepard was born on April 11. See the article. Lancer1289 12:37, October 19, 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)

"Indeed. Some people can't handle the sheer awesomeness, and need to take the nice and safe route."

Well, to quote you, it "is pure fluff and opinion. And it doesn't really have a place on a talk page about the Commander Shepard article".

Thank you.

--62.203.217.117 15:19, February 14, 2011 (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)

Alan Shepard origin confirmed by Casey Hudson himself, here you go! It's the second video. 82.156.214.20 13:27, April 28, 2011 (UTC)
 * And you do realize that we didn't have access to that information at the time this conversation was taking place? Over 7 Months ago. Lancer1289 13:32, April 28, 2011 (UTC)

Of course I do, but that doesn't mean I can't at least be a little bit excited about it. 82.156.214.20 15:04, April 28, 2011 (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)
 * This tell me that Bioware is full of Cheapskates, cause the femshep is just a random nobody... I mean They flew in Mark Vanderloo, scanned his head and used it as a default Male Shep but can't do the same with the Female shep? What a rip-off!!!Shadowhawk27 21:56, October 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure they are... as they pretty clearly state in the video I provided, the only reason they did all that for Vanderloo was so that they could have a good-looking Shepard for the print and tv ads and the pre-release videos and all that. It has nothing to do with being cheap, or not being "fair" to female Shepard fans, and everything to do with marketing their product. SpartHawg948 21:59, October 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * Well lucky for us Players, this website solves our problem for our Fem-Shep :D http://www.masseffect2faces.com/ Shadowhawk27 22:04, October 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * Never used it. I personally thought it was BioWare who solved our problem for us by allowing us to decide what gender Shepard is and what he or she looks like, as opposed to a site that allows you to copy what other people decided their Shepard would be. SpartHawg948 22:16, October 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * This is what you're actually looking for: FemSheploo Ev0lve 22:18, October 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * Indeed! :P SpartHawg948 22:20, October 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * EWW!! No that's just wrong... I prefer that site that allows us to use the faces for our Fem Shep like Sigourney Weaver, Jessica Alba, or even Claudia Black herself so there. Shadowhawk27 23:29, 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)
 * The English language is confusing enough, sure, but I would have thought that an encyclopedic source would want to be precise. The word murder is not used correctly here, and I fail to see how using a more accurate synonym would distort the context. An equally-colorful, emotional verb could be used to draw the same reaction while avoiding the misuse of the word in question. Simply, put, this is how I see it:
 * Reasons to change: Literary correctness.
 * Reasons not to change: It's a commonly misused word and people will get the idea clearly.  Ev0lve 15:01, October 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * And how is murder a commonly misused word? Killed =/= murder, and in this context it doesn’t come even close. How is killed a more accurate synonym when it doesn't convey what actually happened. Killing of surrendering combatants = murder, and replacing the word with something less accurate, takes killing and trying to make it fit into this context is like trying to make a square peg fit into a round hole, it doesn't work. Murdered is a much more accurate way of conveying what actually happened in this circumstance, and yes we are an encyclopedic source, and yes we are precise, hence why murder is used. I can see in no way, shape, or form does killed = murder in this context, with this meaning, and with the same way of conveying the information. What happened was murder, plain and simple, and I see no reason to change it because it is used correctly. Lancer1289 16:24, October 4, 2010 (UTC)

"Killed =/= murder" is exactly my point. Killed is one of the most general terms, while murder is very specific. And that is precisely how it is misused - perhaps in large part due to its prevalence in televised fiction. Murder in particular is the unlawful killing of a human being, with emphasis both on unlawful and human. We have absolutely no information pertaining to the lawfulness of Shepard's actions, even if we assume that "human being" has been expanded to encompass all sentient life.

Also, I'm not sure why you seem fixated on "killed" - although it was the header at the top of this discussion, just a few lines up I stated: "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."

You speak of square pegs in round holes; I would contest that using the word murder to describe Shepard's actions would be the square peg, using killed would be a loose-fitting round peg, and something entirely different would be a nice snug fit. It is purely untrue that "Killing of surrendering combatants = murder," even today. Like you said, it is in the Geneva Conventions, but there are countries which do not acknowledge that as law. Also, it has been legal in the past, and may yet be legal in the future. This isn't my personal opinion, but it has as much proof as any other assumption.

As a sidenote, I appreciate and respect that you're able to discuss this without putting your hands over your ears/eyes and asserting that your way is right. As such, I hope that you don't take any of this as a personal affront. And, sorry about the length - hope you like reading. Ev0lve 16:50, October 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * Murder today is defined as one human killing another, yes. However, then why would Captain Bailey, a person working for the Galactic Government, use the term "attempted murder" when describing how a drell almost killed a turian. Last time I checked, a drell nor a turian are human. So why wouldn't he say something else, like attempted manslaughter, or attempted killing? Murder was chosen for a reason, because it the legal definition of what took place, so again I fail to see how murder isn't accurate in this case because that is exactly what happened, the murder of surrendering, and probably unarmed combatants.
 * As to the Geneva Conventions, note that 194 countries signed the articles from the fourth Geneva Convention, which included the provisions and treaties from the previous three. However in 1993 the UN Security Council adopted a report from the UN Secretary-General that because the overwhelming majority of countries had signed the Conventions, they passed into international law, binding all non-signers to the conventions whenever they engage in armed conflict. Also note that all 15 members of the Security Council at the time had signed the conventions, and all five of the permanent voting members, i.e. the US, UK, France, China, and Russia didn't veto it, which was well within their power.
 * Also how it is untrue that the killing of surrendering combatants, i.e. at that point Prisoners of War, is murder. Because any mistreatment of POWs is considered a war crime, and killing is considered murder.
 * I didn't miss you statement that you quoted above, however I'm "fixated" on it because that is what you want to replace murder with, and to doesn't convey the meaning, and it is also less accurate than murder. You also have to consider the context it is in, and in context it is murder. Also something you have to consider is that while in a fictional universe, it, like all sci-fi universes, are based, in whole or part, on the world at the time. Star Trek evolved over time, and still is, based on what happened in the real world. Murder is the more accurate term here, killed doesn’t convey the same meaning, and a reword would also not convey the meaning and would alter the article says, which is what happened. I’m sure Spart will say more on this later. Lancer1289 17:24, October 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * "I'm "fixated" on it because that is what you want to replace murder with" - that's my point... it isn't the word I want to replace murder with. Not sure how to make it any clearer than I have.


 * There are a number of opponents to universal jurisdiction in international law, such as Henry Kissinger. Despite it being the "official" system at present, it is by no means clear-cut.


 * As to how it is untrue that the killing of surrendering combatants is murder - it's a matter of circumstance and perspective. There have been and are cultures in which such actions would be not only accepted, but the societal norm. The question of lawfulness isn't something we can know.


 * I addressed the comment from Captain Bailey already, stating that even if the definition was expanded to encompass non-humans there is still no reason to assume that because such an act was illegal on the Citadel as judged by C-Sec, there is nothing to say that C-Sec's laws apply to Shepard's situation at Torfan. Would you say it's just as obvious that Saren "murdered" Nihlus? That would be even more plausible to me, yet that article uses "killed." Ev0lve 17:41, October 4, 2010 (UTC)

Just to respond here: the statement that "As to how it is untrue that the killing of surrendering combatants is murder - it's a matter of circumstance and perspective. There have been and are cultures in which such actions would be not only accepted, but the societal norm. The question of lawfulness isn't something we can know." is bogus. This isn't some alien culture we're talking about here. Commander Shepard is a human serving in the Alliance military. The Alliance military is itself the descendant of the current-day militaries of a number of nations. And, per international law such the Law of Armed Conflict and the Geneva Conventions, killing a combatant who is attempting to surrender is murder. Not only murder, but a war crime. This is the case not just under international law, but under the national laws of most nations, including the United States. SpartHawg948 18:28, October 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for joining in. I'm not sure how you can call it bogus - the statement is factual, even after what you said. While I agree that Alliance military law is the direct descendant of current-day international relations, I'm not sure if that's compelling enough to rule out the chance that Shepard killing surrendering combatants in his encounter was illegal. In-game, I don't think Captain Anderson and Admiral Hackett would simply have called it "doing whatever it takes to get the job done" if they considered it a war crime. I'm not sure how it would alter the context or meaning of the comment if it were changed to something along the lines of: "and slaughtered surrendering batarians on Torfan, earning him the name 'the Butcher of Torfan'." This would remove any possible speculation as to the legality of his actions (regardless of how strong you feel the backing is, it is still speculation) without taking anything away from the brutality or ruthlessness of his actions. Ev0lve 18:40, October 4, 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, it's still what I call bogus. After all, my point was that in pretty much all of the militaries that united to form the Alliance military, shooting surrendering combatants is murder. My point had nothing to do with whether Alliance military law is the direct descendant of "current-day international relations". Nor do Anderson and Hackett's comments mean jack in the context of the legality of Shepard's actions. Remember, the victor rarely (if ever) gets charged with war crimes, even if they know at the time that their actions constitute war crimes. Just look at how many Allied Commanders and soldiers were charged with war crimes after WWII. I don't recall "Bomber Harris" or "Bombs Away LeMay" being charged with war crimes, though LeMay himself even admitted that he fully expected to be charged with them should the U.S. lose WWII. As for changing it to "slaughter", I fail to see how that would be any less speculative. After all, slaughter isn't a direct synonym for kill. It carries added connotations of brutality and/or numbers, which we can't back with in-game material, IIRC, so that would seem to be speculation too, would it not? SpartHawg948 18:56, October 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * As for the war crimes, valid point, especially since they'd be even more likely to overlook things like that if they're looking for the sole savior of humanity. I'd disagree with those connotations on slaughter, though - the word is most frequently associated with killing livestock, typically in a humane fashion which on small farms is performed on individual animals rather than en masse. In any case, it was just a suggestion of a possible synonym that carries an emotional vibe (for lack of a better term), without the legal speculation. Ev0lve 19:04, October 4, 2010 (UTC)

But we aren't talking livestock here, we're talking sentient (or sapient, whichever you prefer) beings. In this case, using the livestock definitions instead of the definitions that apply to sentient beings is just plain wrong. Batarian or no, they aren't farm animals! And the definitions of slaughter that apply to people are as follows: "the brutal or violent killing of a person.", "the killing of great numbers of people or animals indiscriminately; carnage: the slaughter of war.", "to kill in a brutal or violent manner.", and "to slay in great numbers; massacre." All of these, as mentioned, have added connotations that are themselves speculative. So, unless we want to take the Cerberus mindset that aliens are somehow less than, and therefor use the livestock definition, (which is "the killing or butchering of cattle, sheep, etc., esp. for food."), I can't see slaughtered being a viable alternative. SpartHawg948 19:10, October 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * Again, just the first possibility off the top of my head. The question is, if there were an acceptable synonym, would you be willing to change it? If so, play devil's advocate with me and throw in a few ideas of your own. If not, I'd be a little disappointed - being opinionated is an excellent quality, being closeminded among the worst. While I'm sure there is no magical, perfect word that fits this occasion like glitter on a unicorn, I'm sure with the versatility of the English language we can come up with something more accurate then murder and more flavored than kill.
 * Edit: One addition to the use of "slaughter" - aside from "butcher" itself, wouldn't that be the closest description inferred from the name the Butcher of Torfan? Ev0lve 19:34, October 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * Wow I step out for lessons, and look what I miss. Thanks Spart for correcting me in a few places, but I also have to agree with his point. I still ne no reason to change it because it is accurate, thanks to Spart point out thinks I missed. I can't see another word that would fit and still convey the information correctly. Shepard slaughtered surrendering combatants, a war crime, and illegal killing, a.k.a murder. I can't see a rewording or another word that can still covey that message, because it works now and is accurate. Lancer1289 19:53, October 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * And I still see nothing compelling that he committed a war crime, illegal killing, and thus murder. Ah well, I have to get ready for class this afternoon - I'll defer to your judgment in this case. Thanks for the discussion, though, it's one of the more pleasurable activities in life when done right! I'll be sure to bother you gents later on some other issue. Ev0lve 19:59, October 4, 2010 (UTC)

Back! Ah, how I do so love the start of the new fiscal year. When government slows down from its normal crawl to a near-standstill. I must again point out that we do have compelling evidence that Shep did commit an illegal killing. I mean, look at how your human companions react throughout the games whenever you kill an enemy who has surrendered. Take Fist, for example. This would seem to indicate that the revulsion we (generally) feel towards killing a helpless foe in cold blood still exists. And again, we do know that the Systems Alliance military is directly descended from the armed forces of today (Jon Grissom, for example, was a United States Marine), and in pretty much every contemporary military, killing an enemy who is attempting to surrender is a crime. And we do know that the Systems Alliance exists as the result of a multi-lateral international agreement between a number of Earth nations, and as has been pointed out, killing an enemy attempting to surrender is murder under any of a number of international laws, accords, treaties, resolutions, etc. SpartHawg948 21:14, October 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm willing to accept that, and in all likelihood that is indeed the case. I just would have been more comfortable with "Shepard killed the surrendering batarians in cold blood, earning him the name "the Butcher of Torfan." But, I concede - the evidence is indeed there to support your view. Again, I do love a well-voiced discussion (arguments are especially fun, though this doesn't qualify). I'll be lurking! Ev0lve 21:22, October 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * If killing these surrendering batarians (assuming they were members of a uniformed military, and not unlawful combatants) was a war crime, do we know why Shepard was not charged or convicted (or discharged from the military) for the crime? --AnotherRho 20:29, October 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * Who knows, probably because of the situation at the time, or maybe there are other reasons, can't say for sure. There are many reasons that I can think of. Lancer1289 20:30, October 7, 2010 (UTC)

The most obvious and likely being that it wasn't a crime. Hah. But I'm not getting into this again... Ev0lve 20:33, October 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict) From what Spart said (above), I guess one could suggest: because the Alliance won (of course, for all we know in this hypothetical future, Shepard's actions weren't considered illegal by the Alliance). That said, as for its being against the likes of the Geneva Convention, it merits mention that the combatants on Torfan would not be considered members of a legitimate military, and would therefore be unlawful combatants. --AnotherRho 20:38, October 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * Whom it is still a crime to kill once they have laid down their arms and are attempting to surrender. The laws (national and international) are pretty much all in agreement on that one point: If someone was fighting you but then throws down their arms and attempts to surrender, it is a crime to kill them. It doesn't matter if they are or aren't members of a "legitimate military". That distinction only matters really when discussing what to do with them after they are in your custody. And again, as you point out, there is pretty much no precedent whatsoever for a victorious nation prosecuting members of its own military for war crimes. That's why Karl Doenitz was tried for war crimes but Chester Nimitz wasn't. Ditto for Herman Goering, but not Sir Arthur Harris. SpartHawg948 23:02, October 7, 2010 (UTC)

Shepard's romantic partner from EM1 in two years.
I just want to throw this out there. Is it just me or is it entirely possible that Ashley Williams or Liara T'Soni could have had Shepard's child in between the destruction of the Normandy and Shepard's resurrection. This being a male Shepard with Ashley and either/or with Liara. It wouldn't make any sense though for a female Shepard to have a child with Kaidan Alenko as she would have been carrying said child when she died and the child would have died with her. The child would have had to have been conceived before the Normandy was destroyed but Shepard did sleep with the romantic partner before heading to Ilos. --Tripodssj6 18:48, November 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't think Ashley would ever have Shep's child - first of all, she can die, too, and second, her role as a love interest is, basically, that of Kaidan's counterpart, basically, that would be unfair for FemShep romancing Kaidan; Liara having Shep's child is more possible, because 1)she can't die, 2)she is a possible partner for both Male and Female Shepard, 3)it is technically possible. Maybe in one of ME3 possible endings you will have an opportunity to start a family with her, but I don't think she *already* has Shep's child. She doesn't act that way, it would surface at some point, in LotSB for example. --Kiadony 19:03, November 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * Just a quick question, if Ashley sleeps with Shepard before Ilos, when can she die exactly? As to the question, I do think that is is possible, but highly unlikely. Lancer1289 19:09, November 6, 2010 (UTC)

I mean that she can die at all, like all other squadmates, while Liara can't. Liara is the most logical choice for the theoretical ME3 ending in which Shep gets a family, because that would be fair for Sheps of both genders. What if in LotSB she actually gives you a hint on what possible romance outcomes you will get in ME3? --Kiadony 07:48, November 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * Ah now I see what you mean. Hmm that is something to consider. I guess we'll have to wait and see but I think, personally, Shepard will end up with whoever you choose wither it be form ME, ME2, or even ME3. BioWare wouldn't cheat us out of another Paramour achievement when they have it in the first two games. Still ME3 will be interesting to see where these romances end up. Not everything has to end in a logical conclusion. It's scifi, the logic book sometimes goes flying out the window. Lancer1289 07:55, November 7, 2010 (UTC)

Well, I hope Shepard will end up with a chosen partner, but perhaps Liara will be the only one who'll possibly have children. As to LotSB hinting, I also mean when Liara asks Shepard about his/her ME2 love interests. Like, peace for Garrus, homeworld for Tali... But, yeah, you're right about logic. With it, it would make sense for them to write an inevitable death for one possible female ME2 love interest to balance out Thane, but that would be the silliest death possible. --Kiadony 08:17, November 7, 2010 (UTC)

Lancer1289 makes a valid point, that there was no intimate enough moment between Shepard's love interest and the Commander until after Virmire that could have conceived a child. Also I never said that a female Shepard couldn't have Kaidan's child but that it would kind of be messed up if they made it that way since Shepard dies not long after. With Ashley it could be explained that she had "the baby" and had to leave it in the care of her mother while she was on active service and with all that she was dealing with and he uncertainty about Shepard ailing with Cerberus she may have decided not to tell him. With Liara it is a similar situation, she could very well raise a child while working for the Shadow Broker and after LotSB she had her hands full taking over the operation. --Tripodssj6 19:11, November 8, 2010 (UTC)

Shepard's Accent
Given that both voice actors for Shepard (Meer and Hale) are Canadian, it's safe to assume that Shepard speaks with a Canadian accent... my previous edit to the main page's trivia section is the reason for me to elaborate on this in the talk page. Being a Canadian myself, a Torontonian to be exact, I could recognize the accent when certain words were spoken... notably words such as "out" and "about" have an elongnated pronunciation when the "o" is pronounced in a Canadian accent. But both actors are born in different parts of the country: Meer's from Alberta... not sure what Canadian dialect is spoken there, but Hale, who's from Newfoundland, has a hint of that dialect, in that words are pronounced more mildly and flatter sounding than Meer. Just my opinion... agree? Disagree? H-Man Havoc 00:01, November 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * Sounds to me like it could be Canadian, but then, coming from the Midwest, it also sounds pretty similar to a Minnesota accent or a Yooper accent. Given the subjectivity of this topic, I'd have to disagree, especially since (given what we know about the ME Universe, specifically thanks to the prologue of Revelation) accents seem to have no real bearing on place of origin or ethnicity in Mass Effect. SpartHawg948 11:26, December 9, 2010 (UTC)

Well, if you chose Earth born, then yah, I'd say he was Canadian(Well, American, since the US annexed Canada), but you cna also choose colonies, etc. And if you have a non-English version there is a different voice actor. I think the point is Shepard is whoever you want them to be and I assume most people model them after themselves.
 * This isn't Fallout, the US did not annex Canada. The US, Canada, and Mexico joined together in one large government, the United North American States. There's a pretty big difference. Lancer1289 21:25, April 14, 2011 (UTC)

Limp?
Has anyone else noticed that Shepard walks with a rather pronounced limp? Does this merit comment, or do we just take it as part and parcel of the premature Cerberus resurrection? 173.164.183.245 09:50, December 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * Never noticed a limp. Certainly haven't noticed any such thing during any of the numerous scenes depicting the Commander running, jumping, etc. SpartHawg948 11:21, December 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * Same, never noticed anything. Lancer1289 14:18, December 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * I think what is being referred to is just the slightly stilted manner in which Shepard walks. While definitely not as natural-looking as the walk animation in Mass Effect, it is far from being an actual limp. I doubt any physical ailment was intended to be implied by the developers. GiantEnemyCrab 23:45, December 9, 2010 (UTC)

The dude died. Gotta expect some side-effects from that. With that said, I think it's just a goofy looking walk animation. --Burkenation 18:11, August 15, 2011 (UTC)

Second Quote
Isn't the second quote renegade? --Dark Energy: The forces of the universe bend to me. 00:25, January 9, 2011 (UTC)
 * It is one of the lower dialogue options, which if you want to call that renegade, but it does seem to describe the story accurately, IMO. Lancer1289 01:21, January 9, 2011 (UTC)

Class Customization
In ME1, the player would choose the class that Shepard belongs to. In ME2, Shep dies and is medically resurrected and while that goes on, the class can be changed (assuming its the first file). What I want to know is how exactly would this be executed in ME3? It's a cop-out if Shep dies AGAIN, and you aren't starting from pure scratch. Perhaps an accident or event that changes Shep's biology or leaves him/her alone. Or perhaps, the player retains the chosen class from ME2 and can't change it, regardless of how unlikely that may seem. Who guesses what? H-Man Havoc 17:27, February 14, 2011 (UTC)


 * I think it depends on what BioWare does: if they overhaul the classes again like they did between the first two games, then I think we'll get to change our class again. Otherwise, I don't think we will. You'll note that you can't change your class from an imported ME2 game to another ME2 game. Only from the original to ME2. Me, personally? I like how the classes work just fine and would rather see BioWare invest in a killer single player then reinvent the wheel. But in truth, it doesn't really matter. I'll be playing Infiltrator regardless. Tanooki1432 17:34, February 14, 2011 (UTC)


 * Well, if they don't modify the powers and abilities of the different classes much like the radical changes from ME1 to ME2, perhaps they'd just make noticeable differences in the powers.... aside from the differences in damaga capabilities, there is no real discerning of one power to a stronger version of it. Perhaps for instance, an Adept Shepard's use of throw. For lower levels, the execution would be sloow and deliberate, and the ability is shown the same way as in ME2. But for stronger versions, the execution would be much quicker, the powers can be charged, and at greatest extent, it appears as a massive pulse of energy. H-Man Havoc 19:45, February 14, 2011 (UTC)

Can you only change your Shepard the first tim you make him or can you change him in game?--Fuzz 01:22, April 9, 2011 (UTC)
 * Just the first time. Lancer1289 01:30, April 9, 2011 (UTC)

Remove Pre-Service History Missions?
I was going to add a ME1 spoiler tag above pre-service history, because it contains references to the pre-service history missions. However, if information about those missions were simply removed, then this portion wouldn't contain spoilers anymore. Is there any reason why this information needs to be here anyway? It isn't part of Shepard creation, it can be found elsewhere, and would be a spoiler to a first time player of Mass Effect. It should be enough to say that there are missions associated with Shepard's pre-service history. Thoughts? Blindman25 18:44, February 28, 2011 (UTC)
 * What is this game called ME1 exactly because I'm sure we don't have a spoiler tag for it? We do have a spoiler tag for ME however and putting that in is much more acceptable as the information is relevant, informative, and noteworthy. There should have been a spoiler tag for it anyway as there are some spoilers about the game anyway, so I'll add the ME spoiler tag. Lancer1289 18:52, February 28, 2011 (UTC)
 * I apologize if I violated a rule of etiquette by referring to ME as ME1. I guess the "World War II" convention of enumerating the predecessor (i.e. "Great War" -> "War World I") does not apply here.  I will keep this in mind in the future.  That being said, I don't question the relevance of the information, but it unnecessarily add spoiler material to something that would otherwise be available to a first-time ME player. It already says, "Some assignments in the game will only appear depending on the selected pre-service history." with a link to the Assignments page.  The Assignments page lists the pre-service history missions near the top. Why can't we let the cross-referencing do its job? Blindman25 19:14, February 28, 2011 (UTC)
 * Then they have to find exactly what they are looking for. Right now it links directly to the assignment as well as the assignments page, which I don't have one problem with because to remove it would be removing valid, informative, and relevant information. The information should stay as it does relate to Shepard, and affects gameplay and possible assignments, and removing it just doesn't sit right with me one bit. As to the name, it does state in the MoS that ME is the abbreviation of Mass Effect, which is the first game. It is not Mass Effect 1, and usually if that isn't said to someone somewhere, we get ME1 or Mass Effect 1 in articles, and neither is acceptable. Lancer1289 19:20, February 28, 2011 (UTC)
 * It seems that we are making different assumptions about the target reader of this page. I was assuming that this page was intended for someone that is interested in playing Mass Effect player, but hasn't yet.  In that case, this first-time player would be assisted by seeing the effect of choosing a pre-service history without the risk of spoiler information.  However, if this page is directed towards a repeat player, then I agree that information about the pre-service history missions is relevant and informative.  I apologize (really) if I came off as snarky about the "ME1" thing.  On a real page, I would never abbreviate Mass Effect.  However, on a talk pages, which I consider to be less formal, "ME1" helps me keep them straight when I am typing quickly.  Blindman25 19:42, February 28, 2011 (UTC)
 * The information is noted under a spoiler tag, so even if it is a new player, they have been warned, and the same is true for many other pages as well so I don't see why this one should be an exception. The information is informative and relevant no matter who the page is targeting and as such, it should stay. Lancer1289 20:06, February 28, 2011 (UTC)

Vandalism
Seriously, why is there so much vandalism on this page? Is it a recent thing, or do people with too much time on their hands as a rule just never get farther than the Commander Shepard page when vandalizing? --Lucius Voltaic 07:08, March 22, 2011 (UTC)


 * To be honest, some people are just jerks. They can't be bothered to build their own sand castles, so they just rampage around destroying other people's castles. The best we can do is build our castle around a rock, so that when they come to kick it down, they get a broken foot. Tanooki1432 09:01, March 22, 2011 (UTC)
 * Beautifully put! Tali&#39;s no.1 fan 16:19, March 22, 2011 (UTC)
 * What also happens usually is that it is just one person who switches IPs quickly, has way too much time on their hands, and needs to inflate their own ego. Spart and myself are usually pretty quick about shutting them down, but every now and then one gets through. Both of us are against protecting pages, and I really don't see that changing anytime soon. Usually one article is targeted and just happens over and over. This is nothing new, just something that is sad honestly. Lancer1289 13:12, March 22, 2011 (UTC)

Page quote
Is the current page quote (“You're not even alive… not really. You're just a machine, and machines can be broken.”) the best we have? There's got to be a better quote, Shepard does a lot of talking.End Times 09:58, April 21, 2011 (UTC)
 * If you've got suggestions, this would be the place for them! :) SpartHawg948 10:07, April 21, 2011 (UTC)
 * "I should go..." ;) JakePT 10:33, April 21, 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah if that is the best we have, then let's stick with the current one. However suggestions are welcome if you have something better from ME. Lancer1289 12:46, April 21, 2011 (UTC)
 * One request though: no "I'm Commander Shepard, and this is my favorite store on the Citadel!" Anyone suggesting that will be banned. Forever. :P SpartHawg948 19:01, April 21, 2011 (UTC)
 * Indeed that quote will not go on this page if I have anything to say about it. Lancer1289 19:52, April 21, 2011 (UTC)

Something from one of the speeches near the end of ME2 would be good

"The Collectors, the Reapers -- they aren't a threat to us. They're a threat to everything -- everyone. Those are the lives we're fighting for. That's the scale."

Another wiki like page uses that as Shepards quote. ( Link )

"Make me proud, make yourselves proud" on the other hand sounds a little corny. End Times 23:24, April 22, 2011 (UTC)
 * First let me say that just about every wikian that I've met about this issue hates those neoseeker sites. Often they just copy information and images from Wikia's sites and don't source it.
 * Second the quote at the top I'm really going to have to say that it should be from ME, not ME2, like every other character that carries over from the two games.
 * Third, when post next to these ones, I have to say the current quotes are much better. I think the ME2 one especially describes, quite accurately IMO, what Shepard is doing over the course of the game. To quote Wrex, "how many times have you stepped in a mess for your crew". Lancer1289 23:40, April 22, 2011 (UTC)

So your for and against using the 'threat' quote? The current quote seems renegade to me, can Shepard be both paragon and renegade in cannon? Could we have two quotes, one for paragon and one for renegade? End Times 01:05, April 23, 2011 (UTC)
 * No I'm not for using it what so ever, I'm really puzzled how you got that impression. In addition, I think that one quote would suffice. Lancer1289 01:14, April 23, 2011 (UTC)

I'll keep looking then. End Times 02:03, April 23, 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, the "Make me proud..." one is pretty corny. You do make a good point though, End Times. We should try to use a quote that occurs for everyone, regardless of whether they choose renegade or paragon. It's kinda a tall order, I know, but it seems like a good way to go. In an aside, I think the "machines can be broken" one occurs as a result of the right-hand (non renegade or paragon) conversation options. SpartHawg948 06:37, April 23, 2011 (UTC)

"We have to give everything...even if that means our lives. We will stop at nothing! We will fight for the lost!" —Shepard

End Times 12:46, April 24, 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm again going to have to say that the ME2 quote does a much better job at describing ME2 than that quote does. It’s a good action quote, but really doesn’t describe much in comparison. Lancer1289 14:00, April 24, 2011 (UTC)

Throwing this out there - "Mr. Vargas, not everything I do is legal, if you catch my drift." that might not be the precise words (haven't played the first game in a while), but i think it's funny. --Burkenation 18:28, August 15, 2011 (UTC)

"I'm Commander Shepard and this is my favourite Wiki on Wikia."  N7  &#91; T &#124; C &#93; 08:41, August 20, 2011 (UTC)

Very odd request - Shephard's 3D model
Hey guys, I have searched up and down the internet but I haven't came close to finding what I was going for. Cutting to the chase, I need default Shephar's male model in 3DS max file, or something which can be imported into 3DS max (like Google Sketch up). I work with 3D in my free time, but I'm nowhere near a level of being capable of replicating a game characted with decent accuracy. I mean, I could give it a shot but anything non-perfect would be an insult to such a great game character so... What I'm about to do is purely for fun purposes but it's so insane you won't believe until you see it. I'll announce it anyhow, Shephard dual-weilding M-920 Cains. Yeah. Those Cains. It was more of a running inside joke between me and some friends of mine, but I'd like to make it happen.

So, would anybody have, or know who might have, or where I could find it in general, a 3D model of Shephard from ME2 (in his N7 armor, color non-relevant)?

It would be greatly appreciated. Eudaimonium 21:58, April 28, 2011 (UTC)
 * First it isn't Shephard, it's Shepard. Second this really isn't the topic for the talk page as it doesn't have anything to do with what a talk page is for. This is much more appropriate in the Forums or in a blog post but not here. Lancer1289 22:06, April 28, 2011 (UTC)


 * Oh. Right, my bad. I guess I'll take it to the forums then. Sorry again. This can be deleted, if you wish.

In defense of the Christ reference.
I've noticed that my addenda have been removed, and I'd like to defend myself. I study literature at university and I was pretty sure I was onto something. Besides, I feel like the scholarly article I attached speaks for itself.

Things to consider:


 * Shepard. Shepherd. In John 10:11 Jesus says "I am the good shepherd, the good shepherd gives His life for the sheep." While the spelling is different the pronunciation is the same. Shepard is willing to sacrifice himself for any member of his team, especially in Mass Effect 2. That name is not random.


 * Lazarus project. Aside from the reference to a dead man Jesus raised, like Jesus Shepard is brought back from the dead to serve a greater purpose.


 * Twelve disciples. During the events of Mass Effect 2 and the DLCs, Shepard recruits twelve permanent party members.

The article I referenced lays down twenty-five criteria for a Christ figure. 

1. Tangible: Commander Shepard's origin stories and career exploits are exceptional. Earthborn gang member who rises to the position of officer, Colonist who survives a slaver attack and seeks revenge, Spacer born on an Alliance cruiser.

2. Central: Commander Shepard drives the narrative of the Mass Effect series.

3. Outsider: Shepard is certainly above and apart from others. In the first game, the Codex tells us that Alliance soldiers receive genetic modifications, which sets them apart from baseline humans. With Shepard's performance in the military in mind, we already have an individual with some serious credentials. Add in the Spectre membership, and Shepard is now legally above and beyond the citizens of the galaxy.

4. Divinely Sourced and Tasked: This one's a bit more difficult, as the Council is decidedly mundane and the Illusive Man skews a bit more sinister.

5. Alter-egos: Commander Shepard's moral duality is of note, with Paragon and Renegade directly opposed to one another in approach. Also, each Shepard could be male or female.

6. Special Normal: Self-explanatory. Shepard's a lot of hero packed into an average sized person.

7. Twelve Associates: Already addressed. Garrus is a lot like St. Peter, too.

8. The Holy Age: Christ died at 33, which is significant when one examines a Christ figure. Shepard is 29 at the start of Mass Effect, and if we count the years he/she spent dead, Shepard is 31 in Mass Effect 2. Big things are going to happen soon.

9. A Betrayer Associate: No significant ones as of yet, but two temporary squadmates betray Shepard.

10. A Sexually Identified Woman: Liara. Morinth. Miranda. Jack. Most of the female squadmates are sexual beings, much like Mary Magdalene in the Bible. Liara's the best fit, given her romantic attachments to the messianic Shepard of either gender.

11. A Pointing Prophet and Baptism Rites: For prophets, Liara and Vigil probably give Shepherd the most direction in the first game. Like John the Baptist, they pave the way for Shepard's self-realization.

12. A Decisive Death and Resurrection: The opening events of Mass Effect 2.

13. Triumphalism: Shepard's death in Mass Effect 2 only makes him/her more powerful. Revived Shepard is far more powerful than the old one.

14. Service to "Lesser", Sometimes Ungrateful, Others: Shepard is met with opposition at every turn, with the Council all but disowning him to his old squadmates like Kaidan and Ashley outright shunning him. Oh yeah, and Shepard really doesn't have to do those sidequests. :D

15. A Willing Sacrifice: The whole concept of the Suicide Mission is based around this. Shepard embarks upon the mission because it needs to be done, regardless of the cost. Also, In the "worst" ending of Mass Effect 2, Shepard lets go of the shuttle so Joker can escape the Collector Base.

16. Innocent: As the audience, we know Shepard is telling the truth about the Reapers, but very few characters in-game want to believe him. Shepard has to deal with a lot of venom from the Council and people like Al-Jilani.

17. A Cruciform Pose: Sorry, got nothing. Maybe the cover art of Mass Effect 3?

18. Cross Associations: None. I doubt they could work those in without a bit of controversy.

19. Miracles and Signs: Throughout the games Shepard does the seemingly impossible. In the first game, Shepard uses a Prothean beacon, kills an asari Matriarch, breaks the stalemate with Sovereign, and maybe even talks Saren into committing suicide. In the second, Shepard comes back to life, kills a thresher maw on foot, and causes the extinction of an entire race of Reaper slaves.

20. Simplicity: A Paragon Shepard comes across as naive and a Renegade as brutish. No matter what, Shepard is a very straightforward, direct type of person.

21. Poverty: Earthborn Shepard most definitely, but it's not a stretch to imagine Colonist Shepard as living a meager upbringing. Spacer Shepard's parents probably weren't rolling in money either, considering military pay is what it is.

22. Jesus's Garb: Physical and Spiritual: Shepard is usually attired in armor or simple off-duty fatigues. In Kasumi's loyalty mission on Bekenstein, he/she is visibly uncomfortable with evening wear and even comments on it.

23. Blue Eyes: Default Male Shepard has blue eyes.

24. Holy Exclamations: "Jesus!" "Keelah!" "Oh Gods!" "Thank the Goddess!" to name a few.

25. J.C. Initials and "Chris" Referents: Unfortunately for my argument, Shepard's initials are J.S. by default.

That's what I've got. I feel like there is more than enough of a connection to at least merit a quick entry in the trivia section of the Shepard article.

tl;dr massive nerd alert --69.131.72.4 20:52, May 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * In your opening paragraph, first it isn't Shepherd, it's Shepard. That is not a valid comparison as there is more in common with John Sheppard of Stargate Atlantis, only one difference in the last name, and that isn't trivia for a good reason. The Lazars Project trivia is mentioned elsewhere, and it was Shepard who was raised from the dead through technology, while Jesus was a completely different manner. Finally, what about the ME squadmates? do they not count or something?
 * Each of your points: 1. Subjective comparison and not that uncommon in scifi, 2. So is every other playable character in their respective universes, not a good comparison as that can literally apply to everything and anything. 3. Above and beyond can also apply to a lot of scifi and general franchises and Shepard getting genetic modifications really isn't anything special. 4. That is a completely subjective comparison and not valid. 5. Alter-egos? Since when did Jesus have an alter ego as I don’t seem to recall that? 6. Again can apply to just about anything and everything. Subjective comparison. 7. Again what about ME squadmates, bringing the total to 16? Also what about temporary squadmates which makes 19? 8. Completely subjective and speculation and neither is valid as an excuse for trivia. 9. So your drawing the line here, again this is subjective and a common theme.
 * 10. Subjective so say the least. I really don't know what else to say about that except that it is another very common theme. Anywhere. 11. That is again something that is subjective and honestly a bit of a stretch. I would have to say the beacons provide more of a path and what about ME2? You completely ignored that. 12. While that isn't very common, there are a lot of very important differences. Also I don't think Shepard died for our sins. And a “suicide mission” of sorts is something that is also common in a lot of things. 13. That is some speculation, some subjective bias, some gameplay changes, and some things that are outside of the game and canon that were changed. 14. Again a very common theme in just about everything. The comparison can be applied to just about everything and is subjective. 15. Again different circumstances and also a common theme. 16. Again another very common theme. No one really wants to hear something that will modify their comfortable existence. 17. This is a point why exactly? Subjective, bias, among other things. 18. Indeed there would be a lot of controversy there so not a valid point. 19. Again something that is subjective, a very common theme in a lot of things. TV Shows, movies, games, books, need I go on?
 * 20. That is something that is subjective to a point, but at the same time it can also be forces outside of the game like ease of making it? 21. You don't know what the pay is in the ME universe for a fact, and even then it could really only apply to one background as again you, nor we know the specifics. 22. This is a point why exactly? Of course no one is going to wear armor to a party like that nor aboard ship. This is also something that would be extremely common in today's world. Not really valid. 23. Default =/= canon and therefore not valid comparison. 24. So what game, TV show, movie, etc. doesn’t use those words or some variant of them? And just to point out, we honestly have no idea what some quarian words, that Shepard doesn't even say I might add, mean. Subjective and such a common theme in literally everything. 25. Again default =/= canon and making a point there isn't valid because of that.
 * There is so much subjectivity in this comparisons that to draw any straight lines, would also draw a lot of lines to a lot of other very common things. Even if you cherry picked your comparisons, there is so much else that can be brought against it that the connection is subjective, biased, and a stretch at best. Also I fell that I should say this, I'm a Roman Catholic, and I can't even see the comparison as there is just too many differences too draw any direct line, would either draw a lot of other equally straight lines to something else, or hit so many things on its way there, that it really wouldn't be straight. This entire thing is one completely subjective comparison based on "connections" that can also connect to a lot of other very common themes in just about everything and anything. This isn’t trivia, it's just a stretch, biased, and completely subjective comparison. Lancer1289 21:20, May 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * Addendum: I just recalled this. One of Jesus' apostles betrays him, while in Mass Effect 2, Shepard can betray a loyal squadmate and get one that isn't so nice. Also don't forget Shepard can also kill Wrex in the first game, who is also a loyal squadmate. Last time I checked, Jesus doesn't betray or kill anyone. Actually, you can take the entire killing part and apply it as another nail in the preverbal coffin of this completely subjective comparison. Lancer1289 21:30, May 2, 2011 (UTC)

Shepard doesn't kill Wrex in the first game, Ashley does after Wrex pulls a gun on him/her.--IWHBYD 21:49, May 2, 2011 (UTC)

Judging by the tone of your article and other edits, you seem to be a very literal person. Did you read the article, or just skim it? Also, I did say "Shepard" in my opening paragraph. The "Shepherd" immediately following was to show the similarities between the name and the word. I don't doubt the reference to Stargate Atlantis, but I don't watch television. Anyhow, the "Jesus didn't kill anyone" argument is just lazy, I think.

If you've ever read  The Grapes of Wrath by John Steinbeck, Jim Casy is an example of a Christ figure. Sure, he sleeps with the women in his congregation and drinks himself stupid, but it's accepted that he is a stand-in for Jesus. Shepard may not be a carbon copy of Jesus Christ, but he's really close.

Lancer, you take my points piecemeal rather than holistically. I never said that each individual point makes or breaks a Christ figure, and I cop to the discrepancies between the Bible and Mass Effect. There's at almost two thousand years between them. Christ figures are rarely perfect (Uncle Tom's Cabin, Chronicle of a Death Foretold, the Narnia series, A Tale of Two Cities, even Harry Potter). Jesus wasn't a black slave. Jesus wasn't an Arabic immigrant in South America. Jesus wasn't a lion. Jesus wasn't a lawyer. Jesus wasn't a gawky kid with a lightning bolt on his forehead.

I find it silly that you dismiss my arguments based on them being "common themes" throughout culture. Do you know why they're common? We live in a culture steeped in Jewish and Christian tradition. If we were playing Mass Effect through the lens of a Japanese or Indian player, we might not pick up on the subtle clues to Shepard's role in the galaxy. It's like playing Zelda as an American. The Triforce appears in a lot of Shinto temples, but we would have no way of knowing that without empirical experience or research.

All it really takes is the desire to dig a bit below the surface. The evidence is all there.

PS It's "proverbial," not "preverbal."

PPS It'd be nice if you could reformat your reply. It's tough to read as-is.

--69.131.72.4 22:04, May 2, 2011 (UTC)


 * I tend to agree that the Christ reference is a load of subjective bunk. Much of the supposed similarity is nothing more than a series of elements common to most video game protagonists. The rest can be explained simply by pointing out that, as you say, we live in a culture steeped in Judeo-Christian values, and as such, we're much more likely to see references and similarities where none are intended. It's akin to how we see shapes and faces and such in natural formations. There is no intentional reference, but we see it there anyways. As for taking things piecemeal, don't you yourself do the same? You maintain as one of your points that Shepard has twelve companions. This is only the case if you take the Mass Effect series piecemeal. If you look at it altogether, Shepard has sixteen followers. Six in the first game, and ten new ones plus two old in the second. That's not counting the temporary squad members, btw. That raises the total to twenty.
 * I'll end by pointing out that, while Christ died for our sins, he never killed for them. I don't recall Christ ever wiping out an entire city or country, the way Shepard annihilated an entire planet. If Shepard is meant to be a reference to Jesus, it's a very cynical one. SpartHawg948 22:13, May 2, 2011 (UTC)

I don't think you read my article. I'm also imagining the pair of you in my high school English classes, lamenting their exam flunking. "How does a blue rose symbolize a crippled chick?" "The author totally didn't mean that!" etc. The twelve followers is only significant within the context of Mass Effect 2. The argument was intended as a whole, not the individual bits of analysis. Also, I say again I find the "Jesus never killed anybody" argument really tiresome and uncreative.

Generally a lot of feathers get ruffled when someone points out biblical allusions. I had a Christian friend who refused to see any references to the Bible in The Grapes of Wrath because "Jesus wasn't a socialist." I think you're taking "Christ figure" to mean "Jesus qua Jesus" when that's not what it means. "Saying that a character is a 'Christ figure' isn't saying that the story is Christian allegory; it's a literary term that means that a character has a core essence that makes him/her better than those around him/her, particularly a character who stays on the path of good when surrounded by the temptations of evil." 

A Christ figure is merely a literary device employed to enhance the gravity of the narrative. Mass Effect is preaching Christian values, it's a story about a messiah who just might deliver the galaxy from the "machine devils" described in the Codex. This is a very obvious usage of this device, and I think it merits a spot on the trivia page.

--69.131.72.4 22:40, May 2, 2011 (UTC)


 * Good. Because belittling others for having differing opinions always helps. Word on the street is that it also makes you feel like a big man, too. If that's what you're after, go back to lording it over high schoolers, please. SpartHawg948 22:42, May 2, 2011 (UTC)

If you can't handle a bit of debate, perhaps being an admin in a democratic organization like a wiki isn't for you. From what I've seen of your other interactions with editors, especially anons, most people with "differing opinions" have their arguments derailed by your ad hominem attacks and repeated miscitations of their previous statements. You and Lancer seem to be highly literal and realistic people, but you don't take rhetoric very well.

--69.131.72.4 22:52, May 2, 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm all for debate, however, I do prefer to keep it topical, your baseless assertions otherwise. Differing opinions are great, and should be respected. This means not ignoring them, not belittling others for possessing them, and certainly not attacking others for daring to utter them. You cite ad hominem attacks I've purportedly made against other editors for daring to have other opinions, yet this is not the case. You, however, respond to differing opinions by failing to address them and by comparing those who possess them to sulky teenagers upset over failing a test, presumably one administered by a superior intellect such as yourself. This is, of course, behavior to be frowned upon, and if this is the extent of your rhetoric, then perhaps it is you who is ill-suited for this environment? SpartHawg948 23:00, May 2, 2011 (UTC)

If you refer back to my opening statement, I'm not a teacher. As for my criticism of your style of administration, I'm sure you've heard the spiel before, so I'll spare you. My case has been made. I am firmly of the opinion that the Christ figure bit should have a place on the trivia section. At this point, I'm simply rebutting your counterpoints. I'd prefer to have you acknowledge my points after the sentence that offended you so we can close this discussion.

--69.131.72.4 23:16, May 2, 2011 (UTC)


 * I don't recall ever stating you were a teacher. You are firmly of the opinion that the Christ reference belongs in the trivia section. Two other editors are of the opinion it does not, and are rather firmly of that opinion. As such, currently, there isn't adequate support to place it there. (When devconfirmation is lacking, popular support tends to carry the day, as you can see on Talk:Nihlus Kryik, in the third thread.) I presented my main arguments against, which have gone unaddressed by you, your next post being the one comparing people who disagree with you to sulky teenagers, which failed to address any of the points I made save one, and that only to say you find one of the counterarguments "really tiresome and uncreative."
 * As such, unless you see pressing need to keep it ongoing, I think that closing the discussion would be the best course of action, at least for the time being. SpartHawg948 23:23, May 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * Just pointing out that some of my arguments from my comment went unaddressed as well and right now there isn't enough support anywhere to justify this being on the page as it is a completely subjective reference based on common themes that in all honesty have more connection with other video games than Jesus.
 * I should also point out that we are open to debate, but that becomes difficult when one person in the argument doesn’t address points brought up, starts avoiding the topic, and criticize others for having the nerve to have a difference of opinion, then it really isn't a debate anymore is it? I would also have to agree that closing this argument for now seems like the best course of action for the time being. Lancer1289 23:29, May 2, 2011 (UTC)


 * Except there are many issues that run counter to this statement, and in fact present a lot of opposition to it, which are already noted above. Lancer1289 04:23, August 20, 2011 (UTC)


 * (edit conflict) "Shepard allowed himself to die. FACT." Actually, that is not a fact, and is incorrect. Shepard put Joker into the escape pod, then, hearing an explosion, when to check on it, then was knocked away from the pod and separated from it by the beam. Shepard then ejected the pod when it was clear that they would never make it. Also, the fact remains is that Shepard was the commander of a starship, and just about any commanding officer would more than likely do the same given that situation. They would make sure their crew is off, then look for a way to save themselves. Now I know this doesn’t always happen, but it is what commonly happens, and often what is expected, especially on naval ships, and is often depicted in stories and scifi of the Captain going down with the ship if necessary. In addition, contrary to what you believe, Shepard was never given a choice about sacrificing themselves, circumstances forced them into that situation, while Jesus did have a choice and made the choice he did. Lancer1289 04:54, August 20, 2011 (UTC)
 * Addendum: "This is a race that repeatedly has destroyed all organic life simply to keep a cycle going. They have never met any resistance, and likely viewed that resistance as a sin." Need I mention how subjective, to say the least, that statement is? Also not to mention they have encountered resistance, that's a fact, but it was always fragmented and separated as the Reapers disabled the mass relays. Also, unless you are privy to information we don't have about the Reaper motivations, their way of thinking, what they do, and why they do what they do, then everything you said that caused me to edit conflict doesn't support your theory, in fact it weakens it because you can't back it up expect with your own opinions. "In the Reaper religion, resistance can fall into the categories of selfish, and is expressed as a physical action." That statement alone has no support and again unless you have information we don't have access to, it doesn’t strengthen anything and only injects a lot of bias into your statement. You don't know what the Reapers think and arguing that you do doesn’t do anything to help your case unless you have information we don't have access to. You claim that it isn't perfect, and yet it is just about the farthest thing from it. There are many more differences than there are similarities and certainly not remotely enough to justify the reference, let alone suggesting it. Lancer1289 05:01, August 20, 2011 (UTC)
 * Addendum 2: Also how do you even know the Reapers have a religion to being with? We've seen no indication they even have anything even approaching it. Lancer1289 05:02, August 20, 2011 (UTC)
 * Addendum 3: I believe that this is stated above, but I'll say it again. The "similarities" being pointed out are so common in science fiction, video games, let alone good vs. evil stories, that I would have to say that Shepard has much more in common than Revan thousands, if not millions of times over, than with Jesus. Lancer1289 05:10, August 20, 2011 (UTC)

I once had a teacher of Classical Literature in my junior year of undergrad in response to one of my more fanciful moments of Christ identification tell me this," Any work written in English by an author with a western background that contains a protagonist will arc back to Christ if you look hard enough. Christ is our measure of the ultimate hero tale, and we are hardwired to retell the story.  You must look past the Jesus to find the real sacrifices...". In other words, the signs may be there but they may not lead anywhere. In Shepard's case there's evidence, but in rigorous analysis, the connections seem inadvertent.--Captainhu 05:48, August 20, 2011 (UTC)

Just a stupid question...
Does anyone know shepard's age. I don't know the date ME2 takes place so I can't do the math.


 * Well.. Shepard was born on April 11, 2154. ME took place in 2183, making the Commander 29 years old, therefore in ME2, Shep's 31 (since it takes place two years later, in 2185). This help? Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem 19:38, June 28, 2011 (UTC)


 * I conciser his age to be a factor that I choose. Not something that was said on twitter and is now canon. --N7 Talk 19:43, June 28, 2011 (UTC)


 * Well, before that Twitter post, Shep's birthday was given as 4/11/2154, which could've either been interpreted as April 11 (American system), or November 4 (International System), 2154. Christina Norman's post on Twitter merely clarified the matter by stating it was in the American system of dating. Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem 19:45, June 28, 2011 (UTC)


 * Oh ok, well I still consider Shepards age as a factor I choose. --N7 Talk 19:58, June 28, 2011 (UTC)


 * You're free to do so. Canonically, however, his age isn't a factor you can choose. SpartHawg948 20:57, June 28, 2011 (UTC)
 * Kind of a shame, really. They could have given us a select range of birth years to choose from. Tali&#39;s no.1 fan 21:01, June 28, 2011 (UTC)


 * Yeah, especially considering you can make him look like a 40 year old guy... --N7 Talk 21:07, June 28, 2011 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict) I think the issue there is the fact that certain backgrounds have certain events linked to them, events which have fixed dates and such. That and the relatively limited timeframe between first contact and the events of the first game, combined with the need to build in enough time for Shepard to have plausibly done enough to reasonably be considered for Spectre candidacy, given the unprecedented nature of a human Spectre. SpartHawg948 21:10, June 28, 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh yeah, I never thought of that. 29 seems a bit young to become a Spectre though... but then again 29 was probably when Shepard was at his peak fitness wise. --N7 Talk 06:49, June 29, 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah. Anderson was about that age too (even younger, IIRC) when he was considered for the Spectres. And I don't think that they'd want someone like Hackett running around out there doing the Spectre thing! He might break a hip! :P SpartHawg948 06:52, June 29, 2011 (UTC)
 * No doubt. Not to mention that regardless of the psychological profile the player chooses for his/her individual character, Shepard still enlists at 18, the earliest opportunity to do so. This means that by the time of ME2, Shep would've served 13 years in the Alliance Navy (though two years deemed KIA and a few months with Cerberus). Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem 11:55, June 29, 2011 (UTC)

I read above that he's 31 in Mass Effect 2. but the way I see it is, he died - that effectively ceased his aging. (JFK has been dead since '63, aged 46, but we don't say "oh he's 94," because when he died he stopped aging. To my point: would Shepard be 31 in ME2, or since he died for two years would he simply resume life at 29 where he left off. especially since they used every advance available to preserve him EXACTLY as he was when he died. if this is an inappropriate place for this I apologize. --Burkenation 18:20, August 15, 2011 (UTC)

Any thought as to what we are going to do
with the main Shepard picture? Are we going to do a combination picture of the two female defaults and the male default?--75.81.2.250 08:27, September 5, 2011 (UTC)
 * For now, we'll leave it alone. When it gets closer to ME3's release date, I'm not sure if the image will change, but the default ME3 femshep will likely adorn the page. Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem 11:48, September 5, 2011 (UTC)


 * I've got an idea to have the infobox image be made into a slideshow showing the male default, the original female default, and the new female default. I think that would be better than trying to squeeze images of all three side-by-side. All I'm waiting for to try it out is an in-game screenshot of the new female default. Either BioWare will provide one, or we'll get one for sure when ME3 is out. -- Commdor (Talk) 12:23, September 5, 2011 (UTC)