Talk:Sovereign

How many people think that it would be great that you can actually pilot one of the 100,000,000,000,000 Reapers in Mass Effect 2 or 3? You should be able to do that.


 * Uh... they kind of 'pilot' themselves, considering they are conscious entities. I'm sure your suggestions as to where they should go are ... interpreted. I'm certain most would simply tell them to 'go to hell'.
 * Such a thing I seriously - make that 100% - doubt that it will be a gameplay mechanic. It may be possible with modifications, even in ME1.

Leviathan of Dis
Could Sovereign have been the "Leviathan of Dis" mentioned in passing in the information about the planet Jartar?

The stories seem to closely match:


 * The Leviathan of Dis, the apparent corpse of a genetically engineered living starship estimated at nearly a billion years old, "disappears" from the bottom of a crater on the planet Jartar after a visit by a batarian survey team twenty years ago (2160s, since current year is 2183). The batarians that witnessed it vociferously denied it ever existed, even as salarian researchers had recorded evidence of the Leviathan while it was dormant on the planet.


 * Sovereign, a Reaper with the appearance of an enormous dreadnought, was discovered in the mid-2100s (perhaps the 2160s) by one of the survey teams of aristocrat Edan Had'dah (a batarian). Sovereign, which has gone through untold cycles of the devouring and rebirth of galactic life at intervals of approximately 50,000 years, may have had a lifespan similar to the Leviathan's. It spends the 50,000 year gap hidden and dormant within the galaxy.

Coincidence?

I agree but could the Reapers have transformed themselvs from Leviathans to Reapers for some reason.

Abased Fear 06:05, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

It seems plausible, given the similar timings and evidence at hand.

As Sovereign stated on Vermire, the beings like it have no name, they were only labelled as 'Reapers' by the Protheans. Thus it doesn't really require any 'transformation', just different people referring to the same object as different things. Leviathan is a logical name for something really, really big that seems to be a ship or structure. It was also discovered by the Batarians, and a survey team at that, which makes me think maybe those Batarians were Had'dah's survey team. It was also strenuously denied, and seemed to disappear. This could have been the result of Sovereign's indoctrination being used to hide it's position, and of course Sovereign eventually became space-bourne, meaning it would have left the crater.

Looking further into the more dispersed evidence, David Anderson told Shepard that the mission he went on with Saren (that lead to Saren capturing the scientific work on Sovereign and ultimately ceasing Sovereign for himself) was 'about 20 years ago'. That puts Saren's involvement slap-bang in the mid-2160s. From Kahlee Sanders's accounts of Dr Shu Qian's discovery and obsession with the artifact, it was only a relatively short while before the Sidon massacre, maybe a year or so. That means the artifact Shu Qian was looking at was discovered at the beginning of the 2160s, a time that by general logic would be said to be 'mid-2100s'. Also the Leviathan was discovered in a crater on Jartar. We see from Eden Prime that Soverign's landing on a planet causes a crater and massive damage to the surface. It would seem plausible therefore that Soverign could have buried itself at the end of the Prothean extinction, when the Reapers had finished harvesting and wiping out the Protheans. Perhaps by flying into the planets surface creating what looked like a large celestial impact crater, or by creating a 'hole' in which to lay dormant using it's immense power and mass effect fields.

It's still very much unclear what Sovereign actually was and how it was constructed. Although it is a 'machine', it is well known in our own contemporary theory that biological constructs can be used to create computer and biomechanical systems. With the vastly advanced technology at the disposal of Sovereign's kind it is logical to assume such rudimentary boundaries as those between mechanical and biological would break down. The likely originals of these sentient beings of such enormous size and complex construction, in my opinion, is either a civilisation that created them to act as their guadrians, and the guardians turned on them, or the members of the civilisation themselves became so advanced and powerful that they evolved through their advances in technology and pursuit of immortality to be these enormous beings with seemingly infinite lifespan.

--LeathamGrant 15:44, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

I would have to say that the Reapers may not even know who their creators are. Perhaps there is a more mysterious force working behind the scenes, or they were once and organic races from the beginning of the universe and augmented themselves as cyborg before they got engulf by their own enhancements and may want someone to end their misery. Just saying, it's only my theory.

--Unic of the borg 19:39, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

I agree with you. They may have had creators who died out, or they may have gotten a superiority complex and destroyed the race that created them and kept on doing so, or they could even have created themselves, as you said, by self augmentation to the point of becoming a giant sentient machine themselves. Whoever or whatever created them was adept in the art of telepathy and Mass Effect manipulation to the point of being able to use both overwhelmingly against any other organic or mechanical species. Who knows. This could be the ultimate pinnacle of what the Geth would develop into over millions of years of evolution, perhaps?

One hypothesis I developed on the matter is that the Husk spikes (Dragon's Teeth) that the Geth used are actually a tool used by Sovereign's kind. The Codex states they extract the meagre small amounts of resources from the bodies and then turn them into terror troops. This mechanism might not be so effective for resource gathering on the scale it was used in during the Sovereign incident, but used en mass during the Prothean extinction they would have sucked the very essence from 100s of Trillions of beings from across the galaxy. That to me sounds like a pretty efficient way to wipe out organic life and then gather the resources from them and use those to self repair. Be honest, even a machine as good as Sovereign is likely to wear over the course of 50,000 years, or at the very least the batteries will run down a bit (although I guess they probably run off eezo). --LeathamGrant 00:02, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Trivia: In Sovereign's conversation with Sheppard on Virmire, one of his responses to Sheppard's questions is "We are each a nation." Sovereign's name seems to be a play on that.--69.200.247.132 18:26, December 1, 2009 (UTC)


 * But if anything, since (regardless of how you play the game) you know the name Sovereign long before you have the chance to hear him say "We are each a nation", wouldn't it be the phrase that is a play on the name? And it is worth remembering that unless the word national or something to that effect is tacked onto it, the word sovereign on it's own, whether as a noun or an adjective, doesn't really have anything to do with nations or countries, it refers more to a ruler, a defunct currency, or an abstract concept of supreme authority. Now sovereignty, on the other hand, does have meaning pertaining to a nation w/out having to tack anything on, but his name isn't Sovereignty, now is it? :P SpartHawg948 20:38, December 1, 2009 (UTC)

Discovery
I'm putting a tentative date on the discovery of Sovereign as being 2162. Evidence for that: Had'dah claims he's put in 'three years of groundwork' on unlocking Sovereign's secrets (see ME:R pg310). In addition, Kahlee started working with Dr. Qian in 2163 (pg175) but he didn't start acting oddly until 'a few months ago' in 2165. That allows enough time for Had'dah to find Sovereign, realise he needed an expert, and spend a year getting in touch with Qian (p245). --Tullis 07:27, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Could have also took a year for him to organize a dreadnought to retrieve the Leviathan. Since the Jatar description states a batarian dreadnought took the ship "twenty years ago" and the ME1 date was 2183. That would line up with Kahlee starting to work with Qian. Also, Sovereign is described as being found "beyond the Perseus Veil" and Hades Gamma is right on the Perseus Arm. Mallissin 19:33, March 18, 2010 (UTC)

"Twenty years ago" could just as easily have meant 2162 in that context. 85.147.165.48 00:56, June 7, 2010 (UTC)

Sovereign pictures
Since the screen shots in this article are rather small I have made a few that could eventually replace them, in 720p resolution. Have no fear or copyrights, I assure you these are made by me from the in-game cut scenes played with a Bink video player and captured with "Print Screen". Anyone could have done the same :) I have posted across a few articles, so be sure to check them out as well (Sovereign, Destiny Ascension, FTL, M35 Mako, Mass Relay and Citadel). Here are the HD screen shots for Sovereign. As I have no idea how to upload images here I will let you do it.

http://c.imagehost.org/0498/SovereingClose.png http://c.imagehost.org/0613/SovereingGeth.png http://c.imagehost.org/view/0398/SovereingUplink.png

69.159.102.144 17:12, 24 July 2008 (UTC)Darkdrium

Sovereign's Dimensions
Hi, does someone knows the exact dimensions of the Sovereign (especially the lenght), i would really appreaciate if someone posts them. Cgs93 19:59, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Length is given in the main article as 2km but the rest is a mystery unfortunately. --Tullis 23:15, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

I have a problem with this: "Sovereign's power of indoctrination is also myth-like, further connecting it to a demon." So it's myth-like. It's also Force-like, but that doesn't mean there's a connection between Emperor Palpatine and Sovereign. This is just too tenuous.--HighTime 20:03, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Character Box
Should we add a character box to the page to complete the characters set? Since he's already in the adversaries section on the characters page, it probably wouldn't ruin much. He has some pretty cool villain quotes to choose from too.--TheWilsonator 01:50, October 14, 2009 (UTC)
 * The idea of this article is to keep data about Sovereign being the actual villain below the spoiler line. And this page should already have a quote on it for Sovereign... --Tullis 12:43, October 14, 2009 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. It was a pretty cool twist. Probably best not for the benefit of those who haven't go round to playing ME yet.--TheWilsonator 12:57, October 14, 2009 (UTC)

Acquisition of the name Sovereign
So, as there wasn't quite enough room in the summary to flesh out my reasoning, and as I was going to quote the relevant passage from Mass Effect: Revelation here anyways, here it is. I removed the bit about how Legion states that Saren gave Sovereign the name Sovereign for a couple reasons. It just doesn't jive with the other source we have on the subject, Mass Effect: Revelation, which states that when Saren first found out about it, the Reaper was already being referred to as Sovereign, implying the name was bestowed on it by either Edan Had'dah or Shu Qian. As stated on page 320 of Revelation:
 * "In the privacy of his small one man craft, Saren had been studying the data on the flash drive inside Qian's metal case for hours. His suspicions had been correct: the alien technology was a vessel of some sort. It was called Sovereign; a magnificent relic from the time of the Prothean extinction; an enormous warship of tremendous power.

This is well before Saren ever laid eyes on Sovereign itself. He was simply reviewing the data acquired from Dr Qian. Factor into this the fact that we have, here on this very site, a statement from a (former) writer for BioWare, who worked on ME and ME2, writing much of the material for Legion, where he points out that there are often-times statements made by characters who really aren't in any position to know for sure what they're talking about, so these comments need to be taken with a grain of salt. How would Legion and the geth know for sure that it was Saren who coined the name Sovereign, and that he didn't just appropriate the name from the people he killed for the data? And that is my reasoning. SpartHawg948 01:40, March 2, 2010 (UTC)

We completely agree. --Dark Scion

Opposition to move
Moving Soveriegn to Nazara was a bad idea. Whatever it called itself, it went by Sovereign for all of ME and was not refered to by any other name until near the end of ME2 and that was in conversation with only one character. Nazara is not used more, every one will be looking for Sovereign first because it is much more common. The page should be moved back.


 * And it was, for exactly those reasons. Moves of this nature need to be discussed on the talk page first, not just done on a whim. There's usually a reason (or several reasons) that the move in question had not been done already. SpartHawg948 21:05, March 8, 2010 (UTC)

Ahhh... is it not simple to just have the term "Soveriegn" redirect to page Nazara. Dark Scion 23:29, March 8, 2010 (UTC)
 * Simple, but the move itself to the new name is a spoiler, and article names should not contain spoilers. --silverstrike 00:01, March 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * Yup. The more appropriate course of action would be to have the term "Nazara" redirect to the Sovereign page. Wait a tick, it does already! Huzzah! And yes, it is a spoiler issue. Same reason the Tali'Zorah nar Rayya article is called Tali'Zorah nar Rayya, and not Tali'Zorah vas Normandy, and vas Normandy and vas Neema redirect to it. SpartHawg948 00:45, March 9, 2010 (UTC)

Indoctrination
Indoctrination is often stated to be a reaper's power, but could it be just Sovereign's ability? It would suit his vanguardness, manipulating races in big ways behind the scenes, to make sure they advanced enough and that the citadel would serve it's purpose and all. I know, Harbinger was mind-controlling the collector general, right? Well, it seems to me to be a different sort of mind control, because most of Sovereign's puppets lost their mind and became dribbling idiots, mindless without Sovereign. But Harbinger's only apparent puppet was the collector general, who's natural ability could have been the control of collector soldiers. If that was the general's natural ability, it was probably a mental ability, which would support my theory that Sovereign and Harbinger's mind control methods were different. Perhaps all the reapers have different abilities suited to their purpose, with Sovereign being infiltration, and Harbinger being long term slave control. 24.72.49.251 03:03, March 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * Vigil stated that the Reapers indoctrinated Protheans. Harbinger's alternate form of mind control was most likely put in place because nothing but regular indoctrination would have rendered them useless once their minds had degenerated. Also, the derelict clearly had the power of indoctrination. JediMB 03:02, March 14, 2010 (UTC)


 * Did you forget about the Derelict Reaper that you are sent to retrieve the IFF? The Cerberus scientists on board suffered from the effects of Indoctrination as well.  So Sovereign isn't the only one with that particular form of mind control.  It is probably more logical to assume that Harbinger is unique in its form of mind control, or probably a better term would be, manipulation. Magicman10893 05:12, August 1, 2010 (UTC)

Nazara = Nazarene?
It's a bit of a stretch, but think about it. I seriously doubt they'd actually make a reference to an alien dreadnought pretending to be Jesus though, that'd cheese a lot of people off. But then, it sounds exactly like the kind of envelope they'd push. 99.197.128.56 02:41, April 12, 2010 (UTC)

Could also be a reference to Hindi or Turkish word "Nazar" which means eye respectively, or Evil Eye in Turkish. So, Naraza could just mean "The Eye" or watcher. Which might make sense, since Sovereign repeatedly calls himself the Vanguard, so he could be a scout. Mallissin 09:35, April 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * Just want to point out- Vanguard and scout are not synonymous. The vanguard is the advance element of an army or fleet, the lead element of a larger formation. Scouts, on the other hand, generally operate completely separately from the main body of an army. So saying that since he calls himself the vanguard, he could be a scout is like me saying that since he calls himself the vanguard, he could be the reserve force. It just doesn't make sense. SpartHawg948 03:44, April 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * I was associating the "eye" references from Nazar with the vanguard mention in the ME1 speach to presume scout, since scouts are typically a part of an army's vanguard that watches/surveys the battlefield to help prepare for the coming battle. Mallissin 09:35, April 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * The vanguard is the lead element of the main body. The scouts operate ahead of the vanguard. In some cases, for extremely small land units, scouts and vanguards are the same, but in the case of large units and for fleets, scouts and vanguard are independent of each other. One of the main reasons for this is because, by necessity, scouts (both in the fleet and the army context) need to be fast, necessitating a lessening of armor and weaponry. As such, scouts generally avoid battle, or operate on the periphery, as flankers. The vanguard, on the other hand, is the first unit to engage the enemy, and tend to be more heavily armed and armored than the scouts. I'm not trying to seem to anal or anything, and I'm not really concerned with the references to the Hindi or Turkish words, but as a service-member, I do take special interest in terminology and whatnot, and I'm just trying to correct a misuse/misassociation of terms. SpartHawg948 18:05, April 12, 2010 (UTC)

Sovereign's quote
"We are legion" is an incomplete quote. The actual line, in context is:

"Shepard: [Are there more of you?] Where are the rest of the Reapers? Are you the last of your kind? Sovereign: We are legion. The time of our return is coming. Our numbers will darken the sky of every world. You cannot escape your doom."

He is using the word in the sense of a large army, or a large number. This is the same sense that the biblical quote uses the word in, but not necessarily a reference to it. He is dismissing the notion that he is the only Reaper. This is further backed up by the shot of the reaper fleet at the end of Mass Effect 2, their numbers could easily be described as "legion."

He describes the multiple-mind nature of the reapers in a different exchange:

"Shepard: [Why are you doing this?] What do you want from us? Slaves? Resources? Sovereign: My kind transcends your very understanding. We are each a nation. Independent, free of all weakness. You cannot even grasp the nature of our existence."

While it is still possible that he was referencing the Bible, it seems more likely to me that he was just using the word in a perfectly valid, if slightly poetic, way. It fits with the style of everything else he said too. --Gelg 23:19, May 20, 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes, this is definitely true. However, it pretty much goes without saying that its phrase (as Sovereign is an it, not a he) is being used to reference the vast numbers of the Reapers. The trivia bit is not to detail what Sovereign meant when using the quote, but rather to point out possible references and sources from which the quote was derived, as this is a work of fiction, and external sources are frequently referenced in dialogue. Stating that the line literally refers to the Reapers themselves is not trivia, it's a literal interpretation. SpartHawg948 23:22, May 20, 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure, but the trivia as it is currently worded implies something contrary to the apparent intent of the line. Someone who only half-remembers the line could easily interpret it to mean that Sovereign misquoted the Bible while describing its mind. Since there's already a nearly identical piece of trivia on Legion's article, and there are similarities between the characters, the chance of confusion is even greater. Since it's possible the writers did have Bible quotes in mind when writing Sovereign's dialog, the trivia point stands, but I'm uncomfortable with the way the current state of the trivia represents the quote. --Gelg 23:48, May 20, 2010 (UTC)

How so? The current bit doesn't state (or even imply) that Sovereign is misquoting a Biblical reference. It states that a likely reference for the line itself is the Bible. At no point is it implied that Sovereign itself is familiar with the Bible. And, given what we know of Reapers, the Biblical reference works just as well for a Reaper (many minds in one body) as it does for the geth known as Legion. And given that one game came out well before the other, the two characters and references are not mutually exclusive. SpartHawg948 23:54, May 20, 2010 (UTC)
 * I didn't mean they are mutually exclusive, but that it would be easy, given Legion's trivia, to interpret Sovereign's trivia the same way. The fact that Sovereign and the Reapers could be accurately described using the biblical quote just makes it that much easier to misinterpret the line out of context.
 * Since the trivia makes no reference to the intent of the line, the way the Gerasene Demon's intent is explained in the trivia implies that Sovereign had the same intent, and that the writers were trying to put the same words in its "mouth," and misremembered the quote. --Gelg 00:02, May 21, 2010 (UTC)

But the trivia bit doesn't imply anything, and when you get right down to it, the fact that the Biblical quote includes 'for we are many' would seem to suggest that the reference was intended to refer to the vast numbers of the Reapers, doesn't it? Regardless, the point of the trivia is to suggest a possible reference, not to suggest it and then offer one possible interpretation over others. The reader is permitted to form their own interpretation. SpartHawg948 00:20, May 21, 2010 (UTC)

Sovereign and the Protheans/Collectors
Spoilers abound.

We all know by now that each Reaper is based off the race that was assimilated to create it. But looking at the Collectors, and looking at Sovereign, I don't really see the similarities. Sovereign isn't even humanoid. What part of him exactly is supposed to be based off the Collectors? Why doesn't it look like the Human-reaper larvae where it had distinguishable bodyparts? Or am I missing something? 24.87.4.53 06:40, June 23, 2010 (UTC)
 * Two things- first, it's theorized that each Reaper is based off the race that was assimilated to create it. It's not known for a fact that A) Reapers 'assimilate' races as a means of propagating or B) That if this is the case, they take on the appearance of that race. It's just a theory. And secondly, at no point is it suggested that Sovereign is based off of the Protheans or the Collectors. In fact, while she is theorizing that Reapers propagate through 'assimilation', she also theorizes that the Reapers were unable to do this with the Protheans, which is why they instead turned them into the Collectors. SpartHawg948 06:56, June 23, 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh..Well now I feel silly. :/  24.87.4.53 14:27, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

An Interesting Fact Of Sorts
This probably doesn't need to be in the article, but I'll at least mention it here. Last night, I was reading through my Star Trek Encyclopedia when I noticed something interesting: the largest class of ship in Starfleet is the Soveriegn-Class Starship. My encyclopedia also has a size comparison to various other Star Trek ships that shows that it may be roughly the same size as Soveriegn, though I'm not sure about this part. Arbington 15:08, July 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * Hmm yes however, we know Sovereign is 2 km in length while the USS Enterprise, the only Sovereign-Class vessel mentioned, is under one km in length. Actually it is mentioned in ST:FC, by Picard no less, that it is nearly 700 meters long, no where near the size of Sovereign. Even after the refit between Insurrection and Nemesis, the Enterprise was still under 800 meters in length. Sovereign is well over twice the length of the Sovereign-class Vessels used by Starfleet. Because of this, I have refrained from adding this trivia becuase of the size difference and becuse it is one of those name only comparisions. Lancer1289 15:29, July 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * Eh, I just thought it was kind of interesting, though I didn't know exactly how long Soveriegn was. I thought to myself "If he can fit on top of the Citadel Tower, over a kilometer might be a little big." but it appears I was wrong. No big deal. I didn't think it should be in the article anyway, as even if they were the exact same size, there is still no confirmation that they are related in any way other then by name. Arbington 15:49, July 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * Indeed I think it is quite interesing as well becuase Sovereign is the largest vessel seen in the ME universe, and the Sovereign-class is one of the largest seen in ST. It is interesting but it is that comparison that is what really intreges me. Lancer1289 15:54, July 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * If it were added as trivia, I would, of course, demand that the Sovereign-class SSD also be mentioned. Unlike the puny little Star Trek Sovereign, which is less than half the length of the Reaper Sovereign, the Star Wars Sovereign is over 7 times larger than the Reaper! But yeah, this just helps demonstrate how common the name Sovereign is for ships in sci-fi, and why none of these comparisons are really trivia. Trivial, maybe, but not trivia... SpartHawg948 17:02, July 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * Indeed if we were to add the Enterprise, then we would have to add the Star Destroyer as well. Anyway the point I as trying to make with the Enterprise bit was that the Sovereign-class is the largest class of vessels in Starfleet and some of the largest seen in the Star Trek Universe. Sovereign is so far the largest vessel seen, apart from all of its friends that we see at the end of ME2, so that is the connection I was trying to make, but that is too trivial to mention. However if that was added the SSD would have to be added along with it becuase it is also one of the largest vessels in the Star Wars Universe. However the name is way to common in scifi to be trivia. Lancer1289 17:17, July 7, 2010 (UTC)
 * I always thought the Galaxy class was the largest class of vessel whereas Sovereign was the strongest. But yeah, I'm getting off topic. The name "Sovereign" is in way too many sci-fi series. That and the name John "Shepard". Freakium 17:25, July 7, 2010 (UTC)

Random tidbit
So, not saying this needs to go either in this article or the Commander Shepard article, but I noticed this when I was perusing wikiquotes. While conversing with Sovereign on Virmire, Shep has the option of telling Sovereign that 'you're just a machine, and machines can be broken.' Compare this to Soviet Field Marshal Konstantin Rokossovsky's comment that 'The German Army is a machine, and machines can be broken! I doubt that anyone at BioWare was looking to paraphrase or reference a Marshal of the Soviet Union turned Polish Defense Minister, but I found the similarity interesting. SpartHawg948 01:35, August 9, 2010 (UTC)
 * Hmm. Interesting indeed! Arbington 01:49, August 9, 2010 (UTC)

Something Interesting
I was taking a look at the artwork book for mass effect and i saw a picture of the design of sovereign. i noticed that his underside almost took the shape of a face? Maybe the face of some ancient race that sovereign was made from? maybe thats why it always seem that the species used to make the reaper never really look like the actual species. Just a thought 81.129.80.226 23:23, September 22, 2010 (UTC)

Cthulu trivia
So, this has become a bone of contention lately. As such, I'd like to reassess the merit of the Cthulu trivia item. Let's look at what it says, and examine it piece by piece. The item claims that Sovereign echoes Cthulu from the works of H. P. Lovecraft (as well as others), namely in terms of "the same appearance", presumed near-invincibility, the claim to be beyond human understanding, the capability of driving others mad with their presence, and a cult following. Now, let's take a look at these:


 * The "same appearance" claim - Demonstrably FALSE. We all know what Sovereign looks like. Cthulu's appearance is best demonstrated by the description of statues of the creature. The statues are of "a monster of vaguely anthropoid outline, but with an octopus-like head whose face was a mass of feelers, a scaly, rubbery-looking body, prodigious claws on hind and fore feet, and long, narrow wings behind." If they really had "the same appearance", Sovereign would have an octopus-like head (Sovereign is shaped more like a cuttlefish, which tend to be angular and pointed, rather than bulbous, like octopi), a "scaly, rubbery-looking body", hind and fore limbs with large claws, and wings. Sovereign has none of these. 0-1


 * Presumed near-invincibility. Demonstrably false. At no point is Sovereign presumed invincible. Extremely hard to destroy, yes. Invincible, no. Remember one of my favorite lines from the game? "You're not even alive… not really. You're just a machine, and machines can be broken." 0-2


 * Claiming to be beyond human understanding. Demonstrably false. The exact phrasing used in-article is that both "are stated to be beyond human understanding". This is imply not true in the case of Sovereign. Sovereign claims, and Vigil reinforces, that the motives of the Reapers are beyond the ability of organics to comprehend. Sovereign itself, and Reapers in general, are easily comprehensible by organics. 0-3


 * The capability to drive others mad with their presence. Demonstrably false. Sovereign uses Indoctrination. The point of this is not to drive others mad, but rather to make them malleable. We have seen one individual who has been driven close to madness while resisting the Indoctrination. One individual. 0-4


 * Cult following. True. Sovereign does have what could be described as a cult following, what with Saren, Benezia and her followers, and the geth heretics. 1-4.

So basically, of the "proof" cited for the trivia, 80% was bogus, and 20% was valid, but not especially unique of exceptional in and of itself. Simply having cult followings is hardly indicative of a link between the two. As such, I am of the opinion that the Cthulu blurb, being based almost entirely upon exaggerations and outright falsehoods, needs to be deleted. Other opinions would, of course, be welcome. SpartHawg948 23:55, January 21, 2011 (UTC)


 * The "same appearance" claim

The primary association people make with Cthulhu's appearance is the squid(squidface), true
 * Presumed near-invincibility

Cthulhu is only claimed invincible as well. Why would he need a spell of protection if he weren't? Importance is the claim of invulnderability
 * Claiming to be beyond human understanding

Cthulhu is not necessarily beyond it either. Not enough is known about him to say. Importance is the claim once again.
 * The capability to drive others mad with their presence

Trait of Cthulhu that he uses to influence the cult, and drive others mad. This trait is exhibited in the Derelict Reaper(which is both dead and not) as well, itself a separate reference to Cthulhu. -- 71.74.72.212 00:10, January 22, 2011 (UTC)
 * You're totally missing my point on a few of those:
 * First, the bit claims that Sovereign and Cthulu have the same appearance. The same appearance. Not that Sovereign looks like the one feature of Cthulu people think of the most.
 * Next - My point about invincibility is that no one thinks Sovereign is invincible. Not that Sovereign only claims to be invincible (which it doesn't). You missed my point entirely.
 * Beyond human understanding - again, this is a claim that no one makes of Sovereign. Not one person. They only claim Sovereign's motives are beyond understanding. I couldn't have been more clear.
 * Madness - The Derelict Reaper is irrelevant. This article is about Sovereign. The Derelict Reaper would be a valid point to make on the Reaper page, not the Sovereign page.
 * And there you go. SpartHawg948 00:15, January 22, 2011 (UTC)

Point of the post was drawing relation between the two, not saying Sovereign is Cthulhu. Inspiration is not plagiarism.

Madness-Yet again, I point out both "Great Old Ones" and the Reapers can both influence and drive insane. This ability is literally an exact match, not an altered inspiration.
 * I am well aware of the point of the post. That is why I have dedicated this thread to demonstrating that this relation is by and large nonexistent. As for Madness, I point out yet again that Sovereign (and again, this article is about Sovereign, not about Reapers in general - I am 100% okay with the Cthulu blurb on the Reaper page) has only once been seen to drive someone to anything even resembling madness, and this was unintended. The intent had been to make the individual compliant, but he was resisting, which was causing extreme mental duress that was approaching madness, though the individual clearly wasn't mad, just extremely agitated. SpartHawg948 00:31, January 22, 2011 (UTC)

Drawing an association between the Reapers and the Great Old Ones does strengthen the link between Sovereign and Cthulhu. Do whatever you want though, I'm off to try and explain evolution to the nearest creationist I can find. -- 71.74.72.212 00:40, January 22, 2011 (UTC)
 * But drawing links between the Reapers and the Great Old Ones is not appropriate content for an article about Sovereign. It's perfect for an article about Reapers, which is why I don't have a problem with the Cthulu item that is currently on the Reaper page. We're talking about Sovereign here, not all Reapers. The item contends that Sovereign itself, not Reapers in general, drives people mad with its presence, and this simply is not true. Making disingenuous points about the Reapers as a whole does nothing to change this. If you're going to argue for evolution in a manner similar to how you argued here, I may have to rethink my stance on the issue. SpartHawg948 00:45, January 22, 2011 (UTC)

Told myself I wasn't going to come back but... it's Cthulhu! CthulHu! Dear lord, at least get that part right and this will be less frustrating. It's like someone saying their an expert on nuculer weapons or libaries -- Shoggoth1890 02:20, January 22, 2011 (UTC)
 * If nuculer or libaries were accepted alternate spellings of the word, your analogy would be correct. However, they are not. Cthulu, on the other hand, is one of many accepted alternate spellings of Cthulhu, though I will admit that Lovecraft himself spelled it Cthulhu. The Encyclopedia Cthulhiana notes many acceptable alternate spellings, and Cthulu is among them. It's like Qaddafi. Or Khadafi. Or Gaddafi. Or any of the other myriad acceptable spellings of the Libyan ruler's name. Now, if there was nothing else besides that outburst... SpartHawg948 02:39, January 22, 2011 (UTC)

The same logic defines nuculer and libary as acceptable in colloquial speech, you have not invalidated my statement. Cthulu and Ktulu are colloquial bastardizations. I have finally realized that you are Cthulhu, intending to drive me insane in the form of a contrarian. -- Shoggoth1890 03:14, January 22, 2011 (UTC)
 * Colloquialisms and accepted alternate spellings are two totally different things, my friend. We're talking apples and cauliflowers here. As for "[t]he same logic", I assume that by this you mean the definitive encyclopedia on all things Lovecraftian? As such, it is you who has failed to invalidate my statement. As for my being Cthulu, you do realize that I can only drive you insane so long as you keep this up of your own free will, don't you? SpartHawg948 03:32, January 22, 2011 (UTC)

Seriously though people: Any other opinions? Anyone besides a certain user who, failing to disprove any of my arguments, has instead resorted to quibbling over spelling? Anyone? Maybe someone prepared to argue logically, based off what I actually said, instead of what they wish I'd said? (I tell you, too many people have been watching The Fog of War. Curse you, Robert McNamara!!!) SpartHawg948 03:37, January 22, 2011 (UTC)

Christ guy, I've approached this trying to come to a consensus, and and you get tripped up by the words "old" and "one". Colloquialisms are considered acceptable alternates by some, but that doesn't make them official. Same applies to the spelling of the name. I have tried a point-counterpoint with you. If you are willing to give it an actual go and see where the roadblock started we can finally get back to the issues. -- Shoggoth1890 04:20, January 22, 2011 (UTC)