This is the talk page for Harbinger/Archive1.
Please limit discussions to topics that go into improving the article.
If you wish to discuss matters not relevant to article upkeep, take it to the blogs, forums,
Discord chat, or discussions module.
Thank you.

The Reapers are Coming?[edit source]

Are we sure that the Reapers we see in the end game are actually "beginning their journey to the Milky way"? As far as they are out, it would likely take tens or hundreds of years to reach the galaxy without the use of any relays. And they may not have the fuel necessary to make the trip at all. Is that possibly just a foreboding depiction of the Reapers in dark space (i.e., in the intergalactic space) waiting until the Citadel relay is opened so they can return?

I agree... the whole point of opening the Citadel relay was so the Reapers could return. If they could have just woken up and moseyed on over to the galaxy, the entire story of Mass Effect would be pointless. Matt 2108 23:44, February 12, 2010 (UTC)
The conflicting point is the line in the article, "...all of which reactivate and head toward the Milky Way." is misleading and it implies that the Reapers can move toward the Milky Way. Perhaps it should be reword to say that the Reapers are overlooking Milky Way or something, not heading towards it. I've watched the ending movie over and over again and no where it implies they are going anywhere yet. Teugene 17:35, February 21, 2010 (UTC)

I understand this, and I'm sure that's part of why they left the story off where it was at the end of me2, however we know Sovereign wasn't the only reaper in the milky way galaxy. We also know that literally nobody knows what the Keepers are up to! For all we know, the Keepers reconstructed parts of Sovereign that they salvaged, that were necessary to activate the Citadel so that the Reapers could come through. This would simply mean that the Reapers are "on their way" being ready for the activated Citadel. Or it could be that ME3 does in fact take place ten or fifteen years after ME2, we just don't know yet. I could easily see it taking place a week after ME2, but could also see it taking place years later. Jaline 00:04, February 13, 2010 (UTC)

In response to Matt 2108, the entire point of Mass Effect wasn't actually to prevent the Reapers from returning to the Milky Way galaxy, it was to delay their arrival, to buy some time for the races here to prepare. Whomever you nominate for the Council makes this quite clear in their rousing little end-of-game speech. It wasn't pointless, it was a move to delay the arrival of the Reapers, changing it from a matter of minutes to a matter of (likely) years. And in response to Jaline, we know that Sovereign wasn't the only Reaper in the Milky Way galaxy how? Granted, there was one incomplete Reaper and one essentially dead Reaper, but there has been nothing shown to indicate that Sovereign was not the only Reaper active in the Milky Way galaxy. SpartHawg948 00:44, February 13, 2010 (UTC)

Well I never said "active" I was referring to the essentially dead Reaper when I said that Sovereign wasn't the only Reaper in the Milky Way galaxy, wasn't saying that it had anything specific to do with the group of Reapers that are now coming, but it could be thought that since there were other Reapers around, there could have been another active Reaper somewhere in the galaxy, specifically: What are the heretic geth up to these days now that Sovereign is gone? They obviously didn't immediately return to the Geth as a whole, and the group of geth heretics that we reprogrammed, wasn't *every* heretic geth, at least I didn't understand it that way. Perhaps there's a chance the geth heretics sought out another "old god" in the galaxy, we don't really know one way or the other. Jaline 00:51, February 13, 2010 (UTC)

So the geth heretics are darkspawn? I KNEW IT!!! :P SpartHawg948 01:04, February 13, 2010 (UTC)

Eh? :P I understand the reference, yet not at the same time... How exactly would what I said mean they are the darkspawn? :o Isn't "Old God" what Legion called what the geth heretics said? Or was it "Old Machine" ? I can't quite remember at the moment, but I'm certain you know what I meant :P Jaline 01:10, February 13, 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, Legion called them "Old Machines" (pretty sure, anyways) b/c remember, Legion did not consider them to be gods. What I meant was you described the geth heretics seeking out another old god in the galaxy, and that's pretty much what the darkspawn do between each Blight. Seek out another old god. SpartHawg948 01:23, February 13, 2010 (UTC)

Well what else would they do? Considering that their solution to the great math problem is to follow the old machines, it was Sovereign at first, but with him destroyed, obviously the heretic geth didn't give up and rejoin the rest of the geth, so the only thing I'd think of them doing is searching for a new leader, which would mean a new "Old Machine" which would mean a new Reaper, from what I understood of the code we used during Legion's loyalty mission, it didn't change over every single heretic geth, there's just no way that every one of them was on that one ship is my point, I don't know the extent of how far the code went into geth space, perhaps it went and turned almost every heretic, but I kinda doubt it... Considering Tali's recruitment mission it almost feels like there's something up with that star, involving "dark energy" and the heretic geth, for all we know there could be a Reaper near that star, taking in the "life" of it, which is causing it to age, perhaps doing something like that is like "eating" for the Reapers, they do afterall have a mix of organic life within their construction. Either way, none of it's confirmed of course, just interesting things to think about since we really don't know all that much about what has gone on with the geth since the end of ME. Jaline 01:35, February 13, 2010 (UTC)

As for it taking hundreds of thousands of years, we dont know how advanced the reapers are, or how far our they are (as it is impossible to judge distance). It is reasonable to assume that they have highly advanced (and thus fast) FTL drives (we know them to have massive Ezo Cores) and they may only just outside the edge of the galaxy (in stellar terms). It is entirly possible that the journy will only take them 2 or 3 years (so a simlar gap between ME1 and ME2). As SpartHawg said, the point wasnt to stop the reapers just delay them, it was very clear at the end of ME1 that the Reaper threat wasnt over. The Citadel was just part of their master plan. Instant Invasion through this super mass relay and then kill the leaders of the galaxy to cause chaos and then systamtically exterminate all sentient life in the galaxy. All Shepard did in ME1 was make them change their plans. I have on quesion though, if the citadel is a mass relay, where is the other mass relay in dark space? We didnt see it at the end of ME2, maybe it was just out of shot. -- Looq 01:01, February 13, 2010 (UTC)

Since the Reapers built the relays, it's entirely possible that they could have mini-relays inside them. A little relay that connects just specially to the Citadel relay. As for the geth and the ones that we reprogrammed, the way I understood it was that it extended very far out into geth space, affecting the vast majority of the heretics. Those who were unaffected for one reason or another (being out of range or not being connected to the geth wireless network) would be affected the next time they "logged on," so to speak. At least that's the way I interpreted it. JakeARoonie 11:51, March 16, 2010 (UTC)

If the Citadel is itself a mass relay that allows the reapers to blitz the galaxy, then there must be another relay on the reapers' side that sends them to the Citadel. So, if they have one relay that apparently only connects to the Citadel, maybe they can refashion it to connect with another relay. Or, they move toward the galaxy on their own power toward a relay near the edge of the galaxy (there are some clusters very close to the edge) and traverse the relay network that way. TheUnknown285 04:04, June 10, 2010 (UTC)

how[edit source]

How did Harbinger awaken? How did it and the fleet emerge from hibernation? Is it a 'secondary' vanguard in case the first one fails? I don't get any of this. - LordDeathRay

You are assuming that they were asleep to begin with. Remember, by the end-game part of Mass Effect (which was two years before ME2), Sovereign was en route to the Citadel to activate it, allowing the other Reapers to use it to exit dark space and wipe out all sentient life and all that nastiness. That would pretty much have to mean that all the other Reapers (including Harbinger) were awake, now wouldn't it? And once they learned that their plan had gone horribly wrong, I doubt they would have just said "oh well" and gone back into hibernation. SpartHawg948 02:48, January 31, 2010 (UTC)

No picture[edit source]

There does not seem to be a picture of Harbinger on the character page yet since it is unclear what he looks like. however, compare the picture of Harbinger with the Reaper leading the Reaper Fleet. I think it is reasonable to assume that these two reapers are one and the same.

I agree, I believe the pic should be changed.

Um[edit source]

he might not have ever been asleep, he may have just been the reaper in charge of maintaining the reproduction facility, also is harbinger his name i thought that was just what possessed collectors were called, what does the word harbinger even mean, it was a sword in fable but thats all i know. ralok 18:07, January 31, 2010 (UTC)

Control[edit source]

Does Harbinger control the collecters or does the Collecter Genreal?

I think the Collector General controls the Collectors, but the Collector General is either controlled or told what to do by Harbinger. so it's both.--Marshmallow2166 00:56, February 28, 2010 (UTC)

Re: Control[edit source]

No the Harbinger controls the collectors as a whole THROUGH the collector General. Because the Collector General can control the rest of the collectors. And through the general, Harbinger can assume control of the collector drones, guardians..etc.

First of all, we have NO idea what the mechanics are involving controlling any collector much less the Collector General. Harbinger could have clearly assumed control of any Collector at any times by use of the Collector Base. The only "evidence" that the Collector General controls the collectors is from the Codex, which is bias since the Codex at that point wouldn't tell you "Hey, The Collector General you've been talking to is a Reaper". So no, I'm assuming that Harbinger needed the base to control any collector and that the Collector General was just like any other collector (except his appearance). -- (Lone Hunter 23:45, February 28, 2010 (UTC))

Well if you look at the ending of ME2 once you finish the suicide mission theres a cutscene where you see the Collector General looking at a live holo of Harbinger that then says "Releasing control" then you see the collector generals eyes stop glowing. Therefor you can infere that Harbinger controlled the Reapers. {{SUBST:User:Jason Shiprat/Illusive}} 18:09, October 7, 2012 (UTC)

If Harbinger plays a role in Omega dlc and "assumes control" then that debunks the 'need of the base to control' idea. Edited. -- Asari Princess (talk) 19:59, October 7, 2012 (UTC)

Things like this belong in the forums or a blog post as this isn’t what talk pages are for. Lancer1289 (talk) 20:01, October 7, 2012 (UTC)

Re: How[edit source]

The cycle... after the extermination cycle ends they most likely go back to sleep. But they failed to activate the citadel thanks to the prothean scientists.

Since all Reapers hibernate around a thousand to maybe thousands of years, as speculation says... nobody is sure, maybe it's not even hibernation or no reapers are even hibernating at all, maybe they are just dormant. But as far as I'm concerned, according to all the information I gathered in WIKI and etc, in my knowledge, the Harbinger was responsible for the Protheans extinction (which was around 50,000 years ago. So it might be possible the Reapers weren't asleep at all. Even now), and responsible for turning protheans into collectors. And is in charge of their big dirty project "human-reaper". Since harbinger is the one controlling the collectors... as sovereign controlled geth (now geth.. or the HERETICS, is worshipping the reapers in general). But that still doesn't explain that Harbinger was responsible for the destruction and abduction of the protheans. But it's possible. It might be a possibility.

A Reaper? Really?[edit source]

I'd always assumed that Harbinger was simply the name of the Collector General, but I was obviously mistaken. When did we find out that Harbinger was the name of a Reaper? Nosferatu13X 02:22, February 9, 2010 (UTC)

It's assumed that Harbinger is a Reaper due to the ending of ME2, most of the time during ME2 we're lead to believe that the Collector General is the one taking direct control, however during the ending movie, we see the Collector General's control cut, meaning that the whole time, the Collector General was under the direct control of Harbinger, and then Harbinger would selectively control a drone/etc through the use of the general. It's assumed that the reaper on the datapad at the end could be Harbinger, however I'm not even certain of that, because even though we'd know of the march of the reapers, how would we have known which was Harbinger? Unless, there was data of an old race named Harbinger, and the reapers do in fact take their name based upon the name of the race, and when that reaper was seen in the group of repears, it matched whatever data they had on the Harbinger race (perhaps based upon prothean ruins data) Jaline 23:41, February 12, 2010 (UTC)

Also he introduces himself with that name during combat. "We are Harbinger." Interesting that he refers to himself in the first-person plural, like how Legion does. Sovereign referred to himself in the singular. "I am Sovereign." Anyway... JakeARoonie 17:15, February 13, 2010 (UTC)

Quotes[edit source]

Could someone please compile a list of all of Harbinger's major quotes (squad member dependent ones unnecessary)? That'd be great. --LBCCCP 03:32, February 10, 2010 (UTC)

Re: How[edit source]

I think the answer is much simpler. From what has been said so far the general consensus seems to be that Soverign was the only active Reaper and that the Reapers were all asleep or that they are all awake. It seems more likely that while the vast majority of the reapers lay domant, that there are several "agents" constantly working (it wouldnt make a lot of sense to entrust the saftey of the entire species to one individual Reaper). Soverign was the Vanguard, designed to judge when the next cycle of extinction should begin and then to active the citiadel.

The books show the collectors have been active a while, and when passing though the mass relay Joke states that some of the wrecks look "ancient". It is safe to assume that as long as the collectors have been active (around 50,000 years) Harbinger has been active, controlling them probably using them as "agents" to gather intelligence about the other races. Remember Soverign couldnt reveal himself for fear that the other races would band against him. A slave species would therefore be useful.

I think it is safe to say that there are several more active Reapers in the Milky Way (each with its own specific duty). This seems likly considering that Soverign called himself a Vangaurd (the leading troop in an army i.e. the first into battle) and Harbinger's name can be simply defined as a "forshadowing" so the meaning there is prettey clear. This Reaper Collective in the Milky Way probably form an advanced guard to prepare for the comming of the Reaper Armada and to prepare the Armada itself.

-- Looq 00:52, Febuary 13, 2010 (UTC)

Actually, Looq, I don't think it's safe to say that there are "several more active Reapers in the Milky Way" Sovereign was the vanguard, so he was left behind. If there were several more, Sovereign could've just rounded up all his buddies and then make his way to the Citadel, guns a'blazin. --Effectofthemassvariety 09:49, February 21, 2010 (UTC)

Harbinger in ME3[edit source]

Someone's article change about Harbinger appearing in ME3 was undone by a user with the summary comment, "pure, unfounded speculation. As an aside, I would really like to see the crystal ball used to determine Harbinger will appear in ME3." I just want to put this out there and ask why anyone thinks that he WOULDN'T appear in ME3. Really, some people treat this game like it's a murder trial and they need absolute conclusive evidence to everything, and can't seem to understand that foreshadowing in a mildly predictable series like this is usually enough. Harbinger may not be the "big bad guy" of ME3, but all things in the ending considered I think it's pretty damn safe to say he will appear. JakeARoonie 17:19, February 13, 2010 (UTC)

I have to agree, you have no way of knowing whether or not Harbringer will have anything to do with ME3, it's pure speculation and utterly pointless. You might as well be saying Urdnot Wrex will make a comeback as a character in your squad in ME3. It could happen, sure, but you don't know if it actually WILL happen. -- 19:30, February 13, 2010 (UTC)
JackARoonie, it's not that we all think that he won't be in ME3. Simply, this is a wiki, an encyclopedia on the Mass Effect universe. It's supposed to deal in facts, never speculation. We don't treat this game like a murder trial, we treat the wiki like it. Otherwise it would be chaos, with people posting speculation everywhere. If we don't know either way, it's better not to mention it at all. As the old saying goes: "Better safe than sorry." --Effectofthemassvariety 10:09, February 21, 2010 (UTC)

According to the ME3 Codex, Harbinger is the oldest and largest Reaper in the fleet and the leader of the attack on Earth. So I guess it's safe to assume that he indeed will appear in ME3. --Tiv83us 05:02, February 28, 2012 (UTC)

Voice actor?[edit source]

This might be a bit of a stretch but; does anyone know who the voice actor for Harbinger was? As a sidenote; what about Sovereign's too? 19:34, February 13, 2010 (UTC)

  • Sovereign's voice was provided by Peter Jessop when he talked to Shepard on Virmire. During the attack on the Citadel, the line "I am Sovereign, and this station is mine," was done by Fred Tatiasciore. I'm NOT sure, but I think one of them did Harbinger's voice. Darth Something

True Power Quote[edit source]

Is that Harbinger saying "I will show you true power" in the Mass Effect 2 trailer? If so, should we add that to his article?

--Cyberweasel89 01:07, February 15, 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I think that's him but I never heard it in-game. Did anyone else find where he says it? JakeARoonie 04:17, February 15, 2010 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure he says it in one of the cutscenes during the Horizon mission Prismvg 23:05, February 17, 2010 (UTC)

He says it during combat when he posesses a Collector.--Marshmallow2166 01:00, February 28, 2010 (UTC)

Speculation[edit source]

why is it speculation to consider the reaper ahead of everyone,is harbinger? it was shown distinctivly as the one with the golden eyes, and while it was possesed, the Collector General had the same eyes, which dimmed out as harbinger released control. its pretty damn obvious that that reaper is Harbinger.--RexGodwin 22:16, February 21, 2010 (UTC)

Naming[edit source]

Do we ever find out who exactly gave Harbinger his current name? We know Saren named Nazara "Sovereign", but as far as I know it's never explained how Harbinger got his. He refers to himself as "the/a harbinger" and just "Harbinger" (as in "We are Harbinger.") from the beginning, which makes little sense considering the fact that BioWare went through the trouble of giving Legion dialogue explaining how Saren named "his" Reaper. 22:14, February 27, 2010 (UTC)

Actually, IIRC, it wasn't Saren who dubbed Nazara "Sovereign", it was the science team employed by batarian Edan Had'dah, who were studying the Reaper at the time. Saren came across Nazara after obtaining the research when he killed Had'dah. SpartHawg948 00:07, February 28, 2010 (UTC)

I haven't read Revelation yet, but Had'dah's article doesn't seem to suggest he or his team already made contact with the Reaper (though the reverse appears to be true as they were slowly being indoctrinated). Also, Legion's quote appears to be quite definitive: "Nazara. That was what the programs within the Reaper called themselves. "Sovereign" was a title given by Saren Arterius. Saren and the heretics believed Nazara to be a surpreme ruler. A sovereign." 20:17, February 28, 2010 (UTC)

Well, as someone who has read the book, Had'dah himself had not come into contact with Sovereign itself, but as I stated above, one of his science teams had, and they then contacted him, at which point he quarantined them there to study it. As for the quote, you may be correct it's been a while since I've read Revelation so I don't recall if the scientists gave Sovereign that name or if it was Saren at the very end, but it is worth noting that one of the (former) writers at BioWare, who actually wrote most of the material for Legion, and who contributes to this very site, has stated (again, on this site) that dialogue needs to be taken with a grain of salt, as characters will say things that they really aren't in a position to know. I'll see if I can't find my copy of Revelation and see what it says. SpartHawg948 21:13, February 28, 2010 (UTC)
Ok, after an epic battle with some boxes of stuff (isn't moving fun?) I found my copy of the book, and it does appear to state that Saren did not name Sovereign, but that the name had already been given to it before he ever encountered it. I'll quote the relevant paragraph in it's entirety, with one minor note inside the text.
  • "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; (interjection- I know! I'm surprised too! I'd forgotten that Revelation italicized ship names! However, the game still doesn't.) a magnificent relic from the time of the Prothean extinction; an enormous warship of tremendous power.- Mass Effect: Revelation, pg 320.
So, as you can see, the text states that Saren learned about this ship, called Sovereign, from the data of Dr. Shu Qian, who was at this time in Edan Had'dah's employ. No mention of him naming it Sovereign. SpartHawg948 22:03, February 28, 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, anywho, about whoever named Harbinger, I assume it must be Commander Shepard. Shepard is the first one to refer to it in the game, and it probaby came from hearing the word over and over on the battlefield. I mean, it's pure speculation and personal opinion, but it seems to be the only explanation.--Effectofthemassvariety 07:57, March 8, 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for going through the trouble of finding your copy of Revelation, SpartHawg. It doesn't really make it clear who exactly named Nazara Sovereign (Had'dah, Qian, Nazara itself through indoctrination or whatever) but it's good to know that Saren didn't come up with that name himself. As for Legion's quote, I suppose the geth have no way of knowing anything about the Reaper before Saren brought it to them, so the geth had no reason to doubt that. As for who named Harbinger, I also thought it might be Shepard, but Harbinger clearly refers to himself/themselves as Harbinger from the moment we see him: "We are the harbinger of their perferction." (Horizon intro) and simply "We are Harbinger." (sometimes when assuming control). In the first quote it doesn't really appear to be meant as a name, but the second kinda does. Also, the Collector General Codex article seems to imply he/they already had this name: "More disturbing still, victims of the Collectors say the General has spoken to them and referred to itself by a human name: Harbinger."' Seems kinda weird that something like this would be in the Codex considering the fact that no one supposedly ever escaped from the Collectors before (atleast before Horizon). Oh well, I should stop overanalyzing this and just enjoy the series. Might as well buy the books while I'm at it. 19:48, March 9, 2010 (UTC)

No problem! Happy to help. As for the Legion thing, someone else did just point out on another page that Legion also states that Shepard spoke to Sovereign on Ilos, when of course this happened on Virmire. So maybe the geth are just working off some bad data? Either that or it's continuity errors that can also be written off as a mistake on the part of the character in question. All the above information does seem to suggest that Reapers may give themselves names like Sovereign and Harbinger, which is a very interesting concept. Guess we'll just have to wait and see. SpartHawg948 19:58, March 9, 2010 (UTC)

Just to throw some more fuel on the fire, there are references made to some sort of personal translator devices, most memorably, FemShep's romance dialogs with Thane. So maybe Harbinger is just what the translator is picking up and spitting into Shepard's ear. And perhaps there's no reason for such an explanation in scenes without Shepard, such as the ending, but then it's just a continuity idea, and the whole thing's in English, so why not continue. Just my thoughts. Greatak 04:41, March 11, 2010 (UTC)

Maybe he is named Harbinger, because he and all of the other reapers are the harbinger of death to the entire glaxy?Lintyelm 00:07, March 14, 2010 (UTC)

Harbinger is a synonym of herald which means - a person or thing that precedes or comes before; forerunner. So it is possible that he is referring to the reapers as a Harbinger of human Accession. They will take humanity to the next/ultimate step i.e integrate with the reapers.Thaner 15:06, August 15, 2010 (UTC)

Gender[edit source]

Harbinger is male. He shouldn't be referred to as "it", because in the endings of ME2 where Shepard survives, he/she says "Harbinger is coming. And you can bet he won't be alone." Therefore, Harbinger should be referred to as male in this article.--Unic of the borg 03:45, February 28, 2010 (UTC)

Ok, but does Harbinger call itself male at any time? If not, then it's not male. SpartHawg948 04:50, February 28, 2010 (UTC)
Are you kidding me? Should we stop calling EDI a "she" then? Even though both Harbinger and EDI are machines and do not have gender, they are cases of gender implied by voice. JakeARoonie 00:29, March 8, 2010 (UTC)
Well, EDI has feminine programming, which is apparent, although if EDI doesn't refer to itself as "she", the case could be made that we shouldn't refer to it as such either. However, while Harbinger may sound male to us, we have no idea if this is, in fact, the case. Nothing is implied when we don't know what a Reaper with male or female programming and mannerisms would sound like. We can make a call with EDI b/c it was designed/programmed by humans along human lines, and we can easily differentiate between male and female human voices. With other species such as elcor, hanar, volus, Reapers, turians, etc, where we don't have the ability (as of yet) to point to examples and say 'this is a male voice and this is a female voice' it's not nearly as cut and dry differentiating gender-specific programming. So comparing EDI to Harbinger in this case is hardly a valid comparison. SpartHawg948 01:18, March 8, 2010 (UTC)

The only reason Shepard refers to Harbinger as a He is because it sounds like a male. The Reapers are synthetic, meaning they don't have a gender. Think of it like in Terminator(hoping you have seen it), the chick in Terminator 3 only LOOKS female, but once all the skin and stuff is melted away, it shows no gender whatsoever. Meaning Harbinger is in fact an "it".--UNCxTrinity 04:04, March 8, 2010 (UTC)

Indeed! SpartHawg948 04:05, March 8, 2010 (UTC)
"Incorrect. Reapers are sapient constructs. A hybrid of organic and inorganic material." You heard it straight from the ship :P. Prismvg 08:20, March 15, 2010 (UTC)
Which ship? You mean EDI of the Normandy SR2? B/c Sovereign stated quite clearly in the first game that the Reapers were not organic lifeforms. And if they aren't organic, then what are they? Let's review. Massive ships, with artificial intelligence, that contain some organic material, but don't consider themselves organic. Remember, just because they contain organic material doesn't mean they aren't machines. I can put bio-diesel in my truck, but it's still a machine. And at the end of the day, who is the bigger expert on the Reapers? EDI, an AI aboard a Cerberus vessel, or Sovereign, an ACTUAL REAPER? SpartHawg948 08:37, March 15, 2010 (UTC)

Lighten up, it was a joke, don't need to get all worked up about it. Just a couple of quotes. I am aware it's something of a mystey and there's no hard evidence anywhere. But just as well Sovereign could be lying (although I can't remember Sovereign actually saying anything about the nature of their lifeform, correct me if I'm wrong), whereas EDI has some Reaper parts down her spine, and that data from the Collectors who were... well, building "an actual reaper" using a heck of a lot of humans, and not for bio-fuel (I'm guessing). But as I said, that was a joke. Prismvg 08:52, March 15, 2010 (UTC)

Lighten up? Whatever for? In order to lighten up I'd first have to be agitated or offended or something. I was merely responding to what I took to be a serious comment with a serious reply. If it had been intended harshly or anything like that, you'd have known. As it was, I was just trying to have a civilized discussion. Not sure how to lighten that up! :P As for Sovereign, it doesn't explicitly state that "Reapers are synthetic lifeforms" but it does make a number of comments that strongly imply that Reapers don't consider themselves organic, such as "We impose order on the chaos of organic evolution." I don't have the others verbatim at the moment, but conveniently that one is right at the top of the Sovereign page. Again, I'd take the word of a Reaper over the word of a human-built AI whose sole experience with the Reapers is an IFF program (which is nothing more than a glorified transponder, with nothing in-game given to indicate that it in any way contains any data whatsoever on the Reapers beyond Identification Friend-or-Foe codes) and some data from a race of Reaper slaves. SpartHawg948 09:17, March 15, 2010 (UTC)

Like they always say, Synthetics are Synthetics!--UNCxTrinity 04:25, March 8, 2010 (UTC)

Mighty insightful. Hmmm... wouldn't that make it a synthetic insight? We'd better watch out! Might be hearing from Lorik Qui'in soon! :P SpartHawg948 04:25, March 8, 2010 (UTC)
HA! ....Oh, and, yeah, I agree. Synthetics have no gender.--Effectofthemassvariety 08:01, March 8, 2010 (UTC)

I don't think it is a matter of what makes sense to us or what we think at all. Harbinger is referred to as a he in-game. Since that's our primary source, it's proper to refer to him that way. It shouldn't be our goal to prioritize our own reasoning over an official source. -- Karm1c 20:16, March 9, 2010 (UTC)

Harbinger is referred to as he once by a character who has no way of knowing for sure. We have statements on this very site from a (former) BioWare writer stating that characters in ME will say things spur of the moment that they have no real way of knowing. We've seen this. Nobody is flawless. Alestia Iallis refers to "President Huerta of Earth", implying that this is the President of Earth, when in fact he's just the President of the UNSA, one nation-state. Legion talks about the time that Shepard spoke to Sovereign on Ilos. Only problem? Shepard talked to Sovereign on Virmire. Legion also states that Saren named Sovereign, which is also directly contradicted by source material (see the section on this page about naming). Casey Hudson referred to Legion as "he" in a pre-release video, which caused this same kind of stir on the Legion page. There are many instances of characters getting things wrong in-game, which is why dialogue does tend to be taken with a grain of salt, especially in cases like this, when what we see and what dialogue tells us seem to conflict. SpartHawg948 20:25, March 9, 2010 (UTC)

Exactly! People need to learn to understand that not everything that the characters say in the game is true, and most of it is just what they think at that point in time. If everything they said was true, we would have contradictions left and right.--UNCxTrinity 03:34, March 11, 2010 (UTC)

Harbinger, the Reaper, and Harbinger, the Collector Combatant[edit source]

I am trying to implement the adversaries infobox, but it would require restructuring this article. So far the article has 2 headings: an introduction, which talks about Harbinger, the Reaper character; and the walkthrough, which talks about Harbinger, the Collector combatant (obviously it would be silly to have a tactics guide about Shepard + 2 squadmates vs a dreadnought starship). The way I see this article right now is as a character page about a Reaper, it has the frame and it is written in the same way as a character page. It seems that the 'walkthrough' section is just tacked on and is all about a Collector. I propose two methods of remedying this: either create a new page with a title like Harbinger (Combatant) or Harbinger (Collector), similar to how Horizon and Horizon (mission) are done, or divide this page into two distinct and separate sections. If the latter, the second section about Harbinger, the Combatant will be similar to e.g. Geth Hunter page, basically: (1) Intro/Summary, (2) Capabilities divided into (2a) Offensive and (2b) Defensive, (3) Tactics. Any thoughts? Leaving it is also okay. Dch2404 19:42, March 8, 2010 (UTC)

Harbinger picture[edit source]

Their is no proof that the Reaper at the very end of the game in space is Harbinger. Its strongly implied but there is nothing conclusive to backup the idea.

And Im not trying to start an edit war. I put back the old image from before these new images were added in. Everyone agrees thats a image of Harbinger, but we cant agree on these newer images. The old image should stay until it is proven that the new images are of Harbinger. Besides the new images are blurry. If youre going to revert me then use bettewr images.

Ha! Scandal exposed!! Matt2108 reverted the same images for the same reasons I did and the guy reverting me now is the same guy who got reverted by Matt last time. The people reverting me have ultirior motives LOL.

I gotta say, that was the least interesting scandal exposition in... well, in the history of ever. A scandal, after all, is defined as "a disgraceful or discreditable action, circumstance, etc" and I see nothing scandalous about people trying to make this wiki a better place, even though you may disagree with their methods. No shocking revelations, no reputations ruined, no nothing. Also, it's worth pointing out that "the guy reverting me now" is actually two users, not one guy. Both JakeARoonie and Lancer1289 have reverted your edits. And I don't see any ulterior motives. Both of these users have a decent track record of trying to make this a better site for everyone. Let's not ascribe malicious intent where none exists, whether or not it was meant seriously. SpartHawg948 03:27, March 11, 2010 (UTC)
'"the guy reverting me now" is actually two users, not one guy' - so you're saying it's a conspiracy? :P --silverstrike 03:48, March 11, 2010 (UTC)
Conspiracy indeed! Seems to be a lot of this going around today! I blame the "rarefied air of elitism wherein the admins are opposed to just about anything that doesn't pass their small set of criteria and they share a common, yet secretive, vision." (I don't see that particular quote EVER getting old! :P) SpartHawg948 04:11, March 11, 2010 (UTC)

How is it not suspicious that the same guy who got reverted before is reverting me now over the same thing? His image of the Reper in space got taken out, then somebody else puts it back in, then I put back the hologram Harbinger, then he reverts me. Even if the guy isnt doing anything bad hes so obviously trying to push in his image. The scandal is the abuse of the system. Why should my edit get reverted and stepped on? Why cant the picture that me and other users want on the page get to stay?

Wow I wasted an hour on this. Do what you want then. I still say its injustice and personal motives but whatever. If anyone did anything bad its on their consience and thats enough. But get better images if you revert me.

How is it not suspicious? How IS IT suspicious? Maybe the users in question have this page watchlisted. Maybe they've seen vandalism or pointless edits and are being conscientious users by watching out for this stuff. I'm all for that! At least three or four times a week I have to do something similar (ie revert something I've had to revert in the past, for whatever reason). Just look at the Golo or Sovereign pages. Is that scandalous? Am I doing something bad? Neither of those images was uploaded by either of the users who you claim are obviously trying to push their images. If you have proof of personal motives, present it. If not, leave it be. I could just as soon claim that your reversions are due to bad faith personal motives, but I don't. I figure you're just trying to improve the wiki, same as the other two users you've accused of pushing images. Nothing scandalous about using the system for exactly what it's intended to do. SpartHawg948 04:04, March 11, 2010 (UTC)
Wow I had no idea there was a "scandal" about me. I reverted the image to the in-space Harbinger because it's common sense that that's freaking Harbinger. The glowing eyes are meant to be the connecting thread to show us that that's the same Reaper as we saw barely one freaking minute ago in the hologram. I am trying to push "my" image because it is the correct image that should be up there, except that some people don't want to turn on their (un)common sense. So yes, I watch this page for needless, ridiculous statements. I joined in reverting the image back to space-Harbinger because I saw other users changing the image to that one, as well. So it's clear that I'm not the only user who has this point of view here. Should we take a vote here? Are the four yellow glowing eyes a solid enough connecting thread between the hologram and the actual Reaper (seen within less than 2 minutes of each other, depending on your loading time) to prove that they are in fact the same? I would say yes, they are. JakeARoonie 13:00, March 12, 2010 (UTC)

Well if it isn't the "scandalous" JakeARoonie! :P See! I knew there was no malice intended in any of this! Honestly, as far as taking a vote, I'm casting mine in favor of JakeARoonie and the space Reaper. It isn't 100% explicitly stated that the Reaper in question is Harbinger, but (and I could be wrong here) I don't think it was ever 100% explicitly stated that the Reaper in the hologram is Harbinger either. So yeah, I vote for "space-Harbinger", not weird jaundiced hologram Harbinger. SpartHawg948 20:57, March 12, 2010 (UTC)

I agree with SpartHawg948. The space picture is a lot better and not to mention larger. It gives a more realistic picture of you will possibly be facing in ME3. Also the hologram picture is smaller. Lancer1289 21:02 March 12, 2010 (UTC)
Not to mention, it is clear that the Reaper in the hologram is the same as the Reaper shown in space. The only thing that could conceivably be up for a debate is whether that Reaper in both the hologram and in space is, in fact, Harbinger. But on that question, we seem to be in unanimous agreement that the Reaper in the hologram is Harbinger. If A = B and A = C, then B = C. Reaper in hologram = Reaper in space, Reaper in hologram = Harbinger, therefore Reaper in space = Harbinger. JakeARoonie 01:18, March 16, 2010 (UTC)
Nice logic. I believe that that should settle any further debate. User:Lancer1289 01:43 March 16, 2010 (UTC)

Leave The Reaper pic pls and thank you

Tag your posts, pls and thank you :P JakeARoonie 13:56, March 17, 2010 (UTC)

Harbinger or Harbringer[edit source]

For some reason when I type in harbringer my vocab says it's wrong.

The most likely one is Harbinger, due to sources mostly using that one.

Any thoughts?

There is not an R after the B. The correct spelling is Harbinger. Listen to the way it is pronounced in the game, and take a close look at his name-plate in combat. JakeARoonie 14:41, March 13, 2010 (UTC)

"That which you know as Reapers are your salvation through destruction" quote[edit source]

I am curious as to what others think this means. While it can only be answered with speculation, it occurred to me that Harbinger may be hinting at the existence of something darker and more sinister than the Reapers here. Salvation through destruction? Salvation from what? Is there something the Reapers "save" civilizations from by destroying them? Could be interesting to contemplate. JakeARoonie 03:33, March 14, 2010 (UTC)

I have no idea. All I know is that Harbinger's little speech sounds really cool. It's anyone's guess as to what he means, but I assume he's trying to make it sound benign, you know? (although he's not very good at it) I mean, maybe he's trying to convince himself that what the reapers do is merciful and just? (Do reapers have a conscience, or a soul?) Or, and I just thought of this, the reapers believe that they live on a better plain of existence? Remember, he says on Horizon: "Prepare these humans for ascension!" Maybe they think that being melted down and turned into a reaper is like the pinnacle of existance, kind of like heaven. Yup, nothin more heavenly than being turned into grey goop. Anyways, sorry for the long-winded answer. It's all speculation for now. :) --Effectofthemassvariety 17:49, March 18, 2010 (UTC)
Actually I was thinking about that today. The Reapers consider themselves to be gods, so yeah, Harbinger probably thinks he's doing those humans a favor. They are "ascending" to godhood, in his eyes. JakeARoonie 22:47, March 18, 2010 (UTC)
Wait, since when do the Reapers consider themselves gods? I mean, Sovereign mocked the geth heretics for worshiping the Reapers as gods. SpartHawg948 22:57, March 18, 2010 (UTC)
The Reapers consider themselves "the pinnacle of evolution and existence." Harbinger obviously feels that the species serving as a template for a Reaper is the highest honor, making the particular race immortal, in a sense. Matt 2108 23:53, March 18, 2010 (UTC)
Gotcha. So they don't consider themselves gods, they just consider themselves to be perfect from an evolutionary/existential standpoint. I can see this as meaning that they feel they are helping lesser being attain perfection. I don't necessarily buy into it, but I could see it as a possible explanation. SpartHawg948 23:56, March 18, 2010 (UTC)
OK, well, maybe more accurately they consider themselves godlike. Claiming they have no beginning and no end as Sovereign did, etc... JakeARoonie 03:42, March 19, 2010 (UTC)

I figured we might want to include the full quote, as although it "loses a lot of the impact" as suggested by SpartHawg948, paraphrasing it to include only the last sentence omits the previous sentence's expression of the Reaper's view and extent of belittlement towards humanity. What do you guys think? Perhaps just "Human, you've changed nothing." can be omitted instead. 21:16, March 19, 2010 (UTC)

Well, as I stated, including the rest makes it lose a lot of the impact, and also, you have to figure that it's basically two entirely different points being made, which is why it's broken up into multiple sentences. You have "Human, you've changed nothing. Your species has the attention of those infinitely your greater." Now, those two clearly are tied in together and interrelated. But then you have "That which you know as Reapers are your salvation through destruction." which really seems to have nothing to do with the preceding sentences, which is what really makes it lose the impact. It's two different points being made, so I felt we should keep it concise and on-point, as opposed to all over the place. SpartHawg948 22:06, March 19, 2010 (UTC)
I second this. JakeARoonie 01:08, March 20, 2010 (UTC)
Didnt the Reapers enslave the Prothians(sp?) and turned themm into Collecters? I assume by that quote he means thay will do the same thing to Humanity and other races.Sgt. j-man 07:33, June 12, 2010 (UTC)

Is he looking at the galaxy or heading toward it?[edit source]

Let's come to a consensus here. In the closing shots of the Reaper fleet, is Harbinger "looking out over the galaxy" or is he heading toward it? I've seen some people say they've watched the ending video over and over and they see nothing to indicate he's heading toward the galaxy, just that he's looking out over it... Umm, did you maybe miss the sound of the engines? Did you maybe not notice that the Reapers are moving toward the camera on the frontal shot, left on the side shot, and away from the camera on the rear shot? There is the possibility that the camera was moving, not the Reapers, but I believe BioWare wants us to come away with the impression that the Reapers are moving in for the kill. Besides, if they're just gonna sit there and not do jack squat, then we can just leave them alone and not worry about 'em. If they're moving in, THEN we have a reason to have a Mass Effect 3. Thoughts? Disagreements? Flames? JakeARoonie 18:30, March 14, 2010 (UTC)

I'm surprised this is even being debated, I thought it was quite evident that the Reapers were moving toward the Milky Way galaxy. It also clear that they have awakened from their "hibernation" and sitting around, watching the stars, in Dark Space doesn't exactly fulfill their intended goal of galactic genocide. --The Illusive Man 18:40, March 14, 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, it seemed fairly obvious to me too, as they are definitely moving. Oh well, to each their own. SpartHawg948 20:03, March 14, 2010 (UTC)
Yes TIM, I agree, thought it was very evident. I'm sure the page will eventually read as such, but it seemed to take people awhile to realize that that yellow-eyed Reaper was the same as the Reaper in the hologram too. :) *rolls eyes* JakeARoonie 02:53, March 15, 2010 (UTC)
If I recall correctly, the entire ending of ME2 signals that preparations will begin. You either choose to use the reaper technology or destroy it. The emphasis on preparing for war, in my opinion, implies that the reapers are indeed on their way or will soon be on their way. How will they get there? I've no idea, but I'm willing to bet by way of Mass Relay. As we all know, the relays are all over the galaxy. What if all the Reapers needed to do was find one towards the outer rim of the galaxy, take control of it, and then use it to jump towards the Citadel by jumping from one Relay to another? Ůniverse 08:49, March 18, 2010 (UTC) 8:49, March 18, 2010 (UTC)

I beg to differ. At the last scene, the galaxy can be seen gradually becoming "smaller", albeit very slowly, thus implying that the camera is moving away from it. If the camera moves away from the galaxy and behind the Reapers, naturally it would look as though the Reapers are moving towards it. Teugene 05:30, March 15, 2010 (UTC)

And I in turn will have to beg to differ from your statement. I just re-watched it (several times) and saw no evidence that it was the camera moving backwards. The galaxy remained constant in terms of size, while the Reapers moved forward (as well as moving around a bit on their longitudinal and latitudinal axes. In the preceding shot, which shows the Reapers from the side, they can clearly seen to be moving around, and again, there seems to be no evidence that it is the camera moving away from the Reapers as opposed to the Reapers pulling away from the camera. And you have to admit, while showing the Reapers moving towards the galaxy is a great ending that leaves you amped and ready for 3, seeing them sitting still staring at the galaxy... doesn't. Now, this next bit is pure opinion, but it doesn't seem likely that BioWare would build up to a huge ending, and then have it deflated when it turns out to be nothing but the status quo, with the Reapers sitting there stewing over their repeated failure to overcome one man (or woman). SpartHawg948 05:42, March 15, 2010 (UTC)
You have a point and might be right too, though I still stand by my point for now until proven otherwise (maybe in ME3!). As it is, it all still seems ambiguous. How many hundreds of years before the Reapers will reach our dear Milky Way, or some kind super sub-light travel to reach instantly? Lol. I can't wait for this and other questions to be answered in ME3 :D Teugene 05:48, March 15, 2010 (UTC)

On a side note, thanks for the spelling edit. I'm writing this in haste and doing something else in the same time, hence the messed up stuffs! And by the way, I'm older than you, not a kid as you imply ;) Teugene 05:57, March 15, 2010 (UTC)

Wait, I implied you're a kid? When did this happen? I'm so confused! As for how the Reapers get here... that will be interesting. My only guess is that maybe they have some sort of mass relay network leading to the Milky Way, but that it takes some time to complete the journey. It was implied that there's at least one Mass Relay out there in dark space, as they would seem to need one to connect to the Citadel when activated, so maybe the Citadel relay is Plan A, but they have a Plan B network of relays as well. All speculation on my part, of course. SpartHawg948 06:15, March 15, 2010 (UTC)
  • Oh! Nevermind, just figured it out! You were referencing my edit summary when I said "silly kid, no Z in galaxy". No, that was addressed to myself. I noticed just as I hit 'save page' that I had misspelled 'galaxy' as 'galazy'. So I went back and fixed it, and chided myself for my poor spelling in the summary. I'm a big fan of pointing out my own screwups. Keeps me humble! :) SpartHawg948 06:19, March 15, 2010 (UTC)
LOL! I thought I was the one who spelled it wrongly! Dang, looks like I shouldn't be multitasking, gets my mind all messed up! Teugene 06:40, March 15, 2010 (UTC)

I'm still trying to figure out how a fleet of thousands (looked like to me anyway) of Reapers is going to be stopped. It's going to be a long two years. Matt 2108 06:07, March 15, 2010 (UTC)

Just my 2 cents, but I think it'll have to be with a virus that gets spread to all the Reapers, like how a virus was planted in the geth base to reprogram all of the heretics. So, we probably have to get inside a living Reaper (Harbinger?) and have it spread the virus around...and since the trilogy has to end with a bang, the virus will probably have the side effect of blowing infected Reapers up, meaning there will be some dramatic escape sequence as we leave. JakeARoonie 22:56, March 15, 2010 (UTC)
That seems like a good theory. I imagine both the geth and the quarians will have a big impact on the outcome. Matt 2108 23:26, March 15, 2010 (UTC)
Or maybe you could go an alternate route and just hurl waves and waves of rachni and krogan at them! I know... not as elegant or sci-fi-ish as a computer virus. :P SpartHawg948 00:37, March 16, 2010 (UTC)
Or you could go the alternate-ALTERNATE route and work with the Illusive Man to grow your own Reaper, and spread the virus through that... O_O The truth comes out! Bwa ha ha... :P OK so seriously now, back to the issue: where do we draw the line between including a minority opinion or not including it? JakeARoonie 01:11, March 16, 2010 (UTC)
What about using the virus to control ALL the Reapers... and wham, you now own an army of Reapers :) Teugene 09:55, March 16, 2010 (UTC)
Neat! First place I'd go would be right to that smug turian ambassador. Where are your verbal jabs now, buddy? :P SpartHawg948 09:56, March 16, 2010 (UTC)
The ambassador? I remember him being a little smug but not nearly so much as the turian counselor. "Hey buddy, remember when you were putting air-quotes around the word 'Reapers?' WHERE ARE YOUR AIR QUOTES NOW?!?!" Then all the Reapers make air quotes with their tentacles as they say "'Turian counselor?' Nah, never existed." *blasts him* :P On a side note, Sovereign's voice saying "where are your air quotes now" would be drop-dead hilarious. JakeARoonie 11:35, March 16, 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, that's the guy I meant! The turian who sits on the Council. Well, he doesn't sit, he stands, byt indeed, that guy! Smug S.O.B. "Remember that conversation we had on genocide, Councilor?" Or I could paraphrase Ralphie from A Christmas Story, "Turian Councilor, now you get yours!" :P SpartHawg948 20:25, March 16, 2010 (UTC)

Trivia[edit source]

There's a ship called Harbinger in KOTOR 2. There is also a ship that brings destruction in its wake called Harbinger in the game called, you guess, Harbinger. Can this go into the Trivia section? Braveangel 18:27, May 21, 2010 (UTC)

A 'harbinger' is a sign of things to come. Appropriate name, but far too used to be any form of trivia. That would be like saying 'Sovereign also means 'king appearing in Sovereign's trivia. Phylarion 18:32, May 21, 2010 (UTC)
(edit conflict)Yes and no. the Harbinger was actually a Republic Cruiser that was captured by the Sith in their pursuit of the Jedi Exile. The ship was presumed destroyed when either the Ebon Hawk, or the Harbinger itself (choice), destroyed the Peragus Asteroid Field. I believe what you are refereing to was either Darth Malak's Flagship the Leviathan or Darth Nihilus' Flagship the Ravager. Lancer1289 18:35, May 21, 2010 (UTC)
Obsidian made KotOR 2, not Bioware. --Effectofthemassvariety 18:58, May 21, 2010 (UTC)

Yup. The only destruction caused by the Harbinger in KOTOR II is possibly the destruction of the Peragus mining colony, and then only if you don't destroy the colony yourself. And given that the ship is caught in (and presumed destroyed in) the ensuing explosion, I wouldn't describe that destruction as being 'in its wake'. SpartHawg948 19:03, May 21, 2010 (UTC)

No, Spart. The ship that brings "destruction in its wake" is the ship in a rather obscure game called "Harbinger"--not a very good game, Diablo-esque. I played that game several years ago, when Diablo clones were in their hey-day. Didn't finish the game, back to playing Diablo. Heck. Why does anyone bother to put ugly clones in the market anyway? Well, just trying to get hold of what could be admitted in the Trivia section. Braveangel 21:55, May 21, 2010 (UTC)

Oh, gotcha. I ran the two sentences together. Well then in that case there really isn't anything at all to suggest a link between Harbinger the Reaper and Harbinger the Republic Cruiser. After all, as has been pointed out, Harbinger is a common sci-fi ship name, right up there with Sovereign (also this), and Leviathan. SpartHawg948 22:17, May 21, 2010 (UTC)

You forgot Hyperion Spart. Lancer1289 22:54, May 21, 2010 (UTC)

Do what now? I don't recall a Hyperion in Mass Effect, and if you're referring to another sci-fi genre, it's one I'm not aware of. SpartHawg948 23:39, May 21, 2010 (UTC)

There wasn't. Hyperion really got is start after StarCraft and has been mentioned in Babylon 5, among other places. Wikipeida doens't list them all. Sorry huge StarCraft fan and I do like the name. Lancer1289 23:45, May 21, 2010 (UTC)

Oh, gotcha. Yeah, the Hyperion battlecruisers from Starcraft and the Hyperion... heavy cruisers, weren't they? from B5. SpartHawg948 00:10, May 22, 2010 (UTC)

Errr, digressing. What's that (edit conflict) tag in Lance's post? I didn't get what it means. Care to explain? Braveangel 02:10, May 22, 2010 (UTC)

It means there was an edit conflict. Two editors (Phylarion and Lancer1289) were making edits to this page in the same place (this thread after your first comment) at the same time. Phylarion finished and saved first. Thus, when Lancer1289 tried to save, it wouldn't work, and a red bar at the top of the screen informed him that the page had changed since he started posting. So he re-posted, and added the edit conflict note to the beginning of the post to inform readers of the edit conflict, likely in case there was any redundancy in his comment. SpartHawg948 02:36, May 22, 2010 (UTC)

Sorry had to take a nap, but that is the reason we do that. Sometimes edit conflicts can go on for a while, so the edit conflict tag, and in some cases X2 etc, lets people who are reading the page that the comment was met to be inserted earlier and to take that into account. It does get really annoying at times on long talk pages. However that is my perpective and opinion. Lancer1289 03:16, May 22, 2010 (UTC)

His voice actor is also in other games. Not only bioware-related ones.

Except we do not permit that kind of trivia by site policy. Consolt the MoS on Voice Actor/Actress Trivia. Lancer1289 20:44, February 5, 2012 (UTC)

Design of Harbinger[edit source]

I along with everyone else whose played ME2 knows that each Reaper is designed based on a template from its creator species. Although it didn't specifically mention it, it is implied that Sovereign was a Prothean-created Reaper, so if that's the case, any ideas on who built Harbinger? After all, Reapers can't build each other. H-Man Havoc 12:38, June 5, 2010 (UTC)

They look alike to me. If the final appearance of a reaper is based on the species that was melted down, then it seems that Sovereign and Harbinger came from the same species. TheUnknown285 03:55, June 10, 2010 (UTC)
Is Sovereign really a Prothean-Reaper? I think the Reapers attempted to create one, but failed, otherwise they didn't need to transform captured Protheans into Collectors, as they could build more Prothean-Reapers using their genetic material. Also, in Digital Art Book there is a concept of possibly mature Human-Reaper which has classic Reaper design, but it also has human face on its rear. Personally, I think when Reapers mature they take on squid-like shape, retaining some details of race used to create them. Maybe the race used to create Harbinger had glowing eyes.Harbinger265 04:17, June 10, 2010 (UTC)
You're right, EDI says during the suicide mission that the Reapers couldn't make a Prothean-Reaper. But I thought it was obvious that Sovereign and Harbinger were different. Sovereign has a more elongated body with larger tentacles that project forwards. Harbinger has a wider, more triangular shape, with smaller tentacles that project downwards and are swept back. I think that while all Reapers are generally squid-like, that squid shape is not made 100% uniform on every Reaper, but adapted to best fit around the unique cores. -- Commdor (Talk) 04:29, June 10, 2010 (UTC)
Yes, it is confirmed by final cutscene where the Reapers show great diversity in details. One Reaper in a corner appears to have a pair of claws instead of tentacles. I wonder how a Rachni-Reaper would look like, if the Reapers would managed to create it.Harbinger265 05:16, June 10, 2010 (UTC)

It could be that Harbinger was created before Sovereign, but I believe that Harbinger had something to do with the Protheans being turned into the Collectors. Harbinger's more rigid in his design, which usually means an earlier species, as newer Reapers like Sovereign are more slenderly-built. The Human-Reaper easily would've been the most advanced Reaper ever created had it been finished. H-Man Havoc 03:37, June 11, 2010 (UTC)

Hmmm... that's one way to look at it, I suppose. I was more thinking that the Human-Reaper was less advanced than the others, as its creation was more a move of desperation. The Reapers culling was severely delayed, so they launched a 'Plan B', using the Collectors to create a Reaper using indigenous technology, as opposed to doing it the right way. SpartHawg948 03:41, June 11, 2010 (UTC)

true, the reapers started building a new reaper before they actually invaded, i imagine that they typically do it the ohter way around. Although i dont see any reason that the reapers couldnt have built prothean reapers and have converted some members of the species into collectors, the idea that reapers couldnt build a prothean reaper was just supposition on edi's part. ralok 03:52, June 11, 2010 (UTC)

The most intriguing thing about Reapers, I think, is the way they get their own identities.For now, it looks like they are created already having pompous name and willingness to bring 'salvation through destruction'. I suppose, Reaper's personality is being somehow formed using processed race's individualities but corrupting them in process.Harbinger265 05:54, June 11, 2010 (UTC)

I beleive that nazara is the name of the species sovereign was built from, andifully expect to see reapers in the next game with the following names zeioph, inusanono or thoi'han, and arthenn ralok 06:49, June 11, 2010 (UTC)

I think the names of the Reapers such as Harbinger and Sovereign are to imply "authority" over the rest of the species in the universe, since Sovereign is another name for a monarch, Harbinger is a term to describe a forthcoming, in this case a foreshadow of destruction. Using this pattern, perhaps there would be another Reaper known by a "power" name, maybe like "Leviathan", Thomas Hobbes' most famous work, of which name's based on a biblical sea monster. H-Man Havoc 16:22, December 28, 2010 (UTC)

Hmm perhaps since we do know what the Reapers do every 50,000 years or so. To be honest I wouldn't be surprised to see one name Leviathan. Interesting theory. Lancer1289 18:03, December 28, 2010 (UTC)
Well there was something that was nicknamedLeviathan of Dis. I really want to know where that ends up. Ilovetelephones 07:09, December 29, 2010 (UTC)
That may have been something else altogether... as if this is a Reaper corpse like the Reaper ship, it would be strange for the Batarians to deny such an existence. In fact it doesn't mention what type of ship it is... H-Man Havoc 16:07, December 29, 2010 (UTC)

Page changing[edit source]

I think we should merge this page with the collector harbinger page. Also I have slightly edited the page format in comparison with Sovereign's page but it requires a bit more adjusting that goes beyond my editting skills because I am a noob with wikis. Xboxannihilator 05:40, August 28, 2010 (UTC)

I disagree. Harbinger the Reaper and Harbinger the Collector puppet are two separate characters. Additionally, the format edits were mostly, if not entirely, counterproductive, though I elaborated a bit more on why that is on your talk page. SpartHawg948 05:43, August 28, 2010 (UTC)
(edit conflict)And why should be merge the pages, there is no reason too because they are two completely separate subjects. The Harbinger (Collector) page is for the Collector that Harbinger possesses during missions in ME2. While this page is for Harbinger itself, i.e. the Reaper. There is no valid reason to merge the two pages as they cover completely separate subjects and the other page deals with more in-game material, like tactics, attacks, powers, etc than this page, and it should stay that way. Lancer1289 05:46, August 28, 2010 (UTC)

Spoiler picture[edit source]

What's the point of having a spoiler tag about ME2 events if you have a giant picture of reaper-form at the top of the page? I mean, really. 12:49, August 30, 2010 (UTC)

Um because it's policy that we have a spoiler tag for spoilers about the games. Also note that the Spoiler tag for the Normandy SR-2 article is also useless by your definition. However we have the spolier tags, and the character boxes for a reason. Lancer1289 12:53, August 30, 2010 (UTC)
Adding on, How is the picture a spoiler? Reapers, as far as we have seen, look the same. Yes that is Harbinger but it does not indicate at which point you see Harbinger. Anyone who never played the game could guess when this sighting occured, but the only way they can really know is to look at a guide (like ours) or play through the game. So the picture is just a picture, not a spoiler by any means. MEffect Fan 13:13, August 30, 2010 (UTC)
Except Harbinger isn't revealed to be a reaper until literally the very end of the game, before which it's assumed he's merely the Collector General, so the problem is showing that he's a reaper at all. The SR2 on the other hand is discovered in the beginning of the game, and the SR1 destruction was well-known before release because Bioware showed off the intro. If someone fresh-faced comes here to find some minor info on Harbinger, perhaps looking for some of his phrases or combat info, they'll be greeted by a giant picture of an individual reaper, which is pretty obvious. The lead picture should be a possessed drone, the way you see Harbinger for most of the game, or the Collector General, with the reaper picture and/or the holographic display from the endgame moved lower on the page so it's possible to avoid being spoiled just by coming to the article. -- 16:38, October 6, 2010 (UTC)
This one I'm actually fine with. There's no way to not have spoilers right from the get go, which is why the spoiler tag is at the very top of the page. I see no need to change anything here. SpartHawg948 19:21, March 30, 2011 (UTC)

Reaper Datapad[edit source]

Harbinger datapad.jpg
File:Harbinger 278x449.jpg


At the end of Mass Effect 2 we see Joker give Shepard a datapad detailing a Reaper. Can we assume that this is detailing information on Harbinger? You can see the top-left image to be pretty much exact of that of the lead Reaper in the following cinematic, including the lights and plating. WNxSajuukCor 20:57, January 31, 2011 (UTC)

No. Neither can we assume that it is a Reaper either. This datapad has been added to both the Harbinger and Reaper articles, with and without the image, many times over now since ME2 was released, and it is all the same. It is speculation because basing things on visual comparisons is extremely shaky ground and direct visual comparisons have been dismissed before. Lancer1289 21:10, January 31, 2011 (UTC)
Then how can we justify the image on the right being Harbinger at all? Would it make more sense to have an image from the hologram image of it as it releases control over the Collector General? WNxSajuukCor 21:14, January 31, 2011 (UTC)
That issue was handled above with no problems. Lancer1289 21:21, January 31, 2011 (UTC)

Harbinger image and Article's beginning, problems/suggestions[edit source]

Here's a brief summary: 1. the identity of the space-Reaper screenshot with Harbinger is at best speculative. 2. The opening line of the Article seems ungrounded (speculative). Suggest amending both to indicate such; and/or eventually replacing the "Harbinger" shot with a fine, full screenshot of the Harbinger holo that can be encountered in Arrival.

Problems: (To be clear, no problem with using a Reaper pic over the end-game datapad pic). The (1) article's screenshot, and (2) first lines, are problematic for fundamentally the same causes. 1. The preceding Talk-page section notwithstanding, it wasn't shown above that Harbinger is any one of the Reapers in the end-game cutscene. At any rate, there are problems. The only useful evidence (which had not been mentioned) that Harbinger is even beyond the limits of the galaxy is the secondary Codex on Harbinger, which speaks on the testimony of Cerberus, that declares that signals were sent to the Collector General from outside the galaxy (and then it speculates with a "likely" inference that the source is Harbinger). It'd be a further assumption from this that Harbinger is with the other Reapers (ignoring more problems that would arise). In any event this Codex is admittedly speculative in its language, suggesting only that Harbinger is not "in" the galaxy (maybe he's much closer to the core, who knows). Leaving the Codex aside: from a survey of this Talk page, the identification of Harbinger with the mentioned lead Reaper is based entirely "on visual comparisons". For convenience, I've gathered up some of the arguments on this Talk page to illustrate the latter:

  • "compare the picture of Harbinger [by which is meant the datapad] with the Reaper leading the Reaper Fleet. I think it is reasonable to assume that these two reapers are one and the same," and another, later, "it was shown distinctivly as the one with the golden eyes, and while it was possesed, the Collector General had the same eyes": Plainly these are both "visual comparisons".
  • "because it's common sense that that's [the Reaper in question] freaking Harbinger". Lacking any elaboration, it's fair to assume "common sense" here refers to the common inferences we all draw from sense perception, i.e., "visual comparison".
  • "it is clear that the Reaper in the hologram [who "releases control" of the General] is the same as the Reaper shown in space". A mathematical equation ensues to prove these are both Harbinger. The (quoted) major premise is plainly based on a visual comparison (i.e. the proposed equation is in fact a paralogism).

2. The article's 1st paragraph declares without any ambiguity that Harbinger is in dark space "with the rest" of the Reaper fleet; yet this statement, as above, is at best a guess (unless there is evidence of which I am unaware). It seems that Harbinger, who would best know his locale, once declares, rather vaguely, to the Shadow Broker: "You pretend to be everywhere at once--I already am."

Possible Suggestions: (2.) Whatever the demerits of visual comparisons may be, it's clear that several Reapers (of whom we get glimpses) look quite like the one in the Article, such as do all of them in the Arrival videos (and frankly, I don't see much difference between the hologram of Sovereign and the holos of Harbinger). Since it's unclear whether some one Reaper in the end video is Harbinger, I don't see why we couldn't rather use an undisputed Harbinger image, maybe of the holo in Arrival (probably the largest and fullest hologram available). Otherwise, the extant screenshot's caption could rather be amended to indicate its likely/speculative character.
Anyone have a screenshot, or willing to get one, of "Arrival" Harbinger? I'd do it myself, but I've lost access to my game (darn digital downloads).
(1.) The article's opening should be at least modified to indicate its speculative character (, "Harbinger... might reside/apparently resides/is believed to reside in dark space with the rest of the Reaper fleet.") Thoughts? --AnotherRho 06:08, August 22, 2011 (UTC)

First let me point out that the previous discussion is still valid and makes a convincing argument for the current Reaper to be Harbinger. There is no doubt in my mind that it is Harbinger and the previous discussion points that out. I would also very much object to using the datapad at the end of the game for the picture because, unlike the current image, there is no proof that the Reaper picture is Harbinger and since this article is about Harbinger, having something that can't be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to be Harbinger. I also have a problem using a general shot because that doesn't fit with character articles. If we did do that, then it's best to remove the pictures entirely but then I'd object to that as well given what has already been discussed.
I would also object to using either instance of the Holo as it doesn't provide the best image for what we are describing here.
If you have a problem with the article, then start up a rewrite and then open a page in the Projects forum so people can talk about it as this really goes beyond what can be discussed here. Lancer1289 12:48, August 22, 2011 (UTC)
I'd also have a problem with the datapad pic, since I'm of the opinion that there's no direct link between the datapad and Harbinger, just as there is no direct link between the central Reaper of the final dark space scene and Harbinger. If we could get a good image of the Arrival hologram, which I think we can all agree is of Harbinger, I'd have no objections.
With the opening sentence, however, I see no reason to change it. We know that the Reapers reside in dark space between their purges, with the exception of a vanguard who stays in the galaxy to activate the Citadel relay. We kill the vanguard, Sovereign, in ME, and nothing we've seen in ME2 or other media indicates in any way that Harbinger is somehow not in dark space with the rest of the Reapers. I'd think Arrival's events even affirm that Harbinger is with his brethren, he does that whole hologram show to taunt Shepard about how close they are to returning. And isn't it more speculative to assert that Harbinger is not in dark space if there's no evidence to back that up? If ME3 ends up proving otherwise, then fine, but until then I oppose the change. -- Commdor (Talk) 13:01, August 22, 2011 (UTC)

Harbinger-Arrival Hologram.png

Well, since everyone's been debating this over and over. I'll just upload the best shot that I can get from the Arrival Harbinger. There's no doubt that this is the only visible form of the most full looking Harbinger appearance in the game. Now from the picture here, I can see a lot of similarities with the reaper on the Datapad. But quite minor differences with the Dark Space reaper. The shape is similar, details are almost there, but the eyes and the placements are a bit off. The eyes from the Dark Space reaper seems to only have 4 and the Arrival and datapad reaper has 6. (ignoring the bright light thing on the middle, I don't think it's an eye) Not to mention the shape looks a lot different too. The Dark Space reaper seems to appear to have just 4 eyes due to the glare of the front-center pair of eyes which blocks the front-outer pair of eyes to be obscured behind the glare (which may makes the eye doesnt' look round. I'm guessing it is Harbinger, although it's quite a long shot. In conclusion, feel free to use the holo image to replace the dark space reaper. At least it's a 100% certain it's Harbinger.
About the SPOILER concern, I think it's not spoiling when it comes to an Encyclopedia structured article. You'd want to present the fact first, then goes into more detail later on with the appropriate spoiler tags. So I think having a reaper form Harbinger at the top of the page is the right move. For example you don't want to have let's say John Lennon's article, and have an impostor John Lennon at the top of the page and revealing the true John Lennon's face in the bottom of the page. What's appropriate is to put the true picture at the top, and have the impostor picture below with the appropriate content next to it. Same goes with Harbinger, I say use the holo picture at the top of the article, then having the ASSUMED DIRECT CONTROL Collector General picture below/within the article.
PERSONAL OPINION: Spoilers are my best friend, keeps me from making the wrong decisions. You can say that I follow my playing style in a set path defined by the spoilers.................. OMG!! I'm being indoctri-ASSUMING DIRECT CONTROL!
-- TommyIrianto (Talk) 16:12, August 22, 2011 (UTC)
If that is the image we plan to to put into the article, then I'm saying no. I don't like the way that image looks one bit. Lancer1289 16:24, August 22, 2011 (UTC)
It's up to anyone here, from my understanding, the issue was partly about the picture of the Darkspace harbinger to be debatable if that is really Harbinger or another reaper. That is the best picture that I can come up with from the scene. The grainy elements came from the debris in space while the asteroid's speeding through space. And that picture is the most complete variant from the scene. Others are partially focused on the eye, shot from the backside, shot from the side, none of them give a full body frontal shot since the hologram is HUGE. Best of all, it is 100% confirmed that the hologram is Harbinger itself since it speaks and in the subtitle is named "Harbinger" There's no doubt about this picture. -- TommyIrianto (Talk) 17:10, August 22, 2011 (UTC)

TommyTrianto, thanks especially for looking into the new holo of Harbinger.

(Lancer, I never suggested using the datapad (rather, the opposite). Also, I was only calling attention to the fact that every argument above this section, in favor of that "Space Reaper" being Harbinger, is based on "visual comparisons", which you yourself rejected as a criterion of choosing the relevant screenshot. As to your order to start a project page, etc., and not raise my questions about 1 sentence and the screenshot in the Article, I respectfully refuse. The Talk pages are much more appropriate for questioning the soundness of individual sentences, screenshots, or speculation).

As to the first sentence of the Article, I'll let it go, as Commdor suggests, simply because Harbinger really does seem to be "everywhere" (as he once said to the Broker), appearing in holo at the galactic core AND at the galactic outer rim.

We could replace the caption to suggest that this is a probable image of Harbinger. Otherwise, I prefer the Hologram shot of the character who proclaims himself to be Harbinger. It's better than the fuzzy Reaper we have now, if there really are no fuller or wider-angled shots. Thanks again, TommyTrianto. --AnotherRho 00:17, August 28, 2011 (UTC)

Whatever then, but at the same time, my argument still stands. I cannot support a replacement of the image based on discussions on this page, and the fact that the other image isn't better. Lancer1289 00:21, August 28, 2011 (UTC)
We agree, then, that your argument (which rejects a certain image since the identity of the one pictured is only based on "extremely shaky" "visual comparisons") still stands. For the same reason, that Space Reaper image should be replaced by something less open to doubt. --AnotherRho 00:29, August 28, 2011 (UTC)
I'm not sure what we agree on, but I can't see us agreeing on anything at this point. I cannot support any change to the article, especially the picture, given everything that has happened and the events during the "endgame" sequence. Lancer1289 00:33, August 28, 2011 (UTC)
At the risk of repeating myself: In the previous section you wrote (rejecting the allegation that the datapad depicts Harbinger): "It is speculation because basing things on visual comparisons is extremely shaky ground". That is the argument you've made on this overall topic. And by the same argument, we are doubting the soundness of using that "Space Reaper" image (since the only ground on which anyone supported it, as is plainer than the sun, is "visual comparison"). That's the (tacit) "agreement" that we (should) hold. We are adding that, since we have screenshots of a game character who proclaims himself to be Harbinger (and in his voice, etc.), we should use the latter instead. -- AnotherRho 00:59, August 28, 2011 (UTC)
Actually what you did was pull my comment out of context and try to apply it to this discussion, and it really doesn’t work. That comment dealt with the fact that they were trying to put the datapad in as confirmed proof that it depicted Harbinger or another Reaper, and that isn't remotely the case. There is too much room for interpretation with that one. You state that it is a visual comparison, and while you can make the argument against any Reaper we've seen so far, there is more evidence in this case than there is for any other case so far, enough to justify it. I again oppose the picture for what I've stated above. Lancer1289 01:35, August 28, 2011 (UTC)
Lancer, are you just trolling or do you genuinely believe that the datapad doesn't depict Harbinger? SlayerEGO1342 01:52, August 28, 2011 (UTC)
Scratch that; not just Lancer, but ANYBODYSlayerEGO1342 01:56, August 28, 2011 (UTC)

I'm 99% confident that the datapad depicts Harbinger. I'm not willing to say I'm 100% sure because I can't be. There's no dialogue or text explaining who that Reaper is, so there's room for a reasonable doubt, there's a chance that it's not Harbinger. And since I'm not 100% sure about the datapad, I'd oppose using an image of it in the article. Same with the central Reaper of the dark space part of the cutscene, I can only be 99% sure and that's not good enough for the article. -- Commdor (Talk) 02:20, August 28, 2011 (UTC)

(Lancer, you misrepresent me, unwittingly or wittingly. I supplied the context, and quoted you, more than once; read my posts. You then say, "there is more evidence in this case than there is for any other case so far,". Before, I was being charitable by attributing an argument to you. If you dislike that, then, to be frank, you have given no argument or evidence of your claim whatsoever, instead substituting imperious assertions for argument.)
Yes, I think most of us agree with Commdor: there is an equal amount of "evidence" for identifying each of the two Reapers (Space Reaper and Datapad Reaper) with Harbinger (they all appear quickly in succession, and they all look similar). The player then infers they're the same. But since we have undisputed and indisputable holograms of Harbinger, they would be preferable for the article. -- AnotherRho 03:44, August 28, 2011 (UTC)
How did I misrepresent you? You did pull my quote out of context and try to apply it to something else, i.e. this topic. Therefore misrepresent me and what I said about something specific, actually you did that with all of your quotes. I never stated that I doubt the hologram is Harbinger, I know for a fact it is. You twisted my quotes to say something that I never did about this topic that I never had any intention of saying, or for that matter, even implied it. I merely stated that I object to an image of the hologram being used because it doesn't present the best image. For that, just reread my first comment in this topic. So who is misrepresenting who?
I also stated that there is more evidence for the Space Reaper picture than there have been in previous cases. The evidence is already on this page, though scattered, it does present enough evidence to justify the picture. Lancer1289 04:38, August 28, 2011 (UTC)

Knock this arguing over "did we agree or didn't we" off. It seems, to an outside observer, that AnotherRho is correct, and that there was a tacit agreement. Nothing was taken out of context. What happened was that a statement made in a previous conversation that was applicable to this one was taken (with context given) and the underlying argument/logic was applied to this situation. There's no reason it should have progressed beyond one or two posts. Certainly there was no need for accusations of "quote twisting" and the like. Speaking of no need for... SlayerEGO1342, there was no need for your comments. None at all. In fact, given that the definition of "troll" is "someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response", I fail to see how the accused, and not the accuser, would be guilty of "trolling".

Now, on to the issue at hand... excellent points were raised all around, but ultimately, I tend to agree with Commdor and further, with AnotherRho. If the datapad image is inadmissible, then the space image should be as well. Both are based on visual comparisons, whereas in the image of the hologram from the Collector Base, we have a definitive image of Harbinger. We can't have it both ways. If visual comparisons are bad news for the datapad, then it is for the space image as well. And if visual comparisons are sufficient for the space image, they are for the datapad as well. One or the other, and I opt for the former. SpartHawg948 07:20, August 28, 2011 (UTC)

Wew, all these arguments and looking at Harbinger pictures and comparing one with the other makes me hungry and crave for some Calamari and chips. I'm suppose this is what indoctrination feels like?? -- TommyIrianto (Talk) 14:44, August 31, 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for calming the proverbial waters, SpartHawg. --AnotherRho 04:09, September 21, 2011 (UTC)

would it be safe to assume he is the "lead" reaper?[edit source]

i say this since he is the one who controls the collectors and is the one who appears to Shepard in hologram form in arrival(if you completed the main story).--Ranjam01 22:23, December 8, 2011 (UTC)

Take this to the appropriate place, which is the forums or a blog post, not here as this isn't what talk pages are for. Lancer1289 22:24, December 8, 2011 (UTC)
This is explicitly stated in the codex for ME3: Harbinger is the leader of the Reapers and the oldest. TheUnknown285 20:16, March 15, 2012 (UTC)
No, he's the leader of the assault on Earth and one of the oldest in the Reaper armada. But he's not de-facto leader of all Reapers. Read the codex again. --Kainzorus Prime Walkie-talkie 20:21, March 15, 2012 (UTC)

Did Someone Just Delete the words?[edit source]

Because the article is showing nothing. No words or pictures whatsoever. Missing Mandible 23:43, January 7, 2012 (UTC)

It was a vandal. It's fixed now.--Only the faithless will perish, but those without cannot be punished. 23:49, January 7, 2012 (UTC)

The vandalism was by WC the faithless will perish, but those without cannot be punished. 23:50, January 7, 2012 (UTC)

It's a caching issue that Wikia has yet to resolve and at this point I doubt they will. It only started appearing after they implemented this horrible new editor and have yet to fix the issue. It has appeared in blogs, forum pages, articles, talk pages, and user talk pages. Lancer1289 00:37, January 8, 2012 (UTC)

ME3 - kills squadmates[edit source]

I brought Liara and Garrus, and in the ending sequence after the end of the game, both of them climb out of the Normandy along with Joker.

So does he in fact kill the squadmates you bring? Doesn't seem like it.

Either that or Bioware has fixed who appears at the end regardless of who is brought along.. which would be lame. :| -- 17:49, March 8, 2012 (UTC)

Speaking of which, does anyone know what the trigger for your squadmates going down is? Is it possible to avoid it with a high readiness rating? etc Numbers never lie 22:31, March 12, 2012 (UTC)

Nope, you can have max readiness, they'd still get blasted --GodzillaMaster 23:25, March 12, 2012 (UTC)

They actually don't follow you down the hill completely. So maybe they possibly leave after seeing Shep get blasted? --SpectreAngel 23:28, March 12, 2012 (UTC)

Harbinger the Reaper at the end?[edit source]

Where did this even come from? Is it said in game and I missed it? When I was playing I don't even remember being given the impression that it was Harbinger. How did this information come about? How do we know it is Harbinger at the very end?

It is from the guide book IIRC. I'll look at it in a while as I need to do a lot of reading. Lancer1289 19:13, March 15, 2012 (UTC)

Prima guide says "Destroyer randomly targets..." and that is at the end of the guide right before it goes "spoiler-free" for the Crucible part. The shape, size and no mention of it being Harbinger to me just says that this is speculation that became accepted truth despite being wrong. If I'm wrong, great. But I am sure Harbinger doesn't even appear at the end, let alone the whole of ME3 pre-extenstion DLC if it comes.--Xaero Dumort 19:18, March 15, 2012 (UTC)

When Shepard and the squad make a run for the beam with Anderson, a Reaper with a very distinctive set of 4 "eyes" shoots at the advancing Alliance army. Not to mention beforehand, I believe it is either Hackett or Joker informs Shepard of several Reapers, including Harbinger, moving away from the battle and heading for Earth prior to the dash for the beam. The Illusive Man 19:28, March 15, 2012 (UTC)

I don't remember Harbinger being mentioned. I'm almost at the end of my Insanity run, I'll look for it. If it is mentioned cool. But if it isn't then it is pure speculation as the guide states as does the shape of the Reaper that it is a Destroyer.--Xaero Dumort 19:31, March 15, 2012 (UTC)

If the guide says the Reaper in the Beam Run mission is a destroyer, then the guide is wrong. Destroyers' leg joints are at the same level as their single beam weapon. Contrast with the Reaper in the Beam Run mission, whose eyes and multiple beam weapons rise well above the leg joints. There's a good shot of the Reaper in that mission here: 20:29, March 15, 2012 (UTC)
Your little video proves nothing. That's actually a very terrible shot. And while I am prone to agree it looks like Harbinger, without a statement in the game or from the developers, it is just speculation and if we declare it to be Harbinger without real confirmation then we have to allow all other speculation. However, since this is a community, I feel that it is up to the community to decide.--Xaero Dumort 22:14, March 15, 2012 (UTC)
Finally reached the end of my Insanity play. They make specific mention of Harbinger so I no longer think it is up for debate from myself.--Xaero Dumort 08:42, March 16, 2012 (UTC)

Stop deleting information in the beginning of article[edit source]

Stop deleting the bit about Harbigner being the oldest and largest Reaper. It's right in the Codex.

The information that was written about Harbinger being the oldest and largest is taken from the game's codex. There is absolutely NO reason it should not be included.

It's mentioned in the ME3 section of the article. The game's Codex states it is "believed" that Harbinger is the oldest and largest Reaper; since this detail isn't certain and we don't learn of it until later, it isn't an appropriate detail for the intro paragraph. -- Commdor (Talk) 23:32, March 18, 2012 (UTC)

Oldest reaper?[edit source]

1.Harbinger has 4 eyes 2.Protheans/Collectors have 4 eyes 3.Harbinger can control the Collectors from thousands of light years away

Result:Harbinger is a prothean reaper,which makes him the youngest actually?

+ Harbinger can be a title not a name,given to the newest generation of reaper,to lead the armada in the next cycle ( If ME 3 would have ended with a reaper victory,The title of "Harbinger" would be given to the toughest and wisest asari/turian/human etc. reaper created post-harvest )

Things like this belong elsewhere as this isn't what talk pages are for. And this comes straight from the Codex. Lancer1289 17:31, June 4, 2012 (UTC)

Creators of the Catalyst?[edit source]

Could it be assumed that if Harbinger is the oldest reaper, It's the reaper preserving the race that created the Catalyst AI? Should this be mentioned? -- 19:42, June 28, 2012 (UTC)

Well we don't assume anything in pages. We only accept facts. Is it ever explicitly mentioned that Harbinger is the oldest?

--The Milkman | I always deliver. 19:53, June 28, 2012 (UTC)

Yes, it is... kinda. Codex/The Reapers#Harbinger states that Harby is believed to be the oldest. However, there is no evidence to suggest that he was the first: it is possible that the original Reaper that was harvested from the Reaper creators has long been destroyed and Harby is simply the oldest of the ones left. --Koveras Alvane 10:55, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

Identity[edit source]

I think Shepard found out about Harbinger after Horizon. Remember the Codex and Mission report? Maybe he was sputtering about while fighting.--Mike Gilbert 01:30, July 16, 2012 (UTC)

What was the point of this comment? Lancer1289 (talk) 01:35, July 16, 2012 (UTC)
Because, the page hasn't made a reference how Shepard found out Harbinger existed.--Mike Gilbert 20:10, July 17, 2012 (UTC)
And now relevance to the article? Lancer1289 (talk) 20:40, July 17, 2012 (UTC)
Read the article, where it says Shepard found out about Harbinger.--Mike Gilbert 01:48, July 19, 2012 (UTC)

The First Reaper[edit source]

Leviathan DLC confirms Harbinger was the first Reaper. Page needs an edit!

Please read the article. It has already been updated with this information. -- Commdor (Talk) 19:45, August 28, 2012 (UTC)

Extended Cut[edit source]

Harbinger is present in the Control ending's epilogue. Should this be mentioned in article?--AdmiralPedro1stFleet (talk) 00:20, September 2, 2012 (UTC)

ME3 Multiplayer[edit source]

So, are we not going to add the info regarding the Retaliation trailer and how Harbinger appears to be present in the pack? Leon S. Kennedy AKA Shepard 21:52, October 6, 2012 (UTC)

That could be just part of the trailer. If he actually shows up during a hazard, then that's a different story. --Mr. Mittens (talk) 21:54, October 6, 2012 (UTC)
I'd say it's pretty much confirmed that it assumes control of Collector troops. Leon S. Kennedy AKA Shepard 21:57, October 6, 2012 (UTC)
We'll know for sure in a couple of days. --Mr. Mittens (talk) 21:58, October 6, 2012 (UTC)
Ok, but, just to be sure, that info will be added if it does assume control, right? Leon S. Kennedy AKA Shepard 22:01, October 6, 2012 (UTC)
Harbinger's ability to assume control of Collectors is already mentioned in the Mass Effect 2 section. Unless the collectors show up in a Mass Effect 3 single-player expansion, then I don't think we should put it in the ME3 section, because multiplayer isn't exactly canon. If Harbinger (the Reaper) makes an appearance in the multiplayer during one of the new hazards or something, then we could probably put that information in the trivia section. Again, I'll see how it all plays out once Retaliation is released. --Mr. Mittens (talk) 22:06, October 6, 2012 (UTC)
Uh, MP is canon. Leon S. Kennedy AKA Shepard 22:07, October 6, 2012 (UTC)
Not when I'm fighting geth on Earth it's not. Look, let's just wait until the pack is released before deciding what to do with this information, ok? --Mr. Mittens (talk) 22:09, October 6, 2012 (UTC)

I have spoken to Chris Priestly (BioWare community manager) about this and they do not consider MP as canon. However, this does not mean it cannot foreshadow events that are about to occur within the SP campaign. IE: Collectors attacking before Omega is released. Edit: Also, a dev commented on twitter that Harbinger was indeed just for the trailer. He will not be appearing in the MP maps as a hazard. -- Asari Princess (talk) 13:38, October 7, 2012 (UTC)

Can we get sources on this. Lancer1289 (talk) 15:42, October 7, 2012 (UTC) I couldn't find the exact twitter quote, but there is a quote from Derek Hollan about Harbinger not appearing in the MP. As for the first section, you will just have to take my word on it. I'm not screenshotting my PM conversation with Priestly. But feel free to ask him yourself. :) -- Asari Princess (talk) 15:54, October 7, 2012 (UTC)

Leviathan[edit source]

"Through Harbinger, the Catalyst directs the Reapers to harvest the galaxy of advanced life every 50,000 years." - Can I ask where in the lore that this is established?

Asari Princess (talk) 13:35, October 7, 2012 (UTC)

Extended cut. Lancer1289 (talk) 15:42, October 7, 2012 (UTC)

Can you be more specific? I don't recall the Catalyst saying this. -- Asari Princess (talk) 15:55, October 7, 2012 (UTC)

I think the line you're looking for only shows up if you've completed Leviathan. Doing so gives you the opportunity to ask the Catalyst about its creators in greater detail. --Mr. Mittens (talk) 19:52, October 7, 2012 (UTC)

I have done it. The fact is this wikia prides itself on not including information unless it's 100%. I cannot recall this being said and still haven't received proof of it. If it was clear enough to include it on Harbinger's page. Then it should be easy enough to recite. -- Asari Princess (talk) 20:05, October 7, 2012 (UTC)

Then go ahead and remove that sentence if you feel there is nothing to support it. No one's stopping you. --Mr. Mittens (talk) 20:16, October 7, 2012 (UTC)

I will if there isn't any evidence to support it. That's what these talk pages are here for after all, aren't they? So I wasn't going to simply edit it out without addressing it here first. If no one can provide any proof, only then will I remove it. I'm patient as well so I will give it a few days and if no one can come up with anything, then I will remove it. Feel free to remove it yourselves should you go looking for proof and find none. -- Asari Princess (talk) 20:22, October 7, 2012 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure this is mentioned either in the conversation with the Leviathans or in the conversation with the Catalyst after the Leviathan DLC has been completed, but not word-for-word. -- Commdor (Talk) 20:27, October 7, 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I know for a fact that it wasn't said word-for-word. I'm looking for the sentence that alluded to this hypothesis. -- Asari Princess (talk) 20:31, October 7, 2012 (UTC) The sentence isn't based on any specific statement made by either character. It's inferred information. The Catalyst controls the Reapers, so therefore it controls Harbinger. Harbinger is meant to be the leader of the Reapers, so therefore the Catalyst leads through it. I really don't see how that's factually incorrect. --Mr. Mittens (talk) 20:32, October 7, 2012 (UTC)

Actually, I think the precise relationship between the Catalyst and the Reapers is still pretty vague. This seems speculative to me as well.--Zxjkl (talk) 22:41, October 7, 2012 (UTC)

Again, you're more than welcome to remove it. I'm still mulling it over. --Mr. Mittens (talk) 22:43, October 7, 2012 (UTC)

I understand if it's just inferred information. But as Zxjkl said it seems speculative. other than Capital ships > Destroyers, we know nothing about Reaper hierarchy. I guess leave it for a couple of days and see what other users think. -- Asari Princess (talk) 02:29, October 8, 2012 (UTC)

So what is the point of telling me I can change it when someone just changes it back anyway? I heard people hear pride themselves on making the lore 100% correct and factual. Having "implied" information as facts should not be allowed. There is nothing to support that the Catalysts controls the other Reapers through Harbinger. It should be changed. Edit: So can you back up your statement with anything more specific than "Extended Cut" Lancer1289?--Asari Princess (talk) 04:02, October 27, 2012 (UTC)

i think it's an accumulation of gathered information over the course of the series.

  1. harby's established as de facto "leader" of the reapers - ingame (as in "first true reaper" etc etc c/o catalyst and leviathans) and ingame speculation.
  2. the catalyst is established as de facto -controlling intelligence- of the reapers. per youtube links above again.
    1. harby is obviously a reaper.
  3. 1 + 2 = 3 which is good enough in my book.

don't really have an opinion on changing the wording anyway - unless you blatantly put in misinformation - which didn't appear to be the case in your reverted edit. T̴̴͕̲̞̳̖̼̱͒͛̎͒ͫ̃ͧeͩ̈̽̈҉͓̝̰̼̦̫̤̀͠m̫̪̪̯̻͎̫̅̇̓̇͌̚p̸̙̝̓̓͌ͨ͆ͣͥ̂̕o͒̽͐̽͏̞̬̻͕͔͕͚̰͍͠͞ṙ̢̞͚͈̹̰ͨ̓ͭ̈́̌ạ̢̧̪̹̺̺̣̹̲͂͆̏ͪͨ͒ͭř̹͈͜͠y̷͍̻̜̹̼̾̽̈́e̵̹̼̟̦͚͐̈́͌͘d͉̲̣̻͉̱͗̅ḭ̷̻̆͋̆̓̔͝t̨͍̦̫̗͂̅̍̋̆ͩ͝ộ̫̟̬̳̝̲̾ͫ̒̿ͮ̑̚rͯ̎ͨͭ̄̿̽͛҉̠̫̱̠̘̘̲́ͅ7̩̻ͤͩͨ͝͡8̜̣̙͇̻ͨ͛͛̆͒̆̽̒͐͜͡ ͥ̍̉̃̇ͥ̓ͨ͏̕҉̥̹͓̗̤̠̖̤ (talk) 05:03, October 27, 2012 (UTC)

I still feel that the wording needs to be changed, "through" Harbinger implies that the Catalyst only has a connection to other Reaper through Harbinger. Which (although is not specifically stated otherwise) is highly unlikely. You cannot prove one way or the other, so it should be changed. --Asari Princess (talk) 06:18, November 1, 2012 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.