29107 réponses à ce sujet

[Andaius20]

Good point Pac I can also see that as true. Garrus gives off the Justice first no matter the methods.

[Nilfalasiel]

Pacifien wrote...

Nilfalasiel wrote...
Somehow, I don't think Garrus was high-ranked/rich enough to have had direct dealings with the Shadow Broker. Remember that Barla Von tells you that the Shadow Broker's services cost a small fortune. Plus, I'm not quite sure Garrus would condone getting information from such a shady source.

I don't think the Shadow Broker would consider your status if he wanted certain information to get to you. Afterall, Barla Von gave Shepard information for free because the Shadow Broker was just that pissed off about it. Anyway, certainly Garrus would have had criminals slip through his fingers because they were rich enough to use the Shadow Broker's resources to escape.

I think Garrus would also use shady sources. Just such a cop cliche, the cop that have their sources deep in the criminal world. Though I think Garrus would only have access to the Shadow Broker's agents, not the Shadow Broker. If it's something I can picture Bailey doing, it's something I can picture Garrus doing. They seem cut from the same cloth. Yep, even the "buy tickets to the C-Sec Charity Ball" aspect. I'm not going to look at Garrus with rose-tinted glasses.

It's not a question of rose-tinted glasses, it's just that I, for one, really don't see Garrus doing that kind of thing. Roughing up a suspect, yes, but getting dubious info from god knows who? No. Especially if he knows that that very same person could tip his suspects off against him. That could actually be counterproductive to his investigation. Especially if he doesn't have the kind of money to be persuasive.

Then again, maybe it's just me.

Modifié par Nilfalasiel, 22 juillet 2010 - 07:44 .

[Pacifien]

Ragabul the Ontarah wrote...
Granted he also considers some renegade types as "good people" or "doing what's necessary." The question remains how does he classify the Shadow Broker?

Above his pay grade, I bet. But a meddling bastard all the same.

[Andaius20]

Ragabul the Ontarah wrote...

Granted he also considers some renegade types as "good people" or "doing what's necessary." The question remains how does he classify the Shadow Broker?

most likely on a case by case basis. After all information he sells is a tool, just like a weapon can be used for good or ill. However the SB is said to keep balance in the galactic scene by never letting one power get a one up on the others. So it could be said while not a "nice guy" in the moral sense it is good in the overall sense as it keeps the greater peace.

[Pacifien]

Nilfalasiel wrote...
It's not a question of rose-tinted glasses, it's just that I, for one, really don't see Garrus doing that kind of thing. Roughing up a suspect, yes, but getting dubious info from god knows who? No. Especially if he knows that that very same person could tip his suspects off against him.

Then again, maybe it's just me.

Just a curiosity question, not a debate point, but what do you think Garrus would have done in Chellick's situation? He needs to obtain the latest tech, needs to know who the sources are trafficking such tech to the Citadel. So use Rita sister's? Let the krogan walk away after finishing the weapons deal?

[Andaius20]

Nilfalasiel wrote...

It's not a question of rose-tinted glasses, it's just that I, for one, really don't see Garrus doing that kind of thing. Roughing up a suspect, yes, but getting dubious info from god knows who? No. Especially if he knows that that very same person could tip his suspects off against him. That could actually be counterproductive to his investigation. Especially if he doesn't have the kind of money to be persuasive.

Then again, maybe it's just me.

I don't think he would act solely on said informatoin, I do see him using as a start for his own investigation.

[Andaius20]

Me either. I think he would have played it the same. Have precautions in place to help her if she's really gets into trouble but send her out all the same.

[Nilfalasiel]

Pacifien wrote...

Just a curiosity question, not a debate point, but what do you think Garrus would have done in Chellick's situation? He needs to obtain the latest tech, needs to know who the sources are trafficking such tech to the Citadel. So use Rita sister's? Let the krogan walk away after finishing the weapons deal?

Well, he actually seems to disapprove of Chellick's methods, if he's along when Shepard talks to him. He says "nice to see you're still working all the angles, Chellick". Perhaps it's simply in reference to the fact that Chellick is trading favours with Shepard, but perhaps he also disapproves of the actual weapons deal.

I see him using Rita sister. It's risky, but at least it doesn't involve making deals with criminals. I think it's very characteristic of Garrus to be a "no deals" kind of guy, for better or for worse. So yeah, I agree he might also try to arrest that krogan. I also think he might have let the hostages in BDtS die for the sake of capturing Balak, for example.

As for using the Shadow Broker's info as a starting point for his own investigation, yes, but like I said, if he knows that that very same guy could be tipping his suspects off (as he very well could be, if the suspect is richer and if it serves to maintain balance, as has been mentioned), he'd probably think twice about it.

As for Garrus being cut from the same cloth as Bailey, doesn't he say something along the lines of "I see C-Sec hasn't changed" during one of the convos with Bailey? That also suggests disapproval.

Modifié par Nilfalasiel, 22 juillet 2010 - 07:54 .

[Pacifien]

Nilfalasiel wrote...
Well, he actually seems to disapprove of Chellick's methods, if he's along when Shepard talks to him. He says "nice to see you're still working all the angles, Chellick". Perhaps it's simply in reference to the fact that Chellick is trading favours with Shepard, but perhaps he also disapproves of the actual weapons deal.*snip*

I've seen people interpret that line as disapproval of Chellick's methods. I always took it as a simple comment on the way Chellick always works, he works all the angles. Seems that Garrus and Chellick worked different type of cases, anyway.

[Pacifien]

Nilfalasiel wrote...
As for Garrus being cut from the same cloth as Bailey, doesn't he say something along the lines of "I see C-Sec hasn't changed" during one of the convos with Bailey? That also suggests disapproval.

Actually, if you comment on Bailey's conversation about roughing up a suspect when you first meet him, I think Garrus actually says "C-Sec has changed." I suppose I heard wrong?

[Andaius20]

http://twitter.com/t...tus/19277159770



Gah! why?

[Nilfalasiel]

Pacifien wrote...

Actually, if you comment on Bailey's conversation about roughing up a suspect when you first meet him, I think Garrus actually says "C-Sec has changed." I suppose I heard wrong?

I honestly can't remember. I just know he says something about C-Sec and change, but I can't remember which way round it is, lol. I'd have to wait until I can replay Thane's LM for that.

But yeah, for me, Garrus is a "no deals" kind of guy. Even if it results in casualties. Pre-ME, at least. After that, it's up to how much Shep influences him and in what direction.

Even though "no collateral damage" seems to be a tenet that sticks both with Paragon and Renegade Garrus.

[Pacifien]

Well, the situation with the hostages is that a greater evil was going to get away unless you risked their lives to stop him. There was nothing to be gained by doing something against the salarian workers or the biotic god. Maybe if Wasea had the biotic god strapped with explosives and the only way to keep the building from blowing up was to shoot him, Garrus would have taken the shot.

[Nilfalasiel]

Pacifien wrote...

Well, the situation with the hostages is that a greater evil was going to get away unless you risked their lives to stop him. There was nothing to be gained by doing something against the salarian workers or the biotic god. Maybe if Wasea had the biotic god strapped with explosives and the only way to keep the building from blowing up was to shoot him, Garrus would have taken the shot.

That's a good point, but Garrus also says that he was careful about not having collateral damage when dealing with the mercs on Omega. That could've potentially involved situations where hostages were taken, or people at least used as bait by mercs to get away. But he still says "no collateral damage".

[Sialater]

He lets the krogan body guards go on Fade's volus front if you paragon the confrontation. I'd say that's a clear sign of avoiding collateral damage.