lillitheris wrote...
@fainmaca
“targetting all non-indoctrinated forces in the vicinity of the station.” This seems kinda iffy. How can it tell?
I don’t have anything particularly useful to offer, except one note: I was never a big fan of the Interchangeable Alien Person motif. Lost your turian? Too bad. No, you can’t just have another one appear.
Its not that its differentiating, its more that all of the indoctrinated forces have been destroyed, including the two Reapers directing the battle.
So would you say that it would be better to not have Bakliss as a potential squad mate if Etarn dies? I was kind of thinking along the lines that having a representative of the Hegemony on board would be a good idea for the Commander. It also allows for a different flavour of squadmate. You chose to destroy the station in exchange for military resources? Then you get the more militant Bakliss. You chose to save the station, preserving a huge facet of Batarian culture? Then you get the more politically oriented Etarn.
The choice itself has its own rewards and penalties. on the one hand, you preserve a part of batarian culture (the Batarian equivalent to a Citadel and the location of their government pretty much ever since they mastered FTL travel). On the other, you get more resources to fight the Reapers with. One affects the Batarian epilogue, the other affects your overall ending.
The main reason I was courting the idea of letting Etarn die was because I wanted to give the readers the first taste of actual, story-changing consequences to their choices. For about 20 months now I've been offering choices, but the consequences are still off in the future, nebulous until their true extent is revealed. I wanted to be able to provide a little echo of the emotional payoff that the story will deliver later.
I'm really thinking that I won't let Etarn die. He's already integrated into the squad, and the readers are familiar with him. I also feel that he still has a story that can be told.