Early in Mass Effect 3, it’s possible to run into Kelly Chambers, Shepard’s yeoman from the previous game, aiding refugees on the Citadel. While catching up, Kelly lets slip that Cerberus, her borderline terrorist ex-employers, are searching for her. Shepard is given a simple dialogue choice: The Paragon option encourages Kelly to continue her work with the displaced persons; the Renegade option orders her to change her identity and go into hiding. Players who have been exclusively playing Paragon without consequence since the beginning of the series might be shocked to learn that this Paragon option gets Kelly Chambers killed. When Cerberus invades the Citadel—crossing the line from “borderline terrorists” into “terrorists”—they seek Kelly out by name and summarily execute her for betraying them. For the very first time in the series, choosing a Paragon option has truly negative repercussions.

Advertisement

In this moment, the galaxy is actually as ugly and unforgiving as Garrus and the others who share his cynicism always insist it is. Up to this point, adhering purely to Paragon options has only ever been rewarded, even if, at the time, the available Paragon choice seems short-sighted, naive, or morally dubious. Choosing to free, rather than kill, the captive queen of a dangerous spacefaring insectoid species results in that one-time scourge of the galaxy becoming valuable allies in Mass Effect 3. A batarian terrorist can be permitted to walk free as you instead choose to rescue his hostages, and not only does he not cause any more trouble if allowed to live, but he can later be convinced to commit ships to Shepard’s fleet. When asked to either reprogram or eradicate a sect of the robotic geth, choosing to spare their lives will reward Shepard with loyal soldiers-in-arms in her fight against the genocidal Reapers—nobody questions whether she had the moral right to commit what is essentially mass brainwashing.

Given how often Mass Effect coddles Paragon Shepard, it’s a wonder Garrus and the like ever managed to become so pessimistic in the first place. Mass Effect’s betrayals and revenges seem to happen offscreen or to people who aren’t in Shepard’s gang. When Shepard forgives characters, they are genuinely repentant; when others makes her a promise, they can be counted on to keep it. So long as players continually select Paragon options, her trust and faith in people will always be rewarded, and nobody who lies to her will ever get away with it. That’s why Kelly Chambers losing her life to the selection of a seemingly benign Paragon dialogue choice is so shocking. For the first time in the series, Paragon Shepard is not a saintly warrior-poet whose every decision is ethically and practically airtight. Suddenly, she’s a naive rube whose unfounded optimism got her friend killed.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Mass Effect’s morality system isn’t supposed to be about choosing between good and evil but between Lawful Good and Chaotic Good, molding Shepard into either Dale Cooper drinking black coffee in the Milky Way or Dirty Harry Callahan with an M-6 Carnifex instead of a .44 Magnum. Its pampering of Paragon Shepard, though, makes it more like a choice between being right and being a jerk for no reason. If more Paragon options had led to Shepard’s trust and optimism being betrayed, had the galaxy actually been as unforgiving as everyone in it claims, it would have given every decision much more gravity. Would Paragon purists still be willing to free the captive rachni queen if she returned the rachni to their historical warmongering? Would they let that batarian walk free in order to rescue a dozen people if there was a real chance he would use his freedom to kill hundreds? It would obviously be overkill for every Paragon option to blow up in Shepard’s face, but by allowing Paragons to stroll infallibly through the galaxy, Mass Effect defangs a world it spends a lot of time insisting will bite.