Janus, Yrliet, and dumb decisions. Spoilers within.

[Neoz]

So, after playing around with a save to see different outcomes, I noticed something.

no matter what "alliance" you form, you basically cede partial governance to the Aeldari. Either fully giving control to them, or forming "an alliance" with them, where it seems they continue to mind control people, work towards their ends, and seemingly will allow most of your current works to continue. You get a promise of reward from Yrliet in both.

However, if you use the skill check to tell them "No, you can't rule, but you can stay and live in safety" you 1. Block Yrliet from becoming a companion, cuz reasons. 2. Get no reward, 3. Get no help in the upcoming fight. All because you "need no help from Xenos" Which doesn't make any sense with the dialogue option

What I don't understand though is that if you slaughter them, Yrliet just happily comes along like a lost puppy.

Don't get me wrong, I understand how and why working with Aledari is dubious, especially certain craftworlds. Although I'm fairly certain you could press more as an Iconoclast. But to just lock Yrliet out as a companion because you convinced them to bow to you, more or less, is absolutely asinine.

[Neoz]

don't get me wrong, I love everything about how its handled, really feels dubious even at the best. But that one option just blocking her as a companion... what?

[wei270]

first of all you are not gonna sit there and rule the planet, so don't be ridiculous and think you can, all you need is the food production on the planet if the elders can help you with that why not let them do their ♥♥♥♥

sec if you let them live in safety you can still get Yrliet after you kill your cute blondie. regardless of your action with the elder if you are there with Yrliet when you kill the chaos nobles you should get the option to invite Yrliet.

The slaughter option only works if you get Yrliet to agree with you before you attack them. Because Yrliet is upside that Muran didn;t deal with the chaos before the humans

[Psajchol]

I just did that today and everything was working well.

You must've messed up some dialogues along the way. I did the 'Iconoclast' alliance choice and they actually arrived during battle with the corrupted governor. After killing the governor Yrilet started a dialogue that for whatever reason she wants to join me for SECOND time, FIRST was during the Eldar camp conversation.

It doesn't matter either way really, because you don't even see any Eldar afterwards, it's kinda ♥♥♥♥ that so many choices don't really matter.

[Balekai]

Just a few things after reaching this point myself and testing/looking at the alliance dialogue Etudes with Toy Box:


1. "I don't want anymore blood..." Iconoclast give into Eldar demands option - Starts the [JanusEldarAllies] etude for alliance. However, it also starts the second etude [JanusEldarGovernPlanet]. Gives +5 Iconoclast and requires no Iconoclast. It also gives +1 to your (TheSirenicalDiplomat) flag counter like many Iconoclast diplomacy notions.

The conversation is followed up immediately by Yrliet offering to join you, which if you agree with any of the agree options, enables a companion quest to save her craftworld Aeldari and some more companion quests etudes that seem like follow up quests for Yrliet.

This is the most iffy of the Alliance options from a position of weakness. Heinrix didn't like this option. :p



2. "We shall do things another way..." Iconoclast assert authority and have a more dominant RT in alliance - This starts [JanusEldarAllies], but DOES NOT START [JanusEldarGovernPlanet]. This option requires 15 Iconoclast and gives no Iconoclast shift. Again +1 to (TheSirenicalDiplomat) flag counter.

It also enables the side quest to save some Aeldari for Yrliet.

This option for a pure Iconoclast seems like the best option (more on that in next option). You get the Yrliet quest and the [JanusEldarGovernPlanet] is not activated. (Edit: After a patch later in the day, this is no longer true see option 3. for more detail) Interestingly enough, Pascal had some disapproval dialogue in addition to Heinrix this time.



3. "I cannot give Janus to the Aeldari..." persuasion "semi hidden" Dogmatic option etude wise (Edit no longer hidden and is now labelled as a dogmatic option /edit). This is a similar option to option 2. and the one I originally chose, but has some KEY differences (Edit Not so much anymore /edit) that are hard to spot just looking at initial etudes in dialogue. It starts [JanusEldarAllies] like the other two (which is why future dialogue/NPC reactions are so similar in all of them. However, like option 2. it does not start [JanusEldarGovernPlanet]. It gives +3 (Edit: Now +4 after today's patch /edit) Dogmatic shift. +1 (TheSirenicalDiplomat) flag counter.

Here's the big different from the other two: (BIG EDIT: The following paragraph is no longer true. Funny enough later in the day of this post, this was patched to allow for the missing Yrliet dialogue from options 1. and 2. which now seems to have been an oversight. Players can now choose this persuasion option and get all the benefits of option 2. +4 dogmatic shift /edit) RT is colder to Yrliet/Eldar in the immediate follow up dialogue and basically refuses any help from Eldar "I certainly will not need any Xenos' help' in this affair." Yrliet just purses her lips and says "So be it." Which means Yrliet never offers to directly join the RT here and DOES NOT GIVE the RT her companion sidequest to save the crafworld Aeldari or the future possible follow up quest etudes. I played a little further to see if I could get this quest(s) later but to no avail. Someone further in the game would have to confirm or deny whether it's possible to get them tkaing this option. Pascal and Heinrix had nothing to say.



Anyways. So yeah there's some key differences between each of the alliance options. I myself will be keeping an eye to see how much [JanusEldarAllies] or [JanusEldarGovernPlanet] is used in future convo. It's possible and I believe in BETA it may have come up with High Inquisitor, about you truly being in control of alliance with option 2., basically checking [JanusEldarGovernPlanet] whether Janus was truly governed by Eldar which it isn't. So my RT if I remember correctly was able to push back a bit. Dunno not there yet. But that whole convo was bugged and cut off half way through for this route and went straight to Chapter 3 missing the remaining Chapter 2 end crisis dialogue lol.

A good example of how it should have been done better by checkign whether [JanusEldarGovernPlanet] was active or not, is when you bring Heinrix to the Janus Governor cultist fight. After the battle he pulls you aside and challenges your decisions, mentioning leaving the planet in control of Xenos (just checks the [JanusEldarAllies] flag). That dialogue should have had some extra pushback if [JanusEldarGovernPlanet] was not active. It also was a bit wonky overall like if you walk back out of the chamber door after Governor and/or cultist runs away, it triggers this convo early and includes dialogue about leaving the cultist governor in control even if she was killed by her Maiden in Waiting.

If option 3 doesn't give access to Aeldari quest like options 1-2 I would pick option 2. a whole other quest is probably better than 9 exp from a persuasion check and +3 Dogmatic shift.

[White sun]

Kill the xenos, burn the heretic governor, rule the planet yourself. The Emperor protects.

On a serious note though, the logic of some quests in RT is off at times.

[=DeadShot=]

Also if you try to switch the human rebels from the side of eldar and ten continue the conversation with the eldar the eldar will go hostile and you can kill them nice and easy without worrying with dogmatic /iconoclast points or backlash from Yrliet.

[Mack]

I tried to be peaceful, it didn't work, we blew them away.

Yrliet was okay with it.

The path of the outcast works in mysterious ways.

[corisai]

Originally posted by Balekai:

[JanusEldarGovernPlanet] is used in future convo. It's possible and I believe in BETA it may have come up with High Inquisitor, about you truly being in control of alliance with option 2., basically checking [JanusEldarGovernPlanet] whether Janus was truly governed by Eldar which it isn't. So my RT if I remember correctly was able to push back a bit.

Inquisitor would be unhappy even if Janus isn't truly governed by Eldar.

Plus you will see in beginning of Act 4 how eldar are "following their promises" (spoiler: they don't).

But AFAIK it could lead to pretty good ending slide currently. Unsure - either because of bugs (ending slides ARE confirmed to be bugged) or not.

P.S. I really expected option to mark a target for our Lance batteries during this encounter. It would be so cool - Farseer, dodge THIS ^_^

[Balekai]

Originally posted by corisai:

Originally posted by Balekai:

[JanusEldarGovernPlanet] is used in future convo. It's possible and I believe in BETA it may have come up with High Inquisitor, about you truly being in control of alliance with option 2., basically checking [JanusEldarGovernPlanet] whether Janus was truly governed by Eldar which it isn't. So my RT if I remember correctly was able to push back a bit.

Inquisitor would be unhappy even if Janus isn't truly governed by Eldar.

Plus you will see in beginning of Act 4 how eldar are "following their promises" (spoiler: they don't).

But AFAIK it could lead to pretty good ending slide currently. Unsure - either because of bugs (ending slides ARE confirmed to be bugged) or not.

P.S. I really expected option to mark a target for our Lance batteries during this encounter. It would be so cool - Farseer, dodge THIS ^_^

Yeah I kind of expected that they wouldn't fully keep their word. Especially the way the Iconoclast dialogue goes for options 1. and 2. Hell even Yrliet betrays you in Chapter 3. The same way in most sci fi plots when an idealist Human protagonist puts an alliance together like in Star Trek or Babylon 5, only to get screwed by their alliance partners and has to fix things in a crisis moment.

Aeldari are that type of "honourable people" that are all about honour, their word and sacrifice, until they're not and they just rationalize everything away and do what they want in the name of "honour" lol.

Can't trust dem baddie Xenos! :D

[Neoz]

Originally posted by Balekai:

Aeldari are that type of "honourable people" that are all about honour, their word and sacrifice, until they're not and they just rationalize everything away and do what they want in the name of "honour" lol.

Can't trust dem baddie Xenos! :D

I thought you were descring huma- I mean, Mon-keighs there for a second!

[corisai]

Originally posted by rorek55:

I thought you were descring huma- I mean, Mon-keighs there for a second!

Don't worry my eldar friends - I'm one who don't have a racistic biases and share absolutely equal level of hatred toward traitors, heretics and xenos. Sister Argenta, would you be so kind?...

[Balekai]

Originally posted by rorek55:

Originally posted by Balekai:

Aeldari are that type of "honourable people" that are all about honour, their word and sacrifice, until they're not and they just rationalize everything away and do what they want in the name of "honour" lol.

Can't trust dem baddie Xenos! :D

I thought you were descring huma- I mean, Mon-keighs there for a second!

Nope the two races are COMPLETELY DIFFERENT!!! As both Mon-keighs and Aeldari will tell you!!! They also look COMPLETELY DIFFERENT and could never be attracted to one another!! Gross!!

[Balekai]

Ok new update and new changes. Option 3. has been changed that i talked about earlier and it is now the most optimal choice. The persuasion check is now labelled Dogmatic and shifts +4 instead of +3. More important as the patch notes suggested, they added a new line to the dialogue which allows for the recruitment dialogue with Yrliet which gives you her companion quests. I'm going to edit the original post I made today to reflect the new change.

[One Old Soldier]

At the risk of metagaming a teeny bit: Eldar (Because to hell with GW trying to get all fancy pants with renaming everything) have a long-standing history of double-speak and putting on a good face to back their motives.

They'll work with you until the split second after their goals are achieved and then they will do everything in their power to plunge the knife and twist. It's just in their nature, hell it's in their LANGUAGE they literally see humans as rock-banging monkeys too primitive and stupid to even hope to see as equals. We are tools at best for them to throw at their problems or at worst an obstacle to euthanize.

Eldar should never be trusted, that's even as someone that has been doing their best to be Iconoclast up to that point.

[Neoz]

Originally posted by Two Armed Bandit:

At the risk of metagaming a teeny bit: Eldar (Because to hell with GW trying to get all fancy pants with renaming everything) have a long-standing history of double-speak and putting on a good face to back their motives.

They'll work with you until the split second after their goals are achieved and then they will do everything in their power to plunge the knife and twist. It's just in their nature, hell it's in their LANGUAGE they literally see humans as rock-banging monkeys too primitive and stupid to even hope to see as equals. We are tools at best for them to throw at their problems or at worst an obstacle to euthanize.

Eldar should never be trusted, that's even as someone that has been doing their best to be Iconoclast up to that point.

but they brought mister Girlyman back to life.

Though, I suppose depending on who you ask, thats the highest act of treachery of all.

also, on the iconoclast note, its actually worked out rather well trusting the Aeldari.