PDA

View Full Version : The Kenway Family Plothole- Its far from "Over"



Mr.Black24
03-06-2015, 09:12 PM
So inspired by the thread "Favorite Unsolved Mystery" by SixKeys, this post was meant for a reply for that thread, but then the more I thought about as I wrote on my mystery, the more questions and theories popped up alongside it to the point it deserves its own thread since its such a big series of questions that I feel that it should be discussed, *Wink* *Wink*Podcast*Wink**Wink*

But Here is a big plothole that no one mentioned at all in the Kenway Saga, and it was right in our faces. In AC: Rogue, Shay assassinated Charles for the Precursor Box in 1776. Now here is the problem right here in this dialogue:

Charles: “Old…Connor and his Assassins…The American Revolution undid your Templar business.”

The thing is the American Revolution ended in 1781. The Templars were far from even being crippled by the end of 1776. Connor only killed 3 our of the main 7, counting Benjamin Church since he was still a Templar at this point. Plus Connor had just recruited the 3 Assassins from Boston. Its been shown too that the Templars were also manipulating events in the American Revolution, such as the Boston Massacre, so how did that undo any of their Templar business, besides the Assassins' actions? Plus since it was early on, in 1776, what did Shay do with the Precursor Box, did he give it to Haytham? And if so, why wasn't he sent to hunt down Connor after that mission too? Especially since Connor was tearing down Templar power in the new world? A threat like that should have been brought to Shay's attention right? After 1776, we should have 7 years before Connor eliminates Templar influence completely in 1783, plenty of time for Shay to show up, so what happened? What was the Colonial Templars' plan for the Box?

This will even lead down to more questions. If Connor gets wind of the Box, won't he contact the French Brotherhood to let them know, since he was kept informed from Charles about their goings? Once they realize the Box is still in play, the French Brotherhood realizes that Charles was not only killed for it, but left his son, the newly ranked Master Assassin, Arno Dorian, an orphan? Will they let him know of the reason why his father was killed? Arno is not about revenge, so instead of killing Shay out of anger, but will he want to go after the Box to find out why his father was killed for it. Like Ezio's travel to Masyaf, would he travel to America for answers about the tragedies of his life that was caused by the Box? After the events in Dead Kings, he looked more interested in the Precursor Sites. Will he and Connor discover the meaning and reason for the existence of the Precursor Tree? Was Connor even warned by Achilles at all of what they represent? I mean Connor knows that the artifacts are dangerous, but for that reason, would he want to learn more about them, at least the locations to prevent accidents like in Lisbon from ever happening again. Ah Tabai had Assassins stationed at the Observatory after Edward's departure to prevent any future breaching, won't Connor want to do the same there? Will he at least do an attempt study on them, like Edward did before him?

This leads to even more questions, such as Shay's motives, like in this here dialogue:

Shay: "Then perhaps we shall start a revolution of our own."

The French Revolution itself was started by François-Thomas Germain in a coup against François de la Serre for the role of Grand Master of the Templars. The goal behind beginning the revolution was to bring in a new middle-class leadership to the Templars instead of the previous aristocratic leaders, and to show humanity the horrors of unrestrained free will so that they would prefer control above all else. The thing is, Shay doesn't seem like a fanatic, his character demonstrates that, but yet he seems aware of the plot. Does that mean he is all for Germain's plan? Other Templars were against his plot, I bet even Haytham and his brothers would be too. But this dialogue feels inconsistent to his character. One might argue that perhaps Shay did not know the nature of the plan, but how so? The Colonial and French Assassins kept in touch about their doings, evident with Charles and Connor, so how can this be any different from the French and Colonial Templars, especially since they have stronger connections and resources than the Assassins? How can Shay's dialogue be misinterpreted? Is he a conservative, reformist, or a fanatic Templar? Respected rivals to Connor, brokered a truce with him, or became just as fanatic and dangerous as Germain respectively? The dialogue and his character just doesn't fit at all, but its there.

In the end, there are way too many questions in this story that cannot be considered done. I honestly want to know how is this story considered "done."

The Kenway Family Saga is not done, and Connor's and Shay's story from the looks of it is far from over!

Megas_Doux
03-06-2015, 09:19 PM
Meh....

I like the story of the kenways, but I just cant stomach another game set Colonial America.

Namikaze_17
03-06-2015, 09:26 PM
Voice clips akin to Subject 0 for this would be nice.

You know, if cutscenes are too much...

Xstantin
03-06-2015, 09:40 PM
In the end, there are way too many questions in this story that cannot be considered done. I honestly want to know how is this story considered "done."

The Kenway Family Saga is not done, and Connor's and Shay's story from the looks of it is far from over!

I think it's "done" simply cause Ubi moved on (unless they'll throw another bone like Connor's blonde wife down the road).

Mr.Black24
03-06-2015, 09:40 PM
Meh....

I like the story of the kenways, but I just cant stomach another game set Colonial America. At least a big DLC, or more like an expansion set, for Rogue/Victory/Unity, can help. It bothers me more that this story is considered done, besides all of this.


Voice clips akin to Subject 0 for this would be nice.

You know, if cutscenes are too much... Cinematic cutscenes are never too much. ;)If we're going that route, might as well make a CGI movie like Embers to finish it.

LoyalACFan
03-06-2015, 10:46 PM
To be honest, the entire AC lore has become a gigantic clusterf**k. I'm still in it for the standalone stories and characters (AC4 was great for this) but I'm just about fed up with the intertwining plot lines that NEVER end up going anywhere. Every promising lead just turns into some BS that's handwaved away when they change writers, just like Subject 16 (not to blame the writers themselves, can you imagine being hired on and having to keep the disconnected lore of 21 games and a bleeding heap of transmedia straight?). The franchise is just barreling forward too fast and too sloppily for even the most talented writers/designers to hold it all together.

For what it's worth, Charles' comments about the American Revolution bothered me too, but in all honesty I'm not that invested in it and I have very little hope that they'll follow up on it. Neither Shay nor Arno were met with overwhelming fan support, and now that we have confirmation that the next game doesn't star either one of them, I have a hard time believing they'll ever go back to seeing them star again. Initiates here we come :nonchalance:

Megas_Doux
03-06-2015, 11:01 PM
To be honest, the entire AC lore has become a gigantic clusterf**k. I'm still in it for the standalone stories and characters (AC4 was great for this) but I'm just about fed up with the intertwining plot lines that NEVER end up going anywhere. Every promising lead just turns into some BS that's handwaved away when they change writers, just like Subject 16 (not to blame the writers themselves, can you imagine being hired on and having to keep the disconnected lore of 21 games and a bleeding heap of transmedia straight?). The franchise is just barreling forward too fast and too sloppily for even the most talented writers/designers to hold it all together.

For what it's worth, Charles' comments about the American Revolution bothered me too, but in all honesty I'm not that invested in it and I have very little hope that they'll follow up on it. Neither Shay nor Arno were met with overwhelming fan support, and now that we have confirmation that the next game doesn't star either one of them, I have a hard time believing they'll ever go back to seeing them star again. Initiates here we come :nonchalance:

Indeed....

ze_topazio
03-07-2015, 01:06 AM
"Then perhaps we shall start a revolution of our own."

I'm convinced this was just a figure of speech.

Charles: HA HA, Connor and his American revolution undid all or your work, lol pwned

Shay: Then perhaps we shall start a revolution of our own AKA then perhaps we just have to kick his arse and start from scratch.


Yes, it could be a reference to the upcoming Templar sponsored French revolution, randomly mentioned in the same awkward and forced manner that Charles mentioned the American revolution despite Connor having nothing to do with the revolution starting or it being planned by him nor Connor was using it to fight the Templars, not to mention the fact that the American revolution was having no effect whatsoever on the Templars plans, you could say the revolution was actually perfect for them, Haytham even instigated some of the early violence.

EaglePrince25
03-07-2015, 01:40 AM
Meh....

I like the story of the kenways, but I just cant stomach another game set Colonial America.

This, so much this. And i'm speaking as a guy who loved 3, Black Flag, and Rogue, along with their main characters. I would like to know what happened to Connor, Shay, and even Arno, but i'm also kind of done with this point in time.

VoldR
03-07-2015, 07:50 AM
The question is what did Charles know, is he talking of Washington?
Which he did save him on that year, that alone someone might say something like that. :)

It is a big step and people like to boast for confidence and lower morale...

Mr.Black24
03-21-2015, 04:20 AM
I'm so tired of bring this up, but yet this fact really irks me. Like I don't know who thought this was a good idea, how was this a good idea. I mean Shay isn't a Kenway, but yet he is worthy of closing the book on the Saga? Why not just on Connor, who is a Kenway by blood? It wasn't even a good send off for both of them....

Its just one of those moments I'm havin now.....:(

I honestly hope Victory doesn't screw up.

M3gaToxic
03-21-2015, 05:12 AM
I normally don't read a lot of text from an OP of a thread, but it was just so interesting. And very good points were made. I would love for there to be another AC with Connor, but I am not sure if that will happen. I do like Colonial America though, I just wish there was a little more parkor to do. Either way Mr.Black24 you brought up some interesting stuff.

pirate1802
03-21-2015, 06:59 AM
Okay so it's my turn to needlessly crib about the title of a thread. :)

I don't think a plothole means what you think it means.

Defalt221
03-21-2015, 07:32 AM
So inspired by the thread "Favorite Unsolved Mystery" by SixKeys, this post was meant for a reply for that thread, but then the more I thought about as I wrote on my mystery, the more questions and theories popped up alongside it to the point it deserves its own thread since its such a big series of questions that I feel that it should be discussed, *Wink* *Wink*Podcast*Wink**Wink*

But Here is a big plothole that no one mentioned at all in the Kenway Saga, and it was right in our faces. In AC: Rogue, Shay assassinated Charles for the Precursor Box in 1776. Now here is the problem right here in this dialogue:

Charles: “Old…Connor and his Assassins…The American Revolution undid your Templar business.”

The thing is the American Revolution ended in 1781. The Templars were far from even being crippled by the end of 1776. Connor only killed 3 our of the main 7, counting Benjamin Church since he was still a Templar at this point. Plus Connor had just recruited the 3 Assassins from Boston. Its been shown too that the Templars were also manipulating events in the American Revolution, such as the Boston Massacre, so how did that undo any of their Templar business, besides the Assassins' actions? Plus since it was early on, in 1776, what did Shay do with the Precursor Box, did he give it to Haytham? And if so, why wasn't he sent to hunt down Connor after that mission too? Especially since Connor was tearing down Templar power in the new world? A threat like that should have been brought to Shay's attention right? After 1776, we should have 7 years before Connor eliminates Templar influence completely in 1783, plenty of time for Shay to show up, so what happened? What was the Colonial Templars' plan for the Box?

This will even lead down to more questions. If Connor gets wind of the Box, won't he contact the French Brotherhood to let them know, since he was kept informed from Charles about their goings? Once they realize the Box is still in play, the French Brotherhood realizes that Charles was not only killed for it, but left his son, the newly ranked Master Assassin, Arno Dorian, an orphan? Will they let him know of the reason why his father was killed? Arno is not about revenge, so instead of killing Shay out of anger, but will he want to go after the Box to find out why his father was killed for it. Like Ezio's travel to Masyaf, would he travel to America for answers about the tragedies of his life that was caused by the Box? After the events in Dead Kings, he looked more interested in the Precursor Sites. Will he and Connor discover the meaning and reason for the existence of the Precursor Tree? Was Connor even warned by Achilles at all of what they represent? I mean Connor knows that the artifacts are dangerous, but for that reason, would he want to learn more about them, at least the locations to prevent accidents like in Lisbon from ever happening again. Ah Tabai had Assassins stationed at the Observatory after Edward's departure to prevent any future breaching, won't Connor want to do the same there? Will he at least do an attempt study on them, like Edward did before him?

This leads to even more questions, such as Shay's motives, like in this here dialogue:

Shay: "Then perhaps we shall start a revolution of our own."

The French Revolution itself was started by François-Thomas Germain in a coup against François de la Serre for the role of Grand Master of the Templars. The goal behind beginning the revolution was to bring in a new middle-class leadership to the Templars instead of the previous aristocratic leaders, and to show humanity the horrors of unrestrained free will so that they would prefer control above all else. The thing is, Shay doesn't seem like a fanatic, his character demonstrates that, but yet he seems aware of the plot. Does that mean he is all for Germain's plan? Other Templars were against his plot, I bet even Haytham and his brothers would be too. But this dialogue feels inconsistent to his character. One might argue that perhaps Shay did not know the nature of the plan, but how so? The Colonial and French Assassins kept in touch about their doings, evident with Charles and Connor, so how can this be any different from the French and Colonial Templars, especially since they have stronger connections and resources than the Assassins? How can Shay's dialogue be misinterpreted? Is he a conservative, reformist, or a fanatic Templar? Respected rivals to Connor, brokered a truce with him, or became just as fanatic and dangerous as Germain respectively? The dialogue and his character just doesn't fit at all, but its there.

In the end, there are way too many questions in this story that cannot be considered done. I honestly want to know how is this story considered "done."

The Kenway Family Saga is not done, and Connor's and Shay's story from the looks of it is far from over!

We know Connor trains Eseosa in 1805 and he doesn't have the precursor box apparently. That means :
1)Shay didn't go after Connor
2)Shay hid them or trusted them to another Templar and went after Connor and got killed. (There's no way he'd go after Connor after 1800 because by then he'd be too old. No,every character doesn't live a century like Altair or a half century like Ezio)

Sabutto
03-21-2015, 07:49 AM
booo

Thread tittle got me hype. for nothing .....

Mr.Black24
03-21-2015, 07:45 PM
Okay so it's my turn to needlessly crib about the title of a thread. :)

I don't think a plothole means what you think it means.
What, emphasizing things like how Shay isn't a hider, who being an Assassin Hunter, would have gone to hunt down Connor after the retrieval to the Box in 1776, but somehow never showed up between then and 1783?

Or perhaps you did read my first post on the first page? I think that new title post on this page confused some people, but its still part of what I'm talking about.


booo

Thread tittle got me hype. for nothing ..... Go to page 1 buddy!

Assassin_M
03-21-2015, 08:13 PM
But Here is a big plothole that no one mentioned at all in the Kenway Saga, and it was right in our faces. In AC: Rogue, Shay assassinated Charles for the Precursor Box in 1776. Now here is the problem right here in this dialogue:

Charles: “Old…Connor and his Assassins…The American Revolution undid your Templar business.”

The thing is the American Revolution ended in 1781. The Templars were far from even being crippled by the end of 1776. Connor only killed 3 our of the main 7, counting Benjamin Church since he was still a Templar at this point. Plus Connor had just recruited the 3 Assassins from Boston. Its been shown too that the Templars were also manipulating events in the American Revolution, such as the Boston Massacre, so how did that undo any of their Templar business, besides the Assassins' actions? Plus since it was early on, in 1776, what did Shay do with the Precursor Box, did he give it to Haytham? And if so, why wasn't he sent to hunt down Connor after that mission too? Especially since Connor was tearing down Templar power in the new world? A threat like that should have been brought to Shay's attention right? After 1776, we should have 7 years before Connor eliminates Templar influence completely in 1783, plenty of time for Shay to show up, so what happened? What was the Colonial Templars' plan for the Box?

By December 1776, the Templars were pretty crippled. Don't just consider the main story, consider everything from AC III. By December 1776, Connor had already rebuilt the Homestead (not entirely), recruited Duncan, Stephan and Clipper. In that, he'd have already liberated the city of Boston too. Lets take into consideration the contracts as well. By this time, Connor had liberated many cities on the eastern seaboard from Templar control from Maryland to North Carolina. That effectively destroyed their networks in the eastern colonies. He also managed to keep the eastern seaboard safe from Templars and establish secure trading routes from there to the indies and Europe.

Rebuilt Homestead
Rebuilt Brotherhood
Templar networks disrupted
Patriot victories
Forts under control
Sedition from the UK
A lot of dead Templars (Contracts, Liberation missions, main story)

I'd say that's what Charles' words meant.

Connor's story is finished. You'll just have to live with that. Not seeing death =/= unfinished stories.

Mr.Black24
03-21-2015, 11:22 PM
By December 1776, the Templars were pretty crippled. Don't just consider the main story, consider everything from AC III. By December 1776, Connor had already rebuilt the Homestead (not entirely), recruited Duncan, Stephan and Clipper. In that, he'd have already liberated the city of Boston too. Lets take into consideration the contracts as well. By this time, Connor had liberated many cities on the eastern seaboard from Templar control from Maryland to North Carolina. That effectively destroyed their networks in the eastern colonies. He also managed to keep the eastern seaboard safe from Templars and establish secure trading routes from there to the indies and Europe.

Rebuilt Homestead
Rebuilt Brotherhood
Templar networks disrupted
Patriot victories
Forts under control
Sedition from the UK
A lot of dead Templars (Contracts, Liberation missions, main story)

I'd say that's what Charles' words meant.

Connor's story is finished. You'll just have to live with that. Not seeing death =/= unfinished stories. That may be true, that the Templars' hold on the american colonies have loosened, and there are good points that Connor did all of those things, but they were still far from crippled. He did after all assassinate 2 major Templar leaders, out of 7.
Plus as I mentioned:
in 1776, what did Shay do with the Precursor Box, did he give it to Haytham?
And if so, why wasn't he sent to hunt down Connor after that mission too? Especially since Connor was tearing down Templar power in the new world? A threat like that should have been brought to Shay's attention right? After 1776, we should have 7 years before Connor eliminates Templar influence completely in 1783, plenty of time for Shay to show up, so what happened? What was the Colonial Templars' plan for the Box?
These would surely have gotten Connor's attention. Did Achilles even mentioned the Box to Connor? What is the function for the Precursor Trees? Did Connor heed Achilles words, if he ever mentioned it, or did he go out on his own to find out their true nature, more cautious now due to the latter's experience?

And what about Aveline's experience with the Precursor artifacts, what impact did they have on her in Liberation, we just get footage of her witnessing the memory of ancient humans declaring Eve as their leader, but thats it. Does she mention it to Connor? Do they make an attempt to find out more about them? And if so, will this trigger Shay to stop them, thinking that they'll use it for the worse, when in reality they won't? Will Arno be curious to know about the Box, the sole reason to why his father was killed for? Due to his experiences with the artifacts in Dead Kings, I think so but how so?

It not that if his death is conclusion or not, these questions, and more are still too big of a gap to be considered a closed book on them. Basicly what I'm trying to say is that there are too many open ended questions on both Shay, Aveline, Arno, and Connor to be considered done.

Assassin_M
03-22-2015, 12:44 AM
That may be true, that the Templars' hold on the american colonies have loosened, and there are good points that Connor did all of those things, but they were still far from crippled. He did after all assassinate 2* major Templar leaders, out of 7.
3*
Johnson, Pitcairn and Hickey.
And no one said anything about crippled, just that Connor undid Shay's Templar business in the colonies. Lets look at this in the context of Rogue. What would Charles mean by telling Shay "Your Templar business"? What was Shay doing throughout the game? wiping out the Assassins and building Templar influence and power. Connor rebuilt the Assassins and greatly weakened Templar influence and power. They're not necessarily crippled but they're undone. Consider it a knot. If you undo a knot, it doesn't mean that what it's holding is all gone, but it's getting there. It's a big step.



Plus as I mentioned:
in 1776, what did Shay do with the Precursor Box, did he give it to Haytham?
And if so, why wasn't he sent to hunt down Connor after that mission too? Especially since Connor was tearing down Templar power in the new world? A threat like that should have been brought to Shay's attention right? After 1776, we should have 7 years before Connor eliminates Templar influence completely in 1783, plenty of time for Shay to show up, so what happened? What was the Colonial Templars' plan for the Box?
These would surely have gotten Connor's attention. Did Achilles even mentioned the Box to Connor? What is the function for the Precursor Trees? Did Connor heed Achilles words, if he ever mentioned it, or did he go out on his own to find out their true nature, more cautious now due to the latter's experience?

And what about Aveline's experience with the Precursor artifacts, what impact did they have on her in Liberation, we just get footage of her witnessing the memory of ancient humans declaring Eve as their leader, but thats it. Does she mention it to Connor? Do they make an attempt to find out more about them? And if so, will this trigger Shay to stop them, thinking that they'll use it for the worse, when in reality they won't? Will Arno be curious to know about the Box, the sole reason to why his father was killed for? Due to his experiences with the artifacts in Dead Kings, I think so but how so?

It not that if his death is conclusion or not, these questions, and more are still too big of a gap to be considered a closed book on them. Basicly what I'm trying to say is that there are too many open ended questions on both Shay, Aveline, Arno, and Connor to be considered done.
These are all arbitrary questions, really. One could also ask the same questions of Ezio's time between ACB and ACR. Why no one brought up the shroud in AC II nor ACB, nor Peretto nor Giovanni. They're all arbitrary. The latest story we have of Connor, is that he's training Eseosa as of 1804. Whatever happened between is up for anyone to think about. Connor's story itself has nothing to do with the box, nor the trees nor the manuscript. That was Shay's story.

Mr.Black24
03-22-2015, 02:18 AM
3*
Johnson, Pitcairn and Hickey.
And no one said anything about crippled, just that Connor undid Shay's Templar business in the colonies. Lets look at this in the context of Rogue. What would Charles mean by telling Shay "Your Templar business"? What was Shay doing throughout the game? wiping out the Assassins and building Templar influence and power. Connor rebuilt the Assassins and greatly weakened Templar influence and power. They're not necessarily crippled but they're undone. Consider it a knot. If you undo a knot, it doesn't mean that what it's holding is all gone, but it's getting there. It's a big step.


By December 1776, the Templars were pretty crippled. You said they were crippled, not me. My argument was that Charles said it as if Connor completely dismantled them, although he was weakening them, just like how you pointed out, I'm not against you on that. Oh and you're right, its 3!



These are all arbitrary questions, really. One could also ask the same questions of Ezio's time between ACB and ACR. It was mentioned in the Revelations novel that Ezio was overseeing the Italian Brotherhood till he came across his father's papers of Masyaf. The wiki sums up what its written in the Novel quite well:
With Cesare's death, the Borgia and their plans for Italy were finished. Ezio focused himself on internal matters, forming stronger ways of communication for the Assassins from Sicily to Venice, and creating more standard training methods for new Assassin recruits.In 1509, Ezio happened upon some of his uncle Mario's documents, finding a letter written by his father Giovanni a year before Ezio was born, which mentioned a sealed library beneath the old Assassin fortress of Masyaf; the home of Altaïr Ibn-La'Ahad, who had been Ezio's spiritual mentor during his early years as an Assassin.


Why no one brought up the shroud in AC II nor ACB, nor Peretto nor Giovanni.
The shroud, Peretto, and Giovanni were characters in Project Legacy. Their stories are minor compared to characters like Ezio and Connor. Plus its already mentioned that the Shroud is hidden away again by Italian Assassins, Peretto was killed, and Giovanni's life...well yeah I wonder what happen to him too, especially since an entity had taken over him by the end of the story, yeah that was an interesting lead, that should be explained too.


Connor's story itself has nothing to do with the box, nor the trees nor the manuscript. That was Shay's story. That may be true in the beginning, but latter on, that will be a different matter. Remember that as an Assassin, anything that the Templars are interested in, the Assassins follow. If its an interest that the Templars, and especially for the former Haytham Kenway, you can be sure that its something that Connor will want to know about. After all it is his responsibility as leader of the American Assassins to stop the Templars and make sure that any Precursor artifacts aren't abused. Especially if his own father had interest in the Box, he will want to know. Plus I recall that you had interest on the trees and the box too in the podcast, why against it now? I feel like concluding the Colonial protagonits' story can perfectly explain these new lore elements, as well as much needed closure.

ace3001
03-23-2015, 01:16 AM
Just finished Rogue, and this bugged me too, though I never thought of it in depth like this.

But honestly, we need to realistically consider the fact that Shay probably never even existed in the story when they initially worked on AC III. Later, they created him, created a story for him, making Achilles look like a fool in the process, and fitted him in between AC IV and AC III the way they thought was best, all so that they could sell one more game.

ze_topazio
03-23-2015, 02:01 PM
I believe Ubisoft call this the "American Saga", there was never a Kenway saga since from the beginning we had Liberation, just think of this saga being about the heighdays of colonial North America and its eventual independence.

VestigialLlama4
03-23-2015, 03:32 PM
The main problem is that ROGUE is a s--tty game.

It gives us a Playable Templar who doesn't act like the Templars we know in the series (i.e. massacre civilians for the greater good), has no historical interest, no new gameplay and it doesn't even have the virtue of being good fan-fiction (i.e. fill in the blanks of the Colonial Era so that nobody feels like there's anything left to know about the Kenways).

pacmanate
03-23-2015, 11:30 PM
Why does that make no sense OP? Because Shay was a last minute thought, thrown in, and the research with timelines was messed up.

THUS creating another plothole in the AC franchise :)

Shahkulu101
03-24-2015, 12:52 AM
Why does that make no sense OP? Because Shay was a last minute thought, thrown in, and the research with timelines was messed up.

THUS creating another plothole in the AC franchise :)

It's not a plothole, just an open thread. Shay and Connor both have complete arcs. However, I would like to see why Shay wasn't involved in the American revolution too - it's just not vital IMO.

Mr.Black24
03-24-2015, 02:50 AM
It's not a plothole, just an open thread. Shay and Connor both have complete arcs. However, I would like to see why Shay wasn't involved in the American revolution too - it's just not vital IMO.
Just curious, is it a plothole or not for the lack explanation of Shay hunting down Connor during the period of 1776 to 1783? I mean a guy like that doing great deal of damage to the Templars, one would think they'd send the best of the Templars to hunt down Connor.

DumbGamerTag94
03-24-2015, 07:06 AM
OP. As to your original question. No there is no plot hole. And here's why.

First. What is commonly referred to as the "American Revolution" is actually the War of Independence. They often get used interchangeably however that is not accurate to do. The Revolution is the slow and systematic breakdown of Americans loyalty to the crown beginning around 1765 and culminating in the Declaration of Independence in 1776. At that point it stops being a Revolution as the trasition to becoming a seperate nation with seperate government and laws had occurred. They still had to win that privilege permanently though. And that conflict is the "War of Independence" or the "War of the Revolution". The latter of those two phrases being the one most used at the time. Which is partly why the "Revolution" and "War of the Revolution" eventually devolved into the American memory/phraseology as one in the same.

It breaks down something like this:

Essentially a "Revolution" is a Civil affair. There may be very small military clashes or a Coup(these conflicts that instate a political Revolution are called "Revolts"). But nothing on the scale of full blown war. A revolution describes the Civil aspects usually meaning a dramatic shift in government structure or social order (think French Revolution for example). In America the "Revolution" is actually the period beginning in 1765 when they began to refuse to obey British laws and taxes, and activist/violent groups like the sons of liberty and committes of correspondence were formed. Building up to the colonies forming their own provincial legislatures and removing the British governments in some places. And ultimately ending with the Americans asserting their control of America(by forcing the British authorities from the U.S. with the withdraw from Boston) and the Declaration of Independence which officially announced the intent to be "Free and Independent States" no longer subject to British Rule.

As for the Military terminology. America after the Boston Massacre in 1770 would have been referred to as a region in Armed Rebellion. Meaning they were being rebellious by not following rules, and that they had weapons and were likely willing to use them if tested. So the British sent more soldiers to restore law and order but the people of America still weren't having it. So in order to prevent the rebellion from becoming a open Revolt they went to round up the Rebel guns at Lexington and Concord, where once the bullets started flying the situations escalated in to open Revolt. The amazing success of the Revolt at bottling up the British occupation force in Boston(and ultimately the British Withdraw in late 1775 early 1776) emboldened the political radicals, the revolutionaries in to seizing the opprotunity. And by use of the rebel political organizations I named earlier formed a Continental Congress to unify the rebels in one government, then declared in the name of the states Independence in 1776. Which at that exact moment officially ended the "Revolution" America officially was under new management. This changed the nature of the military conflict which was until then a Political Revolt to remove the powers that be and replace them with new ones, afterward became a war for Independence or a "Revolutionary War" to defend the new political system from those who would keep the Status Quo or Counter revolutionaries. In this case the British Government.

Once again another great example is the French Revolution. Which had a Civil Revolution where a Revolt removed the King from Power, which was then followed by "Rebolutionary Wars" to protect that new government. Which included the Civil Conflicts against counter revolutionaries in the Vendee, as well as war with nations like. Britain and Austria which sought to return the Status Quo and return the King to Power. Most "Revolutions" tend to be followed by Civil or Revolutionary/Independence Wars. As usually the previous power holders don't leave without a fight.

So:
Revolution: Political Shift

Revolt: Armed/military action to implent the political shift

Revolutionary War/War of Independence: War to defend the new government after a revolution had taken place.

So you see once you know the difference between those things you realize there is no plot hole with Charles Dorians speech, as he said this in 1776 after the Declaration was signed(as Ben Frankin helped to write(with future presidents John Adams and Thomas Jefferson as co-authors) and sign the Declaration before being sent to France as Americas ambassador later that year). So he was right in saying that Connor the American Revolution undid his Templar business. Remember that Achillies kept in touch with foreign assassins so the knowledge of Connor and the resurging brotherhood would likely have found its way to the French assassins by way of Achillies. Especially since the Anericans despirately needed France's money and guns to win the war it would have been a nearly essential correspondence.

And it did really set back the templars as their power structure had been built in the British government system. Thus why they back the British in the early "Revolt" stages. But after the "Revolution" is final they go scrambling to try to rebuild their power structure in the new system by protecting important Templar puppets/allies in the American government (namely Ben Franklin) and trying to kill Washington and replace him with the Templar Charles Lee to ensure Independence succeeds and the Templars hold the reigns when the dust settles. So they had to make a mad dash to try and hold on to power in the new system. Essentially the Revolt/Revolution had undone all their Templar business as Dorian said. Now they were just trying to manipulate the War so they could rebuild their power base in the new system.

pirate1802
03-24-2015, 10:35 AM
Contrary to popular perception, a plot hole is not an absence of information, but the presence of contradictory bits of informations. Like say one game saying Connor remained a lifelong virgin and another showing him getting married. Now that would be a plot hole. The name is deceptive, and 99.99% people get it wrong. This one here isn't a plot hole. It's just loose threads.

Shahkulu101
03-24-2015, 05:37 PM
Contrary to popular perception, a plot hole is not an absence of information, but the presence of contradictory bits of informations. Like say one game saying Connor remained a lifelong virgin and another showing him getting married. Now that would be a plot hole. The name is deceptive, and 99.99% people get it wrong. This one here isn't a plot hole. It's just loose threads.

Yes, this man is correct.

Listen to him. We don't need to see every ancestors life from cradle to grave.

Mr.Black24
03-24-2015, 09:42 PM
OP. As to your original question. No there is no plot hole. And here's why.

First. What is commonly referred to as the "American Revolution" is actually the War of Independence. They often get used interchangeably however that is not accurate to do. The Revolution is the slow and systematic breakdown of Americans loyalty to the crown beginning around 1765 and culminating in the Declaration of Independence in 1776. At that point it stops being a Revolution as the trasition to becoming a seperate nation with seperate government and laws had occurred. They still had to win that privilege permanently though. And that conflict is the "War of Independence" or the "War of the Revolution". The latter of those two phrases being the one most used at the time. Which is partly why the "Revolution" and "War of the Revolution" eventually devolved into the American memory/phraseology as one in the same.

It breaks down something like this:

Essentially a "Revolution" is a Civil affair. There may be very small military clashes or a Coup(these conflicts that instate a political Revolution are called "Revolts"). But nothing on the scale of full blown war. A revolution describes the Civil aspects usually meaning a dramatic shift in government structure or social order (think French Revolution for example). In America the "Revolution" is actually the period beginning in 1765 when they began to refuse to obey British laws and taxes, and activist/violent groups like the sons of liberty and committes of correspondence were formed. Building up to the colonies forming their own provincial legislatures and removing the British governments in some places. And ultimately ending with the Americans asserting their control of America(by forcing the British authorities from the U.S. with the withdraw from Boston) and the Declaration of Independence which officially announced the intent to be "Free and Independent States" no longer subject to British Rule.

As for the Military terminology. America after the Boston Massacre in 1770 would have been referred to as a region in Armed Rebellion. Meaning they were being rebellious by not following rules, and that they had weapons and were likely willing to use them if tested. So the British sent more soldiers to restore law and order but the people of America still weren't having it. So in order to prevent the rebellion from becoming a open Revolt they went to round up the Rebel guns at Lexington and Concord, where once the bullets started flying the situations escalated in to open Revolt. The amazing success of the Revolt at bottling up the British occupation force in Boston(and ultimately the British Withdraw in late 1775 early 1776) emboldened the political radicals, the revolutionaries in to seizing the opprotunity. And by use of the rebel political organizations I named earlier formed a Continental Congress to unify the rebels in one government, then declared in the name of the states Independence in 1776. Which at that exact moment officially ended the "Revolution" America officially was under new management. This changed the nature of the military conflict which was until then a Political Revolt to remove the powers that be and replace them with new ones, afterward became a war for Independence or a "Revolutionary War" to defend the new political system from those who would keep the Status Quo or Counter revolutionaries. In this case the British Government.

Once again another great example is the French Revolution. Which had a Civil Revolution where a Revolt removed the King from Power, which was then followed by "Rebolutionary Wars" to protect that new government. Which included the Civil Conflicts against counter revolutionaries in the Vendee, as well as war with nations like. Britain and Austria which sought to return the Status Quo and return the King to Power. Most "Revolutions" tend to be followed by Civil or Revolutionary/Independence Wars. As usually the previous power holders don't leave without a fight.

So:
Revolution: Political Shift

Revolt: Armed/military action to implent the political shift

Revolutionary War/War of Independence: War to defend the new government after a revolution had taken place.

So you see once you know the difference between those things you realize there is no plot hole with Charles Dorians speech, as he said this in 1776 after the Declaration was signed(as Ben Frankin helped to write(with future presidents John Adams and Thomas Jefferson as co-authors) and sign the Declaration before being sent to France as Americas ambassador later that year). So he was right in saying that Connor the American Revolution undid his Templar business. Remember that Achillies kept in touch with foreign assassins so the knowledge of Connor and the resurging brotherhood would likely have found its way to the French assassins by way of Achillies. Especially since the Anericans despirately needed France's money and guns to win the war it would have been a nearly essential correspondence.

And it did really set back the templars as their power structure had been built in the British government system. Thus why they back the British in the early "Revolt" stages. But after the "Revolution" is final they go scrambling to try to rebuild their power structure in the new system by protecting important Templar puppets/allies in the American government (namely Ben Franklin) and trying to kill Washington and replace him with the Templar Charles Lee to ensure Independence succeeds and the Templars hold the reigns when the dust settles. So they had to make a mad dash to try and hold on to power in the new system. Essentially the Revolt/Revolution had undone all their Templar business as Dorian said. Now they were just trying to manipulate the War so they could rebuild their power base in the new system.

I already knew all these things, however you missed the point of everything that I was saying. What I was saying, one of many questions I have written down, if you read the first page of this post, was how was Shay not involved in the American Revolution after the retrieval of the box in 1776?
He had from 1776 to 1783 to hunt down Connor from destroying the Templars. Where was he?

Yes, this man is correct.

Listen to him. We don't need to see every ancestors life from cradle to grave. If only you read my first post in the first page, you'll realize that I'm not asking for his death, but the many questions that are left hanging due to very open ended endings and not very well constructed lore.

Since no one here read the first page of my thread, I'll link you the FIRST page of my original post for further debate and disperse of miscommuncation: http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/1022017-The-Kenway-Family-Plothole-Its-far-from-quot-Over-quot?

Farlander1991
03-24-2015, 10:13 PM
He had from 1776 to 1783 to hunt down Connor from destroying the Templars. Where was he?

Most likely protecting the Precursor Box, as is his mission. It's an object that too easily changes sides when in the midst of conflict (and Shay knows that too well on his own personal experience), so he wouldn't go into the conflict with it, and it's an object that Shay unlikely would like to leave unattended (even in a hidden place where it could be found just randomly by somebody) or even guarded (as if somebody else guards it then information may leak). The fact that he retrieved the box most likely means that he has to stick to the shadows and background.

ACZanius
03-25-2015, 02:37 AM
I will finally be super active on forums, so hi everyone.

OK now my POINT:

So being a hardcore AC fan, played each game many times (too much probably lol), let me explain what is the problem here and this is truth, when ASSASSIN'S CREED 3 was finished THERE WAS NO ASSASSIN'S CREED ROGUE in development, to sum it up easy SHAY was created out of BLUE flat out, he did not even exists way back then, i bet original plot line is that it was Haytham who finished Colonial brotherhood, this is where problem comes in you see Shay was never mentioned in Forsaken Novel and of course not even in AC3, this whole "plot-hole" is cluster-f**k because he was created after and now the circumstances with 1776 when he retrieved the box is very puzzling, why wasn't he in Revolution, him and Haytham were good professional buddies, yes alot of reasons why he would NOT BE and one is CUZ ROGUE DID NOT EXIST BACK THEN, just open your eyes, it's simple. But since things are how they are these questions obviously come regarding Shay, i wonder if Ubisoft was prepared for this, especially the Writers and they make things more mind boggling, they connect Shay with Arno's story. Now you have these inter-connected plots which without a doubt are leading somewhere, if Ubisoft simply made a mistake with all these things they seriously are waisting a mind-blowing story that could finish Connors, Arnos and even introduce Eseosa, honestly like for real this thing is perfect to finish Arno's story, it will come full circle and Connor's too. Bottom line something is "going on" with these connected plots. Now yes This all could be wrong but Shay could be dead by later some time, idk if this whole thing will lead somewhere they gotta go with some "piece of eden" that he has and is still alive and in fighting form cuz he's gonna be pretty old. Overall when Mr. Black said why didn't Shay come for Connor which would be obvious is simple it's just Rogue didn't exist back but since that is the case they have to make something idk, novel, comic, something to explain these weird things...oh god i hope it's a game.

Cliffs:
-They *****d up story cuz of release timeline of certain games, a lot of inconsistencies with Shay and later AC3 Plot
-Obviously it looks that Shay/Connor/Arno is leading somewhere (Comic, Novel, Game)

ACZanius
03-25-2015, 02:59 AM
OK 2nd Point:

Shay and AC: Unity, holy shyt Ubisoft knows how to complicate stuff do they? Shay kills Arno's father, i will not debate why Arno did not go after his REAL FATHER'S killer (That could be plot for Arno's conclusion) but i will debate something bigger, So he kills Charles, gets the box, and pretty much says flat out "Perhaps we will start a revolution of our own" aka French Revolution, now this is a big question which even well known AC guy Loomer brought up, and question is simple, now Shay is not in AC 3 which i explained why, now he's not in Unity which makes little sense, it's hard to debate this topic, hmm. OK so if Shay flat out says what we all heard and saw, if he is the guy BEHIND french revolution which obviously was not the case if you play Unity, my take is again writing and story inconsistencies, or maybe he was guy behind Germain or idk hard to explain this, HE WAS NOT EVEN MENTIONED IN UNITY, again lol it's like he doesn't even exist. AC3 has a reason for that but not AC: Unity and it's story, obviously Unity was in development longer than rogue now again Unity could be so far deep in story they just couldn't change it later and re-write and put Shay and everything...my take is this is not some secret plot but a writing and story problems and Ubi couldn't fix it. Just think about what i said carefully. Now they did create this mess and obviously they have to respond somehow like i said before (Comic, Novel, Game)


Conclusion of both 1 and 2 points i made:
-Connor's, Arno's, Shay's story could be concluded cuz things are set up in that "product whatever it may be or not idk, Eseosa could be introduced
-Massive mistakes which my personal take is that it has to do with writing and development problems regarding Shay and AC3/UNITY
-No we don't have to explore every bits of every characters life but this thing is set up now that it leads somewhere, if Ubisoft is smart enough to pull what they created AND make amends.
-In some crazy case that there is a game coming somewhat in that "manner" to conclude these arcs it does not have to be set in America but anywhere.


MESSAGE TO UBISOFT: Think about it Ubisoft this could be the game you always wanted, to INCLUDE MULTIPLE ASSASSINS in one game, Connor, Eseosa, Arno ;)

ACZanius
03-25-2015, 03:36 AM
Another post to add to my first 2, i just researched even more reading again WHOLE Haytham Story on AC WIKI slowly and to back up what i said about Shay problem above he basically disappears like he does not even exist. Strong point to back me up IMO.

Namikaze_17
03-25-2015, 04:53 AM
^ The "Edit Post" option is there for a reason.

ACZanius
03-25-2015, 06:02 PM
Yeah sorry haven't been really active here in a long time but just started now. Will remember that for next time.

Mr.Black24
03-26-2015, 03:44 AM
Most likely protecting the Precursor Box, as is his mission. It's an object that too easily changes sides when in the midst of conflict (and Shay knows that too well on his own personal experience), so he wouldn't go into the conflict with it, and it's an object that Shay unlikely would like to leave unattended (even in a hidden place where it could be found just randomly by somebody) or even guarded (as if somebody else guards it then information may leak). The fact that he retrieved the box most likely means that he has to stick to the shadows and background.
It does make sense. However, Shay retrieved the Box for the Templar Order and for Haytham, as Haytham puts it when he bestowed the mission on him. That enough creates a lot of interesting ways that this can be taken. Why did Haytham want the box? What was his plans on it?

So much there, and so little answers!

uday113
03-26-2015, 03:59 PM
What are the pre cursur trees..? Are these star shaped poe from rogue?