PDA

View Full Version : Discussion on Possible Role of Cleopatra?



Nerdman3000
07-12-2017, 08:51 PM
One of the most exciting developments concerning AC Origins, to me at least, is the fact we will be seeing Queen Cleopatra VII show up in the game. To me, this is very exciting, especially when there is a lot they could do with her character, especially in light of the fact the game is beginning in 49 BCE. One possible route the game could go toward, for example, though I partially doubt it, is perhaps having Bayek help lead Cleopatra into the palace by way of fabric to meet Caesar. They could also establish the identity of Caesarion's possible true father, whether it be Caesar or someone else as has been speculated by many historians of now and from the time.

One thing I'm interested is if Cleopatra will be a Templar or simply manipulated by them like Caesar was, as I could be wrong, but despite some people proclaiming her a Templar, she is not actually confirmed as one, only that she was Assassinated by Amunet and that the Templars were present during her rise to power. I don't believe it's ever actually specifically said she is a Templar herself, but I could be wrong.

Anyways, what are your thoughts and what do you think they with do with Cleopatra in AC Origins?

ze_topazio
07-13-2017, 12:04 AM
Bayek helping her rise to power, believing her to be a valuable ally and a sympathizer to the Assassin cause, only for in the end turning out she was fooling him and she was a Templar all along would be a nice twist.

rob1990312
07-13-2017, 02:20 AM
Could just be we are introduced to her she gives some missions we don't see her again just for the sake of shoehorning into the story, it wouldn't be unlike assassins creed

Megas_Doux
07-13-2017, 03:08 AM
Another thing to ponder here is when will the game end????

Unlike AC III, AC IV and Unity in which the time span of the game was pretty clear from the start, in Origins I have NO idea. Bayek is said to be at least in his 30īs and two of the three most plausible and always present templars celebrities are either assassinated by other members of the order in a distant land -Caesar by Brutus- or many years later -Cleopatra by Amunet- and Origins is been written to NOT contradict the lore. The one left out of those three though:



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pompey

A powerful Roman Noble who earned himself the title of "the great".



The figure above even:



Dies just one year after from what you can see in the promotional material (48 BC) unlike Caesar and Cleopatra who were killed much later. Oh that occurred in Egypt too:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pelusium




See how it ends.....

cawatrooper9
07-13-2017, 02:54 PM
I like the idea of "rewriting" AC history a little bit, while still paying respects to the lore.

I think it would be neat to create a bit of a rivalry between Amunet and Bayek, as well as a friendship between Cleopatra and Bayek.

One thing to note here, from the AC Wiki:


Initially sharing power with her father, and later, with her brothers, Cleopatra eventually gained sole control with the help of the Templars.

Now, according to the developers, the Templars don't exist yet in Origins. Whether or not this is true or if they're being coy with us, it would be interesting for Cleopatra's relationship with this organization (perhaps not yet going under the name "Templars") to be something Amunet recognizes as a threat, but Bayek sees as innocuous (maybe even pointing out the irony that they too are in a shadowy secret organization).

I could almost see the fallout of this as being like Arno v Bellec, but handled better.

Abelzorus-Prime
07-13-2017, 04:03 PM
How is it that the Templars do not exist during Bayek's time period? They helped Alexander the Great gain power which was only a few hundred years before.

dxsxhxcx
07-13-2017, 05:18 PM
Now, according to the developers, the Templars don't exist yet in Origins. Whether or not this is true or if they're being coy with us, it would be interesting for Cleopatra's relationship with this organization (perhaps not yet going under the name "Templars") to be something Amunet recognizes as a threat, but Bayek sees as innocuous (maybe even pointing out the irony that they too are in a shadowy secret organization).

I could almost see the fallout of this as being like Arno v Bellec, but handled better.

This would be cool, specially if Amunet end up being Bayek's apprentice, Bayek's gets into a fight with Amunet who then decide to leave the Brotherhood and some years later Bayek's blind faith in Cleopatra ends up getting him killed because the Templars started seeing him as a menace for their future plans and when Amunet finds out about this, she returns and avenges her mentor.

Locopells
07-13-2017, 05:31 PM
How is it that the Templars do not exist during Bayek's time period? They helped Alexander the Great gain power which was only a few hundred years before.

They do exist, just - as others have said - not under the Templar name, as they don't get that until the Crusades. Much as there have been assassins before Bayek, but he creates the Assassin Order.

cawatrooper9
07-13-2017, 05:46 PM
They do exist, just - as others have said - not under the Templar name, as they don't get that until the Crusades. Much as there have been assassins before Bayek, but he creates the Assassin Order.

Basically, as the developers have described it: "The concepts of Order vs Chaos and Control vs Freedom predate the words "Templar" and "Assassin".

Nerdman3000
07-13-2017, 08:55 PM
One thing to note here, from the AC Wiki:

Initially sharing power with her father, and later, with her brothers, Cleopatra eventually gained sole control with the help of the Templars.


That's actually something put by the wiki that I've noticed is actually somewhat inaccurate. If you look at the references they are using for that line, it's from the Abstergo Files from AC Revelations, and it actually paints a slightly different story. The quote that is being referenced to be exact is:

Officially, the Order of the Knights Templar was created in 1129, but we have endured, under various appellations, since well before the 12th century. We were there when Cleopatra claimed her birthright, when Alexander the Great forged his empire, and when Xerxes sent his armies to crush the Greeks.
If you notice, it actually doesn't directly say Cleopatra was a Templar, only that the Templars were present when she began sole rule, but not nessecarily that she was a Templar herself. It's possible of course that she is a Templar, and that there is some other material which mentions that she is one that I might have forgotten or missed, but from what I can tell at present, it's never actually been 100% confirmed that Cleopatra is a Templar, nor that they helped her rise to power. In fact, if she even is associated with the Templars in anyway, then it's more likely that she is a Templar puppet like Caesar was than a full fledged member of the early precursor to the Templar Order.

cawatrooper9
07-13-2017, 08:58 PM
Even from the wiki I wouldn't read that as Cleo being a Templar herself- but yeah, I think the "we were there..." quote reconciles the "Templar" name conundrum a little better.

Megas_Doux
07-14-2017, 01:08 AM
How is it that the Templars do not exist during Bayek's time period? They helped Alexander the Great gain power which was only a few hundred years before.

"Templars" during the time of the game were known as:



The Order of the Ancients



Oh I stand by this character:




being one of the main"templars"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pompey