PDA

View Full Version : What happened to the templars?



alorne
01-08-2010, 04:46 PM
In the first assassins creed they at least had good motives for getting the apple, even tough there way of going about it wasent. Now, however, they just seem to be a bunch for power mad NWO lunaticts. So. what happened to them? did over time they become corrupt by the power the apple could bring? was there an internal conflict within the organization that made them this way? what happened?

DLTyrus
01-08-2010, 05:25 PM
They are no different to the Templar's in AC1, the difference your seeing is that around Altair's time the Templars had only recently been founded, or atleast as the order known publicly as the Templars. Not only this, but they were a public group and not hiding in secret, and they did not have possession of any pieces of eden at this time.

Their motivations or personality did not seem to have changed, in my opinion, only their methods, as the times dictated.

hewkii9
01-08-2010, 07:13 PM
No, I think the OP's on the right track. In the first game, every target had a personality, and they all tried [somewhat successfully] to justify their actions. But in AC2, pretty much all of them are ciphers we barely meet [whose videos basically amount to EVIL EVIL EVIL], and their individual deaths largely do little but check off Ezio's list. I think the death chats should have been a bit longer.

Sprayer160
01-09-2010, 01:47 AM
people don't realize this but the Templars weren't evil, they were the Knights Templar or the poor fellow-soldiers of Christ and the temple of Solomon or something like that. they were simply knights around the third crusade or when the AC1 was based around. that is the historical Templars but the AC templars are still around thats what Abstergo are.

itsamea-mario
01-09-2010, 06:04 AM
I prefer the ac1 templars, and to the one who said they were the soldiers of christ or something, i think in the game they used the crusades and christianity as a front to get funding from the church.
but anyway the templars in ac1 were better because they werent as evil, just misguided, well i think the one who executed ppl was evil. they wanted a new world order and peace (although tghey'd be in control) but the ac2 ones just wanted power, to me they didnt really feel like templars, just a bunch of rich men poisening people and using the name of some long dead brotherhood.
also i prefered the ac1 assassins, more 'creed'y

DLTyrus
01-09-2010, 10:51 AM
No, I think the OP's on the right track. In the first game, every target had a personality, and they all tried [somewhat successfully] to justify their actions. But in AC2, pretty much all of them are ciphers we barely meet [whose videos basically amount to EVIL EVIL EVIL], and their individual deaths largely do little but check off Ezio's list. I think the death chats should have been a bit longer.

Their deaths do little but check off Ezio's list? Are you serious? If you payed any attention to the story you'd know that as we killed these guys, albeit our initial motivation was only revenge, we liberate people from their evil rule and restore peace to Florence, then Tuscany, then attempt to do the same for Venice only we unintentionally make things worse at first, etc.

Perhaps the characters try less to justify their actions, yes, but this is renaisance italy, not the holy land. Christian or otherwise cult/creed belief was less installed in these leaders and simple greed was a much more motivating factor for them.

We are seeing a templar order than is 300 years older and wiser than the one we saw in Assassin's Creed 1, not only that, but its official, publicly recognised establishment has been disbanded or about 100 years. Of course it has become more corrupt, more about simple power than ideals. We see the ideals in Borgia, but the men he has working for him are just power hungry more than brainwashed, because they are working FOR him and not WITH him, an idea presented throughout the game by the fact they are all so terrified of him.

Lastly, a lot of those we fight in AC1 were soldiers, or generals, of the military templar order. They can put up more of a fight and were working for the ideals of the order more than their own personal gain. We saw just plain evil in AC1, too, though, when we kill one guy he says he killed/maimed/etc just because "he could", not for any greater moral belief. And that fat guy who poisoned his entire party, he didn't do that for any greater moral belief either.

Edit: Remember aswell, we are playing the part of an assassin killing for revenge, not for the greater good. Perhaps after Florence Ezio continues on his path to finish his father's work, but he is still very different from Altair who firmly believed that he was killing evil men. As well as the fact that the concept that the Templar's truly believed they were doing good was already established now, we didn't need to be told this again by having all the guys we assassinate tell us they were doing the right thing.