PDA

View Full Version : First hidden blade ever and probably epic fail



IV_trailer
11-29-2009, 07:34 AM
Everybody knows that Altair missing a finger for wearing the hidden blade. Ezio have all there fingers because of a enprovement of the blade.
So why have the statue of the assassin with probably the first hidden blade ever in the auditore villa kept all his fingers?.

Assassin_M
11-29-2009, 10:23 AM
You Got A Point

GaM3r_010
11-29-2009, 01:46 PM
1. Misleading Title
2. Altair does not have the first hidden blade. That one Assassin that killed Xerxes did.
3. Now that you think of it...

Bixel4o
11-29-2009, 02:44 PM
Originally posted by GaM3r_010:
1. Misleading Title
2. Altair does not have the first hidden blade. That one Assassin that killed Xerxes did.
3. Now that you think of it...


Tell us more about "Assassin that killed xerxes" please?

Jack_Vykios
11-29-2009, 02:47 PM
OH GOD, YOUR BROKEN ENGLISH HURTS MY BRAIN!

Seriously, what the HELL are you saying? The first line is decipherable, but the second...WHAT????

thekyle0
11-29-2009, 02:51 PM
Originally posted by GaM3r_010:
1. Misleading Title
2. Altair does not have the first hidden blade. That one Assassin that killed Xerxes did.
3. Now that you think of it... The title isn't misleading at all. He didn't say that Altair had the first blade ever.

Tell us more about "Assassin that killed xerxes" please? Go to the sanctuary underneath the Auditore Villa, walk up to the statue of an assassin with a hidden blade, press the button to interact with it and you will get a short paragraph telling you about this particular assassin. (And by "assassin with a hidden blade" I don't mean Altair. I'm talking about the statue with the only person clearly showing that they have a hidden blade.

Originally posted by Jack_Vykios:
OH GOD, YOUR BROKEN ENGLISH HURTS MY BRAIN!

Seriously, what the HELL are you saying? The first line is decipherable, but the second...WHAT???? He's talking about the statues of the assassins. (the ones in each tomb and beneath the Auditore Villa) There is one statue of an assassin who is showing that he has a hidden blade. If you read the description of this assassin you learn that he invented the hidden blade and was the first to kill with it. However, that was in a time period before Altair's, and in Altair's time the wielder had to have a finger removed to use the blade. But in Ezio's time, they had found a way to make the blade that wouldn't require the wielder to lose a finger. It stands to reason that the first hidden blade ever would require the user to cut a finger like Altair did. However, the statue of this assassin has all 10 fingers. IV_trailer is just pointing this out as a possible mistake by the developers.

IV_trailer
11-29-2009, 03:07 PM
Thank you for the translation lol.

My english isn't so good.

Silhouelle
11-29-2009, 03:36 PM
It stands to reason that the first hidden blade ever would require the user to cut a finger like Altair did. However, the statue of this assassin has all 10 fingers.
Well, it wouldn't neccesarily require the removal of a finger. I don't think the first hidden blade would have been as sophiscated as the ones Altiar used during the crusades. It had whatever sort of mechanism to let it slide back and forth from the bracer. Who's to say the first wasn't just a crudely placed knife that dropped out of the assassins sleeve for him to grab and stab with?

thekyle0
11-29-2009, 03:43 PM
That wouldn't really be a "hidden blade" as it's known in the assassin's creed universe. It's too much like a concealed dagger and less like a Katar, which is the closest thing in real life to what we interpret as a hidden blade. But I don't think that seems as likely because the man on the statue has his forearm pointing down and if the hidden blade from that time was just a knife tucked up his sleeve then it probably wouldn't be able to remain fastened there.

Captain Tomatoz
11-29-2009, 03:48 PM
this is like in solomans temple in ac1 when the 2 other assassin's have all ten fingers

Silhouelle
11-29-2009, 03:48 PM
My point being is that it could well be a crude, less sophisticated design. One that is less hidden/useful, but also doesn't require the loss of a finger?

SWJS
11-29-2009, 03:57 PM
I remember reading somewhere that Altair states that all hidden blade users are required to give some sacrifice to weild it, and that he simply chose to chop off his ring finger, and that this wasn't the exact finger or specific sacrifice they had to do.

Also, did Malik and Kadar wear hidden blades?

I always saw the hidden blade as a tool that only the most worthy assassins could use.

I never saw any informers with a hidden blade either.

Neo_Age
11-29-2009, 04:00 PM
From what I understand, the whole point of removing the finger was so the assassin could "punch" the blade in (though in actuality if you watch altair he never does such a move). Its possible/likely that the first assassin to use such a weapon just kep his hand back when the blade comes out (like we actually see happen in game).

IV_trailer
11-29-2009, 04:05 PM
I guees it is all anyway since altair says he had find a way to spare your finger in the codex and leonardo claimed he had find a way as well. spoiler <span class="ev_code_WHITE">When he jokes about cutting ezios finger</span>

<span class="ev_code_RED">Language Please</span>

TheHellequin
11-29-2009, 04:27 PM
I thought that the removal of the ring finger was an initiation ritual during Altair's time?

Neo_Age
11-29-2009, 04:41 PM
Originally posted by SirDagworth:
I thought that the removal of the ring finger was an initiation ritual during Altair's time?

Likewise, but then again Lucy's ring finger is missing in the first game towards the end. Though why is another matter considering in the second game that isnt required and it would seem to me that it would be a red flag to Abstergo that one of their employees is missing a ring finger.

Captain Tomatoz
11-29-2009, 04:45 PM
Originally posted by Neo_Age:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SirDagworth:
I thought that the removal of the ring finger was an initiation ritual during Altair's time?

Likewise, but then again Lucy's ring finger is missing in the first game towards the end. Though why is another matter considering in the second game that isnt required and it would seem to me that it would be a red flag to Abstergo that one of their employees is missing a ring finger. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

omg she is not missong her ring finger. she just bent it back to show desmond she was an assassin without anyone hearing and finding out

AcNe92
11-29-2009, 09:34 PM
I believe that the cutting of the ring finger was something that the Assassin's did back in the crusades to show there dedication to the creed and a sacrifice that enabled them to carry the hidden blade and do god's bidding or whoever they followed.

BennettGale
11-30-2009, 12:59 AM
Also, if the blade has been improved, then why is lucy missing a finger?

bokeef04
11-30-2009, 02:31 AM
Originally posted by BennettGale:
Also, if the blade has been improved, then why is lucy missing a finger?

OMG!!! doesn't anyone read any posts, Lucy is not missing her finger, she just bent it back, it has even been stated in an interview. I

f you want to know why they do or do not have fingers cut read the codex pages, in one of them Altair states that they will have to do away with the finger cutting ritual so as to go underground like the templars

mitiusit
10-20-2011, 10:03 AM
the sacrifice was for your dedication and to give way for the blade to come through. although altair doesn't do this, it is a game error and as far as i can find a blade never exsisted in altairs time like that a katar or punch (push)mdagger did but it is far more different that that of the hidden blade.

naran6142
10-20-2011, 01:37 PM
im pretty sure that the removal of the ring finger is only a ritual thing and not a requirement to use the hidden blade

make a fist and look at your hand pretending to have a hidden blade, if the only way the blade would fit was by removing your ring finger, the blade would have to be inside your arm

LightRey
10-20-2011, 01:44 PM
Originally posted by naran6142:
im pretty sure that the removal of the ring finger is only a ritual thing and not a requirement to use the hidden blade

make a fist and look at your hand pretending to have a hidden blade, if the only way the blade would fit was by removing your ring finger, the blade would have to be inside your arm
Originally it was a requirement to be able to use the blade. This was done in order to ensure the owners dedication to the order, but eventually it became a liability and Alta´r had the design altered to allow for the finger to remain intact.

Alta´r had his ring finger removed just like the other assassins had before he changed it.

It is not a game error. The concept of the hidden blade has nothing to do with history. It was supposed to be a secret of the order, so it should not appear in history because of it.

naran6142
10-20-2011, 01:54 PM
Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by naran6142:
im pretty sure that the removal of the ring finger is only a ritual thing and not a requirement to use the hidden blade

make a fist and look at your hand pretending to have a hidden blade, if the only way the blade would fit was by removing your ring finger, the blade would have to be inside your arm
Originally it was a requirement to be able to use the blade. This was done in order to ensure the owners dedication to the order, but eventually it became a liability and Alta´r had the design altered to allow for the finger to remain intact.

Alta´r had his ring finger removed just like the other assassins had before he changed it.

It is not a game error. The concept of the hidden blade has nothing to do with history. It was supposed to be a secret of the order, so it should not appear in history because of it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

if you think about it tho the blade would fit if you removed your finger or not

unless it is designed differently than the way i think it is

LightRey
10-20-2011, 01:59 PM
Originally posted by naran6142:
if you think about it tho the blade would fit if you removed your finger or not

unless it is designed differently than the way i think it is
It would fit, yes, but it would cut off your ring finger if you used it.

naran6142
10-20-2011, 02:13 PM
Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by naran6142:
if you think about it tho the blade would fit if you removed your finger or not

unless it is designed differently than the way i think it is
It would fit, yes, but it would cut off your ring finger if you used it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

make a fist and pretend to have a hidden blade

the blade would be mounted on your wrist, also the housing for the blade would make it go farther from your closed fist

in order for the blade to cut your finger off the blade would have to be inside your arm

a blade that doesn't cut your finger off would be easier to design than one that does, tho i supposed it could have been designed that way to ensure the commitment of the person using it

but that doesn't make much sense to me

LightRey
10-20-2011, 02:26 PM
Originally posted by naran6142:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LightRey:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by naran6142:
if you think about it tho the blade would fit if you removed your finger or not

unless it is designed differently than the way i think it is
It would fit, yes, but it would cut off your ring finger if you used it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

make a fist and pretend to have a hidden blade

the blade would be mounted on your wrist, also the housing for the blade would make it go farther from your closed fist

in order for the blade to cut your finger off the blade would have to be inside your arm

a blade that doesn't cut your finger off would be easier to design than one that does, tho i supposed it could have been designed that way to ensure the commitment of the person using it

but that doesn't make much sense to me </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
The bracer forces the hand to be positioned at an angle, which means your ring finger is forced in front of the blade.

dxsxhxcx
10-20-2011, 02:43 PM
guys, the last post made on this thread before "mitiusit" bring it back to life was on 30-11-09.. :P

LightRey
10-20-2011, 03:04 PM
Originally posted by dxsxhxcx:
guys, the last post made on this thread before "mitiusit" bring it back to life was on 30-11-09.. :P
ugh, you're right. Damn you, new forum page, and your ability to shroud the fact that it was a necropost!

naran6142
10-20-2011, 03:15 PM
Originally posted by dxsxhxcx:
guys, the last post made on this thread before "mitiusit" bring it back to life was on 30-11-09.. :P

i actually wouldn't have said anything if i new how old the thread was

Sarari
10-20-2011, 03:27 PM
Altair along with all the other assassins before him had their finger removed to become an assassin. It didn't come off because it was an accident.

LightRey
10-20-2011, 03:34 PM
Originally posted by Sarari:
Altair along with all the other assassins before him had their finger removed to become an assassin. It didn't come off because it was an accident.
This thread is too old. We shouldn't be posting in here. They were cut off beforehand, because else the blade would cut the ring finger. It's all stated in the codex and by Leonardo. The end.

Calvarok
10-20-2011, 04:42 PM
Technicaly if you bend back your hand at an uncomfortable angle you don't need to cut your finger off. But to make a closed fist while doing it, you did. I expect that in this case it's a less efficent version of the hidden blade.

rileypoole1234
10-20-2011, 08:52 PM
Yeah I really don't understand the need to cut the finger off unless it's for ritualistic purposes. Ezio, while I know he's using an upgraded blade, can still make a fist. He does it on his first Assassination, where he takes it a little overboard, he's making a fist. I don't see why Altair couldn't use his design and just move his hand back a little. He wouldn't need to cut the finger off if he did that I think. I'd wager it's just to be able to tell who the Assassin's are without much questioning.

naran6142
10-20-2011, 09:44 PM
Originally posted by rileypoole1234:
Yeah I really don't understand the need to cut the finger off unless it's for ritualistic purposes. Ezio, while I know he's using an upgraded blade, can still make a fist. He does it on his first Assassination, where he takes it a little overboard, he's making a fist. I don't see why Altair couldn't use his design and just move his hand back a little. He wouldn't need to cut the finger off if he did that I think. I'd wager it's just to be able to tell who the Assassin's are without much questioning.

im going to agree with u here

i like the idea of it being a ritual thing better than it being a technical reason

cuz it seems to easy to avoid IMO

LightRey
10-21-2011, 06:54 AM
Originally posted by naran6142:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by rileypoole1234:
Yeah I really don't understand the need to cut the finger off unless it's for ritualistic purposes. Ezio, while I know he's using an upgraded blade, can still make a fist. He does it on his first Assassination, where he takes it a little overboard, he's making a fist. I don't see why Altair couldn't use his design and just move his hand back a little. He wouldn't need to cut the finger off if he did that I think. I'd wager it's just to be able to tell who the Assassin's are without much questioning.

im going to agree with u here

i like the idea of it being a ritual thing better than it being a technical reason

cuz it seems to easy to avoid IMO </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
It was a deliberate mechanical reason. The blade was deliberately designed this way so that only people with the dedication to have their finger cut off (likely in an initiation ritual similar to those in ACII and ACB) could use the blade.

Now could we please end this necro-spree?

sassinscreed
10-21-2011, 06:55 AM
Originally posted by IV_trailer:
Everybody knows that Altair missing a finger for wearing the hidden blade. Ezio have all there fingers because of a enprovement of the blade.
So why have the statue of the assassin with probably the first hidden blade ever in the auditore villa kept all his fingers?.

removing finger was more traditional thing that thing that makes him able to use blade

Black_Widow9
10-21-2011, 11:37 AM
Please do not resurrect old Topics.
Thanks http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

<span class="ev_code_RED">Topic Closed</span>