PDA

View Full Version : The creed



lothario-da-be
02-15-2014, 04:17 PM
I made this thread to share a little masterpiece and discuss it, the foundation of the ac games. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ITrB9lj2NU
First of all I advise everyone to subscribe to that chanell. Its the best ac chanell i know. But now the meaning of the vid, The creed. How do you feel about the evolution of the presence of the creed in the ac games? has it realy become a side thing or is it shown this way because its ment to? Is the creed actually still so important?
I feel like the creed has taken a backseat in the games and it can only be brought back by returning to the pre-colonization era. I truly miss the conflict between moralities and not people. That was ac1's strongest point. I hope Ubi will return ac to its routs and make an ac game with a strong presence of the order,rules and especially moral ambiguity.

Or are we wrong? Doesn't acb have a very strong pressence of the brotherhood? You rebuilt it and teach the creed to the new Assassins. And acr? you arrive at Constantinople and you meet the brotherhood. At the end of the game Ezio even explains the creed to Sofia. And then ac3 isn't this ALL about the brotherhood and creed? The brotherhood is defeated and the only assassin left tells Connor the ceremonies and rules aren't neccesary. Isn't that what Haytham says to Connor too? Ac4 seems to have the least amount of brotherhood screen time. But the whole story is about someone who doesn't live by rules and clashes with the assassins morals. Whats your opinion on the matter lads?

frodrigues55
02-15-2014, 04:30 PM
I hope it returns too. I didn't mind it was gone a little for AC3, but 2 games in a row was a bit of a bummer to me. Puting it away for AC5 would be just too much.

As for this Youtube channel, I agree - their video montages are simply awesome and flawless!

lothario-da-be
02-15-2014, 04:34 PM
I hope it returns too. I didn't mind it was gone a little for AC3, but 2 games in a row was a bit of a bummer to me. Puting it away for AC5 would be just too much.

As for this Youtube channel, I agree - their video montages are simply awesome and flawless!
Indeed, every video they make impresses me.

Farlander1991
02-15-2014, 04:50 PM
I'm generally speaking alright with all the different opinions about the different AC games, because, heck, we're on a forum of a series the main motto of which is 'Nothing is true, everything is permitted', it would be strange to state that somebody's plain wrong.

That being said, I REALLY take issue whenever people say that AC3 or AC4 weren't about the Creed. The point is in not how much the Creed is stated or how present are the Assassins, the point is in... well... the Creed. Exploration of the Creed.

The game that has the most mentions of the Creed is Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood (mainly due to all the recruits we initiate to assassins). That's also the game in which the Creed is actually totally pointless. It's just... there. You rebuild the Brotherhood, you say it, you supposedly live by it, BUT. It's not explored in any way. You don't see different facets. You don't see how it can affect life. You don't see the Creed's importance in any way, shape or form.

AC1 of course is about the Creed, it introduces it, delves into it, and show's what it's about via Altair who has a bunch of misconceptions about it.
AC2 takes a bit more personal approach to the Creed, exploring the nature of choice and being responsible for consequences of your actions. (also, AC2 and ACB are the least morally ambiguous games, so the presence of Assassins/Templars/rules/Order doesn't really matter if the Creed is not explored, and vice versa, the absence of those things doesn't matter if the Creed IS explored).
ACB doesn't do **** with the Creed.
ACR tackles the topic of what can happen when the Creed becomes your lifelong devotion, is there a way out and should you take it or not.
AC3 is about the dangers of putting the Creed onto a blind unshakeable ideal on a pedestal.
And AC4 is a little bit less about the Creed specifically, it is similar in a way to AC1 (in that it explores the Creed from a basis of misconception), but it tackles the topic from a broader perspective, from the perspective of finding your own Creed and philosophy of life, a theme that is seen in almost every character of the game, and how the search for that and influence from OTHER philosophies as well can bring you to understanding of the topical Assassin's Creed.

EDIT: Also, technically speaking, you don't have to have a single member of the Assassin order in the entire game to make it about the Creed, though that's quite hard and having at least one certainly helps a lot :D

frodrigues55
02-15-2014, 05:04 PM
Well, obviously all of the games mention/use the Creed somehow. It's in how they use that makes it feel less important or less present.

For AC4, the use of the Creed was all sorts of wrong in my opinion, and even though they kept rumbling about it here and there, it simply didn't work for me. Maybe it's because they just stuck it in there to keep the IP for the pirate adventures. Maybe it's because the absense of the Brotherhood in 3 and 4 make them feel farther from the Assassin's Creed as a whole (which isn't to say I didn't like the games, especially AC3's dialogues and perspectives, which are the strongest IMO).

It's just that I would like them to go back to the basics of the creed and of the brotherhood for the next game, instead of finding other ways to explore it every single time. Once you make all the games about the different ways of the Creed - what happens when you put your goals first; then what happens when an outsider is introduced to it, then what happens when whatever - you forget how the regular creed is supposed to work.

Farlander1991
02-15-2014, 05:11 PM
Once you make all the games about the different ways of the Creed - what happens when you put your goals first; then what happens when an outsider is introduced to it, then what happens when whatever - you forget how the regular creed is supposed to work.

There is no regular way for the creed to work (if it were, then AC1 would've said pretty much everything there is to say). There's only what you personally hold as the truth. That's kind of the point of all the different explorations, to show that the Creed in a meta way also applies to its own self as well ;)

frodrigues55
02-15-2014, 05:23 PM
There is no regular way for the creed to work (if it were, then AC1 would've said pretty much everything there is to say). There's only what you personally hold as the truth. That's kind of the point of all the different explorations, to show that the Creed in a meta way also applies to its own self as well ;)

To be honest, I was afraid to write that because I know there's no "proper" way to work the creed ;) It's not what I meant to say though, but English isn't my mother language and unfortunally I don't know how to say any other way :(

You can take other approaches to show the creed working with the brotherhood in a variety of ways. AC3 does that a little bit but there's no denying AC4 was not about that. It mentions the creed, Edward talks about the creed here and there, but it simply isn't there. Most of the game and its missions don't give a crap about it.

I don't really know how to explain it, but the fact that Darby has to defend and explain the Creed within his story every single interview and Q&A just shows how it didn't work for a bunch of people either. It's not bad, it's just that I think this shouldn't be the norm for the game, which is way I hope they go back to its roots for AC5. Make the Creed present in a way we don't have to read in between the lines just to find some link with how they define what Assassin's Creed is about.

Farlander1991
02-15-2014, 06:20 PM
I don't really know how to explain it, but the fact that Darby has to defend and explain the Creed within his story every single interview and Q&A just shows how it didn't work for a bunch of people either.

I'm sorry, but I don't consider that a good criteria. The reason being because AC:B worked for a bunch of people, and that was only because the statement of the Creed was mentioned there a bunch of times and for some reason THAT'S what matters to a lot rather than how the Creed is ACTUALLY important. Now, mind you, I'm not implying you here, I'm just saying I've seen a lot of such people (who can't even answer the question of why the Creed is important in AC:B and what's the point of it, and if somebody can do that in a meaningful manner, which I haven't yet seen, - well, all power to them, but that makes them a minority even though I would be interested in their point of view). And it's from these kind of people Darby has to defend, mostly.


AC3 does that a little bit but there's no denying AC4 was not about that. It mentions the creed, Edward talks about the creed here and there, but it simply isn't there. Most of the game and its missions don't give a crap about it.

I take issue with that 'no denying' :p Yes, I agree that the Creed of the Assassins in particular is not the sole focus of the game, it's more of a meta-focus but it's as valid and totally reasonable way to use the Creed as any other - because it's about the path to the Creed, and to properly show that path you have to hold it against other philosophies and ways of seeing life, which the game does. (Now, if the game WOULDN'T have done that, I would agree with you ;) ) On Edward's path from 'live free and do whatever you want' to starting questioning 'if nothing is true, then why believe anything, and if everything is permitted, then why not chase every desire?' he encounters (and all the following is summarised for the sake of not writing too much :p ) Stede Bonnet with his yearning for adventure, Benjamin Hornigold who desires Order, Charles Vane who lives with no regrets (and is the absolute embodiment of Edward's original attitude to which even Edward himself didn't fall), Roberts who has created his own set of rules and goes by 'a merry life and a short one' way of thinking and other characters with other ways of thinking, and even when the Creed isn't mentioned, it's the interaction with those other philosophies that leads Edward to it and provides with different lessons and things he learns about himself.

frodrigues55
02-15-2014, 07:15 PM
It's hard to disagree with you because you have great points and put them in a great manner :p

However, as I mentioned, the problem IMO isn't the lack of the creed itself, but how it is presented. So when you write that the creed is "not the sole focus of the game", I see it differently. It's not the focus of the game at all in my opinion. It's there, but I never really got the sense it was. That's why I mentioned Darby - I understand that a lot of people don't give too much thought into it, but once every single interview is about him explaining what most couldn't see, it's because it's more hidden than it was meant to be IMO.

And the root of the problem, to me, is that you can't have Assassin's Creed with just the creed. I personally need the assassins, the brotherhood and the creed to make it complete.

Now listen, I don't mind if one of those elements is missing from one game or another, but really they can't be missing from too many games in a row. That's why I started this argument by saying that I could deal with 3 and 4, but if 5 goes this way too, it's just too many games without all those elements combined.

The reason why I feel people rather have Brotherhood's presentation is because all the core elements are there. It doesn't really work upon the creed itself, but you feel like it's there because the Assassin organization is working throughout the entire game. You play along the brotherhood in order to reach its goals. Your serve the people, you try to give them freedom as opposed to the Templar's way of oppression and leadership.

This goes away a little by the time AC3 was released, but 4 just take it to a whole new other level. The creed is there because you heard of it. By the time Edward really decided to join the cause, the game ends.

Prior to that, it's either solving pirate problems (fall of Nassau, the lack of medicine, Blackbeard wants to retire OH NO) or working with the Assassins, but for reasons that have nothing to do with them, including killing templars for no reason. It doesn't feel right even if there's creed talk. Hell, Ubisoft can make another IP based on Black Flag with no creed and no brotherhood, and it wouldn't even look like something's missing.

Plus, Black Flag's Assassins are so stupid that it makes me wonder how come they are not extinct. I got a tad annoyed at how easy it was to knock them out, even if I parked my big *** ship right in front of their noses. It gave me the impression the entire franchise is built upon a group that are as easy to fool and to kill as any other random guard.

Again, I'm not saying I dislike Black Flag or that it was a bad call to give this type of perspective to the plot. My problem is if this becomes the norm.

Dome500
02-15-2014, 07:45 PM
A big part of why I think the Creed does not come across as good in AC4 is IMO that the native Assassins are so foreign and introverted. They reject Edward the moment he is introduced to them and they act in a more strict, not understanding and hostile way. Like natives speaking to intruders in their country.

They mention the Creed, Kid mentions the Creed. Almost like a side note, like she "knows" Edward will not be interested in it anyway. And it is not really elaborated. There is no clash of morals or cultures, no conflict other then that they are wondering why Edward only cares for gold. They don't try to draw Edward on their side, or tell him to either join or leave. They don't offer friendship either though. They say he is not welcome.

The way it comes across Edward is rejected like a hostile object the second he learns about the Creed and only comes in contact with it once in a while.

The Assassins all seem to be mainly natives, not mixed as Kid describes them. We do not see how the different sides (natives with similar philosophies <=> original Assassins) influence each other or if there are conflicts sometimes. They just ... merged.

You are never really shown what they want, from Edwards perspective. They are all like "this is out creed, we do X and Y. Templars are evil because Z" Period.

Nothing more.
No philosophical delving into it, no borderline grey-zone discussions.

A fact that does not really help is that Edward is not at all interested in it either. I mean, yes, it is one thing to not understand the Creed, or to not share philosophies, morals or goals. But Edward himself is not OPEN to such discussions either. Both sides (Edward and the Assassins) have a mental wall build against each other that only in the end, and surprisingly sudden at that, is broken and opens up.

That is one of several problems I see with the relationship of Assassins Creed IV Black Flag and the Creed.


EDIT:

Plus, Black Flag's Assassins are so stupid that it makes me wonder how come they are not extinct. I got a tad annoyed at how easy it was to knock them out, even if I parked my big *** ship right in front of their noses. It gave me the impression the entire franchise is built upon a group that are as easy to fool and to kill as any other random guard.

I agree that they were too easy to fool.
Next time they do something like this they should make the Assassins a real challenge. Not only in terms of quick detections, but also fighting techniques, and that some of them are in the trees, and stuff like that. They should have been something SPECIAL.

dbzk1999
02-15-2014, 08:10 PM
A big part of why I think the Creed does not come across as good in AC4 is IMO that the native Assassins are so foreign and introverted. They reject Edward the moment he is introduced to them and they act in a more strict, not understanding and hostile way. Like natives speaking to intruders in their country.

They mention the Creed, Kid mentions the Creed. Almost like a side note, like she "knows" Edward will not be interested in it anyway. And it is not really elaborated. There is no clash of morals or cultures, no conflict other then that they are wondering why Edward only cares for gold. They don't try to draw Edward on their side, or tell him to either join or leave. They don't offer friendship either though. They say he is not welcome.

The way it comes across Edward is rejected like a hostile object the second he learns about the Creed and only comes in contact with it once in a while.

The Assassins all seem to be mainly natives, not mixed as Kid describes them. We do not see how the different sides (natives with similar philosophies <=> original Assassins) influence each other or if there are conflicts sometimes. They just ... merged.

You are never really shown what they want, from Edwards perspective. They are all like "this is out creed, we do X and Y. Templars are evil because Z" Period.

Nothing more.
No philosophical delving into it, no borderline grey-zone discussions.

A fact that does not really help is that Edward is not at all interested in it either. I mean, yes, it is one thing to not understand the Creed, or to not share philosophies, morals or goals. But Edward himself is not OPEN to such discussions either. Both sides (Edward and the Assassins) have a mental wall build against each other that only in the end, and surprisingly sudden at that, is broken and opens up.

That is one of several problems I see with the relationship of Assassins Creed IV Black Flag and the Creed.


EDIT:


I agree that they were too easy to fool.
Next time they do something like this they should make the Assassins a real challenge. Not only in terms of quick detections, but also fighting techniques, and that some of them are in the trees, and stuff like that. They should have been something SPECIAL.
Well I wouldn't expect a man who killed other assassins in Havana to automatically be welcomed with open arms into the assassin brotherhood

Dome500
02-15-2014, 09:10 PM
Well I wouldn't expect a man who killed other assassins in Havana to automatically be welcomed with open arms into the assassin brotherhood

Sure, but they behave that way throughout the whole game. Both sides, Edward and the Assassins.

Hans684
02-15-2014, 09:13 PM
Sure, but they behave that way throughout the whole game. Both sides, Edward and the Assassins.

Not exactly, Mary ask several times if he wants to join.

dbzk1999
02-15-2014, 09:21 PM
Sure, but they behave that way throughout the whole game. Both sides, Edward and the Assassins.

We'll they did forgive Edward for killing the others but they don't forgive him for giving away the other assassin locations

Dome500
02-15-2014, 09:54 PM
Not exactly, Mary ask several times if he wants to join.

It doesn't change the attitude the Assassins have towards Edward and the attitude Edward has towards them.

Sushiglutton
02-15-2014, 10:14 PM
Since it's a yearly franchise (which you may like/dislike) I think they are correct in trying different perspectives so it doesn't start to feel stale. In AC4 they took it a bit to the extreme in the sense that the protagonist never became an assassin at all in the game. For one game I think that's fine and in this case it made sense since he had conflicting personalities, which was also reflected in the gameplay.

Now that they have done this I think it would make sense to have a pure, dedicated assassin in the next game.

Hans684
02-15-2014, 10:26 PM
It doesn't change the attitude the Assassins have towards Edward and the attitude Edward has towards them.

It doesn't but Mary did change their attitude, originally they wanted him dead. Mary changed that becouse she saw something in him. And they tried killing him in Havana, the same place he killed a few assassins. From an outsider perpective the assassins and templars would look crazy, at least to begin with.

Farlander1991
02-16-2014, 09:50 AM
I got a tad annoyed at how easy it was to knock them out, even if I parked my big *** ship right in front of their noses. It gave me the impression the entire franchise is built upon a group that are as easy to fool and to kill as any other random guard.

Well, to be fair, the ship wasn't parked straight at the coast where Assassins were, but behind a cliff. I'm not sure if, as a player, we could see it there anyway during the mission from the position of the Assassins, but I personally willing to fall for suspension of disbelief considering the scale of the game world and the fact that we would have to move the ship even farther away and that might not just have been fun.

And speaking of how it's easy to kill the Assassins... Just because we play as somebody who's a very capable fighter (though, btw, we never truly know their fighter capabilities due to this being an Animus simulation - if we kill 1000 guards in the game, doesn't mean the ancestor has actually done that), doesn't mean that EVERY Assassin's a capable fighter. The very first scene of AC1, for example - 2 Assassins (since we were thrown out) vs. 5, I think, Crusaders (one of them admittedly being the Grand Master) - and the result is one is dead and the other one got his hand cut off. And then when Crusaders attack Masyaf, even though all the Assassins forces were fighting, they still had to retreat, and there were still a bunch of them captured and executed. And one of the three people who performed leap of faith has performed a leap of fail - broken his leg while landing. And then almost every memory sequence we get approached by a guy who says that his students need to learn better how to fight and asks us to help.

The point is, Assassins are human, and Assassins are of different skill sets, and when they're larger than a small group of elite fighters - most of them wouldn't be as skilled as some of the Assassins we know anyway.


They are all like "this is out creed, we do X and Y. Templars are evil because Z" Period.

As opposed to the other games where Assassins act exactly the same? (AC2 and ACB especially, where everything's absolutely black & white in that respect)

Philosophical discussions come not from the Assassin Order. In all games the Assassins, as are the Templars, are ironically enough a fairly rigid Order in their beliefs (which, to be fair, makes sense). Philosophical discussions come from the clash of a particular person (i.e. our main character) of one belief with people of other beliefs.

The point of AC4, though, is not about challenging the Assassin philosophy (we've got AC1 and AC3 for that), the point is about shaping it. It's philosophical and grey-zone discussions of other kind (and there's no lack of people sharing their different points of view in AC4, btw, which is why the said philosophy can actually be shaped).

frodrigues55
02-16-2014, 11:11 AM
And speaking of how it's easy to kill the Assassins... Just because we play as somebody who's a very capable fighter (though, btw, we never truly know their fighter capabilities due to this being an Animus simulation - if we kill 1000 guards in the game, doesn't mean the ancestor has actually done that), doesn't mean that EVERY Assassin's a capable fighter. The very first scene of AC1, for example - 2 Assassins (since we were thrown out) vs. 5, I think, Crusaders (one of them admittedly being the Grand Master) - and the result is one is dead and the other one got his hand cut off. And then when Crusaders attack Masyaf, even though all the Assassins forces were fighting, they still had to retreat, and there were still a bunch of them captured and executed. And one of the three people who performed leap of faith has performed a leap of fail - broken his leg while landing. And then almost every memory sequence we get approached by a guy who says that his students need to learn better how to fight and asks us to help.

The point is, Assassins are human, and Assassins are of different skill sets, and when they're larger than a small group of elite fighters - most of them wouldn't be as skilled as some of the Assassins we know anyway.

We're going a bit offtopic, but anyway - I agree with Dome, it would be interesting if the Assassins were designed as tougher "enemies". A little tweek on their fighting skills and detection rules would add the extra challange you need to fool them. I understand this might have not happened because the games have to be rushed in time for release now, so they wouldn't direct efforts into this specific mission design as it's not "essencial" per say.

As for AC1, I agree, the assassins were pretty stupid as well, especially the ones for the side missions. It bugged me too, but I let it pass because AC1 wasn't as well developed as the others. Assassins are humans, yes, and not every assassin is a fighter. The impression I got, however, is that those mayan assassins (which are all very weird by the way) have no skills at all. And they are so annoying and rude every time they appear, like, who the hell would ever want to join them?

I don't know, it just bugged me. The whole Assassin thing in AC4 looked like an afterthought IMO.

Dome500
02-16-2014, 05:13 PM
And they are so annoying and rude every time they appear, like, who the hell would ever want to join them?


That was one of the problems I had.

I mean, it's the fact that both sides (Edward <=> Assassins) are so negative towards each other.
They seem to be a less open then they were in some of the previous titles, more stubborn as well.
Also the native Assassins seem different from the Assassins we got to know in the previous games.

Additionally, neither the Assassins care to explain what the Order is all about to Edward, nor does Edward show any interest in it. The Creed is mentioned once in a while like a not important thing and Edward does not question it because he is not really interested in it.

I understand the main point of the game, showing the difference between Pirates and Assassins and how a philosophy similar to the Assassins Creed can fail, showing other differences in the Creed as well.

It still doesn't change the (relatively new) attitude of the Assassins though.

Hans684
02-16-2014, 07:08 PM
http://assassinscreed.wikia.com/wiki/The_Sage%27s_Buried_Secret

Edward: "You walked me blind and backwards into this mess, Kidd! Who the hell was that jester back there?"
Kidd: "Ah Tabai, an Assassin. And my Mentor."
Edward: "So you're all part of some daffy religion?"
Kidd: "We're Assassins and we follow a Creed, aye. But it does not command us to act or submit... only to be wise."
Edward: "Oh. Do tell. I'd love to hear it."
Kidd: "Nothing is true, everything is permitted." This is the world's only certainty"
Edward: "Everything is permitted?" I like the sound of that. Thinking what I like, and acting how I please."
Kidd: "You parrot the words... but you do not understand them."
Edward: "Don't get haughty with me, Kidd. I followed you as a friend, and you tricked me."
Kidd: "I saved your skin bringing you here, man. These men wanted you dead for what you did in Havana. I talked 'em out of it."
Edward: "Well cheers for that."
Kidd: "Aye. Cheers."

http://assassinscreed.wikia.com/wiki/Overrun_and_Outnumbered

Edward: "By God, you bravos are a cheery bunch eh. All frowns and furrowed brows."
Ah Tabai: "Captain Kenway. You have remarkable skills."
Edward: "Ah, thanks, mate. It comes natural.'"
Ah Tabai: "But you are churlish and arrogant, prancing around in a uniform that you have not earned."
Edward: "Everything is permitted. Isn't that your motto?"
Ah Tabai: "I absolve you of your errors in Havana and elsewhere, but you are not welcome here."
Kidd: "Sorry, mate. Wish it were otherwise."
Later, Edward met with Kidd again.

Kidd explaining the Assassin and Templar causes to Edward.

Edward: "Cheery bunch of mates you've got."
Kidd: "You deserve scorn, Edward. Prancing about like one of us, bringing shame to our cause."
Edward: "And what is that? Your cause?"
Kidd: "To be blunt... we kill people. Templars and their associates. Folks who'd like to control all the empires on Earth... claiming it's in the name of peace and order."
Edward: "Sounds like Du Casse's dying words.
Kidd: "You see? It's about power really. About lording over people. Robbing us of liberty."

http://assassinscreed.wikia.com/wiki/...Everything_Is_Permitted

Edward: "Jaysus, Adé. What the hell happened here?"
Adéwalé: "You happened here, Edward. The damage you caused six years ago has not been undone."
Edward: "I'm not an easy man to call a friend, am I? Is that why you're here?"
Adéwalé: "To fight beside a man so driven by personal gain and glory is a hard thing, Edward. And I have come to feel the Assassins - and their creed - a more honourable course. Have I been unfair?"
Edward: "No. For years I've been rushing around, taking whatever I fancied, not giving a tinker's curse for those I hurt. Yet here I am... with riches and reputation, feeling no wiser than when I left home. Yet when I turn around, and look at the course I've run... here's not a man or woman that I love left standing beside me."
Ah Tabai: "There is time to make amends, captain Kenway."
Edward: "Mary... before she died she asked me to do good by her. To sort out the mess I'd made. Can you help me?"
Ah Tabai: "Mary was fond of you, Edward. She saw something in your bearing that gave her hope you might one day fight with us."
Edward: "Aye, she told me."
Ah Tabai: "And what do you think of our creed?"
Edward: "It's hard to say. For if nothing is true, then why believe anything? And if everything is permitted... why not chase every desire?"
Ah Tabai: "Why indeed?"
Edward: "It might be that this idea is only the beginning of wisdom, and not its final form."
Ah Tabai: "That's quite a step up from the Edward I met here many years ago."

Dome500
02-17-2014, 02:04 AM
Maybe you are right.

Maybe it was only an impression of mine.

Some scenes just seemed... unrefined....

I would have wished there was more debate about the Creed and stuff like that. And questioning it as well.
But there is to hope that the next protagonist will do that....
Every time another perspective. Let's hope it stays that way.

By the way, did you actually notice that while the Assassins swiftly and fluidly make friends and find people with the same philosophies and morals among foreign populations, the Templars were always Europeans up until today, except of some very rare occasions, were most of the time money and fame was also a part of the reason for those people to follow the Templars?

From my perspective, the Templar order has a mainly European domain while the Assassin order is more multi-cultural and well received by many foreign people.

Assassin_M
02-17-2014, 02:49 AM
By the way, did you actually notice that while the Assassins swiftly and fluidly make friends and find people with the same philosophies and morals among foreign populations, the Templars were always Europeans up until today, except of some very rare occasions, were most of the time money and fame was also a part of the reason for those people to follow the Templars?

From my perspective, the Templar order has a mainly European domain while the Assassin order is more multi-cultural and well received by many foreign people.
AC I:

Tamir: Syrian
Talal: Either Bedouin or Palestinian
Masun: Syrian
Jamal: Syrian
Al-Mualim (formerly): Syrian/ possibly Persian
Majd addin: Palestinian
Aboulnoqood: Syrian
Jubair: Syrian

As you can see, a fair amount of Arabs were Templars in AC I

AC II and ACB do not count, because they're set in Europe and in a time when there weren't too many foreigners encroaching on Italy.

ACR:

Haras: Arab (most likely Syrian)
Shahkulu: Oghuz Turk
Ahmet: Turkish
Damat Ali Pasha: Turkish
Mirela Djuric: Romani
Odai Dunqas: Sudanese

Asians, Africans and an Arab..not bad...

18th Century:

The Coyote man: Native American
Baptiste: African
Jing Lang: Chinese

and so many more from so many areas around the world...Eastern Asia, Central Asia, Middle East, Western Africa..etc..just sayin

I-Like-Pie45
02-17-2014, 03:46 AM
I don't really know what this has to do with M's post, but just because he mentioned one of the AC3 multiplayer templars, I'd like to comment that the Redcoat Templar girl had a really nice butt.

Its a pity Connor n Haytham didn't get to kill any of the multiplayer characters like his grandfather or Enzio did. sure would have been a lot better than what passed for side assassinations in AC3

its also a pity that Connor and Edward didn't get to say the words "nothing is true everything is permitted" every other piece of dialogue like the other assassins to show that they are true assassins that embrace the creed because **** subtle development everything must be doled out in dialogue and extremely exaggerated gestures n expressions

I don't know what the original purpose of this post was

but I think the Creed is silly and the Templars are right because they need no creed and indoctrination by desperate old men. They are born of a realization. All they need is that the world be as it is.

Open your eyes, Assassin sheep.

Farlander1991
02-20-2014, 09:48 AM
Speaking of Assassins on Tulum, if you listen to some of their dialogs, not only they have seen Edward's ship passing, they say "He has been summoned. Though he does not know it" so they're fully aware that Edward's there and have no intention of stopping him on his way.

dxsxhxcx
02-20-2014, 12:25 PM
And speaking of how it's easy to kill the Assassins... Just because we play as somebody who's a very capable fighter (though, btw, we never truly know their fighter capabilities due to this being an Animus simulation - if we kill 1000 guards in the game, doesn't mean the ancestor has actually done that), doesn't mean that EVERY Assassin's a capable fighter. The very first scene of AC1, for example - 2 Assassins (since we were thrown out) vs. 5, I think, Crusaders (one of them admittedly being the Grand Master) - and the result is one is dead and the other one got his hand cut off. And then when Crusaders attack Masyaf, even though all the Assassins forces were fighting, they still had to retreat, and there were still a bunch of them captured and executed. And one of the three people who performed leap of faith has performed a leap of fail - broken his leg while landing. And then almost every memory sequence we get approached by a guy who says that his students need to learn better how to fight and asks us to help.

The point is, Assassins are human, and Assassins are of different skill sets, and when they're larger than a small group of elite fighters - most of them wouldn't be as skilled as some of the Assassins we know anyway.


how I wish the devs could read this before create the next ancestor and turn him into a unbeatable god in battle.

Assassin_M
02-20-2014, 03:47 PM
Speaking of Assassins on Tulum, if you listen to some of their dialogs, not only they have seen Edward's ship passing, they say "He has been summoned. Though he does not know it" so they're fully aware that Edward's there and have no intention of stopping him on his way.
on that note, since someone also mentioned how the Assassins were not racially diverse at the time, the dialogues between the Assassins had a few accents and different languages..which yes, it means they were racially diverse..