PDA

View Full Version : John De La Tour in Rogue?



MnemonicSyntax
08-18-2014, 08:31 PM
So, I've been running through Assassin's Creed 3 and I'm nearing the end. I just fetched Achilles' uniform from the cave and he told Connor that it belonged to John De La Tour, the first of the Colonial Assassins and the one who started the Brotherhood in the States.

That being said, you think he'll be mentioned in Rogue? It's one of those things you don't really think about, but with Rogue sorta filling the blanks, it'd be nice to see his character and how it all unfolds in maybe a bit of backstory.

Thoughts on this?

THE_JOKE_KING33
08-18-2014, 08:32 PM
It'd be interesting if we end up killing him.

Shahkulu101
08-18-2014, 08:34 PM
Apparently during the games timeline he's a bit of an old foggie, but maybe we will still see him. Just not in action.

SpiritOfNevaeh
08-18-2014, 08:36 PM
Would be interesting to see de la Tour's role in general and how he made the first Colonial Brotherhood.

JustPlainQuirky
08-18-2014, 08:37 PM
Theorized this a while back before Rogue was even officially announced.

M said something about him being too old to be in Rogue, but I personally want to see him in Rogue.

I mean, he has a name and a costume already created. And he did something notable close to the time of Rogue.

I'm secretly hoping he's an assassination target.

DumbGamerTag94
08-18-2014, 08:55 PM
Why would he have to be a mega old man? I checked the wiki and it doesn't give a birth or death date anywhere. We do have Achilles' birth 1710. By the fall of the colonial assassins Achilles was 53 in 1763. So if John were Achillies mentor he could be anywhere from 10 years younger or any age over Achilles. After all Connor and Ezio were both mentors to a few people older than them so it's not impossible to be slightly younger than Achilles either but obviously died earlier.

I mean he was the first assassin in the colonies but nowhere does it say when the assassins started there. I mean the Templars didn't even have a presence until 1754. So I highly doubt the assassins would be so far ahead of the Templars to have come along with the original US settlers in the 1600s. My guess is that logically the Assassins would only have formed in the 1730s or 40s since the Templars wouldn't allow them to get that much of a head start there.

So if John clearly died before 1763 since Achilles had become mentor by then. It's safe to assume John may have died sometime between 1754-1761. An 8 year gap. Achillies would have been 50 in 1760. So if John lives to 1760 he could be anywhere from around 45-65 by the time he died. So we are only talking Ezio in revelations old. Perfectly capable of being an effective assassin.

So while John de la Tour may possibly be super mega old. It isn't unreasonable to be only in his 50s during the events of rogue either. We can't say definitively he will be a dinosaur.

I'm personally going to guess he's in his 50s and we kill him in 1758-61 thereabouts.

JustPlainQuirky
08-18-2014, 08:58 PM
That's what I was thinking, but too many peeps discouraged me so I just kinda let that theory die out.

Glad to see it revived tho. I want to fight John de la Tour.

...

I hope he isn't UUUUUUUGLY

#shallow

marvelfannumber
08-18-2014, 08:58 PM
Wait if John De La Tour is in Rogue I may just have found the connection between Rogue and Unity.

If you rearange parts Tour's name and add the country in which Unity is set you get Tour de France, which means bicycles are confirmed for Unity!

.....and it all traces back to the Kennedy assassination, into the kingdom of the Crystal Skull!

JustPlainQuirky
08-18-2014, 09:01 PM
Wait if John De La Tour is in Rogue I may just have found the connection between Rogue and Unity.

If you rearange parts Tour's name and add the country in which Unity is set you get Tour de France, which means bicycles are confirmed for Unity!

.....and it all traces back to the Kennedy assassination, into the kingdom of the Crystal Skull!

And if you rearrange the letters in "Ubisoft" it spells "Connor sequel confirmed"

marvelfannumber
08-18-2014, 09:05 PM
And if you rearrange the letters in "Ubisoft" it spells "Connor sequel confirmed"


http://youtu.be/weG3dX7290Q?t=1m34s

MnemonicSyntax
08-18-2014, 09:07 PM
Wait if John De La Tour is in Rogue I may just have found the connection between Rogue and Unity.

If you rearange parts Tour's name and add the country in which Unity is set you get Tour de France, which means bicycles are confirmed for Unity!

.....and it all traces back to the Kennedy assassination, into the kingdom of the Crystal Skull!

Oh look, an "Ilikepie Jr."

Let's try to keep it on topic, shall we?

Ureh
08-18-2014, 11:25 PM
The A-esque tomahawk that Connor wields also belonged to John, iirc?

SpiritOfNevaeh
08-18-2014, 11:38 PM
The A-esque tomahawk that Connor wields also belonged to John, iirc?

Was it? I thought that was made specifically for Connor to use as soon as he joined the brotherhood.

Jexx21
08-18-2014, 11:51 PM
the assassin tomahawk def belonged to john

JustPlainQuirky
08-18-2014, 11:55 PM
One possible theory is Shay chases John De La Tour to france where he kills him. Then he settles in france and has Elise. Then he's killed off.

Or Shay just kills him in america

GoldenBoy9999
08-19-2014, 12:48 AM
I personally hope Shay doesn't kill John, although we know almost nothing about him. I think Rogue's story is a cool idea, but I just hope Shay mainly takes out new characters.

DumbGamerTag94
08-19-2014, 12:57 AM
the assassin tomahawk def belonged to john

Hmmm so John de la Tour(a French/Englishman) possessing a Tomahawk a native weapon. Suggesting a strong familiarity/cooperation with Indians. STRONGLY suggests his presence during the French and Indian war. It being perhaps the most notorious(and one of the first) events where Europeans and Natives allied with eachother.

#delatourcomfirmedforrogue

DumbGamerTag94
08-19-2014, 12:59 AM
I personally hope Shay doesn't kill John, although we know almost nothing about him. I think Rogue's story is a cool idea, but I just hope Shay mainly takes out new characters.

We've never met John or even seen him. Anything about him is a new character except for his name.

GoldenBoy9999
08-19-2014, 01:05 AM
We've never met John or even seen him. Anything about him is a new character except for his name.

I meant new as in new like Torres from AC4. Just because AC4 was before AC3 didn't mean we had to trace family history back and assassinate Charles Lee's grandfather or something because he visited the Caribbean in so and so year or something like that. I'd feel pretty sad if I had to kill John in-game. Though I don't know him, for me he symbolizes assassins in the new world and their start. Not everything has to link together. It's okay to have characters in the same time-frame that don't intersect.

DumbGamerTag94
08-19-2014, 01:12 AM
I meant new as in new like Torres from AC4. Just because AC4 was before AC3 didn't mean we had to trace family history back and assassinate Charles Lee's grandfather or something because he visited the Caribbean in so and so year or something like that. I'd feel pretty sad if I had to kill John in-game. Though I don't know him, for me he symbolizes assassins in the new world and their start. Not everything has to link together. It's okay to have characters in the same time-frame that don't intersect.

It's called the Kenway SAGA. Its supposed to be connected!

And other than John's name and the fact that he was the first assassin in the colonies. We know absolutely nothing. He would in fact be a new character because he was never a Character per se but just a reference and since the Kenway games are supposed to connect I would imagine they wouldn't reference something for nothing.

Megas_Doux
08-19-2014, 01:27 AM
I always tought John lived in the XVII century...

Where did you get he is Achilles master?

GoldenBoy9999
08-19-2014, 01:28 AM
It's called the Kenway SAGA. Its supposed to be connected!

And other than John's name and the fact that he was the first assassin in the colonies. We know absolutely nothing. He would in fact be a new character because he was never a Character per se but just a reference and since the Kenway games are supposed to connect I would imagine they wouldn't reference something for nothing.

Lol, what? Yes the Kenway games are supposed to connect but it's not possible for every single thing to. Anne Bonny's baby doesn't have to appear as an assassin boss just because we don't know what happened to it. By the way, I didn't say I didn't want John in Rogue, just that I hope we don't kill him. And also, no matter how much you insist we know nothing about John, he's still the first assassin in the the Americas and I'd much rather kill someone like Ah Tabai than him.

P.S. We do know some other stuff about John like the fact that he owned both the Colonial Assassin outfit and Achilles original outfit. He also was the original wielder or the Assassin tomahawk which we may see him use if he is indeed in-game ;)

JustPlainQuirky
08-19-2014, 01:37 AM
I always tought John lived in the XVII century...

Where did you get he is Achilles master?

Achilles says it when Connor finds his old assassin garb.

DumbGamerTag94
08-19-2014, 01:47 AM
Achilles says it when Connor finds his old assassin garb.

Thanks rice!

And where are people getting that he was in the 1600s???? Source please???

Achilles got the robes from him Achilles was born in 1710. And the Templars didn't have an American presence until 1754(in any organized sense). So if John arrived in the 1600s why would the Templars allow the Assassins to get a 50+ year head start in the region? That makes no sense

JustPlainQuirky
08-19-2014, 01:50 AM
People just assume he got there as soon as colonies started forming and that he was significantly older than achilles because achilles took over before Rogue began or something like that.

I don't know.

I expect to see John De La Tour anyway.

DumbGamerTag94
08-19-2014, 01:57 AM
That's another question I have how do we know Achilles took over before the events of Rogue circa 1752? Does it say that anywhere? It could be that he was a Machiavelli like figure in the colonies. A slightly younger second in command to the mentor(John de la tour). Who then takes command after the mentor's death.


Edit: nevermind that just checked the wiki Achilles took over in 1746.

JustPlainQuirky
08-19-2014, 01:58 AM
According to M, It said somewhere Achilles became leader assassin some time before Rogue. I dunno where tho. Check the wiki i guess.

I just took his word for it.

Megas_Doux
08-19-2014, 02:01 AM
I just watched all Achilles Homestead missions and did NOT found ANY prove of John de la Tour being Achilles master, he just have his Robes. In fact, not even in the wikia he is mentioned as his master:

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

It was odd enough, since this is the first time I hear such thing.......

DumbGamerTag94
08-19-2014, 02:02 AM
Perhaps going along with the Machiavelli comparison. Perhaps John is the Machiavelli/Mario to Achilles' Ezio. With John kind of starting the order and keeping it going but handing over the mentorship to the more skilled Achilles?

JustPlainQuirky
08-19-2014, 02:06 AM
Pretty sure John De La Tour is the first colonial assassin.

And Achilles tells Connor when he finds Achilles' old robes that the robes were passed down by his "mentor, the first colonial assassin"

DumbGamerTag94
08-19-2014, 02:07 AM
Achilles becoming mentor in 1746 seems to nix the concept of John bing in Rogue really. I hadn't noticed that date before. It is strange though because I can't imagine the Templars lagging so far behind the assassins by any more than like 30 years.

JustPlainQuirky
08-19-2014, 02:08 AM
Maybe Shay kills old man John De La Tour? lol

Megas_Doux
08-19-2014, 02:09 AM
And Achilles tells Connor when he finds Achilles' old robes that the robes were passed down by his "mentor, the first colonial assassin"

He DOES NOT say that:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5ucwZvVPKM

12:20

Connor: Who does THAT belong to?
Achilles: These were the robes of the first Assassin to come to the colonies.

NO such thing as "my master" there.......

JustPlainQuirky
08-19-2014, 02:11 AM
coulda sworn he said he was passed down the robes from his master the first colonial assassin.

where have i heard that then

Megas_Doux
08-19-2014, 02:12 AM
http://assassinscreed.wikia.com/wiki/Manor_Mysteries%2C_Part_1

Connor: I have what you asked for. But I must know– who put it there and for what purpose?
Achilles: I did. I put it somewhere I knew only I could reach, but that was a long time ago.
Connor: Who does THAT belong to?
Achilles: These were the robes of the first Assassin to come to the colonies.

NO word master to be found, this whole theory is made up without any evidence.

And that IS Achilles Robe........

JustPlainQuirky
08-19-2014, 02:14 AM
OH HERE IT IS

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


John also owned another outfit, one which was passed down to Achilles Davenport.

And if you click "another outfit" it links to you Achilles' outfit.

Clearly his underling.

Megas_Doux
08-19-2014, 02:17 AM
Well, yes!!! However that DOES NOT make John de la Tour Achilles Master.

Ezio owned BOTH Altairīs sword and Armour, yet Altair is NOT Ezioīs Master.

Bottom line, based on FACTS, is:

1 John de la Tour owned those two outfitts.
2 Achilles had one of those.

Yet John is NEVER mentioned as Achilles master, Achilles has his outfit, end of story.

GoldenBoy9999
08-19-2014, 02:18 AM
Again, it seems like Achilles would have mentioned that John was killed by Shay if the story was thought out before hand. Also, the possibly many generations did a good job of keeping the robes clean so Shay and John probably wouldn't have got in a big bloody fight if he was wearing those robes. ;)

JustPlainQuirky
08-19-2014, 02:19 AM
John was a master assassin, being the founder of the colonial assassins.

His robes were passed down to Achilles. And Achilles was made a master assassin in charge of the colonial brotherhood. Those two statements are clear.

Based on that info, he must've been John's underling to be passed down said robe and be promoted to master assassin.

Megas_Doux
08-19-2014, 02:25 AM
John was a master assassin, being the founder of the colonial assassins.

His robes were passed down to Achilles. And Achilles was made a master assassin in charge of the colonial brotherhood. Those two statements are clear.

Based on that info, he must've been John's underling to be passed down said robe and be promoted to master assassin.

Assumptions, thatīs all I see here.

We dont know when this guy John lived, we only know for a fact he is the first Assassin to come to the 13 colonies and that Achilles has his robes, end of story.

GoldenBoy9999
08-19-2014, 02:26 AM
John was a master assassin, being the founder of the colonial assassins.

His robes were passed down to Achilles. And Achilles was made a master assassin in charge of the colonial brotherhood. Those two statements are clear.

Based on that info, he must've been John's underling to be passed down said robe and be promoted to master assassin.

I thought something could also be passed down through many generations.


Ezio owned BOTH Altairīs sword and Armour, yet Altair is NOT Ezioīs Master.

This reminds me. Which equipment items are actually canon to the story line? What I mean is that Edward had Ezio's and Altair's swords. He also had Connor's and Ezio's robes but I highly doubt Ezio's is canon with Connor's being impossible. And as I recall you could use the previous assassin's equipment in a lot of the other games like Ezio's robes in AC3.

JustPlainQuirky
08-19-2014, 02:28 AM
-John (himself) passed his robes down to Achilles
-Achilles became in charge of the colonial brotherhood after John

It's obvious 'context clues' that Achilles was an assassin who worked under him and got promoted from this evidence.

Yes, it is an assumption. But assuming a person walking out of a men's bathroom is a guy is also an assumption.

It's downright logical.

Megas_Doux
08-19-2014, 02:40 AM
-John passed his robes down to Achilles
-Achilles became in charge of the colonial brotherhood after John

It's obvious 'context clues' that Achilles was an assassin who worked under him and got promoted from this evidence.

Yes, it is an assumption. But assuming a person walking out of a men's bathroom is a guy is also an assumption.

It's downright logical.

It is not stated anywhere this John guy gave his robes to Achilles himself, Achilles just has them!!!! Pretty much like Ezio has Altairīs sword and armor. So, this whole thing is just speculations and assumptions.

We dont know when this John de la Tour arrived to the thirteen colonies, it COULD happen, but until confirmed is just rumours. Pretty much like Connor being this guy:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eb38sShAjOU

Just because Lafayette invited him to France.....

JustPlainQuirky
08-19-2014, 02:43 AM
Fair enough then. I'll consider it a headcanon.

I'll re-check AC3's dialogue to make sure just in case tho.

Ureh
08-19-2014, 03:29 AM
Yep, iirc, they don't specify when exactly John arrived in NA. Colonial America started quite early.... in the late 16th to early 17th century, right? It's possible that John is older than even Connor's grandma.

Hans684
08-19-2014, 02:28 PM
So, I've been running through Assassin's Creed 3 and I'm nearing the end. I just fetched Achilles' uniform from the cave and he told Connor that it belonged to John De La Tour, the first of the Colonial Assassins and the one who started the Brotherhood in the States.

That being said, you think he'll be mentioned in Rogue? It's one of those things you don't really think about, but with Rogue sorta filling the blanks, it'd be nice to see his character and how it all unfolds in maybe a bit of backstory.

Thoughts on this?

I highly doubt we will kill him.

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

The Coyote Man, his real identity unknown, was a Native American killer during the 18th century, who allied with the Templars and was responsible for the death of one of the Mentors of the Assassin Order.

There are only two Colonial Mentors we know of, John De La Tour and Achilles. He didn't kill Achilles so it has to be John. Unless he gave the title to someone else before Achilles.

aL_____eX
08-19-2014, 02:33 PM
This reminds me. Which equipment items are actually canon to the story line? What I mean is that Edward had Ezio's and Altair's swords. He also had Connor's and Ezio's robes but I highly doubt Ezio's is canon with Connor's being impossible. And as I recall you could use the previous assassin's equipment in a lot of the other games like Ezio's robes in AC3.
And that my friend is the work of a hell machine called 'Animus'. I hate how everything that's illogical in AC can be/is explained with using an Animus which adjusts the world to the user's preferences and advantages.

JustPlainQuirky
08-19-2014, 04:08 PM
I highly doubt we will kill him.

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

The Coyote Man, his real identity unknown, was a Native American killer during the 18th century, who allied with the Templars and was responsible for the death of one of the Mentors of the Assassin Order.

There are only two Colonial Mentors we know of, John De La Tour and Achilles. He didn't kill Achilles so it has to be John. Unless he gave the title to someone else before Achilles.

Oh dayum we might see the Coyote man in Rogue

Namikaze_17
08-19-2014, 09:18 PM
I think John dies before Shay's siege and after he makes Achilles Mentor.

Hans684
08-19-2014, 09:40 PM
I think John dies before Shay's siege and after he makes Achilles Mentor.

More like Achilles becomes Mentor before he dies, so John actually passes the title to him.

Jexx21
08-19-2014, 11:29 PM
Achilles became the mentor way before Rogue even starts.