Board Thread:Wiki discussion/@comment-18014300-20200504004330/@comment-28601337-20200504051947 - Revision history

Soranin: Text replacement - "
" to "
"

2026-07-12T22:17:35Z

Text replacement - " " to " "

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:17, 13 July 2026
Line 7:		Line 7:
	==Where '''''must''''' we draw the line?==		==Where '''''must''''' we draw the line?==
	I think the line was very clear in Origins, that was the purpose of that game after all. (In my headcanon, the Assassins made a posthumous ceremony where they inducted the figures of Darius, Iltani and Wey Yu as their own as an act of tribute).		I think the line was very clear in Origins, that was the purpose of that game after all. (In my headcanon, the Assassins made a posthumous ceremony where they inducted the figures of Darius, Iltani and Wey Yu as their own as an act of tribute).
	With the Templars was a little different (we knew about their origins throught a slab), but we ended up knowing anyway...<br />''"My proposal, however, is not to start calling these figures Assassins again."''<br />With this, I agree as well. Specially since they were never Assassins in the first place (thanks to the retcon Origins gave us). These are the figures that, one way or another, ended up inspiring the first Assassins (the Hidden Ones), but weren't Assassins. The same goes with the Children of Cain. If no relation is shown between them and the Order of Ancients, then we should consider the Children of Cain as proto-templars.		With the Templars was a little different (we knew about their origins throught a slab), but we ended up knowing anyway...<br>''"My proposal, however, is not to start calling these figures Assassins again."''<br>With this, I agree as well. Specially since they were never Assassins in the first place (thanks to the retcon Origins gave us). These are the figures that, one way or another, ended up inspiring the first Assassins (the Hidden Ones), but weren't Assassins. The same goes with the Children of Cain. If no relation is shown between them and the Order of Ancients, then we should consider the Children of Cain as proto-templars.

	==What about the Templars?==		==What about the Templars?==
	"However, Cris seemed to have said many months back that the second edition of The Essential Guide calls the Order of the Ancients proto-Templars. We would need to verify if this is true."<br />Translated from Spanish to English: '''''"The Templar Order began as a secret society known as the Order of Ancients."'''''		"However, Cris seemed to have said many months back that the second edition of The Essential Guide calls the Order of the Ancients proto-Templars. We would need to verify if this is true."<br>Translated from Spanish to English: '''''"The Templar Order began as a secret society known as the Order of Ancients."'''''
	I read the E.G. 2.0 again and it doens't call them as proto-templars, the connection is confirmed inmediately. They ARE the Templars. My apologies, it seems I was high while reading the guide. I don't see any "proto-templar" mention regarding the Order of Ancients.		I read the E.G. 2.0 again and it doens't call them as proto-templars, the connection is confirmed inmediately. They ARE the Templars. My apologies, it seems I was high while reading the guide. I don't see any "proto-templar" mention regarding the Order of Ancients.

Line 34:		Line 34:
	# Kass dismantled the Cult.		# Kass dismantled the Cult.

	But the possibility for them to be considered as a group that influenced the Templars still remains possible. How? '''Aspasia.'''<br />Canonically, Kass let her live. In her search for the "philosopher-king", she could have joined the Order of Ancients and shared her secrets with them.		But the possibility for them to be considered as a group that influenced the Templars still remains possible. How? '''Aspasia.'''<br>Canonically, Kass let her live. In her search for the "philosopher-king", she could have joined the Order of Ancients and shared her secrets with them.

	Also, it's important to mention this: E.G. 2.0 says that Aspasia believed in the Father of Understanding, but doesn't tell since when. Do I consider this proof enough to tell that the Cult was a proto-templar organization? No, because such beliefs could have been influenced by the Cult's alliance with the Order of Ancients.		Also, it's important to mention this: E.G. 2.0 says that Aspasia believed in the Father of Understanding, but doesn't tell since when. Do I consider this proof enough to tell that the Cult was a proto-templar organization? No, because such beliefs could have been influenced by the Cult's alliance with the Order of Ancients.

Soranin: Text replacement - " " to " "

2026-07-09T22:36:01Z

Text replacement - " " to " "

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:36, 10 July 2026
Line 6:		Line 6:

	==Where '''''must''''' we draw the line?==		==Where '''''must''''' we draw the line?==
	I think the line ~~was very clear in~~ Origins, that was the purpose of that game after all. (In my headcanon, the Assassins ~~made a~~ posthumous ceremony where they inducted the figures of Darius, Iltani and Wey Yu as their own as an act of tribute).		I think the line was very clear in Origins, that was the purpose of that game after all. (In my headcanon, the Assassins made a posthumous ceremony where they inducted the figures of Darius, Iltani and Wey Yu as their own as an act of tribute).
	With the Templars was a little different (we knew about their origins throught a slab), but we ended up knowing anyway...<br />''"My proposal, however, is not to start calling these figures Assassins again."''<br />With this, I agree as well. Specially since they were never Assassins in the first place (thanks to the retcon Origins gave us). These are the figures that, one way or another, ended up inspiring the first Assassins (the Hidden Ones), but weren't Assassins. The same goes with the Children of Cain. If no relation is shown between them and the Order of Ancients, then we ~~should consider~~ the Children of ~~Cain as~~ proto-templars.		With the Templars was a little different (we knew about their origins throught a slab), but we ended up knowing anyway...<br />''"My proposal, however, is not to start calling these figures Assassins again."''<br />With this, I agree as well. Specially since they were never Assassins in the first place (thanks to the retcon Origins gave us). These are the figures that, one way or another, ended up inspiring the first Assassins (the Hidden Ones), but weren't Assassins. The same goes with the Children of Cain. If no relation is shown between them and the Order of Ancients, then we should consider the Children of Cain as proto-templars.

	==What about the Templars?==		==What about the Templars?==
	"However, Cris seemed to have said many months back that the second edition of The Essential Guide calls the Order of the Ancients proto-Templars. We would need to verify if this is true."<br />Translated from Spanish to English: '''''"The Templar Order began as a secret society known as the Order of Ancients."'''''		"However, Cris seemed to have said many months back that the second edition of The Essential Guide calls the Order of the Ancients proto-Templars. We would need to verify if this is true."<br />Translated from Spanish to English: '''''"The Templar Order began as a secret society known as the Order of Ancients."'''''
	I read the E.G. 2.0 again and it doens't call them as proto-templars, the connection is confirmed inmediately. They ARE the Templars. My apologies, it seems I was high while reading the guide. I don't see any "proto-templar" mention regarding the Order of Ancients.		I read the E.G. 2.0 again and it doens't call them as proto-templars, the connection is confirmed inmediately. They ARE the Templars. My apologies, it seems I was high while reading the guide. I don't see any "proto-templar" mention regarding the Order of Ancients.

	==Is Kass considered a proto-assassin?==		==Is Kass considered a proto-assassin?==
Line 31:		Line 31:
	# The Templars already existed (as the Order of Ancients).		# The Templars already existed (as the Order of Ancients).
	# They were allies but certain decisions made by the Cult caused the Ancients' rejection and ultimately ended up being enemies.		# They were allies but certain decisions made by the Cult caused the Ancients' rejection and ultimately ended up being enemies.
	# The Cult of Kosmos believed in many things, control among other things, but ultimately this was not their ultimate goal: it was power. ''But that's the Templars' goal as well?'' It´s debatable. According to Germain: it was never about power, it was all about control. Power corrupts, and when the Templars are drunk in it they start to fulfill their own wishes instead of the Order'~~s for~~ the betterment of humanity. The Cult of Kosmos was a chaotic order, having a group wanting order, another one ~~wanting chaos~~, some people worshipped Alexios as a demigod, etc. This group doesn't share all of the features the Templar Order has.		# The Cult of Kosmos believed in many things, control among other things, but ultimately this was not their ultimate goal: it was power. ''But that's the Templars' goal as well?'' It´s debatable. According to Germain: it was never about power, it was all about control. Power corrupts, and when the Templars are drunk in it they start to fulfill their own wishes instead of the Order's for the betterment of humanity. The Cult of Kosmos was a chaotic order, having a group wanting order, another one wanting chaos, some people worshipped Alexios as a demigod, etc. This group doesn't share all of the features the Templar Order has.
	# Kass dismantled the Cult.		# Kass dismantled the Cult.

imported>Cristophorus35: Created page with "As always, sorry for my english. ==First Point== ''"Two organizations bearing two different names but having clear continuity with one another can still be the exact same orga..."

2020-05-04T05:19:47Z

Created page with "As always, sorry for my english. ==First Point== ''"Two organizations bearing two different names but having clear continuity with one another can still be the exact same orga..."

Páàjì titun

As always, sorry for my english.
==First Point==
''"Two organizations bearing two different names but having clear continuity with one another can still be the exact same organization."''

Such continuity has been confirmed in the E.G. 2.0. It says that the Order of Ancients and the Templar Order are the same group (the organization existed through time and, due to changes across the years, it ended up becoming the Templar Order. In my headcanon, this happened when the Order of Ancients found out about the Children of Cain) The same goes with the Hidden Ones and the Assassin, they are the same.

==Where '''''must''''' we draw the line?==
I think the line was very clear in Origins, that was the purpose of that game after all. (In my headcanon, the Assassins made a posthumous ceremony where they inducted the figures of Darius, Iltani and Wey Yu as their own as an act of tribute).
With the Templars was a little different (we knew about their origins throught a slab), but we ended up knowing anyway... ''"My proposal, however, is not to start calling these figures Assassins again."'' With this, I agree as well. Specially since they were never Assassins in the first place (thanks to the retcon Origins gave us). These are the figures that, one way or another, ended up inspiring the first Assassins (the Hidden Ones), but weren't Assassins. The same goes with the Children of Cain. If no relation is shown between them and the Order of Ancients, then we should consider the Children of Cain as proto-templars.

==What about the Templars?==
"However, Cris seemed to have said many months back that the second edition of The Essential Guide calls the Order of the Ancients proto-Templars. We would need to verify if this is true." Translated from Spanish to English: '''''"The Templar Order began as a secret society known as the Order of Ancients."'''''
I read the E.G. 2.0 again and it doens't call them as proto-templars, the connection is confirmed inmediately. They ARE the Templars. My apologies, it seems I was high while reading the guide. I don't see any "proto-templar" mention regarding the Order of Ancients.

==Is Kass considered a proto-assassin?==
In the E.G. 2.0, yes, she is. Primarly because her deeds happened long before the birth of the Brotherhood.

==What does it say about darius?==
He's considered as the origins of the Assassin's values, but '''''not'' '''an assassin.

==Who are considered to be proto-assassins?==
This are my thought about the subject:
# Every group that came before the "Assassins".
# Every group that ended up fighting against the Order of Ancients
# Every group that ended up inspiring/influencing the Assassin Brotherhood in one way or another (I think we shouldn't label a group that fought for liberty and never gave something to the Assassins in that regard. For me, it doesn't make sense to call every group, that fought for freedom, peace and stuff, proto-assassins).

==But I must ask, where does this place the Cult of Kosmos?==
In the E.G. 2.0, they aren't mentioned as proto-templars.

Personally, I don't consider them as such. These are my reasons.
# The Templars already existed (as the Order of Ancients).
# They were allies but certain decisions made by the Cult caused the Ancients' rejection and ultimately ended up being enemies.
# The Cult of Kosmos believed in many things, control among other things, but ultimately this was not their ultimate goal: it was power. ''But that's the Templars' goal as well?'' It´s debatable. According to Germain: it was never about power, it was all about control. Power corrupts, and when the Templars are drunk in it they start to fulfill their own wishes instead of the Order's for the betterment of humanity. The Cult of Kosmos was a chaotic order, having a group wanting order, another one wanting chaos, some people worshipped Alexios as a demigod, etc. This group doesn't share all of the features the Templar Order has.
# Kass dismantled the Cult.

But the possibility for them to be considered as a group that influenced the Templars still remains possible. How? '''Aspasia.''' Canonically, Kass let her live. In her search for the "philosopher-king", she could have joined the Order of Ancients and shared her secrets with them.

Also, it's important to mention this: E.G. 2.0 says that Aspasia believed in the Father of Understanding, but doesn't tell since when. Do I consider this proof enough to tell that the Cult was a proto-templar organization? No, because such beliefs could have been influenced by the Cult's alliance with the Order of Ancients.

I'd like to finish with a question.

==And what about the groups that ended up merging with the Hidden Ones/Order of Ancients after their fundation? Are they still considered as a proto-group?==
By definition, no. But how can we categorize them?

Board Thread:Wiki discussion/@comment-18014300-20200504004330/@comment-28601337-20200504051947 - Revision history

Soranin: Text replacement - "" to ""

Soranin: Text replacement - " " to " "

imported>Cristophorus35: Created page with "As always, sorry for my english. ==First Point== ''"Two organizations bearing two different names but having clear continuity with one another can still be the exact same orga..."

Soranin: Text replacement - "
" to "
"