User blog comment:Abelzorus Prime/The Dark Assassin/@comment-90.218.118.81-20140713210507/@comment-1153722-20140713235322: Difference between revisions
imported>Master Sima Yi Created page with "For a list of corrupt Templars (all Italian Renaissance Templars), see Assassination targets#Ezio Auditore da Firenze, up to 1507. Whether you acknowledge it or not, both..." |
imported>Master Sima Yi No edit summary |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
Whether you acknowledge it or not, both Malfatto and Hickey were officially inducted into the Templar Order, and thus members like anyone else. They were not just employed as henchmen. | Whether you acknowledge it or not, both Malfatto and Hickey were officially inducted into the Templar Order, and thus members like anyone else. They were not just employed as henchmen. | ||
Thinking that at first Rodrigo was a true Templar (which he may as well have been, he may not), believing first and foremost that the Templars are more noble, is fine, but I think you're already too convinced of what you're selling. | |||
Ahmet could just as well have sent an attack squad after Ezio in the city, which would have probably bought him the same amount of time. Sofia was an innocent, not even aware of either Order or their goals. Ezio's actions at in Cappadocia were no better, but I am quite sure Ezio was not aware of the damage he would cause, while Ahmet most certainly was aware that Sofia... would die. That does not make Ezio's actions good, but it doesn't make Ahmet's better either. | Ahmet could just as well have sent an attack squad after Ezio in the city, which would have probably bought him the same amount of time. Sofia was an innocent, not even aware of either Order or their goals. Ezio's actions at in Cappadocia were no better, but I am quite sure Ezio was not aware of the damage he would cause, while Ahmet most certainly was aware that Sofia... would die. That does not make Ezio's actions good, but it doesn't make Ahmet's better either. | ||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
Also, you keep pointing out that Haytham did not condone Johnson's actions, but that's not an argument. Johnson was as much a Templar as Haytham. If we're just talking about Grand Masters, you should've made that more clear. | Also, you keep pointing out that Haytham did not condone Johnson's actions, but that's not an argument. Johnson was as much a Templar as Haytham. If we're just talking about Grand Masters, you should've made that more clear. | ||
As I said myself, neither Order is good, and they both do bad things to achieve their Order. The difference is, and I don't see why you're trying to avoid this, that the Templars are more | As I said myself, neither Order is good, and they both do bad things to achieve their Order. The difference is, and I don't see why you're trying to avoid this, that the Templars we've seen in the games so far are more loose with their morals than the Assassins are, not paying as much regard for the lives of innocents most importantly. It's not the Templars, by ideals, being more bad than the Assassins, it's the game writers turning the white and black lights on too much. | ||
Latest revision as of 01:59, 14 July 2014
For a list of corrupt Templars (all Italian Renaissance Templars), see Assassination targets#Ezio Auditore da Firenze, up to 1507.
Whether you acknowledge it or not, both Malfatto and Hickey were officially inducted into the Templar Order, and thus members like anyone else. They were not just employed as henchmen.
Thinking that at first Rodrigo was a true Templar (which he may as well have been, he may not), believing first and foremost that the Templars are more noble, is fine, but I think you're already too convinced of what you're selling.
Ahmet could just as well have sent an attack squad after Ezio in the city, which would have probably bought him the same amount of time. Sofia was an innocent, not even aware of either Order or their goals. Ezio's actions at in Cappadocia were no better, but I am quite sure Ezio was not aware of the damage he would cause, while Ahmet most certainly was aware that Sofia... would die. That does not make Ezio's actions good, but it doesn't make Ahmet's better either.
As far as we know, Haytham never found out about his father's life. Birch could just as easily have killed Jenny (which would have been more merciful in the long term) or held her captive anywhere. His sending her to a life of slavery was partially his own amusement, and served no real purpose. Yes, it was morally bad, and certainly not necessary.
The comics most certainly put the Assassins in a bad light, first with Nikolai's brutality towards Dolinsky and his secret disinterest in the Order. And later the brutality of Sergei and the Assassin team that were sent after Nikolai.
Also, you keep pointing out that Haytham did not condone Johnson's actions, but that's not an argument. Johnson was as much a Templar as Haytham. If we're just talking about Grand Masters, you should've made that more clear.
As I said myself, neither Order is good, and they both do bad things to achieve their Order. The difference is, and I don't see why you're trying to avoid this, that the Templars we've seen in the games so far are more loose with their morals than the Assassins are, not paying as much regard for the lives of innocents most importantly. It's not the Templars, by ideals, being more bad than the Assassins, it's the game writers turning the white and black lights on too much.