Welcome to Assassin's Creed Wiki! Log in and join the community.

Talk:Hidden Ones: Difference between revisions

From the Assassin's Creed Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Sol Pacificus
imported>Sol Pacificus
Line 10: Line 10:
::It's not a strong objection but having separate pages may be an easier read with each broadly covering a thousand years each. [[User:Vetinari|<b><span style="color: black">Vetinari</span></b>]]<sup>[[User talk:Vetinari|(Appointment)]]</sup> 00:23, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
::It's not a strong objection but having separate pages may be an easier read with each broadly covering a thousand years each. [[User:Vetinari|<b><span style="color: black">Vetinari</span></b>]]<sup>[[User talk:Vetinari|(Appointment)]]</sup> 00:23, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
:::I am leery of doing this before we have more definite lore surrounding Hassan-i Sabah. Per official canon he captured Alamut from someone. As far as we know Alamut never left Hidden One control. So regardless of what Ubisoft has said this implies some schism of some sort. I mean until its in actual canon anything Ubisoft says about future lore is just as speculative as anything we say. I'm not against the merge per se and its seemingly not as big a break as between the Ancients and the Templars but it's still something to think about. [[User:Lacrossedeamon|Lacrossedeamon]] ([[User talk:Lacrossedeamon|talk]]) 02:37, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
:::I am leery of doing this before we have more definite lore surrounding Hassan-i Sabah. Per official canon he captured Alamut from someone. As far as we know Alamut never left Hidden One control. So regardless of what Ubisoft has said this implies some schism of some sort. I mean until its in actual canon anything Ubisoft says about future lore is just as speculative as anything we say. I'm not against the merge per se and its seemingly not as big a break as between the Ancients and the Templars but it's still something to think about. [[User:Lacrossedeamon|Lacrossedeamon]] ([[User talk:Lacrossedeamon|talk]]) 02:37, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
::::Vetinari, the history section of the Assassins article has already been moved to its own page, "[[History of the Assassins]]", due to its length (even though I would argue a brief 1–3 paragraph summary of it should still be present in the Assassins article. In addition, the scope of Assassin history spans as far back as Adam and Eve, as antecedents of the Hidden Ones are regarded by modern Assassins as part of their historical tradition. The idea of "Hidden Ones" discussing 1 millennium of the Assassin history and "Assassins" discussing the next millennium is premised on the misconception that there is a clear delineation between the two in canon and within in-universe historiography. This is not the case as it has not been confirmed—as has been fans' assumption since ''Origins''—that the name "Assassins" originated with Hassan-i Sabbah.  
::::Vetinari, the history section of the Assassins article has already been moved to its own page, "[[History of the Assassins]]", due to its length (even though I would argue a brief 1–3 paragraph summary of it should still be present in the Assassins article. In addition, the scope of Assassin history spans as far back as Adam and Eve, as antecedents of the Hidden Ones are regarded by modern Assassins as part of their historical tradition. The idea of "Hidden Ones" discussing 1 millennium of the Assassin history and "Assassins" discussing the next millennium is premised on the misconception that there is a clear delineation between the two in canon and within in-universe historiography. This is not the case as it has not been confirmed—as has been fans' assumption since ''Origins''—that in the ''Assassin's Creed'' universe the name "Assassins" originated with Hassan-i Sabbah.  
::::To repeat what I said in the community discussion, Ubisoft had advertised ''Origins'' to be about the origins of the Assassins. ''Origins'' made a retcon that shifted the beginning of the Assassins from Adam and Eve to the 1st century BCE. In reaction, fans then conceptually shifted the beginning of the Assassins to the ''11th century'' just based on assumptions about when the name Assassins must have arisen and that that name's invention must entail when the modern Assassins were actually born. This is not what was said in the lore. In this way, fans' misconception threatened to make a more extreme retcon on top of a retcon, and it is vital that we rectify this. Ubisoft's retcon is that the Assassins, by the name Hidden Ones, were founded in the 1st century BCE in Egypt. There is no delimitation about when or how Hidden Ones transitioned into using the name Assassins at this time, making any arbitrary delimitation with articles improper. It is clear, however, that it is the same organization.
::::To repeat what I said in the community discussion, Ubisoft had advertised ''Origins'' to be about the origins of the Assassins. ''Origins'' made a retcon that shifted the beginning of the Assassins from Adam and Eve to the 1st century BCE. In reaction, fans then conceptually shifted the beginning of the Assassins to the ''11th century'' just based on assumptions about when the name Assassins must have arisen and that that name's invention must entail when the modern Assassins were actually born. This is not what was said in the lore. In this way, fans' misconception threatened to make a more extreme retcon on top of a retcon, and it is vital that we rectify this. Ubisoft's retcon is that the Assassins, by the name Hidden Ones, were founded in the 1st century BCE in Egypt. There is no delimitation about when or how Hidden Ones transitioned into using the name Assassins at this time, making any arbitrary delimitation with articles improper. It is clear, however, that it is the same organization.
::::In addition, "Assassins" currently expounds upon philosophy, ideology, goals, and methods, which are more or less identical with the Hidden Ones. So information between the two pages on these topics are the same. The Hidden Ones article would just be folded into "Assassins" and cut down to keep the page concise.  
::::In addition, "Assassins" currently expounds upon philosophy, ideology, goals, and methods, which are more or less identical with the Hidden Ones. So information between the two pages on these topics are the same. The Hidden Ones article would just be folded into "Assassins" and cut down to keep the page concise.  
::::Lacrosse, I double-checked the AC1 game guide and both editions of ''The Essential Guide'' and can find no mention of Hassan-i Sabbah "captur[ing] Alamut from someone". Was this mentioned in ''Valhalla'' or ''Mirage''? [[User:Sol Pacificus|<span style="color:#990000;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:17px">'''Sol Pacificus'''</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Sol Pacificus|<span style="color:#D4AF37;font-family:Californian FB;font-size:11px">(Cyfiero)</span>]]</sup> 03:36, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
::::Lacrosse, I double-checked the AC1 game guide and both editions of ''The Essential Guide'' and can find no mention of Hassan-i Sabbah "captur[ing] Alamut from someone". Was this mentioned in ''Valhalla'' or ''Mirage''? [[User:Sol Pacificus|<span style="color:#990000;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:17px">'''Sol Pacificus'''</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Sol Pacificus|<span style="color:#D4AF37;font-family:Californian FB;font-size:11px">(Cyfiero)</span>]]</sup> 03:36, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Revision as of 04:38, 20 November 2023

This is the discussion page for Hidden Ones.
Here, you may discuss improving the article.
To discuss the subject itself, use the Forums.

Idea for Infobox

I believe the Hidden Ones should have a reorganized subsection, or at least have the Date reorganized section have 1090 (as the Assassin Brotherhood). AngelicDragonborn (talk) 11:46, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Merge into "Assassins"

I think it's pretty clear from this point, coming off of Assassin's Creed: Mirage, that the Hidden Ones and Assassins pages should be merged as the distinction as far as we know is more of a name change rather than there being any discontinuity between the two. In fact, this was already clear enough from Assassin's Creed: Origins in my opinion and reinforced in Assassin's Creed: Valhalla. Merging these two pages is extremely overdue, and so I will be committing to it by the end of this month if there are no strong objections and potentially earlier if there is popular assent. The confusion to our readers about the lore that leaving these two pages as separate articles has caused and may continue to cause is serious. Merging these two pages will also be in line with our community discussion back in 2020. Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 23:03, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

I completely agree with the merge. Like you said, the fact that it was only a name change has been clear for long. TiagoFF (talk) 23:39, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
It's not a strong objection but having separate pages may be an easier read with each broadly covering a thousand years each. Vetinari(Appointment) 00:23, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
I am leery of doing this before we have more definite lore surrounding Hassan-i Sabah. Per official canon he captured Alamut from someone. As far as we know Alamut never left Hidden One control. So regardless of what Ubisoft has said this implies some schism of some sort. I mean until its in actual canon anything Ubisoft says about future lore is just as speculative as anything we say. I'm not against the merge per se and its seemingly not as big a break as between the Ancients and the Templars but it's still something to think about. Lacrossedeamon (talk) 02:37, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
Vetinari, the history section of the Assassins article has already been moved to its own page, "History of the Assassins", due to its length (even though I would argue a brief 1–3 paragraph summary of it should still be present in the Assassins article. In addition, the scope of Assassin history spans as far back as Adam and Eve, as antecedents of the Hidden Ones are regarded by modern Assassins as part of their historical tradition. The idea of "Hidden Ones" discussing 1 millennium of the Assassin history and "Assassins" discussing the next millennium is premised on the misconception that there is a clear delineation between the two in canon and within in-universe historiography. This is not the case as it has not been confirmed—as has been fans' assumption since Origins—that in the Assassin's Creed universe the name "Assassins" originated with Hassan-i Sabbah.
To repeat what I said in the community discussion, Ubisoft had advertised Origins to be about the origins of the Assassins. Origins made a retcon that shifted the beginning of the Assassins from Adam and Eve to the 1st century BCE. In reaction, fans then conceptually shifted the beginning of the Assassins to the 11th century just based on assumptions about when the name Assassins must have arisen and that that name's invention must entail when the modern Assassins were actually born. This is not what was said in the lore. In this way, fans' misconception threatened to make a more extreme retcon on top of a retcon, and it is vital that we rectify this. Ubisoft's retcon is that the Assassins, by the name Hidden Ones, were founded in the 1st century BCE in Egypt. There is no delimitation about when or how Hidden Ones transitioned into using the name Assassins at this time, making any arbitrary delimitation with articles improper. It is clear, however, that it is the same organization.
In addition, "Assassins" currently expounds upon philosophy, ideology, goals, and methods, which are more or less identical with the Hidden Ones. So information between the two pages on these topics are the same. The Hidden Ones article would just be folded into "Assassins" and cut down to keep the page concise.
Lacrosse, I double-checked the AC1 game guide and both editions of The Essential Guide and can find no mention of Hassan-i Sabbah "captur[ing] Alamut from someone". Was this mentioned in Valhalla or Mirage? Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 03:36, 20 November 2023 (UTC)