Talk:Artaxerxes I of Persia

This is the discussion page for Artaxerxes I of Persia. Here, you may discuss improving the article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.	Be polite Assume good faith Do not insult other people

Contradictory info

When meeting the the man who would go on to become Darius II his dialogue implies his father is still alive and not exiled. The note earlier in the arc from Gergis states the Order wanted him dethroned and sent an assassin implicating Artabanus/Darius but notes that Artaxerxes lived while making no comment on whether we was successfully dethroned. In light of this I think we should write more speculatively on the individual Kassandra meets in Megaris. Lacrossedeamon (talk) 07:48, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

Have we been able to rule out that "Prince of Persia" takes place after Legacy of the First Blade? Because that would be the less speculative choice. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 19:46, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

Hard to say but nothing in that memory really makes any historically logical sense. If it's after LotFB there wouldn't be too much time if any before Artaxerxes's historical death date. Lacrossedeamon (talk) 01:30, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

You would have to elaborate in full detail about this. I always took the premise of "Prince of Persia" to be that Artaxerxes was dethroned and officially reported dead in 424 BCE but actually survived and escaped to Greece, so his death date in Assassin's Creed isn't meant to be the same as his historical death date. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 02:49, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

Well given the dialogue the memory seems to take place before Kassandra meets Darius which would place it a few years prior to Artaxerxes's historical death date. Also the failed assassination attempt mentioned by Gergis would have to take place before Legacy of the First Blade (memory) where the dialogue implies Artaxerxes is still alive and reigning. Lacrossedeamon (talk) 04:47, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

Can you cite specific quotes as evidence? Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 17:55, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

This whole exchange implies to me that Artaxerxes is still alive and ruling:

• Son of Artaxerxes: I am Darius. Son of the Persian king, Artaxerxes.
• Darius: Artaxerxes...
• Son of Artaxerxes: You know my father?
• Darius: We've met... But it's been a while.
• Son of Artaxerxes: He's a good king and a great father. Persia knows peace. She prospers. I miss him.

It's not explicit but the tense and phrasing is not what I'd use for someone that has passed. Lacrossedeamon (talk) 01:45, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

Yes, I'm aware that Artaxerxes is alive and ruling at the ending of Legacy of the First Blade. That is unambiguous and not what I was asking about. The fact that Artaxerxes is the king during the events of the DLC doesn't eliminate the possibility that the memory "Prince of Persia" is set after, when Artaxerxes has been dethroned and officially pronounced dead to the public and to history while still being covertly hunted by the new king.

You mentioned in response that the dialogue of "Prince of Persia" suggests it should be set before Kassandra meets Darius. You also noted a failed assassination attempt described by Gergis prior to the ending of Legacy of the First Blade. Admittedly, I don't remember off the top of my head when he mentioned this since it's been a while since I played it. It is these two pieces of evidence I am asking for direct reference to. Of course, I could spend the time to investigate all of this myself, but I'm handling many things at once on the wiki. Since you're the one posing these counter-points, I hope it's not too much to ask that you really present the case you want to make about this in full by laying out all the evidence you have in mind thoroughly. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 01:30, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

The description of a failed assassination is in a scroll we have transcribed over in Smoke and Fury:

For decades Artaxerxes brought peace and prosperity, but Persia needs more.
From promise of legacy and glory to coercion and threat, unlike his predecessors, Artaxerxes refused to yield. But the Order needed him dethroned. We led him to believe that Artabanus made the attempt on his life.
Artaxerxes lived, but no matter. The King is ephemeral.
The Order is eternal.
- The Herald.

Meanwhile, from Prince of Persia we have these quotes:

• Kassandra: Your turn to tell me something. You said a man tried to kill you.
• Artaxerxes: The man who rose up to kill the tyrant Xerxes was named Darius... He was of a new creed of killers, unlike any Persia had known. He was also the man hired to kill me.
• Kassandra: A killer of kings, hired to kill a simple blind man? Why?
• [...]
• Kassandra: Now that's out of the way, you owe me a tale. You said the king killer, Darius, was hired to kill you, too.
• Artaxerxes: He was. By my brother.

It does very much sound like she's learning about Darius for the first time, but that might just be me. - Soranin (talk) 01:52, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for locating these Sora. Both of these pieces of evidence actually jog my memory. When I first encountered Gergis' note, I thought it was referring to the event recounted by the Blind King in "Prince of Persia" of being ousted from his throne. Gergis mentions that "Artaxerxes lived" after the Order made an "attempt on his life" because they "needed him dethroned". I took this to be consistent with the premise in "Prince of Persia" that Artaxerxes survived an assassination attempt that dethroned him. Although the public believes Artaxerxes died, the Order knew he "lived". At that stage in Legacy of the First Blade, it all looked brilliantly consistent to me. As well, if Gergis' scroll does align with "Prince of Persia" telling of events, then there is actually a conflict within legacy of the First Blade, between Gergis' scroll and the ending. There is the also the possibility that when Gergis writes that the "Artaxerxes lived", he also meant the plot to dethrone him also failed, in which case it won't conflict with the ending.

The dialogue in "Prince of Persia" does heavily sound that she had no yet met Darius at that point, and that was how I must've also interpreted it when I first played it. Thus, "Prince of Persia" does conflict with the ending of Legacy of the First Blade whether or not it conflicts with Gergis' record. But I find the idea of "writing more speculatively about the individual Kassandra meets in Megaris" to be too... well, speculative... because speculation is not allowed. Perhaps Lacrosse meant to say ambiguously instead. Writing ambiguously is not unprecedented when we are confronted with lore conflicts, and it is a good tactic. But I am concerned about inserting speculative headcanons as a "solution" to the conflict here. While Legacy of the First Blade is a more important source than "Prince of Persia", and the man Kassandra entrusts Elpidios to is likely more trustworthy than the blind stranger in Megaris, how do we know this? If we write ambiguously about the stranger in Megaris, should we also write ambiguously about the man who takes Elpidios into his care? Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 22:55, 28 June 2023 (UTC)