User talk:Lacrossedeamon

Welcome to the Order, Lacrossedeamon!

Welcome to the Assassin's Creed Wiki! We hope you enjoy your stay, and we look forward to working with you!

Have you something to say?

You can always ask our beloved administrators! Our local staff members can always lend a hand! You can also visit the wiki's community portal! We also have the Discord if you're ever in the mood for a chat! You can also check out the blogs, where you and other contributors can voice out your opinion.

We seek unity, stability and order.

Not sure where to start? You can always help out by sharing what you know on some of our stubs. Got some useful pictures? Share them with us on these articles. Got a useful concept for an article? Why not help out in some articles in need of a revamp? Always remember to sign your messages on talk pages with four tildes (~~~~) to avoid any confusion between users. You can also refer to the wiki's help pages if you're ever in doubt. Please remember to read our wiki policies to avoid gaining any unnecessary attention.

We wish you safety and peace on your future endeavors. Happy Editing!

Format

Hey Lacrossedeamon, I want to thank you for your initiative in creating the article on Mirages, but there were several formatting errors in regards to that page:

• Perspective

We take a lore-oriented approach here, and as a result, mainstream articles should be written as though you actually are living in the Assassin's Creed universe. This means that you should be writing from an in-universe perspective, rather than a gameplay one. A lot of the information on the page, while not explicitly referring to the game, were organized and listed out in such a specific way as to clearly suggest that it's coming from a gameplay point-of-view. For example "Known Mirages" implies that there is an audience that this list is using as a referential point—known to whom? Known to players. But from an in-universe perspective, players of the game doesn't exist. Instead, you should integrate that information into the article as just what mirages can manifest as without implying the observers of this are obviously players.

• Tense

Because we write from an in-universe perspective, this means we treat people and things that existed historically in Assassin's Creed, such as Ezio Auditore, as having really existed historically. This is why we tend to write in the historical past tense. However, not everything from historical periods are long gone; some still exist in the present day in the Assassin's Creed world. Mirages is one of these things. Mirages, being a naturally occurring optical phenomenon, continue to exist in the present day and will continue to exist as long as this phenomenon can exist in the universe. As such, it was incorrect to write about mirages in the historical past tense rather than the present tense.

• Introducing the subject of the article

As an extension of the first point, introducing the subject of the article from the very specific perspective of a main protagonist heavily implies that you're writing from a gameplay perspective. When you introduce subjects, the first line should always define exactly what it is. What exactly is a mirage? Refer to my correction as an example.

Anyways, I hope all our formatting standards don't come across as too overwhelming for you. You are not at fault because we have not had our layout guide and manual of style written out yet, and in fact, several other new editors such as yourself have been making similar errors. So don't worry. You are free to try to add back information to the page and even expand on it; just make sure to do your best to write from an in-universe perspective! Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 04:00, February 8, 2018 (UTC)

Hey thanks for the rundown. I’m usually not big on editing as all I have is an iPad which makes formatting a pain. I was just surprised that the page hadn't been created yet so I just hoped to get the ball rolling on this one in hopes a better Wikia editor might pick it up. I’m also curious on the validity of creating a page similar to the Hunt for the Nine or Liberation of Rome but about Bayek and Aya hunting the Snake. Lacrossedeamon (talk) 04:17, February 8, 2018 (UTC)

That would be entirely valid, even encouraged. Technically, we should have articles on every major event in the series. However, these articles are normally among the largest of projects, so you might want to warm-up with smaller articles first just to have a little more experience. You're not required to do so though. Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 04:21, February 8, 2018 (UTC)

The Shroud

Hello Lacrossedeamon.

I'm here to ask you again about the shroud. Once, you told me that Jesus' and Jason's weren't the same one. But it seems that Syndicate says otherwise and it confuses me. (A lot).

Let me explain myself by giving you some important points:

1- In Syndicate we know that Abstergo had one shroud before the one the Templars got from the Buckingham Palace, and that shroud was the original Consus created long before. (And it had his consciousness stored inside of it).

2- That shroud (the original) is known as the Golden Fleece, because Consus (in one of his conversations with Álvaro Gramática) mentions Jason as a person who he had contact with. And Consus' consciousness is stored ONLY in the original shroud. (Although a magazine says that Consus can/could communicate telepathically with some individuals).

3- This is not official, but I think that the Assassin Intel in Syndicate adds the stories from Project Legacy because that's explaining the journey that Shroud #1 (let's call the original that way hehe) took before being sold to Abstergo. (It was sold, was it?)

4- Renato mentions that the shroud had the image of a tortured man on it. (A reference to the shroud of Turin) This could confirm that the shroud of Turin is fake, since Shroud #1 was stolen by the assassins. It could be Brutus' body, but he wasn't tortured... right? Why would the responsible ones for the lore make such a reference? Was it suppose to be Jesus'?

5- The Essential Guide mentions Jesus' shroud as ONE of many, and also said that it's not the same one that Jason used before.

It confuses me so much. Can you explain to me once more why Jason's shroud is not the one Jesus wore? 

Oh, and I read your fanfic about Jesus' story. We have some details in common hehehe.

Thanks in advance.

Cristophorus35 (talk) 06:49, March 9, 2018 (UTC)

First thanks for the read, it means a lot. I tried to keep it mostly canon compliant and just theorize stuuf but admit it did get little fanfic-y in places, especially the Chalices and MD portion. Ideally Ubi are working up to a life of Jesus story as some of the coincidences like Kawab and the Holy Lance/Devotion Prong seem to perfect, But I’m worried if it does come to fruition I’ve hyped myself up to much and it won’t be as good as my idea and then I’d be devastated.

But onto the Shrouds. So Ubi has introduced a possible 4 Shrouds: the Golden Fleece or #1, the Coat of Many Colors, Jesus's, and the Buckingham Palace. Now I theorize that those last three are actually the same with the Coat of Many Colors being based down the Tribe of Judah to Jesus and then taken to Britannia by some of his Disciples as told in a few of the Holy Grail myths. Now due to the Abstergo files in Syndicate we know that the Golden Fleece is the original Shroud with Consus in it and that through it he also came in contact with Jason, Giovanni Borgia, and William Robert Woodman (the last hasn't been explained how he came in contact with the Shroud though) but that Shroud was destroyed by the Assassins necessitating for the acquisition of the other Shroud in Syndicate. Consus is also shown to have a connection to Dorothy Osbourne from Uprising but we don’t know how as the Shroud should have still been in Europe. Additionally, Abstergo theorized that Jeanne d'Arc's Voices were from Consus (I've got my own theories on that though). Those two are probably what magazine was referring to.

The main confusion is due to the Shroud of Turin. It’s advertised as the same Shroud that Jesus had but Project Legacy tells us differently. It was stolen and replaced with a fake by Italian Assassin’s. When used to heal Giovanni Borgia, it give the boy a connection to both Consus and Brutus. This tells us that the Shroud of Turin was the original Shroud, ie the Golden Fleece, and the one used on and buried with Brutus. While it’s possible I find it highly unlikely that it made its way from Brutus's tomb to Judea in half a century in order to also be the same Shroud Jesus had. It’s described depicting the visage of a tortured man but that the man has changed throughout history, possibly to be the last person who used it, so the tortured man shown on the Shroud could be anyone and not specifically Jesus or Brutus. Now why the Templars marketed the Shroud of Turin as the same Shroud Jesus had is unknown. Either they were mistaken similar to the belief that the Chalice was an object rather than a person or they believed there was some benefit to be gained by the deception. We won’t known until it explained how d'Charney found it or it’s history from Brutus to that point. Hopefully we see it in the Origins comic.

Please let me know if you have more questions or if anything I said was unclear and I’ll try to explain myself better. Also I’d love to know what details we had in common.

V/R Lacrossedeamon (talk) 06:15, March 10, 2018 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay. I forgot there's no notification on the talk page haha.

So... it's basically a plot hole then, that's sad. It was well explained in Project Legacy, but now with Syndicate, it got confused. I tried to ask Mr. Aymar and M.r Yohalem about it... but no answers. Now, another thing that disturbes me, it's the color of the Shroud. According to the glyphs, Jesus' was red. Why do I say this? Some glyphs shows us the real aspect of some POEs, like the staff and the sword. First, I thought that all the historical characters (that were the answer to solve the puzzle) had the same POE, but know I see that those had that kind of POE, but NOT the same one. Example: Saint Peter and Alexander had a staff, but it wasn't the same one, and the staff we saw in the glyph was the papal one. You follow me? Same happened with the sword and, I theorize, the same happened with the shrouds. Jason's wasn't Joseph's and the glyphs show us a red shroud. Curiously, it shows us that when we are seeing an image of Jesus crucified. If this is true, then Joseph's wasn't the one Jesus wore. In my headcanon, Joseph's, David's and Jesus' was the same one. (I thought as much because, according to the Bible, Joseph and David were Jesus' ancestors. Please, correct me if I'm wrong). But now, I don't know anymore. It bothers me because, as a believer, it hypes me seeing the history of my beliefs being adapted to my favorite franchise, but this lack of attention really pisses me off.

And don't worry about your idea. If it doesn't make it, you can always write a good fanfiction. (As I'm doing these days... well... not the writing part haha. It still a work in progress... a very... very slow progress). And of course, we can chat about the things we have in common about it. I fact, I tried to search your username in the ACWiki discord server, to make you this very question, but it seems you are not there. If you have an alternative when we can chat (aside from this, because talking on the talk page it's... uncomfortable for me hehe), but don't feel forced to share it if you dont want to. 

It was fun reading your adaptation about Jesus' life. I really, really, like it. :D

Cristophorus35 (talk) 07:36, March 12, 2018 (UTC)

I wouldn’t say it’s a plot hole. First off I disregard how the Shrouds have been depicted as artistic license. We don’t yet know enough about them to say how static they are in their physical attributes. I still do believe Joseph's Shroud is both David’s and Jesus's. And your are sorta right about them being related, David is actually descended from Judah, one of Joseph’s older brothers, which makes sense as they stole the Shroud from him and sold him to Egyptians as a slave. Now, Mary’s husband, St. Joseph, is descended from David; some say Mary is as well but others say she’s from the Tribe of Levi, not Judah. So technically Jesus isn’t officially descended from David. Incidentally, I think the Papal Staff was the one in the possession of John the Baptist before St. Peter got it. And since John the Baptist is from the Tribe of Levi, I think that Staff was also Moses's as he is also from the Tribe of Levi.

Now in regards to Jesus's Shroud not being the Shroud of Turin, I don’t think that’s a plot hole either. Ubi likes to subvert some commonly held beliefs, like Juno being married to Aita instead of Jupiter or Hephaestus being older than her. So if I was in charge here’s how I’d explain it. The Shroud of Turin surfaces in the 1300s a few decades after the disbanding of the Knights Templar in the hands of a man allegedly the newphew of one of the Templars executed during the disbandment. Bonus points for having it be the Templar we saw in the beginning of Unity. So the Order has lost its clout with the Church at this time. What better way to regain it than to claim that the mystical artifact in your possession was previously owned by Jesus. This backfired obviously as it advertised the owner of the Shroud and the Assassins stole it back (no clue how they lost it in the first place though).

I definitely think we should get another story from the Templar point of view dealing with the fallout of the public disbandment of the Order. The Sinclair Expedition could tie in to it as well.

Lacrossedeamon (talk) 10:35, March 13, 2018 (UTC)

I see now. Thank you very much.Cristophorus35 (talk) 04:25, March 18, 2018 (UTC)

Titling images

Hey Lacross, when you title images you upload, remember to give them a title reflective of what they are, not a random series of numbers and letters.  Since you're only using them for your own reference, I think I will be lax and not delete them which would force you to reupload them all over again, but yeah, just make sure that you give them proper titles for future reference. :P Sol Pacificus^(Cyfiero) 23:30, July 20, 2018 (UTC)