Board Thread:Wiki discussion/@comment-18014300-20200504004330/@comment-4801149-20200509000041

Cris's closing question summarizes my own thoughts on the matter: How well have the true arbiters of canon thought this through? Have they considered this as carefully as we have, or are they simply repeating what they've read here on the wiki as "canon," mistakenly-written or otherwise, which leaves us simply self-fulfilling our own interpretations of the lore? Sol intimated that the latter has already happened in his opening post. If Ubisoft wants to be lazy and "outsource" the lore-keeping to this wiki, that's on them, but at the same time, we shouldn't be giving them that option. If it's at all possible, the writers are welcome to and should weigh in on this topic. Though I understand the issues with actually getting them to come down and talk to us. The impression I've gotten is they're able to have it their way on all fronts—use our speculation to fill in their own blanks, provide no guidance in return, and then point fingers at us if other fan groups have problems with it.

As for Kassandra being an Assassin, proto- or otherwise; if the Essential Guide states that fighting against the Order of Ancients is sufficient enough, then she counts. That's what I meant by a "lore master." It would be a writer or an officially licensed documentation by the writers.