Talk:The Creed
Reasoning[edit source]
Most of the information above, which is rather impressive might i add, is related mainly to the first Assassin's Creed story line, but still plays a very important roll in the sequal. This is not just for the sake of making the game harder, it provides a way to play and understand the game(s). Even though i believe strongly that the 3rd Assassin's Creed video game will take place in the future, the story line, im sure, will still incorparate these teachings of the ways of an assassin. After all, isn't that what the games about? - Mr. Ezio Auditore 12:45, January 2, 2010 (UTC)
Guys, i noticed that the article says that Altair may kill a beggar without any punishments. I've been playing all day and whenever i kill a beggar, i lose syncronization. Can someone remove that bit of info then?Dr. Soksok 12:48, November 7, 2010 (UTC)
- Removed. But next time, you can remove yourself and present the reason at the "Summary" section. ;D -- D. Cello 15:39, November 7, 2010 (UTC)
The Assassins are real i need to get hold of them they need to get to afganistan They need to stop the war someone tell them .09:45, April 12, 2012 (UTC)82.18.17.28
I disagree with the reasoning that Altair compromised the Brotherhood by killing the 8 templars. He was under orders from Al Mualim. There was no reason for him to disobey as he did not have the knowledge to know what linked those men, and discovered the truth when it was almost too late.
No. It was Al Mualim who compromised the Brotherhood by having Altaïr take out those templars, whom all found the Apple together... Al Mualim wasn't just the Mentor of the Libertine Assassins, but also a closet Templar.
I am not changing what is on the page because I would like this point to be properly debated before changes are made. Foetus 18:50, September 24, 2012 (UTC)
Ezio broke the Creed?[edit source]
ezio broke the creed during a memory in Revelations in Derinkuyu, when he caused explosions killed innocent civilians. - KratosSon (talk) 17:49, October 31, 2012 (UTC)
- We're now onto AC3, and you mention this now? Crimson Knight Intercom 17:54, October 31, 2012 (UTC)
- Nobody paid that much mind during the Renaissance. --Kainzorus Prime Walkie-talkie 18:01, October 31, 2012 (UTC)
Incorrect Punctuation[edit source]
The Creed, as listed, is incorrectly punctuated. It should be enumerated as "Nothing is true; everything is permitted." I humbly suggest fixing this error.
96.245.213.65 20:21, February 17, 2013 (UTC)
- You have a point, but it has been puncuated and said in different ways. Crimson Knight Intercom 20:32, February 17, 2013 (UTC)
- On that note: Should it be two separate sentences, just left alone, or what the anon said? Crimson Knight Intercom 20:41, February 17, 2013 (UTC)
- The grammatically correct form would either be with a semicolon or represented as two separate sentences; whether or not the games' direct quotations should be corrected for errors is up to debate. The previous anonymous user was me, utilising my iMac as opposed to my laptop. 96.245.213.65 03:44, March 1, 2013 (UTC)
Requiescat in Pace[edit source]
Requiescat in Pace is translated into "May he/she/it rest in/through peace". Just check any Latin dictionary and you will figure out "Requiescat" is a third-person subjunctive verb for Requiesco (I rest). "Rest in Peace" is used in parallel in English to the term but it does not translate, as "Rest" at the beginning of the clause suggests an imperative clause, demanding the dead to rest, instead of praying to God that the dead may rest. -Iosue (talk) 16:46, December 11, 2014 (UTC)
- And? --Kainzorus Prime ⚜ Walkie-talkie 16:47, December 11, 2014 (UTC)
RL origin of the phrase?[edit source]
Not a big deal but was interested int he origin of the phrase, it appears even earlier than Alamut. It is interesting, the earliest instance I can find is in a passage deep in Friedrich Nietzsche's book On the Genealogy of Morality published in 1887
" When the Christian crusaders in the Orient encountered the invincible order of the Assassins, that order of free spirits par excellence, whose lowest ranks followed a rule of obedience the like of which no order of monks ever attained, they obtained in some way or other a hint concerning that symbol and watchword reserved for the highest ranks alone as their secret: "Nothing is true, everything is permitted."—Well now, that was freedom of spirit; in that way the faith in truth itself was abolished. Has any European, any Christian free spirit every strayed into this proposition and into its labrynthine consequences? has one of them ever known the Minotaur of this cave from experience?—I doubt it [….] "
So was Nietzsche of all people the one who coined the phrase? Or was it already somewhat established even earlier. It does seem like he 's drawing upon something he'd read before. It's not directedly about the games, but in any case it is interesting, ..to me anyway. :P
76.235.173.36 10:10, February 4, 2015 (UTC)E
And the Queen of the south shall rise again Revelation
The Sign of Jonah …41"The men of Nineveh will stand up with this generation at the judgment, and will condemn it because they repented at the preaching of Jonah; and behold, something greater than Jonah is here. 42"The Queen of the South will rise up with this generation at the judgment and will condemn it, because she came from the ends of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon; and behold, something greater than Solomon is here. —unsigned comment by 198.49.31.3 (talk · contr)
Invention of the famous creed motto[edit source]
If you check the 4th page of the Magas Codex in Valhalla, someone mentions "yet if nothing is true (...)" and Eivor is in 9th century. Does that mean the motto was created before the 11th century by Hassan ? —unsigned comment by Azertyijkl123 (talk · contr)
Removal of the history section[edit source]
I wanted to leave a note as to why I have removed the history section.
First, the section was being used to discuss moments in the series when the Creed was relevant, such as violations of it. Not only is the Creed always relevant whenever an Assassin is operating, but in practice, the content of the section not only overlapped with the "Penalty for disobedience" section but it also read in some places more like a general recounting of events in some Assassin characters' missions. It was redundant, superfluous, and struggled to stay on-topic.
Second, it was being used by editors to note cases Assassins have violated the Creed, even in the absence of characters calling them out themselves. Since this activity relies on our own interpretation, this was territory ripe for violating both neutrality and no original research policies. The latter may be confusing because our wiki has loosened restrictions on original research in regards to supplementing our writing with external sources, but with two exceptions where leniency is observed (a section extrapolating a group's philosophy and the "Personality and traits" section) it still strictly applies in regards to inserting our own personal analyses. Those of us who have visited the Assassin's Creed subreddit know how divisive debates regarding what constitutes a violation of the Creed can be. Certainly, as in any matter of law, violations have also been disputed among Assassins within universe. (We know this was the case with Pierre Bellec even though in my opinion, he committed clear-cut treason). What counts as an "innocent" has also been heavily debated. For my part, some examples that were listed in the history section I did agree with (e.g. Chevalier de la Vérendrye's bombardment of the Homestead) and others I did not (e.g. the Assassins allying with New France to protect indigenous sovereignty).
Regardless, a violation of the Creed (or potential violation) should only be noted if this is a point raised in the actual story by characters, like when Ezio's apprentice mistakenly assassinated an innocent, or Perotto Calderon attacking his Assassin comrades for the Shroud of Eden. But these violations can already be discussed in the "Penalty for disobedience" section whose topic is to enlighten readers on how Assassins enforce the tenets and what reprisals they enact.
In other words, I don't think an article on the Creed is something that warrants a history section. If it were to have one, it should concern how it was developed. We have some information about that from The Hidden Ones DLC which can be expanded on. It should not be an exhaustive list of every moment when it was practiced, debated, and not practiced. That kind of information overlaps with the biography or history sections of other articles or other sections of this article and the Assassins article. Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 05:32, 27 November 2023 (UTC)