main index




Topical Tropes

Other Categories

TV Tropes Org
Headscratchers: Assassin's Creed
Note: For the sake of organization, if you have a Headscratcher that only pertains to a specific game, please put it on one of the following pages instead of here:

This page is for Headscratchers that focus on the series and mythology overall, or questions about what is going on during Desmond's time.

And remember: If your question can be answered with "The Animus does not create a perfect simulation" or "The Templars or the Assassins altered the history", it does not need to be listed.
  • Just how does one use a Hidden Blade, exactly? In-game, the user sort of flicks their wrist to extend it, and flicks it back to retract it. But aren't there thousands of situations where an Assassin could do so accidentally? Like, when climbing up a structure, or trapped in combat, or even reaching for an apple?
    • If you're assuming that the blade freely slides in and out, it doesn't. There's some kind of switch or pressure-activated trigger within the glove itself that shoots the blade out at great force and locks it in place until it's retracted (that's part of what makes it so deadly).
      • But Ezio (and Altair) don't wear gloves with their blades. I think we see a few Assassins that do, but they don't.
      • Well, mainly it looks cool. But yes, in the novelizations, they're said to use some type of deploy mechanism attached to their finger.
      • If I remember correctly, when Game Informer did a cover story on the game, someone explained how the hidden blade works. Basically, removing the ring finger is symbolic in that not only can the assassin no longer marry (excluding Ezio in ACII), he is in effect married to the Brotherhood (with the hidden blade being the ring) but it also shows their commitment to the Brotherhood. Once they put the hidden blade on, there is a ring that is attached to the stump with a wire that activates the mechanism that draws the blade whenever the wearer flicks their wrist or so. I'd imagine there's also a safety wire of sorts attached to one of their other fingers to prevent the blade from deploying accidently, can't really remember what they said exactly.
  • I don't understand why they made the animus/modern day storyline in the first place. Even by the end of the second game, it still hasn't justified itself to this troper. Assassin's Creed would have worked just fine as a series of games, each with their own story.
    • Because it's cool.
      • It also allows the skipping of boring time, a justification for the side-missions respawning, etc. Basically it's a framing device, and it looks like they're building up to a third in the modern day.
      • Looks like? They set the release date in the first game! December 21, 2012 is repeatedly stated as the Templar's deadline and was on the right schedule for when the game was initially released to provide development time to put out the third game then (maybe a little earlier to make more than last-minute holiday sales unless they're really dedicated to the solstice).
      • While a series of self-contained games could work, the metaplot ties the whole history of the two groups together.
    • 1. Desmond Miles is the man here (like it or not). 2. Having a computerized simulation gave Ubisoft a lot of leeway in how things could be presented (which, as you may guess from most of the entries here, they needed big time). 3. Knowing that the Assassins and Templars have been fighting, constantly, for hundreds thousands of years, as opposed to three remote, unrelated flareups, really drives home the sheer scope of the conflict.
    • Also it basically justifies anything wrong in the game. Why can't Alta´r swim? The animus has a bug.
    • This was a bit of realism. It was extremely uncommon for people to know how to swim back then. Its actually kind of weird that Ezio knows how to swim in the sequel for that matter.
      • Actually, I figured that was because he had no reason to know how to swim. They don't live in an area with a large number of bodies of water, and he seems to operate mainly in that area. Sure, there are seas sort of nearby, but I don't really see him learning to swim. It would be like learning to move through a forest quietly; kind of a moot point in the area. What makes less sense is Ezio being able to swim with all of that gear and the heavy clothes on him.
      • Actually, I just remembered something. Lorenzo di Medici, AKA Giovanni Auditore's friend, almost died by drowning. Giovanni saved him with swimming. So, perhaps, when Ezio was a boy, Giovanni said, "Alright, it's a hot day in Firenze. EZIO! We're going to the river. You're going to learn to swim! You'll never know when you need it. . ."
    • Actually, it's justified at the end of the second game. Minerva speaks directly to Desmond through Ezio via the animus and gives him an important message about an upcoming global disaster. The fact that Those Who Came Before seem to be able to transcend time in this way shows that the scope is waaaay bigger than just a Templar/Assassin war.
  • If the parting of the red sea was an illusion created by the Piece of Eden, how did they cross it?
    • This troper has a sneaking suspicion that Al Mualim was ever so slightly full of it when he claimed that all the Biblical miracles were nothing but illusions cast by the Pieces of Eden. After all, how exactly does he know that all the Biblical miracles were illusions? Because he found one of the Pieces of Eden? Nonsense. That's like some future archaeologist stumbling across an old copy of Adobe Photoshop and concluding that Elvis never really existed, he was just some guy they photoshopped into a bunch of pictures. I suspect that at the end of the series we'll discover that there's more truth to religious belief than the Templars ever suspected.
      • In the sequel we're told by one of Those Who Came Before that they and their technology were what inspired human religions, so Jossed. As for how Al Mualim got his information, the Apple isn't just a hypnotism device it's also a repository of knowledge.
      • Not Jossed at all. The Truth video reveals that the Book of Genesis is actually a fairly accurate (if poetic and non-literal) account of the creation of the human race.
      • Except for the bit where humans were not created by a god but by the race who made the artifacts.
      • Hence the phrase "poetic and non-literal". And as always, remember Clarke's Third Law: Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. Those Who Came Before are advanced enough that they may as well be gods.
      • I think we basically agree here but are arguing about two different things. Al Mualim claimed that the Apple and artifacts like it were responsible for all the miracles of various religions, the second post in this block argued that he was wrong and it would turn out that there was more to religions than the Templars thought. That's the point I said was Jossed a few posts back - Assassin's Creed II makes it quite clear that Those Who Came Before really are ultimately responsible for various apparent miracles (including what is pretty much the big one, as shown in The Truth).
    • Create the illusion of parting the Red Sea, and then an illusion of you crossing it. Meanwhile, you move the rest of your people away while everyone chasing you is brainwashed. Or hell, just brainwash the people chasing you and tell them to walk into the ocean until they die from it, then send a few mind-raped survivors back to tell everyone you parted the Red Sea and drowned everybody.
      • This also makes sense in that it explains the period of wandering detailed in the Bible. Since Moses was taking the Jews the long way around, he had to give them some sort of excuse for it taking so long. So he made them think they were wandering in the desert even though he was just making up the extra distance.
    • Even though Al Mualim states that all the Apple ever does is perform illusions, he demonstrates that the Apple is actually capable of more than that every time he restrains Alta´r. Another thing to think about is that in the second game, we are introduced to the Staff, which can have the Apple installed on it to increase its power. Since the original Biblical story makes many reference to Moses' staff, it is possible that he had both the Staff and the Apple and with their combined power was able to create both the illusion of the parting of the Red Sea and facilitate a means of getting across it without having to part it.
      • Al Mualim is not fully informed. We know as of ACII that humans have a dormant neurotransmitter int hem that is triggered by the Pieces, particularly the Apple. This is what he was using to restrain Altair, albeit to a very limited degree thanks to his innate Assassin genes that made him resistant.
      • They seemingly can't decide whether atheists are right or the villains. Chalk it up to that "multicultural team" they want to PC you with.
      • Just because some villains are atheists doesn't mean they're not right about that specific conviction. Ezio's an atheist, or close to; Altair seems not to subscribe to Islam, Judaism or Christianity and later in his life writes his theories about why anyone does, going so far to think of pantheism as a more logical (though still wrong) method of explaining the world. On that note, there are villainous and heroic theists as well. It's not inconsistent so much as, well, realistic. Your faith or lack thereof is part of who you are and may inform your ethics, but it doesn't actually make you a good or bad person. Fanaticism, on the other hand... My point being, TWGB are god-figures, and several humans or human-hybrids throughout history used the power of their artifacts, the Pieces of Eden, to seem like prophets or avatars. The Pieces have varying abilities, from mental domination to healing to boosting combat skills to possibly manipulating time itself. Maybe parting the Red Sea was one of them. Or Al-Mualim may have just been using poetic license. Nothing is true.
      • We get a conclusive answer to this in Assassin's Creed III. Juno reveals to Desmond that when enough people are enthralled by a Piece of Eden and told to believe something, they can make it come true. By extension, this would mean all miracles actually did happen.
  • If you steal from people, nobody calls you for it directly (they only lament "my purse! It's gone!"), and it raises your notoriety. However, if you loot bodies, bystanders yell at you for it to your face, but it doesn't make you more notorious.
    • The first part is untrue; you can hear your victims calling for the guards if you run for it (though you're usually fast enough to escape without trouble), but if you stick around for too long the person you stole from will forget the guards and start punching you him/herself. As for the point about looting corpses, that's a natural reaction for typical crowd behavior, as crowds usually observe and fail to act. The only reason cutpurse victims fight you is because the atrocity directly affected them.
    • Notoriety deals with how the guards perceive you, not the unwashed masses (who are pretty much always the same regardless of your recent history). As for the grossly disproportionate outrage over looting corpses...what, putting them in that state is perfectly fine?...I chalk it up to irrational stick-up-the-butt prejudice. Annoying but ultimately harmless.
  • Just what is eagle vision supposed to be? At first I figured it was the Animus's best approximation of Alta´r's skilled eye to relate to Desmond. But now Desmond has the power in the real world. Ezio also seemed to be able to pick a man out instantly with the eagle vision, where other Assassins had failed. Is Ezio just that good, or is eagle vision an actual power? As in, it's not Broad Strokes or artistic license or anything, and people in the Alta´r/Ezio/Desmond bloodline just had the power to see things as gold/red/blue false color?
    • It's not supposed to be video-game targeting. It's supposed to be ultra-perception, that basically constructs "the truth from the lies" (wait what am i doing dammit too much nasuverse magibabbly has cooked my brain) LET'S START AGAIN. It lets people with it identify the not-that-obvious signs that show things like "hidden door here", "that guy is evil", "distinguish feather from information-rich rooftop", "minor painted over traces that can be reconstructed into coherent image", that sort of thing. In-game, it shows up as highlights. Basically, it gives you Batman's eyes. It's kinda absurd, but this is a game series about hereditary Assassins who are actually closer to Batman than the Hashashin.
    • The Assassins are Not Quite Human, as Subject 16 implies. Eagle Vision is simply a sixth sense they possess, probably as a result of descent from Those Who Came Before.
      • I thought the ending sequence of ACII made it pretty clear that eagle vision was a sixth sense passed down from Those Who Came Bedfore, based on what Juno said while Desmonds trying to hit all the power switches underneath the Colleseum.
      • It's very, very strongly implied in Subject 16's glyph puzzles that the Assassins (or at least, Desmond's bloodline) are descended from a half-human, half-Those Who Came Before coupling. As TWCB were essentially Gods, this means that Desmond's ancestors possess several unique abilities, including Eagle Vision. It's possible that their extreme durability (ability to survive falling from great heights) and unlimited stamina could also come under this, if they're not simply effects of the Animus.
      • Eagle Vision is not the sixth sense that Those Who Came Before kept from us. If it was, there wouldn't be any reason for Juno to tell Desmond to "Awaken the Sixth". Eagle Vision is just a more basic version of the Sixth Sense. This also justifies the sudden renaming and upgrade it gets in Revelations, where it's named Eagle Sense, and allows you to do the same as with Eagle Vision, as well as predict where a target will go, and where he has already gone. In other words, Desmond, Ezio and possibly Alta´r as well, awaken the sixth sense in Revelations.
  • Why is "being in the Animus" a legitimate excuse for every illogical feature of the Animus?
    • Because the Animus is basically a Game Within A Game. It's explicitly shown to be not fully realistic, to tell the story in Broad Strokes and to glitch at times.
      • Yes, I know. This is more of a thing that Bugs Me than an actual Fridge Logic situation. Any nonsensical situation occurring within the Animus can be hand waved in this manner. It's just such a lame excuse.
      • Oh, baw. To you, it's lame. To me, personally, it's brilliant, clever, simple, and highly effective.
    • Indeed; the Animus isn't so much "viewing the past" as it is creating a video game based on Desmond's genetic memories in his DNA. Even in-universe, the playable Alta´r and Ezio sections are basically a video game that Desmond is playing via virtual reality.
      • So what will the excuse be when it's time to fight in Desmond's shoes? I think less emphasis should be on the nature of the Animus and instead remember the MST3K Mantra.
      • ACII is consistent about this — Desmond's fight scenes happen without a user interface.
  • As far as Cain being the first Templar, who's the first Assassin? Considering Cain killed Able, who avenged Able? Did that person therefore become the first Assassin?
    • In the Bible, I think Adam and Eve have a third son, named Seth, after Cain kills Abel. Perhaps Seth grows up and kills his older brother Cain in revenge for killing Able, making Seth the first Assassin?
      • According to the more dramatic interpretations of the Bible, Cain was cursed by God to wander the Earth forever without the ability to die (i.e. never being able to enter heaven). If the next sequel deals with Cain then, in keeping with the Rule of Drama, it'll probably have him as some sort of immortal Big Bad (supreme leader of the Templars, perhaps?).
      • I doubt it, just because it would draw comparisons with another Kane.
  • Exactly what race is Desmond? Apparently Alta´r was Arab, and Ezio was just Italian with a tan, so what's Desmond? If they are both Alta´r's descendants, does that mean that Ezio has Arab blood too?
    • Actually Alta´r is half-Arab. His mother was a Christian, meaning she was probably white. Desmond is the direct descendant of both Ezio and Alta´r, therefore Desmond has some amount of Arab blood in him. But it's such a small amount and it's so distant that it's reasonable to call Desmond white.
    • I've always assumed that Desmond was deliberately designed to be of mixed racial origin, so they could justify anyone being his ancestor. Especially when contrasted with Lucy, Shaun, and Vidic, Desmond clearly has some recent non-European ancestry, most likely Hispanic or Arab.
    • Ezio isn't a descendant of Alta´r's. I believe that it states this in Black Flag in one of the emails, so Ezio isn't Arab by Alta´r's blood, but if he has another ancestor thats Arab, it wasn't stated.
      • And, of course, Maria (Alta´r's wife and Desmond's ancestor) was white and probably English.
  • If the animus is programmed for Desmond to be able to access his ancestors' memories through Broad Strokes, wouldn't it make more sense if it skipped all the stuff that didn't directly relate to what they want to find out? I mean, broaden the strokes even more? Remove the guards from the streets, for example, so Desmond is free to go to places without being harassed.
    • Those guards were in Alta´r's/Ezio's memories, so they're there in the Animus. The idea of the device is that you relieve your ancestor's memory exactly; removing parts of it to save time might cause problems. The MST3K Mantra really applies here — the Animus works like a video game, just run with it.
      • Case in point: The fact that they needed Desmond to actually dive into the memories and personally sift through them suggests that they don't know exactly what they're looking for. Abstergo knew Alta´r had found several other Pieces of Eden, but they don't know when, where, or how he found them. Even if they had the ability to omit certain memories (and they might not, the design of the Animus or the nature of the genetic memory may not allow it), they don't know which memories are relevant to their search. Suppose one of those street guards had provided Alta´r with a piece of vital intelligence that was key to the completion of his mission. If they remove all the guards, Alta´r can't get that intelligence, can't complete his mission, and Abstergo can't find the Pieces of Eden.
      • Right at the start of the first game they try to skip right to when Alta´r found the Apple, but end up with an incomprehensible glitchy mess. They had to replay a bunch of previous memories to give Desmond enough context to watch the important scene.
    • Plus, with Alta´r, Abstergo wanted a specific memory but in order to reach it, they needed Desmond to synchronize with Alta´r as much as possible, which meant replaying things as Alta´r remembered them. With Ezio on the other hand, the Assassins wanted to train Desmond, so the guards made a suitable training obstacle.
    • To a degree, there is a lot of fast-forwarding going on; the Animus makes it explicitly clear that it is "fast-forwarding to a more recent memory."
  • Are we told explicitly at any point how long Lucy, Rebecca or Shaun have been with the Assassins?
    • No.
    • Shaun and Rebecca were both recruited into the organization after trying out other careers - they both look to be in their mid-thirties at the latest, so it's probably safe to assume that at the longest, they've been with the Assassins for about twelve years. Lucy's origins with the Assassins are still unclear so it's hard to tell, but in ACII she mentions that it's been seven years since she's seen Rebecca, so she's been with the Assassins for at least that long.
  • Okay, I have one question that confuses me about the Assassin's Creed games. What are the Templars after? At the end of ACII you hear Minerva's warning and learn that there is a threat to the entire planet approaching. So, what do the Templars do in all this? Each Templar leader or prominent member have wildly differing goals, from Robert and Al-Mualim, to Rodrigo and then Cesare Borgia. Do they have any other goals other than obtaining the POE for personal gain? We have enough information to suggest otherwise, but am I missing something or do the Templars' overall goals seem to be more and more aimed at destroying the world (which they happen to live on)?
    • The Templars all want to control the world, through the Pieces of Eden. Abstergo plans on launching a satellite containing a Piece of Eden, presumably the apple, to orbit around the world, allowing them to control the minds of most, if not all, of the people on the planet. The threat of the Earth's destruction is a second matter entirely, in which the Earth's poles reverse, and the Sun will destroy the entire planet. The Templars/Abstergo have nothing to do with that threat, and likely don't even know about it.
  • Altair fucks over the Templars royally. He kills off several of their major leaders, and then hunts down a lot of the others for a long time. He's very good at straight up murdering people in the face, so we can assume that a *lot* of templars got facemurdered. He reorganises the assassins into a more effective force, one that can change and modify itself as necessary. And then we get to Ezio's time and find out that the Templars are once again highly organised and generally in control of stuff (able to install one of their leaders as pope apparently quite easily) and the assassins are a weak and distributed force that can't quite stand up to the templars. And then Ezio joins, royally fucks up the templars again, killing their main leader of the time, steals two pieces of eden from the vatican after punching the pope in the face a few times, pumps a lot of money into the assassin organisation, single handedly rediscovers all the stuff that Altair already discovered, and starts rebuilding the assassin's order into something that can stand on equal grounds with the templars. And then we get to Desmond's time and find out that the templars rule the world and the assassins are on the run, in hiding, and losing badly whenever they go into open conflict against the templars. They're so desperate that they're willing to devote a *lot* of time and resources into Desmond to get him on the team. So what's the deal here? Is it just that the assassins, as a whole, just plain suck? That Altair, Ezio and Desmond are the ultimate badasses who can single handedly turn the war in their favour whenever they bother to join? Frankly at this point in the series, the templars *deserve* to win. They have some serious organisation acumen and determination.
    • It's a war. The conflict between the Assassins and the Templars is a back-and-forth struggle involving secretive actions across entire civilizations. Keep in mind that even at the height of Ezio's power, he was focusing the majority of his efforts at fighting one Templar leader in one city in one part of Europe, while the Templars in this timeframe controlled entire armies. The Templars have always been more powerful than the Assassins, which is why the Assassins have always been forced to operate covertly. Ezio's actions were little more than a moderate setback for them, because the width and breadth of their control spread across the entire globe. And, to be honest, Ezio's elimination of the Borgias may have, ultimately, helped the Templars out quite a bit, as the Borgias were power-mad loonies with no real interest in the Templars' overarching goal of establishing a New World. By the time Cesare took over, it was less about idealism and more about Cesare stabbing the Borgia flag into as many skulls as he could.
  • Why is the series called Assassin's Creed? It's not just Altair's or Ezio's. All Assassins have the same creed. Shouldn't it be Assassins' Creed?
    • It's just a matter of perspective. We are only following one Assassin in the game, and the creed belongs to him. "Meet Ezio Auditore. He is an Assassin. This is the Assassin's Creed."
  • If I understand correctly, the Templar/Assassin breakdown works like this: All Designated Historical Villains are Templars, and all Designated Historical Good Guys are Assassins (or sympathizers). But it's stated in the games that the Templars altered history books to smear the Assassins - shouldn't the breakdown be opposite then? Shouldn't the Borgias actually be Assassins, considering their modern connotations (especially Lucrezia, with her reputation as a poisoner)? Shouldn't Richard the Lionheart be a Templar? Of course, I understand that the games are narrated from the Assassins' point of view, so "the eeeeevil Templars changed all the history books to make us appear bad, but we never engage in such underhanded tactics, no sir!" would fit, but it still bothers me.
    • ....did you actually pay attention? Lots of people who are considered heroes were actually Templars. Winston Churchill and FDR were Templars!
    • Let's not forget that Niccol˛ Machiavelli was revealed to be an Assassin. Psychology itself takes the term Machiavellianism to mean being cool and emotionally detached. This leaves him as appearing inhuman. However, when looked at from a different angle, being calm, cool and collected makes one a clever negotiator, manipulator, and a great Assassin as well, thus showing the Templars' twisting of history.
  • Is it ever revealed why Cain wanted the Apple and/or why he founded the Templars?
    • No but my guess is power.

  • Why do the Assassins call themselves assassins? I mean I know they assassinate people but that isn't all they do. Clearly they are a mercenary group that travels all around the world fighting in wars where the Templars have political interest and have helped rescue people in need around the local communities. I mean the Templars engage in assassinations too and yet they aren't called assassins as a result. I guess the name "traveling mercenaries who fight against a global conspiracy spanning thousands of years who sometimes assassinate members of said conspiracy" doesn't roll off the tongue quite as well?
    • Because we only associate the word "assassin" with murderers because of the Templars editing history.
    • It's unintentional but the word that inspired assassin originally means "foundation". Not a bad word to describe your group's ideals.
    • Assassination (and all the killing/stealing/information gathering/sabotage they have to do to get to their targets) is still the primary focus of the organization. As Shaun once pointed out, it's the one part of the job that's the same for everybody. One Assassin might rescue slaves, one might destroy Templar propaganda, one might deliver food to starving refugees, but all are versed in the art of blade-to-vital-area and will do it at some point. Yes, even Shaun.
  • Did Frederich Nietzche really say "Nothing is true, everything is permitted"? I've seen it at TOW's article on Assassins and removed it assuming it was vandalism but they put it right back in.
    • He mentions them in On the Genealogy of Morality, and at one point does say the line. The quote, just because I think it's badass: "When the Christian crusaders in the Orient came across that invincible order of Assassins ľ that order of free spirits par excellence whose lowest order received, through some channel or other, a hint about that symbol and spell reserved for the uppermost echelons alone, as their secret: "nothing is true, everything is permitted". Now that was freedom of the spirit, with that, belief in truth itself was renounced."
  • How exactly does the Animus work? Is it like a 3D videogame? Does Desmond control Altair and Ezio like we do, with a couple of buttons, seeing it from 3rd person view? It seems implied to be so. If so, does he feel, smell or taste the things like the characters do? Wouldn't it make much more sense if he would control their bodies like his own, with his brain, with the Animus being something like the Matrix, you being loaded in a virtual reality within a body of your ancestor? Or is it actually something like that?
    • It's a bit of both. It's like a 3D videogame, except Desmond doesn't control Altair and Ezio with buttons, but with his own mind. His point of view is actually the camera angle, as seen when Minerva turns to it at the end of ACII to talk directly to Desmond.
  • How did the Templars and Assassins maintain worldwide secret organizations with the levels of communication and travel technology available to them?
    • It is mentioned in the Codex in ACII as well as in Revelations that Alta´r had begun vastly reorganizing the Assassins in a number of ways. One of the biggest ways being the abandonment of the fortress that was Masayaf. Alta´r claimed it had become a symbol of arrogance and disregarding that all together it was a giant advertisement for themselves. It was also mentioned in the Codex that as the Assassins began being more secretive, the Templars followed suit. Seeing as both sides of the war began to practice more stealth and subtlety as far back as the Crusades, it's fair to say that they've had practice with staying out of the public spotlight.
  • Massive Assassin's Creed III Ending Spoilers: So in the end, the Second Disaster is averted by Juno... how? Throughout the game we're told repeatedly that Those Who Came Before didn't find a way to stop their disaster despite spending years working on plan after plan to survive. The world was still devastated despite the entirety of the First Civilization still being alive and aware of the problem. So how is it exactly that only one First Civilization member managed to avert the disaster when the rest of her species couldn't?
    • She completed the first plan (use the tower to disperse the sun's energy). Remember, the only reason TWCB scrapped it was they didn't have enough time, and Juno was in the tower for thousands of years. The aftermath (some minor damage in various spots worldwide and global communications temporarily messed up) supports this.
    • To me, my main annoyance about the ending is more meta, in that people are comparing it to the ending of Mass Effect 3. Mostly because it seems like that was just the big thing to bring up for a while and there hasn't been enough time in between. To me they aren't even comparable though; we all remember the endings to the second game and Brotherhood, right? How they were crazy and non sensible and made no sense and went unexplained until the sequel? For Assassins Creed, stupid endings like this are established and expected, where as for Mass Effect it came right out of a writers ass when they couldn't think of anything better. Obviously the ending could have been handled better, but it's not even remotely comparable to Mass Effect 3.
    • Haven't seen the ending yet, but I'd guess that it's because Juno actually knows what is happening this time. The first time this happened, Those Who Came Before were trying to figure out what exactly was going on, what it was doing, and what it's effects were. This time, What's left of them know what happened, what it did, how it did it, and had thousands of years to figure out how to deal with it.
  • Related to the above question, what is up with the assassins in the past doing absolutely nothing to avert the upcoming Second Disaster? The order learned about it at the end of Assassin's Creed II, so they decide to do nothing with this information? To my knowledge, the only person Ezio told was Mario and they seemed to think it far enough away to be affected by the Bystander Syndrome. Isn't that way too short-sighted for people who believe themselves to be protecting the world? Shouldn't knowledge of the impending disaster, at the very least, be common knowledge amongst the assassin order, if not shared with the entire world, so that it wouldn't be completely sprung on present day assassins by surprise? I mean, Pieces of Eden give knowledge of technology centuries ahead of its time, shouldn't they have been used to help find a way to stop the disaster instead of being locked away for being too dangerous?
    • If memory serves me right, Ezio label it someone else's problem after Minerva specifically told him that he was not important, that he was the prophet and all he had to do was getting into the vault so she could warn someone who could actually do something about it, Desmond. As such, after the end of ACII he went on a journey, through Rome, Masyaf and Contantinople to learn what was that, in the end, given up on the journey saying that "I've seen enough for one life".
    • Ezio was explicitly told he was nothing more than a conduit. He probably didn't see any point in trying to do the job of someone who had yet to exist (or had existed, whichever way you look at it). Before that, I'm not sure anyone else was completely aware that something like this was going to happen. Those Who Came Before kept bringing it up with the likes of Ezio and Connor so that they could do their specific jobs as Desmond's ancestors, but otherwise left everyone else to survive on their own.
  • Is the "genetic memory" justification for the Animus still canon? If it is, how is Desmond able to relive the memories of old Altair and Ezio? With Ezio, I can assume that by the events of Revelations he still hasn't sired a child, but for Altair, we're specifically shown in AC 2 that Desmond can no longer follow him after gettin' jiggy with Maria. Which makes it rather jarring when in ACR we're back with elderly Altair.
    • The Altair sections in Revelations were actually Desmond reliving Ezio reliving Altair through those magic key things.
      • This has irked me as well. How exactly does one continue to follow the genetic memory of someone up until the very moment of their death? It would seem to me that the only genetic memories that would be "recorded" would be up until the next person in the genetic line was concieved. At that point it becomes a completely new person, without the ability to alter their genetic code to continue adding memories. Thus it would be impossible to create a synch nexus unless there were very specific circumstances. Fully living out Altier's memories were done through Ezio's experiences, but it would be impossible to see Ezio's final memories because he would have had to sire a child before then.
      • Desmond doesn't see Ezio's death. At some point after the end of Revelations Ezio had a daughter with Sofia, which is where his genetic memory would end (but this memory isn't in the games) and you see his death in Embers, which is not part of the framing device genetic memories. Altair's death was recorded on magical discs, not his DNA.
      • You don't follow the memory until the moment of their death. The words used in Revelations is "until your ancestor has nothing left to show you". Presumably, that means all the important and significant memories of that ancestor you have in your DNA, not every single memory from birth to death.
      • Again, you weren't following Altair's memories in ACR because of the genetic memory, you were following Ezio who saw Altair's memories through the magical DVD's.
  • Related to the above, how does genetic memory keep so intact? Each parent contributes only one set of chromosomes (and recombined ones at that) to the child. Assuming 4 generations per century, Desmond would be 33 generations removed from Altair, the blood getting diluted (figuratively speaking) every time, and that's not accounting for minor mutations within the germline. And yet, the Animus makes it possible for Desmond to access Altair's memory very clearly, remember exact conversations and so on. And that's not something easily written out of the AC-verse (i.e. "we already have genetic memory in this setting, just roll with other fictional elements").
    • A common fallacy when discussing genetics is that the half of your genes from your father are all the same ones from his. However, there are more than just X and Y chromosomes - there are 23 pairs in total, and anything one of each pair other than the sex (X and Y) chromosomes can be passed on separately. Your son could, therefore, have your Y chromosome, but any mixture of 22 others from your parents. You wouldn't be able to remember ALL of your ancestors' memories, but specific individuals would show up.
  • How on earth is the Templar organization still around? In the series, you have killed their leadership and smashed their plans to dust no less than four times. A better question would be: Where have the Assassins gone? In the Ezio timeline, you have the ability to build the Assassins up to controlling most of the cities of Europe. Yet, in 3rd official game, it is like the Assassins never existed except for Achilles. Where did they go? How did the Templars regain power? If the Assassins had the Apple, and the Templar leadership is dead, who exactly is rebuilding the organization? It drives me mad....
    • Simple because the Templars represent an Idea. The Templar's Ideal and goal is to create a Utopia with happiness and no suffering, which will attract many people, no matter how many Templars the Assassin kills their will always be people who want to create an ideal world. Similar to how the Assassins still exist, they represent freedom and independence, and someone will always wants that.
    • All I know is that they had some major famous leaders on their side in the newer generations, like FDR, and that the Assassins were pretty scattered and crushed, as we learn in Assassins Creed Brotherhood. Considering that Abstergo had enough money to purchase Ubisoft to research Edward Kenway by ACIV, I'd say the newer generations had become more powerful.
  • I honestly don't know how the Templars are going to make the world better. According to them, once the pieces of Eden are in their hands, they will be able to control the collective will of humanity and bring world peace. That sounds mighty fine and all, except the ones with any free will left will be the Templars themselves. And if there's nothing to control the will of the Templars, what's to keep them from abusing their power and turning the world into a dystopic nightmare? What happens if a Templar with mental illness gains control of the pieces of Eden and decides to make everything into a model of his twisted fantasies? How many templars would be needed to keep humanity in check? What will prevent one Templar from using the pieces against his fellow order? How will the worlds' economy keep itself in check? For example, we humans have domesticated many animals to service our needs. Alot of our accomplishments and survival wouldn't happen if it weren't for sheep, dogs, cows, and horses. Yet that hasn't stopped us humans from waging wars against each other and being dicks to each other. Do the Templars honestly think they will be so above such things that things like this wouldn't happen!?
    • Yes. Yes they do.
Art of FightingHeadscratchers/GamesAssassin's Creed I

TV Tropes by TV Tropes Foundation, LLC is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available from
Privacy Policy