PDA

View Full Version : Discrace for the ancestor



OSnailsO
08-25-2009, 04:14 PM
Is it just me or is Ezio turning out to be everything that Altiar hates? He uses poison "a cowards weapon" he is befriending a lot of commoners who Altair would rather ignore and he isn't even living by the creed!
Also is it spelled Altiar or Altair?

Realjambo
08-25-2009, 04:23 PM
Also is it spelled Altiar or Altair?

Too much cheese!

A L T A I R http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

SLB_2009
08-25-2009, 04:39 PM
Well, I think that Altair would like Ezio because he followed his code and continued his work, but he'd probably be against the use of poison.

I think that, overall, Altair would like to know that he was going to have such an awesome descendent http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

MartaVasques
08-25-2009, 04:48 PM
I agree with you to some point, OSnailsO, but…
Ezio isn’t using poison to assassinate his targets. It’s just meant to create a distraction.
As for not living by the Creed, well… We don’t exactly know that at this point. Remember the rules of the Creed:
1. Don't kill innocents
2. Don't draw unnecessary attention to yourself
3. Never compromise the brotherhood of assassins
So far, I guess we haven’t heard of any action by Ezio that breaks these rules. And keep in mind he was not raised to be an Assassin, like Altair was. By the end, I believe we will be pleasantly surprised with Ezio’s evolution.
Or at least I hope…

caswallawn_2k7
08-25-2009, 04:55 PM
2. Don't draw unnecessary attention to yourself
the gun breaks that one.

MartaVasques
08-25-2009, 05:04 PM
Originally posted by caswallawn_2k7:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">2. Don't draw unnecessary attention to yourself
the gun breaks that one. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Tell me about it (don’t get me started on the gun thing)… But if you use it wisely, when no one is around…

SLB_2009
08-25-2009, 05:53 PM
But if you use it wisely, when no one is around…


The gun will be useful in traps (like in the E3 trailer, with the guards hiding) or maybe if there isn't any other way to kill our target.
Still, it will probably make a lot of noise and attract the guards attention...


PS: I finally pre-ordered the black edition!!!!

alkarnur
08-25-2009, 06:30 PM
Where is it said that Altair hates poison?

The Hidden Gun is very cool concept art but I'd take the Throwing Knives instead any day. They're ranged AND silent.

EmperorxZurg
08-25-2009, 06:54 PM
in the first game when Altair was talking to Al Mualim about the doctor, he said something along the lines of, poisons and herbs are for the weak and are immoral

texas1656
08-25-2009, 06:55 PM
i believe that the poison is mearly for a distraction so i dont think it would be that big of a disapointment to altair and the gun at least for me will only be used in extreme situations so it would not be "unnecesary" attention

Edengoth
08-25-2009, 07:03 PM
Originally posted by d1sturbedme_468:
in the first game when Altair was talking to Al Mualim about the doctor, he said something along the lines of, poisons and herbs are for the weak and are immoral

It wasn't the doctor (Garnier). It was the merchant king (Abul Nu'quod (sp?)). And the line was, "He killed them! The men and women at his party. It was poison, a coward's tool!"
'member the wine fountain?

FifthGeneration
08-25-2009, 07:32 PM
every tiime altair killeed his target he was suddenly in aggressive mode escaping from the guards reegardless of how sneaky he was. The gun is just another way of doing the same thing. If your gonna have to run from guards for killing any taregt with stealth anyway then why not use the gun so you can get a head start? I think Altair would approve i mean he used throwing knives didnt he?

thekyle0
08-25-2009, 08:25 PM
Altair also talks about the creed commanding the assassin's to be wise. Is it wise to inhibit yourself by refusing to use a method you find distasteful?

EmperorxZurg
08-25-2009, 09:00 PM
just because ur wise doesn't mean u'll try anything, part of being wise is to realise what is wrong, he percieved that the use of poisons was a foolish thing to do and not wise at all

thekyle0
08-25-2009, 09:07 PM
Did I say wise for the assassins? I meant to say it was wise for Ubi. That feature is awesome! Pair poison with throwing coins on the ground and turn the streets into a blood-soaked mosh-pit. Brilliant! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif

EmperorxZurg
08-25-2009, 09:15 PM
oh, but ya that is BRILLIANT <STRIKE>now if we throw a child out there the pope will wrestle for it</STRIKE> I mean now we get to see people scratch each other to death for $5! Wait that's not nice either, uh... *throws money on the floor and escapes while everyone kills each other for $5*

thekyle0
08-25-2009, 09:19 PM
Pff. It's only five dollars. It's not like I care. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif I can find plenty of- HEY! GET THOSE KIDS AWAY FROM MY MONEY! I WILL BREAK YOUR LITTLE LEGS!

obliviondoll
08-25-2009, 09:25 PM
Originally posted by caswallawn_2k7:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">2. Don't draw unnecessary attention to yourself
the gun breaks that one. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>No it doesn't. Define unnecessary attention.

Xanatos2007
08-26-2009, 12:05 AM
If you're using it to assassinate a target I don't think it's 'unnecessary'. If you're going to assassinate a target someone is bound to notice someday.

Anyway, the Assassins adapt to the times, it's why they're still around. Changes in methods of assassination are to be expected.

alkarnur
08-26-2009, 02:04 AM
Originally posted by thekyle0:
Altair also talks about the creed commanding the assassin's to be wise. Is it wise to inhibit yourself by refusing to use a method you find distasteful?
No, it is not wise. For taste is also one of the things you call entirely your own, but it isn't. As it relies or at least can't contradict a moral code that is not entirely of your own making. Choice in such matters should not be driven by taste but by the overall effects of the method.

Historically, the Assassins disliked poison, and even ranged weapons for that matter, because these were methods that did not ensure a 100% chance that the target will die. Their weapon of choice was the melee dagger; they could make sure their target died, plus the real-world Assassins didn't run after killing their target, they didn't even fight the body guards. They just stood there, uttered some fanatical phrase then died from the dozens of sword stabs. While it may seem weird to us to do this, the reason why they did it is this: they would kill their target in a very busy and crowded place. Some of the crowd, upon seeing their zeal and courage, would be mesmerized into joining the Sect. Lose one man, gain dozens. Plus, real-world Assassins strongly (and blindly) believed in the martyrs' heaven; you name it: 72 virgins, rivers of wine, endless gardens of the most exotic fruits...

The hidden gun, if it had existed at the Assassins' time, would have been discarded because it's ranged and one can miss, not because it's loud, since the Assassins had a love for the spectacular and terrifying (they were commanded by their faith to terrorize their enemies). Poison would have been discarded because it's not spectacular.

Another historical approach was that of the Ninjas. Ninjutsu literally means "survival skills". So it would be contradictory to get yourself killed when it can be avoided. Ninjas believed in killing people without even letting anyone know or even suspect that it was murder. They developed techniques to make it look like a natural death, an accident, or a suicide. The subtlest poison, one that leaves no trace, would not only have been used but probably developed by them. At other times, they needed to make a show, to build their myth into the minds of their enemies, and to demoralize them.

This is in contrast with Samurai, who always put on a show and rely on visible terror, as opposed to "unspeakable, hidden, terror".
Truly, Japan is a place where the ways of war were thoroughly developed.


Originally posted by Xanatos2007:
If you're using it to assassinate a target I don't think it's 'unnecessary'. If you're going to assassinate a target someone is bound to notice someday.

Anyway, the Assassins adapt to the times, it's why they're still around. Changes in methods of assassination are to be expected.
What you say is true, but why let them know right away? Better to allow for stealth that allows for an easier escape. There's no absolute answer, it's all relative. "Nothing is absolute, everything is permitted". It's all relative to what you want to do: do you want to just kill the target or do you also want to put on a show? That said, a death by small firearm is generally neater than by blade weapons (sword, dagger...), so those would make for a better show.

Xanatos2007
08-26-2009, 02:50 AM
I see what you mean, I usually go for the stealthy approach as well. But with times changing the Assassins would have to look into ranged weapons and poisons eventually. I think using the element of water would be good though; assassinate a target up close, the next one surrounds himself with bodyguards. Assassinate him from long range, the next one hides inside a fortress. Poison his food, the next one prepares his own meals. Infiltrate his quarters, the others will realise that nowhere is safe and eventually give up.

(the water element refers to modifying your tactics in relation to the situation)

alkarnur
08-26-2009, 03:43 AM
I agree with you completely. This concept of escalation is pervasive. Luckily, one can always use deception to lure them into the open with the promise of an easy kill, make them over-confident, wait between assassinations, let them feel safe again. Bribe or otherwise leverage their own people to poison/betray/rebel against them... The variations are endless. As you said, one would have to be like water that takes the shape of its surroundings and never rule any method out. Probably the best Chinese metaphor ever http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

FROGGEman2
08-26-2009, 03:55 AM
Originally posted by MartaVasques:
I agree with you to some point, OSnailsO, but…
Ezio isn’t using poison to assassinate his targets. It’s just meant to create a distraction.
As for not living by the Creed, well… We don’t exactly know that at this point. Remember the rules of the Creed:
1. Don't kill innocents
2. Don't draw unnecessary attention to yourself
3. Never compromise the brotherhood of assassins
So far, I guess we haven’t heard of any action by Ezio that breaks these rules. And keep in mind he was not raised to be an Assassin, like Altair was. By the end, I believe we will be pleasantly surprised with Ezio’s evolution.
Or at least I hope…

Altair didn't actually care about the creed, that was just Al Muliam imprinting his desire on him. Also, poison does kill targets.

alkarnur
08-26-2009, 04:54 AM
True, at first he didn't. He thought any creed or rule was overridden by the "Nothing is true, everything is permitted" motto. But as is later revealed, this saying doesn't grant total freedom but rather requires wisdom to be correctly understood.

Wisdom is the accurate perception of the link between causes and effects (you can quote me on that http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif ).

The 3 tenets are not what serve Al Mualim's goals of power. It is the death of the nine on the list and Altair's not questioning the purpose of those killings.

The nine should have been killed whether Al Mualim benefited from the deaths or not. They were Templar who were working to create a new religion instead of freeing people from religion.

What Al Mualim was trying to do (e.g. when they talk in the library, in the corner) was to keep him from asking too many questions and discover the link between the 9 and the Master. The tenets have nothing to do with this, i.e. keeping him from asking too many questions. If there was a 4th tenet that said something along the lines of "never question your superior", then yes their purpose would be manipulation not just preservation.

As for the poison, yes it does kill targets. Sometimes, if the dose is too big, the target vomits and survives. This is just an example. The point is that poison doesn't have a 100% success rate, while stabbing someone through the neck at close range does.

MartaVasques
08-26-2009, 05:07 AM
From what I read, the use of poison in AC II is meant to spread chaos and not to kill the target.

daydark87
08-26-2009, 09:52 AM
I'm don't think he's disgracing his ancestors, I mean Altair didn't follow the creed at the beginning either. And Altair could befriend a lot of simple people as well.

I find it a bit odd, that an assassin thinks poison is a cowards tool, I mean, he's stabbing people in the back, it's not like he's a fair player himself.

EmperorxZurg
08-26-2009, 09:59 AM
and with the not befriending common folk thing, remember in the theatrical trailer for the first? when Altair was running away, he gentle pushed the civilian out of the way while the guard just tackled her, so Altair at least respects the citizens if he doesn't befriend them

FROGGEman2
08-27-2009, 06:59 PM
Originally posted by alkarnur:
True, at first he didn't. He thought any creed or rule was overridden by the "Nothing is true, everything is permitted" motto. But as is later revealed, this saying doesn't grant total freedom but rather requires wisdom to be correctly understood.

Wisdom is the accurate perception of the link between causes and effects (you can quote me on that http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif ).

The 3 tenets are not what serve Al Mualim's goals of power. It is the death of the nine on the list and Altair's not questioning the purpose of those killings.

The nine should have been killed whether Al Mualim benefited from the deaths or not. They were Templar who were working to create a new religion instead of freeing people from religion.

What Al Mualim was trying to do (e.g. when they talk in the library, in the corner) was to keep him from asking too many questions and discover the link between the 9 and the Master. The tenets have nothing to do with this, i.e. keeping him from asking too many questions. If there was a 4th tenet that said something along the lines of "never question your superior", then yes their purpose would be manipulation not just preservation.

As for the poison, yes it does kill targets. Sometimes, if the dose is too big, the target vomits and survives. This is just an example. The point is that poison doesn't have a 100% success rate, while stabbing someone through the neck at close range does.

Waaagh! Fiction-Reality crossover!

When I said "imprinting" I didn't mean that he was using the piece of Eden to get his way, I meant that he was forcing/scaring/socially subjugating Altair to the rules of the Creed. And I don't think that Altair changed either, I think that at the end of the game he was as foolish and human as he was at the beginning. Moreover, I believe this is the whole point of the game.

As for the poison thing, I was referring to the in-game poison. Someone was saying that it didn't kill people if you nicked them with it, but it does.


Originally posted by MartaVasques:
From what I read, the use of poison in AC II is meant to spread chaos and not to kill the target.

But it does kill the target in the end, it says so in the GC interview and game footage.

thekyle0
08-27-2009, 07:13 PM
I just noticed you spelled "disgrace" as "discrace". http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

obliviondoll
08-27-2009, 08:18 PM
Originally posted by thekyle0:
I just noticed you spelled "disgrace" as "discrace". http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif
I just assumed his CDs had a running track...

Edengoth
08-27-2009, 08:29 PM
Originally posted by obliviondoll:
I just assumed his CDs had a running track...

With Evanescence in the lead, Assassin's Creed falls behind. Will Lady GaGa catch up? What's this? Planet Earth from Team Blueray is rolling his way back into the lead. And it's a photo finish for the Korean counterfeit copy of Lemmings!

FROGGEman2
08-27-2009, 08:49 PM
Edengoth! You changed your avatar! Now how will I recognise you? NOOOOO!

BloodOfTheCreed
08-27-2009, 09:16 PM
Originally posted by d1sturbedme_468:
and with the not befriending common folk thing, remember in the theatrical trailer for the first? when Altair was running away, he gentle pushed the civilian out of the way while the guard just tackled her, so Altair at least respects the citizens if he doesn't befriend them

lol, not my Altair http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/icon_twisted.gif

moqqy
08-28-2009, 01:54 AM
Originally posted by caswallawn_2k7:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">2. Don't draw unnecessary attention to yourself
the gun breaks that one. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No, it doesn't.

You get less attention if you kill someone with a gun than if you'd do it straight up with a blade. With the gun, chances are people won't see you. With the blade, they will see you.

Edengoth
08-29-2009, 04:57 PM
They'll hear you though. It will draw LOTS of attention because people in that time are far more accustomed to hearing blades against steel and flesh than the sound of a gun, even a small one, firing.

Xanatos2007
08-29-2009, 07:07 PM
Perhaps you'll be able to use sound masking during carnival fireworks to prevent drawing lots of attention, just time the shot with a firework going off.

moqqy
08-30-2009, 04:06 AM
Originally posted by Edengoth:
They'll hear you though. It will draw LOTS of attention because people in that time are far more accustomed to hearing blades against steel and flesh than the sound of a gun, even a small one, firing.

They'll hear the gunshot, yes... so what? They'll hear people scream once they notice you've just killed someone with your blade.

Your logic makes no sense.. you're telling me that you would just move along, barely noticing someone going on a killing spree with a gun just because you're "used to it"? And you'd notice someone killing with a sword much better, because you're not used to them?

Fact is, gun draws less attention because you don't have to be close to the target.

thekyle0
08-30-2009, 11:31 AM
The gun is less subtle. It may draw the same amount of immeditate attention, but the guards would be much more interested in finding the killer who used what they must think is magic than somebody who used a more mundane weapon.

moqqy
08-30-2009, 01:03 PM
I disagree.

thekyle0
08-30-2009, 01:10 PM
Care to elaborate?

Ok, assume that the target killed in both scenarios(killed with gun and killed by a blade) were equally important and that there were no other variables.

Xanatos2007
08-30-2009, 02:18 PM
It seems you people have forgotten about the stealth assassination from AC1.I personally thik that's a lot quieter than a firearm.

moqqy
08-31-2009, 02:36 AM
Originally posted by thekyle0:
Care to elaborate?

Ok, assume that the target killed in both scenarios(killed with gun and killed by a blade) were equally important and that there were no other variables.

Ezio is the only assassin in the city that looks like.. well, him. They've already 100% surely received orders to catch him no matter what. BUT.. if he uses something that looks like magic the guards will be LESS inclined to go after him. Would you want to run after someone who can just instantly kill you?

So, they are already as interested as possible in finding the killer, the gun just makes them fear him more.

thekyle0
08-31-2009, 09:32 AM
Now you're contradicting yourself. Weren't you arguing that the gun was more subtle? If people are more afraid of Ezio because of the gun then it isn't as subtle a weapon as the hidden blades are.

moqqy
08-31-2009, 10:29 AM
I never said the gun's more "subtle."

And uhh.. what does people being afraid of the assassin have to do with drawing unnecessary attention to yourself? They will definitely figure you out much, much quicker if you use the blade than if you use the gun.

thekyle0
08-31-2009, 11:13 AM
Originally posted by moqqy:
I never said the gun's more "subtle."

Originally posted by moqqy:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by caswallawn_2k7:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">2. Don't draw unnecessary attention to yourself
the gun breaks that one. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No, it doesn't.

You get less attention if you kill someone with a gun than if you'd do it straight up with a blade. With the gun, chances are people won't see you. With the blade, they will see you. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> Subtle: (according to the "Merriam Webster Dictionary") Hardly noticeable; drawing little attention
You may not have said "subtle" directly but what you did say implied the same meaning.

Originally posted by moqqy:
And uhh.. what does people being afraid of the assassin have to do with drawing unnecessary attention to yourself? It builds a reputation which makes people paranoid that the assassin might be around and that they are in danger.

Originally posted by moqqy:
They will definitely figure you out much, much quicker if you use the blade than if you use the gun. It wouldn't be that much faster. I would think that the people standing next to Ezio wouldn't have any hesitation to get some distance from him. Once the people around him have scattered a bit I think Ezio would be fairly noticable. Not to mention the smoke cloud the gun makes.

moqqy
08-31-2009, 12:15 PM
The assassin that kills his target with a gun.. that's a lot less to be afraid of than someone who gets in close with blades.

And yeah, it won't be much faster. It's about the same. Which is my point.

thekyle0
08-31-2009, 12:20 PM
Originally posted by moqqy:
They will definitely figure you out much, much quicker if you use the blade than if you use the gun.

Originally posted by moqqy:
And yeah, it won't be much faster. It's about the same. Which is my point. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

TheEpicWolf
08-31-2009, 01:30 PM
The gun seems like a cool addition but personally for me blades are the only way of assassinating. I just prefer sword fighting over using something that you don't even get to see the light leave you're victims eye's because you're so out of the action!

moqqy
09-01-2009, 06:37 AM
Originally posted by thekyle0:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by moqqy:
They will definitely figure you out much, much quicker if you use the blade than if you use the gun.

Originally posted by moqqy:
And yeah, it won't be much faster. It's about the same. Which is my point. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Exaggeration. Remove "much much".

Xanatos2007
09-01-2009, 07:00 AM
Originally posted by TheEpicWolf:
The gun seems like a cool addition but personally for me blades are the only way of assassinating. I just prefer sword fighting over using something that you don't even get to see the light leave you're victims eye's because you're so out of the action!
That's why rifles nowadays come with scopes. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

thekyle0
09-01-2009, 11:37 AM
Originally posted by moqqy:
Exaggeration. Remove "much much". I was actually shocked because you said one thing and then immediatley said the opposite.

JonaD
09-02-2009, 01:45 PM
Originally posted by alkarnur:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by thekyle0:
Altair also talks about the creed commanding the assassin's to be wise. Is it wise to inhibit yourself by refusing to use a method you find distasteful?
No, it is not wise. For taste is also one of the things you call entirely your own, but it isn't. As it relies or at least can't contradict a moral code that is not entirely of your own making. Choice in such matters should not be driven by taste but by the overall effects of the method.

Historically, the Assassins disliked poison, and even ranged weapons for that matter, because these were methods that did not ensure a 100% chance that the target will die. Their weapon of choice was the melee dagger; they could make sure their target died, plus the real-world Assassins didn't run after killing their target, they didn't even fight the body guards. They just stood there, uttered some fanatical phrase then died from the dozens of sword stabs. While it may seem weird to us to do this, the reason why they did it is this: they would kill their target in a very busy and crowded place. Some of the crowd, upon seeing their zeal and courage, would be mesmerized into joining the Sect. Lose one man, gain dozens. Plus, real-world Assassins strongly (and blindly) believed in the martyrs' heaven; you name it: 72 virgins, rivers of wine, endless gardens of the most exotic fruits...

The hidden gun, if it had existed at the Assassins' time, would have been discarded because it's ranged and one can miss, not because it's loud, since the Assassins had a love for the spectacular and terrifying (they were commanded by their faith to terrorize their enemies). Poison would have been discarded because it's not spectacular.

Another historical approach was that of the Ninjas. Ninjutsu literally means "survival skills". So it would be contradictory to get yourself killed when it can be avoided. Ninjas believed in killing people without even letting anyone know or even suspect that it was murder. They developed techniques to make it look like a natural death, an accident, or a suicide. The subtlest poison, one that leaves no trace, would not only have been used but probably developed by them. At other times, they needed to make a show, to build their myth into the minds of their enemies, and to demoralize them.

This is in contrast with Samurai, who always put on a show and rely on visible terror, as opposed to "unspeakable, hidden, terror".
Truly, Japan is a place where the ways of war were thoroughly developed.


Originally posted by Xanatos2007:
If you're using it to assassinate a target I don't think it's 'unnecessary'. If you're going to assassinate a target someone is bound to notice someday.

Anyway, the Assassins adapt to the times, it's why they're still around. Changes in methods of assassination are to be expected.
What you say is true, but why let them know right away? Better to allow for stealth that allows for an easier escape. There's no absolute answer, it's all relative. "Nothing is absolute, everything is permitted". It's all relative to what you want to do: do you want to just kill the target or do you also want to put on a show? That said, a death by small firearm is generally neater than by blade weapons (sword, dagger...), so those would make for a better show. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually much of what you said is wrong no offence. It is true what you said about poisons and ranged weapons. The original Hashasins as they were called (yes they really existed I found out about them while researching Templars who were real too but just normal knights though, not men with pointy hats who try to take over the world with lizard men.)prefered using a knife to ensure a victims death. They usually killed targets in their beds when they were asleep, when they were alone or approached in disguise and escaped quickly in the chaos.They infiltrated everywhere with spies. They were like the mob had someone in everyone's camp. Saladin was nearly assassinated several times. When he besieged their fortress after the first night when he woke up he found a type of cake (bread) which only the assassins baked next to him (not kidding) with a poisoned dagger beside him and a note on his chest that said "you are within our power" of course he left them alone after that and slept in a dungeon in the tallest room of the tallest tower (not really but you get the pic). They only used poison to threaten but never used it to kill. Assassins were actually rebellious against Islam and believed that Saladin was wrong as was Richard they killed men from both sides. Al mualim (who has a weird real name) would drug the new recruit and he would then wake up in a garden with virgin girls and wine and was told that this was heaven and he would get to go here if he served Al Mualim so he tried to be a god similar to the Assassins Creed version of him. Sorry I'm totally off topic lol http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/typing.gif. But I still think it's cool that a lot of the Assassins Creed 1 stuff was based off of reality/History.

MartaVasques
09-02-2009, 05:00 PM
Actually, JonaD, this has been discussed here in the forum. There’s no evidence the original Hashashin didn’t defend themselves after a hit, or tried to escape. They were prepared to die for their creed, but would escape if given the chance.
One thing is true, they followed no specific religion and their targets were as random as their master’s will. By the way, Al Mualim is not a “real name”, but it means “the Teacher”, which is quite appropriate, don’t you think?
If you’re into history discussions, you might want to check this out: http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...024/m/1741065387/p/1 (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/5251069024/m/1741065387/p/1)

And welcome to the forums! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

godsmack_darius
09-02-2009, 05:21 PM
Kaxen!!! You should make a comic of this

Altair spanking Ezio or something http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Im not gay, dont judge me -_-

thekyle0
09-02-2009, 05:50 PM
We don't judge you, we just make fun of you. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif