PDA

View Full Version : What's so bad about Templars?



Sabooza
11-09-2010, 11:54 AM
Why do people view Templars as truly evil human beings? I mean sure, control and all that yada yada yada yada, bbut they are overall trying to obtain the same as the Assassins, just in a very different way.

Abeonis
11-09-2010, 11:58 AM
The Templars are never once called "evil" in-game; the simple fact of the matter is that, playing as an Assassin, the Templars are your enemy. Needless to say, the Assassin chose to see mainly the negative aspects of their counterparts.

The Assassins had just as many negative aspects themselves, the only difference between the two factions being the means by which they sought to obtain the main objective: world peace.

itsamea-mario
11-09-2010, 12:04 PM
in assassins creed 2, ezio seemed to just kill people because they are templars.
whereas in AC1 he killed people because they were bad, and later discovered they were templars.

and hey, i'm all for the templare regime of a new world order.

Sabooza
11-09-2010, 12:05 PM
I agree, but more and more I see people from other communities, (epecially youtube -_-) be all like, "OMG THAT n00b THUMBED DOWN THIS VID, HE MUST BE A EVIL TEMPLAR" but it is not portrayed like that in the game

lilbacchant
11-09-2010, 12:09 PM
I don't think most see *all* Templars as evil and, indeed, recognize that many of them have noble intentions (the same could be said of the Nazis -- as a whole**).

They do, however, all share an ignorance that allows them to justify that a noble end justifies perverse, corrupt, and violent means.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

** I'm in no way suggesting that the goal of exterminating the jews, or any other group of people, is noble.

Sabooza
11-09-2010, 12:10 PM
hmm, I wonder if, as you walk to hell, there are loads of stones on the floor (paved stones of course, only the finest for the damned http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif) and each stone has a good intention carved into it XD

persiateddy95
11-09-2010, 12:12 PM
Lol, yeah, I've never seen Templars being called evil directly.

And I actually like them http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

Tuck2103
11-09-2010, 12:14 PM
I don't know.
I mean, the Templars have ways to achieve their goals, which are mostly incorrect. But then, are the Assassins just? Their tactics mainly include killing those whom they think plot evil scemes, while claiming that people should not be forced up a certain faith. But is killing always the perfect way to help human developement?
Take Dante Moro for example. He was commander of the police force in Venice before he got stabbed in the head by Marco Barbarigo for a women, leaving him with severe braindamage. He didn't need to die, he was being controled by Templars while not sharing their ideas.

So my vote is: meh...

Sabooza
11-09-2010, 12:15 PM
TBH, Templars aren't even the main bad guys (revealed in AC II) so I would like the Assassin's and Templars to team up for the greater good, and persia, new sig i see http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Shinta07
11-09-2010, 12:16 PM
There is something almost fascist about them and the way they operate. Obviously that generally leads to negative opinions regarding them.

gimya
11-09-2010, 12:16 PM
How can you say that the Templars are good when seek to end mankind's freewill, which is exactly what the Assassins try to protect. Would you rather become a zombie with no freedom of choice? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Sabooza
11-09-2010, 12:19 PM
Originally posted by gimya:
How can you say that the Templars are good when seek to end mankind's freelwill, which is exactly what the Assassins try to protect. Would you rather become a zombie with no freedom of choice? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif
you are just saying that cos youre a TEMPLAR! LOLjk, I see where you are coming from, BUT you know their goals change slightly constantly.

gimya
11-09-2010, 12:25 PM
They can hide behind pretty speeches, but the only constant I see in their goals is CONTROL! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Assassin-Saiyan
11-09-2010, 12:29 PM
The end justifies the means. This goes for the Assassins and the Templars. The big question that needs to be answered really is: Do both sides really want to lower themselves to a point that their means become the very thing they seek an end too?

Sabooza
11-09-2010, 12:31 PM
Originally posted by Assassin-Saiyan:
The end justifies the means. This goes for the Assassins and the Templars. The big question that needs to be answered really is: Do both sides really want to lower themselves to a point that their means become the very thing they seek an end too? sounds like a codex http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

obliviondoll
11-09-2010, 12:38 PM
The Templars want to enforce peace by removing freedom.

The Assassins want to encourage peace by teaching respect.

Who are you going to support?

gimya
11-09-2010, 12:39 PM
Originally posted by Assassin-Saiyan:
The end justifies the means. This goes for the Assassins and the Templars. The big question that needs to be answered really is: Do both sides really want to lower themselves to a point that their means become the very thing they seek an end too?

How can the end justify the means when they intend to bend all humanity to their concept of peace? Not to mention all the experiments they do for "peace"...

lilbacchant
11-09-2010, 12:39 PM
BTW, one of the great things about the storyline in AC, imo, is the frequent presence of moral ambiguity. Often in life, for a thoughtful person anyway, the distinction between what is morally good vs. evil is like discerning shades-of-grey, and not simply recognizing black and white.

A perfect example is at the very beginning of AC1 in Solomon's Temple where Altair kills an "innocent" -- an evil act fueled by arrogance. Ezio, of course, spent most of AC2 fueled by revenge, and neither arrogance nor revenge generally lead to morally good outcomes. And, yet, these two characters are who we are expected to identify with as players.

Imnsho, those who refer to the Templars as "evil" need to watch less japanese animation and read more greek myths.

Kakashi590
11-09-2010, 12:44 PM
Assassin's protect mankind from tyrants who wish to take peoples will to choose for themselves. The assassin's do not try to govern in the place of there targets, They simply have a never ending war to continue and they have realised that. Remember it was Al Mualim who told Altair that the Assassin's goal was to achieve peace in all things and he turned out to be a power hungry tyrant...exactly what the assassin's are against.

Templar's on the other hand achieve most of there goals through tyranny exactly why the Assassin's oppose there "agenda".

So in my opinion Templar's are evil and Assassin's are good.

TheMusingMoose
11-09-2010, 12:45 PM
History is written by the victor, so we really should wait and see who wins before we decide who is good and who is evil.

persiateddy95
11-09-2010, 12:46 PM
Originally posted by lilbacchant:
BTW, one of the great things about the storyline in AC, imo, is the frequent presence of moral ambiguity. Often in life, for a thoughtful person anyway, the distinction between what is morally good vs. evil is like discerning shades-of-grey, and not simply recognizing black and white.

A perfect example is at the very beginning of AC1 in Solomon's Temple where Altair kills an "innocent" -- an evil act fueled by arrogance. Ezio, of course, spent most of AC2 fueled by revenge, and neither arrogance nor revenge generally lead to morally good outcomes. And, yet, these two characters are who we are expected to identify with as players.

Imnsho, those who refer to the Templars as "evil" need to watch less japanese animation and read more greek myths.
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif

Originally posted by Sabooza:
and persia, new sig i see http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
Yep http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

obliviondoll
11-09-2010, 12:48 PM
Originally posted by gimya:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Assassin-Saiyan:
The end justifies the means. This goes for the Assassins and the Templars. The big question that needs to be answered really is: Do both sides really want to lower themselves to a point that their means become the very thing they seek an end too?

How can the end justify the means when they intend to bend all humanity to their concept of peace? Not to mention all the experiments they do for "peace"... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Basically, the assassins believe the murder of certain men to be a necessary evil, because it prevents the men killed from imprisoning, enslaving, and torturing other men. And the Templars believe that imprisoning, enslaving and torturing other men is a necessary evil, because it will mean that in the future, no men will have to be tortured or killed ever again, even though they will all be imprisoned and enslaved in a sense.

Assassin-Saiyan
11-09-2010, 12:49 PM
Originally posted by gimya:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Assassin-Saiyan:
The end justifies the means. This goes for the Assassins and the Templars. The big question that needs to be answered really is: Do both sides really want to lower themselves to a point that their means become the very thing they seek an end too?

How can the end justify the means when they intend to bend all humanity to their concept of peace? Not to mention all the experiments they do for "peace"... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Think about it. In a Templars point of view sacrifices must be made to ensure world peace. For the greater good. Who will care about a couple of million lives if it ensures world peace, something no one has achieved.


Originally posted by obliviondoll:
The Templars want to enforce peace by removing freedom.

The Assassins want to encourage peace by teaching respect.

Who are you going to support?


What you forget is that Assassins also KILL to encourage peace. Isn't that contradictory to the peace they want to achieve?


Originally posted by Sabooza:
sounds like a codex Wink


Thx, I'm really into the filosofy of AC so I'm really happy I'm getting Altairs Codex


Dammit, you snatched my reply away from me obliviondoll.

gimya
11-09-2010, 12:54 PM
But is it really peace? No, you are simply being controlled by another to do his biding.

Shinta07
11-09-2010, 12:54 PM
Originally posted by Assassin-Saiyan:
Think about it. In a Templars point of view sacrifices must be made to ensure world peace. For the greater good. Who will care about a couple of million lives if it ensures world peace, something no one has achieved.
It's not truly world peace if it is forced upon people against their will. Using fear, violence, and intimidation doesn't create peace


What you forget is that Assassins also KILL to encourage peace. Isn't that contradictory to the peace they want to achieve?
They eliminate those that would usurp the freedom of people by violent and often deadly means to create a false sense of peace. The assassin's means and methods seem to follow a time tested belief: If you wish for peace, prepare for war.

Assassin-Saiyan
11-09-2010, 12:56 PM
Originally posted by Fenrir_07:
They eliminate those that would usurp the freedom of people by violent and often deadly means to create a false sense of peace. If you wish for peace, prepare for war.

So in the end the Assassins do think that the means justifies the ends.
But the second question that rises is:
What are the boundaries to what is justified to get too the end?

xsatanicjokerx
11-09-2010, 12:57 PM
i think that the templars were good people irl

Kakashi590
11-09-2010, 12:59 PM
Originally posted by Assassin-Saiyan:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by gimya:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Assassin-Saiyan:
The end justifies the means. This goes for the Assassins and the Templars. The big question that needs to be answered really is: Do both sides really want to lower themselves to a point that their means become the very thing they seek an end too?

How can the end justify the means when they intend to bend all humanity to their concept of peace? Not to mention all the experiments they do for "peace"... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Think about it. In a Templars point of view sacrifices must be made to ensure world peace. For the greater good. Who will care about a couple of million lives if it ensures world peace, something no one has achieved.


Originally posted by obliviondoll:
The Templars want to enforce peace by removing freedom.

The Assassins want to encourage peace by teaching respect.

Who are you going to support?


What you forget is that Assassins also KILL to encourage peace. Isn't that contradictory to the peace they want to achieve? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
End a few hundred mens lives to save thousands it seems more intelligent than: control all,torture and kill. then if the templars suceed and kill all the Assassin's the templars will still continue to kill and torture people.

Think about it. Assassin's kill only templars and there ally while templars hunt the Assassin's and kill them while kill/torturing innocent people.

Shinta07
11-09-2010, 01:03 PM
Originally posted by Assassin-Saiyan:
So in the end the Assassins do think that the means justifies the ends.
But the second question that rises is:
What are the boundaries to what is justified to get too the end?
The Assassins want to give people the option and the freedom to choose. The Templars do not. There in lies the basic difference.

gimya
11-09-2010, 01:05 PM
Originally posted by Kakashi590:
End a few hundred mens lives to save thousands it seems more intelligent than: control all,torture and kill. then if the templars suceed and kill all the Assassin's the templars will still continue to kill and torture people.

Think about it. Assassin's kill only templars and there ally while templars hunt the Assassin's and kill them while kill/torturing innocent people.

Exactly. Templars seek to enslave everyone to their ideals. Assassins are a counter-force to ensure that humanity retains free will

Assassin-Saiyan
11-09-2010, 01:06 PM
Originally posted by Kakashi590:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Assassin-Saiyan:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by gimya:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Assassin-Saiyan:
The end justifies the means. This goes for the Assassins and the Templars. The big question that needs to be answered really is: Do both sides really want to lower themselves to a point that their means become the very thing they seek an end too?

How can the end justify the means when they intend to bend all humanity to their concept of peace? Not to mention all the experiments they do for "peace"... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Think about it. In a Templars point of view sacrifices must be made to ensure world peace. For the greater good. Who will care about a couple of million lives if it ensures world peace, something no one has achieved.


Originally posted by obliviondoll:
The Templars want to enforce peace by removing freedom.

The Assassins want to encourage peace by teaching respect.

Who are you going to support?


What you forget is that Assassins also KILL to encourage peace. Isn't that contradictory to the peace they want to achieve? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
End a few hundred mens lives to save thousands it seems more intelligent than: control all,torture and kill. then if the templars suceed and kill all the Assassin's the templars will still continue to kill and torture people.

Think about it. Assassin's kill only templars and there ally while templars hunt the Assassin's and kill them while kill/torturing innocent people. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Of course you're totally right on this one.
What I'm trying to make clear is the templars point of view.
And because the Templars won't rest until they have their world order or until they are laid too rest there are only two options.
Kill or be killed

salted onions
11-09-2010, 01:23 PM
What everyone is saying is that Templars are trying to enslave mankind, taking away their free will, where as the Assassins are basically protecting free will, therefore Templars are evil because free will is good.

But what if one argued that free will is bad?

Mankind is a self destructive force. Unless tamed, we are doomed to constant fighting. Throughout history, mankind has been through many wars for many different reasons, but they will always find reasons to fight, kill, and destroy, whether it be religion, race, territory, money, anything. Templars see that. This is why if the entire world is unified over one overarching power, there will be none of that. World peace.

Okay, Assassins will kill a few dozen Templars so that they cannot achieve their goals. The more the Assassins slow down the Templars, the more difficult the Assassins make it for the Templars, the more people die outside of this little Assassin/Templar skirmishes, due to real war, fought by normal people. So what if the Templars kill a few thousand people? So what if they kill a few million? By taming the entire human race, billions of lives will be saved, and more to come.

This is the Templar mindset. And it's rational. There is no good. There is no evil.

Shinta07
11-09-2010, 01:31 PM
But what if one argued that free will is bad?
Even if it is, creating a system of control doesn't do anything to ensure that there won't be fighting or murder. In fact, it's probably going to create more turmoil.

gimya
11-09-2010, 01:32 PM
Originally posted by childprodigy:
What everyone is saying is that Templars are trying to enslave mankind, taking away their free will, where as the Assassins are basically protecting free will, therefore Templars are evil because free will is good.

But what if one argued that free will is bad?

Mankind is a self destructive force. Unless tamed, we are doomed to constant fighting. Throughout history, mankind has been through many wars for many different reasons, but they will always find reasons to fight, kill, and destroy, whether it be religion, race, territory, money, anything. Templars see that. This is why if the entire world is unified over one overarching power, there will be none of that. World peace.

Okay, Assassins will kill a few dozen Templars so that they cannot achieve their goals. The more the Assassins slow down the Templars, the more difficult the Assassins make it for the Templars, the more people die outside of this little Assassin/Templar skirmishes, due to real war, fought by normal people. So what if the Templars kill a few thousand people? So what if they kill a few million? By taming the entire human race, billions of lives will be saved, and more to come.

This is the Templar mindset. And it's rational. There is no good. There is no evil.

Then imagine that the Templars achieve full control over mankind.

"Mankind is a self destructive force. Unless tamed, we are doomed to constant fighting.", right?

I can only imagine who would be used as cannon fodder if there was dissention in the Templar ranks... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

salted onions
11-09-2010, 01:40 PM
Originally posted by gimya:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by childprodigy:
What everyone is saying is that Templars are trying to enslave mankind, taking away their free will, where as the Assassins are basically protecting free will, therefore Templars are evil because free will is good.

But what if one argued that free will is bad?

Mankind is a self destructive force. Unless tamed, we are doomed to constant fighting. Throughout history, mankind has been through many wars for many different reasons, but they will always find reasons to fight, kill, and destroy, whether it be religion, race, territory, money, anything. Templars see that. This is why if the entire world is unified over one overarching power, there will be none of that. World peace.

Okay, Assassins will kill a few dozen Templars so that they cannot achieve their goals. The more the Assassins slow down the Templars, the more difficult the Assassins make it for the Templars, the more people die outside of this little Assassin/Templar skirmishes, due to real war, fought by normal people. So what if the Templars kill a few thousand people? So what if they kill a few million? By taming the entire human race, billions of lives will be saved, and more to come.

This is the Templar mindset. And it's rational. There is no good. There is no evil.

Then imagine that the Templars achieve full control over mankind.

"Mankind is a self destructive force. Unless tamed, we are doomed to constant fighting.", right?

I can only imagine who would be used as cannon fodder if there was dissention in the Templar ranks... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Like you and Fenrir said, yes, it is flawed, since Templars are still human too, but the ways of the Assassins are flawed as well. They are obstructing peace in the eyes of the Templars, because Assassins allow for free will, and free will is dangerous. Mankind needs to be guided, and tamed. Assassins kill needlessly, if they just submitted and gave in to the Templars, then it would make it that much easier for the Templars to take hold of the world by it's reigns and lead to a glorious new world order...

..oh god I'm a Templar aren't I?

Shinta07
11-09-2010, 01:46 PM
Therein lies the flaw in the templars logic. You can't eliminate free will. It will always exist and nature will find a way to balance itself back out. It's an impossible task so long as there are still people alive in this world. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

AMuppetMatt
11-09-2010, 01:48 PM
"We walk in the darkness to serve the light"
Quote from an Assassin initiation. Could the light equal the sun? If so, that is certainly an extremely negative comment, because it shows the support the impending disaster in game.
It's all down to interpretation IMO.

The Templars wish to control people to protect them, whether or not serving them is one of their goals or not seems to be a grey area. What IS certain, however, is that they don't want the world dead, they want to ensure that there is peace. Again, good moral outcome, bad moral means to reach the outcome.

Someone mentioned that the assassins want people to be free by educating people. Free, yes. Educated? Where in AC 1 or 2 is education even a factor. They want peace and freedom through means of killing, be they Templar or people who stand in their way. Again, great moral outcome, not sure on the means though.

I'm pretty indifferent to the Templars, I'm still expecting the twist that they're the proverbial "good guys" http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

(The best way to control a population is to do so in such a way that they don't realise they're being controlled. Who does the controlling in the more subtle way?)

Shinta07
11-09-2010, 01:52 PM
Someone mentioned that the assassins want people to be free by educating people. Free, yes. Educated? Where in AC 1 or 2 is education even a factor. They want peace and freedom through means of killing, be they Templar or people who stand in their way. Again, great moral outcome, not sure on the means though.
There was a chapter in 2 I believe were they took out a templar that was burning books and preventing the populace from learning. The assassin's hands are definitely bloody, however, nobody's hands are going to be clean in this struggle. It's a matter of who gives the best option for the long term. Subjugation will never work long term.


(The best way to control a population is to do so in such a way that they don't realise they're being controlled. Who does the controlling in the more subtle way?)
You can't control a population long term. It will collapse eventually. Hence will freedom and free will is so important. If people make their own choices, they only have themselves to blame.

dchil279
11-09-2010, 01:54 PM
Originally posted by AMuppetMatt:
"We walk in the darkness to serve the light"
Quote from an Assassin initiation. Could the light equal the sun? If so, that is certainly an extremely negative comment, because it shows the support the impending disaster in game.
It's all down to interpretation IMO.

The Templars wish to control people to protect them, whether or not serving them is one of their goals or not seems to be a grey area. What IS certain, however, is that they don't want the world dead, they want to ensure that there is peace. Again, good moral outcome, bad moral means to reach the outcome.

Someone mentioned that the assassins want people to be free by educating people. Free, yes. Educated? Where in AC 1 or 2 is education even a factor. They want peace and freedom through means of killing, be they Templar or people who stand in their way. Again, great moral outcome, not sure on the means though.

I'm pretty indifferent to the Templars, I'm still expecting the twist that they're the proverbial "good guys" http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

(The best way to control a population is to do so in such a way that they don't realise they're being controlled. Who does the controlling in the more subtle way?)
It's "We WORK in the light to serve the light" not walk. And It's not a reference to the impending disaster.

obliviondoll
11-09-2010, 01:59 PM
OK.

Free will is bad, ON ITS OWN (more on this later), because humans are inclined to be selfish and violent.

But enslaving people isn't the right way to go about changing that, because it puts power in the hands of those doing the enslaving.

And free will with power over others is worse.

The Assassin's way doesn't end with killing the Templars. It isn't just about the destruction. They also seek to teach people to RESPECT THE FREE WILL OF OTHERS.

Achieving that particular goal is a much more time-consuming plan than that of the Templars, but the end, in this case, truly does justify THOSE means.

Yes, they are killers, but they don't kill needlessly. Their Creed is law, in specifies that they must not kill innocents. The Templars have no such restrictions, and THAT is where they went wrong.

Even those in power need to be governed by laws, or as V would say, "People should not be afraid of their governments, governments should be afraid of their people."

AMuppetMatt
11-09-2010, 02:00 PM
Originally posted by dchil279:

It's "We WORK in the light to serve the light" not walk. And It's not a reference to the impending disaster.


And you know this how? Big Grin

OK, I admit it's pretty vague, but let's face it, AC has been the definition of vague at times. Don't get me wrong, the way the story has unfolded has been fantastic, but can you honestly say that it isn't a possibility? I don't think that that's the case, I don't think the Assassins knew about the impending disaster or are supporting it, I'm just making a point that it is down to interpretation of what you think is good and evil, and therefore, if evil actions with good justifications is good or not.

There's a lot of grey in AC.

AMuppetMatt
11-09-2010, 02:06 PM
Originally posted by obliviondoll:


Even those in power need to be governed by laws, or as V would say, "People should not be afraid of their governments, governments should be afraid of their people."



Ah, the great V.
Watched that today actually.

What government would be more afraid of their people?
One where the people are free
or
One where the populace is enslaved?

A free population all with free thought have less reason to fight back.
Personally, if I were controlling the population with a PofE I would be terrified that the effects wouldn't work on someone... after all, they could lead an uprising. One or two voices against 100 all thinking the same are much more powerful than one or two voices against 50 groups of people thinking the same. This is me personally, but I would definitely be more worried be the enslaver than if I were the leader.

salted onions
11-09-2010, 02:07 PM
Once could just say that the Assassin's efforts are futile since they'll never be able to teach people that. Especially since they've gone underground, I doubt many "Assassin School Of Respecting Free Will" institutions have popped up. Their goal is noble, but in the end it is just futile to try such a thing.

The plan of the Templars is much more concrete, and does not rely on something as fickle as mankind, because if all goes according to plans, they will be GODS. They'll basically be just like "The Ones Who Came Before."

And if you say that "The Ones Who Came Before" enslaved mankind, and mankind rebelled because enslavement was bad, guess who were the ones who started the rebelling, and the war? Adam and Eve. The first Assassins. Before they broke free from control, despite being slaves, they were at least alive.

obliviondoll
11-09-2010, 02:07 PM
Originally posted by AMuppetMatt:
Someone mentioned that the assassins want people to be free by educating people. Free, yes. Educated? Where in AC 1 or 2 is education even a factor.
Altair mentions teaching others multiple times to various people he's killing. His job is to kill, teaching is something others do for him.

It's referenced even more in the journal entries you can read in the game.

Not so directly referended by Ezio, but AC2 focuses more on his personal story of revenge.

(AC2 SPOILER!!!)

And Leonardo is a member of the Assassin order, even though he's a pacifist and doesn't fight. What did he do for them? He was a man of learning, and he taught Ezio plenty. So, Leonardo would appear to be a teacher. Probably one of many through the ages. And from the way Altair created the codex, and from the things you can read by going through it thoroughly, it would appear he spent a lot of time in that role as well.

(END SPOILER)

Sabooza
11-09-2010, 02:09 PM
wow, so many respnses, and so many good views, great! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

notafanboy
11-09-2010, 02:17 PM
the templars goal is good ... but the way they are getting there ... well.

salted onions
11-09-2010, 02:19 PM
Originally posted by notafanboy:
the templars goal is good ... but the way they are getting there ... well.

Yep. Basically the ends justifies the means.

The way the Assassin's operate, however, there will be no end. Just the constant killing of Templars. If the Assassins would just submit, that would save so many lives, both assassins, and templars, and the lives of those caught between the crossfire.

persiateddy95
11-09-2010, 02:20 PM
Originally posted by Sabooza:
wow, so many respnses, and so many good views, great! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
No one voted for "WOOT WOOT go Templars!" yet http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

salted onions
11-09-2010, 02:26 PM
Originally posted by persiateddy95:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Sabooza:
wow, so many respnses, and so many good views, great! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
No one voted for "WOOT WOOT go Templars!" yet http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I completely forgot about the poll, I went straight for the responses http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif
*votes for "WOOT WOOT go Templars!"*

obliviondoll
11-09-2010, 02:28 PM
Originally posted by childprodigy:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by notafanboy:
the templars goal is good ... but the way they are getting there ... well.

Yep. Basically the ends justifies the means.

The way the Assassin's operate, however, there will be no end. Just the constant killing of Templars. If the Assassins would just submit, that would save so many lives, both assassins, and templars, and the lives of those caught between the crossfire. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yep. Basically the end justifies the means.

The way the Templars operate, however, there will be no end. If the Templars would just submit, that would save so many lives, both Assassins and Templars, as well as the lives of those caught in the crossfire.

If the Templars ended their "mad quest", as Altair called it, the Assassins would stop killing, and they could teach openly.

If that happened, people could learn to look beyond their prejudices and respect the rights of others as well as protecting their own.

Shinta07
11-09-2010, 02:29 PM
Originally posted by childprodigy:
Once could just say that the Assassin's efforts are futile since they'll never be able to teach people that. Especially since they've gone underground, I doubt many "Assassin School Of Respecting Free Will" institutions have popped up. Their goal is noble, but in the end it is just futile to try such a thing.
You don't have to teach people that. It's an issue of balance. Allowing a small few to grab power puts things out of balance. By keeping the Templars at bay, they are helping to maintain a balance that is necessary. If the Templars win, they gain control. Probably just for a short time however, until there is a revolt and more blood shed occurs.


The plan of the Templars is much more concrete, and does not rely on something as fickle as mankind, because if all goes according to plans, they will be GODS. They'll basically be just like "The Ones Who Came Before."
They will be "gods" but still with the same logical and emotional flaws as every other human. Just because they suddenly have a piece of Eden, doesn't mean they will suddenly be able to eradicate these issues. As we've seen, there are those that have natural resistances to the pieces of Eden. The Templars will simply never be able to succeed.


And if you say that "The Ones Who Came Before" enslaved mankind, and mankind rebelled because enslavement was bad, guess who were the ones who started the rebelling, and the war? Adam and Eve. The first Assassins. Before they broke free from control, despite being slaves, they were at least alive.
This is a perfect example of why the Templars goals will never work in the long term. There are those that would risk everything to obtain their freedom. The only long term solution is to create a balance. Everybody has free will. It won't be perfect, but it's the best solution.

salted onions
11-09-2010, 03:09 PM
Originally posted by obliviondoll:
Yep. Basically the end justifies the means.

The way the Templars operate, however, there will be no end. If the Templars would just submit, that would save so many lives, both Assassins and Templars, as well as the lives of those caught in the crossfire.

If the Templars ended their "mad quest", as Altair called it, the Assassins would stop killing, and they could teach openly.

If that happened, people could learn to look beyond their prejudices and respect the rights of others as well as protecting their own.

If the Assassins ended their futiile endeavors, then maybe the Templars would've had an easier time with their "mad quest", although more concrete.

If that happened, The Templars would be far ahead of schedule in their plan to subjugate the world, protecting humanity as one.

The Assassins gamble on free will, hoping that they could teach the people, but some people just cannot be taught, like Templars for example. It's futile to try to teach, there will always be opposition.


Originally posted by Fenrir_07:
You don't have to teach people that. It's an issue of balance. Allowing a small few to grab power puts things out of balance. By keeping the Templars at bay, they are helping to maintain a balance that is necessary. If the Templars win, they gain control. Probably just for a short time however, until there is a revolt and more blood shed occurs."

This balance doesn't seem very effective if bloodshed occur anyway. If the Templars win, control will be attained, and if there is a revolt, like you said, and a revolution occurs, I suppose that's just like what happened with Adam and Eve and "The Ones Who Came Before".. and during this revolution, they were distracted, and did not catch the impending natural disaster from the sun.. did we just stumble upon a cycle?



They will be "gods" but still with the same logical and emotional flaws as every other human. Just because they suddenly have a piece of Eden, doesn't mean they will suddenly be able to eradicate these issues. As we've seen, there are those that have natural resistances to the pieces of Eden. The Templars will simply never be able to succeed.

I meant gods in the sense of "Those Who Came Before". Despite being technologically advanced and all powerful, it's not like they lacked emotion. And the Templars know that just having a PoE will solve everything, if they did they would've tried something considering the fact that they've had multiple PoEs at some point. That is why the natural resistances, aka The Assassins, ought to submit, or be killed. They are just an obstruction to the Templar's vision of true world peace.



This is a perfect example of why the Templars goals will never work in the long term. There are those that would risk everything to obtain their freedom. The only long term solution is to create a balance. Everybody has free will. It won't be perfect, but it's the best solution.

If they didn't risk everything, maybe so much wouldn't be lost. If they submitted, everything would turn out okay, or atleast better than the way the broken up world is, filled with war and death.

Grafferu
11-09-2010, 03:17 PM
The templars and the crusaders killed thousands of innocent people so yeah, they should rot in hell ! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

Shinta07
11-09-2010, 04:21 PM
Originally posted by childprodigy:
If they didn't risk everything, maybe so much wouldn't be lost. If they submitted, everything would turn out okay, or atleast better than the way the broken up world is, filled with war and death.
It will be filled with war and death anyway. Do you think that once the Templars get in power they will be satisfied? There will be fighting amongst themselves and with the pieces of eden in the mix, it would be even more brutal. There will always be fighting, but at least in the status quo, there isn't a super villain with ultimate technology in power controlling everything, creating a superior class with slaves below.

tH3PatRi0Tx1776
11-09-2010, 05:24 PM
Originally posted by dchil279:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AMuppetMatt:
"We walk in the darkness to serve the light"
Quote from an Assassin initiation. Could the light equal the sun? If so, that is certainly an extremely negative comment, because it shows the support the impending disaster in game.
It's all down to interpretation IMO.

The Templars wish to control people to protect them, whether or not serving them is one of their goals or not seems to be a grey area. What IS certain, however, is that they don't want the world dead, they want to ensure that there is peace. Again, good moral outcome, bad moral means to reach the outcome.

Someone mentioned that the assassins want people to be free by educating people. Free, yes. Educated? Where in AC 1 or 2 is education even a factor. They want peace and freedom through means of killing, be they Templar or people who stand in their way. Again, great moral outcome, not sure on the means though.

I'm pretty indifferent to the Templars, I'm still expecting the twist that they're the proverbial "good guys" http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

(The best way to control a population is to do so in such a way that they don't realise they're being controlled. Who does the controlling in the more subtle way?)
It's "We WORK in the light to serve the light" not walk. And It's not a reference to the impending disaster. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Your wrong also! it's " We work in the darkness to serve the light" All it means is that they are servants of the light, or free will but they protect free will by being masters of darkness, or by killing people.

obliviondoll
11-09-2010, 10:31 PM
Originally posted by childprodigy:
The Assassins gamble on free will, hoping that they could teach the people, but some people just cannot be taught, like Templars for example. It's futile to try to teach, there will always be opposition.
The Templars gamble on ancient technology, hoping they can enslave the people, but some people just won't be subjugated so easily, the Assassins for instance. It's futile to try and enslave everyone, there will always be opposition.

And yes, it is very kind of you to give me a template to work from like that.

Apparently both sides can be argued for and against with almost identical wording. This is really showing off the ambiguity and moral grey areas of the game, wouldn't you say?

Personally, working from the information we're given, I believe I'd side with the Assassins, but if I was shown the world from a Templar's perspective, it's entirely possible they would appear to be in the right.

lilbacchant
11-09-2010, 10:43 PM
Originally posted by obliviondoll:
Apparently both sides can be argued for and against with almost identical wording. This is really showing off the ambiguity and moral grey areas of the game, wouldn't you say?


Yep, the back-n-forth between you two was interesting. Now, stop playing nice and get back to arguing! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/icon_twisted.gif

EmperorxZurg
11-09-2010, 10:50 PM
hooray for lurking this entire thread http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif I'll jut back in once the arguing starts again

salted onions
11-10-2010, 06:44 AM
Originally posted by lilbacchant:
Yep, the back-n-forth between you two was interesting. Now, stop playing nice and get back to arguing! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/icon_twisted.gif

This is pretty entertaining isnít it? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif


Originally posted by obliviondoll:
The Templars gamble on ancient technology, hoping they can enslave the people, but some people just won't be subjugated so easily, the Assassins for instance. It's futile to try and enslave everyone, there will always be opposition.

And yes, it is very kind of you to give me a template to work from like that.

Apparently both sides can be argued for and against with almost identical wording. This is really showing off the ambiguity and moral grey areas of the game, wouldn't you say?

Personally, working from the information we're given, I believe I'd side with the Assassins, but if I was shown the world from a Templar's perspective, it's entirely possible they would appear to be in the right.

The moral ambiguity is one of the reasons why the story in this franchise is so enthralling to me, and Iím glad to have had this little back and forth with you. Not saying that you do specifically, but what annoys me is when people blindly proclaim the Templar as evil just because we play as Assassins. Both perspectives have their rationalities, and their reasons.

Really, the politically, morally correct answer would obviously be the path of the Assassinís, but the more cynical, Machiavellian answer would be the Templarís plan. A bit ironic, describing the Templar using a word derived from Niccolo Machiavelli himself, an Assassin Grand Master http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

Big_Steve68w
11-10-2010, 07:20 AM
Originally posted by Sabooza:
Why do people view Templars as truly evil human beings? I mean sure, control and all that yada yada yada yada, bbut they are overall trying to obtain the same as the Assassins, just in a very different way.

Well, there seems to be a big shift in the motives of templars in AC1 and AC2. In AC1, there seemed to be more grey areas with your targets. Initially, you thought they were just evil men. However, after their death sequences, you can see reason to question your own motives. AC1 Templars = Peace through control.

In AC2, the assassin and templar struggle seems pretty black and white. Besides, I just can't see Borgia as the peace seeking type. Maybe, he'll attain peace when everyone loses their free will and he controls everything.

Assassin-Saiyan
11-10-2010, 09:27 AM
Originally posted by Big_Steve68w:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Sabooza:
Why do people view Templars as truly evil human beings? I mean sure, control and all that yada yada yada yada, bbut they are overall trying to obtain the same as the Assassins, just in a very different way.

Well, there seems to be a big shift in the motives of templars in AC1 and AC2. In AC1, there seemed to be more grey areas with your targets. Initially, you thought they were just evil men. However, after their death sequences, you can see reason to question your own motives. AC1 Templars = Peace through control.

In AC2, the assassin and templar struggle seems pretty black and white. Besides, I just can't see Borgia as the peace seeking type. Maybe, he'll attain peace when everyone loses their free will and he controls everything. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The ethical question in AC 1 is much more complex than it is in AC 2. Mostly because AC 1 is a story of redemption (at least sorta) and AC 2 is story of revenge.

Good to see that just something little as the sentence "The ends justifies the means" can trigger such a big discussion.

Shadowchsr79
11-10-2010, 10:28 AM
If someone else posted, something similar I appologize in advance. Also there are possible spoilers in here for those who haven't finished with ACII. Read at your own risk.

I think what really upsets me about the Templars is not their goal but their attitude toward the rest of humanity. Not only do they believe that any means are able to justfity the end they seek by removing free will. It's like their knowledge of the fact that humans were built with the the neurotransmitter that makes them able to be controlled by Pieces of Eden, in a sense, created as slaves, that this is how humanity needs to be again, controlled by those that they consider superior, namely the Leaders of the Templar order themselves. It's the utter lack of faith in humanity to be anything other than violent that is rather disenheartening.

Also if you go with another group of clues in "the Truth" on the Abel and Cain conflict, the children of Adam and Eve, possibly fighting and even killing for control over the Apple. Now i don't know if one killed the other or not but what if Cain became the first Templar and his brother became the first assassin, the one who maybe swore to stop the use of the Pieces of Eden for control since humanity managed to fight themselves free of slavery once and vowed to never let it happen again. In a way, this whole thing could be on ancient blood feud. It wouldn't surprise me if there were some on both sides of this conflict whom are immune to the mind control effects of the Pieces of Eden.

Crazy theories aside, While the templars aren't truly evil, they do seem to cast aside morals and ethics in their quest for a new world order. In a lot of religious doctrine, (i'm generalizing here so please don't be offended) I get the impression that those on the side of good promote free will which is why God or the Gods are no longer present to influence us on earth, while the devils and such seek to control and enslave. So in the broadest terms the templar's methods can be catagorized as evil.

Yet history and actions is always in the eye of the beholder. For example, America's great war for independence, our defining fight for freedom from our oppressors, is called the "colonial Uprising" in England and barely gets a mention in their history books. It's a blip on the screen for them and hardly worth mentioning.

I think it's this kind of knowledge that drives the templars. That nothing is true, that things recorded are colored by the eyes who viewed them so in a way they reject that "reality" and intend to put a new one, a single guiding one in it's place my any means nessesary. In a way their actions are the assassin's own creed taken to the worst possible heights because they've removed what the limits of their own morals to embrace there one ideal and will do anything to push that one ideal on all others. For them the cruisades never ended, it just went underground and ceased to be about religion when they learned the truth of "those who came before" I think in a way, the templars are the most human form of evil that we as people can recognize. These are people who according to the clues in the truth, created the second world war's beigninng and end, with the knowledge that millions would suffer and die all in the attempt to further their agenda. Live are of little meaning or purpose to them outside of being tools to further their goals. They have an inhuman view of humanity, like a child who plays with an ant farm. It may not be evil, but in such a large scale, it is a frightening way of seeing things.

breakdown89
11-10-2010, 10:39 AM
it's true that the templars (AC fictional-wise) aren't necessarily "evil" per-se, but they are as close to that as you can possibly get. The assassin's on the other hand, are as close to the side of "good" respectively as well.

salted onions
11-10-2010, 10:52 AM
Originally posted by DeusEx89:
it's true that the templars (AC fictional-wise) aren't necessarily "evil" per-se, but they are as close to that as you can possibly get. The assassin's on the other hand, are as close to the side of "good" respectively as well.

There really is no good and evil when it comes to either of them. They both work towards a certain goal with good intentions. The Assassin's goal is to protect free will. The Templar's goal is to ensure peace. They both sound like noble causes, and this is because they are. The actions that lead to these goals aren't always the best either.

The Assassin's have killed many. The Templars have killed many many more. The way I rationlize this is that the Templars killed in the name of peace, where as the Assassin's kill just to be an annoyance, obstructing peace by protecting free will.

Assassin-Saiyan
11-10-2010, 11:27 AM
Originally posted by childprodigy:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DeusEx89:
it's true that the templars (AC fictional-wise) aren't necessarily "evil" per-se, but they are as close to that as you can possibly get. The assassin's on the other hand, are as close to the side of "good" respectively as well.

There really is no good and evil when it comes to either of them. They both work towards a certain goal with good intentions. The Assassin's goal is to protect free will. The Templar's goal is to ensure peace. They both sound like noble causes, and this is because they are. The actions that lead to these goals aren't always the best either.

The Assassin's have killed many. The Templars have killed many many more. The way I rationlize this is that the Templars killed in the name of peace, where as the Assassin's kill just to be an annoyance, obstructing peace by protecting free will. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

And the one thing that must be anwsered is:
Which of the above two is less worse?

Because as said a thousand times before both are noble goals reached by means that contradict their goals.

breakdown89
11-10-2010, 11:31 AM
Originally posted by childprodigy:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DeusEx89:
it's true that the templars (AC fictional-wise) aren't necessarily "evil" per-se, but they are as close to that as you can possibly get. The assassin's on the other hand, are as close to the side of "good" respectively as well.

There really is no good and evil when it comes to either of them. They both work towards a certain goal with good intentions. The Assassin's goal is to protect free will. The Templar's goal is to ensure peace. They both sound like noble causes, and this is because they are. The actions that lead to these goals aren't always the best either.

The Assassin's have killed many. The Templars have killed many many more. The way I rationlize this is that the Templars killed in the name of peace, where as the Assassin's kill just to be an annoyance, obstructing peace by protecting free will. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

while that may be true however, the templars also wish to control humanity as well, as seen by al mualim at the end of AC1, using the apple of the eden to take control over people's minds. therefore, the templars goals are nowhere near as "noble" as the assassin's are.

ibn-al-ahad
11-10-2010, 11:57 AM
A man once said " There is no such thing as good or evil. There is only power, and those to weak to wield it..." Templar ideology.

If the Assassins were to fail, if Abstergo finds the remaining pieces, it would just enter another cycle like with the ones who came before. It would all happen again. Either that, or mankind would wipe itself out completely. Besides, even in the templar-ideal world, would you live in a world with no war, no hunger, no suffering? A world with no pain and where all is well? Would you live in that world, even if meant you would lose your ability to enjoy it?
To lose the ability... to apreciate it?

breakdown89
11-10-2010, 12:26 PM
obviously not, because then it would mean de-voiding one's self of what it means to actually live life in the first place lol.

Shadowchsr79
11-10-2010, 12:35 PM
Sometimes, I think the Templar's goal is truly unrealistic in the basic sense that Life without struggle, with out pain and loss and the fight against our own darkness, things would lose their meaning. I think in a society where everything is peacefull and in it's place, means we'd cease to evolve. We are defined not just by our success but also by our failure and it's in our darkest times that people can band together to create our greatest strength. I think to lose that would be to destroy humanity.

PhiIs1618033
11-10-2010, 01:50 PM
Templars seek peace? Fine with me. It's the way that they try to enforce it, by gaining absolute power.
The templars effictively want a dictatorship. And as you people should know, of the many dictatorships we've had in this world, not one can be said to have been a proper society.

The assassin's are morally grey, too, but at least they have a realistic goal: protect free will. Free will leads to a sort of free-market algorithm in which the best ideas will stay on top eventually.


The templar goal isn't rational. They are driven by the thought that there exists something as 'absolute peace'. They picked a way to achieve it (oppression) and went on with it. Thing is that this approach will not lead to absolute, neverending peace. The templar's reasoning is a thinly veiled attempt to disguise a madman's speak as rational.

Shadowchsr79
11-11-2010, 10:35 PM
I think it's not just that the Assassin's are morally gray but also the Templars believe their cause is just. As is true of any War, "war doesn't decide who is right, it decides who is left" And then the winners write the history books. But in any war, there are two groups who believe they are in the right. And it's that belief that keeps both sides fighting. The templar's desire for order and the illusion that they can create peace through their actions and that such a goal is worth the price. and then the Assassin order that believes in free will and education of all complexities that are part of life so that we can continue to grow and evolve and maybe someday reach a point that we can actively choose peace. But more important that peace is the freedom to choose it.

Though one thing that you see in ACI with all of Altair's victims is that all of them truly believed that their actions were right and justified. They felt they were guiding the people by their actions of burning books or experimenting with herbs to cloud the mind, torture, fear, military power. In some ways they were like overprotective parents, not letting the rest of humanity become fully independent of their influence.

What I find rather frightening is the number of people who willingly follow the templars blindly because they want what they promise. In a way I find a parallel with this storyline and the Matrix. The select few exception humans who can break the chains of the false reality they are living to fight for the freedom of the rest of the world, even if it means a world much altered and more desolate than the one they believed to be real. It's probably why it's so compelling of a story, the great conspiracy. Yet in a way both sides are fighting for their way of life. And I think I'm rambling now so I'll be quiet

obliviondoll
11-12-2010, 02:42 AM
Originally posted by Shadowchsr79:
(not actually quoting because it's too long)
I REALLY liked your post. All of it. Well said. Much of it has been said by others, myself included, in different ways, but it's a good summation of things.

I have to mention, as I have before, that this is viewed through the filter of an Assassin-centric perspective. And you also have to remember that Assassins are human too, and prone to mistakes and pride.

(AC1 SPOILER)

Look at Al Mualim - a grandmaster of the Assassins who not only conspired with the Templars to gain possession of a Piece of Eden, but then had them killed not for their own plan, but so he could more easily get away with doing EXACTLY WHAT THEY HAD PLANNED.

(SPOILER END)

So yes, with what we're being shown, the Templars are a darker shade of grey than the Assassins, but how much of the picture are we missing?

What if the Templar doctor in AC1 was truly only drugging people who were practically on their deathbeds, and for whom nothing could be done? What if deadening the pain was the best his patients could hope for anyway? Would he really seem so evil? He's legitimately helping ease their passing, AND learning things which will help lead to peace in the future. Where's the evil?

Also, I like the Abel/Cain theory. Very interesting to think about while playing.

gimya
11-12-2010, 04:06 AM
Originally posted by obliviondoll:
What if the Templar doctor in AC1 was truly only drugging people who were practically on their deathbeds, and for whom nothing could be done? What if deadening the pain was the best his patients could hope for anyway? Would he really seem so evil? He's legitimately helping ease their passing, AND learning things which will help lead to peace in the future. Where's the evil?


Hmm... remember what happens to the guy who tries to escape him? He seems healthy to me, at least to run http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif I agree that he believed that he was actually doing that for the greater good, but his methods clearly suggest he is a madman. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

*PS*

Also, looking at his conversations with the "patients" before you kill him and his final speech, it seems to me that he is only interested in "freeing their minds from their prison"... control over them to be more precise.

obliviondoll
11-12-2010, 04:35 AM
Originally posted by gimya:
Hmm... remember what happens to the guy who tries to escape him? He seems healthy to me, at least to run http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif I agree that he believed that he was actually doing that for the greater good, but his methods clearly suggest he is a madman. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

*PS*

Also, looking at his conversations with the "patients" before you kill him and his final speech, it seems to me that he is only interested in "freeing their minds from their prison"... control over them to be more precise.
Unless, of course, they truly ARE insane, and he's freeing him from that insanity.

Yes, he's taking away free will, but what good is free will when guided by delusion anyway?

In that particular context, who's to say he's wrong to do it.

Of course, "delusion" may be a subjective term in its own right, and believing inaccurate information may be enough (even if the information is provided by those who judge you as delusional for believing it).

Yeah, I see your point, but you may have noticed, I'm more on the Assassin's side than the Templars. I'm just playing devil's advocate and trying to show that there is a good side to their efforts as well.

gimya
11-12-2010, 04:45 AM
I'm not saying that you are in favor of the Templars, my apologies if it seemed that way http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Again, the man who tries to expose Garnier and what really happens there seems to be with his mind clear. Like him there may be others, just my opinion ofc http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

*PS*

To me, the Templars are a group that seeks control above all the others and masks that goal with pretty speeches about peace.

Shadowchsr79
11-13-2010, 09:54 PM
obliviondoll,

I'm glad you liked my post and a few of my wonky theories. I probably would have done more but I didn't want to get too far off topic. I tend to run off on tangents at times. I just think there is so much interesting stuff going on in ACII that was barely touched in the first one.

**spoiler warning**

Al Mualim's betrayal is quiet interesting. I wonder if he was always a templar or he was tempted later on by the knowledge of the piece of eden and what it could do. After all he did arrange for the deaths of all of Robert de Sable's men. We know for a fact that the apple is a form of temptation itself and if Al Mualim didn't have the genetic ability to even partially resist it like Altair then it's possible that just being in possession of it can be too overwhelming. Especially if one of the primary purposes of the apple is to control and influence a person's mind and perception. Even Altair struggled with continued exposure to the Apple. Ironically, Ezio didn't appear to have such hesitation. Though we only see him with it at the end of the game to fight our final enemy. But I'm rambling again.

Al Mualim, may or may not have always been a templar but he certainly did end up with wanting the same goals, only he had no desire to share it. Yet in a way, Al Mualim's betrayal helped awaken Altair and others to the razor's edge they walk and how close the were to becoming no different from their enemies.

**spoiler end**

As for how much of the picture we're missing. I'm sure it's a lot. Altair's codex was only about 25 journal entries and several illustrations. That's not much considering he spent decades with the PoE. I do hope we get a few more flashbacks with Altair as long as they are important to the story. I can't wait for more of the story to be revealed. I'm almost willing to pay full price for Brotherhood when in comes out instead of waiting a while for the price to go down.

ninja_7_7
11-13-2010, 10:01 PM
Originally posted by childprodigy:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DeusEx89:
it's true that the templars (AC fictional-wise) aren't necessarily "evil" per-se, but they are as close to that as you can possibly get. The assassin's on the other hand, are as close to the side of "good" respectively as well.

There really is no good and evil when it comes to either of them. They both work towards a certain goal with good intentions. The Assassin's goal is to protect free will. The Templar's goal is to ensure peace. They both sound like noble causes, and this is because they are. The actions that lead to these goals aren't always the best either.

The Assassin's have killed many. The Templars have killed many many more. The way I rationlize this is that the Templars killed in the name of peace, where as the Assassin's kill just to be an annoyance, obstructing peace by protecting free will. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yea stupid free will. Let us all be ruled by a tyrant.

masterfenix2009
11-13-2010, 10:35 PM
You guys don't get it. Good and evil is with ones own opinion. Which means there is no true good or evil.

Nothing is true.

The point of life is self fulfillment. Everything is allowed to reach that fulfillment.

Everything is permitted.

You guys say that sense the Templars are human, so there vision is flawed. But what if they ended up using the piece of eden on themselves afterward, once they have complete control?

TasBlue1234
11-13-2010, 10:37 PM
Just play sequence 13 Bonfires Of The Vanities...then tell me what you think of the Templars :]

AubreyWilborn
11-13-2010, 10:58 PM
I actually sympathize with the templars in AC1. Those guys were trying to fashion a new world in the MIddle East-one where everyone is truly equal. In their utopia, there would be no Christians, no Jews, no Muslims. There would be no rich, or poor. There would just be people. Of course, all of that was prevented by Altair and his assasinations.

I think the moraly ambiguity of the Assasins, and the Templars is presented superbly. The Templars want to FORCE the human race into a regime of peace and tolerance. Whereas the Assasins fight to preserve man's "free will" to be violent, racist and destructive. Really, which side is more noble?


Towards the end of his life, I think that even Altair began to sympathize with the Templars he killed in AC1. His diary seems to echo many of the ideals of the nine targets. He writes about how most organized religions are "bunk". He writes with despair over the overall-wickedness of the human race. I wonder if he had been given a second chance, Altair wouldn't try to help the nine templars in their goal?

ninja_7_7
11-13-2010, 11:02 PM
Well it seems like templars want a perfect society. Everyone equal to racism or anything. Assassins want freedom. Personally I agree with assassins. I rather control my life and be free rather than have peace but be brainwashed.

Shadowchsr79
11-14-2010, 07:24 AM
AubreyWilborn,

*possible spoilers for those who don't complete the games*

Moral ambiguity is the name of the game here which is what makes this such a compelling debate. I think a lot of people who played ACI and listened to the the monologues of Altair's targets would feel somewhat conflicted as well as see the irony of the Assassin's order, clinging to their own form of religious dogma. It was truly a fine line they tread. In fact Al Mualim crossed that line and became a Templar. or he might always have been that detail is not clear.

In a way the assassin's method of operation is rather vulcan, to sacrifice a few in order to benefit the many. I think the one major flaw with what is done in the first ACI is that there is no certainty that whomever rises to take the place of the man they kill will not be just as much of a tyrant as those who were removed from power. At least in ACII, they had allies to replace those who were trying to take over. granted, that made some aspects of the game a little more political but only slightly.

As for echoing the Templar Ideals. I think utlimately the Assassin's and Templars desired the same thing. Peace. But the assassin's believed that the methods of the templars were wrong, a forced peace that in there eyes is little more than another form of enslavement. And I think any man who fights so hard to achieve something would despair at falling short of his goals. Especially when he says he sees another power rising to oppress others in the form of Ghengis Khan. (Sp?)

The problem in this storyline is that Humanity was built do survive. To be a survivor, one has to have the drive to rise up against the odds and surpass all others. We were born to fight. if we don't have to fight to survive, then we tend to fight each other. Even King Richard said so, (I'm paraphrasing here)we come into the world kicking and screaming. Our very nature is volitle and violent. Even the assassins' must kill in their attempts to achieve peace. We keep fighting for peace. Even today we 'fight for peace' though I guess it's better to argue that we fight for freedom.
Now i'm thinking of a line from "rent" "the opposite of war isn't peace, it's creation" I think peace, absolute peace, is an illusion and even Altair knows this. He's seen visions of the effects of the future solar flare and knows something larger than even the fight against the templars and tyrants is coming. The templars, despite knowing the truth or at least some of them knowing the truth, are still desperate to push their. views on all others. It's like they fear the truth and wish to abolish it by putting their own in it's place. Now I've really gone onto a tangent so I'm going to end this here

mad_god87
11-14-2010, 11:12 AM
you may think someone is doing evil but the person that is supposedly being evil never thinks for one second that they are doing evil only what is right or what has to be done...

ninja_7_7
11-14-2010, 12:05 PM
Originally posted by mad_god87:
you may think someone is doing evil but the person that is supposedly being evil never thinks for one second that they are doing evil only what is right or what has to be done...
Maybe but we can see Vidic is evil mostly just cause he is using Desmond and plans to kill him.

cory.k
11-14-2010, 03:36 PM
Originally posted by ninja_7_7:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mad_god87:
you may think someone is doing evil but the person that is supposedly being evil never thinks for one second that they are doing evil only what is right or what has to be done...
Maybe but we can see Vidic is evil mostly just cause he is using Desmond and plans to kill him. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's true, Ninja, but I think the point that most are trying to make here is that morality is relative more often than not. Vidic (and Abstergo as a whole, for that matter) is most definitely evil, but I think what mad_god is saying is that he (Vidic) would not see himself as such. He views his goals and those of the templars as noble ones. The simplest way that I can think to put it is this:
The assassins see the templars as the evil ones, while the templars see the assassins as self-righteous hypocrites who try to stand in the way of progress in the name of free will. Ugh, now I feel all dirty having played devil's advocate for the templars http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

swanny1323
11-14-2010, 04:04 PM
What it basically comes down to is this:

Assassin's believe that ALL people, deep down, are GOOD.

Templar's believe that ALL people, deep down, are BAD.

Therefore, the Assassin's do everything they can to stop people(things) who(that) oppress people's inherent goodness and poison them to no longer be good.

Templar's do everything they can to give people as few chances as possible for their inherent badness to emerge.

I just turned this from an AC argument into purely philosophy. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

mad_god87
11-14-2010, 11:29 PM
Originally posted by cory.k:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ninja_7_7:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mad_god87:
you may think someone is doing evil but the person that is supposedly being evil never thinks for one second that they are doing evil only what is right or what has to be done...
Maybe but we can see Vidic is evil mostly just cause he is using Desmond and plans to kill him. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's true, Ninja, but I think the point that most are trying to make here is that morality is relative more often than not. Vidic (and Abstergo as a whole, for that matter) is most definitely evil, but I think what mad_god is saying is that he (Vidic) would not see himself as such. He views his goals and those of the templars as noble ones. The simplest way that I can think to put it is this:
The assassins see the templars as the evil ones, while the templars see the assassins as self-righteous hypocrites who try to stand in the way of progress in the name of free will. Ugh, now I feel all dirty having played devil's advocate for the templars http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>at least one person got the point that i was trying to get across....

nedostapna
11-15-2010, 02:53 AM
Templars want to make the world a better place by controling everyones mind. They want to be the ones to pull the strings, to make the people puppets.

obliviondoll
11-15-2010, 03:20 AM
Originally posted by TasBlue1234:
Just play sequence 13 Bonfires Of The Vanities...then tell me what you think of the Templars :]
Just play Sequence 13 again and notice that it's not the Templars doing that part. It's a lone madman working against their plans - he was already unbalanced before he got hold ot the Piece of Eden.

And...

Originally posted by cory.k:
Ugh, now I feel all dirty having played devil's advocate for the templars http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif
Now you see how I've been feeling this whole time...

Shadowchsr79
11-15-2010, 02:24 PM
If you ask me, nobody should feel dirty because they can see an alternative point of view. If you ask me, being able to see and to a point understand where the enemy comes from shows that you are open minded and willing to look at all aspects a situation. While part of the code here is that that "Nothing is true" there is an older saying that there is three sides to the truth, Your side, their side, and what really happened. We may never get at the full truth of everything but to at least see two sides of it brings us closer to seeing all sides. Sighs, I wish there were more discussion forums on here like this. I find it very interesting.

lilbacchant
11-15-2010, 03:31 PM
Originally posted by Shadowchsr79:
there is an older saying that there is three sides to the truth, Your side, their side, and what really happened.

Never heard that before ... very cool. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif

Henry454
11-15-2010, 03:56 PM
Doesn't the fact that the Templars are more powerful answer the question? The templars are logical they think output, mass production, train 100,000,000 people at once. The assassins think with their hearts quality, people, individual pricise small issues.

The Templars are smarter when a plan breaks down there is a back up.

The assassins think irattionly with their hearts, foil a plan and see where we are then.

The Templars are Chinese.
The assassins are German (minus tthe huge mustles and blond hair).

Shadowchsr79
11-15-2010, 05:08 PM
I don't know if the templars are smarter or just started out more well funded. If you look at ACI, the Templars were serving under King Richard. In other words, they were operating with the blessing of the King of England as well as the church. They had men in high positions in three major cities as well as the right hand man on the King. It seems like in ACI, that was the first time the Templars or the order that was recognised as Templars came across their first Piece of Eden but that is pure speculation on my part as Al Mualim seemed to know a lot about what it could do, that a piece of eden was responsible for the miracles of both Moses and Jesus and such. But I think this was probably the first time in a millenia that a piece of Eden was uncovered. I think the problem was that the Assassin order had to be rebuilt after Al Mualim was taken down whereas the Templars still were very sizable and possibly were able to find another piece of eden and weren't afraid to use it for their advantage in large ways. Though they probably did suffer when they were disbanded and could no longer go about in public as templars there were men who others didn't know were templars.

But just because they were well funded and had such a large group doesn't tell us which side they were on. Granted in a lot of classic stories there is an "evil Empire" with a small band of rebels fighting off the opression to free the people and is a classic story form but it's never as black and white as that. I think to call either side purely good or evil would cheapen the story of Assassin's Creed.

Assuming things like that is never the answer. Remember Assume, will make an *** out of you and me (*** of u and me)

sneaksmasher
11-17-2010, 06:41 AM
they have good intensions but they do it wrong in ac 1 they wanted to take over the world and in ac 2 and brotherhood they still want to ive checked on real templar groups and i must say they have large groups some members even have ancestors that were templar. if they are evil? they have all the men they need. if they are good? they must be waiting for something or they want to do something

Shadowchsr79
11-18-2010, 11:18 AM
When ever someone says "they have good intentions" I just want to shake my head and laugh because I then remember that age old line "the road to hell is paved in good intentions" I think that good intentions are not enough and the Assassin's know this. There comes a point when good intentions become nothing more than an excuse to justify horrific acts. I'm not saying the real world Templars today are evil. I am saying that the AC version of the Templars is a very twisted mind set bent on forcing their will on all of humanity for the sake of their vision of piece.

I think in some ways the AC templars are a little mad. I think they either think they know or truly believe that humanity will never achieve true peace and so they've gone to the extreme and will use any means nessesary to force peace among the people, even taking away their free will.

Though here is an intersting question. As much as we fight for free will, if it's taken away, will we even be able to miss not having it? I just remember how devoted Al Mualim's people were once he used the apple to control his people. They weren't in their right minds and to anyone that is horrific but I doubt we are aware while in such a state. If the AC Templars win and transmit the apple's signal across the globe nearly all of humanity would follow blindly and never even miss it. I'm not sure what's scarier, the possible loss of free will or the allure of getting away with controlling all of mankind for the ideal of a greater good.

realrobloxian
12-14-2011, 08:48 PM
well as we learned in the first game that the assassins and templars are trying to do th same thing-bring peace to the world but each the assasins way and templar way is different the templars way is force and the assassins way is free will

realrobloxian
12-14-2011, 08:49 PM
srry for the bad spelling im tired

realrobloxian
12-14-2011, 08:52 PM
i didnt copy shadow's words i just read all of the assassins creed wiki today intead of studying for an exam

guest-hXYgoa5K
03-12-2016, 08:47 PM
Templars-order, science, prosperity.
The Roman Empire, the Russian Empire, the USSR, the Russian Federation, the Mongols, the British Empire.
Assasins-disorder,chaos, anarchy, pseudo-democracy.
USA pseudo-democrats.

Jessigirl2013
03-14-2016, 08:36 PM
Templars-order, science, prosperity.
The Roman Empire, the Russian Empire, the USSR, the Russian Federation, the Mongols, the British Empire.
Assasins-disorder,chaos, anarchy, pseudo-democracy.
USA pseudo-democrats.

WOW, this is seriously old thread that got revived.:rolleyes:

I'm assuming your team Templar.

HyperZurre
04-14-2019, 04:47 AM
The Templars arenít evil.
They believe that humanity is flawed, which is true, and they want to create a paradise, a world where there is no crime, hate, etc by controlling humanity via the Apples of Eden, so that they can ďfixĒ humanity.
When you think about it, itís actually a nice-sounding idea. Who would not want to live in a world where peace reigns and there arenít any problems, where everybody lives happily?
However, the bad part about it is that they want to CONTROL humanity to achieve that, in other words, they want to force humanity to obey them, so that they can create their perfect world. This contradicts with the Assassins, who too want to create a paradise, but one where people have freedom, not one where they are forced to do something.
The problem is, supreme freedom can also be a problem. You couldnít guarantee that crime was inexistent, people could rebel, etc which is why the Templars believe in order, to prevent things like that from happening.
Both factions are prone to corruption/misguiding or wrongdoing, like the Borgias and the original Colonial Assassins.
Both factions have good intentions and want to make the world a better place, unfortunately both have ideologies which have flaws and good parts, which is what causes them to clash with each other.
What would you prefer: A world where peace reigns via order or a world where peace reigns via freedom?
That is the question that you must answer in order to know which faction you think is right.

Swailing
04-15-2019, 07:06 PM
When Ubisoft used to have guts, and actually enriched their games with social commentary rather than setting up potentially interesting situations and doing nothing with them, the Templars were unequivocally bad because they backed every awful political leader throughout time. They were bad because they backed the fascists in Germany, Itay and Spain. They were pro-Pinochet and anti-Allende, they supported Thatcher and Nixon, they brought the coup against Mossadegh, and on it goes.

The set-up was simple: sure, the Assassins are questionable because they kill to achieve their aims and are by default terrorists, in that respect, but they often stayed their hands and allowed their enemies to keep power if the alternative meant harming the innocent. By contrast, the Templars would happily collaborate with the worst of humanity in the pursuit of their aims (and besides, their aims are often the same).

JKAC2013
04-15-2019, 09:46 PM
In the First Game and the Ezio Trilogy the templars where represent as the Pure Evil. In ACIII and Rogue there where shown the Order had a good side. (Haytham, Shay)

But I think the interesting Templar Order was the one in Unity. This Templars seem to be the good guys under Grandmaster De La Seere. But when Germain let him kill the Order wants pretty bad. If you want to see the good side of the order I would recommend the books Forsaken (ACIII) and Unity. They both shows that the Order had an good side too.

For myself I think the had Noble Goals(Order,Peace) but use the wrong ways to reach them. Even In the movie it looks like Sophia Rikkin was not ok with the ways the Order use. I think it would be very cool if we see in the Future some Templars and Assassins working together because some games thematized that and together the can help each other to move away from their flaws.

cawatrooper9
04-16-2019, 04:11 PM
The Templars in the Ezio trilogy do tend to all be portrayed as evil, but one of my favorite parts of AC1 is how even if Altair disagrees with their means, he sees their ends as sometimes admirable.

Like, there's never a question that the Templars are far from perfect, but Altair does see enough good in them to cast some shadow of doubt.

Sam.skh
04-17-2019, 07:32 AM
Why do people view Templars as truly evil human beings? I mean sure, control and all that yada yada yada yada, bbut they are overall trying to obtain the same as the Assassins, just in a very different way.
In 2014, assassins creed ROGUE was published but in a way that no one could realise the game really existed !
It was only released for the old gen of consoles and had no advertisement.
But ROGUE is the main core of the templar story in assassins. It shows you the consequences of what the assassins are doing and makes you feel like "Wow! The templars are right!". And when you become the templar and realise who are the real criminals you have the feeling of satisfaction ... like now you know everything about the real cause of the game.
That was the game that the creators just forgot about the technicals of the game, and for a moment ,although short, spread all the creativity throughout it. Which in my opinion is more important than the new fight moves added to a game!
So the main idea of templars being bad is that ubisoft never made a game like ROGUE again. But I believe, if they do so, it will be the best assassins game we will ever play.

Sam_Boo26
04-17-2019, 01:10 PM
I think Shay was still being manipulated by Haytham and the Templars in Rogue. I was mad at the Assassins, but sometimes, when Shay was really emotionally struggling to kill some of his targets and still did it, I was mad at the Templars, too. So yes, Rogue is well balanced for this. But I also think that Unity depicts the conflict between the Assassins and the Templars really well, and it's the one, at least for me, in which we see the most how great some Templars could be and how some Assassins could be extremist, too. It's the one that is the most well balanced for me.

GameGuru2018
04-19-2019, 04:32 PM
https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3318ee185dd5c0c6447f303df5260a92.jpg Assassin's Creed and conspiracy theories are not so far from each other. Conspiracy theories always existed. The more we live the more we start believe it. People have been plotting since ancient times. And of course, rich people do not stand aside from world Affairs, as in the economy and as a consequence in politics. Sorry, not rich......I mean very rich. When you have so much money you just can't afford to be out of power control. Very rich people always try to expand their influence - to save the wealth and increase it. It's called oligarchy. And democracy is for them, first of all. Not for 90% ordinary people. Among themselves, yes, they agree somehow. But for other people......they only let to play so called democracy. One of this game is presidential elections, every 4 years. It would be better to call it fools-party. You have many different persons as candidates - Tom, Jack, Kate....but they are all olygarchy puppets. So with parties in parliaments. "Choose anyone you like! Look how many....real democracy!" But this is fake. They all belong to a bunch of oligarchs. Sometimes there are disagreements between oligarchs, in one country (Trump situation), it may cause even civil war. But disagreement between oligarchs of different countries is inevitable. And it cause World War. ...When Marx predicted World War long before....people were laughing at him - "Old man gone insane! What World War he is talking about?! " But he was not insane - he looked at the heart of economic and political situation. He saw the very essence of it. Essense - that leads to World War. Always! Impossible to escape. Next time it will be suicidal for humanity. Killing humanity for what?! For a bunch of oligarchs?!!! Who weave their conspiracies in the "dark Nightclubs of New York"......