FANDOM


  • One of the things Aymar Azaïzia, head of content, mentioned during his recent Reddit AMA is that, in light of the movie, he does not consider the events of Discovery to be canon anymore. Specifically, his answer was this:

    That was the tough call we add to take, and ultimately the question was... Do you prevent ourselves from getting into that time period because of the DS game, and I was the one giving a greenlight to the movie, and removing discovery from the canon :/

    Tough call, but I think it is worth it

    That being said, I don't think his answer was a fully informed one. What I mean is that 1) He probably hadn't played the game recently (assuming he had ever played it at all) and 2) He probably is not aware of the discussions and lengths we here at the wiki have gone to in order to reconcile the events of the game with the movie. It's not perfect, but we've managed it.

    If someone here has a reddit account (I don't have one), then perhaps you can inform him of that in order to save us the trouble of having to systematically remove all Discovery content from the pages.

      Loading editor
    • I can't believe i was the only one asking that question.

        Loading editor
    • JazeBlack wrote:
      I can't believe i was the only one asking that question.

      A bit surprising yes. I hope you, or perhaps someone else, could inform him of our efforts at the wiki to reconcile the events of Discovery and the movie. It would be great if he could change his mind and declare it canon. I'd hate for our efforts to ultimately be undone.

        Loading editor
    • WHY AYMAR ??? WHYYY ?? The movie's set right after Discovery, period. And what exactly prevents it from being canon ? Ezio's failed assassination attempt ? Cause Brotherhood's contracts didn't care much about it and ACB's canon, as far as I'm aware. Why would Columbus be "a friend of the Brotherhood" then ? So much for a head of content. /rant

        Loading editor
    • Touloir wrote:
      WHY AYMAR ??? WHYYY ?? The movie's set right after Discovery, period. And what exactly prevents it from being canon ? Ezio's failed assassination attempt ? Cause Brotherhood's contracts didn't care much about it and ACB's canon, as far as I'm aware. Why would Columbus be "a friend of the Brotherhood" then ? So much for a head of content. /rant

      It's not quite as simple as the movie being set right after Discovery. Long story short, Discovery covers events from late 1491 to about August 1492. Ezio's attempted assassination of Torquemada occured after Columbus had already left on his first voyage. Like I said, these events are not irreconcilable.

        Loading editor
    • So... why not just admit both the movie's and Discovery's events concur then ? Like something happens in the movie, then in the game, then in the movie, etc.

        Loading editor
    • Because there aren't too many cross references between the movie and the game. At the very least Brotherhood's Pidgeon missions suggest that Ezio did indeed meet Luis Santangel. In my honest opinion not much is lost if Discovery is deemed non-canon, but i do miss what could be lost (like Ezio getting the funds for Columbus' Expedition). Nevertheless, it would actually be helpful if we could get Aymar to give the definitive answer.

        Loading editor
    • It definitely doesn't help that, as the user Sol Pacificus has mentioned, Ubisoft in general seems to have forgotten that the game exists. It's not on their website and is no longer available on iOS. The only times it's been referenced is the brief suggestion in Brotherhood's Pidgeon missions as well as a brief reference in the database entry for the North Atlantic in Rogue.

      The database entry mentions that Abstergo insists on spelling Columbus' name as "Christoffa Corombo", with Violet stating that she doesn't know why aside from it having something to do with Desmond. It's a reference to the fact that that's what Columbus was called throughout the events of Discovery

      Anyway, given all of that, it wouldn't at all surprise me if Aymar only has a vague recollection of Discovery's plot and, as such, wasn't fully informed when he stated that it was no longer canon.

        Loading editor
    • Discovery was removed from App Store, because since iOS 7 it crash right after tutorial, you are not even able to play a single mission, UbiSoft hasn't updated it to be compatible with new iOS versions and since 2012, so Apple removed it.

        Loading editor
    • Wow Wikia Editor, thank you for having paid such close attention to this. :P.

      For those that don't know, I covered these inconsistencies before here.

      I also wrote the article Granada War, which should serve as a good example of how we've reconciled the film and the game. (Mind you guys, I did take real-world information not in AC sources for the first segments of the war in an effort to flesh out the article, a controversial method it seems administrators are a bit divided and unsure about after asking them).

      I really think that the inconsistencies mainly have more to do with the oddness of Ezio not being involved in Aguilar's mission to save Ahmed or to retrieve the Apple of Eden, but as iffy as that is, it's not impossible that circumstances meant that Ezio had to be elsewhere at those exact moments or there were some disconnect in communication between the two groups.

      I also want to point out that the more recent game Assassin's Creed: Identity does figure in Raphael Sánchez in a prominent role in the backstory. However, this game is of dubious canonicity since its timeline is all messed up and contradictory, but the particular segment concerning Raphael doesn't contradict anything. (The only issue with it is that Raphael seems to be an idiot beyond possibility, what with being tricked into training a group of elite Templars for 5 years xD).

      Luis de Santángel is also mentioned in a Contract mission linking Assassin's Creed: Project Legacy and Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood, where the Assassins apprentices of Ezio have to deal with the aftermath of his death since he was their main source of information regarding Isabella.

      I'd be very loathe to excise Discovery. It would really make things sloppy for us, I think. It's been well-integrated into the lore before the film.

      I know Master Sima Yi said that this might indicate that Assassin's Creed: Altaïr's Chronicles is also non-canon, but aside from Adha being mentioned in Assassin's Creed, Altaïr's codex in Assassin's Creed II, and in Assassin's Creed: Memories, certain points in that game's plot are explicitly recalled in Assassin's Creed: The Secret Crusade, such as the poison plot at the Siege of Acre. I know we haven't received word of Altaïr's Chronicles canonicity yet, but I think it might turn out to be a similar case, where we should remember that these games actually have been integrated into the overall lore more than we might think or Ubisoft might remember.

        Loading editor
    • Thank you for the compliment Sol Pacificus, I appreciate it.

      In terms of continuity, I think Altaïr's Chronicles is "safer" in the sense that it's not in a time period that's likely to be revisited (and retconned) later on.

      As you said, reconciling Discovery and the movie, while not perfect, is doable. If the events were completely irreconcilable I'd be annoyed but ultimately would have no choice but to accept it. But the fact that it IS reconcilable is why this is bugging me so much.

      I'm pretty passionate about this stuf and ideally I would not want any lore to be lost, especially if it's unnecessary.

      On a more positive note, the rest of the AMA was fun to read and informative, confirming some things we already suspected (Arno being Cal's ancestor), debunking theories (For example: Ojeda is not a Sage) and even explaining other things such as what exactly Cal's "initiation" was.

        Loading editor
    • I wanted to clarify a few things.

      First, if Discovery is non-canon, this doesn't mean we will have to or will be removing all content of the game. Instead, we would simply be labeling them with a non-canon tag {{non-canon}}; wikis generally document all matters of a franchise, even the non-canon ones.

      Second, I know a user just tagged one of the Discovery articles as non-canon. I reverted for the following reasons:

      1. I think it's a good idea to make sure that we have really finalized our discussion before we act. Even when Disney controversially but decisively declared a reboot of Star Wars lore that designated 95%+ of its old content non-canon, Wookieepedia held a long discussion on this matter first.
      2. Part of this means at least postponing any action until we have managed to talk to Aymar on our thoughts on this. Although it may seem uncouth, I think this is problematic enough that we should at least attempt this course first. It is problematic because it destabilizes the overall lore of Assassin's Creed, especially at a time when the franchise is already being lambasted for being indecisive about its direction and of uncertain integrity. I personally think this has ramifications on Assassin's Creed's integrity as a whole and can be damaging to the franchise. Since Discovery and the film are reconcilable, even if not the most smoothly, and it has been referenced in other media in contrast to the film, I do not think that it is necessary to threaten the integrity of Assassin's Creed canonicity. I am going to reference Star Wars again because it had an immense history of contradictions in lore, many that were worse than the one between Discovery and the film, and for decades Lucasfilms worked tirelessly to weave them all back together, proving that this is doable. I don't want to suggest that we have any right or bearing to contest the word of Ubisoft on canon; I really want to emphasize that that is not what I'm suggesting, but I really believe that this move is so problematic, we should express our point-of-view on the matter especially since we're so involved with the maintenance and tracking of the lore.
      3. The final reason for my revert though, is that I didn't want to be too hasty in light of the first two points. More importantly, if we are too hasty, and we haven't clarified our unified stance on this, even if the unified stance should be obvious, there would be a lot of inconsistency in its implementation; it would create a mess. This is partially because many of the articles have Discovery content woven into the articles. This includes, but not limited to, articles on Ezio Auditore da Firenze—a featured article—Granada War, Christopher Columbus and Muhammad XII of Granada. Obviously, to reflect Discovery's non-canon stance, we would need to radically rewrite some of these articles. We would also need to create a template to describe that a section (but not the entire article) is non-canon. Unless these steps are taken, we would be implementing the non-canon status of Discovery partially, in some articles, but not yet in others. Given the recent low activity of this wiki, I think what would likely happen is that a few Discovery articles will be marked as non-canon but not others that would need major rewriting. The ones that need major rewriting may in turn be hastily done and be of poor quality. Then, without a template devoted to describing a particular section as non-canon, but not the entire article, as Wookieepedia does, there would remain confusion over which parts of an article such as "Christopher Columbus" are canon or not. We could move the non-canon section to the Trivia, but then the size of the Trivia section would eclipse that of the biography section. I think that before we implement this, we should have the proper preparation or it might turn out to be sloppy and half-assed. :/

      EDIT: For further clarification on this last point, I mean that we should also discuss how we are going to implement Discovery's non-canon status before we go right ahead. For example, are we going to (a) move content relating to Discovery in canonical articles to the Trivia section (b) create a non-canon template for specific sections not entire articles (c) create separate articles for the canon/film versions of characters like Christopher Columbus and Muhammad XII? As some ideas.

        Loading editor
    • Discovery's events happened, just not as Discovery told them, of course. But he has the final word, and if he says it's Non-Canon, then it's true. Everything stated in other media about Discovery remains Canon, like Luis and Raphael's existance.  

        Loading editor
    • DipsonDP wrote:
      Discovery's events happened, just not as Discovery told them, of course. But he has the final word, and if he says it's Non-Canon, then it's true. Everything stated in other media about Discovery remains Canon, like Luis and Raphael's existance.  

      No one is really disputing what he said, it's whether or not his answer was an informed one. Yes, he has the final word, but I believe we should, at the very least, be allowed to voice our opinion and discuss it with Aymar more thoroughly.

      Based on his interactions with fans during the Reddit AMA, he seems like a pretty swell and reasonable guy who appreciates fan input and enthousiasm. I'm pretty sure that we can convince him to change his mind on this matter.

        Loading editor
    • DipsonDP wrote: Discovery's events happened, just not as Discovery told them, of course. But he has the final word, and if he says it's Non-Canon, then it's true. Everything stated in other media about Discovery remains Canon, like Luis and Raphael's existance.  

      Aside from Wikia Editor's response, my other point was how are we going to implement the change that Discovery is non-canon? Hence my questions I posed in my edit of the message. Because there are a lot of articles where the Discovery content is merged in with the film content, and if we have to modify them in response to Ubisoft's decision, I want to do it cleanly.

      By the way, I created a reddit account just now, but I've never used the site before. As a total noob xD, I don't know how to reach Aymar, or if reddit is even the best way since the discussion in the link above was an AMA specifically.

        Loading editor
    • Sol Pacificus wrote:

      DipsonDP wrote: Discovery's events happened, just not as Discovery told them, of course. But he has the final word, and if he says it's Non-Canon, then it's true. Everything stated in other media about Discovery remains Canon, like Luis and Raphael's existance.  

      Aside from Wikia Editor's response, my other point was how are we going to implement the change that Discovery is non-canon? Hence my questions I posed in my edit of the message. Because there are a lot of articles where the Discovery content is merged in with the film content, and if we have to modify them in response to Ubisoft's decision, I want to do it cleanly.

      By the way, I created a reddit account just now, but I've never used the site before. As a total noob xD, I don't know how to reach Aymar, or if reddit is even the best way since the discussion in the link above was an AMA specifically.

      As you mentioned, segregating the Discovery content from the rest of the articles would be quite a hassle. As for the non-canon indicator, perhaps something similar to what the Back to the Future and Metal Gear wikis have done.

      Funny enough, Bob Gale, co-writer of Back to the Future, originally stated that only the movies were canon, with everything fitting into the 'what-if?' category or that it "might be canon in some alternate universe". However, he later changed his mind and stated "when you have a time machine and a premise that allows for multiple pasts, presents, and futures, everything is canon".

      The situation with Metal Gear is a bit more complicated. Basically, everything Hideo Kojima worked on is canon, some games, like Ghost Babel, were explicitly declared non-canon, and others, like Portable Ops and Revengeance, are a bit more ambiguous.

      Revengeance isn't such a big deal because it takes place, chronologically, after everything else in the series.

      Kojima's official stance regarding Portable Ops is that it's "canon, but some details are off". The "details" he mentioned being the things that could potentially be contradicted by his later games. Or, as DipsonDP put it, "Discovery's events happened, just not as Discovery told them".

      I think that, if we fail to convince Aymar to make it canon again, then we might at least succeed in convincing him take a more Hideo Kojima-esque approach to the matter and declare it "canon, with some details being off".

        Loading editor
    • I agree with Sol Pacificus. Someone must have the chance to speak with him. Even if Discovery has a few continuity errors, like Altaïr's Armor, the events of the game are important if later games are mentioning them.

      Maybe it's like Dipson says, these events happened without Ezio. But if Aymar says that Discovery isn't canon and Torquemada was a Templar in the movie, perhaps everything Discovery stands for... doesn't exist in the AC universe anymore. And THAT would be awful to the entire timeline.

      If someone should speak with Aymar... that should be you Pacificus. The ACWikia community can help you, I think.

      EDIT: Now that I think of it. If Aymar admits Discovery, the problems between the movie and the game would appear again and those explanations Pacificus wrote before would have to be in comics, novels, etc. And that would take some time... I guess the only thing we can hope is to have the chance to speak with him.

        Loading editor
    • Cristophorus35 wrote: I agree with Sol Pacificus. Someone must have the chance to speak with him. Even if Discovery has a few continuity errors, like Altaïr's Armor, the events of the game are important if later games are mentioning them.

      Maybe it's like Dipson says, these events happened without Ezio. But if Aymar says that Discovery isn't canon and Torquemada was a Templar in the movie, perhaps everything Discovery stands for... doesn't exist in the AC universe anymore. And THAT would be awful to the entire timeline.

      If someone should speak with Aymar... that should be you Pacificus. The ACWikia community can help you, I think.

      EDIT: Now that I think of it. If Aymar admits Discovery, the problems between the movie and the game would appear again and those explanations Pacificus wrote before would have to be in comics, novels, etc. And that would take some time... I guess the only thing we can hope is to have the chance to speak with him.

      Hm, so can anyone direct me to the best way of contacting him? I assume I might send him a private message over reddit? But is there perhaps a better alternative?

        Loading editor
    • Sol Pacificus wrote:

      Hm, so can anyone direct me to the best way of contacting him? I assume I might send him a private message over reddit? But is there perhaps a better alternative?

      There's Twitter... not to talk but to say "hey. I'd like to speak with you" and he might share his page or something like that to discuss this problem.

      Or... like you said, his reddit or his facebook.

      But if you wanna have instant response, another AMA in Reddit would be your best chance.

      "Hey Aymar. I'm Sol Pacificus and I came from ACWikia... bla bla bla and I want to share you some ideas to bla bla bla... and make Discovery canon again".

      I don't know hehe.

        Loading editor
    • Cristophorus35 wrote:
      Sol Pacificus wrote:

      Hm, so can anyone direct me to the best way of contacting him? I assume I might send him a private message over reddit? But is there perhaps a better alternative?

      There's Twitter... not to talk but to say "hey. I'd like to speak with you" and he might share his page or something like that to discuss this problem.

      Or... like you said, his reddit or his facebook.

      But if you wanna have instant response, another AMA in Reddit would be your best chance.

      "Hey Aymar. I'm Sol Pacificus and I came from ACWikia... bla bla bla and I want to share you some ideas to bla bla bla... and make Discovery canon again".

      I don't know hehe.

      I agree that those would probably be the best ways to attempt and contact him. If we can't convince him to make it canon, then perhaps at least "canon, with some details off". I don't mean that in the sense that Ezio wasn't there, but rather by integrating the events of the movie better and explaining where Ezio was during those events in order to justify his absence. It certainly helps that both Discovery and the movie use a rather vague timeline in which we mostly have to guess when exactly something occured.

      Also, Altaïr's Armor is not an inconsistency. Although it's possible for the player to acquire it at the earliest around Sequence 10 (which takes place in 1486), we don't actually know when exactly Ezio canonically acquired it. The Armor's page currently states that Ezio acquired it sometime after 1491, citing Discovery as its source. The only thing we know for certain is that he had acquired it before 1497, as he was wearing it during the Bonfire of the Vanities.

        Loading editor
    • Just ask Azaïzia politely for clarification on Twitter. Though I haven't played it, it would be a shame if everything from Discovery got thrown out, especially if retcons could add nuance to the story. I don't have access to the Essential Guide anymore, is Discovery in there?

      Was surprised to see him say that the movie's treatment of the Apple as the only one was a mistake rather than an effort to keep things simple for people being introduced to the franchise through the film. I kinda assumed Aguilar's Apple would later be established to have something unique about it which makes it so prized.

        Loading editor
    • Vetinari wrote:
      Just ask Azaïzia politely for clarification on Twitter. Though I haven't played it, it would be a shame if everything from Discovery got thrown out, especially if retcons could add nuance to the story. I don't have access to the Essential Guide anymore, is Discovery in there?

      Was surprised to see him say that the movie's treatment of the Apple as the only one was a mistake rather than an effort to keep things simple for people being introduced to the franchise through the film. I kinda assumed Aguilar's Apple would later be established to have something unique about it which makes it so prized.

      I'm afraid that asking him on Twitter would probably result in the same kind of answer as the one he gave on the Reddit AMA. Our response to him needs to be more in-depths than a simple "is Discovery still canon?" kind of question.

      We need to explain to him our efforts on the wiki, perhaps even send him a link to this thread, in order to show him that we don't want to lose Discovery, especially since it would be unnecessary.

        Loading editor
    • Could just ask him to expand on what he means but any answer he chooses to give will probably be limited anyway. It's not like he's going to reverse a decision that's already made just to help out with a fan site's admin work. ;)

        Loading editor
    • Vetinari wrote:
      Could just ask him to expand on what he means but any answer he chooses to give will probably be limited anyway. It's not like he's going to reverse a decision that's already made just to help out with a fan site's admin work. ;)

      He's had pretty lengthy conversations with people during the AMA as well as the Movie production subreddit page. Also, I'm pretty sure that changing his opinion is not going to be that difficult, people can and do change their minds, as Bob Gale, co-writer of Back to the Future, did in regard to continuity. He cares about the fans and, like I already said, we do have a right to voice our opinions.

        Loading editor
    • I'm preparing the message to him now. I'm going to bring up some points about why we thought it to be problematic, including how much work we've put into reconciling the two, how difficult it would be to accommodate this change, as well as how we're concerned this may threaten the integrity of AC lore in light of how the two are still reconcilable. I might also tentatively add that the film is after all, harder to fit in with the overall lore of AC whereas Discovery has fit in fine, though if I do, I'll be clear, I'm not trying to suggest that the film be made non-canon. These are some ideas of what I would write. But is there anything else you guys would like me to add in case I'm missing anything?

        Loading editor
    • I think there's no way to contact the guy, iasked him some stuff on Twitter but i don't think he's active on any social media. And if by chance you manage to contact him i would like him to clarify the Boxes situation, because he directly contradicted what Richard Farrese (Rogue Director or something) previously said (That Shay's and Ezio's Boxes are different.)

        Loading editor
    • My God. These people are making a mess with the timeline! This is a bad augury :/

        Loading editor
    • I recommend mentioning my previous suggestion of potentially making Discovery "canon, with some details off". However, I'd also recommend only bringing it up if you don't manage to convince him to make it fully canon. Also, perhaps sending a link to this thread to give him an idea of our discussions on this topic might be a good way of convincing him.

        Loading editor
    • What I'd really wish they'd do is remake the spinoff games, i.e. Discovery, Bloodline, Altair's Chronicle, as ACC: Spain, ACC: Cyprus, and ACC: Levant while retconning anything that was contradictory.

        Loading editor
    • well. there aren´t any problem in bloodline

        Loading editor
    • True but it could probably benefit from a remastering and would make it more accessible to people that don't have a PSP or Vita

        Loading editor
    • Lacrossedeamon wrote: What I'd really wish they'd do is remake the spinoff games, i.e. Discovery, Bloodline, Altair's Chronicle, as ACC: Spain, ACC: Cyprus, and ACC: Levant while retconning anything that was contradictory.

      I feel like a remake of Discovery, rather than retconning any details, only needs to add details that show why Ezio wasn't present when Aguilar and Maria interrupted the ransom exchange, and why Ezio didn't learn from Aguilar Torquemada was a Templar all along. I think it's entirely within the realm of possibility that unexpected circumstances could've led to some communication barrier.

      I actually think Bloodlines is entirely fine being left alone, especially in terms of lore; it doesn't contradict anything. I wouldn't be too excited for a remastered version because it would essentially just be the same game, and it honestly was the Assassin's Creed game I had the least fun with aside from Identity.

      As for Altaïr's Chronicles, I had always wanted it to be remade with much of its plot mostly intact, but the details revised. The game is the only one in the entire series to be littered with the improbable, "malevolent", architecture of classic platforming games (e.g. treacherous pits of spikes and fire and swinging axes along the entrance to a public party at a villa xD), elements which are obviously non-canon. The game suffers from the absence of a lot of major plot details, leaving us with no explanation as to what the Chalice or Adha really is meant to be, why it wasn't actually at the Temple of Sand, why Al Mualim said the Crusaders already had it at the beginning of the game only for them to frantically be searching for it throughout the game, why the Crusaders managed to enter the Temple when they lost all keys and the map to Altaïr, etc. Patching up these details, while showing how the Assassins came to believe Altaïr after he killed their traitorous second-in-command Harash would be great... It would also be exciting to actually play Altaïr in his final chase to save Adha that ended in tragedy and likely is what set him so against the Creed at the beginning of Assassin's Creed. Thing is that the plot of this game is mentioned in other sources, including The Secret Crusade, so it's definitely canon... just the details needs explaining. But I'm going way off-topic from this thread.

        Loading editor
    • I definitely would like for these games to make a return in as remakes/remasters. I also agree that adding details to fill in some of the plot gaps would be nice.

      I'm curious, did the movie novelization specify that the Assassins led by Benedicto already knew for certain that Torquemada was a Templar? Because the movie doesn't really specify. They definitely knew that some members of the Inquisition were Templars, but did they know about Torquemada specifically?

      The only time Torquemada explicitly demonstrated his allegiance to the Templars was when he was monologuing while holding the Apple, and the only Assassins within earshot were Aguilar and Maria. Maria died shortly afterwards and Aguilar, as far as the other Assassins would have known, went missing after performing a leap of faith off of a bridge and was probably presumed dead until he resurfaced again. The novelization states that Aguilar gave the Apple to Columbus about 5 days after escaping from the Templars, but we don't know whether he came in contact with the other Assassins during that time.

      But even if they knew about Torquemada's allegiance beforehand, it's possible that they failed to pass this information on to Luis and Raphael's Assassin faction due to, as Sol Pacificus suggested, some sort of communication barrier.

        Loading editor
    • I always just assumed that they were two different Assassin factions entirely since Benedicto's group obviously originated in Andalusia and Luis and Raphael are from Barcelona. The two locations are pretty far away from each other.

        Loading editor
    • 98.148.139.249 wrote:
      I always just assumed that they were two different Assassin factions entirely since Benedicto's group obviously originated in Andalusia and Luis and Raphael are from Barcelona. The two locations are pretty far away from each other.

      Right ? The movie shows a "Moorish Brotherhood". The formal Spanish Assassins are probably just based around Aragon and Castille. They're far from each other not only by distance, but also by their culture. Besides, the remote Assassin fortress (where's the real one, btw ?) from the movie sort of proves the Moorish Assassins are more secluded, which could explain why they stuck to the old ring finger tradition. Anyway, nothing confirmed so far.

        Loading editor
    • Just an update: I'm pretty much finished writing my message to Aymar, which is more of a full letter I think lol. I haven't sent it yet though because I wanted to spend a few days thinking over it in case I am forgetting some things.

      You guys are making some excellent points by the way. :) Ezio's group proceeded directly from Zaragoza to Granada where as Aguilar's group is based in Andalusia. In Discovery, it is shown that there were many Templars within the Spanish army fighting in Granada. Add that with the Templar army under Ojeda, and it's entirely probable that communication between the two groups was limited because of a large Templar presence between them. The recent purge of Assassins throughout Iberia by the Inquisition should probably have also hampered communication. Maybe they didn't know exactly where to send the pigeons to or maybe they thought it unsafe or weren't sure if Benedicto's group was still around.

      Since Granada was technically a separate country, with much of Andalusia being just land recently conquered from the Moors by the Spanish, it is entirely possible that Benedicto's branch was distinct from the one based in Aragon and Castile, but I'm not sure. Was it ever explicitly called a Moorish Brotherhood? In fact, I think it's kind of "fridge brilliance" that Benedicto's branch would maintain their outdated, archaic practices if they were a more isolated group.

        Loading editor
    • I don't think Benedicto's group was ever identified as the "Moorish Brotherhood" aside from Aguilar's robes having Moorish influences. Not to mention the fact that the term "Moors" is an exonym used by others, with the group themselves being neither a distinct nor self-defining people.

      Me and Sol Pacificus had a similar conversation about whether the Assassins in Peru should be called the "Peruvian Brotherhood" or "Inca Brotherhood", although that situation was a bit different from this.

      I do, however, agree that Benedicto's branch seemed rather distinct from Luis and Raphael's branch. While never explicitly mentioned, it's probably safe to say that Luis and Raphael's branch didn't have the finger amputation ceremony.

      The only real issue left is the fact that, by August 1492, Luis and Raphael's faction still weren't certain about whether Torquemada was a Templar, something that Aguilar could have informed them about once he resurfaced. But I suppose we could handwave that away by suggesting that Aguilar took some time to recover from his injuries and was perhaps more focused on rebuilding the Brotherhood in Andalusia. Additionally, Aguilar might have also decided to stay close by Columbus until he left on his voyage, making sure that the Apple was secured.

      Timelinewise, I'm pretty sure the events of Discovery's Memory Block 7, Ezio protecting civilians in Granada from the Inquisitors, assassinating Juan de Marillo, finding Columbus and bringing him to the Queen as well as stopping the Templars' assassination attempt on the Queen during Muhammad's abdication ceremony, all occured on the same day, January 2, 1492, presumably after Aguilar had already escaped with the Apple. Aguilar, according to the novel, gave the Apple to Columbus about 5 days after he escaped, presumably on January 7, 1492.

      I should also make note of the fact that the Renaissance novel makes no reference to the events of Discovery, but that's mostly due to the fact that the novel was released one week after Discovery came out, meaning that the author obviously didn't have time to incorporate its events into the novel. The closest the novel gets to referencing Discovery is this passage on page 89:

      Venice in 1492 was still under the relatively honest rule of Doge Agostino Barbarigo. The city was abuzz with talk of how a Genoese seaman called Christoffa Corombo, whose mad plans to sail westwards across the Ocean Sea had been turned down by Venice, had got funding from Spain, and was about to set out. Had Venice itself been mad not to fund the expedition? If Corombo succeeded, a safe sea passage to the Indies might be established, side-stepping the old land route now blocked by the Ottoman Turks. But Ezio’s mind was far too full of other matters to pay much attention to these matters of politics and trade.

      Funny enough, the bigger inconsistency during Ezio's confrontation with Torquemada, at least to me, is the fact that Ezio is aware of Rodrigo's atheism whereas he seemed surprised by it during his fight with Rodrigo in the Vatican. Then again, rereading what Ezio and Rodrigo said to each other during their fight, Ezio's surprise seemed mostly due to Rodrigo's complete rejection and dismissal of the central text of his faith, rather than his atheism in general.

        Loading editor
    • So, I just sent the message to Aymar regarding this via Reddit private messaging. I'm not sure if this is the best way to contact him though, but it's a start. Admittedly, I'm actually a bit nervous he won't respond at all.

        Loading editor
    • How long would you guys like to wait for his response?

        Loading editor
    • Sol Pacificus wrote:
      How long would you guys like to wait for his response?

      The pessimist in me says we'll be waiting a long time.

      Also, if he doesn't respond, what do we do?

        Loading editor
    • Move the info and say that it is noncanon per an AMA?

        Loading editor
    • We've already discussed that. Moving the info would be quite an undertaking and I would rather we discuss this first with Aymar before taking any immediate action. As for the wait, If he doesn't respond after the while, I guess we can try sending again on another form of social media, or perhaps wait for another Reddit AMA.

        Loading editor
    • I said it before, I'll say it again. If we don't get an answer soon, the best chance we have is another Reddit AMA where he's literally in front of the screen, reading questions. But... perhaps we'll be waiting a long, long time.

      "Hey guys. I'm doing another Reddit AMA. So, leave your question :D" - Aymar

      F#%K!

        Loading editor
    • I'd already asked Aymar about this myself personally and discussed it over two months ago and he gave me the same answer. I see no point in 'trying' to reconcile the events when it just ends up being a highly convoluted mess just for the sake of it. It's pretty clear there was no regard for Discovery's events when the movie script was being written and that's just how it is. I myself much prefer the story of Discovery to that of the film, but it's not like it's something that didn't cross his mind before I or anyone else asked about this and I highly doubt it's an ill-informed decision on his part.

      Also, just to be clear, I don't see adjusting the wiki to accurately represent this change should be a reason to change Aymar's mind.

        Loading editor
    • Master Sima Yi wrote: I'd already asked Aymar about this myself personally and discussed it over two months ago and he gave me the same answer. I see no point in 'trying' to reconcile the events when it just ends up being a highly convoluted mess just for the sake of it. It's pretty clear there was no regard for Discovery's events when the movie script was being written and that's just how it is. I myself much prefer the story of Discovery to that of the film, but it's not like it's something that didn't cross his mind before I or anyone else asked about this and I highly doubt it's an ill-informed decision on his part.

      Also, just to be clear, I don't see adjusting the wiki to accurately represent this change should be a reason to change Aymar's mind.

      I think that even if we shouldn't be trying to convince Aymar to change his mind, it's still better to at least voice our perspective on the matter. Sure, we can have faith that they thought over it, but we can't be absolutely sure really how informed their decision was, and it doesn't hurt to present our analysis.

      Aside from this, it leaves a sour taste in my mouth that they adveetised the film as being so true and faithful to lore many times, yet in the end, they don't even make a show of effort to be true to these words. I think if I said that this point I'm making is about ethical reasons, that would be too extreme, but I do think that if they marketed their product in such a way, they have an obligation, a responsibility to be honest. It shocked me that more than just having forgotten Discovery or overlooked how they contradict, they outright declared it non-canon, then claimed before the issue was ever brought up that they worked hard to ensure it stayed true to pre-existing lore. I didn't bring this point up in my message to Aymar, but I did mention that I think that it's poor for the integrity of the series. Many franchises have grappled with inconsistencies; Star Wars dealt with hundreds of them far worse than the ones between Discovery and the film and always persevered to weave it all together in the end, ultimately creating a very vibrant world of diverse concepts (until Disney came along and finally axed everything).

      The issue at hand is that aside from the fact I think it's wrong of Ubisoft to been so blatantly dishonest in advertising their film as faithful to pre-existing lore (heck, it even contradicts Unity and The Essential Guide on the structure of the Templars), the integrity of this series, as abstract of a concept as that is, matters. The point that we have here is that not only does integrity matters, but declaring Discovery non-canon wasn't necessary in the first place.

      And here I must point out that if I remember correctly, Master Sima Yi, you weren't exactly present in our discussions about the conflict between Discovery and the film and had spoken with Aymar before you got a chance to look over our analyses on the matter, so forgive me if I say that I'm also unsure if you had the most informed view of this when you were speaking with him. Thus far, it seems to me that Discovery was declared non-canon in fear of the "convoluted mess" that would result from "trying" to reconcile it with the film, which, if this really was Ubisoft's perspective as well, seems to me preemptive even if they thought and talked over it. Preemptive because when we ourselves checked over how to reconcile the two, it was not hard at all, nor has it created a mess of a plot, which to me is evidence that they may not have made as much of an effort as they had claimed.

        Loading editor
    • It doesn't surprise me at all that they didn't deliver on delivering a storyline that was truthful to the lore, because in the end, it wasn't entirely written by people who worked at Ubisoft and it wouldn't be the first time they did not entirely deliver on pre-release promises.

      I am a bit surprised, though, that you are under the impression I did not know about the storyline of Discovery before I spoke with Aymar and had not given it any thought myself prior to asking. I've read through the discussions that were held and, while I get where you are coming from, I do find the end result to be more convoluted than necessary. It could work - if and when they release a new storyline adressing this issue. As the convergence of these storylines stands now, they could theoretically co-exist, albeit without context and clarification. Which, to me, is not preferable.

      Also I wouldn't exactly say pre-Disney Star Wars is the best example for creating a coherent narrative.

      I would also dare to say quite frankly that Discovery is just not important enough to the brand team to warrant this kind of attention. It's a DS game, not a major release, and therefore will likely not receive the same amount of attention and 'care' as a movie or big game release will. Given how little attention the game's already gotten in things like the Encyclopedia, I'm quite sure these attempts will most likely be in vain. For your sakes though, I hope not.

        Loading editor
    • I'm in full agreement with Sol Pacificus.

      I also disagree with our attempts at reconciliation being a "highly convoluted mess". It certainly seemed like a mess when we began this discussion when the movie first came out, but at this point we've got a pretty solid timeline.

      When I think of convoluted I generally think of the stuff on Wookiepedia and the Metal Gear wiki. The stuff on those sites makes this look incredibly mild by comparison, which only further exacerbates my suspicion that Ubisoft didn't give this as much thought as it deserves.

      Declaring something non-canon should, ideally at least, never be something that's done lightly, only as an absolute last resort. Even the creator of Metal Gear, Hideo Kojima, generally avoided declaring something non-canon. Instead, he was willing to settle for "canon, with some details off".

        Loading editor
    • Also I wouldn't exactly say pre-Disney Star Wars is the best example for creating a coherent narrative.

      Haha yeah, people do have divided opinions on whether Star Wars: Legends succeeded in creating a cohesive narrative despite all the inconsistencies. Personally, I think if you go just by the reference books, i.e. The Essential Guides of Star Wars, they did an excellent job mending everything, especially with the later releases, and Star Wars: The Old Republic manages to stay especially consistent with the vast lore; it's mostly the pre-2000s works that were an odd mess. (Well, okay The Clone Wars did create a great deal of difficulties).

      But, I think aside from the more sentimental reasons, I genuinely think that cutting out Discovery leaves a very awkward mess in the Assassin's Creed continuity, far more than reconciliation. As I said in my message to Aymar, it's like "blasting a whole that didn't need to be". This is because the film quite obviously fits with the overall lore worse than Discovery, making it especially awkward when Discovery, which fit into the puzzle, is spontaneously excised for a piece that doesn't fit into the puzzle. The main contradiction between the film and the wider lore is in the structure of the Templars. The Essential Guide and Unity are pretty clear that there's no such thing as the Council of Elders, that the Guardians answer directly to the General of the Cross, and that Alan Rikkin, himself, served simultaneously as a member of the Inner Sanctum and as a Guardian. Unity and The Essential Guide are more authoritative sources, especially since the former is a main game, even if the information is revealed through Helix data fragments or whatever. The film doesn't conflict with just Discovery, and in general, it feels like a major outlier. Even though its other contradictions with wider lore, aside from the Templar hierarchy, are more implicit than explicit, and can be mended with explanations, it's still a mess to integrate with the canon.

      I actually think that from the perspective of a reader to this site, it would be far more of a confusing mess for them to come across Discovery content, realize it's non-canon, except parts in Project Legacy and Identity, then look at film content, read about things that contradict other lore aside from Discovery, but find that it's canon.

        Loading editor
    • It's kinda surprising how the movie, despite not having that much stuff happen in it, managed to introduce all these weird inconsistencies. Some of them can be dismissed as script errors, such as how the movie implies that there is only one Apple and that the Templars had never had one in their possession before, but some are just weird. The depiction of the Granada War especially is confusing, as the movie seems to think that the war was still raging in 1492, rather than the mostly peaceful capitulation that it was. At least the novel author seemed to understand that the actual siege took place in 1491.

      This was pretty much our main point of discussion when the movie first came out, as neither the movie nor Discovery gave specific dates as to when these events were supposed to be happening, forcing us to construct a timeline based mostly on character dialogue and logical deduction.

      The novel author, however, was also seemingly not fully familiar with the Templar hierarchy, given that Alan Rikkin is stated to be a Grand Master, whereas he's actually a Guardian. We've currently managed to reconcile it mostly by assuming that it's possible to hold both positions simultaneously. It does make me wonder which Rite he's supposed to be a Grand Master of, though, given that the American Rite already had a Grand Master as of 2014.

      Also, thank you for support, Master Sima Yi. I understand your reservations regarding this matter, but I think it's an important matter to settle now, rather than let it set a precedent for Ubisoft to potentially remove more spin-off releases in the future on the basis of "not important enough".

        Loading editor
    • Also, thank you for support, Master Sima Yi. I understand your reservations regarding this matter, but I think it's an important matter to settle now, rather than let it set a precedent for Ubisoft to potentially remove more spin-off releases in the future on the basis of "not important enough".

      If Ubisoft continues to be this capricious about the continuity and the lore, it would derail our wiki, and we would then technically fare better by not writing in-universe, but we should never go through all the trouble of rewriting every last article for that change. I don't see why they felt like it was a necessity to declare the film canon when most developers declare their video game movies non-canon anyways for the exact issues we're facing now.

        Loading editor
    • If Azaïzia has also told Sima Ya that Discovery is no longer canon that settles how the wiki handles the material, no? Maybe this place could adopt Wookieepedia's non-canon tags for article sections?

      I don't care much for the film but I think it's a point in the movie's favour that it's not a separate continuity. Does the Essential Guide have any movie material? I don't recall.

      Bit odd that the French comics still have a say in the lore but the game doesn't. Never been a fan of throwing entire works out because of inconsistencies that can be written around.

        Loading editor
    • Vetinari wrote: If Azaïzia has also told Sima Ya that Discovery is no longer canon that settles how the wiki handles the material, no?

      No it does not because if I have this right, Sima Yi doesn't really object to this decision, or at least doesn't think we should bother with making an effort to voice our misgivings about it? If I recall, he was just asking Aymar for advice on how to approach the inconsistencies on this wiki; while that was going on, our wiki was in the middle of (or had almost finished) reconciling Discovery and the film, hence, I don't think he brought to him that we find this decision problematic, particularly since we hadn't reacted to it because we weren't aware of it. Aymar, therefore, might not understand why this is an issue with us.

      Vetinari wrote: Does the Essential Guide have any movie material? I don't recall.

      I've checked the entire The Essential Guide for content on Discovery and the film, and it seems to entirely avoid both materials. The only reference is that the Spanish Inquisition is listed among a rough timeline of "Main Time Periods", which can potentially refer to either works. Also, most curiously enough, this timeline includes periods we haven't actually explored, including World War II (complete with a picture of a male Assassin), Shanghai in the Opium Wars (Black Cross is set more than half a century after the last Opium War), the Cold War, and the New York City draft riots, unless I somehow missed some of these. It does include a few Project Legacy settings.

      The Essential Guide conflicts with the film because it clearly describes the Templar Order's structure, and there is no such thing as the Council of Elders. Between the Inner Sanctum and the General of the Cross is the three Guardians, one of whom is Alan Rikkin as revealed in Unity. We might reconcile this by explaining that it simply failed to mention the existence of the Council of Elders between the Guardians and the General of the Cross, except the book also explains that only the three Guardians know the identity of the General of the Cross, and they report directly to him. EDIT: Actually, I've just thought of a possible reconciliation between the guide and the film... but it's so forced in my opinion though it should work. >_<

      There is a timeline of the Animus progress, and the Animus 4.3 is missing from the different versions of Animi listed. I know The Essential Guide was published about a month before the film's release though.

        Loading editor
    • I'm mostly wondering why they felt the need to introduce the Council of Elders in the first place. I'm guessing the writers needed a group of evil elders to whom Alan Rikkin could present the Apple and were not aware of the existence of the Inner Sanctum.

      Speaking of which, a thought occured to me that Alan Rikkin might have been the Grand Master of the Inner Sanctum, assuming, of course, that you think of the Inner Sanctum as a Rite. It's the only explanation I can think of for how Rikkin can be a Grand Master and a Guardian simultaneously.

        Loading editor
    • The Wikia Editor wrote: I'm mostly wondering why they felt the need to introduce the Council of Elders in the first place. I'm guessing the writers needed a group of evil elders to whom Alan Rikkin could present the Apple and were not aware of the existence of the Inner Sanctum.

      Speaking of which, a thought occured to me that Alan Rikkin might have been the Grand Master of the Inner Sanctum, assuming, of course, that you think of the Inner Sanctum as a Rite. It's the only explanation I can think of for how Rikkin can be a Grand Master and a Guardian simultaneously.

      I think the Inner Sanctum is an entity of its own, distinct from Rites. Alan Rikkin is specifically the CEO of Abstergo and the Inner Sanctum and therefore its head anyways, so maybe that's why he's called a "Grand Master" in the novel (whether mistakenly or not). I think being the head of a Rite isn't mutually exclusive from holding a position in the Inner Sanctum. However, because the Guardians rank above the Inner Sanctum, it is a little weird that Rikkin is a member of both, but this isn't impossible. Perhaps the Templars specifically designate one of the position of Guardians to the CEO of Abstergo and the head of the Inner Sanctum. Perhaps the Templars, as many (corrupt) authoritarian regimes do, allow individuals to hold more than one office simultaneously.

        Loading editor
    • Sol Pacificus wrote: Also, most curiously enough, this timeline includes periods we haven't actually explored, including World War II (complete with a picture of a male Assassin), Shanghai in the Opium Wars (Black Cross is set more than half a century after the last Opium War), the Cold War, and the New York City draft riots, unless I somehow missed some of these. It does include a few Project Legacy settings.

      The draft riots are covered in Last Descendants. Presumably the WW2 Assassin is the guy from Conspirations?

      Strange not to cover the film in any way though, especially when you know something like the Council of Elders is being introduced. I assume the Elders are there because they - Ubisoft - didn't want the Inner Sanctum/Templars to be the overtly villainous group that the Elders are.

      Heresy goes some way to establish that the Templars have secrets from each other and Rikkin's approach to the Order is likely the real heresy of the title.

        Loading editor
    • Vetinari wrote:

      The draft riots are covered in Last Descendants. Presumably the WW2 Assassin is the guy from Conspirations?

      Wait... Conspirations is canon now?

        Loading editor
    • Cristophorus35 wrote:
      Vetinari wrote:

      The draft riots are covered in Last Descendants. Presumably the WW2 Assassin is the guy from Conspirations?

      Wait... Conspirations is canon now?

      It was always canon. I believe the writer stated as such during an interview.

        Loading editor
    • Given what we know of the Council of Elders, they are also the board of directors of Abstergo Industries. While being between the General of the Cross and Guardians, the Elders seems more like a distinct group who's only function is directing Abstergo as a whole while Guardians direct the divisions(Inner Sanctum) within Abstergo. There's nothing that I'm aware of that suggests the Elders are more than the directors of Abstergo. And the Essential Guide specifically says Grand Masters control their own Rites, so it's therefore right to assume Alan Rikkin controls a specific Rite. If I'd guess one it would be the British Rite but that's just speculation.

        Loading editor
    • ACsenior wrote: Given what we know of the Council of Elders, they are also the board of directors of Abstergo Industries. While being between the General of the Cross and Guardians, the Elders seems more like a distinct group who's only function is directing Abstergo as a whole while Guardians direct the divisions(Inner Sanctum) within Abstergo. There's nothing that I'm aware of that suggests the Elders are more than the directors of Abstergo. And the Essential Guide specifically says Grand Masters control their own Rites, so it's therefore right to assume Alan Rikkin controls a specific Rite. If I'd guess one it would be the British Rite but that's just speculation.

      I'm confused about this. It's well-established across virtually all sources that the Inner Sanctum is identical to the Board of Directors of Abstergo Industries. The Council of Elders is clearly distinct from the Inner Sanctum and thus the Board of Directors. The Guardians' role isn't meant to be limited to divisions within Abstergo. They're the highest authority of the entire order aside from the General of the Cross, and only they are granted knowledge of his identity.

        Loading editor
    • Yes, the Inner Sanctum function as a Board of Directors since each of the 9 seats is part of the many divisions of Abstergo. I didn't say the Inner Sanctum isn't a board of directors nor did I say the Inner Sanctum didn't control the entire entire order. You misunderstood that to, what I said is that Guardians control the Inner Sanctum and as I just explained. Each member also are part of Abstergo's various divisions. My over point with the previous comment was that the only thing the Elders has been portrayed as, is a distinct group who's only power is guiding Abstergo. It's not been portrayed as a higher authority of the entire order unlike the Inner Sanctum.

        Loading editor
    • ACsenior wrote: Yes, the Inner Sanctum function as a Board of Directors since each of the 9 seats is part of the many divisions of Abstergo. I didn't say the Inner Sanctum isn't a board of directors nor did I say the Inner Sanctum didn't control the entire entire order. You misunderstood that to, what I said is that Guardians control the Inner Sanctum and as I just explained. Each member also are part of Abstergo's various divisions. My over point with the previous comment was that the only thing the Elders has been portrayed as, is a distinct group who's only power is guiding Abstergo. It's not been portrayed as a higher authority of the entire order unlike the Inner Sanctum.

      I'm not sure if there can be two Boards of Directors, hence my confusion with you saying that the Council of Elders is also the Board of Directors. However, I do understand the point that you're trying to make that you think the Elders exclusively control Abstergo only.

        Loading editor
    • Keep in mind that Ellen Kaye is both the chairwoman of the Board Of Directors of Abstergo and the leader of the Council of Elders. Meaning that in Abstergo's hierarchy, depending on how involved she is, she's basically equal to, if not higher than, Rikkin in terms of power in Abstergo.

        Loading editor
    •   Loading editor
    • Spanish assassin wrote:
      https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ECkWZPLQbS4 camon guys!

      DAMNIT SPANISH ASSASSIN! I was going to post that :c

      That's right guys, it seems the chance has come to us. Now it's your turn.

      Maybe the interview is going to be spoken in french... so, is there any french here? hehe. Nah, I guess it won't be necessary.

      Good luck guys. May the Father of Understanding guide you :D.

        Loading editor
    • Native French speaker here. I just shared this thread to White24Room (the interviewer) and told him to ask Azaïza to join us if you deem it necessary. They met in person and I trust the guy.

      Does he need to know anything in particular, other than the fact that you guys sort of managed to concile ACD and the film ?

        Loading editor
    • Touloir wrote:
      Native French speaker here. I just shared this thread to White24Room (the interviewer) and told him to ask Azaïza to join us if you deem it necessary. They met in person and I trust the guy.

      THIS IS THE BEST COMMUNITY I'VE EVER BEEN!

      I'm hyped, truth be told. I feel we can make a change here. We can demonstrate our passion to Azaïza and maybe... just maybe... he can change his mind and explain this stuff in future books, encyclopedias, comics and references. Because a remake... won't happen :/

      I'll be in touch.

        Loading editor
    • Touloir wrote: Native French speaker here. I just shared this thread to White24Room (the interviewer) and told him to ask Azaïza to join us if you deem it necessary. They met in person and I trust the guy.

      Does he need to know anything in particular, other than the fact that you guys sort of managed to concile ACD and the film ?

      Thank you so much Touloir! :)

      It might be good to mention to Aymar that we sent a message about this to him through Reddit PM just in case he actually just doesn't really check Reddit. Aside from that, it might also be good to just explain that we were concerned what retconning Discovery off would mean for the integrity of Assassin's Creed lore when we don't think it's a necessary step given our own reconciliation between it and the film.

      Also, while we're at it, we should ask about the contradiction between the film and the other sources over the structure of the Templars, like the Council of Elders. Aymar apparently avoided answering that question in his AMA >.<.

        Loading editor
    • It's not really that he avoided it so much as it never really came up much. Someone asked whether the Council of Elders outranks the General of the Cross and he answered no. He did at times seem rather disappointed about how the script ultimately turned out.

        Loading editor
    • I think one other question we might ask in the interview (or the next interview or AMA that should come up), a nice reprieve from this business, is what were the Templars called before they were established as the Knights Templars in 1119. What were the Assassins called before Hassan-i Sabbah made them a public state? We use the terms Templars and Assassins retroactively to refer to their groups before those times, but what did they call themselves at the time.

      Funny enough, Rebecca Crane herself asks this question in Database: The Assassin Brotherhood.

        Loading editor
    • Sol Pacificus wrote:

      What were the Assassins called before Hassan-i Sabbah made them a public state? We use the terms Templars and Assassins retroactively to refer to their groups before those times, but what did they call themselves at the time.

      The Liberalis Circulum in the Roman Republic-Empire... if AC2 is still canon :P

        Loading editor
    • Given how contact between the various Assassin branches and Templar Rites ranged from limited to non-existant, it wouldn't at all be surprising if different groups went by different names.

      The Roman Assassins called themselves the Liberalis Circulum, but we don't really know about the rest. According to the Encyclopedia, Aquilus was a member of the "Assassin Brotherhood from Lugdunum", which isn't helpful as it also refers to the Levantine Brotherhood as the "Assassin Brotherhood in the Levant".

        Loading editor
    • Touloir wrote:

      Sol Pacificus wrote:

      What were the Assassins called before Hassan-i Sabbah made them a public state? We use the terms Templars and Assassins retroactively to refer to their groups before those times, but what did they call themselves at the time.

      The Liberalis Circulum in the Roman Republic-Empire... if AC2 is still canon :P

      That term is never mentioned in AC2.

      What I reckon may be faster is for me to contact Aymar directly. I've also met him in person and have several of his contact details, so I can just reach out to him tomorrow and mention this thread to him more directly.

        Loading editor
    • Master Sima Yi wrote: What I reckon may be faster is for me to contact Aymar directly. I've also met him in person and have several of his contact details, so I can just reach out to him tomorrow and mention this thread to him more directly.

      Have you done this Master Sima Yi? :P

        Loading editor
    • Master Sima Yi wrote: What I reckon may be faster is for me to contact Aymar directly. I've also met him in person and have several of his contact details, so I can just reach out to him tomorrow and mention this thread to him more directly.

      That's better than waiting for a new reddit post. Please, try tomorrow.

        Loading editor
    • I'm dealing with both a broken PC and laptop at the moment and have only been able to get the latter working today, but the email has been sent.

        Loading editor
    • We did it! Aymar has replied to us and has officially changed his mind on the matter of Discovery's canonicity. Discovery is now officially canon again. Yes! I repeat, we did it! :)

        Loading editor
    • Came here to say that he was gonna reply to the message, but he already did. Congratulations guys. :)

        Loading editor
    • Congratulations guys. Great news, good work. Let's hope it's the beginning becoming a pressure group on the franchise.

        Loading editor
    • Sincronization complete guys!

      You did it! Congratulations! Ezio would be proud, should he exists of course haha.

      But seriously, you are awesome guys. Really.

        Loading editor
    • Haha, somehow I feel a little bad xD, maybe just my nature. Anyways, thank you for notifying him for us Master Sima Yi, and of course to you all for holding this fruitful discussion. :)

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message

Ad blocker interference detected!


Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers

Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.