Poll: Assassin's Creed: Are you an assassin or a templar?

[CaptainMarvelous]

This is basically do you want to be a fascists or a communist, neither option actually sounds fun OR feasible in the long-term. The big problem is neither side is really honest with what they WANT, the Templars believe they're establishing order and given the historical nature of the game I can't be-fucking-lieve AC3 wasn't about how the settlers helped to 'enlighten' the Native Americans and as a giant stab at colonialism.

But by contrast the Assassins, aren't that much better since their plans seem to be either the exact same as the Templars but with a socialist bend, take over secretly and rule with their idea of order. They don't WANT total freedom since AC4 pointed out, Assassins just do what they're told and follow the path but they're usually playing the rebellious under-dogs. I mean fuck, Duke Franz Ferdinand was a Templar and Gavrilo Princip an Assassin who wanted to stop his rise to power. THERE, the assassins just caused World War I (bet you Ubi don't have the balls to do that.)

I'd go Assassin with the caveat that it IS actual freedom not stab-the-other-guy, free the slaves and get out not free the slaves, give them machetes and massacre a plantation.

 

[DEAD34345]

I will choose free will over control any day of the week.

Yeah, free will! Except when people use their free will to do something we don't like of course, then we have to murder them, along with hundreds and hundreds of innocent guards and soldiers. /s

OT: The Templars are evil villains who will use any means necessary to accomplish their goals of world peace, while the Assassins are virtuous heroes who will... use any means necessary... to... prevent... world... peace?

Uh...

What exactly is it the Assassins are trying to do again? I've played through all of the main-line games except Unity and I don't have a god damn clue. They just really hate that the Templars use magic to control people I guess, murder and terror are much more humane.

 

[ReservoirAngel]

I'll take the Templar way.

Sorry but a bunch of people in really conspicuous hoods running around stabbing anyone they think is oppressive and just kind of winging it in terms of thinking doing so will work out well for humanity because FREEDOM just doesn't sound all that appealing as a real ideology.

There's a reason they wipe out every designated 'bad guy' in every game but never seem to keep their shit together; they don't have an endgame to this.

I think it was Haytham Kenway who said that all the Templars need to exist is for the world to be as it is. Which is true. The world will always be a chaotic mess of blind ambition and terrible people. As much as the Assassins might seem to think otherwise, you will always need people at the top keeping things in line.

This is why I love Rogue as a game; it shows you that the Assassins' whole way of being is reckless anarchism for the sake of naive idealism.

 

[rgrekejin]

I'll take the Templar way.

Sorry but a bunch of people in really conspicuous hoods running around stabbing anyone they think is oppressive and just kind of winging it in terms of thinking doing so will work out well for humanity because FREEDOM just doesn't sound all that appealing as a real ideology.

There's a reason they wipe out every designated 'bad guy' in every game but never seem to keep their shit together; they don't have an endgame to this.

I'll repeat my question from earlier - why do the Assassins need to have an end game? To insist they need one is to buy into the Templars' basic assumptions about how the world needs to work. The Assassins don't have a plan for the world, so we have to side with the Templars, who do? Why do we *need* a plan for the world? Why can't people be allowed to make their own choices for themselves, without some shadowy organization trying to guide them around? The Assassins aren't anarchist or communist, as some in this thread have suggested - they're libertarian. They're fundamentally uninterested in forcing people to do things against their will. They're not against all organizations or all forms of government - just ones no one ever consented to or elected. That's always been their principle problem with the Templars - the Templars want to run the world, but no one ever asked the world if it wanted Templars running it. Just because the Templars have a theoretically noble goal doesn't make it right.

 

[JemothSkarii]

To quote Old El Paso: 'Why don't we have both?'

They're two extremist factions, which is the best way to make somebody not sure of what side they're on. If one side was more moderate, everyone would say 'THEY'RE THE GOOD GUYS'. But I stopped caring about Assassin's Creed after 3, though I did get 4 because it turned out to be a wonderful pirate simulator and actually had a fun story when it didn't focus on Assassin things. Anyways, I'd say both because THEY KEEP EACH OTHER IN CHECK. The games are basically about Yin-Yang at this point.

But gun to my head, Assassins. Authoritarian stuff grates against me. Obviously we need SOME authority, but I'd rather anarchy to Orwell's Nightmare.

 

[RealRT]

I would prefer to live in a world ran by an evil genius than one ran by a well-intentioned idiot.

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

Both ideologies have the best interests of humanity at heart. But as with every ideology, bad elements of society are drawn to them. Templars are worse though, because they attract the worst elements and the consequences of that are long lasting. They attract power hungry psychopaths, greedy and sleazy politicians and pretty much the worst people that are in charge of the actual world that we live in. Most politicians and bankers today would no doubt favor Templar ideology for all the wrong reasons. Because people in power fall into the same trap every time. The entire history of humanity is evidence of that. Assassins exists because of that fact. Their ideology is a natural response to humans when you try to enslave them. Just like Templar ideology is a natural response to complete anarchy.

However, Assassins are not anarchists. I don't know where you people get that. Sure, they can attract "anarchists" in their ranks, but the group doesn't strive for that. Anarchists don't actually exist, as much as some people would like to claim that they are anarchists.

Like rgrekejin said, they're libertarians. REAL libertarians. Not the American redneck kind. Assassins basically support democracy, freedom of thought, science education over religious dogma and all those other modern day human rights and freedoms. They have ranks, rules and structure within their own group as well, so claiming that they're an anarchistic group is stupid.

Now here's the kicker. If you brought an Assassin and a Templar to talk to people and tell them about their ideas, the majority would most likely end up supporting the Templars. Just look at the world we live in. It's what inspired the creators of AC to portray those two groups in such a way. People today vote for those who lie to them in order to feel safer. People give up their rights and freedoms to feel safer even when nobody is threatening them. And most people are stupid and they want to be told what to do.

 

[KyuubiNoKitsune-Hime]

As the Assassins tend to be rather liberal(not the US political kind) and progressive(again not the US political kind) libertarians rather than conservative totalitarians like the Templars are... I'd probably be an assassin, knowing that if things get too out of hand I can quietly cut the problem down behind the scenes, while not having any real power in the long run. Except for maybe the ability to own the majority of Rome. That would be sweet.

 

[conmag9]

Neither in their purest state are a good thing, at least at first. The Templar's overarching goal, that of peace, is admirable. Their reasoning and their mechanisms are not. The totalitarian control thing is bound to fail, and their "let's use hypertech we can't even begin to understand" ideas aren't much better. Vidic brings up an excellent point in the first game: you can't stop the corruption of society without deep level re-education. Problem is, the Templars methods and strategies draws on and in some ways relies on the worst elements of human society. They will always taint themselves because the control mechanisms they desire simply attract that sort of individual. So, even without the Assasins, they'd never fully succeed. They'd make one hell of a mess failing though.

The Assasins are more easily mistaken for the good guys because of their status as protagonists for most of the series, but lots of people try and see past that. Freedom's all well and good, but taken too far, you get anarchy. That's not how far things usually get though. With the Templars around, Assasin efforts are focused, if failing on the global scale. The Templars are a big, obvious ideological target and that simplifies things. But what if the Assasin's beat the Templars in some permanent form? No more secret controlling order of any kind. At this stage, once the parties die down a bit and the smarter members of the Order take stock of the situation, I suspect something unpleasant will happen. The Assasin's are more likely to draw selfless people than the Templars. Their current state in the modern era doesn't have enough resources to make it a power draw like their rivals, so they're less self-sabotaging. But once their position is secure, the more far-seeing ones will want to stabilize and maintain the freedom they've won for humanity. That means turning their attention to the smaller evils in the world. Tyrants and the like. But without a single big target, this becomes much, much more disorganized and difficult. In order to succeed in any practical way, you need some way of keeping everything moving in the right direction to prevent those terrible people from gaining power in the first place. You need a system. Systemic intervention.

In short, without the Templars, the Assasins may very well become them, all in the hope of preventing both the uprising of the Templar Order and the formation of freedom destroying tyrants. For the greater good, small sacrifices have to be made to keep freedom active.

So I'd say you need both of them around, if only to counter the worst of each other (yes, I know, Golden Mean fallacy, but the options don't include "get rid of both groups at once", so I think a balance actually is a good idea here). The status quo certainly could use some adjustment in freedom's favor, but unrestrained, the Assasins will likely do terrible things to keep free will "safe". After all, they're already willing to kill for it.

 

[Zen Bard]

What's interesting is how the perceived morality of the two sides have shifted over the course of the series.

In the Altair and Ezio games, the Assassins seemed like an organization dedicated to upholding freedom in the face of an oppressive subjugating group who wanted nothing more to control civilization for selfish ends.

But in the Black Flag and Rogue games, the Assassins have devolved into an anarchic group of terrorists with no real direction while the Templars are now dedicated to unifying mankind to help them achieve enlightenment.

That being said...I'll go with the Assassins because they wear cooler clothes and know parkour!

 

[TP Potato]

I say templars, though in all honesty it depends on the game. The ethics of the templars seem to vary depending on which entry in the series it is. In the Ezio trilogy they are much more evil and I would be more inclined to side with the assassins, but in the Kenway series they seem more morally ambiguous.

 

[Souplex]

Absolute freedom without oversight is anarchy.
Their continued conflict gives is probably in everyone's best interest, as it keeps us in a happy medium.

 

[TheIceQueen]

I will choose free will over control any day of the week.

Yeah, free will! Except when people use their free will to do something we don't like of course, then we have to murder them, along with hundreds and hundreds of innocent guards and soldiers. /s

Do I like that I'm forced to choose between one extreme side over another? No. And, in fact, the Assassins rub me the wrong way a whole hell of a lot, but at the end of the day I value my free will far more than being controlled. It's not an ideal situation, nowhere close to it, but I'll take anarchy over dystopia.

That doesn't mean that I agree with the Assassins. That doesn't mean I don't think that the Templar's goals aren't noble when not being twisted by Borgias. All I'm doing is picking between two extremes, both of which are ultimately terrible.

Edit: I'd also like to note that I've only played one and two. My interest in the series dropped off after that. Apparently, the Assassins get even worse after that. I wouldn't know because I'm not a big fan of the games.

 

[Souplex]

That doesn't mean that I agree with the Assassins. That doesn't mean I don't think that the Templar's goals aren't noble when not being twisted by Borgias.

To be fair, in AssCreed2 you help the Meddicis. Look them up, they're as bad, if not worse than the Borgias.

 

[FPLOON]

Uh... Whichever side can agree with my Methodist beliefs and shit...

Other than that, whichever side has the best oatmeal raisin cookies...

 

[Ahoge-dono]

Both sides have taken their ideology and manipulated it to satisfy their own personal gain. Maybe the Templars have done it more often than Assassins, particularly with the Borgia, but majority of the Templar Order's cause of failure is in fighting and abuse of power. The Assassin's aren't above internal struggle either as demonstrated in Rogue. What it comes down the base ideology with the Templars, those with superiority in society should control all the information or with Assassins, people get all the information to determine their own decisions; but no, instead their war became that of a personal grudge match.

 

[Souplex]

I...errr, well, ummm...oh I hate having to choose! Is there free ice-cream with any of these guys?

Most things you enjoy (Including ice cream) require infrastructure, which requires civilization.
Assassin's destroy infrastructure.
Assassin's destroy potential ice cream.

 

[Azure23]

That doesn't mean that I agree with the Assassins. That doesn't mean I don't think that the Templar's goals aren't noble when not being twisted by Borgias.

To be fair, in AssCreed2 you help the Meddicis. Look them up, they're as bad, if not worse than the Borgias.

I always thought it was weird that they chose the Borgias to be the bad guys for those games, while the Medici and Sforza came of smelling like roses. It was probably just that a Borgia was Pope during the time and they wanted it to be a real "fight the power" kinda narrative. And it was even weirder when Machiavelli is suddenly on your side. Dude loved the Borgia's, and seriously, it seems like he should be the poster boy for the Templar beliefs.

 

[rgrekejin]

I...errr, well, ummm...oh I hate having to choose! Is there free ice-cream with any of these guys?

Most things you enjoy (Including ice cream) require infrastructure, which requires civilization.
Assassin's destroy infrastructure.
Assassin's destroy potential ice cream.

...I simply must know what games people are playing such as that it becomes possible to confuse "an opposition to an illegitimate authority imposed unilaterally in secret without the consent of the governed" with "an opposition to any form of organization or government whatsoever".

 

[CaptainMarvelous]

I...errr, well, ummm...oh I hate having to choose! Is there free ice-cream with any of these guys?

Most things you enjoy (Including ice cream) require infrastructure, which requires civilization.
Assassin's destroy infrastructure.
Assassin's destroy potential ice cream.

To be fair, Assassin's destroy TEMPLAR infrastructure. M-fuckers are quite OK having their own order with their own leaders, really it just depends who it is making the ice cream.

If an Assassin started making Ice cream you can be sure the Templar would either kill em or buy all the cows to extort the recipe THEN kill them.
Whereas if it was the other way round, the Assassin would kill the Templar and probably a lot of the farm-hands then give the recipe to someone they liked who is historically lovable.

It is LITERALLY a gang war where they both want the same thing with different coats of paint. So, sadly, neither side will have ice-cream. Only knives.