Because people still haven't gotten it right yet after 15 years:
Bayek cutting off the finger was an accident because the blade went off when his fist was clenched.
--->One of his earliest Hidden Ones recruits cuts off her ring finger as a show of faith in Bayek.
Things spiral from there, and soon, the ring finger amputation becomes a requirement to even receive the blade.
Things stay the same up until Altaïr's time, and after he becomes Mentor, he changes the mechanism to one where the blade won't activate without the arm tensing *and* the hand moving out of the way (something about pressure plates replacing the scissor system).
Leonardo only ever says the blade's *been* modified, not that he modified it himself. Did the hidden blade in the game not originally belong to Ezio's father? Why doesn't he have a missing finger, then? Why did the Assassins switch to branding the ring finger and not cutting it off if the mechanism hadn't been changed?
Edit: forgot to say it was Ezio's father's hb (funny how no one called me out on that)
The codex states explicitly that Altaïr and Malik together redesigned the Hidden Blade because Altaïr found it barbaric to cut his sons' fingers off for the sake of tradition. And indeed, if you check Revelations, I'm pretty sure his older son Darim has all 10 fingers, as does Malik's son Tazim.
Yep. A lot of lore from the Wiki comes either from the other two games in the Altaïr trilogy (Bloodlines and Chronicles) or from the Secret Crusade. Everything about Altaïr's father Umar, his mother Maud, his children and his friendship with Malik comes mostly from the book. Be warned though, that in the books, the last parts of Malik's story are, uh, significantly more visceral and depressing than in the game.
Wasn't it also done for combat for Altair? Not that it *couldn't* work for combat before but it made it easier given the flimsical design of his blade right?
Maybe it's just me bit how did Bayek wear that blade that it could cut of his ringfinger? Maybe it's just me bit it would feel way "better" to have the blade come out under the palm or at least in the middle of the hand but even them it would cut my middle finger and not my ringfinger. Is it just me or is that weird?
The inventor of the blade intended for it to be used on the outside of the hand, not under the palm. Bayek not knowing this puts it under his hand thinking it’d better conceal it. He loses his finger by using the blade while his hand is closed and his wrist bent inwards. He loses his ring finger rather than his middle finger because the blade was not perfectly centered.
I think the devs said pre release the reason why Eivor wears the blade above the wrist was for cultural reasons and not because it was practical.
Something about how vikings never want to hide the weapons that they carry. Shame that they didnt use this in game instead Eivor went: *I dont want to lose a finger lol*.
I don't think Viking considered their way of life as 'culture' thing yet back then. Just what they though was their way to honor the gods. I mean they don't even see Christian as 'different culture' and more like 'heretic'.
When they first arrive in England either Sigurd or Eivor make a comment about the Christians likely thinking the vikings as strange as they thought the Christians. So they werent historically accurate in that sense, at least not Sigurd and Eivor.
Maybe, but he tends to be more of a raider, pillager and killer than a great philosopher, at least in his actions up to the point where they leave Norway. The same is true of Eivor.
Pretty sure eivor says the gift is too beautiful to have on the under side(hiding it) and that he wants to show it off. Very in line for viking culture.
Eivor also says it's because they want to show the weapon. The full quote is "I have no wish to hide this. And I would rather not make the same mistake you two have."
If that's the primary reason, a lot of people need to get off their high horse lmao.
I have a lot of issues with Valhalla, but the hidden blade being on top of her arm is not one of them
And yet there was dead silence when Shao Jun had a hidden blade in her fucking boot...
Again, this is a pretty nit-picky thing to hate. And I say that as someone who's been invested in the franchise for over ten years
I get your point. That's true if we're going by the timeline of the settings of each game. But I'm talking more about the timeline of the AC games in reality. Like AC1 was the first game in the franchise. Followed by 2 and so on. So they had the liberty of making changes in these latter titles. For example, Altair's accent. they added that later on. My point was simply that the concept behind the hidden blade was that it was a weapon concealed under the forearm. The newer titles changed that
They sort of retconned it so that it is more symbolic/ritualistic than practical. I still don't understand how in the original games they were too stupid to figure out how to make a better blade without needing to use a dead god's knowledge
Yes, he read that in the codex. It's easy to deduce that the blade has been modified before Leonardo, just look at Ezio's dad, Giovanni, he doesn't miss a finger.
Codex talks about how Altair made modifications in order to preserve the finger of the user. A commenter elaborated further on this in one of the top comments.
I mean such a small, durable and complex mechanism for the 11th century is a complete engineering feat, the redesign would’ve almost been asking too much without the dead god knowledge.
I mean, lore-wise, modern metallurgists haven been able to replicate the alloy used in the armor of Altair
It's the holding the hand open like this when the middle finger especially lines up with the blade. However Altaïr closed his fist and could also use his blade with a punch, if you close your fist your ring finger will be more aligned with the blade.
Source: played the game and played with my hand
Edit: also the blade does not follow the direction of the bracer so now Im thinking the drawing is just a bit bad. The hidden blade was mounted in the middle of the bracer and aligned with it
>Why would an assassin need to punch someone in addition to stabbing a blade into their artery?
The concept was carried over from the original [Prince of Persia: Assassins concept video](https://youtu.be/-vPmJY2rvBU?si=6HcHoVCQrJRVAAaj), which was what AC1 was originally conceptualized as.
Yes, but no where in your tangent did you address the thing you initially responded to. There's plenty of reasons to punch when you go to stab with the blade. Like giving it a more solid reinforcement. Punch someone in the face and slip the blade into a vital area like the eye socket. The hidden blade at the end of the day is just a wrist blade that's the size of a small dagger. Not too out of the ordinary that Altair would sometimes use it in a versatile fashion. Literally every assassin does this anyway. Ezio fights with his reinforced blades. Connor I believe even pulls one of the daggers out to use it as a dagger if you choose to fight with the hidden blades.
Point is, you're limiting how you think about the hidden blade when it's the most versatile weapon the assassin has
I never said the HB wasn’t versatile, just that the lore regarding chopping the finger didn’t make sense. How would closing your fist provide more reinforcement for the blade? I’m fairly certain it’s possible to stab a hidden blade into an eye socket without punching.
Also, it’s funny you mention hidden blade combat because literally every game with hidden blade combat has the assassins fight with their wrists *tilted up* and with wide, slashing attacks. And when they do go for the vital areas, guess what? They don’t make a fist. Again, we don’t even see Altair do that.
So it being a symbolism of pure, unwavering devotion to the Assassin cause doesn't make sense? You should replay the games. Who cares if it never happened in the game lmfao. You're trying really hard to be pedantic over nothing. Yes, they have their hands slanted upwards, congratulations. Now point to me where I'm wrong in anything I've stated? You use the games specifically for an argument but the lore says Altair would punch with the weapon. There's only one source telling me the truth here. And it's not the disingenuous, pedantic arguing stranger on Reddit
Oh, you're a Terminally online Redditors who hasn't touched grass in 13 years. My bad bro, you know so much more than I do
Maybe he's just curling that finger down in the "assassin's gang sign" way like Lucy at the end of AC1 did. That's probably a post-Da Vinci hidden blade that extends under the fingers safely.
Altair is the one who originally modified the blades to allow for that, Da Vinci just noted the change when talking about the blade to Ezio. So this very AC1 style gauntlet with the AC2 style hidden blade makes a fair bit of sense
Yes and no. Origins shows that the blade will amputate the ring ringer with the fist clenched. Later, in Origins and Mirage it’s established that the finger amputation is only an initiation ritual that is later abandoned by the time of the 13th century.
The Hidden Blade is designed to be worn on top of the wrist, not under it.
Bayek, the protagonist of of AC Origin wears it incorrectly. During a skirmish he accidentally cuts his ring finger off cause he couldn't open up his hand to get his fingers out of the way.
Later on, one of Bayek's Hidden Ones cuts off the same finger as a show of dedication to the cause.
Over a thousand years later, the Assassins have altered the design of the Hidden Blade. The Blade is now telescopic and thinner.
If you look closely enough at art of Altair, the Hidden Blade looks like it extends upwards slightly. There's no room for the assassin to make a fist and extend the blade (possibly to make it slightly more concealable), hence the missing finger is now necessary.
The Hidden Blades for Assassins after Altair extend straighter outwards along the forearm, allowing them to extend the blade while making a fist. So, removing the finger is now no longer necessary. And it's now possibly more difficult for Templars to spot an Assassin now that they aren't all missing a ring finger.
I think the issue with the art is that the hand isn't in a natural position and it looks like the blade is cocked off to the side. They've drawn it as a straight line from the tip of the middle finger to the elbow (which is how you grab things), when a natural hand position would have it so that a straight line would go from the wedge between your middle and ring finger to your elbow. On top of that, the blade isn't in line with the center of the forearm, like you'd expect. So it's a mistake on the artist's part.
Ubisoft pulled an Ubisoft.
In AC, the blade was designed in such a way that the finger would be cut off when using the blade. When they clench their fist, the blade goes through the hole for blade punching.
By AC2, it had been redesigned by Altaïr such that it no longer required the sacrifice of a finger, using the knowledge of gods for that mechanical engineering marvel. The ritual was disbanded and replaced with rings because the cut off fingers became recognizable as Assassins.
In Origins, the blade cuts off Bayek's finger when he's fucking with it. Darius wore the blade on the back of his hand in Valhalla, and it was indicated that Bayek tried to put it on backwards and that's why he cut off his finger - it sort of makes sense, too, since that means the blade is designed at that time to lay flat against the arm and thus most able to cut off your finger; even so, it's not easy to pull your finger back (to activate the blade) while keeping your ring finger low enough toward your wrist to be cut off at the first knuckle. It was then made ritualistic to cut off the finger as a show of loyalty to the Hidden Ones.
As for what change was made by Altaïr to make the blade not cut off a finger: it's unspoken. Could be offsetting it from the arm (fairly unlikely), but I think rather it requires pulling the hand back further. With the blade on the back of the hand, the mechanism is flipped so you'd have to push your hand forward, but your wrist has slightly less range in that direction (and is not really the way you want your wrist bending in most situations), so it might have required less tension. That means it's more likely to eject when you haven't pulled your hand back very far, until Altaïr's change. But, that also theoretically means that the change is simply a matter of wire length, which is pretty simple and shouldn't require the knowledge of gods to figure out.
So, the answer is it's both, neither, and not even worn the initially intended way.
Pretty sure its supposed to be Altaïrs hand after redesigning the hidden blade so it didn't need a finger sacrifice anymore. Though it still looks a little too far to the right.
That used to be it, until later redesigns of the mechanism made it so the finger could stay where it was, and assassins just had a burn in their ring finger.
It was later retconned to have always been a purely symbolic trait, which was later replaced with the burnt finger.
Yes but I think here they placed the hidden blade there to mimic the logo for magic shown on the right. Look at the shadow cast by the hand on the left. It matches the magic logo on the right in orange. Pretty sure this was intentional
To summarize this, I think Ubisoft did a bad writing from the start because it is pretty obvious that initially the assassins have to cut their finger to let the blade works properly which OP said for the blade can go through the user's hand. You can also see how Altair propels the blade through his hand in the game.
Now, they introduce AC Origins' protagonist, Bayek, the founder of Hidden One (Assassins Order) who accidentally cut his finger while using the hidden blade. BUT later in the game, his followers also cut their finger but specifically to show dedication to Bayek and not because of using the blade. IIRC, Bayek and Aya are the only user of hidden blade at the event of AC Origins.
Why exactly Bayek could lose his finger? Because he use blade the wrong way. How is it the wrong way? There comes the AC Odyssey which introduce Darius in the DLC, the first user of the hidden blade that wore it on the arms instead of under.
BUT if you see correctly in the villa of AC2, the Darius statue. He wore the hidden blade under the arm.
so I don't know what is Ubisoft cooking exactly lmao.
\>Have your relaxed palm facing you
\>Make a fist
\>Draw a line from the middle of your wrist towards your hand
I only have two hands so I can only say that in 2 tests, if I had a hidden blade extended, they would pierce my ring fingers 2/2 times.
That and cutting off their ring fingers was symbolic to the Brotherhood.
Origins already showed that it was an accident, but since Bayek is one of the original leaders of the Brotherhood, they incorporated that accident into tradition because it happened when he was on a mission.
Yes and no, it retconnrd in ac origins, kinda. In ac2 da Vinci said "you had to cut your ring finger so it functions properly, I resigned it using apple of eden's knowledge" or something like that(not exact quote). But in origins bayek cuts off his own finger in an accident while trying to assassinat someone, and later other followers of the hidden one cut their own finger to show respect
You can literally just move your fingers out of the way. This is so stupid. You could easily identify who’s an assassin by looking at there hands and seeing who’s missing there ring finger.
It was more of a cultural thing, it started with bayek *accidentally* severing his finger during an assassination. Future assassins in the brotherhood started doing it to honor that sacrifice (& apparently because the blade required it)
This later changed with altair’s codexes due to what he learned from the apple of eden. This change was applied to giovanni auditore’s hidden blade, which later become’s ezio’s hidden blade (and ezio was teased abt the finger amputation by leonardo da vinci about after reading the codex to repair it)
Assassins still honor the whole finger thing by branding themself rather than cutting off their finger.
The change wasn't made to Ezios blades until he inherited them and had Da Vinci repair them. Da Vinci then decoded the codex and was able to modify it IIRC
No, it had already been altered. Giovanni isn't missing a finger. Leonardo only says "the blade has been altered", not that he modified it himself - Altair was the one who modified the design using the knowledge of the Apple, in part because he found the practice barbaric and in part because it made identifying Assassins easier\*
\*while this was mentioned, I might be wrong about who said it and whether it was part of Altair's reasoning or someone else who said it was smart because of that.
Either way, Assassins still branded their fingers, but modern day Assassins might just wear a ring.
Yes and also it was a practice that was abolished as of the second game. By that point the assassins had redesigned the blade so that it wouldn’t need to cut your finger off. After that they just started branding your ring finger during the induction ceremony
Though I think that too no longer existed by the third game
Mah super secret organisation that no one can no about...
Cut your ring finger off to show all the other assassins (and anyone else) you're one of them
In the art posted by the OP the angle looks wrong where the hidden blade comes out. If you look at how the bracer leans slightly to the left, yet the blade points straight to the top.
Maybe it's just me bit how did Bayek wear that blade that it could cut of his ringfinger? Maybe it's just me bit it would feel way "better" to have the blade come out under the palm or at least in the middle of the hand but even them it would cut my middle finger and not my ringfinger. Is it just me or is that weird?
If I remember from AC2, it was to ensure the ultimate dedication of the user. They couldn't use the blade without it. That is, until it was modified (smartly so).
Now both my ring fingers hurt.
This screams "I skipped games and cutscenes"
>Isn't the point of cutting the finger off for the blade to go through?
Never really was. Bayek lost his finger since he acted in a rage moment, and OOPS , finger goes yeet!
Initiates after Bayek founded the Hidden Ones cut their fingers as an act of faith and honor for Bayek.
Later on many thought you had to cut it for the blade to be used, but that's only the case if you are using it while clenching your hand.
the distance between blade and arm / the angle.
He made it "safer".
the original one was still "safe^(TM)" if it was used [with your hand open](https://static.zerochan.net/Altair.Ibn.La-Ahad.full.1355963.jpg) (this is artwork, but i couldnt find images of Origins in-game assasssination.
Outside story cutscenes, you can see Bayek keeping his hand open while killing random enemies.
Leonardo modified it so if your hand is in a fist, the blade will not hit the hand
Leo never modified the design, Altaïr did. Leo just implemented aforementioned modification when fixing Giovanni's blade, and was able to decipher Altaïr's musings about the original design via the Codex. Hence his prank on Ezio.
Because people still haven't gotten it right yet after 15 years: Bayek cutting off the finger was an accident because the blade went off when his fist was clenched. --->One of his earliest Hidden Ones recruits cuts off her ring finger as a show of faith in Bayek. Things spiral from there, and soon, the ring finger amputation becomes a requirement to even receive the blade. Things stay the same up until Altaïr's time, and after he becomes Mentor, he changes the mechanism to one where the blade won't activate without the arm tensing *and* the hand moving out of the way (something about pressure plates replacing the scissor system). Leonardo only ever says the blade's *been* modified, not that he modified it himself. Did the hidden blade in the game not originally belong to Ezio's father? Why doesn't he have a missing finger, then? Why did the Assassins switch to branding the ring finger and not cutting it off if the mechanism hadn't been changed? Edit: forgot to say it was Ezio's father's hb (funny how no one called me out on that)
The codex states explicitly that Altaïr and Malik together redesigned the Hidden Blade because Altaïr found it barbaric to cut his sons' fingers off for the sake of tradition. And indeed, if you check Revelations, I'm pretty sure his older son Darim has all 10 fingers, as does Malik's son Tazim.
Do you know if The Secret Crusade goes into that? I'm getting everything from the wiki
Yep. A lot of lore from the Wiki comes either from the other two games in the Altaïr trilogy (Bloodlines and Chronicles) or from the Secret Crusade. Everything about Altaïr's father Umar, his mother Maud, his children and his friendship with Malik comes mostly from the book. Be warned though, that in the books, the last parts of Malik's story are, uh, significantly more visceral and depressing than in the game.
Wooohaaa..... I forgot his father was some sort of Assassin... Yeah why does he still have his finger? Blasphemy... Hang him.... Wait...
Ok, ok, now that's just cruel. Upvote.
Wasn't it also done for combat for Altair? Not that it *couldn't* work for combat before but it made it easier given the flimsical design of his blade right?
Yeah with a new alloy and everything
I wish Reddit gold still existed. This is deserving of it!
This.
Maybe it's just me bit how did Bayek wear that blade that it could cut of his ringfinger? Maybe it's just me bit it would feel way "better" to have the blade come out under the palm or at least in the middle of the hand but even them it would cut my middle finger and not my ringfinger. Is it just me or is that weird?
The inventor of the blade intended for it to be used on the outside of the hand, not under the palm. Bayek not knowing this puts it under his hand thinking it’d better conceal it. He loses his finger by using the blade while his hand is closed and his wrist bent inwards. He loses his ring finger rather than his middle finger because the blade was not perfectly centered.
Well in Valhalla Eivor said under the wrist was stupid and wore it above so the blade doesn’t go through the fist/finger.
I think the devs said pre release the reason why Eivor wears the blade above the wrist was for cultural reasons and not because it was practical. Something about how vikings never want to hide the weapons that they carry. Shame that they didnt use this in game instead Eivor went: *I dont want to lose a finger lol*.
Eivor does mention the whole "show weapon thing". He says "I have no wish to hide this. And I would rather not make the same mistake you two have."
Yes but they could have made Eivor explain that its part of her culture to not hide their weapons instead they made it seem as a personal preference.
I don't think Viking considered their way of life as 'culture' thing yet back then. Just what they though was their way to honor the gods. I mean they don't even see Christian as 'different culture' and more like 'heretic'.
When they first arrive in England either Sigurd or Eivor make a comment about the Christians likely thinking the vikings as strange as they thought the Christians. So they werent historically accurate in that sense, at least not Sigurd and Eivor.
That's just a logical conclusion or observation though, especially since Sigurd is well-traveled
Maybe, but he tends to be more of a raider, pillager and killer than a great philosopher, at least in his actions up to the point where they leave Norway. The same is true of Eivor.
It was not a culture thing. It looked like a pretty jewel and Eivor basically said: Why would I hide such a pretty thing?
they don’t need to spoonfeed you the plot
I remember Eivor's reaction being more about why you would want a *hidden* blade, more than the finger thing.
I think he does make a mention to “not wanting to make the same mistake as Basim”
Pretty sure eivor says the gift is too beautiful to have on the under side(hiding it) and that he wants to show it off. Very in line for viking culture.
Fun fact, not trying be passive aggressive just a neat fact, eivor is canonically a woman
Yes because they wanted to set Eivor apart as she wasn't actually a member of the Hidden Ones.
Eivor also says it's because they want to show the weapon. The full quote is "I have no wish to hide this. And I would rather not make the same mistake you two have."
Eivor never became an assassin/hidden one
Which is why a lot of people don't look at Valhalla as an Assassin's Creed game.
If that's the primary reason, a lot of people need to get off their high horse lmao. I have a lot of issues with Valhalla, but the hidden blade being on top of her arm is not one of them
🤦 no, that's not the ONLY reason but one of many that shows just how detached it was from the lore.
And yet there was dead silence when Shao Jun had a hidden blade in her fucking boot... Again, this is a pretty nit-picky thing to hate. And I say that as someone who's been invested in the franchise for over ten years
Eh, the boot knife is an actual thing, even the KGB still uses it.
It was in a James Bond movie
Which is dumb because that's how the hidden blade was supposed to he used lol
Every AC game that came before it says otherwise.
Wdym, the original hidden blade used by first assassin, was on wrist
The original hidden blade used in the AC lore was hidden under the wrist.🤷♂️
Didnt Darius wore it on his wrist when he killed that king?
Yes, but they already made changes at that point. Darius still had the hidden blade under his forearm in AC2.
Lorewise one could explain that the statues were made centuries after the people they depict lived hence the inconsistencies.
I get your point. That's true if we're going by the timeline of the settings of each game. But I'm talking more about the timeline of the AC games in reality. Like AC1 was the first game in the franchise. Followed by 2 and so on. So they had the liberty of making changes in these latter titles. For example, Altair's accent. they added that later on. My point was simply that the concept behind the hidden blade was that it was a weapon concealed under the forearm. The newer titles changed that
They sort of retconned it so that it is more symbolic/ritualistic than practical. I still don't understand how in the original games they were too stupid to figure out how to make a better blade without needing to use a dead god's knowledge
It's just a quickly scrawled note that says "move finger out of the way".
try finger but hole
Did Leonardo tell Ezio that Altair modified the design so you didn't need to cut off your finger?
Leonardo said the design had been modified so it no longer required the removal of the ring finger
Yes, he read that in the codex. It's easy to deduce that the blade has been modified before Leonardo, just look at Ezio's dad, Giovanni, he doesn't miss a finger. Codex talks about how Altair made modifications in order to preserve the finger of the user. A commenter elaborated further on this in one of the top comments.
Leonardo said he read it in the codex, the codex which was written by Altair using the knowledge of the Apple
The assassins have always been stupid, it's why they never have the upper hand.
And when they did have the upper hand, it was missing a finger.
I mean such a small, durable and complex mechanism for the 11th century is a complete engineering feat, the redesign would’ve almost been asking too much without the dead god knowledge. I mean, lore-wise, modern metallurgists haven been able to replicate the alloy used in the armor of Altair
Yes, but not when the hand is stretched like in the photo above.
It's the holding the hand open like this when the middle finger especially lines up with the blade. However Altaïr closed his fist and could also use his blade with a punch, if you close your fist your ring finger will be more aligned with the blade. Source: played the game and played with my hand Edit: also the blade does not follow the direction of the bracer so now Im thinking the drawing is just a bit bad. The hidden blade was mounted in the middle of the bracer and aligned with it
The shadow doesn’t match the hand at all either
That looks to be intentional. It's supposed to be the Planeswalker Spark (most recognizable symbol of the card game)
[удалено]
>Why would an assassin need to punch someone in addition to stabbing a blade into their artery? The concept was carried over from the original [Prince of Persia: Assassins concept video](https://youtu.be/-vPmJY2rvBU?si=6HcHoVCQrJRVAAaj), which was what AC1 was originally conceptualized as.
[удалено]
What are you even talking about?
[удалено]
Yes, but no where in your tangent did you address the thing you initially responded to. There's plenty of reasons to punch when you go to stab with the blade. Like giving it a more solid reinforcement. Punch someone in the face and slip the blade into a vital area like the eye socket. The hidden blade at the end of the day is just a wrist blade that's the size of a small dagger. Not too out of the ordinary that Altair would sometimes use it in a versatile fashion. Literally every assassin does this anyway. Ezio fights with his reinforced blades. Connor I believe even pulls one of the daggers out to use it as a dagger if you choose to fight with the hidden blades. Point is, you're limiting how you think about the hidden blade when it's the most versatile weapon the assassin has
I never said the HB wasn’t versatile, just that the lore regarding chopping the finger didn’t make sense. How would closing your fist provide more reinforcement for the blade? I’m fairly certain it’s possible to stab a hidden blade into an eye socket without punching. Also, it’s funny you mention hidden blade combat because literally every game with hidden blade combat has the assassins fight with their wrists *tilted up* and with wide, slashing attacks. And when they do go for the vital areas, guess what? They don’t make a fist. Again, we don’t even see Altair do that.
So it being a symbolism of pure, unwavering devotion to the Assassin cause doesn't make sense? You should replay the games. Who cares if it never happened in the game lmfao. You're trying really hard to be pedantic over nothing. Yes, they have their hands slanted upwards, congratulations. Now point to me where I'm wrong in anything I've stated? You use the games specifically for an argument but the lore says Altair would punch with the weapon. There's only one source telling me the truth here. And it's not the disingenuous, pedantic arguing stranger on Reddit Oh, you're a Terminally online Redditors who hasn't touched grass in 13 years. My bad bro, you know so much more than I do
Maybe he's just curling that finger down in the "assassin's gang sign" way like Lucy at the end of AC1 did. That's probably a post-Da Vinci hidden blade that extends under the fingers safely.
Altair is the one who originally modified the blades to allow for that, Da Vinci just noted the change when talking about the blade to Ezio. So this very AC1 style gauntlet with the AC2 style hidden blade makes a fair bit of sense
I'm pretty sure the reason the blade is angled that way is so it can loosely match the shadow of the planeswalker symbol below.
Didn’t notice the shadow till you said it but that’s definitely it
Yes and no. Origins shows that the blade will amputate the ring ringer with the fist clenched. Later, in Origins and Mirage it’s established that the finger amputation is only an initiation ritual that is later abandoned by the time of the 13th century.
The Hidden Blade is designed to be worn on top of the wrist, not under it. Bayek, the protagonist of of AC Origin wears it incorrectly. During a skirmish he accidentally cuts his ring finger off cause he couldn't open up his hand to get his fingers out of the way. Later on, one of Bayek's Hidden Ones cuts off the same finger as a show of dedication to the cause. Over a thousand years later, the Assassins have altered the design of the Hidden Blade. The Blade is now telescopic and thinner. If you look closely enough at art of Altair, the Hidden Blade looks like it extends upwards slightly. There's no room for the assassin to make a fist and extend the blade (possibly to make it slightly more concealable), hence the missing finger is now necessary. The Hidden Blades for Assassins after Altair extend straighter outwards along the forearm, allowing them to extend the blade while making a fist. So, removing the finger is now no longer necessary. And it's now possibly more difficult for Templars to spot an Assassin now that they aren't all missing a ring finger. I think the issue with the art is that the hand isn't in a natural position and it looks like the blade is cocked off to the side. They've drawn it as a straight line from the tip of the middle finger to the elbow (which is how you grab things), when a natural hand position would have it so that a straight line would go from the wedge between your middle and ring finger to your elbow. On top of that, the blade isn't in line with the center of the forearm, like you'd expect. So it's a mistake on the artist's part.
Ubisoft pulled an Ubisoft. In AC, the blade was designed in such a way that the finger would be cut off when using the blade. When they clench their fist, the blade goes through the hole for blade punching. By AC2, it had been redesigned by Altaïr such that it no longer required the sacrifice of a finger, using the knowledge of gods for that mechanical engineering marvel. The ritual was disbanded and replaced with rings because the cut off fingers became recognizable as Assassins. In Origins, the blade cuts off Bayek's finger when he's fucking with it. Darius wore the blade on the back of his hand in Valhalla, and it was indicated that Bayek tried to put it on backwards and that's why he cut off his finger - it sort of makes sense, too, since that means the blade is designed at that time to lay flat against the arm and thus most able to cut off your finger; even so, it's not easy to pull your finger back (to activate the blade) while keeping your ring finger low enough toward your wrist to be cut off at the first knuckle. It was then made ritualistic to cut off the finger as a show of loyalty to the Hidden Ones. As for what change was made by Altaïr to make the blade not cut off a finger: it's unspoken. Could be offsetting it from the arm (fairly unlikely), but I think rather it requires pulling the hand back further. With the blade on the back of the hand, the mechanism is flipped so you'd have to push your hand forward, but your wrist has slightly less range in that direction (and is not really the way you want your wrist bending in most situations), so it might have required less tension. That means it's more likely to eject when you haven't pulled your hand back very far, until Altaïr's change. But, that also theoretically means that the change is simply a matter of wire length, which is pretty simple and shouldn't require the knowledge of gods to figure out. So, the answer is it's both, neither, and not even worn the initially intended way.
"Shit, we cut off the wrong ones"
This picture is wrong.
I was looking at the picture, and I was thinking the EXACT same thing... then I read the OP 😅
Pretty sure its supposed to be Altaïrs hand after redesigning the hidden blade so it didn't need a finger sacrifice anymore. Though it still looks a little too far to the right.
it's just that's the blade isn't aligned with the middle of the bracer in this art otherwise it would be under the ring finger
It was for initiation
That used to be it, until later redesigns of the mechanism made it so the finger could stay where it was, and assassins just had a burn in their ring finger. It was later retconned to have always been a purely symbolic trait, which was later replaced with the burnt finger.
The blade is supposed to be where tht missing finger is !!!!!!!!!
Yes but I think here they placed the hidden blade there to mimic the logo for magic shown on the right. Look at the shadow cast by the hand on the left. It matches the magic logo on the right in orange. Pretty sure this was intentional
To summarize this, I think Ubisoft did a bad writing from the start because it is pretty obvious that initially the assassins have to cut their finger to let the blade works properly which OP said for the blade can go through the user's hand. You can also see how Altair propels the blade through his hand in the game. Now, they introduce AC Origins' protagonist, Bayek, the founder of Hidden One (Assassins Order) who accidentally cut his finger while using the hidden blade. BUT later in the game, his followers also cut their finger but specifically to show dedication to Bayek and not because of using the blade. IIRC, Bayek and Aya are the only user of hidden blade at the event of AC Origins. Why exactly Bayek could lose his finger? Because he use blade the wrong way. How is it the wrong way? There comes the AC Odyssey which introduce Darius in the DLC, the first user of the hidden blade that wore it on the arms instead of under. BUT if you see correctly in the villa of AC2, the Darius statue. He wore the hidden blade under the arm. so I don't know what is Ubisoft cooking exactly lmao.
I'm just here laughing at the shadow cause it's ignoring the fact that one finger is chopped off
It’s the Magic the Gathering logo, tf kinda demon claw do you think he has??
\>Have your relaxed palm facing you \>Make a fist \>Draw a line from the middle of your wrist towards your hand I only have two hands so I can only say that in 2 tests, if I had a hidden blade extended, they would pierce my ring fingers 2/2 times. That and cutting off their ring fingers was symbolic to the Brotherhood.
Origins already showed that it was an accident, but since Bayek is one of the original leaders of the Brotherhood, they incorporated that accident into tradition because it happened when he was on a mission.
Altair would close his fist at times when using the hidden blade. So yeah the blade would be where the missing finger was.
Yes and no, it retconnrd in ac origins, kinda. In ac2 da Vinci said "you had to cut your ring finger so it functions properly, I resigned it using apple of eden's knowledge" or something like that(not exact quote). But in origins bayek cuts off his own finger in an accident while trying to assassinat someone, and later other followers of the hidden one cut their own finger to show respect
The person who drew this just didn’t care enough, the blade isn’t aligned with the brace also the shadow is wrong
yes, but its also more of a sign of loyalty to the Brotherhood.
You can literally just move your fingers out of the way. This is so stupid. You could easily identify who’s an assassin by looking at there hands and seeing who’s missing there ring finger.
It was more of a symbolic thing like you are willing to cut of a finger for the creed
It was more of a cultural thing, it started with bayek *accidentally* severing his finger during an assassination. Future assassins in the brotherhood started doing it to honor that sacrifice (& apparently because the blade required it) This later changed with altair’s codexes due to what he learned from the apple of eden. This change was applied to giovanni auditore’s hidden blade, which later become’s ezio’s hidden blade (and ezio was teased abt the finger amputation by leonardo da vinci about after reading the codex to repair it) Assassins still honor the whole finger thing by branding themself rather than cutting off their finger.
The change wasn't made to Ezios blades until he inherited them and had Da Vinci repair them. Da Vinci then decoded the codex and was able to modify it IIRC
No, it had already been altered. Giovanni isn't missing a finger. Leonardo only says "the blade has been altered", not that he modified it himself - Altair was the one who modified the design using the knowledge of the Apple, in part because he found the practice barbaric and in part because it made identifying Assassins easier\* \*while this was mentioned, I might be wrong about who said it and whether it was part of Altair's reasoning or someone else who said it was smart because of that. Either way, Assassins still branded their fingers, but modern day Assassins might just wear a ring.
Hmm.. it seems I need to replay ac2
Yes and also it was a practice that was abolished as of the second game. By that point the assassins had redesigned the blade so that it wouldn’t need to cut your finger off. After that they just started branding your ring finger during the induction ceremony Though I think that too no longer existed by the third game
Mah super secret organisation that no one can no about... Cut your ring finger off to show all the other assassins (and anyone else) you're one of them
It’s WOTC they really don’t care about lore or being consistent with said lore.
Don’t templars get a ring when they join? Cutting off one’s ring finger technically/symbolically prevents someone from becoming a templar.
In the art posted by the OP the angle looks wrong where the hidden blade comes out. If you look at how the bracer leans slightly to the left, yet the blade points straight to the top.
i will say, the blade isnt aligned with the middle of the blade mechanism, but neither is the hand as its turned a bit so idk
Maybe it's just me bit how did Bayek wear that blade that it could cut of his ringfinger? Maybe it's just me bit it would feel way "better" to have the blade come out under the palm or at least in the middle of the hand but even them it would cut my middle finger and not my ringfinger. Is it just me or is that weird?
I’m confused at what you’re getting at. He cut off his finger by accident because he never used the blade in action before
The wrist can move in more than 2 directions…
If I remember from AC2, it was to ensure the ultimate dedication of the user. They couldn't use the blade without it. That is, until it was modified (smartly so). Now both my ring fingers hurt.
Yea they fucked up
No , it was to show faith
Nah, assassins are just extra as shit
tell me you never played an assassins creed game
This is a clear sign of the people who skip games and then complain about something not making sense.
This screams "I skipped games and cutscenes" >Isn't the point of cutting the finger off for the blade to go through? Never really was. Bayek lost his finger since he acted in a rage moment, and OOPS , finger goes yeet! Initiates after Bayek founded the Hidden Ones cut their fingers as an act of faith and honor for Bayek. Later on many thought you had to cut it for the blade to be used, but that's only the case if you are using it while clenching your hand.
What did Leonardo davinci modify about the blade then? Or was he just a fraud?
the distance between blade and arm / the angle. He made it "safer". the original one was still "safe^(TM)" if it was used [with your hand open](https://static.zerochan.net/Altair.Ibn.La-Ahad.full.1355963.jpg) (this is artwork, but i couldnt find images of Origins in-game assasssination. Outside story cutscenes, you can see Bayek keeping his hand open while killing random enemies. Leonardo modified it so if your hand is in a fist, the blade will not hit the hand
Leo never modified the design, Altaïr did. Leo just implemented aforementioned modification when fixing Giovanni's blade, and was able to decipher Altaïr's musings about the original design via the Codex. Hence his prank on Ezio.
Thanks for the correction!
Look at the lore $tu?id
Yeah. Why?