Board Thread:Series general discussion/@comment-1153722-20170822085816/@comment-18014300-20170822112838

The Gameinformer magazine that first detailed Assassin's Creed: Origins before the trailer was even released was quite clear that it would not contradict or revise Amunet's lore...

However, if it is true that they have found that an Egyptian cobra is not guaranteed to kill, then they might have a plausible excuse to retcon it for scientific reasons. On the other hand, discovering that it is "not guaranteed to kill" is not the same as "cannot kill", and I don't think the former is cause for such a retcon. I hope that if Cleopatra does not die from an asp after all, they find a way to still involve an asp in the assassination to give reason for how that myth came to be and how the asp became Amunet's iconic "weapon".

Side-note here, I was always incredibly annoyed that Qin Shi Huang was randomly killed by a spear not mercury pills because it is well documented that that was how he died: he ingested mercury pills that his alchemists and physicians thought would grant him immortality, which I had always thought was perfect as an assassination long before Chronicles: China had the Jiajing Emperor die from a similar method. (Quite a few emperors in Chinese history died this way xD, so it might feel redundant, but Qin Shi Huang is the especially famous case, not the Jiajing Emperor so if they had to choose only one emperor to be assassinated from this method, I would've preferred that they had chosen the former. But I think since they already had Alexander the Great poisoned, they didn't want more than one of those Assassins in that group had a poisonous potion or pills as their weapon...) This is actually one of the few cases I wouldn't mind being retconned because I found it way too deviant from history.