Because if you listen and do the math, he is much older than the age on the Wiki. For example, Theresa says Oakvale was destroyed 600 years ago (or 500 I forget) and then shortly after it was destroyed a second time. Which we can assume be around 50 years later, which makes Reaver ready 550, or 450. Then Fable 2 came out, Reaver waited 20 Years (for you to get to him) which adds 20 to the numbers above. THEN another 50 after that for Fable 3.. which all adds to 450+20+50= 520. AND not to mention how old he was WHEN he first went to the Shadow Court. So he was ages from 18 to like.. 49? you add the number to 520 and you'll have his age.
And not to mention he was NOT in Bloodstone right after OR during the time Oakvale was destroyed. He even says over 200 years (200 years ago Ursula and Penelope was around during that time, and Reaver wasnt Reaver in Oakvale he was a different man.) Which means he could not have just around 200..
The key part of your list of info that mean we cannot use that info is assume. We don't use assumptions to make the pages. Based on all in-game info we can gather, all non-assumption data, Reaver and the deal that destroyed Oakvale were done around the 200years prior to Fable 2 and meeting Reaver. For all we know, the second destruction of Oakvale could have happened 100 years prior to the start of Fable 2, but its never actually stated the second time. Its a good attempt to work it all out, but we can't use assumptions.
Nope. Oakvale was destroyed 500 years prior. If you played the game you'd know. So until we ACTUALLY know his age for sure.. I suggest you delete his age. Because if you keep his age YOU'RE assuming his age as well 🙄
As far as I remember, the two referenced destructions of Oakvale are 500 years before Fable II, which is the one you witness in Fable, and 200 years before Fable II, which is the one when Reaver destroyed the village.
That is NOT true. Because Reaver was in BLOODSTONE 200 years prior to the game, which MEANS he was NOT in OAKVALE 200 years prior to Fable 2, but many years before. If he was in Bloodstone, then he couldnt have destroyed the village now could he? No he couldnt. 200 years ago was when he was with Ursula and Penelope and Andrew, meaning be never had a lover to actually change the way he was from her death (along with his friends and family). Because we all know after the village was destroyed, Reaver changed and became who he was today. So 200 years before Fable 2 he was in Bloodstone and many years AFTER Oakvale.
And let's not forget that Reaver witnessed the fall of Oakvale, and Oakvale is a few hours away from Bloodstone.
AND Reaver is the hero of Skill, meaning he was a pirate for many years, including 200 years before fable 2! So HOW could he have destroyed Oakvale AND be a pirate the way he is at the same time?? He couldn't, which means Reaver destroyed the village LONG before 200 years ago.
Fair enough. This was itself over 10 years ago though, clearly I remembered the 200 years bit but not what it was connected to. So we know that Oakvale was destroyed by Reaver more than 200 years ago but less than 500 years ago, and nothing else. Which means that any attempt to work out Reaver's age can't work.
Hi Alpha! My name is Bluerock, and I'm the new Wiki Manager for the Fable Wiki. This means I'm your first point of contact and liaison for Fandom Staff. If you ever have a question or issue relating to the wiki, editing, etc., feel free to drop me a message!
Hey there, I was wondering that if I used any of the information on this wiki and converted it and condemed it into my own video, would that be ok for any copyright issues? Of course I would link this wiki in any video I make. Thank you