Sandro/Yog/other lore characters discussion

[GreatEmerald]

Well, at least sometimes everything ends with a new Word of Dante.

[Slayer of Cliffracers]

WRONG. If i said "My family wasn't happy with me becoming a Christian 20 years ago." it would be totally correct. And it would still be correct if i shorten it to "My family wasn't happy with me becoming a Christian."

Same thing with "My family hasn't been too happy about me becoming a Christian 20 years ago."

He hasn't been too happy about me becoming a Necromancer and wants to remove the blight from his career.

Wasn't/Was Not, is a strong past tense signifier. Sandro uses has not. We are not talking about all the possible ways you can used becoming, but that particular sense.

But grammar is sufficiently subjectively that I cannot see the point of this discussion really.

You think people that are famous and on TV nowadays can go to public places and not be recognizes like famous people used to do in almost all old stories? That's what i was talking about.

But they could never hide in this way from people that knew them personally. Nor could they go about using their real name.

In Sandro's case he's hiding from a person that knows him personally and using his own name.

If Sandro (who is in Antagarich) knows about the 'other Sandro' in Enroth, then using his own name is actually rather clever ruse in order to throw Gem and Crag Hack off guard. Because if you were a necromancer in disguise you certainly wouldn't use the name of a famous necromancer as your cover.

Except that Crag isn't smart enough to fall for that if he actually knew of a Sandro that was a necromancer...

No see, there's actually no implication of how much time has passed, just that it wasn't a small amount... so not days, weeks or even a few months... sure, it might have been only a little more then 6 months, but you're assuming that based on what you want it to be, not based on the evidence presented.

Exactly. There is no definite indication of exactly how much time has passed. My reasons for believing that it is a few months are to avoid the proceeding 7 problems.

1. Sandro has not been Ethric's student for 20+ years according the Ethric; yet Sandro describes his old master as finally tracking him down. However, it is implausible that Ethric continued to search for Sandro for so long and did not manage to catch him, especially since he is a high-profile public figure, not a recluse in hiding.

2. Ethric's motives for wishing Sandro dead are to remove the blight on his career caused by Sandros becoming a Necromancer. However after 20+ years (decades), such a motive makes little sense because after so long Sandro would have already blighted his career such that his death now would not salvage the situation. Everyone would know who Sandro is and who taught him, so there would be nothing Ethric could do.

3. Since Sandro fought in Heroes II, alongside or against Gem or Crag Hack, it is extremely implausible that such characters would be so easily deceived by Sandro. For this to happen they would have to be ignorant of who he is, which given the limited selection of heroes in the ranks of any heroes game is beyond implausible.

4. Since Sandro has effectively assumed a cover identity, even if for some 'Hiding in Plain Sight' reason it is called Sandro, he would avoid making any real contact with Crag Hack or Gem (especially the latter). To do so would risk exposure; since no reason exists why he requires the artifacts to be collected by Crag Hack or Gem, he would have hired a local hero that is less likely to know who Sandro is to reduce the risk.

5. As Sandro is already an established Necromancer with a reputation, it is unlikely that he would not have managed to enter Deyja immediately upon arrival in the Contested Lands and conduct the search for the artifacts from there. Also Gem (and the consequent risk of exposure she represents) becomes an unnecessary liability given the artifacts are all in areas full of Deyjan forces anyway.

6. When Sandro remembers kidnapping and raping Jabarkas's daughter, he remembers it as happening several years ago in this region of Antagarich. However not only is this unlikely due to his undead condition (and would be a truly major Squick smile smile ) but several years is whatever it means is definitely not 20+ years. And Sandro was in Enroth before very recently.

7. Not only does Sandro a Liche show a sexual interest in Vidomina; but Vidomina shows a similar interest in Sandro. This means that physically he must have either not have been at least completely a Liche at all at that point, or that he had not been a Liche long enough to have assumed a properly skeletal form (and undead psychology perhaps). We know from images of Sandro from Heroes II/I that Sandro definitely has a fully skeletal form already.

None of the problems exist for me. They exist for you though.

Not familiar with vendettas and people holding a grudge, are you...

And there's no indication that he's been doing nothing but searching for 20 years either...

You are only addressing part of the problem there, problem 2. Problem 1 reinforces problem 2 badly.

1. Sandro has not been Ethric's student for 20+ years according the Ethric; yet Sandro describes his old master as finally tracking him down. However, it is implausible that Ethric continued to search for Sandro for so long and did not manage to catch him, especially since he is a high-profile public figure, not a recluse in hiding.

Let's assume that Ethric's motives are an obsessional quest for revenge capable of lasting 20+ years. Then explain why Sandro, who isn't a recluse in hiding but a high-profile public figure can manage to avoid confronting his master for 20+ years.

Sandro is not in hiding, far from it. A person obsessional enough to hold a deadly vendetta for 20+ years cannot fail to find a known person that is not hiding if they are looking for THAT LONG!

The problem with your initial argument is what is actually said about Ethric's motives *by* Sandro.

He hasn't been too happy about me becoming a Necromancer and wants to remove the blight from his career.

Revenge is not Ethric's motive here. His career is Ethric's motive. It is improbably that after 20+ years of Sandro being a Necromancer Ethric could remove the blight from his career by killing him.

Nope, Sandro was not a campaign-specific hero in HoMM2. Lord Corlagon and Brother Brax were campaign-specific, and the most famous of Archibald's generals

Neither is Gem and Crag Hack. And I specifically said that he wasn't and that's why he must be high-profile.

He didn't mean it like that, he meant that if you could hire him from the Tavern he must have been famous and involved in the conflict... he has issues separating gameplay from lore...

Are the Might and Magic games a series of books with a computer game based upon them ThunderTitan? No they are not.

I don't have the problem here, you have the problem. The vast bulk of Might and Magic lore *is* game-play. Only things that appear in manuals are such are not game-play. If you consistently discount what is game-play (which you do not), very little remains of the lore at all.

Gem and Crag Hack only ever appear in Heroes II *as* tavern hired heroes, which is *shock-horror* a game-play mechanism (just like pop-up text windows). However it is quite clearly stated that Gem was involved in the succession wars.

Since there is no presence of either Gem nor Crag Hack in the canon lore of Heroes II, the Heroes III reference thus confirms the canonical status of the game-play hero-list itself, because the only existence of Gem and Crag Hack is IN THAT GAME-PLAY HERO LIST!

If Gem and Crag Hack only ever existed as a game-play mechanic of Heroes II and yet were involved in the canonical recount of what happened in the succession wars, this confirms that the hero-list represents the characters that were canonically involved in the succession wars as generals.

And this means Sandro.

[ThunderTitan]

But grammar is sufficiently subjectively that I cannot see the point of this discussion really.

Oh man, you're just too funny...

I don't have the problem here, you have the problem. The vast bulk of Might and Magic lore *is* game-play. Only things that appear in manuals are such are not game-play. If you consistently discount what is game-play (which you do not), very little remains of the lore at all.

Gem and Crag Hack only ever appear in Heroes II *as* tavern hired heroes, which is *shock-horror* a game-play mechanism (just like pop-up text windows). However it is quite clearly stated that Gem was involved in the succession wars.

Since there is no presence of either Gem nor Crag Hack in the canon lore of Heroes II, the Heroes III reference thus confirms the canonical status of the game-play hero-list itself, because the only existence of Gem and Crag Hack is IN THAT GAME-PLAY HERO LIST!

If Gem and Crag Hack only ever existed as a game-play mechanic of Heroes II and yet were involved in the canonical recount of what happened in the succession wars, this confirms that the hero-list represents the characters that were canonically involved in the succession wars as generals.

And this means Sandro.

Some people are american. 2 americans are confirmed as taking part in the Anglo-Zulu War. Thus all americans have taken part in the Anglo-Zulu War...

Yes, i have a problem, and it's name is logic...

[Corlagon]

Anyway, the main point was established many pages ago: it is still 100% possible and still very plausible that H3 Sandro is H2 Sandro (whether somebody likes it or not), much as it's entirely possible that H3 Alamar is H2 Alamar, etc... therefore there's very little to debate.

[ThunderTitan]

I don't know... i'm sure an any language teacher would have much to say about how grammar isn't even remotely close to subjective.

[Slayer of Cliffracers]

Some people are american. 2 americans are confirmed as taking part in the Anglo-Zulu War. Thus all americans have taken part in the Anglo-Zulu War...

Yes, i have a problem, and it's name is logic...

If you think I have the problem with logic, just look at what you are saying!

You are trying to argue that Sandro of Heroes II is the same Sandro as the one in Heroes III.

Yet if you only accept written texts as canon and reject game-play, as Sandro does not appear in any written text in the Heroes II campaign, then Sandro DOESN'T EXIST.

Sandro has no existence except as one of the basic hero list of Heroes II. If that list is not canonical, then as a result there *is* no earlier Sandro to be the same character as the one in Heroes III, since the Sandro in Heroes II does not canonically exist.

Heroes II is the Succession Wars. If you reject the canonical status of the hero list of that game, then you have no Sandro to be the same character as the one in Heroes III.

<about my logic>
I never claimed that every hero from Heroes III was involved in the Succession Wars (the equivalent of all Americans were involved in the Zulu War).

I made the claim based upon the logical basis of both sides of the argument, they both hold that there *is* a Sandro in Heroes II/I but they disagree on whether they are the same character as the one in Heroes III.

Since Heroes II has as it's background the Succession Wars; we must all logically accept the canonical status of the hero list of Heroes II as representing those involved in the Succession Wars to claim that there is an earlier Sandro *at all*.

Anyway, the main point was established many pages ago: it is still 100% possible and still very plausible that H3 Sandro is H2 Sandro (whether somebody likes it or not), much as it's entirely possible that H3 Alamar is H2 Alamar, etc... therefore there's very little to debate.

I do not deny that it is possible that the two Sandros are the same. But the extent and number of the problems caused by this are so great, that this being so is extremely implausible. These are the points that really matter here.

1. Sandro has not been Ethric's student for 20+ years according the Ethric; yet Sandro describes his old master as finally tracking him down. However, it is implausible that Ethric continued to search for Sandro for so long and did not manage to catch him, especially since he is a high-profile public figure, not a recluse in hiding.

2. Ethric's motives for wishing Sandro dead are to remove the blight on his career caused by Sandros becoming a Necromancer. However after 20+ years (decades), such a motive makes little sense because after so long Sandro would have already blighted his career such that his death now would not salvage the situation. Everyone would know who Sandro is and who taught him, so there would be nothing Ethric could do.

3. Since Sandro fought in Heroes II, alongside or against Gem or Crag Hack, it is extremely implausible that such characters would be so easily deceived by Sandro. For this to happen they would have to be ignorant of who he is, which given the limited selection of heroes in the ranks of any heroes game is beyond implausible.

4. Since Sandro has effectively assumed a cover identity, even if for some 'Hiding in Plain Sight' reason it is called Sandro, he would avoid making any real contact with Crag Hack or Gem (especially the latter). To do so would risk exposure; since no reason exists why he requires the artifacts to be collected by Crag Hack or Gem, he would have hired a local hero that is less likely to know who Sandro is to reduce the risk.

5. As Sandro is already an established Necromancer with a reputation, it is unlikely that he would not have managed to enter Deyja immediately upon arrival in the Contested Lands and conduct the search for the artifacts from there. Also Gem (and the consequent risk of exposure she represents) becomes an unnecessary liability given the artifacts are all in areas full of Deyjan forces anyway.

6. When Sandro remembers kidnapping and raping Jabarkas's daughter, he remembers it as happening several years ago in this region of Antagarich. However not only is this unlikely due to his undead condition (and would be a truly major Squick ) but several years is whatever it means is definitely not 20+ years. And Sandro was in Enroth before very recently.

7. Not only does Sandro a Liche show a sexual interest in Vidomina; but Vidomina shows a similar interest in Sandro. This means that physically he must have either not have been at least completely a Liche at all at that point, or that he had not been a Liche long enough to have assumed a properly skeletal form (and undead psychology perhaps). We know from images of Sandro from Heroes II/I that Sandro definitely has a fully skeletal form already.

While normally I would not think that Sandro is a different character but I have reasons. The very existence of the listed 7 problems is enough to call into question the claim that Heroes III Sandro is automatically the same character as the one in Heroes II.

Alamar by contrast is automatically the same character as the one in Heroes II because no problems are caused by them being the same person.

That is why there is a great deal to discuss. For the claim that the Sandro's are the same to hold weight you are going to either find solid evidence that they are the same character or eliminate the improbabilities by demonstrating them not to exist.

The claim by Ethric that Sandro left his tutalage 20+ years ago not only itself does not actually PROVE that they are the same character (a reference to his past in the succession wars would be needed), but still runs into nearly all of the 7 problems.

In fact since the only real way to get around problem 1 and 2, is to claim that Sandro was a recluse in hiding for 20+ years, Ethric being HONEST still means that they are probably different characters.

If there's any problem here it's that my case is so nigh-on impregnable that it risks shutting down the entire argument by it's mere existence.

[ThunderTitan]

PostPosted: 23 Nov 2010 21:06 Post subject:
ThunderTitan wrote:

Some people are american. 2 americans are confirmed as taking part in the Anglo-Zulu War. Thus all americans have taken part in the Anglo-Zulu War...

Yes, i have a problem, and it's name is logic...


If you think I have the problem with logic, just look at what you are saying!

You are trying to argue that Sandro of Heroes II is the same Sandro as the one in Heroes III.

Yet if you only accept written texts as canon and reject game-play, as Sandro does not appear in any written text in the Heroes II campaign, then Sandro DOESN'T EXIST.

Sandro has no existence except as one of the basic hero list of Heroes II. If that list is not canonical, then as a result there *is* no earlier Sandro to be the same character as the one in Heroes III, since the Sandro in Heroes II does not canonically exist.

Heroes II is the Succession Wars. If you reject the canonical status of the hero list of that game, then you have no Sandro to be the same character as the one in Heroes III.

Actually going by written text H3 Sandro has been to Enroth per his biography.


And the proper application of logic dictates that just because Gem is a confirmed participant in the Succession Wars it doesn't mean any other basic hero from H2 was... and it doesn't meant they weren't...

At this point it's an unknown, so it doesn't actually support either of our positions.

The point is that it's not something that supports your argument, no matter how much you want it to.

In fact since the only real way to get around problem 1 and 2, is to claim that Sandro was a recluse in hiding for 20+ years.

yeah, that's totally the only explanation...

[Macros the Black]

Logically, if Sandro is an acknowledge warlock/necromancer/lich who comes from Enroth, then he simply must have been involved in the Succession Wars. You think the Necromancers would let you choose? No. If you're part of the club, you have to fight for the cause. Thus, yes, Sandro played a part in the Succession Wars.

However, we do not know how big this part was that he played. Thus, even involved in the war as he was, he could still have been keeping a low profile. And even if he wasn't, then there were probably too much armies/orders/duties in the way of Ethric to try and take out Sandro. So I don't see why it's important that Sandro did or did not play a part in the Succession Wars. It doesn't help either of your arguments.

[ThunderTitan]

His argument is that H3 Sandro is a new character that was still alive when he first met Gem at the start of her campaign...

That would mean he couldn't have participated in the Succession Wars... so either it's another Sandro (and H3' Crag Hack is another Grag too, as i don't recall Gem saying anything about having heard of him either) or there was no Sandro in H2's canon.

[Macros the Black]

Regardless, Sandro could have been involved in the war yet not important enough for Gem to know about him. Crag Hack doesn't matter, the way the campain handles the dialogue between him and Sandro he comes off as extremely dumb and naive.

[Slayer of Cliffracers]

Actually going by written text H3 Sandro has been to Enroth per his biography.

And the proper application of logic dictates that just because Gem is a confirmed participant in the Succession Wars it doesn't mean any other basic hero from H2 was... and it doesn't meant they weren't...

At this point it's an unknown, so it doesn't actually support either of our positions.

The point is that it's not something that supports your argument, no matter how much you want it to.

It is not an unknown to me. It is known to me. Sandro appears as a hero in Heroes II, Heroes II is the story of the Succession Wars, thus Sandro took part in the Succession Wars as he appears in the list of heroes.

You cannot logically argue as you were trying to do, that Heroes II and Heroes III Sandro's are the same and reject the canonical status of the hero list of Heroes II as representing those heroes that were involved in the Succession Wars.

Because Sandro has no existence prior to Heroes III that is anything other than a member of the basic hero list. The same with Gem and Gelu.

The two Sandros cannot be the same character, because the Heroes II Sandro does not now canonically exist.

Logically, if Sandro is an acknowledge warlock/necromancer/lich who comes from Enroth, then he simply must have been involved in the Succession Wars. You think the Necromancers would let you choose? No. If you're part of the club, you have to fight for the cause. Thus, yes, Sandro played a part in the Succession Wars.

However, we do not know how big this part was that he played. Thus, even involved in the war as he was, he could still have been keeping a low profile. And even if he wasn't, then there were probably too much armies/orders/duties in the way of Ethric to try and take out Sandro. So I don't see why it's important that Sandro did or did not play a part in the Succession Wars. It doesn't help either of your arguments.

Macros, it matters little to me whether Heroes III Sandro took part in the Succession Wars in some minor way. The Heroes II Sandro is anything but low-profile, because he is a hero.

A hero is a commander of an entire army, the kind of person that determines by his or her success or failure the entire course of history. Heroes II Sandro *is* a hero.

There are very limited selection of people that are heroes in each game. Gem is also one of those limited people.

It is practically impossible for Gem and Crag Hack not to know who Sandro is, if Sandro is another hero and was involved in the Succession War simply because the pool of heroes is so small.

His argument is that H3 Sandro is a new character that was still alive when he first met Gem at the start of her campaign...

That would mean he couldn't have participated in the Succession Wars... so either it's another Sandro (and H3' Crag Hack is another Grag too, as i don't recall Gem saying anything about having heard of him either) or there was no Sandro in H2's canon.

Unless absence of evidence is evidence of absence I cannot see where Crag Hack comes into it.

There is only no Sandro in Heroes II canon only if you reject the notion that the Hero list of Heroes II has a canonical basis for determining those heroes that were involved canonically in the Succession Wars.

As I pointed out to you above, the only way that Heroes II and Heroes III can be the same character is if the Heroes II hero list has a canonical status. Since canonically speaking there's no such as Heroes II, only the Succession Wars, if Sandro is not a general in the succession wars like Gem, he doesn't exist.

Regardless, Sandro could have been involved in the war yet not important enough for Gem to know about him. Crag Hack doesn't matter, the way the campain handles the dialogue between him and Sandro he comes off as extremely dumb and naive.

Only if the two Sandro's are the same character. If they are not, there is no problem at all, they don't suspect him of being an evil Necromancer because they know Heroes II Sandro and know he is a different person.

Gem remembers the Heroes I Yog. And that was before the Succession Wars since Yog does not appear in Heroes II at all.

Gem is fooled precisely because she knows that this particular Sandro is a different person from the Heroes II character. It is also the case that Sandro must have been human when he met Gem; because Gem being a powerful sorceress should have been able to detect that Sandro is a Liche.

[Corlagon]

Now this is just a comment and not an argument, but as regards taking hero lists as fundamentally accurate at all costs:

• Yog is recruitable in Heroes Chronicles: Warlords of the Wasteland, based on the H3 engine and set over 1000 years before Heroes I. Does that mean Yog is part of the story of the game and we must rework the entire storyline to accomodate his presence there?
• The living Lord Haart is recruitable in some Armageddon's Blade maps, despite being killed at the end of Restoration of Erathia. Does that mean Lord Haart was both living and undead during Armageddon's Blade and we must rework the entire storyline to accomodate his presence there?
• It's possible to spring Lord Harke from prison in Heroes IV and have him running around the map before Elwin gets to the cliffs. Does that mean Lord Harke really escaped, the storyline as given in textboxes is wrong and we must rework reality to accomodate a million parallel universes?
• Roland Ironfist's character model was used in a Legends of Might and Magic trailer. Does that mean Roland was in the storyline, or that he was even in the game whatsoever?
• Maeve Falcon is recruitable in 969 YSD in Heroes V, despite having been killed over 200 years prior. Does that mean Maeve is part of the story of the main campaign and we must rework the entire storyline to accomodate his presence there?

Just for clarity, the correct answers are no. As people said before, there are game mechanics and then there is storyline. They aren't always entirely the same thing.

It's subjective as always, but I came up with a simple policy to deal with this kind of problem (to prevent messes in wiki):

• a hero is ALWAYS canonical if they have a role in the storyline. Archibald has a role in H2's storyline, therefore he's canon to Heroes II.
• a hero is ALWAYS canonical where first introduced to a game. Flint the Wizard was introduced in Heroes II: Succession Wars. Therefore he's canon to Heroes II, but NOT necessarily to the expansion pack, H2: Price of Loyalty. Drakonia was introduced in Price of Loyalty and therefore is canon to Price of Loyalty.
• a hero is canonical to the expansion packs IF they play a role in the storyline. Jeddite has a role in The Shadow of Death, so he's canon to the Shadow of Death.
• a hero is canonical to the expansion packs IF they're placed on a map. No matter how many times you restart it, Calh always appears in Oblivion's Edge, the last map of Armageddon's Blade, therefore he's canonical to Armageddon's Blade.
• a hero is NOT necessarily canonical if they're totally anachronistic. cf. all of the Heroes Chronicles and the maps in Heroes V which take place in various eras yet use the same heroes.

As such I would say Sandro is totally canon to Heroes II: The Succession Wars. I would also say all those weirdoes transferred to H1-2 from MM1-5 (such as Crodo, Maximus, Zam, Tyro, Kastore and so on) are all canon to it as well, despite never playing a story role.
I wouldn't, however, be caught insisting that this means "it is practically impossible for Succession War hero A not to know who Succession War hero B is". Sorry, but the enormous jump between fact and that conclusion is too far for me to traverse.

[Macros the Black]

The Heroes II Sandro is anything but low-profile, because he is a hero.

Wait, what?
Here's the bio on Rion (HoMM 3 Cleric):

Rion worked as a battlefield medic in the Erathian Military, but proved his ability to command when his captain was slain fighting the Kreegan hordes. Rion was able to outmaneuver the enemy long enough for reinforcements to arrive.

He's just a commander. Here's Adela:

Originally Adela only contributed her skills prior to battles. If she could not convince her commander to avoid a fight, she would at least prepare a blessing for the troops as they entered combat. She was given command of the Whitestone garrison.

Also just a commander in charge of a garrison. Of course, some of the heroes are more than just commanders, Sir Christian for instance. While his title is never mentioned in his bio, it is mentioned that his battlefield tactics are feared throughout the world. So even if he doesn't have a high rank either, he is certainly known. If HoMM 2 Sandro was like Sir Christian, "feared throughout the world" for his accomplishments in the Succession Wars, then Gem would have indeed known about him. And even then it doesn't mean she would actually recognise him. However, just the fact that he's a hero in HoMM 2 does NOT make him important.

I think it should be obvious that the heroes we can hire in the games are not the only characters of their caliber available in the lands. There's likely many more (especially if you can start counting them at the rank of "commander"), but gameplay mechanics and limited development time make it so only a few diverse ones are put in the game.

So even though Sandro is a hireable "hero" in HoMM 1 and 2, a very succesful puppetmaster in HoMM 3, the leader of the Necromancers in Might and Magic 8, and I don't know what he was doing in HoMM 4 actually, this does not mean he was also already well-known/powerful/important during HoMM 1 and/or 2.

After all, the campaign is called "RISE of the Necromancer", not "The new and also succeful schemes of Sandro who was already succesful before but just has to prove himself in this other continent now".

Only if the two Sandro's are the same character. If they are not, there is no problem at all, they don't suspect him of being an evil Necromancer because they know Heroes II Sandro and know he is a different person.

How would she know he's a different person?

Gem remembers the Heroes I Yog. And that was before the Succession Wars since Yog does not appear in Heroes II at all.

Yes, and then she goes ahead and confuses (according to you!) the Heroes I Yog with the Heroes 3 Yog. So again, how would she be able to tell it's another Sandro?

Gem is fooled precisely because she knows that this particular Sandro is a different person from the Heroes II character. It is also the case that Sandro must have been human when he met Gem; because Gem being a powerful sorceress should have been able to detect that Sandro is a Liche.

There's just too many assumptions involved with that argument. I could just as well counter in saying that Sandro is a powerful Liche and able to counter her detection attempt. Truth is, we don't even know if such spells exist or that either of them learned it (and Sandro would have been alot more likely to have invested time in learning such spells than Gem).

As for Sandro choosing to use Gem and Crag Hack for his schemes, it makes perfect sense to me that he would choose people he already knows can get things done.

[ThunderTitan]

It is not an unknown to me. It is known to me. Sandro appears as a hero in Heroes II, Heroes II is the story of the Succession Wars, thus Sandro took part in the Succession Wars as he appears in the list of heroes.

You cannot logically argue as you were trying to do, that Heroes II and Heroes III Sandro's are the same and reject the canonical status of the hero list of Heroes II as representing those heroes that were involved in the Succession Wars.

Because Sandro has no existence prior to Heroes III that is anything other than a member of the basic hero list. The same with Gem and Gelu.

The two Sandros cannot be the same character, because the Heroes II Sandro does not now canonically exist.

No, he does not canonically participate in the Succession Wars... but by H3's Sandro's bio he was in Enroth at some point... which is why his portrait is available at the tavern in H2... because he was around and someone might have hired him, or not.


Here's some reading material on the subject:
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/M ... dBreathing
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/M ... egregation

[tolich]

Sandro appears as a hero in Heroes II, Heroes II is the story of the Succession Wars, thus Sandro took part in the Succession Wars as he appears in the list of heroes.

Sandro appears as a Warlock hero in Heroes of Might and Magic: The Strategy Quest. He is Sandro first seen on the Darkside of Xeen in Necropolis. The fact that he have to finally die after achieving own heart cannot be ignored. Sandro of Heroes I and Heroes II is just a reference to Might and Magic serie, no more.

[Avonu]

To be honest we don't really know if he die or not. He simply "disappaered" after reciving heart saying something that he can finally die. But we didin't see any text that he died.
So it is POSSIBLE that he change his mind and somehow he land on Enroth.

[Slayer of Cliffracers]

Now this is just a comment and not an argument, but as regards taking hero lists as fundamentally accurate at all costs:

• Yog is recruitable in Heroes Chronicles: Warlords of the Wasteland, based on the H3 engine and set over 1000 years before Heroes I. Does that mean Yog is part of the story of the game and we must rework the entire storyline to accomodate his presence there?
• The living Lord Haart is recruitable in some Armageddon's Blade maps, despite being killed at the end of Restoration of Erathia. Does that mean Lord Haart was both living and undead during Armageddon's Blade and we must rework the entire storyline to accomodate his presence there?
• It's possible to spring Lord Harke from prison in Heroes IV and have him running around the map before Elwin gets to the cliffs. Does that mean Lord Harke really escaped, the storyline as given in textboxes is wrong and we must rework reality to accomodate a million parallel universes?
• Roland Ironfist's character model was used in a Legends of Might and Magic trailer. Does that mean Roland was in the storyline, or that he was even in the game whatsoever?
• Maeve Falcon is recruitable in 969 YSD in Heroes V, despite having been killed over 200 years prior. Does that mean Maeve is part of the story of the main campaign and we must rework the entire storyline to accomodate his presence there?

Just for clarity, the correct answers are no. As people said before, there are game mechanics and then there is storyline. They aren't always entirely the same thing.

Not necessary Corlagon. Several of your presumed problems aren't even problems at all. They simply establish certain things as being the case. Only where a problem cannot be plausibly resolved without directly contradicting canon does the game-play thing come into play.

1. Both Yog's are half-genies. Do you know how long a half-genie can live for? It could easily be the Heroes I Yog 1000 years earlier.
2. No, it simply means that Lord Haart was a TWIN. Lord Haart's first name is never mentioned only his surname. When his brother was executed for murdering King Gryphonheart; the twin inherited his titles, money, land etc.
3. Obviously you recaptured Lord Harke after re-uniting with Shaera! Only with Kalibarr however or the Troll Lord, you are right because they were canonically killed rather than captured.
4. ??????????????? Don't know anything about that. Might be right.
5. Maeve was never killed Corlagon (this is the entire plot). Jezebeth is not ALLOWED to finish killing Meave; because the Demon Sovereign intervenes to force Jezebeth to withdraw and spares her life. The basic canonical story is fairly complex, but I figured it out after about the 3rd rerun of the dialogue.

Maeve is not the Falcon heir, she is the MOTHER of the Falcon heir, a queen-regent for him. The Falcon heir is not IN Falcon's Reach as Jezebeth believed but in another city far away. This means that the Demons have failed in their plan to end the Falcon line.
Maeve's son is never again mentioned, this means that the Falcon line faded into obscurity since there was a Civil War in which the Falcon's were not a player (else it wouldn't have happened). This is where it gets clever.
Maeve was spared by the Demon Sovereign from Jezebeth because she knows the location of her son and the Demon Sovereign was relying upon Maeve fighting to uphold his right to the throne. With Falcon's Reach gone, that would then allow the Demon Sovereign to eliminate the son (because that's one part of the prophecy, Falcon Reach must go first).
The Demon Sovereign is very angry at Jezebeth, BECAUSE precisely by slaying Maeve she would essentially ensure the survival in obscurity of the Falcon line by ensuring that it stayed OFF the throne. Thus the prophecy is not fulfilled and the world survives.
Fortunately; Maeve figures this is exactly why she was spared and Jezebeth punished and so abandons her son, never visiting him again. Thus we never hear of the Falcon heir again or the Falcon line, but it survives somewhere and somehow.
She was supposed to seek power for her son and herself as regent! Because that is what the Demon Sovereign would have done! By not doing that she foils the Demon Sovereign's plan to eliminate the Falcon line and end the world.

As such I would say Sandro is totally canon to Heroes II: The Succession Wars. I would also say all those weirdoes transferred to H1-2 from MM1-5 (such as Crodo, Maximus, Zam, Tyro, Kastore and so on) are all canon to it as well, despite never playing a story role.
I wouldn't, however, be caught insisting that this means "it is practically impossible for Succession War hero A not to know who Succession War hero B is". Sorry, but the enormous jump between fact and that conclusion is too far for me to traverse.

If you merely analyzing facts without a shred of imagination and common sense perhaps it is too much to traverse.
We know that over the extent of entire continents for several years the same basic group of people are consistently re-employed by varied employers in varying regions.
If any heroes hired from taverns (actually Heroes II hires heroes in forts) were not famous and well known this situation would not occur. Every scenario would hire brand new heroes, not members of the same elite circle of individuals.

If it's common knowledge to every political organization in an entire continent who the small group of people you want to hire to lead your armies are, how likely is that then that these individuals who not only associate with said organizations don't know about the other heroes, especially since they are their allies and foes.
It is basically completely improbable that Crag Hack and Gem all don't know who Sandro is and Sandro doesn't know who either of them are.
Remember that only one of them needs to know who the other is for the whole thing falls apart.

Also just a commander in charge of a garrison. Of course, some of the heroes are more than just commanders, Sir Christian for instance. While his title is never mentioned in his bio, it is mentioned that his battlefield tactics are feared throughout the world. So even if he doesn't have a high rank either, he is certainly known. If HoMM 2 Sandro was like Sir Christian, "feared throughout the world" for his accomplishments in the Succession Wars, then Gem would have indeed known about him. And even then it doesn't mean she would actually recognise him. However, just the fact that he's a hero in HoMM 2 does NOT make him important.

A 'garrison' is not necessarily a map garrison Macros the Black. The local military forces of a region of Erathia are referred to as garrisons in the first Tatalia scenario of the Restoration of Erathia.
The bio refers to how Adela started out, in the Whitestone garrison. That is to say, she was originally hired by the political/military leader of that garrison as a hero.
However that is not where she is now. Obviously she managed to get sufficient fame by her achievements there to achieve the status of tavern hirable hero (what she is now).
Fame is an essential requirement of being a tavern hirable hero. A complete stranger cannot turn up and be given overall command of a major army of any political power. Try doing that in the real world and see where that gets you.

So even though Sandro is a hireable "hero" in HoMM 1 and 2, a very succesful puppetmaster in HoMM 3, the leader of the Necromancers in Might and Magic 8, and I don't know what he was doing in HoMM 4 actually, this does not mean he was also already well-known/powerful/important during HoMM 1 and/or 2.

After all, the campaign is called "RISE of the Necromancer", not "The new and also succeful schemes of Sandro who was already succesful before but just has to prove himself in this other continent now".

Again the only way the military system that prevails in Heroes games by which outsiders are immediately given supreme command over entire armies which must logically have lower ranking officers in them capable of promotion is if those outsiders are famous for their previous military achievements.
It's not about success Macros. It's about your success being known. These men and women are celebrities, that's why they can be tavern heroes. They only are trusted with great power and responsibilities by political organizations BECAUSE everyone knows about their great military accomplishments and obviously their identity.

Yes it's the RISE of the Necromancer. It's not the RETURN of the Necromancer. It's always great when other people decide to make your own arguments for you.

Yes, and then she goes ahead and confuses (according to you!) the Heroes I Yog with the Heroes 3 Yog. So again, how would she be able to tell it's another Sandro?

Yog has no role in Heroes II at all. Therefore the very fact that Gem makes the confusion is proof positive that she is able to remember heroes that were only involved in the big war after the last big one (Heroes I). So she should be able to remember Sandro who was involved in BOTH wars.
The confusion is made because Gem has not actually met the new Yog yet, but only knows his name and the rough description of him being a half-genie barbarian.
Sandro, Gem has met face to face. He makes no attempt to disguise his name. The reason she is so easily fooled is because she knows full well that this Sandro is a different one, because she has met both.
If you have two people and both called Terry you will normally assume that it is first Terry is it is referenced by a third party. But when you have actually met the second Terry, you will realize that they are a different person.
Especially when the 'first Terry' is a skeleton man and the second one is well a human being.

There's just too many assumptions involved with that argument. I could just as well counter in saying that Sandro is a powerful Liche and able to counter her detection attempt. Truth is, we don't even know if such spells exist or that either of them learned it (and Sandro would have been alot more likely to have invested time in learning such spells than Gem).

As for Sandro choosing to use Gem and Crag Hack for his schemes, it makes perfect sense to me that he would choose people he already knows can get things done.

We know that Sandro can quickly conceal his skeletal appearance under an illusion spell thus fooling people into thinking he is not undead. If however even some Liche's are BOTH able to assume any identity they wish and the most powerful spell-casters are unable to detect that they are Liches or dispel the illusion, then said Liches are now invincible.
Why conquer Erathia when you can simply 'replace' the King of Erathia? Have a problem doing that, then why not disguise yourself as someone close to him?

Gem hates the undead Macros. Of all the people likely to have studied means of exposing Liches Gem is one of the most likely to have done so.
Reason is simple, if you are enemy of the undead and Liches can disguise themselves under Illusions, you have to be able to detect and dispel this or else you are toast. As certain dwarves found out in the 3rd Mission of Rise of the Necromancer I may add.

[ThunderTitan]

2. No, it simply means that Lord Haart was a TWIN.

Wow, a soap opera staple as an argument, that's lame even by your standards...

[Slayer of Cliffracers]

2. No, it simply means that Lord Haart was a TWIN.

Wow, a soap opera staple as an argument, that's lame even by your standards...

I am not arguing with Corlagon, I generally agree with him on principle here as to what is canon. I was just pointing out that his arguments are a lot weaker than he apparently realizes, because there are simple solutions to the problems (or in the 5th argument Maeve surviving is the entire point of the story).

We don't know what Lord Haarts first name is. We don't know of any other heroes that are twins. There is a fairly decent probability that one of the heroes is a twin.

It only becomes a lame argument if I use it too often that given the number of heroes that it becomes implausible. But since I have only used it once, so it is hardly lame.

[Secret_Holder]

No, it's a lame argument already. There is no evidence to support this hypothesis.
You're reaching, my dear.