Originally Posted by
kyoryu
Not directly, but it
Okay, so let's start with kyoryu's rule. People make reasonable decisions based on their goals and knowledge.
Why would someone tell the Seelie what the Fomori are planning?
Well, they would if they wanted the Seelie to help, they had the information, they knew that the info would get the Seelie to help, and they knew that giving the info wouldn't harm them.
We can reasonably safely discount the first one - there were there to get help.
They had the information, but if they didn't remember the info, that would explain it.
If they didn't know the information would get the Seelie to help, that would also explain it.
If they had reason to suspect that giving the info might bite them in the butt, that would also explain it. You know it wouldn't, but they don't. And I'd say based on your descriptions of things that your games have a high tendency to have unforeseen blowback from seemingly innocent actions - at least that's the impression that I get, and I suspect your players would agree. That kind of gaming, even if it's not the case here tends to breed players that are very careful about what they do, since they don't know what is or is not a land mine to avoid stepping on.
So that gives us a few explanations. First, and simplest, is that they just forgot about the attack. If they forgot about it, they wouldn't mention it, even if you told them.
If they didn't know it would help, and especially if they also didn't know it woudn't harm them, they might also be cagey with the info. To them, the attack was effectively irrelevant - they didn't know where the Seelie had a stronghold, and couldn't know. If the Fomori were instead planning on attacking something completely unrelated to the Seelie, would you have been as confused as to why they didn't divulge that info? That's understandable, but if so, that's very much a clue that you're expecting them to make decisions based on your knowledge.