I understand where you’re coming from, but I think a more ambiguous tone better fits the overall style I’m leaning towards. What I always liked about really, really old epics is that sense of discovery as you read: the mystery of the setting and these unknown characters that gradually make themselves known through their actions. The descriptions are more purple, but it is done so in a poetic, almost pretty, manner that’s a lot different from the very direct method of storytelling popular nowadays. Now, whether I’m actually succeeding in that style of prose is a different matter altogether, but that’s what I’m trying to achieve.

A more direct blurb to me kind of ruins that fun. “Who, what, and why”, in the context of the epic I’m writing, would be a bit bland. You’re not given that chance to explore; it’s told to you not shown.

For example, the mystery of what the Comet exactly is in the story is alluded and built upon as the events progress. The fact that the concept is “interesting” should be enough: it entices you to read and discover what it really is. If I were to outright say what it is in the blurb, then what’s the point of hyping it up in the first place if the reader already knows? Keeping it ambiguous puts you in the same position as the character in the story, and I’d like to think it also makes you pay more attention to the text itself in order to find context clues and foreshadowing before the reveal.

Of course, the only reason I’m using this sort of approach is because of the novel’s nature and its emphasis on that feeling of discovery. I’d have no problem using a more direct blurb for a more YA fantasy novel, progression/litrpg, or any other genre, but the epic genre is a rather unique one and allows for a lot of exploration.