D&D 5E Do you care about setting "canon"?

[Remathilis]

Cannon never survives contact with the PCs.

That said, my rule of thumb is "unless it affects the game I'm playing at the moment, its canon" rule. I mean, DC and Marvel can't keep their continuity straight with setting bibles and the like, why should I worry about it. Otherwise, it happened somewhere offf screen and I don't worry about it.

 

[flametitan]

I jumped back and forth when I first picked up the game. At first I was going to use the starter set as a jumping off point for my own world, but I backtracked when I realized there was a world Neverwinter was "supposed to" inhabit. After that I wanted t hew as close to canon as possible.

After a couple years to think about it, I started to care less about canon, and will gladly change things for my own ends. Sadly, I don't feel like I can recapture my own enthusiasm, and use the starter set for my own world like I originally planned.

 

[Shiroiken]

For me, it depends on the setting. I usually try to stick to the original concept of the setting designer, but as I'll show, that vision is often corrupted for the desires of the company. When that happens, I often ignore the corruption and use only what I like.

Greyhawk was intended by EGG to be a static setting. The folio/boxed set would start everyone at the same time frame, and then individual DMs would add to the setting the events would be determined by the DM and Players. Adventures referenced each other, so that you could advance the plot with them, but only if you ran them (only the players' actions really advanced the story). All other products were going to expand the world beyond the Flanaess (those were never made, unfortunately). This was EGG's vision, and so I run what is called Gygaxian Greyhawk, where no product or information after EGG's ousting is canon. This leaves very little canon, comparably, so it's only partially canon.

Realms was intended by Ed to be an expanding story, especially considering it was a story setting before a D&D setting. This is why the Realms has a glut of novels and stories that are all canon. The downside of this is twofold: it's hard for a DM to actually have perfect Realmslore, and some of it really sucks. DMs can just run it as best they can, using the knowledge they have and minimizing the canon they don't like. I don't run Realms often, but I try very hard to expand my Realmslore for when I do (I've read a ton of the novels, but I've not read much of the sourcebooks because I can't find them).

Rokugan was the "official" Oriental Adventures during 3E, but was eventually sold back to AEG by WotC. Unlike most settings, Rokugan did not have a single designer, even from the beginning. John Wick is generally consider the father of the setting, but since it was a CCG setting before an RPG setting, John Zinser, Dave Seay, and Dave Williams had a lot of input. Wick was only involved with the first story arc, and most story arcs have had it's own story writer, so "designer intent" is very, very vague. Because of this, the story arcs very wildly, and it makes canon somewhat of a mess. In general, I use mostly Wick's work as history, then ignore the second story arc (which I thought was pretty stupid) replacing it with my own, incorporating aspects I liked from later writers (such as the Spider Clan and Daigotsu).

 

[Sunseeker]

Yes.

Because I've seen what happens to a game and it's setting when the creators start ignoring canon. It's not pretty.

 

[GameOgre]

Cannon is great when its a movie or book series.

In a RPG cannon is actually something to avoid. As a DM you should steal every single idea,story,npc,spell,God, magical Item,place,person or thing that will make your game a better game.

 

[DMZ2112]

Historically I've only ever used published settings as inspiration and for occasional multiversal jaunts to shake things up in a ~100% homebrew game, but within the last three years I've started two games very heavily based in 'official' canon.

The first is a Planescape game, the stated goal of which is to get some direct use out of my complete collection of books. The second is a Dragonlance game, which I started with a group of adult players almost completely new to D&D. Dragonlance provided an easily accessible source of lore for the players to use in character development for which they were not dependent on me and my writing speed.

My attempts to cleave to Planescape canon have been a disaster, and the campaign has almost completely destroyed any love I once had for the setting. Even immediately discarding the more labrynthine mechanical conceits, deeply engaging the thematic design of the setting has really exposed all of its 90s-era RPG warts.

On the other hand my Dragonlance campaign has been a dream. The characters are in Solamnia toward the close of the War of the Lance and much of my fun comes from adapting the canon to their activities and having them interact with events and NPCs when they cross paths with the original story.

What I've learned from these experiences is that it is as important to let go of bad canon as it is to embrace good canon. Good canon turns a setting into a home. Bad canon frustrates dungeon masters and players alike.

If you really want to run a enjoyable campaign in an established setting, you need to recognize which is which and be willing to act accordingly. Be flexible; don't fear to use someone else's ideas when they give your player characters a firm place to stand tall, but if something official is going to install a ceiling that forces them to kneel, cut it mercilessly.

 

[Ath-kethin]

I tend to stick with canon that a) is in the core book for whatever setting I'm using and B) I remember off the top of my head when it is relevant. I can't afford to buy everything published for any setting, and there's no way I will remember everything anyway.

That said, 'canon' material is what defines a setting. If I'm not going to use any of it, why would I pick that setting? Hell, if I'm not going to use any of the canon, AM I really picking that setting?

 

[Remathilis]

Not at all. Don't want to. My FR games are a hodgepodge of stuff from every edition that takes place pre ToT, is humanocentric, less "powered up" and has a gritty S&S Wilderlands-esque feel. Its also devoid of all the Novel concepts of ultra powerful people and gods directly involved in day to day life. Edit- back in the dawn of 3.0 I wrote my own revision of the ToT/FR. I will have to see if I can find the file again and post.

My Nentir Vale games are devoid of the Dragonborn,Tieflings, half-anythings, and essentially is a region of The Known World as glimpsed in the original Expert rulebook, and early B/X adventures.

Canon lawyers drive me crazy and I always forewarn players if they are those types who would be offended by me deviating from official materials. Generally I avoid rule and setting lawyers, period.

Can I ask what the advantage of call either of those setting "Forgotten Realms" or "Nentir Vale" is then?

I mean, your pretty much home-brewing a setting, but stealing proper-nouns and perhaps a few maps. Why not go the extra mile and make it your own with your own names and places? At least nobody playing would have an expectation of cannon or setting knowledge.

I mean, if I tell you I'm going to run a STAR-TREK game, but I'm replacing Romulans with the Galactic Empire (complete with Sith and Death Star), weakening the Federation so that is a collection of infighting planetary states, making Cylons a playable race, and having them face Reapers from Firefly as primary antagonists, can I really say I'm playing STAR TREK anymore?

 

[Greg K]

Importance of canon and what I consider canon depend upon the setting in question. Canon is also only important for establishing the base setting and lore (pantheons, races, cultures, etc.). It is to be diverged from once play begins.

Greyhawk: It is the original folio, original boxed set, the deities Gygax presented in Dragon Magazine (so no Suel Pantheon), and bits of information on various cultures that appeared in Dragon (e.g., the culture information that appeared in the Barbarian class).

Forgotten Realm: Canon for me is the original grey box set, the 1e FR series of supplements, some early 1e articles by Ed Greenwood, and a 2e supplements from the 2e FOR supplement line. Nothing from the Time of Troubles onward

Al Qadim: Arabian Adventures book, Land of Fate boxed set and anything by Jeff Grubb

Darksun: Only the original boxed set and 1e articles by Timothy Brown

Ravenloft: Only the Realms of Terror boxed set and a few of its supplements.

Furthermore, any additional canon added by Planescape, Spelljammer, novels or late 2e and beyond is automatically ignored by me.

 

[The_Gneech]

I port stuff I like into my homebrew world, so canon isn't really an issue. I've got a "Sword Coast"-ish area, a "Bissell and Barrier Peaks"-ish area, a "Zamora and Stygia"-ish area, and so on. The world's "canon" is internally consistent (mostly) but the rest is mostly name-checks to give the world a context.

-The Gneech