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

[Shasarak]

Umm, how are you not using your personal likes or dislikes to judge canon? You don't like the changes to Forgotten Realms, thus don't accept those changes. You don't like the changes to elves, thus reject Eladrin. You do like the changes to Dragonlance and thus accept the changes. I'm still confused what the difference is.

When I look at story changes I have to consider; 1) does this use something that exists already even if it maybe in a new way. If it does then usually it is going to be OK. For example Szass Tam turning Thay into an Undead wasteland. This seems like it could be plausible canon change even though it goes against what I would prefer. 2) if it does not already exist, is it plausible that it may have possibly existed just not previously mentioned. The Shadovar fall into this category for me, creatures that as far as I was aware did not previously exist but it is possible that they were just living in the Plane of Shadow until now.

But what about Eladrin? They did exist on the Planes so it is possible for them to travel to Forgotten Realms like the Shadovar. But they did not, instead all High Elves were revealed to be actually Eladrin all this time. Surprise! Bet you did not see that coming after all those years of Forgotten Realming.

So Eladrin fail both the canon change test as well as my personal bs sniff test.

The Dragonlance canon I have explained already so no need to belabor that tired point again.

 

[Shasarak]

See, this right here, is what I'm talking about. Cherry picking lore and ignoring other facts. Like the "magic user" that casts feather fall is a GOD. Good grief, it's nod and wink Deus Ex Machina written straight into the books. Fizban wasn't a magic user. He was Paladine. Not even an avatar of Paladine either. Straight up a god stepping in and changing things. I'm fairly comfortable with breaking any rule you like when you add a god into your party.

Yes a God specifically pretending to be a senile old wizard who can not even appear to cast a simple first level feather fall spell properly. You dont see Tasslehoff jumping up and down about a mysterious storm of feathers appearing and breaking his sense of belief do you? No because no one really knows what Wizards can do - especially if the main Wizard that you know is a paranoid cynical guy who would trade his own soul for more power. I would say that your Fighter character would also have no idea what the difference is between different Wizards which would make this a meta-game problem.

And who killed Paladine? Raistlin killed Paladine? When? Age of Mortals is set after Dragons of Summer Chaos and the gods have retreated from Krynn. Here's a bit of canon lore I was completely unaware of.

Raistlin killed them in Test of the Twins. Well that is he does briefly before Tasslehoff retcons everything back to normal again.

 

[Shasarak]

Shasarak has their own opinions on what is OK and what's not and so do you and both of you are equally valid. You only disagree because lore changed. If FR was more or less the same FR or if DL was more or less the same DL, this wouldn't be a disagreement.

Come on, one of us has actually read the books so surely not equally valid!

 

[Hussar]

When I look at story changes I have to consider; 1) does this use something that exists already even if it maybe in a new way. If it does then usually it is going to be OK. For example Szass Tam turning Thay into an Undead wasteland. This seems like it could be plausible canon change even though it goes against what I would prefer. 2) if it does not already exist, is it plausible that it may have possibly existed just not previously mentioned. The Shadovar fall into this category for me, creatures that as far as I was aware did not previously exist but it is possible that they were just living in the Plane of Shadow until now.

But what about Eladrin? They did exist on the Planes so it is possible for them to travel to Forgotten Realms like the Shadovar. But they did not, instead all High Elves were revealed to be actually Eladrin all this time. Surprise! Bet you did not see that coming after all those years of Forgotten Realming.

So Eladrin fail both the canon change test as well as my personal bs sniff test.

The Dragonlance canon I have explained already so no need to belabor that tired point again.

So, basically, it's just the name. Had they just called Eladrin, "High Elves" then all your problems would go away? It's not the magical end of things, nor the background, just simply that they repurposed a monster?

 

[Hussar]

Yes a God specifically pretending to be a senile old wizard who can not even appear to cast a simple first level feather fall spell properly. You dont see Tasslehoff jumping up and down about a mysterious storm of feathers appearing and breaking his sense of belief do you? No because no one really knows what Wizards can do - especially if the main Wizard that you know is a paranoid cynical guy who would trade his own soul for more power. I would say that your Fighter character would also have no idea what the difference is between different Wizards which would make this a meta-game problem.

Of COURSE it's a meta-game problem. How could it not be? Note, trying to cast a Feather Fall spell and getting a bunch of feathers isn't something a wild mage could do either. Everyone at the table knows this. And, of course, you're also ignoring the actual canon of the setting which retcons wild mages into the setting through the Greygem.

But, again, why are you arguing with me? I'm not the one insisting settings can't change. I have ZERO problem with changing the setting. Bringing in a wild mage in no way bothers me at all. If I didn't have an issue with a kender cleric, I'm certainly not going to have an issue with a wild mage.

Canon doesn't matter. You're saying it yourself. Canon is flexible and can be changed. Even your own "sniff tests" prove that. If canon was actually important, in and of itself, ANY change would be problematic. But, as you say, so long as you can justify the change in your own head, then it's not problem. Thus, canon is largely unimportant.

Raistlin killed them in Test of the Twins. Well that is he does briefly before Tasslehoff retcons everything back to normal again.

Been a long time since I read the books. I had forgotten that. Of course, it does kinda point to the idea that the gods are kinda important in the setting. If they weren't, then why would the author change things back? What is the lesson we're supposed to take from this? That we can challenge the gods in the setting? Or that the gods are part and parcel to the setting and any challenge to the gods is ultimately going to fail? I'd say that the message is pretty clear here.

I think that's an important point that's been floating through this thread. Settings are more than just dates and places. Things like theme and conceit are also VERY important to the setting. Feel is just as important as fact. Letting Raistlin kill both the major gods of the setting would feel very out of place in the setting would it not?

 

[pemerton]

Is the character authentic in your opinion? Fantastic. You want to present an authentic setting character? Great. Make me believe it. Make me a believer that this character is authentic.

I like this. It elevates the actual play of the game over the GM's prep for the game. That fits with the way I prefer to use background etc.

So, basically, it's just the name. Had they just called Eladrin, "High Elves" then all your problems would go away? It's not the magical end of things, nor the background, just simply that they repurposed a monster?

I think there is also an objection that they could teleport all this time.

Which is different from them being able to cantrip all this time - because the latter is just harking back to the OD&D days where they could take off their armour once a day and cast a spell. (Or something like that - it's hard to keep track of what is acceptable and unacceptable change.)

 

[Hussar]

On a completely unrelated note, I'd just like to say that I'm very, very impressed with how civil this entire conversation has remained, by and large. We're way past the point where things should be discussed, but, this discussion has remained (IMO) very productive. No one is accusing each other of "missing the point" or "misrepresenting arguments" or any of that other semantic crap that usually bogs down these conversations.

While recognizing that we're all pretty passionate about our respective positions (after 600 posts, we've left anyone else behind ), I do find this conversation quite illuminating. I honestly, and I mean this in all seriousness, don't really "get" the need for canon. I'm not a nostalgic person. I'm really not. I have zero problems changing, dropping, folding, spindling or mauling any lore or canon that comes my way.

I mean, heck, I haven't even RUN a Primeval Thule campaign yet and I'm already changing, adding, subtracting and otherwise retooling various parts of the setting. For me, a campaign setting and it's accompanying lore is just the starting point. It serves to spark creativity, but, otherwise, has little value in itself. I simply don't care.

So, it is such a foreign country for me to talk to people who actually DO care about lore and care enough about it that changes actually affect their enjoyment of the game.

 

[Maxperson]

But if accepting lore changes is subjective and arbitrary, then canon has no actual value in and of itself. It's never, "Well, I like this change, but, it's different from what came before, so, we shouldn't change this". Which is precisely what I've been saying all the way along. "This isn't canon, thus it's bad" is just a way to attempt to justify personal preferences from an unassailable position. Instead of simply saying, "I don't like X" which is perfectly fine, the person insisting on canon is taking it a step further and saying, "I don't like X, therefore you CAN'T have X".

I disagree. It still has value. Let's take steak. You might like all steak. I might not like round steak and chuck steak. Shasarak might only like porterhouse. No matter which way we like it, it still has the value of being steak. That differentiates it from chicken and fish.

No matter how you use it, canon has value. The only time it really won't have any value is if you don't use any of it at all. Eberron canon is worthless to me since I don't run the setting.

But, for someone to come out and tell you or me or anyone else, "No, sorry, you can't have that because it doesn't fit with previous canon" is completely disingenuous. It has NOTHING to do with whether or not it's canon and EVERYTHING to do with whether or not that observer likes the changes.

It's actually both. It has to do with canon AND whether the DM likes the changes.

 

[Maxperson]

Yes a God specifically pretending to be a senile old wizard who can not even appear to cast a simple first level feather fall spell properly. You dont see Tasslehoff jumping up and down about a mysterious storm of feathers appearing and breaking his sense of belief do you? No because no one really knows what Wizards can do - especially if the main Wizard that you know is a paranoid cynical guy who would trade his own soul for more power. I would say that your Fighter character would also have no idea what the difference is between different Wizards which would make this a meta-game problem.

To be fair, it wasn't a spell that Fizban failed to cast properly. It was more of a failed initiative roll and Fizban hit the ground before the spell finished its casting time, resulting in only the feather portion of the spell.

 

[Maxperson]

Been a long time since I read the books. I had forgotten that. Of course, it does kinda point to the idea that the gods are kinda important in the setting. If they weren't, then why would the author change things back? What is the lesson we're supposed to take from this? That we can challenge the gods in the setting? Or that the gods are part and parcel to the setting and any challenge to the gods is ultimately going to fail? I'd say that the message is pretty clear here.

Because in the process of killing them and becoming a god, Raistlin destroyed much of the world and could not create to fix it. He abandoned his plan after being shown the pain and destruction he would bring to Krynn, not because Paladine and Takhisis are important to the setting.