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

[jayoungr]

Alternate universe? As in a completely independent unique universe? Or would "altered timeline" be a better description? I'm guessing the latter. They are connected. As you even admit.

Actually, "parallel universe" is the term I should have used. Like the one in Mirror, Mirror where everyone is evil and/or has facial hair. The important part is that nothing that happens in the Abrams universe changes anything that happened in the original TV series, because they don't touch each other. The only point of connection ("old Spock") would come long after any of the original TV shows or even the movies.

 

[Corwin]

Actually, "parallel universe" is the term I should have used. Like the one in Mirror, Mirror where everyone is evil and/or has facial hair.

So even ST:TOS broke its own canon?!?! Sacrilege!!!

The important part is that nothing that happens in the Abrams universe changes anything that happened in the original TV series, because they don't touch each other.

Not even any of the countless novels, comic books, cartoons, etc.? Nothing has ever touched on "old man Spock"? Are you certain of that?

The only point of connection ("old Spock") would come long after any of the original TV shows or even the movies.

...so far. Careful.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[I'm A Banana]

No, it doesn't. Changes in the canon (the lore) keeps something relevant.

A thing doesn't need to change to keep relevant. The Odyssey is still relevant, and that's probably older than words. Gilgamesh is still relevant. The Tale of Genji is still relevant. Go and Shogi and Chess and Chutes & Ladders and Tetris are still relevant.

All you've been doing is cherrypicking sole examples like Guernica. The Killing Joke, instead of Batman. This would be similar to saying, "You know what, I think Detective Comics #27 is the Bat-Man, and I don't want them re-writing it.

They should never do another Bat-Man comic again!

Except they did. And it spoke to different people, at different times, in different ways- by emphasizing different parts of what "Batman" is.

This isn't cherry-picking. It's because "Batman" has changed so much and so dramatically the word "Batman" doesn't have much intrinsic meaning anymore. If I say "I like Batman", maybe I'm only talking about Detective Comics #27! Maybe I'm talking about Nolan's Dark Knight. Maybe I'm talking about Adam West. Maybe I'm talking about The Animated Series. Maybe I'm talking about The Killing Joke. You can't know unless you get more details. The word itself doesn't signify much.

ST:TOS isn't the same as ST:TNG or STS9. The same "canon" speaks differently, to different people. The same "canon" from LoTR is used differently, depending on whether you're reading just the basic books, all of the expanded works of Tolkien, playing an RPG, or watching the movies.

Things change. Sometimes Superman is an allegory for the immigrant experience. Sometimes it is a useful way of exploring teenage angst and (ahem) alienation. Sometimes Superman is just a canvas for Zack Snyder to poop on.

I'm not disputing that change happens, I'm articulating one of the negative effects (costs) of change happening in TTRPGs, and so why changes should be more carefully considered than they often seem to be.

If they re-published Detective Comics #27 and revised it entirely to be a Frank Miller style Batman, wouldn't that make it harder to talk about what Batman was like in that issue?

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Shasarak]

Rather, it's the internet nerd empowerment theory. The idea that people (such as you, or me) feel empowered to tell the creators of the works what is, and isn't, canon, because we think we know better than the people doing the writing.

There is also an accepted phenomenon where the author has read the same chapter so often that they do not notice things that a brand new reader would. They literally see what they want to see rather then what they have actually written.

And also there is a danger when you get so close to the work that you could go shooting off into directions that you may not necessarily have chosen if you had more clarity and distance.

 

[Corwin]

There is also an accepted phenomenon where the author has read the same chapter so often that they do not notice things that a brand new reader would. They literally see what they want to see rather then what they have actually written.

I don't see the relevance to the topic here. Sorry. Please expound a bit if you'd be so kind.

And also there is a danger when you get so close to the work that you could go shooting off into directions that you may not necessarily have chosen if you had more clarity and distance.

And it *still* becomes the creator's creation. Besides, some truly great and original works have come from such behavior.

 

[Shasarak]

I don't see the relevance to the topic here. Sorry. Please expound a bit if you'd be so kind.

Well, lowkey13 claims that the people creating the canon know better then the people reading the canon. But what if the people creating the canon think they have written something that they actually have not written? Or they did write it originally but it was edited before publishing and they remember the first draft rather then the official published "canon". Or if they wrote it ten years ago and therefore can not remember it as well as someone who has just finished reading the whole series yesterday. Or if the creator gets told by the editor that they need to fit in the new hotness into their work.

I listened to a podcast by Bob Salvatore where he admitted using a forum to find out what equipment some of his own characters had that he could not remember himself.

So does the creator know canon better then a fan? Not necessarily no.

And it *still* becomes the creator's creation. Besides, some truly great and original works have come from such behavior.

Yes and no. Look at how many sequels do as well as the original. Take the movie Highlander for example - that was a great original movie that spawned a good TV series and yet they never did a sequel movie. And think about the Matrix movie and how good it would have been if they did a sequel to that.

 

[Shasarak]

*And technically, anything that WoTC puts out that is Dragonlance will become canon. I hope you like it.

I dont think that is our time line.

 

[Corwin]

Ah, okay. Thanks for clarifying. In that case...

Sure fans can *know* canon as well, or even better, than the creator. Of course. But a fan cannot *create* canon. Not without the consent of the creator. Nor override what a creator decides his creation's canon should, or shall, be. Fair?