Yes. in 5e there is no "canon". It's up to the DM to decide what is and is not canon in their version of the FR.
As a matter of fact, during the Spellplague era (4e), Chult was an island.understanding FR canon has been an important part of that (e.g. writing "the island of Chult" would be a misleading faux paus because Chult is an archipelago).
To answer your question, topic creator, you can ask Ed Greenwood on Twitter and he may have an answer for you. He is usually pretty good with that stuff. His Twitter handle is @TheEdVerse .
Thanks for the tip guys.That trivia dealt with, the important point: I concur with the suggestion you ask Ed Greenwood. It's his world and he might have some ideas knocking around that he hasn't put into print.
You start by mentioning the person you are asking the question. Then you pose the question. If you want examples, go to the profile of whoever you are asking and check their replies to others. That way you can see how they asked the questions.Thanks for the tip guys.I have a Twitter account, but I'm not too well versed in Twitter etiquette (Twitterquette?). Is the proper way to pose question to create a message and then address that to TheEdVerse? Or do I post a tweet to my account with my question (making sure to keep it under 280 characters) and mention @TheEdVerse?
Thanks. I tweeted my question to Ed Greenwood and Robert Schwalb...You start by mentioning the person you are asking the question. Then you pose the question. If you want examples, go to the profile of whoever you are asking and check their replies to others. That way you can see how they asked the questions.
Actually, I would disagree with this assessment. As far as I can tell... there ARE multiple "Nine Hells". Every single thing in D&D in WotC's "multiverse" theory has infinite multiples of everything. It's due to the top-down meta perspective-- the "Nine Hells" that I use in my campaign is not the same "Nine Hells" that you might use in your campaign is not the same "Nine Hells" that are written about in Descent Into Avernus. Just like standard real-world multiverse theory... every one is just slightly different than each other because each of our games and each person who writes a new book changes things ever-so-slightly. There isn't one set "canon" because it isn't possible to make one.
- 5e assumes a shared multiverse between different campaign settings (as exemplified in the new Eberron book). This suggests that the Nine Hells are the Nine Hells; there is not a Nine Hells (Faerûn verse), a Nine Hells (Oerth verse), a Nine Hells (Krynn verse), etc. It's just the Nine Hells. Similarly with the Astral Plane and Tu'narath.
I believe all articles in the 4e era of Dungeon and Dragon magazines were considered "canon," at least that is my recollection. So that would makes Scales of War Canon. Did they change anything regarding what happened in SoW in 5e? I don't think we have information on that at this time.A couple things that make me wonder about its canonicity...
- There are examples of articles from Dungeon magazine being considered canon.
But of course... if your tweet to Ed receives a different opinion, then go with whatever he says.
NoDid Ed Greenwood write any of the Scales of War adventures?