D&D General WotC: Novels & Non-5E Lore Are Officially Not Canon

At a media press briefing last week, WotC's Jeremey Crawford clarified what is and is not canon for D&D.

"For many years, we in the Dungeons & Dragons RPG studio have considered things like D&D novels, D&D video games, D&D comic books, as wonderful expressions of D&D storytelling and D&D lore, but they are not canonical for the D&D roleplaying game."

"If you’re looking for what’s official in the D&D roleplaying game, it’s what appears in the products for the roleplaying game. Basically, our stance is that if it has not appeared in a book since 2014, we don’t consider it canonical for the games."

2014 is the year that D&D 5th Edition launched.

He goes on to say that WotC takes inspiration from past lore and sometimes adds them into official lore.

Over the past five decades of D&D, there have been hundreds of novels, more than five editions of the game, about a hundred video games, and various other items such as comic books, and more. None of this is canon. Crawford explains that this is because they "don’t want DMs to feel that in order to run the game, they need to read a certain set of novels."

He cites the Dragonlance adventures, specifically.

 

[GreyLord]

There is a difference between the D&D roleplaying game and the campaign settings canon. In regards to the game, nothing is canon prior to 2014, and that SHOULD make sense to everyone. What may have been canon in regards to the D&D game (for example, Warlocks operated vastly different in 2006 than they did in 2012 and from what they do in 2021) is not canon now. This probably could also in many ways apply to the game campaigns run in certain campaign worlds (a Warlock's magic in how it is described in a FR realms book written a decade ago may operate completely different in some ways then it would in relation to the game rules in 2021 for example).

HOWEVER...as per campaign setting canon...that could be a little bit more...nebulous.

For example, many talk about Forgotten Realms...but for many, without Ed Greenwood's stamp of approval...NOTHING is canon unless he says it is okay (and then there are those that are more fanatical which try to align themselves to whatever is canon to his game...or what they think is canon in his game period...which excludes a lot of other material).

ON the otherhand you have worlds which are not beholden to a singular author or creator...of which Ravenloft is probably an example. Here you probably have more leeway, but you still have fans that will demand you stick to the older works that are written as well.

Then you have those that are sort of in between. Greyhawk could fall in this, where most who are fans would want the original ideas of Gygax to stick, but don't care too much about the history or materials written after that unless it is the very hardcore of fans.

You also have the wierd ones which are sort of like Ravenloft is, but a set of authors are considered by many fans the definitive curators of canon for it, even if they are not truly considered the canon holder of it...such as Dragonlance's relation to Weiss and Hickman.

In regards to the game itself though, the statement makes complete sense. This does not necessarily mean they are scrapping the canon of campaign settings (From my interpretation of the statement), only that they are not necessarily beholden to it in every situation (as Ravenloft's new release aptly shows). I think they understand though, that they cannot simply toss out the canon of every campaign setting because, as shown above, they are not always the ones that are actually in control of what others consider canon or not.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Unless it was an answer to a specific question, as this came out at a press event. It's dangerous to assume context.

True, but I stand by my opinion here.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

This isn't new news. WotC have always (at least since 5e) said "there is no canon", this is just restating that.

My take from them stressing the point now is there will be a Dragonlance setting book next year, and it will make significant changes. (We already knew about the drow changes).

 

[Faolyn]

Exactly. I mean, Crawford's stance is reasonable, but ultimately it has no effect on our games.

Maybe it's for people who sell on DM's Guild?

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Maybe it's for people who sell on DM's Guild?

Good point.

 

[RFB Dan]

I would imagine that WotC will make changes on a case-by-case basis. Wild changes to the Dragonlance Chronicles wouldn't be prudent from a business sense, but snips along the edges (like with Ravenloft) can fix some stuff that maybe got out of hand in the past. To me this whole is a reminder of "we haven't forgotten about the old settings." That's the real takeaway for me. If some changes being made is the cost to finally seeing new products for Mystara, Greyhawk, Dragonlance, Birthright, etc. I'm on board.

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

Not sure that I buy that it was the majority of old school Ravenloft fans (and even if that were the case, considering D&D's demographics both going younger and getting bigger, that would not be a significant population). As someone that has his original and well-used Realm of Terror boxed set right behind me, I just can't see getting worked up over Wizards updating a bunch of filler domains to actually be interesting, and other domains to be less racist.

The majority of the DnD audience? No
The majority of old school Ravenloft fans? Yes

Same. It was demeaning to have to wear a bald cap over my real baldness.

I'm glad the cartoons aren't considered canon. I was getting tired of having to wear this at every game:
View attachment 141007

R.A. Salvatore, right there. Though, in his defense, it was editor fiat that demanded Chewbacca's death.

Stuff like Chewie getting killed by a moon falling on him,

I blocked that one out until now. Though, I kinda wish that they had kept that up, with each subsequent clone getting another u added to their name. Give the world Luuuuuuuuuuuuuuuke.

or an evil clone named Luuke, were dumped.

 

[RFB Dan]

This isn't new news. WotC have always (at least since 5e) said "there is no canon", this is just restating that.

My take from them stressing the point now is there will be a Dragonlance setting book next year, and it will make significant changes. (We already knew about the drow changes).

IMO most of the changes to Krynn will probably be to allow for more core stuff content in the setting. Finding ways to add in orcs, tieflings, and other stuff.

 

[Bolares]

When they gender swap or change the lineage of the original Dragonlance characters, I'm walking away.

...yikes

 

[Disgruntled Hobbit]

removing cause I'm tired of discussing Ravenloft