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.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

The most important take for me in this thread... at least 4 other people like gnomes in enworld. GNOME LOVERS UNITE!

I love Gnomes! They're my favorite race! (It's probably because I can relate with their fixations, quirks, and info-dumping as someone with both ADHD and Autism Spectrum Disorder. They're just so fun and easy for me to roleplay!)

 

[Bolares]

Am I happy with novels not being canon? yes

Do I think people are overreacting? Yes

That said, I can understand the emotional state. If Wizards made dramatic changes to Eberron, or straight up contradict Keith Baker I would lose my sh*t. Even before reading the changes to see if I liked them. I would be wrong, but that would be my emotional reaction.

 

[Bolares]

I love Gnomes! They're my favorite race! (It's probably because I can relate with their fixations, quirks, and info-dumping as someone with both ADHD and Autism Spectrum Disorder. They're just so fun and easy for me to roleplay!)

I like the chance to be a prankster while not being meanspirited. Love minor illusion and never ever said a bad thing about the Trust.... they don't even exist. please don't stab me

 

[AdmundfortGeographer]

Long, long, overdue. Good call.

 

[Henadic Theologian]

Thats... already a thing.

Seriously. D&D continuity is already disjointed mess. Several settings continuities have wildly fluctuated from edition to edition. Hell, within editions things have changed sourcebook to sourcebook. I mean, just a few examples I can think of...

• Asmodeus became the Lord of Hell because he a.) overthrew Lucifer b.) betrayed an unknown human deity or c.) always was a god.
• Succubi are a.) demons b.) devils c.) neither, but a unique type of fiend.
• Dragonmarks in Eberron can manifest a.) only specific marks on specific races or b.) any mark on any race
• Madam Eva in Ravenloft is a.) a powerful Vistani b.) a Green Hag or c.) Strahd's sister

I mean, those were a few I can think of off the top of my head. I'm sure lore gurus can find more.

Yes there are lore inconsistencies, that is not a license to jettison the novel canon, the novels ARE the Forgotten Realms, its what made FR the most successful D&D setting ever by a wide margin. To alot of folks the FR novels ARE the Forgotten Realms, more so then the RPG line.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

I like the chance to be a prankster while not being meanspirited. Love minor illusion and never ever said a bad thing about the Trust.... they don't even exist. please don't stab me

Meanwhile, in Avengers LIX: Into Eberron . . .

Peter Quill: Where is the Trust?!?!
Iron Man: I'll do you one better; What is the Trust?
Drax: I'll do you one better! Why is the Trust?!?!

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Not to derail the thread here too much, but how could you forget the EU idea of Boba Fett escaping from the sarlacc?

Oh, man, and that's almost note-for-note from the EU, complete with his armor getting scarred up as a result.

 

[Remathilis]

No, I haven't overthought it.
Right, Crawford is saying that the contents of the 5E RPG books are "scripture." One Canon. Which I call the "RPG Studio Timeline" (aka Reality 5-Prime).
And that the contents of all pre-5E RPG materials, 5E novels, 5E video games, etc. are not part of that Canonical Timeline. In the "RPG Studio Timeline," those events did not take place.
That is the content of those paragraphs which Crawford wrote.

But obviously, the Novel stories and Videogame stories "happened" in some imaginal sense, in some reality or timeline. But not in the "RPG Studio Timeline." So they must've taken place in a D&D Novels Timeline and D&D Video Games Timeline(s).
Crawford says these other timelines may or may not be used for inspiration for the RPG Studio Timeline, but they are separate timelines.

Pretty simple.
Just blurring things together with fuzzy words doesn't make it all copacetic.

You might be over-explaining it.

Marvel had a similar issue for a while: its movies (the MCU) were all in continuity with each other (barring some minor discrepancies, like recast actors or most of the Incredible Hulk being forgotten) but the TV shows (Agents of Shield, Agent Carter, Daredevil and the Netflix, and Inhumans) were a separate continuity that referenced the MCU but were never referenced by the MCU. So, Phil Coulson could sit and talk about how he was stabbed by Loki and brought back to life, but the MCU movies never referenced Coulson becoming the Director of Shield (or in fact, was alive again). TV and movie lore was strictly a one-way street. (That, of course, changed with the advent of the Disney+ TV shows)

D&D is going to be similar; the sourcebooks are going to be mostly in continuity with each other, but the auxiliary materials (novels, games, etc.) can reference the sourcebooks continuity, but not be referenced BY the sourcebook continuity.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

Its not a may, its no longer canon period.

nope.

That's what you, as many people have pointed now, read in this statement of facts.

Look, you decide to ignore what people have been telling you for a couple hours now. You look like someone who doesnt want to be convinced otherwise. You prefer to be ''right'' in your reading of Crawford statement than actually trying to see what it really means in terms of further lore development in relation with past editions.

You can continue to state your vision as if it was a fact, but it doesnt change what will come next and what has been happening for 7+ years.

 

[RFB Dan]

Sometimes you just need to get rid of the canon. Another hot mess is the one Nintendo made in the lands of Hyrule. Up until Wind Waker, you could reasonably create some sort of timeline. Then Nintendo had to go and start this whole 3 timelines mess centered around Ocarina of Time (A good game, but Link to the Past & Breath of the Wild are better). I'm certain that the reason they set BotW so far beyond all that is so that they could also drop the baggage.