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.

 

[PsyzhranV2]

Are you seriously implying someone not liking a bit of lore (like the backstory for dragonborn in the Realms) is akin to someone's hundred dollar phone exploding in their pocket?

"We shouldn't fix this thing that is causing some of our end-users problems because the majority of our consumer base is using it fine with no issues." Same line of logic.

 

[Faolyn]

So instead WizCo should erase ALL lore so the player can INVENT lore the doesn't care about

Your argument is still "some people don't like it therefore it shouldn't exist and nobody should be able to use it"

No, my argument is that the lore isn't some amazing thing that needs to be memorized in full and always used exactly like it is.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

"We shouldn't fix this thing that is causing some of our end-users problems because the majority of our consumer base is using it fine with no issues." Same line of logic.

Also, it's not an issue of "disliking lore", it's an issue of "people being harmed by canon" (like female gamers that had to prove that they were a "True Fan/Gamer").

 

[Disgruntled Hobbit]

"We shouldn't fix this thing that is causing some of our end-users problems because the majority of our consumer base is using it fine with no issues." Same line of logic.

I hate pineapple on pizza because I'm mildly allergic (makes my mouth itch)
It's causing this end-user to have problems

Therefore I want NO pizzas to ever have pineapple again and it to be removed from the menu. People who want Hawaiian pizza can simple add it themselves to ham pizza they buy

 

[Disgruntled Hobbit]

No, my argument is that the lore isn't some amazing thing that needs to be memorized in full and always used exactly like it is.

Yes
It doesn't
But it CAN be
And some people LIKE to do that and ENJOY memorizing that old lore
And that's being removed and invalidated because the old lore no longer applies and won't be included in the future

 

[Remathilis]

Also, it's not an issue of "disliking lore", it's an issue of "people being harmed by canon" (like female gamers that had to prove that they were a "True Fan/Gamer").

Not to dismiss this, but I'm not exactly sure what Crawford is talking about is going to fix this. If no true D&D continuity beyond the 5e Player's Handbook existed, purity tests using just it would still be a thing. You're narrowing the field of knowledge, but not fixing the gatekeeping problem.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Many of those can be addressed via fluff.

Gully dwarves aren't stupider, they're an underclass that other dwarves discriminate against. (And before anyone says that doesn't make sense for the Lawful Good dwarves, I invite you to look at our world.)

Tinker gnomes are just rock gnomes and their devices work as well as any other gnomes' stuff. Maybe they add some beefed-up tinkering rules to the book to show that.

As for Goldmoon's people, get rid of the bad cowboys and Indians cosplay and go with either something more distinctive to Krynn or pick another Earth culture to be influenced by, and either give Goldmoon a different appearance or make it clear that her people have a wide variance of appearances.

People will complain about each of these, but honestly, they're not complaints that I would listen to.

I suspect a much more significant change will be to shake up the morally absolute good/neutral/evil gods. Not that the "good" gods acted that way in any case.

 

[Disgruntled Hobbit]

Also, it's not an issue of "disliking lore", it's an issue of "people being harmed by canon" (like female gamers that had to prove that they were a "True Fan/Gamer").

That's a very different issue
Harmful canon is bad and can be safely removed
But there's a big difference between harmful lore being removed and ALL past lore being removed because a small percentage might be harmful

And guess what?
Gatekeeping STILL exists and there is STILL lore people are expected to know to prove they're True Fans/ Gamers
It's just four years old rather than forty
You can't remove the behavior by removing one method the naughty words use to be naughty words

 

[Dungeonosophy]

You have surely overthought this. No need to systematize what is a pretty casual approach centered on serving the needs of DMs, with complex terminology.

If we were in a Strawberry Shortcake forum, I'd totally agree. But c'mon man, this is D&D, with 800 page rules. Our community's approach to Timelines can be at least as clear and nuanced as Transformers or Marvel or DC or TMNT.

BTW, what I wrote about clarifying and untangling the Realities is totally based on D&D Brand Manager Bruce Heard's official DRAGON magazine article which explains the difference between the BECMI Reality and the AD&D 1e Reality, both of which co-exist, even from an in-game perspective. (There's a link to his DRAGON article near the bottom of the post.)

 

[Parmandur]

If we were in a Strawberry Shortcake forum, I'd totally agree. But c'mon man, this is D&D, with 800 page rules. Its approach to Timelines can be at least as clear and nuanced as Transformers or Marvel or DC or TMNT.

BTW, what I wrote about clarifying and untangling the Realities is totally based on D&D Brand Manager Bruce Heard's official DRAGON magazine article which explains the difference between the BECMI Reality and the AD&D 1e Reality, both of which co-exist, even from an in-game perspective. (There's a link to his DRAGON article near the bottom of the post.)

...

Yeah, referencing a Dragon magazine article that came out over 3 decades ago seems relevant. Thing is, there isn't a coherent "video game canon": Dark Alliance and Baldur's Gate 3 do not relate to each other, except in utilizing the Sword Coast as a background. There is no overarching canon to media tie-ins, just brand management on a PR level. there is no Grand Unified Theory to be found here.