D&D 5E WotC Explains 'Canon' In More Detail

Recently, WotC's Jeremy Crawford indicated that only the D&D 5th Edition books were canonical for the roleplaying game. In a new blog article, Chris Perkins goes into more detail about how that works, and why.

This boils down to a few points:

• Each edition of D&D has its own canon, as does each video game, novel series, or comic book line.
• The goal is to ensure players don't feel they have to do research of 50 years of canon in order to play.
• It's about remaining consistent.

If you’re not sure what else is canonical in fifth edition, let me give you a quick primer. Strahd von Zarovich canonically sleeps in a coffin (as vampires do), Menzoberranzan is canonically a subterranean drow city under Lolth’s sway (as it has always been), and Zariel is canonically the archduke of Avernus (at least for now). Conversely, anything that transpires during an Acquisitions Incorporated live game is not canonical in fifth edition because we treat it the same as any other home game (even when members of the D&D Studio are involved).

D&D Canon | D&D Studio Blog | Dungeons & Dragons

In this D&D Studio Blog, Chris Perkins describes the D&D Studio's position on canonicity.

dnd.wizards.com

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...

www.enworld.org

 

[Faolyn]

Nothing.

It lacks alignment.

So if you're fine with (any alignment), then why aren't you fine with simply not having that? Having no listed alignment at all is exactly the same as you, the DM, choosing whatever alignment you want.

 

[Maxperson]

It's canon for that game.

Then we're back to everything being canon and not canon at the same time. By making canon so broad, it's been rendered useless as a term.

 

[Maxperson]

So if you're fine with (any alignment), then why aren't you fine with simply not having that? Having no listed alignment at all is exactly the same as you, the DM, choosing whatever alignment you want.

Consistency. If demons, dragons, fey, etc. all have alignment, then so should humanoids, even if it's "any." And I didn't say I was fine with it. I said what I expected that's they would do.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Then we're back to everything being canon and not canon at the same time. By making canon so broad, it's been rendered useless as a term.

Canon for what? That is the crucial distinction you're missing.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Clarification?

"It can also be said that every campaign that’s ever been run in any of our published settings has its own canon. Your version of the Forgotten Realms has its own canon, which doesn’t make it any less valid than anyone else’s version. Elminster might be a lich in your Forgotten Realms campaign. Elminster might be a miniature giant space hamster in mine—both are acceptable and awesome."

So anything and everything we use or create is canon. So quite literally everything official, every novel, and every video game is canon(all that has ever been made officially is used by someone in a campaign) and everything official is simultaneously not canon, as it's has been ignored in some one personal campaign or another.

Some clarification. They made it worse. Now there's no such thing as canon as quite literally everything is both canon and not canon.

Canon = Continuity for the story you are telling.

If your group storms Dragonspear castle and kills the Avatar of Bane... then that is canon for your table, as long as you continue telling that story in those realms. And you don't need to say that Dragonspear castle was actually the home of a Vampire Lord. Or that it is the secret location of a portal to Dragon Heaven. Or that it was just a ruin full of goblins.

Canon is only as useful as determining what you need to be true for the story you are telling. No more. No Less.

 

[Voadam]

But isn't it interesting that all of their authoritative work is not considered canon. I think this really something that people are glossing over that should be discussed. The have "officially" claimed that everything after the PHB, MM, & DMG is not canon. That's big news and no one is talking about it (unless I missed it - I jumped in late)

Van Richten's Guide is not canon Ravenloft in 5e.

There is almost no canon Ravenloft in 5e, just snippets from the core 3.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Eberron "officially" has two canons. One canon is the book that WotC publishes for the Eberron setting. The other canon is the content that Baker and fellow collaborators create on his website and sell in DMsGuild.

Also known as the official one and the right one.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Peak nerd rage in this thread.

Nah, the other canon thread was way angrier.

 

[darjr]

There's a long thread with 2K+ posts on it.

I remain convinced it's not an approach I like or want.

There’s another thread with 2k posts about this specific D&D studio blog?!

 

[PsyzhranV2]

There’s another thread with 2k posts about this specific D&D studio blog?!

No, about the comicbook.com article on this topic that was published last week. Thread here.