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

 

[DEFCON 1]

See above for why I'll never buy another setting book from them.

I'm sure they're broken up about that. You can join the hundreds of people who refused to come back to D&D after WotC told fans that 4E would let them skip past talking with the guard to get to the meat of the story inside the city.

 

[TheSword]

It means that since there is no setting canon, there are no official settings. When none of it matters and none of it can be relied upon officially, then it's just a bunch of words with no real meaning. Removing the setting books as canon removes any foundation that they once provided. Anything and everything can be changed tomorrow.

When you say ‘none of it matters’ you get that it’s a game right? So in perspective no, none of it matters. What’s more, it never did. Do you know how many DMs ignored The Death of the Dragon because they liked the king and didn’t want to use his daughter/niece whatever. It literally didn’t matter.

A campaign source book is a collection of ideas and suggestions. That’s it. That’s all they ever have been. They’re not the gospels.

 

[Yaarel]

Actually that is incorrect. The only WotC canon on Eberron is what is in the PHB, MM, & DMG. According to Crawford, no other books are canon.

For Eberron, there is a WotC canon (corresponding to Eberron: Rising from the Last War + PH-MM-DMG).

But there is also a separate canon that Baker speaks about, that involves other Eberron books and much content online.

 

[FrozenNorth]

See above for why I'll never buy another setting book from them.
Did you buy any setting books before? You’ve been pretty adamant about alignment. Did you buy Candlekeep Mysteries or Van Ricten’s Guide to Ravenloft? What about Theros?

 

[Henadic Theologian]

I'm not going to lie, part of my joy comes from watching @Henadic Theologian spiral.

That's a really naughty word thing to say, did I do anything to you, you earn you petty spitefulness?

 

[Yaarel]

Haha. Well, for 6E, I'd prefer the default setting to be an "Un-Setting", where worldbuilding your own setting from scratch is the default way to play D&D, just as rolling your own character is the default.

Yes!

Even the 5e core could be approached more along the lines of an "un-setting", focusing on core and worldbuilding.

A setting like Forgotten Realms belongs in a separate setting guide, similar to the Eberron guide, and so on.

 

[Henadic Theologian]

Yeah, I'm kinda baffled where this is unclear at all. It's pretty straight forward and logical.

With the added bonus of pissing off canon junkies.

Again a needlessly spiteful, nasty comment.

 

[Maxperson]

@a.everett1287 abuse of the laugh button is against site rules. Do it to one of my posts again and I will report it.

 

[a.everett1287]

That's a really naughty word thing to say, did I do anything to you, you earn you petty spitefulness?

No, not really. I just find your histrionic response in which you callously insult the integrity of developers and writers you don't even know to be entertaining.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

Again a needlessly spiteful, nasty comment.

Seeing how you say anything that is counter to your own taste is lazy, nonsensical and a mess (making us that love this change what exactly? Mad? ), and saying that the designers are lazy incompetents looking for a quick buck.

I'd take a minute before saying someone is making spiteful and nasty comments.