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]

hmmmm

I think that not everyone sees "gold dragon: LG" as meaning ALL gold dragons are lawful good... more that this is what they tend to be.

Except that's not what the books say. The MM specifically says that the listed alignment is the default. Default doesn't mean "most common." It means that, unless you actively change it, the monster is this alignment. The default setting for gold dragons is Lawful Good. If you want a neutral or evil or Chaotic Good gold dragon, sure you can do it, but "canonically," gold dragons are LG.

 

[dave2008]

Perkins also mentions, "Every campaign ... has its own canon." Eberron has this kind of separate campaign canon for its own unique setting.

Eberron is further complicated by the fact that the setting canon itself divides into WotC setting canon versus Baker setting canon.

Perkins is talking about your home canon with "Every campaign." So the E:RftW is "canon" at your house it you use it, but it is not canon at my house if I don't.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Could you or someone explain to me why Marvel fandom, DC fandom, and Transformers fandom really cares enough about the subject, but D&D fandom doesn't?

Because Marvel, DC, and Transformers are passive participant media. You read them, you watch them, you very very rarely play them. And when you do, they are very clear how noncanonical those games are.

DnD is an active participant media. The primary way to interact with DnD is by playing the game. Yes, you can read, and have comics, and those are great, but they are no different in canonicity than your second campaign or your fourth campaign.

 

[Yaarel]

Perkins is talking about your home canon with "Every campaign." So the E:RftW is "canon" at your house it you use it, but it is not canon at my house if I don't.

True.

But in the case of the Eberron setting, many players consult the various publications of the Baker canon. The Baker canon is "official" for the Eberron setting.

 

[Faolyn]

I mean...it was religious in its entirety, but in a context of a world with actual gods, and an afterlife, and various 'heavens'? I guess I don't see the problem.

You don't see the problem with atheists being cemented into a wall where they either dissolve into nothing or are pried out by demons and transformed into more demons?

 

[Parmandur]

Two things. First, I've never considered novels canon. They aren't part of the game and go off in wild directions sometimes. I was fine with the first announcement that movies, novels, video games, etc. would not be canon. Second, I've already said in multiple posts that social issues, such as orcs, are an exception. Those are relatively rare, though.

I mean, isn't that precisely what Perkins laid out in his blog post?

 

[Parmandur]

I never understood that saying... OF COURSE I'll have my cake and eat it too, what else am I going to do with MY cake?

For the purpose of the metaphors, it's a visually pleasing cake, like a wedding cake: you cannot eat the cake and have the visual setpiece for your party at the same time. You cna appreciate having the cake, and then eat it, but once it is eaten, it is gone.

 

[Yaarel]

For the purpose of the metaphors, it's a visually pleasing cake, like a wedding cake: you cannot eat the cake and have the visual setpiece for your party at the same time. You cna appreciate having the cake, and then eat it, but once it is eaten, it is gone.

Heh. How did this relate to canon, again?

 

[darjr]

I know you were being a bit tongue in cheek, but I do want to take you seriously for a moment.

I don't mind speculation threads, that's fine and can be a lot of fun. But I've seen people get lost in figuring out the "secret truth" of canon before. Where they dig and dig and basically start conspiracy theories about what the true version of events is, because there was a tweet ending in e that the author made in February. (Okay, maybe not quite that bad, but it got intense)

I just don't want people to start with the whole "there is a real canon out there, they just won't say it directly. but if you look at X, Y,Z and really pay attention and are a true fan, then you'll see it"

I see that too, and it’s unfortunate. I think it best when we don’t take most things so seriously. Especially D&D cannon and fiction cannon generally.

 

[Yaarel]

You don't see the problem with atheists being cemented into a wall where they either dissolve into nothing or are pried out by demons and transformed into more demons?

In the cosmology map in the Players Handbook,

The ring around inner planes that the "spokes" of the Wheel connect to, is that supposed to be the Wall of the Faithless?