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

 

[Maxperson]

Don't you have a long running homebrew world you run in Max? I think in our various discussions that has been said.

No. Long running Forgotten Realms. With some changes to canon.

If you do... why do you care about whether or not the realms is a foundation or not? You aren't using it.

I am, though. Very rarely I will run a setting like Ravenloft for a campaign. 9 times out of 10, though, it's the Realms. I haven't had the time to build a homebrew setting in decades.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

It seems to me that at this point this is pretty much just a semantic debate.

 

[J.Quondam]

It seems to me that at this point this is pretty much just a semantic debate.

On ENWorld? No way, that never happens!

 

[Bolares]

To clarify, IMO, official content can only come from IP's owner - WotC. However, I don't care about that and much prefer, and hold in greater authority, the creator's version (i.e. Keith Baker).

I think some people mix official with quality.

Kanon is not official, that does not mean it's not the best source for Eberron material.

 

[PsyzhranV2]

I think some people mix official with quality.

Kanon is not official, that does not mean it's not the best source for Eberron material.

Theatrical cut vs director's cut, basically?

 

[Bolares]

The MM is quite clear that Alignment is mutable and not absolute. They can make it more clear, and are moving in that direction.

Hey everyone, I have a proposition (it may sound a little crazy... I know):

Let's not make another thread be about alignment?

 

[Chaosmancer]

They have said that the core three are all that is public facing canon. That automatically means that there is more than the core three that is internally facing canon. Otherwise they would not have included "public facing" in that sentence. Canon that is not public facing, but is internal, is hidden from us.

groans

And it begins...

 

[Maxperson]

That's because you have to be able to break the idea of canon into different boxes.

If I am playing in Theros, is Eberron canon to my game? No. So is Eberron: Rising from the Last War canon for a DnD 5e game NOT set in Eberron... no. Why would it be?

No. They aren't talking about personal games with those statements. Perkins said prior to that that everything in a personal game is canon, so there's no need to give advice like, "If you aren't sure what else is canon..." How could anyone be unsure what is canon in their game when 100% of it is canon? That can only be talking about WotC canon of some sort, not personal canon.

 

[the Jester]

Where the core-three canon has sidebars that mention other settings, they are gratuitous. By contrast, the rules themselves are 5e Forgotten Realms. For example, in 5e, individuals like Mordenkainen are part of the 5e Forgotten Realms setting.

No, it's just that 5e FR plays by the core rules.

The PH explicitly lays out that the default setting is the multiverse. You're trying really hard to make it the Realms, but it isn't; the books state so clearly and in so many words, and there are tons of things drawn from or talking about other settings in the core.

And I don't even know how you can try to justify saying Mordenkainen is a part of the FR setting; that's just ridiculous.

 

[Remathilis]

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?

If someone was advocating that in a world like ours where knowledge of the divine is a matter of faith, I'd see a problem with it. (As I do with the "all atheists are going to hell" crowd).

In a setting where divine magic is real, people can die and come back, avatars walked the Earth and you can travel the planes to go visit them, I find it extremely hard to buy "there are no gods" is a possible let alone common. You want to be the guy who denies what is in front of your eyes? Go hang on the wall.