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

 

[Remathilis]

LOL That's actually a great example of what I'm talking about, though.

Prior to Tasha's I had the Sword Coast Bladesingers as canon for my game. Then along comes Tasha's, retconning the subclass, and suddenly my burden was increased(admittedly not by much) as I had to examine the new class and figure out if I was going to use the new version or not.

By that logic, the easiest way to end your burden is too not have WotC produce and D&D product again. No new canon, no new burden.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

It didn't. And the subclass involved changes to how the subclass works, which would also count for FR. That said, everything in Tasha's is optional, so even though it recons the class, the DM doesn't have to engage it.

Wait. Mechanics!?

Mechanics aren’t lore.

 

[Bolares]

Have not read everything. Not sure what the hubbub is about.

Well... what did you expect? if you don't read a thread it's really hard to know what the hubbub is about

 

[Yaarel]

The Eberron books are very clear that outside gods cannot influence Eberron in any way, and the Eberron cosmology is isolated. You as DM would have to open it up to the outside and allow back and forth travel for that to change.

Except, 5e Eberron then gives an example of how the Forgotten Realms Asmodeus CAN influence Eberron.

 

[Maxperson]

These unwanted gods are all part of 5e Forgotten Realms.

But not Realms specific. None of them are setting specific at all. They are generic to be plugged in or not as a setting deems appropriate. Realms and Greyhawk yes, Dragonlance and Dark Sun no.

 

[Mistwell]

It's as much part of the story as alignment is. Alignment is also a rule. Being able to option alignment with creatures involves their story.

WOTC tells a story. Like "Devils are lawful evil in our setting."
You as a DM at your table can use the rule of "you can change a Devil's alignment to suit your needs at your table."
The rule isn't part of the story WOTC is telling however. It's just a rule to allow you to tell a different story at your table.
The story WOTC is telling is their canon. The story you're telling at your table is your canon. The alignment changing line is a rule, and not canon.

 

[Bolares]

Except the canon and future products adhering to the canon say otherwise. Canon is a gift that keeps on giving, whether DMs and players want it or not.

You assume future products have to adhere to the canon... They do not. Not every book published by WotC adhere's to the core books, in fact, most of them have something that is different from core.

 

[Remathilis]

Wait. Mechanics!?

Mechanics aren’t lore.

Eh...

Why couldn't dwarves be magic users prior to 3e? Any answer you give beyond "mechanical balance concerns" would be lore-based.

 

[lingual]

LOL That's actually a great example of what I'm talking about, though.

Prior to Tasha's I had the Sword Coast Bladesingers as canon for my game. Then along comes Tasha's, retconning the subclass, and suddenly my burden was increased(admittedly not by much) as I had to examine the new class and figure out if I was going to use the new version or not.

I thought all the Tasha's class options were optional.

 

[Bolares]

Except, 5e Eberron then gives an example of how the Forgotten Realms Asmodeus CAN influence Eberron.

CAN. I'm not a primary english speaker, but as I read it the Asmodeus bit was about giving you an example of how IF YOU WANT TO, you could bring other gods to Eberron.