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]

Since I don't feel like getting out my copies of SCAG and Tasha's, why don't you explain how a change in a generic splatbook changes how the class is used in a specific setting's worldbook.

I've already done so twice in my posts here.

That was a generic you and you know it.

You were responding to me and my issues, so I correctly applied it to me personally.

The point is, if you have players who insist on reading everything there is about a setting and get mad if you make changes or don't use it all, the problem is with the player, not the canon.

Again, this is not relevant to what I have been saying. It's not about anyone getting mad. It's about the disruption to me and my workload as I have to assess every change to see if I should use it or not. And if I don't do that, the players cannot know what their PCs know, as a particular piece of lore might be X or Y.

You know, nearly all of your arguments boil down to "I'm right but I'm not going to explain myself, and if you read the same thing I did but come to a different conclusion, you're wrong."

Or else I've explained myself repeatedly already and don't feel like repeating it to you every time you ignore it.

 

[Yaarel]

You skipped the second sentence there.

"Beyond these core rulebooks, we don’t have a public-facing account of what is canonical in fifth edition because we don’t want to overload our fellow creators and business partners."

That says very clearly that for them, there's more to canon than the first three books. It includes every bit of lore from the first three, but also has more canon outside of it. Setting canon can and does differ. See Eberron. The default core cosmology doesn't allow for isolation, yet Eberron has it. Their internal canon differs from the public facing canon.

You are adding a separate issue that I am not discussing.

Indeed, in previous posts, I agree WotC keeps internal documents for the sake of consistency. Yes, but moot.



I emphasize that people in the public dont need this internal document. They only need to enslave their product to the core lore of the three core rulebooks. And can still be "official" for WotC, including novels, films, etcetera.

 

[Maxperson]

You are adding a separate issue that I am not discussing.

Indeed, in previous posts, I agree WotC keeps internal documents for the sake of consistency. Yes, but moot.

It's absolutely NOT moot. You're arguing that they will be enslaved to the core three and not deviate, but their internal documents which make up additional canonical lore will also be used and will contradict the core three, as it has with Eberron. AND with Theros. And..

 

[Faolyn]

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

"In your campaign, you might decide" "you might want to incorporate elements from other realms" "Perhaps you want to use"

I don't see anything in that section that says that the events and characters from any other setting will affect Eberron--only that if you, the DM, want to use those events and characters from other settings, then here's some suggestions on how to handle it.

Do you really want WotC to have written that it's completely impossible for you to include something from another setting?

 

[Ibrandul]

Since I don't feel like getting out my copies of SCAG and Tasha's, why don't you explain how a change in a generic splatbook changes how the class is used in a specific setting's worldbook.

It doesn't have to, because the latest SCAG errata brings that book in line with the version presented in Tasha's. (This is not an endorsement of your interlocutor's position.)

 

[Faolyn]

To that extent, sure, but mechanics change so that part of it also has to change. Some changes to canon are necessary, especially when going from one edition to another. I accept that necessity. Changing it within a single edition like Tasha's did? No. That's not a necessity.

That's what retcons are for. "It was always this way. These aren't the Bladesingers you are looking for."

 

[Bolares]

Do you really want WotC to have written that it's completely impossible for you to include something from another setting?

It's either that or Eberron is a slave to the FR

 

[Bolares]

It doesn't have to, because the latest SCAG errata brings that book in line with the version presented in Tasha's. (This is not an endorsement of your interlocutor's position.)

Oh, I didn't know that. That's neat

 

[Remathilis]

The internal canon is more like....guidelines, than rules.

They're a style guide. They make sure the art, tone mechanics, and writing adhere to the same style for coherence. It has nothing to do with timelines, the events of novels or interplanar politics and everything to do with the look of trolls and how potions of healing work.

 

[Remathilis]

"In your campaign, you might decide" "you might want to incorporate elements from other realms" "Perhaps you want to use"

I don't see anything in that section that says that the events and characters from any other setting will affect Eberron--only that if you, the DM, want to use those events and characters from other settings, then here's some suggestions on how to handle it.

Do you really want WotC to have written that it's completely impossible for you to include something from another setting?

He wouldn't be the first one or the only, if Dark Sun or Greyhawk threads are anything to go by.