Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Steampunkette" data-source="post: 8705014" data-attributes="member: 6796468">There were no new movies or shows or games when Disney decided to axe all the canon for Star Wars, either. Same thing with the MCU when they stated that their canon would only be a handful of things and what they write until they decide to include other stuff.Sure, you can -infer- that they were referring to previously published materials as opposed to materials going forward, because those materials existed and they didn't specify...But. In light of the article you posted, which is easily read as a clarification of canonicity and explanation of why the old stuff isn't all automatically canon for 5e, it seems they meant 5e material exclusively.You can read it as a retcon or as a clarification. Considering that as a retcon they're waffling based on what they do before -and- after the Perkins article, clarification is more in line with their actions and better highlights their intentions.Which is: Pick and choose what you want, 'cause that's what we'll be doing, too.Like... which of the following is more logically consistent:"The material in games and novels (from any edition before 5e) is canon (for 5e)." Blanket statement of canonicity."The material in games and novels before 5e is not canon because we don't want a massive barrier for new DMs and Players." Denial of first statement."Hey, check out these specific old games and materials which contain canon for 5e materials." Action contrary to denial.Or"The material in games and novels (going forward) is canon (for 5e)." Blanket statement of canonicity."The material in games and novels before 5e is not canon because we don't want a massive barrier for new DMs and Players." Clarification."Hey, check out these specific old games and materials which contain canon for 5e materials." Expansion of canonicity.</blockquote>

Verification