Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Irlo" data-source="post: 9184043" data-attributes="member: 7028372">For those of you who have strong preferences for consistent fidelity to D&amp;D canon -- within an edition, across editions, and/or across various related media (novels, computer games, etc.) -- how do you find that affects your experience at the game table?Do RPG sourcebooks service the same function for you and your games as a fictional franchise? (It's an actual question -- I'm not implying that they don't or that they shouldn't.) Should publishers use RPG materials to tell a story? Do you make alterations to the canonically established settings? Are the published settings compelling enough that you don't feel the need to put your personal stamp on them? If you do make alterations for your iteration of the setting, can you explain why it's still important that the publisher maintain fidelity to the canon?For my part, I don't look to any campaign setting to tell a story. That might be why canon doesn't matter to me. The story is reserved for the characters in the game. What they do in the setting is the story. My feelings on this are probably different that yours as I've never used published campaign settings except in as much as they relate to published adventures, and even then I make heavy edits to those settings, and I've never read related D&amp;D novels or comic books. But I am sincerely interested to know why it's so important to some people.I read some old threads on canon and changes to canon. People have strong reactions this this subject. Please know that I'm not challenging anyone's preferences or suggesting that they are wrong to have them.&nbsp; If canon is not important to you, please don't use this thread to make that pronouncment. Thanks!</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Irlo, post: 9184043, member: 7028372"] For those of you who have strong preferences for consistent fidelity to D&D canon -- within an edition, across editions, and/or across various related media (novels, computer games, etc.) -- how do you find that affects your experience at the game table? Do RPG sourcebooks service the same function for you and your games as a fictional franchise? (It's an actual question -- I'm not implying that they don't or that they shouldn't.) Should publishers use RPG materials to tell a story? Do you make alterations to the canonically established settings? Are the published settings compelling enough that you don't feel the need to put your personal stamp on them? If you do make alterations for your iteration of the setting, can you explain why it's still important that the publisher maintain fidelity to the canon? For my part, I don't look to any campaign setting to tell a story. That might be why canon doesn't matter to me. The story is reserved for the characters in the game. What they do in the setting is the story. My feelings on this are probably different that yours as I've never used published campaign settings except in as much as they relate to published adventures, and even then I make heavy edits to those settings, and I've never read related D&D novels or comic books. But I am sincerely interested to know why it's so important to some people. I read some old threads on canon and changes to canon. People have strong reactions this this subject. Please know that I'm not challenging anyone's preferences or suggesting that they are wrong to have them. If canon is not important to you, please don't use this thread to make that pronouncment. Thanks! [/QUOTE]

Verification