NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="catsclaw227" data-source="post: 5263052" data-attributes="member: 14197">This is how I read the differences in the books.  Most of the time, when I read D&D fluff, I assume that the voice is giving their own historical perspective of things, and therefore I don't get all caught up in "OMG!!! Violation of Canon!!!"I really like the latter as well.  And when I see the first, it bugs me --- until I look at how much "canon" has been written to date.  Sometimes it blows my mind how much detail a writer needs to know so that they don't mess up a name or cross-up previously written canon.  I don't know how you guys do it!  I'd be botching things all the way through. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />  But, then again, maybe I would have enough insight to simply write my stuff in a way that puts an in-world voice to things so that it comes off as the historical opinion of just another scholar or bard. Now, in home-brews?  Canon, shmanon.  It's the DM's creation, so Asmodeus can be a deity-fallen-to-devil, or he can be a son of a primordial whose wits, greed, cruelty and evil has put him at odds with his progenitor. I got this as well.  It definitely came across as written from the perspective of the "in-game author" and not the WOTC author.Or maybe just lack of necessary time and resources to know every little bit of historical canon.  These books do have deadlines....Maybe one of the 4e (or past 2e/3e) authors can pop in and ask about how they deal with the massive amounts of ever growing canon.</blockquote>

Verification