Do you REALLY run settings as "canon"?

[Treebore]

I think the only reason people hate "canon" is when it used against them to force them to go in directions they do not want to go.

IE players use it to "rail road" the DM. Or at least attempt to.

That's the only reason I can think of for people to hate "canon". Otherwise, its use it, modify it, or ignore it, so nothing to hate, as far as I can guess.

 

[Vegepygmy]

So how many of you actually allow "canon" to trap you? To set boundaries around you and what you want to do? Perhaps more importantly, why do you allow it to do so?

How many of you are like me, and it only becomes "canon" if and when you confirm it is in play?

How many of you totally ignore everything and maybe just use the maps, and fill in everything yourself?

I've been using the World of Greyhawk as my campaign setting of preference since it was first published (1980, I believe), and I've never given a flying woodchuck about "canon."

The original Gazetteer had just the right amount of detail, in my opinion, and I pretty much cleave to that. I try not to contradict the information therein, because I expect my players to familiarize themselves with it and rely on it, so it wouldn't be fair of me to ignore it completely, but I specifically let my players know before the campaign starts that any source other than the Gazetteer is unreliable. I may use details from such supplements, but they rely on such information at their own risk.

So I guess I'm kinda in-between your two options. I don't ignore everything except the maps; there is some canon that exists independently of my confirming it is in play.

 

[Tequila Sunrise]

The only published setting I've ever run [briefly] is Planescape, if that tells you anything about my attitude toward canon. I'm just not interested in many official settings. I still don't know what the Spell Plague is, or why it's such a godd@m travesty. I avoid novels with the D&D logo like the Black Plague, so I don't care who Drizzt just offed, or who's ruling Breland.

When I run a campaign, it's my campaign.

When I'm a player, I want to learn about the game world as I play, not by doing homework.

However, if canon is so heavily ingrained in the setting and also impacts the content of supplements, the setting stops being of any interest to me. This happened e.g. with the advent of the 2e Revised Dark Sun Campaign Setting. Since my campaign world had developed differently from that point official products were mostly useless to me.

Now I probably could have just stopped buying supplements and continue to do my thing, but for me as a DM to stay interested in a setting I really need fresh material regularly. So eventually, the campaign died because I lost interest, being basically disgusted by the new supplements.

Wow, you're stuck between a rock and a hard place!

How long can you go without buying a new book, if you don't mind me asking? And why do you lose interest without fresh meat, er...I mean, material?

What was your longest-running campaign? I imagine that rock and that hard place really put a damper on anything longer than a few months.

 

[Jhaelen]

How long can you go without buying a new book, if you don't mind me asking? And why do you lose interest without fresh meat, er...I mean, material?

I can't really say. I think part of the problem is the long breaks between sessions. In my latest 3e campaign we only played about once a month.
Since I usually prepare the bulk of the current adventure in advance there isn't much to do before each session except making a couple of adjustments to reflect the party's actions.

With such long breaks, I even had to reread the rules regularly to stay reasonably 'fit'. Regularly visiting and posting at EN-World has definitely also been a big help to keep up and slow down the process of losing interest.

What was your longest-running campaign? I imagine that rock and that hard place really put a damper on anything longer than a few months.

That was definitely my 3e campaign which also happened to be the first we actually concluded - after almost seven years! I'm quite proud of that achievement even if it was getting really tedious for me in the end.

All previous campaigns fizzled after about two to three years (although we played more frequently then).

 

[pawsplay]

I think the only reason people hate "canon" is when it used against them to force them to go in directions they do not want to go.

IE players use it to "rail road" the DM. Or at least attempt to.

That's the only reason I can think of for people to hate "canon". Otherwise, its use it, modify it, or ignore it, so nothing to hate, as far as I can guess.

Pretty much. "Here is the new FR canon" can be pretty annoying if it impinges on your gaming. On the other hand, it's hard to get mad about, "Here's some ideas you could use, if you want. Look! A map! You like maps, don't you?"

Usually it's the combination of creeping metaplot, miniscule detail, and drift in tone in a setting that eventually provokes a backlash against canon. Sheer density can be a negative factor, but doesn't seem to be inherently a bad thing; some settings thrive on their breadth and depth.

 

[AeroDm]

Agree with much of the above. I never run cannon but often adopt the recommended cannon into my game. If it fits, awesome. If it doesn't fit, it doesn't exist.