Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 7856520" data-attributes="member: 18">Yes. That's not something from a Dragon mag 20 years ago. That's from a published and rather thick adventure, and Cook himself says he was intending to fix it in a second adventure. You may be thinking of some other Monte Cook thing?It doesn't introduce any new ideas to Planescape, that's the issue. It's straight-up vandalism, in that it deletes literally the core of the setting. It's equivalent of going to Spelljammer and deleting the Spelljammers themselves, or Dark Sun and removing defiling and sorcerer kings and maybe the desert whilst you're at it.Precise canon isn't the issue here. The basic concept of the setting is. Changing up the Factions or the like could have worked and was apparently Cook's ultimate goal. I wouldn't be complaining then. Deleting them entirely? Vandalism.Canon makes it a problem because Cook's work was treated as canon in 3E and 4E. So it's actually kind of the reverse. The problem is treating every published book as canon, no matter how dire. You are pointing your own gun at yourself here.TLDR: Obsessing over canon instead of what makes a setting what it is, is precisely what caused this problem. If canon doesn't matter, Cook could have been ignored. But 3E and 4E writers stuck to canon, despite it being trash.</blockquote>