How constrained do you feel by D&D "canon"

[Greg K]

You really think so? I obviously disagree.
I think he did far more than just "personalize" it. Seems like he fundamentally changed just about everything that makes D&D what it is. Apparently that was his intent. I'd say he succeeded.

Yes, I do. However, I have a large tolerance for what I accept as DND. For instance, Dark Sun and Oriental Adventures were and are still considered by some not to be DND, because they are not pseudo european medieval settings and make changes to some of the assumptions in the PHB. Both were and still remain just as much DND to my friends and I as do Greyhawk and Forgotten Realms.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

I don't feel constrained by D&D's wider canon at all. Most of what hasn't been stripped comes from Planescape and Greyhawk, neither of which I much like, while the Spelljammer canon was unceremoniously swept under the rug.

Even for settings I like, I don't feel constrained by canon in the least. Even most of the Spelljammer campaigns I've run were set years after the events described in the boxed sets, novels and published adventures, so I could set up the political situation as I liked and have intra-Sphere politics impact groundling politics more directly.

Exception: When basing a game on an existing property (a Final Fantasy game, say, or Star Wars), I'll either keep everything explicitly stated in the source material, explicitly call the campaign out as being alternate reality, or explicitly make the changed elements something that was subjective (and wrong) on the part of the character who stated it in the source material.

For example, if I did an FF7-based campaign, I might change the nature of the lifestream from a natural 'river of souls/cycle of life' to an artificial engine for draining ambient magical power - but if I did, I would make it clear that Bugenhagen was lying about it and Aeris deceived, and make that a plot point. I wouldn't just make the change without explaining it.

 

[questing gm]

I would like to play my D&D outside 'canon' constraints...

My whole githyanki incursion campaign was build almost 'sacrillaging' the entire canon while still keeping the main essence of their racial history and hatred for the Illithids as plot points rather than fluff...

The only problem is, i wonder how much does my players want to play within the 'canon' since we metagame very often...

 

[WayneLigon]

I don't feel constrained by 'canon' - the quotes are there because I don't consider what's written in articles or even the MM to be canon such as a setting would have - at all. Sometimes I'll go by what's written in the MM or in some article if I think it's a nice take on a monster and goes where I want my campaign to go. I don't feel constrained by the look and feel of a creature, either; the so-called legacy stuff (such as trolls with cucumber noses) means less than nothing to me.

 

[Ghendar]

To some of us old grognards, that sounds more like D&D than whatever you're probably playing. Back in the day, we had to make up all kinds of stuff like that because setting and details just weren't there yet, and the tone of his game certainly sounds more old school D&Dish than D&D itself does, in many ways.

.

How old does one have to be to be a grognard?

I have called myself that at times but I consider the "true" grognards to be those that played D&D back in the 70's. I started in '84.

 

[Gold Roger]

I used to feel very constrained by canon. This drove me away from FR and this drove me away from planescape.

But on the other hand I feel very compeled by the Core D&D canon. In fact, this is was keeps me from playing other games than D&D as my "standart RPG". It's a rich and very cool history and flavor that reaches back way further than the time I play the game. This is what made me get old modules wherever I could and what recently pulled me back to planescape.

Gladly, I've realised one thing: Canon is malleable. Especially the planar canon. Of most pieces of planar canon there are multiple versions in different timelines which have been defined at various times in different ways.

One can play a pre reconning game (thus, with the old lineup of the 9 hells) with Forgotten Realms, Greyhawk and Dark Sun as part of the material plain, with quasi-elemental planes, formians but no modrons, post Faction War and Die, Vecna, Die Sigil, that is portrayed as cosmopolitan and archfiends and gods unkillable overpowering.

Meanwhile, my planar game is pre faction war and post reconning. I use modern planar fluff, no quasi elemental planes, let my players kill archfiends and Gods from level 15+ (by my definition epic and the peak of mortal power) and construct the planar existance as far more mystical and mythological than standart planescape.

And the two of us in the end still use the same canon, we just use it differently.

 

[DreadArchon]

I try to make my world very consistent with itself, but official canon? Not usually.

For example, my PC's are currently in the Abyss somewhere. The (Neutral Good) Assassin got a mission there to free the (Neutral Neutral nature-deity-worshipping) demon legions from the corrupting influence of their evil gnome oppressors from the prime, because the demons--a generally peaceful, productive, and cooperative bunch--were unprepared for an attack and couldn't properly defend themselves.

 

[Mallus]

Constrained? Not at all.

D&D is whatever game me and players make it into. Any similarities to other's people's games and/or the official 'canon' are purely accidental. Not to mention unlikely.

 

[Desdichado]

How old does one have to be to be a grognard?

I have called myself that at times but I consider the "true" grognards to be those that played D&D back in the 70's. I started in '84.

In this context, old enough to remember when "DMing" and "homebrewing" meant the exact same thing.

 

[Desdichado]

One odd note is that when playing in a "canned" setting, I feel less likely to ignore canon. I guess to me, playing in the setting--if you're going to do it--should be done whole hog.

I mean, I can get into some serious morphing of a setting, but I really wonder why you bother using the setting at all in that case.

I very greatly prefer homebrewing, where "setting assumptions" aren't there at all, though. I like picking up and reading settings, and I loot from them like I'm a pirate and they're Spanish treasure ships, but I don't really like running games set in a setting all that much, largely for that reason.

I do make occasional exceptions for Eberron, Iron Kingdoms and a few other settings here and there on occasion.