How do you deal with canon fanatics?

[HolyGrenadeFrenzy]

I know what you mean, jdrakeh. I also demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty! Or less defined areas. Whatever.

I think you're going to have a hard time in particular with FR, as fans of that setting are usually fans -because- of the canon, not because it's the most inventive fantasy world ever written.

I will say that Eberron is specifically designed to cater to the style you seem to favor. The main campaign setting is very explicit that there are some mysteries that simply up to the DM, and there are no "canon" novels -- each set of Eberron novels is its own universe and has no bearing on the setting as a whole. In addition, powerful NPCs are kept to a minimum, and those that exist are deliberately shackled to keep the PCs as heroes. For example, the most powerful cleric, for example, is only 20th level while she's near her cathedral, and drops to about 3rd level outside of it. There are plenty of high-level villains for PCs to tangle with/accidentally release/ally with to defeat greater foes, but on the whole, it really sounds like Eberron's philosophy matches yours very well.

Nicely put.

Some FR gamers are abit more rigid than Eberron. Swithing up games with different DMs and players in a community helps things move smoothly for some. Believe me, staying in just one game isn't something I am capable of at this point, myself. Even if things were simpler I would remain thirsty for the game and my creativity gets stiffled when that happens.

@JD> Sounds like you are doing pretty well with your own perspective and the advice here. Is there something, specifically, that you think could be done to assist in moving things more smoothly in your situation?

I have stayed pretty abstract and useful to anyone with such troubles yet if your needs are very specific the forum might have some kindly sage advice.

If hurting your creative spirit is allowed your troubles can get worse unless you address it for everyones sake. If you are experiencing emotional reprecussions from dealing with such a behavior, then it isn't the role playing game, it is the relationship with the player(s) and might include a need for some one on one out of gaming conversation in a neutral place like a coffee shop. Don't forget to be a friend to your friend.

You are human and so is your Canon Nazi. Does he/she know you think of them as your Canon Nazi? Probrably not, or if they do the power complex goes far beyond the game. Don't be limited to "Just Gaming Time" with your players, particularly the difficult ones. Sometimes the "real" issue may not have anything to do with the games at all.

If it is an online campaign things are much simpler with enforcing OCC and ICC demands as applicable and saying "We are done discussing this" if necissary.

 

[CruelSummerLord]

I suspect that this is a problem many GMs of many game systems have run into at one time or another:

GM: "I'd like to run a game in the Setting X, though I think I'm going to add a city here and introduce some social themes there, and. . ."

Canon Fan: "NO! If you're not using it EXACTLY AS WRITTEN, you're using it WRONG!"

That sounds pretty extreme, I assure you, though I've seen it happen more times than I'd care to recount. I received a similar response when asking certain questions about the Scarred Lands recently (much to my chagrin) and I'm starting to think that buying into the setting full tilt was a mistake if "Why would you ever change it? It's perfect as written!" is going to be a commonplace response to exercising creativity.

This drove me crazy in FR 2e and I don't see it sitting well with me anytime soon.

So, my question is, how do you deal with players who get overly excited when you, as the GM (or DM, if you prefer) add to or otherwise alter material for a given setting? In the past, I've simply explained to people that canon in the context of a RPG isn't binding (otherwise, it would be defeating the primary allure of RPGs) and that if they think is should be, then they really need to find another game to play in, because they'll hate mine.

It has come to my attention that, while effective, blunt honesty won't win me any admiration. This being the case, I'm examining better, more effective, ways to address the issue when/if it arises during actual play. So. . . how have you dealt with this issue in your own game and/or game groups?

Ooh, this is a fun issue. Your solution, my friend, can be found on page 297 of the 3E Forgotten Realms sourcebook.

Whip it out and show it to any "Canon Nazi" that whines about your changing something.


It says right there, in black and white (okay, black and beige

IT'S YOUR WORLD.

To its tremendous credit, FR seems to be replying to the complaints about metaplot and Mary Sue-ish characters, and reminding people that the PCs are the stars, and that "canon" doesn't have to be what the novels say. No less than Ed Greenwood himself (since he co-authored the book, and no doubt had to have approved that saying, since it made it into the final edition) says that CANON CAN BE CHANGED. YOU, AS DM, HAVE THE FINAL SAY!

I'd llke to see some Canon Nazi come up with a rebuttal to that!

Similarly, if you're playing in Greyhawk, remember that Gary Gygax, the creator of the world, said on page 47 of the 1E DMG that he expected DMs to put their own spin on the setting! So, if you think a lot of post-From the Ashes canon is a big steaming pile (as I do, especially if it has the name Sean K. Reynolds on it), then change it!

In a sense, you are being closer to the spirit of the game and the settings, the TRUE spirit, than any Canon Nazi, by chaning what you want. These settings are meant to be jumping-off points for your vision, to save you a lot of the drudge work if you don't have the time or inclination to build your own setting.

If the Canon Nazis insist on working in every single novel and obscure supplement, they're perfeclty welcome to run their own game. My good buddy GVDammerung and I differ markedly on our visions of Greyhawk, but if we were ever to play in each others' games, I am sure we could both defer to the other's vision of the setting, depending on which of us is DMing.

That's what good gaming is all about.

 

[IanB]

I *am* the canon fanatic in my GH games, as well as DM, so that works out well.

 

[Nightfall]

Ian,

I know what you mean about "cannon". Me I'm all about the SL cannon but in any case I'm glad JD is still open to the Scarred Lands.

*I hope...*

 

[HolyGrenadeFrenzy]

Most experienced gamers are on the cannon......Including myself. Although when using Erratta Fixes from WoTC site and the occasional contradicting rule and vague general direction statements within the "Cannon Campaign Settings as well as the Core Rules". When statements do occasionally pop up it can be some work to keep things cohesive, 3.0 and 3.5 have done better than 2nd did however there are some hang ups still. This is to be expected and although you can always go with the newer "always" updates the older; this approach is often a switch up of pros and cons.

I cetainly hope you are correct about JD still giving the Scarred Lands a shot. Wonderful setting the Scarred Lands are and they are a great place for campaigns and not a bad place to realm jump to. Even a great source for Homebrew Concoctions as well. The Creature Collections are a MUST HAVE IMO regardless of whether you use the setting as a campaign base. (Even WoTC has demonstrated this by using some excerpts for their own manuals, namely the Razor Boar and the Scorpion Folk) Yet there should definitely be more.

I even had an "accidental" boost from one creature I used from a Creature Collection with an NPC before I realized the effects of the outcome. I had produced the most dangerous combination I had seen in years........If others haven't figured it out then it is a shame. It should be obvios to Core Rule Fanatics regardless of whether they use the Scarrd Lands. I will give a clue only if requested. It is dirty, dirty, dirty and I wouldn't consider it cheating just exploiting a good find. Yet restricting it to players by background and role play should be an essential.........It can win decisive battles. Truely, I am afraid to post it outright, lest it become common place.

 

[ruleslawyer]

Incidentally, here's what I think you'd want to show the FR canon fanatics. From the first page of text in the first official FR product ever published:

On my word as a sage nothing within these pages is false, but not all of it may prove to be true. All stories presented are as I have heard them and had them recorded, all information is checked as best as possible given the limited resources of an oldbman in a small town (even if that old man has the power to flatten mountains, mind you). As you adventure in this fantasy world, be warned that not all things are as they appear, and trust to your wits, your weapons, and your common sense in surviving and profiting from the Forgotten Realms.

If that fails, show them another kind of "cannon," preferably by firing them out of it!

 

[HolyGrenadeFrenzy]

Incidentally, here's what I think you'd want to show the FR canon fanatics. From the first page of text in the first official FR product ever published:
If that fails, show them another kind of "cannon," preferably by firing them out of it!

I love that quote.....I also like your suggestion. Yet I may want to use a Gnomish version based on the Catapult Elevator but using blasting powder and more sponges!

 

[William drake]

I know what you'r talking about

I'm runing a WOT game now, and didn't allow someone to join simply because when I asked "would it bother you that I've changed somethings and added exta things elsewhere..." he answered "what did you do?" Since he didn't say NO, right off from the start I told him that I didn't think he'd enjoy my game. Now, he might have, on the other hand, that might have only lasted for a bit, that was untill he found something that I really changed for myown reasons. I just didn't want to deal with it.

Some settings are good, some are bad, and either way, DM's find things they like and dislike in them, but Gaming is where We can change that. Its our right, it's not like we can go into the books we like, and change what bothered us, here we can...if playes argree, that's good, if not, well, they need to find another game.

It's like this. You know those history stories where they allowed Planes and automatic weapons in, well, that bothers me, on the other hand, those books wouldn't be there if peoople weren't reading them. Its not for me to say, and since I take that stance, I feel others should.

My thoughts.

Game On

 

[ShinHakkaider]

Some settings are good, some are bad, and either way, DM's find things they like and dislike in them, but Gaming is where We can change that. Its our right, it's not like we can go into the books we like, and change what bothered us, here we can...if playes argree, that's good, if not, well, they need to find another game.

This sums up exactly how I feel about settings and why most of the time I don't use them. I own several settings (Gazetter of the Known Realms, Forgotten Realms (1st Ed & 3rd Ed), Greyhawk (1st, 2nd & 3rd Edition) Wilderlands and Scarred lands to name a few) but even though I prefer GH, I don't use a fixed setting. I find cool things or ideas that I like from the pre-exisiting ones, file off the names, change a few minor details and go on from there.

 

[ShinHakkaider]

I suspect that this is a problem many GMs of many game systems have run into at one time or another:

GM: "I'd like to run a game in the Setting X, though I think I'm going to add a city here and introduce some social themes there, and. . ."

Canon Fan: "NO! If you're not using it EXACTLY AS WRITTEN, you're using it WRONG!"

That sounds pretty extreme, I assure you, though I've seen it happen more times than I'd care to recount. I received a similar response when asking certain questions about the Scarred Lands recently (much to my chagrin) and I'm starting to think that buying into the setting full tilt was a mistake if "Why would you ever change it? It's perfect as written!" is going to be a commonplace response to exercising creativity.

This drove me crazy in FR 2e and I don't see it sitting well with me anytime soon.

So, my question is, how do you deal with players who get overly excited when you, as the GM (or DM, if you prefer) add to or otherwise alter material for a given setting? In the past, I've simply explained to people that canon in the context of a RPG isn't binding (otherwise, it would be defeating the primary allure of RPGs) and that if they think is should be, then they really need to find another game to play in, because they'll hate mine.

It has come to my attention that, while effective, blunt honesty won't win me any admiration. This being the case, I'm examining better, more effective, ways to address the issue when/if it arises during actual play. So. . . how have you dealt with this issue in your own game and/or game groups?

I'm sorry but I'd have to say that your original method IS the better, more effective way to address the issue. Honestly, if a player comes out at you like that then he/she deserves the blunt response, I can tell you it'd be the one that I'd give them. For me using a setting AS IS defeats the entire purpose of a DM using his/her creativity to mold and play in the campaign world. It's one of the reasons that I DM and one of the reasons I DONT use campaign settings. I'd go as far to be obnoxious (as a few other posters here have been) and say that if the canon fiends want to play canon only games maybe they should pick up a few of the FR based video games out there and play THOSE instead of sitting down and playing a tabletop game. If you as a player are looking to straightjacket the DM by attempting to force him/her to adhere to canon then you need to find a DM that wants to run that type of game and go play with him.

I know that's not what you were looking for, but in my experience, it's not worth being kind
OR civil to obnoxious gamers, especially canon fiends.