How do you deal with canon fanatics?

[Lonely Tylenol]

Its your world, change it how you want. Warn your players beforehand that you are making changes.

While this is a fine sentiment, I don't think that jdrakeh needs our permission to alter canon, despite how willing people are to grant it in this thread. I think that, instead, a helpful thing to do would be for those of us who have had some success working around canon freaks to post advice on how to do so. Unfortunately, I can't contribute. Fortunately, it's because I never have to deal with canon freaks.

 

[Nightfall]

I guess I misread parts of what JD was suggesting, but hey if he wants to create a socialist state in Ghelspad or anywhere else, more power to him. I just point out that even Calastia still has it share of internal and well as external problems. They still have areas where titanspawn emerge. Plus there's all that intrigue going on.

 

[jdrakeh]

I guess I misread parts of what JD was suggesting, but hey if he wants to create a socialist state in Ghelspad or anywhere else, more power to him. I just point out that even Calastia still has it share of internal and well as external problems. They still have areas where titanspawn emerge. Plus there's all that intrigue going on.

It's not all about you (really) In point of fact, I wasn't referring to any response that you gave.

 

[Nightfall]

JD,

Well I know, since I was the one responsible for starting the thread. But I wasn't sure if I was all that helpful or not. See the LAST thing I want to do is turn someone off to the Scarred Lands. So anything I can do to change that or even help improve it is always welcome.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

The selling point of an official setting is that everyone knows exactly what's there, and thus what to expect, when they sit down to play. Deviating from the canon dilutes that quality, and it doesn't take much deviation to render such a quality utterly useless- you might as well brew your own. For the same reason that everyone expect the rules of a D&D game to be consistent across tables, so it is with setting canon; the work is already done for you, so all you have to do is plug it in and play the game- the variety comes from the regions features (rules modules--psi, TOB, etc.--used) and not from the whims of the GM.

The appeal to that idea, that you can enter a new game (whether a new campaign started by your group or when you join a new group) and already know your way around the place, is great.

I, too, prefer the setting to adher to "canon" as closely as possible, with changes that have a reason and are not done on the DMs whim. Mind you, "I don't know about the canon parts of this because I don't have that book" or "I really hated how canon turned out to be in this case" are perfectly good reasons in my opinion. "Couldn't be assed to read those 4 lines in the write-up of the region I base my campaign around", of course, isn't.

The most important thing, in my opinion, is not to adher to canon at all costs, but tell the players about the changes and possible changes. You didn't like how that one guy is now king? Fine, let him be drawn and quartered by an angry mob - but tell the players you did it. You haven't read this sourcebook or that novel and might get things wrong because of that? Okay (though if someone in the party has, you might ask him to give you a short summary of the important parts), but tell your players.

If they want to visit king Karl II, and when they ask about him at the palace and everybody laughs at the characters and tells them "Haven't you heard? He was drawn and quartered, Queen Nellie's in charge now!", you're being a jerk.


A useful thing is to start small. You don't have to treat the whole game world as your playground. Only an area of it - one village, one area, one realm. That way, it won't matter whether King Karl II or Queen Nellie reigns in far-off Monarchia, because the players don't have anything to do with that place. That gives you some time until you have to confront these things, if at all.

The "player knowledge vs. character knowledge" angle can work well, too: If the characters do not have any knowledge about Monarchia, you never need to mention that there's now a Queen reigning there. But make sure that as soon as they have reason to know these things - they are on a mission in Monarchia and the recent coup is still a matter of public talk, so they can't help but overhear it in the tavern's common room.



Bottom line is: The DM does have the right to change the canon. In fact, he can change whatever he wants, but a good DM won't just change stuff just for spite, or will withhold that information. And the players do have the right to be informed about changes, especially if their characters have reason to know it.

The DM who changes stuff on a whim and doesn't tell the players is as much wrong as is the player who insists on 100% canon material in someone's personal campaign.

 

[robberbaron]

Never had this kind of trouble, even when my Star Wars party contained a complete SW nerd. Then again, he doesn't always pay attention to what's going on so maybe he's just missed the changes.

I haven't bought a Campaign Setting either but, if I did, I would change the bits that I didn't like and tell the players when it was going to impact them, e.g., if there were any restrictions on characters I'd tell them before they rolled up.

 

[Elf Witch]

This is one of the reasons I prefer to homebrew so that I don't have to deal with players who are canon fanatics. In worlds like Forgotten Realms there is so much change that happenes that sometimes it is impossible to keep up.

It is why the only setting I will run in is Kalamar because of its static timeline. I love it because once you get stared in play your players change the world it becomes your Kalamar game and it won't look like anyone else's Kalamar game.

I also like that they don't stat out every important NPC take Kabori in one game I played in he was an evil human bent on world conquest in my game he is actually a good guy who is being controlled by his evil advisors.

Neither conflicts with canon.

How I think you should handle canon fanatics is to talk to them before the game let them know that things are going to be changed and what things are going to be changed. If they can't handle it then politely tell them that this is not the game for them.

Before I told them I would try and find out why there was such an issue over it. If is because they like knowing what is going on so they can role play and develop their character better then I would spend the time to write up what the changes are so they have access to it.

As a player I would be upset if I was told we are going to play Eberron and I go and make a character and do its background only to find out that no Cyre wasn't destroyed it was Breland and there are no airships or warforged and magic is rare and dragonmarked people are hunted and burned at the stake. See at that point you are not playing Eberron you are doing a homevrew with some Eberron flavor. As a player it would frustrate me because I would constantly feel lost.

Now if a DM said I want to play Eberron but I want to set the game in the middle of the war so this has not happened yet I would think cool let's do it.

As someone else said if you are going to change the canon let your players know ahead of time don't wait until they are in the middle of play and say oh by the way this is changed.

 

[HolyGrenadeFrenzy]

Regardless of a situation, even if it upsets my sensiblities, I consider that the campaign should be given plenty of time to unravel. Both as a player and a GM/DM/Storyteller I feel this way.

Canon VS presentation doesn't allow much for DM to do other than stay in the corner you allow them to survive in.

Desiring a certain type of game is fine and most Gaming Referees will work with players yet "always as we demand" will push any game into the grave. How can players know what they want if they are never given new challenges for their minds? The world being messed with is fine and should be expected.

The Multiverse and Splinter Universes do not always agree, in fact, that is oftern why they are the way they are.

As for major changes to historical background. There have been games and storylines which play on this and are a great story line. For those that had played the first edition Ravenloft into the ground, combining it with the House on Gryphon Hill:Ravenloft II was an excellent time because of the way it messed with the players. Many of the other modules/adventures can use extreme tweeks and combinations using this method. Chronomancer games are often like that........

Influence from Ray Bradbury's "A Sound of Thunder" can be of great help. Sorting out anomalies by using the players, signs and soothsayers/prophets works for flavor, can lead to a woderful gaming campaign. Many such things are not a constant. Having many characters in about a dozen of so adventures that then find that even the events they were in are historically different than the remember, not because of their memories but because of changes in location is terrible for players.......But it makes for a gooood story. Not to mention, it is great enough fun for DMs that a creative one can invite the players to be thankful that you can mess with these kinds of feelings and sensiblities without ruining a game.

Literally, play Isle of the Ape with their favorite characters and see what I mean.

Kill a few PC's slow and let one live to spread the fear of an enemy just so the character finally does return with their knowledge of a dreaded enemy and a trained army years later to have victory in battle and still show some mercy toward those it is wise to be merciful over because of what is good and right.

This all in itself has little to do with canon yet what if I am leaving out the "other" circumstances like the higher level character knowledge which makes a world "doomed" for any variety of reasons.

It is my personal belief that a storyteller can and should draw on any example that they personally feel can contribute to the experience of gaming/storytelling. All sources, from Novel or books of anykind, TV series, Movie, Radio, Mythology,Academics, Art, Epics, Poems, Games- video.strategy or card; whatever else the past, present and future holds as a resource is fair gaming. With all such things being fair gaming the most important thing I can think to mention is this... Other than what a Referee says whom is to say what is what?

OH, that is right, that is the one running the games job.

Desiring a means to "control" a DM is a wonderful thing to never get simply because, " I am sorry but Control DM is a Divine Salient Ablity that your character does not possess and the Epic Spell of the same is forbidden by ALL the gods."

Role with it. Thinking outside the box is vital to any Table Top RPG. Test your skills and take any game as a learning oppurtunity.

For the record, I have played and ran in games where everything was from memory with nothing more than a deck of playing cards for working out the dice rolls and random factors. Done while hiking with my own companions using mnuenonics. Some of the most fun I have ever had. Freeing up the mind can be more useful than relying on "what others expect".

According to Canon there are visiters from other places. I can run a very rigid canon game and then demonstrate with out conflict why the Canon Fanatic is not getting the point. However, I haven'f felt the need since the last time I ran such a game for some competing Fratenities. It was great fun and everyone had a great time, including me a stranger to both frats, yet I haven't returned to that kind of play in a number of years. Although I still try and keep up, I do have my own projects to work on as well.

 

[Kunimatyu]

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.

 

[Desdichado]

I have never come across that situation due to two factors:

1. Any player who had that kind of attitude is extremely unlikely to be someone I'd be playing with in the first place.
   
   
2. I hardly ever have run a game set in a canned setting; homebrewing is (at least) half of what makes GMing fun for me.