D&D Movie/TV The D&D versions of Theros, Ravnica, and Arcvios should be seperate from the MtG versions.

[Undrave]

What difference does that make? If you're a nerd for continuity, the common consumers opinion might not matter to you at all.

If the common consumers does not care, usually the content creator won't care as much as you. It means you can't always expect answers.

 

[dave2008]

Just like the Boom Comics storyline and the hypothetical Netflix cartoon are seperate canons, I would like the MtG D&D crossover to be seperate from the main MtG setting, which in some ways they already are.

Thoughts?

I don't care about magic itself. I only like it as a feeder for art, ideas, and settings for D&D. So I only care about the lore that is brought to the D&D side of things, and so far that is very little.

 

[dave2008]

This is one of many reasons why I wouldn't be a nerd for either of those things.

Micah, I know you are a big lore fan. However, I was wondering how you handle all the changes and unreliable narrators and such? Much of the lore in D&D history is not treated as "fact," bust as a perspective or story. Pretty much all of the 4e lore was presented this way and that edition was not the first to do it. There doesn't appear to be a set in stone canon for most things. How do you choose what to accept and what to reject?

 

[Micah Sweet]

If the common consumers does not care, usually the content creator won't care as much as you. It means you can't always expect answers.

Good worldbuilding affects everyone, even those who claim not to care about it or those who don't consciously notice it. It is truly the unsung hero of story.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Of course .

I don't expect home campaigns to matter outside of those campaigns.

If your D&D campaign does not effect WotC's MTG campaign, why would you think the reverse might apply?

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

And some times the lore is intentionally altered by the DMs to avoid the rest of players knew too much thanks the fandom wiki. The lore or background should be a source of inspiration, not a straitjacket. Of course we may wish enough coherence with the continuity, but we shouldn't sacrifice the fun and the creative freedom.

In my opinion currently the all metaplots are stopped but the "storylines", and I suspect because Hasbro would rather to await the screenwritters choose the plot for future videogames and media productions. This could be good because they are professionals with experience, they can suggest better ideas.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Micah, I know you are a big lore fan. However, I was wondering how you handle all the changes and unreliable narrators and such? Much of the lore in D&D history is not treated as "fact," bust as a perspective or story. Pretty much all of the 4e lore was presented this way and that edition was not the first to do it. There doesn't appear to be a set in stone canon for most things. How do you choose what to accept and what to reject?

I try to embrace everything that can be made to make sense together, at least in broad strokes, even if I don't personally care for it. If there is an obvious disconnect where I can't make that reconciliation and have to choose, I choose the version I like the best.

For example, a lot of stuff in Planescape was presented as the "real truth" that those bumbling Prime sages misinterpreted or otherwise got wrong. I liked that idea, so that's how it is for me.

A second example. I accepted every update to the Ravenloft setting from the original module through 2e and the licensed 3e stuff, because to my mind all of that was additive to the original or provided a different context for previous events without changing them. WotC efforts in the setting since then changed aspects of the lore in ways that are harder to reconcile, but until VRGtR they just affected Strahd and Barovia so were easy to ignore. The last book rewrote the entire setting from the ground up, however, so I can't accept it as the same setting and resent that they are presenting it as such.

A third example. Third Edition changed a number of cosmological things in ways I didn't care for, but since the changes most strongly affected settings I have little investment in (Forgotten Realms and Eberron), they were easy to ignore so I could maintain my beloved 2e lore for the settings I did care about. Fourth edition changed the entire system, so I had to wall it off. Now, since the 4e World Axis is actually pretty cool as its own thing, I could appreciate it as such. I even added the Feywild and Shadowfell to my cosmology, as they filled some cosmological gaps and were useful in their own right without disrupting established lore all that much. When 5e did the same in 2014 I was quite pleased.

But in the last few years, and especially since Tasha's and their announcement that canon no longer matters, nearly fourty years of storytelling in D&D products has ended. I can't see it another way.

 

[Micah Sweet]

If your D&D campaign does not effect WotC's MTG campaign, why would you think the reverse might apply?

People have different feelings about canon. I know you don't care about it at least as much as I do care. Neither of us is going to convince anyone. Even I only responded above because I was asked a direct question, but honestly I'm just tired of the whole thing. I think at this point we all know where everyone stands.

 

[Umbran]

They do seem to be setting up a new metaplot through their multiverse shenanigans though. The metaplot may rise again soon.

A few cross-references and Easter eggs do not a metaplot make.

Note that metaplot in an RPG has different implications than in a CCG. In a CCG, metaplot generates new content in the form of cards that reference the metaplot. This is a benefit for the player. But the action of playing the card game is not expected to impact the game world.

In an RPG, the actions of the players are expected to impact the game world (or, the local version of that world at their table). But, the metaplot is driven by characters the players don't control. Metaplot makes the major events of the setting about someone else's adventures that the players don't significantly interact with or change. That's... not great from an RPG perspective.

 

[Minigiant]

This why I said the MTG setting aren't really new D&D setting.