Urriak Uruk
Gaming is fun, and fun is for everyone
I thought I'd make this thread, solely because I've noticed something pretty interesting that keeps re-emerging over and over in threads across this forum for D&D, and that is the concept of "Canon."
Canon, or canonical, when applied to fiction, means events or laws that are considered "official" or "true" when in a fictional world. For Star Wars for example, the events within all the films are considered "Canonical," but the events within books written before the Disney purchase are considered "Not Canon" and did not happen.
This concept is remarkably common in fiction, especially fiction that is not written by just one author but instead by many, like the world of a video game with book tie-ins.
But for D&D, the concept of canon is... weird. And this has to do with two pretty big differences with a lot of fiction, the former being reboots, the second being "home games."
Reboots are when a world is essentially "restarted." A good example is DC Comics' New 52, when the comic company only released 52 comic lines from it's main superhero world. These 52 were all replacing not just the previous comic lines, but also the very fiction that preceded it; no piece of fact printed before could be treated as an event that the current "versions" of characters had experienced. This Batman, though still Bruce Wayne, had been restarted.
Each edition of D&D, the entire multiverse has been in effect "rebooted," though I don't think that word has ever been used. The very cosmology and order to the universe has been reshaped from edition to edition, and large changes implemented among various worlds, like Forgotten Realms in its Sunderings. Other worlds like Dark Sun get an even more traditional reboot, where events are reset into an earlier timeline, as 4E did.
So when parsing what D&D canon actually is, it seems only content published for 5E can actually be treated as truly canon, and anything published before needs to be looked at with skepticism.
The second piece of D&D canon, which throws the whole concept of canon for D&D into doubt, is that of the home-table. As many WotC writers and developers have said, although there are several "official" or "canonical" explanation for ever world and the multiverses cosmology, none of them actually impact people's hometable. Meaning, when you play a game of D&D at home, you do not impact official canon in any way; even if you're playing in Forgotten Realms, you are in effect playing in a "fan fiction" FR, one that has no impact on actual canon. For this reason, you can kill the entire Council of Waterdeep, and you're not "playing the game wrong." It is your table.
Now that I've explained canon, and it's very difficulty when applied to D&D, I'll move on to it's actual debate. That often-times, it is used as a weapon against other players, in the "bad-wrong-fun" kind of way.
Every setting has its fans, some have more than others. But as we know, there is a dark side to fandom; if you love something, and something is released that contradicts the spirit of what you like about it, some people can have visceral and negative reactions. We've all seen how people have reacted to the Star Wars prequels and new trilogy. But I've also seen comic book authors receive death threats, such as when Batman was left at the altar by Catwoman.
D&D is not immune to this. Even though D&D has so much more freedom than a normal fandom, as every table is able to create its own version of a world, and even an entirely new world entirely, people still react badly when official content seemingly contradicts their "ideal" version of the world.
Some examples;
Some people love these changes. Others completely detest them. Even more are conflicted, as am I.
But perhaps worse than official content contradicting people's beliefs, is when people use that official content as proof to confirm their POVs, as evidence to use against people that they are "playing in the setting wrong" or "aren't a true X fan."
I've seen Eberron flame wars about the cosmology, about how if you "cross the streams" there you are disrespecting the setting. I've seen people yell how Ravnica and Exandria are not truly canon D&D worlds. I've seen people roil how dragonborn do not match Greyhawk, and to add them would ruin the very essence of what GH is. That how Acq. Inc. makes a mockery of Forgotten Realms. That Takhisis and Tiamat are the same god across entirely different worlds. People nitpicking lines of content to prove their own POV, running through the same cycle of rage and frustration again and again.
And now, I finish my post with a heavy heart, knowing that none of this truly matters. That at the end of the day, we return to our own table with our own friends, and play the version of the game we choose to play. And I ask a seemingly unforgiving world; why?
Why must we use canon as a weapon, when it is simply but a handy tool provided to quickstart a game?
May we all take a deep breath, and accept there is no D&D canon that needs to matter.
Canon, or canonical, when applied to fiction, means events or laws that are considered "official" or "true" when in a fictional world. For Star Wars for example, the events within all the films are considered "Canonical," but the events within books written before the Disney purchase are considered "Not Canon" and did not happen.
This concept is remarkably common in fiction, especially fiction that is not written by just one author but instead by many, like the world of a video game with book tie-ins.
But for D&D, the concept of canon is... weird. And this has to do with two pretty big differences with a lot of fiction, the former being reboots, the second being "home games."
Reboots are when a world is essentially "restarted." A good example is DC Comics' New 52, when the comic company only released 52 comic lines from it's main superhero world. These 52 were all replacing not just the previous comic lines, but also the very fiction that preceded it; no piece of fact printed before could be treated as an event that the current "versions" of characters had experienced. This Batman, though still Bruce Wayne, had been restarted.
Each edition of D&D, the entire multiverse has been in effect "rebooted," though I don't think that word has ever been used. The very cosmology and order to the universe has been reshaped from edition to edition, and large changes implemented among various worlds, like Forgotten Realms in its Sunderings. Other worlds like Dark Sun get an even more traditional reboot, where events are reset into an earlier timeline, as 4E did.
So when parsing what D&D canon actually is, it seems only content published for 5E can actually be treated as truly canon, and anything published before needs to be looked at with skepticism.
The second piece of D&D canon, which throws the whole concept of canon for D&D into doubt, is that of the home-table. As many WotC writers and developers have said, although there are several "official" or "canonical" explanation for ever world and the multiverses cosmology, none of them actually impact people's hometable. Meaning, when you play a game of D&D at home, you do not impact official canon in any way; even if you're playing in Forgotten Realms, you are in effect playing in a "fan fiction" FR, one that has no impact on actual canon. For this reason, you can kill the entire Council of Waterdeep, and you're not "playing the game wrong." It is your table.
Now that I've explained canon, and it's very difficulty when applied to D&D, I'll move on to it's actual debate. That often-times, it is used as a weapon against other players, in the "bad-wrong-fun" kind of way.
Every setting has its fans, some have more than others. But as we know, there is a dark side to fandom; if you love something, and something is released that contradicts the spirit of what you like about it, some people can have visceral and negative reactions. We've all seen how people have reacted to the Star Wars prequels and new trilogy. But I've also seen comic book authors receive death threats, such as when Batman was left at the altar by Catwoman.
D&D is not immune to this. Even though D&D has so much more freedom than a normal fandom, as every table is able to create its own version of a world, and even an entirely new world entirely, people still react badly when official content seemingly contradicts their "ideal" version of the world.
Some examples;
- Eberron fitting into the larger D&D cosmology, instead of being an entirely separate cosmology that cannot cross into other worlds.
- Greyhawk having dragonborn and tieflings, races not mentioned in that world before 5E.
- Forgotten Realms now having an Acquisitions Incorporated book that seemingly makes a comedy podcast canon.
- Ravnica officially fitting into the multiverse, despite seemingly having its own cosmology withing the rules of Magic the Gathering.
- Exandria, and by extension all of Critical Role, getting an official book, and some of its characters making it into main headline adventures (Arkhan in Avernus).
Some people love these changes. Others completely detest them. Even more are conflicted, as am I.
But perhaps worse than official content contradicting people's beliefs, is when people use that official content as proof to confirm their POVs, as evidence to use against people that they are "playing in the setting wrong" or "aren't a true X fan."
I've seen Eberron flame wars about the cosmology, about how if you "cross the streams" there you are disrespecting the setting. I've seen people yell how Ravnica and Exandria are not truly canon D&D worlds. I've seen people roil how dragonborn do not match Greyhawk, and to add them would ruin the very essence of what GH is. That how Acq. Inc. makes a mockery of Forgotten Realms. That Takhisis and Tiamat are the same god across entirely different worlds. People nitpicking lines of content to prove their own POV, running through the same cycle of rage and frustration again and again.
And now, I finish my post with a heavy heart, knowing that none of this truly matters. That at the end of the day, we return to our own table with our own friends, and play the version of the game we choose to play. And I ask a seemingly unforgiving world; why?
Why must we use canon as a weapon, when it is simply but a handy tool provided to quickstart a game?
May we all take a deep breath, and accept there is no D&D canon that needs to matter.
