D&D 5E Whatever "lore" is, it isn't "rules."

[Hussar]

Now here's another question. If a setting has no lore covering something, does it become homebrew if the DM colours in the blank spaces?

Or is that covered under the addition isn't change caveat?

At which point I pretty much challenge anyone to have played a canon game. I mean at the very least you are adding characters. Unless you are playing pregen canon characters, how can you play any setting without changing it?

 

[Hussar]

See this is why I say [MENTION=48965]Imaro[/MENTION]'s bar is too high. I could play a 100% official game and it would be homebrew by his definition.

I could play GDQ set in Greyhawk using 1e rules. That's about as canon as you could get right? But if we succeed and kill Lolth, we're now homebrewing since the lore of my game no longer matches canon.

A 100% official game using pregens for that campaign results in a homebrew campaign? There's something seriously wrong there.

 

[Lanefan]

See this is why I say [MENTION=48965]Imaro[/MENTION]'s bar is too high. I could play a 100% official game and it would be homebrew by his definition.

I could play GDQ set in Greyhawk using 1e rules. That's about as canon as you could get right? But if we succeed and kill Lolth, we're now homebrewing since the lore of my game no longer matches canon.

A 100% official game using pregens for that campaign results in a homebrew campaign? There's something seriously wrong there.

In fairness to the opposition, [MENTION=22779]Hussar[/MENTION] , I think they're mostly using the campaign's starting point to define whether it's canon. I don't think anybody has any problems with what might happen to anything during the actual run of play; it's whether the DM messes with it during campaign design that sets the canon toggle.

Lan-"starting to run out of bad canon jokes"-efan

 

[Mirtek]

A 100% official game using pregens for that campaign results in a homebrew campaign? There's something seriously wrong there.

Why? Who says you have to play a canon game? As you already concluded, any single game becomes non-canon as soon as you start playing.

Canon is for the (meta-)story side of D&D so that te various adventures, sourcebooks and novels can continuously build upon each other

For games canon is merely a jump off point

 

[Aldarc]

So basically WoW orcs.

Not really. Eberron orcs believe they have a duty to ward the world against aberrations (daelkyr), outsiders, and undead, and they have peaceful communities alongside humans, from where we get half-orcs (and House Tharashk). There are also the typical CE orcs, but these tend to worship the Dragon Below. WoW orcs are shamanistic orcs whose spiritual religion was about living in harmony with their ancestral and elemental spirits (among other things). But these orcs also have a sort of "cycle of hatred" history with humans of the Alliance.

 

[Hussar]

Why? Who says you have to play a canon game? As you already concluded, any single game becomes non-canon as soon as you start playing.

Canon is for the (meta-)story side of D&D so that te various adventures, sourcebooks and novels can continuously build upon each other

For games canon is merely a jump off point

But, isn't that the point though? If every single game becomes non canon as soon as you start playing, what use is it to label the game canon or not? And, let's be honest here, most games are going to be non-canon before the game even starts. Players will want to play this or that class/race/background that is going to be not 100% kosher. DM's are going to add towns, NPC's, dungeons, events and various other details before the first die is dropped.

Doesn't that make the notion that a campaign is canon or not a pretty nebulous idea? At best, you could be close to canon or far from canon, but, virtually from word go, you are going to be straying from canon. And, if that's true, what's the point of telling someone else that their campaign is canon or not?

And, as far as the meta-story side of D&D building upon each other, let's be honest, that's a house of cards at best. The canon of the game has changed, and sometimes changed radically over the years. How solid of a foundation are we really working with here? Whether you want to talk about core or specific settings, what is canon is a high speed moving target. What is a _____ is a question that depends on who's asking and when.

Again, I have no real issue with the idea of canon/flavor as a starting point. Fantastic. It's something to use to generate ideas or get the creative juices going. No problems. And, if that was as far as things went, I'd shut my mouth and not worry about it. For example, there's a thread on the boards right now: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?522355-Seeking-details-for-5e-Neverwinter-beyond-SCAG about someone looking for a bit more details about Neverwinter for his/her campaign. Ok, cool. No problems. I can't help, as I'm not really up on the material, but, fair enough.

My beef comes when changes get judged based on how well they dovetail with what came before. That's my bugaboo. The idea that a concept is bad, not because the idea itself is bad but because canon has some sort of intrinsic value that means that what came before is automatically priveleged. It baffles me, mostly because it gets applied so unevenly. It's perfectly acceptable, for example, to make succubus not demons or devils at all, but, changing them from demon to devil was completely wrong? Bwuh? If canon has intrinsic value, then these changes should be judged accordingly.

But, like I said, the judgement is based far more on the preferences of the judge than on whether or not something really is a change.

 

[Mirtek]

, what use is it to label the game canon or not?

There is no use. That's why i would never bother to do it.

But i am not interested to discuss other peoples games anyway. When i go online to discuss D&D i want only to discuss the metasetting/-story

I am not interested what people do at their tables

 

[pemerton]

When i go online to discuss D&D i want only to discuss the metasetting/-story

I am not interested what people do at their tables

My interests are the opposite of these. I'm not very excited by the "metasetting". I'm quite interested in what people do at their tables, though - both on its own account, and because it might help me think about what I might do at my table.

 

[Imaro]

@Hussar... just curious... did you find those posts where I claimed something someone else was doing was badwrongfun? Where I claimed someone in the thread was doing it wrong... or any of the other things you've accused me of during this discussion and then never actually addressed? Because at this point, after the second time you've done it I'm not too keen to just let it go again and start answering your questions... how about you answer the call out for proof of your accusations and then we can continue the conversation? Or admit that in both cases you were mistaken and we can move on from there...

 

[Aldarc]

But, isn't that the point though? If every single game becomes non canon as soon as you start playing, what use is it to label the game canon or not? And, let's be honest here, most games are going to be non-canon before the game even starts. Players will want to play this or that class/race/background that is going to be not 100% kosher. DM's are going to add towns, NPC's, dungeons, events and various other details before the first die is dropped.

Doesn't that make the notion that a campaign is canon or not a pretty nebulous idea? At best, you could be close to canon or far from canon, but, virtually from word go, you are going to be straying from canon. And, if that's true, what's the point of telling someone else that their campaign is canon or not?

And, as far as the meta-story side of D&D building upon each other, let's be honest, that's a house of cards at best. The canon of the game has changed, and sometimes changed radically over the years. How solid of a foundation are we really working with here? Whether you want to talk about core or specific settings, what is canon is a high speed moving target. What is a _____ is a question that depends on who's asking and when.

One certainly has to wonder if Wizards of the Coast even shares the same disposition towards notions of setting canon as some people in this thread, particularly when it comes to adding things to the setting. As you say, a GM may add a town or dungeon into a setting. So what happens to canon when WotC publish that Yawning Portal supplement that presumably drops these previously Greyhawk dungeons into Forgotten Realms for AL play? Are we also not meant to potentially take some of these published dungeons for FR and drop them into whatever non-FR campaign setting we are using? Am I breaking canon by playing the Red Hand of Doom in Eberron?