D&D 5E WotC Explains 'Canon' In More Detail

Recently, WotC's Jeremy Crawford indicated that only the D&D 5th Edition books were canonical for the roleplaying game. In a new blog article, Chris Perkins goes into more detail about how that works, and why.

This boils down to a few points:

• Each edition of D&D has its own canon, as does each video game, novel series, or comic book line.
• The goal is to ensure players don't feel they have to do research of 50 years of canon in order to play.
• It's about remaining consistent.

If you’re not sure what else is canonical in fifth edition, let me give you a quick primer. Strahd von Zarovich canonically sleeps in a coffin (as vampires do), Menzoberranzan is canonically a subterranean drow city under Lolth’s sway (as it has always been), and Zariel is canonically the archduke of Avernus (at least for now). Conversely, anything that transpires during an Acquisitions Incorporated live game is not canonical in fifth edition because we treat it the same as any other home game (even when members of the D&D Studio are involved).

D&D Canon | D&D Studio Blog | Dungeons & Dragons

In this D&D Studio Blog, Chris Perkins describes the D&D Studio's position on canonicity.

dnd.wizards.com

D&D General - WotC: Novels & Non-5E Lore Are Officially Not Canon

At a media press briefing last week, WotC's Jeremey Crawford clarified what is and is not canon for D&D. "For many years, we in the Dungeons & Dragons RPG studio have considered things like D&D novels, D&D video games, D&D comic books, as wonderful expressions of D&D storytelling and D&D lore...

www.enworld.org

 

[Asisreo]

Canon is really only inspiration and a target of theft for me, so I don't mind them changing the canon. I can certainly see this affecting those that take canon seriously, though.

 

[darjr]

I think this is for the best. Interested in hearing what others think.

 

[Voadam]

An interesting bit:

"Fifth edition’s canon includes every bit of lore that appears in the most up-to-date printings of the fifth edition Player’s Handbook, Monster Manual, and Dungeon Master’s Guide. Beyond these core rulebooks, we don’t have a public-facing account of what is canonical in fifth edition because we don’t want to overload our fellow creators and business partners."

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

Public-facing is the key line there. I've no doubt that they have an internal wiki that they use.

we don’t have a public-facing account of what is canonical in fifth edition because we don’t want to overload our fellow creators and business partners."

Perfectly happy with the approach as outlined by Chris Perkins.

Although, now I kinda want my Modrons to have been built in a Radio Shack.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

It's interesting how much that blog post echoes the thread here. Either great (?) minds think alike or he may have peeked at the thread at some point.

 

[Yaarel]

Perkins writes, "This is true not only for lore but art as well."

So different genres of D&D can have monsters and lineages that look different as well.

 

[Yaarel]

I suspect some of the official attention to lore relates to updating the lore to be more welcoming to reallife players of various genders and ethicities.

Certain assumptions within earlier editions of D&D settings dont necessarily apply within 5e.

 

[Charlaquin]

I feel like this is just stating the obvious for people who were freaking out over things they read into the earlier statement. No, this doesn’t mean any lore from any novels are being thrown out or re-written. It just means the designers aren’t beholden to decisions made by previous creative teams for previous versions of the game, or by authors of any stories within the official settings. Continuities remain intact, but separate, as they have always been.

 

[darjr]

It's interesting how much that blog post echoes the thread here. Either great (?) minds think alike or he may have peeked at the thread at some point.

Or is posting here under a pseudonym?