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

 

[PsyzhranV2]

Which isn’t about the D&D studio blog post. Similar subject but different threads.

Well, that is the thread that @Scribe is referring to, so ask them, idk

 

[darjr]

Well, that is the thread that @Scribe is referring to, so ask them, idk

apreciated.

 

[Maxperson]

We don't know if any creatures will continue to have alignments. Fiends didn't in VGR. There's no reason to assume that there will be alignments in any of the upcoming books.

Sure there is. They overreacted in a few books and took out alignment. Then the vocal majority got involved and suddenly it's back with Fizban's. That's a reason, whether you agree with it or not, to think that alignment will be in future books.

 

[Maxperson]

Please don't start down the rabbithole of "secret canon". Please.

They said it, not me.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

it's back with Fizban's.

It is?

 

[Maxperson]

But…. Those are my most favorite threads. The speculation threads.
As long as we all know they are not cannon…..

Well, no, they aren't cannon. However, according to WotC anything we create IS canon, so all of our threads are now canon. Yay!!!

 

[Maxperson]

It is?

Yes. They said the dragons have alignment as well as traits.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Yes. They said the dragons have alignment as well as traits.

I see. Unfortunate.

 

[Maxperson]

I see. Unfortunate.

Why is it unfortunate that people who like alignment will have it, and those that don't will have traits? Why are you against us being having what we enjoy as well as you?

 

[Malmuria]

Sure there is. They overreacted in a few books and took out alignment. Then the vocal majority got involved and suddenly it's back with Fizban's. That's a reason, whether you agree with it or not, to think that alignment will be in future books.

The term "vocal minority" sounds dismissive, as if whatever it is they are being vocal about is irrelevant simply because they (you assume) are in the minority.