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

 

[Bolares]

Not that I care too much about what WotC calls canon for Eberron. My Ebrron is my Eberron, and I care so much more about KB's take than WotC's

 

[Remathilis]

I think people are over simplifying the statement. The setting books are obviously canon for that specific setting.

People are deliberately reading what they want into these statements; veiled threats, innuendo, literal and strict constructionist readings, dictionary definitions, debating the meaning of the word "is", etc. What do you expect of fans of a game notorious for rules lawyers?

 

[Bolares]

They give contradictory information. They say that only the core three are canon, right after they title the section "canon begins with the core three." Then they say, "If you not sure what else is canonical..." indicating that more is canon than the core three.

They say the core books are their public-facing information. It's what they present us and "require" us to know if we care about canon. That does not mean they don't have a company bible that dictates what's canon or not. They are just saying "the core books are all you need to know about 5e's canon", not "the core books are all there is in 5e canon" it may be confusing, but there is a difference

 

[Henadic Theologian]

The three core books are the WotC canon.

However, the Forgotten Realms setting is the default setting for the three core books.

Players who are playing in a different setting, have their own canon for that setting. Namely, the setting guide. This setting content is split between the official WotC book, Eberron: Rising from the Last War, and additional content that Baker and collaborators provide elsewhere.

Perkins doesnt explicitly mention the canonicity of Eberron, but he does mention how separate novels and separate gaming campaigns develop their own canon that is true for their own world. Eberron is in that category. The additional Eberron material comes from the games that Baker and others play.

No there is according to the blog posts now at at least 5 different Eberron canons, 3.5e Eberron canon, 4e Eberron canon, 5e Eberron canon, Novel Eberron Canon, and Video Game Eberron Canon. They took canon and shattered it to pieces without concidering the consquences.

 

[Bolares]

People are deliberately reading what they want into these statements; veiled threats, innuendo, literal and strict constructionist readings, dictionary definitions, debating the meaning of the word "is", etc. What do you expect of fans of a game notorious for rules lawyers?

DON'T YOU DARE SPEAK ILL OF US RULES LAWYERS

 

[Henadic Theologian]

The three core books are the WotC canon.

However, the Forgotten Realms setting is the default setting for the three core books. (That is the way it is, tho I wish core lacked a default setting, and focused on worldbuilding and examples from various other settings.)

Players who are playing in a different setting, have their own canon for that setting. Namely, the setting guide. For Eberron, this setting content is split between the official WotC book, Eberron: Rising from the Last War, and additional content that Baker and collaborators provide elsewhere.

Perkins doesnt explicitly mention the canonicity of Eberron, but he does mention how separate novels and separate gaming campaigns develop their own canon that is true for their own world. Eberron is in that category. The additional Eberron material comes from the games that Baker and others play.

There is no default setting for the core books, multiple settings are mentioned in the core books as examples.

 

[Yaarel]

They give contradictory information. They say that only the core three are canon, right after they title the section "canon begins with the core three." Then they say, "If you not sure what else is canonical..." indicating that more is canon than the core three.

The "canon" for my setting, is nonidentical with the canon of WotC.

The WotC canon is PH, MM, DMG.

Each "expression" of D&D can develop its own canon (for narrative consistency, story planning, etcetera).

But there is only one WotC canon. And it is minimalist: only the three core books.

 

[Bolares]

No there is according to the blog posts now at at least 5 different Eberron canons, 3.5e Eberron canon, 4e Eberron canon, 5e Eberron canon, Novel Eberron Canon, and Video Game Eberron Canon. They took canon and shattered it to pieces without concidering the consquences.

uuuh... that's always been the case for Eberron...

 

[Remathilis]

DON'T YOU DARE SPEAK ILL OF US RULES LAWYERS

Or you'll do what? Cite page numbers at me?

 

[Bolares]

They took canon and shattered it to pieces without concidering the consquences.

And what are those?