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

 

[Scribe]

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

There's a long thread with 2K+ posts on it.

I remain convinced it's not an approach I like or want.

 

[dave2008]

Canon is official. Period.

But what is official? Typically I would say anything printed by WotC is "official" and therefor canon. Buy Crawford's quote here says only the core books are canon. Personally, I love the idea of everything since the core 3 being official books, but not canon.

 

[dave2008]

There's a long thread with 2K+ posts on it.

I remain convinced it's not an approach I like or want.

I don't know. I really like the idea that only the core 3 (PHB, MM, & DMG) are canon. Everything else is "official," but not canon. That seems to be what Crawford is saying here.

It means they can write any manor of lore they want, but it isn't canonical (kinda how it is actually represented in the books really).

 

[THEMNGMNT]

Peak nerd rage in this thread.

 

[Maxperson]

Just looking over various definitions of canon*, I think the word refers more to what is "acceptable for a given purpose" rather than what is "official". And that jibes with this statement.
For the purposes that use IP for novels, crpgs, and other content, the canon is whatever WotC says it is.
And for purposes of our individual tables, canon is whatever players at those tables say it is.

* ETA: to clarify, I'm referring to uses of "canon" with respect to literature, which I think is closest to the case for gaming.

Canon in the definitions that apply to this situation means "Authoritative works." Only WotC has that authority necessary to create canon. DMs have authority over their games, but it's not the same. It's not canon.

 

[a.everett1287]

Canon in the definitions that apply to this situation means "Authoritative works." Only WotC has that authority necessary to create canon. DMs have authority over their games, but it's not the same. It's not canon.

Could also be a sanctioned group of works.
Which this would be.

 

[dave2008]

Canon in the definitions that apply to this situation means "Authoritative works." Only WotC has that authority necessary to create canon. DMs have authority over their games, but it's not the same. It's not canon.

But isn't it interesting that all of their authoritative work is not considered canon. I think this really something that people are glossing over that should be discussed. The have "officially" claimed that everything after the PHB, MM, & DMG is not canon. That's big news and no one is talking about it (unless I missed it - I jumped in late)

 

[Ancalagon]

I've said it before and I'll say it again - if you are upset about canon, play a cannoneer!

OSR: Class: Cannoneer (and Cannon Rules)

My generic fantasy OSR setting is based on ~14th century France, England, and Germany. Gunpowder and cannons exist, but they have yet to mak...

coinsandscrolls.blogspot.com

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Canon in the definitions that apply to this situation means "Authoritative works." Only WotC has that authority necessary to create canon. DMs have authority over their games, but it's not the same. It's not canon.

It's canon for that game.

 

[Maxperson]

But isn't it interesting that all of their authoritative work is not considered canon. I think this really something that people are glossing over that should be discussed. The have "officially" claimed that everything after the PHB, MM, & DMG is not canon. That's big news and no one is talking about it (unless I missed it - I jumped in late)

That's not exactly what they said. They said they don't have any public facing account of what is canon after those three books, not that there isn't anything other than those three that they consider to be canon internally. I would be surprised if they put out another FR book that contradicted things already put out in Sword Coast.

There's other canon, but they haven't told us about it.