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, but they are not canonical for the D&D roleplaying game."

"If you’re looking for what’s official in the D&D roleplaying game, it’s what appears in the products for the roleplaying game. Basically, our stance is that if it has not appeared in a book since 2014, we don’t consider it canonical for the games."

2014 is the year that D&D 5th Edition launched.

He goes on to say that WotC takes inspiration from past lore and sometimes adds them into official lore.

Over the past five decades of D&D, there have been hundreds of novels, more than five editions of the game, about a hundred video games, and various other items such as comic books, and more. None of this is canon. Crawford explains that this is because they "don’t want DMs to feel that in order to run the game, they need to read a certain set of novels."

He cites the Dragonlance adventures, specifically.

 

[TheSword]

The daft thing is that if you read the article linked by Morrus in the first post the justification is really obvious.

• Novels, computer games and comics are wonderful expressions of storytelling and lore.
• Not canon for the rpg.
• They want people to read novels for the joy of reading them not as homework for the RPG
• Dragonlance is a wonderful war story and the novel is just one way of that story playing out. DMs and Players should be able to have it play out their own way
• That’s the same way they view all novels.
• The moment you hit the gaming table it’s no longer WOC’s Dragonlance or Realms, it’s now yours.
• Take inspiration from the novels and video games but don’t be bound by them.
• The same applies to pre 5e accessories and modules which often just update info from the novels.
• Designers still think highly of past stories and use them for inspiration
• There is no longer a need for cataclysmic events to justify changes with editions.
• Fans that disagree with WOC canon can replace it with their preference.

I’m finding it really hard to see how any of this is controversial. In fact it’s pretty amazing. It frees them up to release the prism pentad as an adventure for players rather than being spectators in someone else’s story.

It puts an end to the Mega-disasters of the forgotten realms and means they can release an adventure that lets my players discover Myth Drannor, or use the Gatekeepers crystal to destroy Hellgate keep. I really fail to see how this is bad for the game. It’s bleeding awesome to see WOC are going to open the best of what’s gone before to new players for them interact with, and not just with a history check.

 

[PsyzhranV2]

This discussion is reminding me of two different general trends towards fiction: curative and transformative. I believe this Vox article is where I first heard of the distinction.

Why we're terrified of fanfiction

We love hating the things teenage girls love. Fandom is just one example.

www.vox.com

The section of the article most relevant to my point:

Some fans are curative, which means they're into knowing all the trivia about a given piece of media or canon and discussing it in minute detail. Some are transformative, which means they're into writing fanfiction or drawing fan art and making fan vids. Some are into both! Fandom is not a monolith.

Quoting user/LordByronic from Reddit who seems to have been where the author took this concept from:

Curative fandom is all about knowledge. It's about making sure that everything is lined up and in order, knowing how it works, and finding out which one is the best. What is the Doctor Who canon? Who is the best Doctor? How do Weeping Angels work? Etc etc. Curative fandom is p. much the norm on reddit, especially r/gallifrey.

Transformative fandom is about change. Let's write fic! Let's make art! Let's make a fan vid! Let's cosplay! Let's somehow change the text. Why is Three easier to ship, while Seven is more difficult? What would happen if ______? Transformative fandom is more or less the norm on tumblr. (And livejournal, and dreamwidth, and fanfiction websites, and...)

The original context of the article and of the discussion that inspired it was over a perceived split in the Doctor Who fandom along gender lines, and why fanfiction - whose authors largely skewed female - was generally reviled by the greater fanbase who leaned male. But I think the curative/transformative distinction has a lot of potential as a frame of analysis, even beyond gender differences in fandom.

After thinking on this for a bit, I think this curative/transformative thing is why I'm having such a hard time taking the super pro-canon people seriously.

Despite what I've said in this thread, I actually do the whole encyclopedic canon nerd thing. Not the metatextual commentary when I try to point out something problematic or bigoted in the themes of a work, but the whole "How does Darth Vader's suit work" or "How strong is Goku's Kamehameha" and other nitpicking like that. There was one time when some of my friends were super into My Hero Academia and I basically went on a 2 day lore binge memorizing everything Horikoshi wrote about the world and the characters despite not having watched or read the series myself and having no plans to do so.

But as I've grown more exposed to the TTRPG world, I've been doing that less and less for TTRPGs, and started to see the futility of such. I've been wondering why, and refreshing myself on the curative/transformative thing gave me the words to express it.

I've come to see tabletop RPGs as an inherently transformative medium. Transformative from the jump, with little room for the curative approach. TTRPGs are tools to create your own stories. We can argue over the specific processes and methods of play until the cows come home (who knows how many times the "system matters" discourse has been dragged out of its grave back into the world of the living), but at the end of the day, no matter if the story has been prepared beforehand or if it is spontaneously generated at the table, if it's the GM or the players who are the primary drivers of the story beats, each table creates their own stories, limited by the rules of the game, but after that only by their own imaginations. This applies just as much if they're playing in an already established IP's setting as it would to them playing in a world of their own creation. Basically, tabletop roleplaying is collaborative fanfiction, and since when have fanfic authors given the slightest hoot about canon?

 

[Grendel_Khan]

I’m finding it really hard to see how any of this is controversial. In fact it’s pretty amazing. It frees them up to release the prism pentad as an adventure for players rather than being spectators in someone else’s story.

I suspect this thread is mostly just spinning its wheels at this point, but since you're zooming out to look at the bigger picture (a very good idea at this point) here's my attempt at providing the zoomed-out counterpoint--though I'm doing this in sort of a defense attorney role, since I don't have an emotional attachment to any of it:

-The main objections to wiping away a certain amount of canon are not about function at the game table, but about emotional investment in storylines and world-building that might have seemed cumulative and curated. People can argue over the quality or consistency of that curation over time, but if someone cares enough about it to be upset by Crawford's comments, they must feel that it was at least pretty good/well-managed material.

-People who are really into canon are often flexible about details changing and inconsistencies--they aren't always as rigid as anti-canon folks often make them out to be.

-If someone is into D&D for the lore and worldbuilding and sense of history, and now they say they're frustrated enough to quit buying WotC products (a likely story, welcome to the Resistance, etc., but I digress), what's wrong with that? There are a lot of ways to enjoy RPGs, and emergent storytelling at the table is one of them (very hard for me to not go off on a tangent about how much better other systems handle that sort of thing than 5e........) but feeling like you're part of a living and ongoing and, again, curated story is another. Pardon the dorky expression, but no need to yuck anyone else's yum. They're disappointed, and expressing that disappointment, but I don't really seem them claiming that everyone should care as much about canon, or telling anyone to run or play their games while wielding canon like a cudgel. If anything, that sort of thing is happening in the other direction, with some people only pointing out the downsides of having any sort of canon in games.

In fact, that seems like the more productive conversation to focus on at this point:

Setting aside all other benefits of canon, how does it help some GMs and players, and are there techniques for using it without making it a stumbling block?

 

[Micah Sweet]

The daft thing is that if you read the article linked by Morrus in the first post the justification is really obvious.

• Novels, computer games and comics are wonderful expressions of storytelling and lore.
• Not canon for the rpg.
• They want people to read novels for the joy of reading them not as homework for the RPG
• Dragonlance is a wonderful war story and the novel is just one way of that story playing out. DMs and Players should be able to have it play out their own way
• That’s the same way they view all novels.
• The moment you hit the gaming table it’s no longer WOC’s Dragonlance or Realms, it’s now yours.
• Take inspiration from the novels and video games but don’t be bound by them.
• The same applies to pre 5e accessories and modules which often just update info from the novels.
• Designers still think highly of past stories and use them for inspiration
• There is no longer a need for cataclysmic events to justify changes with editions.
• Fans that disagree with WOC canon can replace it with their preference.

I’m finding it really hard to see how any of this is controversial. In fact it’s pretty amazing. It frees them up to release the prism pentad as an adventure for players rather than being spectators in someone else’s story.

It puts an end to the Mega-disasters of the forgotten realms and means they can release an adventure that lets my players discover Myth Drannor, or use the Gatekeepers crystal to destroy Hellgate keep. I really fail to see how this is bad for the game. It’s bleeding awesome to see WOC are going to open the best of what’s gone before to new players for them interact with, and not just with a history check.

I actually think it is good for the game, in general. I just think it's bad for people that liked the old stories, because it means those stories are over.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

The Star Wars Holiday Special is not canon.

A ton of stuff from it is once again canon.

I think that Jaxxon may have appeared in a comic in the new continuity, so I guess he is canon.

Yes and yes.

A lot of the EU is back. Lucasfilm/Disney just took the opportunity to replace anything they didn't feel worked from the EU, rather than feeling constrained by it.

 

[Faolyn]

I think that's a cool AU as well. I would, for my part, happily play that game. But Star Wars has it's own story, and what makes that AU interesting in the context of Star Wars is that it differs from the baseline. You still need the baseline, and there's nothing wrong with wanting to play within the baseline universe, around the big events. Despite what Kylo Ren insisted, you dont have to "blow up the past".

No, there's nothing wrong with wanting to play within the baseline Star Wars universe, just like nobody is saying that it's wrong to play in baseline Realms or baseline Ravenloft or whatever.

But there's a big difference between not being slavishly devoted to the thousands of details written about an incredibly broad setting like the Realms and creating an AU of a specific story, like the way Star Wars played out.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I suspect this thread is mostly just spinning its wheels at this point

The ENWorld motto!

 

[Henadic Theologian]

Uh-oh…



Double uh-oh!

i was fully convinced by most of the arguments here about the problems with ditching canon…but now you had to bring up bad faith defenses of free speech (that require a default misrepresentation of what free speech is) and the Gillette boycott by men’s rights weirdos.

anyone who thinks politics is not everywhere and in all things, take note. Dig deep enough and it always bubbles to the surface.

The Boycott wasn't just MRAs, there aren't enough MRA out there to succeed (in the west). And MRA aren't weirdos, they are folks who fight for human rights. Many MRAs aren't the stereo type you think of, alot more are lefty wing supporters of human rights, from all walks of life, trans, men, women, every race.

I personally donate to a a shelter for abused men & their children, which unlikely shelters for women who get millions of dollars in publicly funded support, are completely privately funded by MRAs.

My Dad's best friend was murdered by his second wife who was an abusive alcoholic, who beat him, before she got drunk and murdered him. Does it make me a weirdo that I'm not okay with that or that she only spent a few years in prison for the murder of a kind and gentle man who was a wonderful artist, who was like an Uncle to me, who got me intetested in comics and conan?

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

Yeah, the lore is still out there, still being used. The Shield of the Hidden Lord, from Descent into Avernus, has elements that can be traced to Gold & Glory, Empires of the Sands, and the 2e Cult of the Dragon sourcebook, if not more places. All it means is that Wizards is free to move on from it when they need to, and new and old fans don't have to worry about getting Danilo Thann's history, or whatever happened to Fzoul Chembryl, right in their campaign.

@JEB mentioned the MCU, which is assuredly not bound by canon. But no one complains because the characters feel right and true to their core identities. And so far, that's been the case for Wizards' 5e strategy. It's not like Demogorgon showed up as an urbane noble in Out of the Abyss. Acererak wasn't a demilich in Tomb of Annihilation, but it worked, because the Tomb of the Nine Gods felt in line with the Tomb of Horrors, updated to 5e.

1) You still have the canon. It didn't go anywhere. WotC won't bind themselves to it slavishly, but all the old books are still right there. Declaring them "Noncanonical" makes 0 impact on your games or ability to read and enjoy those works.

2) In a -home- game, I can often shut people down with "This is my game." But in a public game using Adventurer's League or whatever where it's the "Official" story, it's not my material to defend. Especially if I don't know the former books as well as the person who wants to argue about whether Thayan Enclaves were ever allowed in Waterdeep, just as an example.

3) There's still lore, for sure. But it's much easier to manage 7 years of around 3-5 books and maybe 2 videogames for a setting is vastly better than the entire back catalog of the Realms for the past 4 decades. TSR wound up shutting down because they produced WAY TOO MUCH content too quickly.

As to the last part... to be fair I've always had that power and the confidence to do it. Younger DMs getting bullied by Grognards who have 40 years of inscrutably dense lore they absorbed one book at a time over decades... particularly ones who dislike confrontation?

They could use the backup from WotC in their corner.

 

[Chaosmancer]

I think most reasonable people will be perfectly fine with whatever explanation a DM can give, if an explanation is even necessary. And most unreasonable people are just looking to nitpick or argue, and won't be swayed no matter what the DM or Wizards says on the matter.

If an explanation isn't necessary, then canon did nothing except negatively impact the player's experience by taking them out of the situation.

If we only want to discuss reasonable people, then canon has very little importance, because any explanation was good enough, whether it was the canon explanation or not.