WotC: Novels and Non-5E Lore Are Officially Not Canon

[TwiceBorn Reborn]

At a media press briefing last week, WotC's Jeremey Crawford clarified what is and is not canon for D&D.

Novels and non-5E products are officially considered non-canon for the development of 5E D&D products, though the latter may draw inspiration from older game products and novels.

https://www.enworld.org/threads/wotc-no ... on.681553/

https://comicbook.com/gaming/news/dunge ... me-novels/

That pretty much settles the question as to what caused all the changes to known characters in the various Domains of Dread in VRGtR and CoS. Nothing. They were intended to serve as a full reboot of Ravenloft, and to stand apart from material associated with previous editions of the game.

So no need to beat yourself up about how to mesh the changes in VRGtR into the pre-5E timelines... you now have the official blessings of WotC to do your own thing!

That said, I do like that they clarified what they consider canon or non-canon when developing 5E products, regardless of campaign setting.

[Drinnik Shoehorn]

Yeah, no. This is not a good thing.

[alhoon]

I think that it was obvious that, at least for Ravenloft, this was a reboot, not a simple retcon.

[Gonzoron of the FoS]

Yeah, it's just an official statement of what was abundantly clear from the products. *shrug*

[Dion of the Fraternity]

Here's Ari "mouseferatu" Marmell's take. He's the author of the Ravenloft novel "Black Crusade."

arimarmell.jpg (196.08 KiB) Viewed 5473 times

[Jester of the FoS]

I respect Ari and his take, but he's totally wrong. Table canon is a thing, but that doesn't negate the existence of book canon.

I've played numerous Star Trek and Star Wars TTRPG campaigns (and I'm planning a Star Wars one for a couple years from now). And each of those games had their own canon. One game had Ben Solo with a bunch of other Jedi who became the Knights of Ren as training Jedi. And that was canon at that tale and would be canon in any sequel, but totally doesn't match the canon of the movies or the Knight's appearance in Rise of Skywalker.

Just because each table writes their own canon doesn't mean the rulebooks and novel shouldn't try to maintain an internal consistency or have an assumed lore that can be used if someone doesn't want to make their own lore.

Given an upcoming book is Fizban's Treasury of Dragons, I expect this has to do with Dragonlance. They didn't know how to reconcile the major changes to that setting that occurred or wish to just do a book set in a particular era without updating the setting to modern sensibilities. So, like Ravenloft, it's just easier to dump everything and start fresh.

[Drinnik Shoehorn]

I respect Ari and his take, but he's totally wrong. Table canon is a thing, but that doesn't negate the existence of book canon.

I've played numerous Star Trek and Star Wars TTRPG campaigns (and I'm planning a Star Wars one for a couple years from now). And each of those games had their own canon. One game had Ben Solo with a bunch of other Jedi who became the Knights of Ren as training Jedi. And that was canon at that tale and would be canon in any sequel, but totally doesn't match the canon of the movies or the Knight's appearance in Rise of Skywalker.

Just because each table writes their own canon doesn't mean the rulebooks and novel shouldn't try to maintain an internal consistency or have an assumed lore that can be used if someone doesn't want to make their own lore.

Given an upcoming book is Fizban's Treasury of Dragons, I expect this has to do with Dragonlance. They didn't know how to reconcile the major changes to that setting that occurred or wish to just do a book set in a particular era without updating the setting to modern sensibilities. So, like Ravenloft, it's just easier to dump everything and start fresh.

To be fair to Ari, if he wants to be considered as an author in the future by WotC, that’s the only response he can give.

But in all honesty, have you noticed the reoccurring theme with all modern reboots?

Odds are that they will suck and/or isolate the fans of the original to an extent it seems almost deliberate.

[Mephisto of the FoS]

I guess they didn't like that April Fools Hasbro joke...

[Five]

A few things as I see them:

Star Wars and Star Trek are both built around storytelling. We walk into the room, sit down, and wait for the storyteller to begin their tale.

Dungeons and Dragons is built around storytelling. We walk into the room, stand up, and begin telling our tale.

In other words, Star Wars and Star Trek dictates imagination, Dungeons and Dragons facilitates imagination creation.

Canon/consistency becomes more necessary when somebody else is telling a story, as otherwise the tale gets bogged/sidetracked and the audience will just lose interest (over time). When we're the storyteller, consistency is equally important, and for the same reason(s). Yet as Dungeons and Dragons is built around providing its audience tools to help them become the storyteller and creators of things such as Star Wars and Star Trek, it shouldn't be as strictly bound to canon as the others.

Though I will admit that if campaign settings are defined as examples of world-building under the current rules, then consistency should be a factor. If, however, the approach to campaign settings are changed from one edition to the other, then...canon got blowed up real quick.

A world-building rulebook (tome) should be the next major rulebook for 5E. In addition to what it is, we'll know for sure then that Wizards is focusing on inspiring imagination and not so much as dictating...

Fan-wise, think of this. If you want every Iron Maiden album to sound like Number of the Beast, then it might just be you're more of a fan of that album than of the band itself. Keep listening to that album if you're that into it. No point in getting mad with the boys for maturing artistically, or, trying new things. That's futile, and pretty bloody selfish. IMO.

Quick thoughts that may or may not be revisited.

[onmyoji]

I mean, if canon isn't a thing in D&D, then someone please explain to me why Mistipedia exists and what precisely it keeps track of?

Clearly, canon is a thing. I think WotC just finally decided to stop adding to the growing corpus of it and retconning what they need to make more. It's pretty similar to the approach that Disney took to the old "extended universe" of Star Wars after they took over. It also completely goes hand-in-hand with the 5E aesthetic of modules being set anywhere, in any setting, in any year, rather than having a "canonical" setting or year.

While I've only started being a fan of D&D these past few years with 5E, I'm very much a fan of canon and absolutely think it's necessary for settings to have a largely agreed-upon history. And it's even easier to keep track of these days due not only to advances in technology, but the widespread efforts of fans to keep the canon and chronologies of different settings together. Settings that haven't been touched officially in decades still have their dedicated fans keeping track of these matters.

It's one thing if people want to just have a basic self-contained campaign that doesn't really reach into anything else. But lore enriches campaigns. And canon is the basis for that lore. Players and DMs can do such wonderful things with pre-established lore if they just take the time to look through it and work with it. It's a powerful tool, and one I wish fewer people were all too happy to shove aside. (My own DM once revealed he wanted an FR-like setting but couldn't be bothered to look into it, so he made his own...... which ultimately ended up being a frustrating experience for him, and the setting was ultimately disowned. Now he's creating a new one, but it's really quite similar to his old one. I can't speak for his needs at the time, but I half-wonder what would have happened if he had just taken the time to learn what FR had to offer—my approach—and gone from there? Nothing against anyone making their own settings of course; this is totally based on my DM's experience.)

— onmyoji

[Resonant Curse]

I know the reason is for brand recognition and to milk longtime fans and collectors by releasing more products with the appropriate logo, but I can't understand why, if they feel having a canon history is a problem that they don't just shelve all of the existing campaign settings and just... make one that does and has what they want? The random kitbashing that is 5e could easily be done without all the name dropping and stealing from various campaign settings they have been doing. Take the upcoming middle school aimed novels/graphic novels for later this year and next year. Dungeon Academy for monsters to learn to guard/inhabit dungeons and obvious Harry Potter style narrative knockoff. It is taking place in the Forgotten Realms. Clearly is not something that previously would fit the tone or style of the setting. Just generically label it D&D and you can drop that into any non-existing setting easily enough.

[Drinnik Shoehorn]

I know the reason is for brand recognition and to milk longtime fans and collectors by releasing more products with the appropriate logo, but I can't understand why, if they feel having a canon history is a problem that they don't just shelve all of the existing campaign settings and just... make one that does and has what they want?

Because they’re creatively bankrupt. They don’t know how to create something new, only replace something that already exists. Pre-existing IPs come with a built in fanbase, so they know those people will buy it. Then, pre-release they can change what they want and claim they’re being true to the story only for that finished product to look nothing like the past.

Or they rip out everything recognisable and bank on the name pulling in people.

[Gonzoron of the FoS]

I mean, if canon isn't a thing in D&D, then someone please explain to me why Mistipedia exists and what precisely it keeps track of?

I don't think WotC is making decisions with Mistipedia in mind. But regardless, the purpose of Mistipedia is to document what exists. Victor Mordenheim exists (in 2nd and 3rd Edition books). Viktra Mordenheim exists (in the 5e book, and likely any going forward that might exist). So Mistipedia should document both. We try to label canon levels so that people know what they are getting, but it's not a passing of judgement, just a label of the source.

Continuity is for the hard-core fan (self included). The average newcomer doesn't care. (I know you do, onmyoji, but you're above average. ) Even the average person who looks back with nostalgia doesn't remember all the details of a setting or other fictional world. It's a matter of priorities. Spend time and energy catering to the mega-fan, for little gain, or ride the nostalgia wave and bring in the new customers? D&D isn't the first to go through this. Which is canon? Jeff Goldblum's The Fly or Vincent Price's? Benedict Cumberbatch's Holmes or Robert Downey Jr.'s or Basil Rathbone's? (See also comics, assorted sci-fi and fantasy franchises, etc. etc.)

[The Lesser Evil]

Canon's always been a slippery thing, especially with a setting as finicky as Ravenloft (with many domains referenced to dates before they actually exist w/in canon, for example.) The authors have always change or ignored things to suit their purposes (for example, the retcon that the drow of Arak were actually shadow fey, or how most of the characters from the novels or collector cards were never addressed in the main game materials- Azalin doesn't have an 18th level mummy cleric running around most of the time.)

The implicit suggestion that a person must hew closely to the established canon at one's own gaming table can be a trap. And knowing more about the setting's history does not necessarily make a person a better fan. At the same time, with game and setting discussion online or simply between gamers, a setting's perceived canon will suggest certain default assumptions people make take for granted. These assumptions will always vary from individual to individual, but the range of default assumptions from say Van Richten's Guide to Ravenloft (every domain is by itself, more specified domain themes, more focus on other forms of horror, etc.) differ from other Ravenloft material (the Core, more focus on Gothic horror, etc.) As will 3e/late 2e material from earlier Ravenloft material (independent campaign setting with natives vs. outlander/weekend-in-hell games). The biggest thing it to watch out for is the complications that ensue when people with different familiarities of the setting come together and talk- they may come with different understandings of what the game is. This seems to me why canon is a thing beyond individual gaming tables, in that it affects the reference points people come to the table with. Having different sets of reference points isn't by nature a bad thing, but it can require additional discussion and clarification to understand where each other is coming from.

[Joël of the FoS]

Key part highlighted:

Novels and non-5E products are officially considered non-canon for the development of 5E D&D products

Not a surprise indeed, given how VRGtR doesn't follow anything from previous editions and is in fact a complete reboot.

What Ari said? Obvious. Even when writing in the same edition, if you want to keep expanding a world, once in a while you need to reshape / modify what was written before. Otherwise, things are frozen and that limits creativity. I know his comment was about Forgotten Realms, but it applies to RL too.

Anyway, with 5e, everything it seems gets a complete reboot. So be it, and good luck with it.

I think they do not realize how confusing it will be in ten years when lore will mix and people will talk bout RL. Ivan thinks he is a great actor / what do you mean he never leaves home.

---

So there is a before-than-5e canon, and a 5e era canon.

Who determines what is canon and what isn't? The fans who use the material.

I am mostly with the canon-followers, but I changed many things for my own game. When I wrote Blaustein, I added an exception to Bluebeard that he can leave his domain for a short period of time, because it was IMHO the way to handle his leave-the-bride-in-the-castle-alone-so-she-will-open-the-forbidden-door. Yes, it contradicts canon lore, but heck, what are the rules if not to be brocken

It reminds me of the "this novel is not canon because it explains too much about the dark powers". How that appears trivial now when looking at VRGtR!