Séadna
Legendary Pubber
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2018
- Messages
- 6,435
- Reaction score
- 14,652
For me "canon" and actually playing in the setting are sort of two seperate hobbies. I like learning all the details for fun, but in an actual game I wouldn't use half the stuff and blatantly contradict plenty of it.
Even taking canon on its own, although I find it fun to fill in the blanks and implications an author of course shouldn't stick to canon in many cases. I'd rather a work develop its own themes and characters etc, i.e. it's often better to do something that makes literary sense than "setting logical" sense. (I'm aware the two aren't always cleanly seperated).
Matthew Dawkins of Onyx Path and Aaron Dembski-Bowden of Games Workshop often make the point that canon is more for the IP holders as a tool for easing content production and not something for fans to feel constrained by.
As a funny point often many historical texts or books on the philosophy of history will point out the difference between history and the past and the futility in seeking consistency to the Nth degree in the former. So even history can have a canon problem.
Even taking canon on its own, although I find it fun to fill in the blanks and implications an author of course shouldn't stick to canon in many cases. I'd rather a work develop its own themes and characters etc, i.e. it's often better to do something that makes literary sense than "setting logical" sense. (I'm aware the two aren't always cleanly seperated).
Matthew Dawkins of Onyx Path and Aaron Dembski-Bowden of Games Workshop often make the point that canon is more for the IP holders as a tool for easing content production and not something for fans to feel constrained by.
As a funny point often many historical texts or books on the philosophy of history will point out the difference between history and the past and the futility in seeking consistency to the Nth degree in the former. So even history can have a canon problem.
Last edited: