D&D Novels, Video Games, Spin-Offs Declared Non-Canon By WotC

Best Selling RPGs - Available Now @ DriveThruRPG.com
I see this as numerous things; wanting to get TSR products off their site after the recent issues, pulling a Disney where they don't want to pay old authors anything deemed problematic to the new audience, & not getting into any more entanglements similar to the Weiss/Hickman issue. Even though I don't agree w/how Disney did it, I see why they did and WotC is as well.
In the end my 87 Grey Box says, "...Who gives a +^@#?" But he's rude like that.

That being said; I am usually the most Star Wars Legends versed in any SW group I've been in and constantly had to hide my 'hmm' when something didn't follow the lore. My biggist issues were creating a small character backstory with a little easter egg that GMs had to look up for reference.
I don't agree that it has anything to do with authors though. I don't think they plan to stop selling everything older. It's just not canon. Making something non canon means I don't have to work around a 1985 definition to go forward.
 
Possible but with no real evidence to back it up, I think that is assuming Hasbro suits pay attention to some minor Twitter drama to a far greater degree than they do.

The minor changes to the ruleset and settings that get some worked up online are far more likely to be getting pushed by the younger creatives on the team than the suits who are more likely focused on returns and probably have to be roughly corralled to pay attention to these kind of details.
I take a different tack. We've passed the point where execs are saying "Let's just do nothing and see if all that is 2020's changes are going away.". Now I think we're at minimum at "What's the least work we can do to not get sucked into a shit storm."

Branding all pre 2014 stuff as non canon is pretty minimal impact on ongoing projects other than they can ignore anything problematic from before. They put a sticky note on old PDFs that this is non canon and maybe racist/sexist/somethingelseist.
They get to make appropriate content for now which crusty grognards aren't going to buy anyway and sell old stuff to crusty grognards who want it all the way it was. Sounds like a perfect corporate response. Sell to everyone.
 
... if that's actually the case. For which no evidence has been proffered except speculation.

Seriously, guys, Hasbro is a multinational corporation with several billions in annual revenue. The degree to which the corporate board gnashes its teeth over whatever Weis and Hickman might think or conceive is somewhere between nil and derisive laughter.

Which is kind of weird that they have a history of legal actions and decisions directly against novels in general and those guys in particular.

Because the multinational corporation is, as Shepard Book said, made of people and quite a lot of people are petty assholes.

 
Yeah. While this is slightly tangential, I've often found that gamers have a hard time wrapping their heads around fiction in gameworlds. My (OOC) retort in a bardic competition in a MMORPG to "But there aren't any dragons in Elanthia!!" was there aren't any on Earth either, but that doesn't stop there being a hundred thousand tales, songs and books referencing them ... idiot.

Granted, "lore lawyering" has been around a long while: I tend to save forum posts, and the earliest discussion of canon I have goes all the way back to the Bostongamers Yahoo group in 2003. One cementhead opined "But screwing with the core of the setting without any good reason, like getting rid of kender from Dragonlance, or making Darth Vader a good guy, is just betraying the players."

I was too mild in my response, which started with "Let's get a grip," and probably should have stated flat out that the great majority of the "lore lawyers" are metagamers who resent the cheat codes being taken away.
Elanthia? Gemstone reference?
 
I suspect it's probably as much to do with "Well we can't really blow up the world again now can we. Let's stop doing that."
 
Branding all pre 2014 stuff as non canon is pretty minimal impact on ongoing projects other than they can ignore anything problematic from before. They put a sticky note on old PDFs that this is non canon and maybe racist/sexist/somethingelseist.
They get to make appropriate content for now which crusty grognards aren't going to buy anyway and sell old stuff to crusty grognards who want it all the way it was. Sounds like a perfect corporate response. Sell to everyone.

Given they are continuing to sell this stuff and not taking down so-called "Problematic" stuff (I use quotes only because aside from drow, I don't think many gamers could name problematic content other than lack of representation--TSR had a history of being some of the most controversy adverse fantasy in fiction, see renaming Devils and Demons to avoid the power of BADD), I don't think they're making this move on the grounds of progressiveness even as a dodge.

After all, Salvatore is the source of 99% all things Drow and they're promoting his books more than ever.
 
Which is kind of weird that they have a history of legal actions and decisions directly against novels in general and those guys in particular.

Because the multinational corporation is, as Shepard Book said, made of people and quite a lot of people are petty assholes.


The history of TSR shows that lawsuits and backstabbing are hardly restricted to corporate types.

Anytime money gets involved, lawyers are not far behind.

The difference is these days we're far more likely to hear about such BTS disputes because of social media.

Note that Hickman and Weis quickly changed their tune once this was quickly settled.

I'm sure as long as they are given a cut and can continue to make a living they're fine.
 
Given they are continuing to sell this stuff and not taking down so-called "Problematic" stuff (I use quotes only because aside from drow, I don't think many gamers could name problematic content other than lack of representation--TSR had a history of being some of the most controversy adverse fantasy in fiction, see renaming Devils and Demons to avoid the power of BADD), I don't think they're making this move on the grounds of progressiveness even as a dodge.

After all, Salvatore is the source of 99% all things Drow and they're promoting his books more than ever.
There's a lot more than just Drow that people have issues with. Controversy averse as it relates to 1980's and controversial as it relates to now are not the same.
I'm not doubting there also might be some let's screw some authors issues as well because I think the dragonlance lawsuit wasn't the only case where folks were suing recently.
 
There's a lot more than just Drow that people have issues with. Controversy averse as it relates to 1980's and controversial as it relates to now are not the same.
I'm not doubting there also might be some let's screw some authors issues as well because I think the dragonlance lawsuit wasn't the only case where folks were suing recently.

I'd be interested in what they are.
 
I'd be interested in what they are.

Most well known was criticism of Oriental Adventures for being too based on stereotypes of the 'exotic' East.

I thought some of the criticism ranged from obvious, to legit, to trying too hard to find offence. Ultimately though it is a mountain out of a molehill that WotC addressed by putting a disclaimer on OBS.

I think you can tell that was the right move as it left both extremes on the issue unhappy and left the rest of us to worry about more important things.
 
Last edited:
Given they are continuing to sell this stuff and not taking down so-called "Problematic" stuff (I use quotes only because aside from drow, I don't think many gamers could name problematic content other than lack of representation--TSR had a history of being some of the most controversy adverse fantasy in fiction, see renaming Devils and Demons to avoid the power of BADD)
Gully Dwarves. Vistani.
 
Oh, sure I picked them up. I read a whole lot of them and even used bits here and there. But I freely altered them as I wished. In general, the BIG events stayed mostly as written but the fiddly details got changed as I saw fit.
My problem is that the changes were actually pretty deep if you look into the lore, meaning several books would need thrown out completely, given how deep the changes were.
My impression is that WotC has little interest in being in the fiction business. Since 5e launched they've only put out novels by Greenwood, Salvatore and Erin Evans. Comparatively a handful.
They already confirmed it, waaaaay back at 5e's release.
 
My problem is that the changes were actually pretty deep if you look into the lore, meaning several books would need thrown out completely, given how deep the changes were.

They already confirmed it, waaaaay back at 5e's release.
To be fair though, one expects books from earlier editions to be somewhat redundant. Think of all those prestige classes and feats 3e era setting books are filled with, and how utterly useless that stuff is now.
 
Elanthia? Gemstone reference?

Yes. I was a GS player for many years.

Go take a look at rpg.net or therpgsite.com and search for whatever book your curious about. I'm not interested in debating it here.

Ugh. Over at therpgsite they'd just scream that it's All Because Of The SJWs!!!! Why? Well, just Because, that's why!
 
I really hope WoTC don't plan on pulling their old material from DM's guild. That would be a huge mistake as I would love to use some classic DnD Modules like the The Lost Caverns of Tsojcanth to torment my OSE players.:grin:

As for declaring everything non-canon, who gives a flying f&$!? It's an RPG. A Game played with friends. You can decide what is or is not canon for your group. My Shadowrun group have long run in an alternate Seattle where the Renraku Archology was reduced to a pile of rubble after a particularly epic Arcology campaign.

I've seen some utterly ridiculous, hyperbolic responses from a certain person who shall remain namless comparing this declaration to the genocidal regime of Democratic Kampuchea. The only response I can muster is :clown:.
 
If I was a Forgotten Realms fan, I would care. And I don't blame those who care.

But to me, this is not news. This is not my first rodeo. I remember multiple times events in the lore of the realms came about entirely for editorial reasons (e.g. rules changes, edition shifts. etc.) It was never a stable baseline to build a campaign upon.
 
Yes. I was a GS player for many years.



Ugh. Over at therpgsite they'd just scream that it's All Because Of The SJWs!!!! Why? Well, just Because, that's why!
Thought so, since for the life of me I can't think of any other reference for Elanthia with the de-ICEing. Old GEnie player.
 
I played in a short lived Star Trek Adventures campaign and when we were making characters, one of the players said he wanted to be an android. The GM said "we're playing in the timeframe of TNG/DS9, and the only android at that time was Data.....so no, you can't play an android".

I was kind of surprised because to me, you just let the player do what they'd like without worrying about specific details like that. We can either come up with another android, or some explanation, or whatever. It was jarring. But, the guy in question is like a slave to continuity in comics/books/movies, and so my surprise quickly passed.

Some people are just wired that way. The campaign didn't last long at all, and it was at least partially for other decisions he made that were along these lines, where he placed the events of the films and shows above those of our play. The funny thing is, he's by far the biggest Trek fan of our group....like, no one else there would know if he went against established canon unless they were incredibly obvious, and some of us wouldn't even have caught those.

But his mind just works that way. Here is the way it is, and we cannot contradict that.
 
I played in a short lived Star Trek Adventures campaign and when we were making characters, one of the players said he wanted to be an android. The GM said "we're playing in the timeframe of TNG/DS9, and the only android at that time was Data.....so no, you can't play an android".

And Lore. And Data's "mom." And B4.

And I guess all the androids on Mudd's Planet just... died or something. That still functioning android making machine on Exo-3 didn't have any utility (beyond making androids at will). And the mysterious Flint certainly couldn't have ever crafted any other Raynas or other models.

Nope. No room for other androids anywhere. Nosirree.
 
I was kind of surprised because to me, you just let the player do what they'd like without worrying about specific details like that. We can either come up with another android, or some explanation, or whatever. It was jarring. But, the guy in question is like a slave to continuity in comics/books/movies, and so my surprise quickly passed.

(shrugs) And there are many gamers who are wired that way. That's not self-evident idiocy; that's a choice.

Because, c'mon. With Star Trek technology generally, if you're going to go with "whatever the player wants is kosher," I can stake a legitimate claim to playing a Nazi stormtrooper. Y'know, hitchhiked back with Kirk and Spock from City On The Edge of Forever in some fashion. If we're talking TNG/DS9 tech, then you can justify ANYthing as some manner of holodeck screwup. Whee, I get to play my half-drow half-dragon half-kender (yes, I'm aware that's too many halves) paladin!

This sounds less like an infamous screwjob to me than a GM deciding he didn't want android PCs.
 
And Lore. And Data's "mom." And B4.

And I guess all the androids on Mudd's Planet just... died or something. That still functioning android making machine on Exo-3 didn't have any utility (beyond making androids at will). And the mysterious Flint certainly couldn't have ever crafted any other Raynas or other models.

Nope. No room for other androids anywhere. Nosirree.

Ha I have no idea what any of those references mean! I should clarify that we were members of Starfleet, so Data was the only Android in Starfleet at that point in time, according to him. I honestly don't know!

(shrugs) And there are many gamers who are wired that way. That's not self-evident idiocy; that's a choice.

Because, c'mon. With Star Trek technology generally, if you're going to go with "whatever the player wants is kosher," I can stake a legitimate claim to playing a Nazi stormtrooper. Y'know, hitchhiked back with Kirk and Spock from City On The Edge of Forever in some fashion. If we're talking TNG/DS9 tech, then you can justify ANYthing as some manner of holodeck screwup. Whee, I get to play my half-drow half-dragon half-kender (yes, I'm aware that's too many halves) paladin!

This sounds less like an infamous screwjob to me than a GM deciding he didn't want android PCs.

Well I'd say it's a bit different to want to play an Android in Star Trek than it is to want to play a drow ranger, but okay. I mean, an Android is presented as one of the character options in the book. For me, letting the player play an Android and maybe enjoy the game a bit more would seem to be the obvious choice when compared to fidelity to the canon of Star Trek fiction.

He did bar other races based on their power levels or at least certain abilities that he didn't want to deal with, but he didn't say that about the android; about that, his reasoning appeared to be entirely based on maintaining the canon.
 
Players like that have always amused me. Look people, it's my game and I'll run it and use the lore as I feel. It's a jump off point, not something written in stone. Part of why I'm not a big fan of The Adventurers League. Having to do something mechanics or game world as dictated by the publisher sucks and bores me.

Though I think the whole canon/not canon crap is exactly that, crap. I thought so with Star Wars and Disney as well. I'll use what I want, when I want.
Outside of the author(s) needing to remember what is going on in their setting to keep consistency, especially when more and more things are added, the details of what is canon are just memory contests for nerds, and never as important as the feel of the setting anyway. It's not automatically gatekeeping, but there's a nasty tendency towards it among some folks.
 
Banner: The best cosmic horror & Cthulhu Mythos @ DriveThruRPG.com
Back
Top