DnD Canon?

[TheCreatorT]

So me and my buddies were discussing DnD, and the topic was if there was any true DnD canon? We all know the world is what you, or more specifically, what the DM makes it, but is there any true canon in lets say a 'vanilla' setting, as in unmodified source material? The answer may be a flat no. If that's the case, THE MORE YOU KNOW!!!

[Janthkin]

The "standard" setting for 2e(?)-3.5e is usually considered to be Greyhawk (http://www.canonfire.com/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page). (See also Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greyhawk).)

But it's kind of a question in search of a problem - every group is creating their own canon, even if they were all starting from precisely the same place.

[ahenobarbi]

There are a few settings: Eberron, Thoril aka Faerun aka Forgoten Realms (and already mentioned Greyhawk). Those all are parts of Planescape setting.

All of them have books outlining (some) major events of the setting.

[johnbragg]

So me and my buddies were discussing DnD, and the topic was if there was any true DnD canon? We all know the world is what you, or more specifically, what the DM makes it, but is there any true canon in lets say a 'vanilla' setting, as in unmodified source material? The answer may be a flat no. If that's the case, THE MORE YOU KNOW!!!

Short answer is no. Different editions have default, vanilla settings, but that's not the same as canon. Canon means this is right, anything else is wrong, or at least not quite right.

There is canon for various settings, published campaign worlds like Greyhawk, Dragonlance, Forgotten Realms, Eberron, Dark Sun, Pathfinder's Golarion and others. If someone's campaign doesn't have Elminster or the Harpers, you can validly say "That's not Forgotten Realms." (Unless it's set in the past of FR before the Harpers or something.) IF someone is running Greyhawk, and doesn't let you use Teleport or other means to get to the Orlental Adventures part of the setting at all, they're not really running Greyhawk.

There's nothing like that in any setting to say "You're not running D&D".

[daremetoidareyo]

So me and my buddies were discussing DnD, and the topic was if there was any true DnD canon? We all know the world is what you, or more specifically, what the DM makes it, but is there any true canon in lets say a 'vanilla' setting, as in unmodified source material? The answer may be a flat no. If that's the case, THE MORE YOU KNOW!!!

Mindflayers were/are trademarked. So are Beholders...

So, I mean as much as any tentacle faced psychic entity can be, it is definitely a d&d centric piece of canon.

So there's that.

[Thurbane]

Greyhawk was arguably the defacto "vanilla" setting for 3.X.

The default gods in the PHB are of Greyhawk origin, and the "named" spells and items (Boccob, Mordenkainen etc.) all are named after Greyhawk NPCs.

[Werephilosopher]

There's this timeline (http://www.minmaxboards.com/index.php?topic=16384.0) of multiversal events.

[Bohandas]

There are a few settings: Eberron, Thoril aka Faerun aka Forgoten Realms (and already mentioned Greyhawk). Those all are parts of Planescape setting.

All of them have books outlining (some) major events of the setting.

Everything EXCEPT for Eberron is part of Planescape and Spelljammer. Eberron has an explicitly different set of outer planes which, unlike in Forgotten Realms and Dragonlance, were NOT established by an arbitrary retcon.

[BowStreetRunner]

Greyhawk was arguably the defacto "vanilla" setting for 3.X.

The default gods in the PHB are of Greyhawk origin, and the "named" spells and items (Boccob, Mordenkainen etc.) all are named after Greyhawk NPCs.

Years ago I met one of the players who used to game with Gary Gygax and I recall that he stated Gygax got the name Greyhawk from one of the possible etymologies (there are many, none proven) for the word Camelot. If that is true, then perhaps the true D&D canon is the Arthurian legend. Of course, that legend itself has been rewritten so many times it's hard to say what parts of it may be considered canon.

[Bohandas]

Years ago I met one of the players who used to game with Gary Gygax and I recall that he stated Gygax got the name Greyhawk from one of the possible etymologies (there are many, none proven) for the word Camelot. If that is true, then perhaps the true D&D canon is the Arthurian legend. Of course, that legend itself has been rewritten so many times it's hard to say what parts of it may be considered canon.

New Weapon Enchantment:

Dismembering: On a critical hit this weapon severs a random extremity on the enemy (Price: as +4 bonus)

(One of the more noteworthy abilities of Excalibur (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhRUe-gz690#t=01m42s))

[Thurbane]

New Weapon Enchantment:

Dismembering: On a critical hit this weapon severs a random extremity on the enemy (Price: as +4 bonus)

(One of the more noteworthy abilities of Excalibur (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhRUe-gz690#t=01m42s))

This is pretty much how a Sword of Sharpness worked in AD&D.

[Bohandas]

This is pretty much how a Sword of Sharpness worked in AD&D.

Maybe Arthurian legend is the true canon then