Dynaheir

[Mike1072]

all of the FR books were considered canon, inconsistencies notwithstanding.

I think not, 'cause it'd be pretty much impossible what with all the different authors out there going off on their own tangents. Part of the idea of "canon" is to have at least some attempt at consistency, which like I said, is tough enough with just the published game manuals even within an edition (2nd, 3rd or whatever).

What I mean is that I see all the stories as taking place in the Realms unless some other source contradicts it, and yes, I'd probably regard the game manuals as having the last say. I think the stuff that you refer to as not being canon is a large part of what popularised the whole setting, and as the events from those novels seem to have been directly included/referenced in future game manuals, viewing them as glorified fanfiction seems to underestimate their importance to the lore a bit (regardless of the quality of their writing).

 

I think I read an introduction in The Annotated Elminster compilation where Ed Greenwood talks about the contributions to the setting made by the various authors of the novels, but I can't find it online anywhere.

Maybe it's no coincidence you can't find it, but I'll take your word for it . But saying authors have made contributions to the setting and saying they're part of the accepted standard are two different things, and the former doesn't imply the latter.

True, I was just hoping to find it somewhere so I could remember what it said. I think it at least mentioned that R.A. Salvatore practically invented drow society single-handedly.

[Miloch]

What I mean is that I see all the stories as taking place in the Realms

Well of course the FR books take place in the FR. That's quite different from saying they're "canon" (an accepted body of standards or rules).

I think it at least mentioned that R.A. Salvatore practically invented drow society single-handedly.

Well that's clearly untrue, since he didn't even know what the FR were before TSR contracted him to write novels. Moreover, even the earliest FR canon material likely pinched most of its drow background from Gygax's Vault of the Drow and other sources (unfortunately, Norse mythology probably wasn't one of those sources, which is where the drow came from originally).

 

But all that I suppose is a bit off-topic (not that it matters much in Noobermeet).

[Mike1072]

What I mean is that I see all the stories as taking place in the Realms

Well of course the FR books take place in the FR. That's quite different from saying they're "canon" (an accepted body of standards or rules).

And what I meant by THAT was that within the universe, they are assumed to have taken place. There's no separation of "these things actually happened" and "these things are made-up stories in the same setting, but they have no effect on the actual lore." Was Drizzt introduced in a Campaign Setting rulebook? No, he was introduced in novels and later the rulebooks referenced his exploits.

 

I think it at least mentioned that R.A. Salvatore practically invented drow society single-handedly.

Well that's clearly untrue, since he didn't even know what the FR were before TSR contracted him to write novels.

It's only untrue if the first FR Campaign Setting included detailed information about drow society. I don't know whether it does or not. Him not knowing about the FR before being given the chance to write his first FR book is excusable, considering the first official product releases were made in 1987, and Salvatore was contacted in July 1987 to write the second book in the setting.

 

But all that I suppose is a bit off-topic (not that it matters much in Noobermeet).

True and true.

[Miloch]

Was Drizzt introduced in a Campaign Setting rulebook? No, he was introduced in novels and later the rulebooks referenced his exploits.

And that's exactly what makes it canon - the fact it's been adopted into the rulebooks. It's not like every novel and piece of fan fiction starts out as "canon" just because it supposedly takes place in the campaign world. And Cunningham's ideas about Rashemen being descended from the Rus, etc., aren't in any of the canon stuff I've come across (referenced above).

It's only untrue if the first FR Campaign Setting included detailed information about drow society. I don't know whether it does or not.

It's untrue because the FR gobbled up Gygax's Underdark and drow (both first detailed in the 1978 Vault, later expanded in detail in other supplements including Doug Niles' 1986 Dungeoneer's Survival Guide). It did the same with Kara-Tur (detailed in Gygax & Dave Cook's 1985 Oriental Adventures), basically just slapping the entire continent on the Toril map next to Faerun. The Underdark was just slapped on underneath it.

 

Now in Greenwood's 1991 Drow of the Underdark, he dedicates it to a bunch of folks, including Gygax for "the first dark look at the drow" and Salvatore "for bringing the drow to life in the Realms." Maybe that's what you were thinking of. But that's a far cry from saying Salvatore "invented drow society single-handedly," which is quite off the mark.

[Mike1072]

Was Drizzt introduced in a Campaign Setting rulebook? No, he was introduced in novels and later the rulebooks referenced his exploits.

And that's exactly what makes it canon - the fact it's been adopted into the rulebooks. It's not like every [licensed] novel and piece of fan fiction starts out as "canon" just because it supposedly takes place in the campaign world.

I would disagree (with the edited quote), but I think this argument's pretty much reached its limits. I know that I'm not involved enough in the fandom of the Forgotten Realms to be able to say for sure.

 

Now in Greenwood's 1991 Drow of the Underdark, he dedicates it to a bunch of folks, including Gygax for "the first dark look at the drow" and Salvatore "for bringing the drow to life in the Realms." Maybe that's what you were thinking of. But that's a far cry from saying Salvatore "invented drow society single-handedly," which is quite off the mark.

This is why I was looking for the original introduction, because that was just the general vibe I picked up from it, but I don't recall what was actually said. The lines you quote sound like something I've read before, but I believe the introduction I'm thinking of was more long-winded than that, and talked about the work of all the authors who contributed to the setting.

 

 

Edit: decided to do some digging on canon...

 

Canon, according to Ed Greenwood, is any published source relating to the Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting.[citation needed] This means that if it is for sale in paper form then it is official Realmslore.

 

9. We’re not retconning. We’re assuming that everything that was, was.

 

PA: I guess you could call this the “not throwing out the baby or the bathwater” rule. If it happened in a novel or in a game product—any part of the FORGOTTEN REALMS canon—it happened.

 

9.5.2. What does "canon" mean?

 

Tom Rinschler explained:

 

When mentioned in this list, "canon" refers to information that is in official products released by TSR (previously) and WotC (now), and only such information. The opposite of "canon" is "custom", information that individual players have made up for their own or others' use. That Elminster is a 29th level mage living in a tower in Shadowdale is "canon". That he likes to wear the Symbul's underwear would definitely be "custom" information. :-)

 

Jenn Millington added:

 

Canon references things which have been written and are considered OFFICIAL FR references. Such as modules, accessories, novels (although the last is dubious in many people's eyes *G*)

 

9.5.3. So, are novels canon or aren't they?

 

Jim Butler gives the official (or canon) answer

 

Everything that bears the Forgotten Realms logo is considered canon. Where two sources contradict one another, a decision needs to be made as to which one should be followed. For game products, that would mean you'd follow a game product over a novel. Later products have precedence over older products.

[Domi]

Aww, this discussion ran away on me, and it is very interesting. Just wanted to point out that Dynaheir's purple skin, rather than realistic dark skin, seems to be rather an artistic thing, because most of the BG1 portraits seem to be done in purple and poisonous green shades.

[Miloch]

Just wanted to point out that Dynaheir's purple skin, rather than realistic dark skin, seems to be rather an artistic thing, because most of the BG1 portraits seem to be done in purple and poisonous green shades.

Yeah, I never saw her skin colour as purple - just assumed it was the standard bad lighting.

I think this argument's pretty much reached its limits.

I thought so too, until I saw your edit after the fact (and hey, it was a "discussion" until you made it an "argument" ).

Edit: decided to do some digging on canon...

There's a lot of waffle here, but some of it is notable.

Canon, according to Ed Greenwood, is any published source relating to the Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting.[citation needed]

Citation missing intentionally?

If it happened in a novel or in a game product—any part of the FORGOTTEN REALMS canon—it happened.

Now this would be significant, but for two things:

1. It's the author of the BG novels.

2. He's talking about 4th edition specifically.

Canon references things... Such as modules, accessories, novels (although the last is dubious in many people's eyes *G*)

Indeed .

9.5.3. So, are novels canon or aren't they?

Jim Butler gives the official (or canon) answer

 

Everything that bears the Forgotten Realms logo is considered canon. Where two sources contradict one another, a decision needs to be made as to which one should be followed. For game products, that would mean you'd follow a game product over a novel.

And this really is the bottom line, and what I was getting at with my example of Niles' supplements vs. his novels. If all the supplements suggest the Rashemen sprang from an ancient empire with more sub-Saharan or proto-Sumerian type influences and depicts them all, or the vast majority, with dark skin, and none with Russian-style names (nevermind Minsc respelled is the capital of Belarus - it's probably a coincidence and he's not even canon anyway by any of the above standards) then we have to believe the supplements over novels that say something different entirely.

[Mike1072]

Edit: decided to do some digging on canon...

There's a lot of waffle here, but some of it is notable.

Still, that's the best info I could find on the subject in a short period of time and it mostly seems to agree with what I've been saying. If you've got quotes supporting the view that the stuff in the novels is not canon unless also referred to in a rulebook, let's see 'em.

 

If it happened in a novel or in a game product—any part of the FORGOTTEN REALMS canon—it happened.

Now this would be significant, but for two things:

1. It's the author of the BG novels.

Yeah, I've never heard anything but bad things about his novels, but apparently he is an editor at WotC.

 

2. He's talking about 4th edition specifically.

So, all the materials published in the 2e/3e era are part of the canon of the 4th edition, but not part of the canon of the 2nd and 3rd editions? What?

 

I think this argument's pretty much reached its limits.

I thought so too, until I saw your edit after the fact (and hey, it was a "discussion" until you made it an "argument" ).

Discussion, argument, we still seem to disagree no matter what we call it. I don't think there's much more to say on the issue of canon that's relevant to this thread. We do seem to agree that officially, some sources override other sources, though one might make the argument that the most popular source should be considered more important. While I'm sure Races of Faerûn might be useful for PnP campaigns set in the Forgotten Realms, I've not read it, but I have read the Liriel Baenre trilogy.

[Miloch]

If you've got quotes supporting the view that the stuff in the novels is not canon unless also referred to in if it's contradicted by a rulebook, let's see 'em.

Why should I, when:

a) I don't really care. It's too easy to point out FR inconsistencies even (or perhaps especially) within their official "party line." I said that quite early in this thread. It's more of an amusing pasttime than anything else.

b) You've already done it, at least as far as the edited quote. Because this:

9.5.3. So, are novels canon or aren't they?

Jim Butler gives the official (or canon) answer

 

Everything that bears the Forgotten Realms logo is considered canon. Where two sources contradict one another, a decision needs to be made as to which one should be followed. For game products, that would mean you'd follow a game product over a novel. Later products have precedence over older products.

Does not resolve with this:

I was under the impression that all of the FR books were considered canon, inconsistencies notwithstanding.

In other words, you cannot ignore inconsistencies, and where there's a conflict, the game products overrule the novels.

Yeah, I've never heard anything but bad things about his novels, but apparently he is an editor at WotC.

I'm not saying it's because his novels are "bad" necessarily, but it's obviously a biased viewpoint. But more importantly, it raises an interesting question. If he's claiming his novels are "canon", knowing full well they are *novelisations* of video games (as it says on the covers), does that make his source material, the games themselves, "canon" - indeed even "more canon"? If yes, it raises a whole bunch of other questions - which games, etc. If not, it raises yet another contradiction. Again, I don't really care (I have my own answer anyway ) but it just shows how eventually Hasbro/WtC/WtF or whatever is gonna end up shooting themselves in the feet by raising more inconsistencies rather than resolving them.

So, all the materials published in the 2e/3e era are part of the canon of the 4th edition, but not part of the canon of the 2nd and 3rd editions? What?

Huh?

We do seem to agree that officially, some sources override other sources, though one might make the argument that the most popular source should be considered more important.

If *you* are making that argument (assuming you're saying the novels are "most popular") then you're waffling again, because you've already conceded this:

yes, I'd probably regard the game manuals as having the last say.

That's great if you're a big fan of someone's novels. Why don't you just leave it at that?

[Mike1072]

Fun discussion times...

 

This:

9.5.3. So, are novels canon or aren't they?

Jim Butler gives the official (or canon) answer

 

Everything that bears the Forgotten Realms logo is considered canon. Where two sources contradict one another, a decision needs to be made as to which one should be followed. For game products, that would mean you'd follow a game product over a novel. Later products have precedence over older products.

Does not resolve with this:

I was under the impression that all of the FR books were considered canon, inconsistencies notwithstanding.

In other words, you cannot ignore inconsistencies, and where there's a conflict, the game products overrule the novels.

I've never argued that the novels do or should override the rulebooks, except for giving a reason why someone could do so in my last post. What I have argued against is your statement that the novels by Cunningham, Salvatore, Niles, etc. are not considered canon.

 

So, all the materials published in the 2e/3e era are part of the canon of the 4th edition, but not part of the canon of the 2nd and 3rd editions? What?

Huh?

You thought the quote was invalid because it was referring to the canon of 4th edition. Maybe I should have provided more context for the quote. He was explaining that the Spellplague (or whatever it is) would not invalidate previous happenings in the realms, instead it would just turn them into historical events.

 

We do seem to agree that officially, some sources override other sources, though one might make the argument that the most popular source should be considered more important.

If *you* are making that argument (assuming you're saying the novels are "most popular") then you're waffling again, because you've already conceded this:

yes, I'd probably regard the game manuals as having the last say.

That's great if you're a big fan of someone's novels. Why don't you just leave it at that?

I wasn't making that argument. Just saying that someone could do so, and then the issue would shift to whether a source being "official" is more important than it being awesome.

[Miloch]

So, all the materials published in the 2e/3e era are part of the canon of the 4th edition, but not part of the canon of the 2nd and 3rd editions? What?

Huh?

You thought the quote was invalid because it was referring to the canon of 4th edition. Maybe I should have provided more context for the quote. He was explaining that the Spellplague (or whatever it is) would not invalidate previous happenings in the realms, instead it would just turn them into historical events.

What I was probably suggesting was that, while Athans may have been saying 4th edition encompasses the content of all previous editions (which I hardly see being possible, given the rules were completely overhauled, but whatever), past editions certainly do not encompass future ones except by fairly narrow margins. Now in the context of the original post (i.e. what should Dynaheir's skin colour be in BG1, which is based on 2nd edition, just as the box says), we should rely on 2nd edition supplements. Now I actually leaned on a 3e rulebook (Races of Faerûn) but that's ok since it just gives additional info to 2e stuff (rather than contradicting it, for the most part), and the games use stuff from both 1e and 3e, even though they're overwhelmingly 2e as far as rules. I'd also be ok with using novels if they gave info not available in the manuals (and obviously, didn't contradict the manuals either) but that isn't the case here. And 4th edition is right out, as far as BG/BG2.

 

Of course, someone could mod Dynaheir's skin colour to whatever they wanted, and many mods have done so. I'm just saying what I would do, which is try to resolve the inconsistencies in the FR world, rather than make more of them, which seems to be the goal of 4th edition etc.

[Ardanis]

I'm wondering if they take this tack in NWN2, part of which is supposed to be based in Rashemen

There is a great deal of russian names there. Not to mention bears everywhere and, apparently, vodka.

[Miloch]

There is a great deal of russian names there. Not to mention bears everywhere and, apparently, vodka.

Must've been Russian developers. No wonder why it's so buggy (hardy har har ).

[Ardanis]

Must've been Russian developers.

You know they aren't.

[Miloch]

Must've been Russian developers.

You know they aren't.

I do? I have no clue who actually developed it. Guess I could look at the names in the back of the manual if I owned it (I don't), but even if it's a Canadian or French or whatever company, that doesn't tell you much. I worked for a UK software company that outsourced all its development to Belarus or something like that (cheap rates I guess).