| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| TaeghenAmalith |
Posted - 22 Jul 2020 : 13:27:10
Does the Adventure League material considered CANON material?
Without exception?
Thanks |
| 14 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Zeromaru X |
Posted - 21 Jun 2021 : 01:53:07
quote:
Originally posted by Garen Thal
quote:
Originally posted by Zeromaru X
So, they decanonized them? How sad. Some stuff of the LFR was really good. Thanks for clarifying.
I don't disagree that some of it was good. But I don't think "decanonized" is the right way to describe it, either. I wrote all the way through 4E, and from the perspective of the magazines—which was the primary source for canon setting material—they were never treated as canon in the first place.
I remember some articles that did reference stuff from LFR, although just stuff (like places or names) not the plotlines. Save from the Ambers of Dawn mini-campaign (the one set in Returned Abeir). At least the first adventure was referenced in one article.
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
What a relief. Their Impiltur stuff was ... basic. And the names ... 
-- George Krashos
You can always update your High History of Impiltur with quality content  |
| George Krashos |
Posted - 20 Jun 2021 : 14:13:39
What a relief. Their Impiltur stuff was ... basic. And the names ...
-- George Krashos |
| Garen Thal |
Posted - 19 Jun 2021 : 20:35:46
quote:
Originally posted by Zeromaru X
So, they decanonized them? How sad. Some stuff of the LFR was really good. Thanks for clarifying.
I don't disagree that some of it was good. But I don't think "decanonized" is the right way to describe it, either. I wrote all the way through 4E, and from the perspective of the magazines—which was the primary source for canon setting material—they were never treated as canon in the first place. |
| Zeromaru X |
Posted - 18 Jun 2021 : 01:19:21
So, they decanonized them? How sad. Some stuff of the LFR was really good. Thanks for clarifying. |
| Garen Thal |
Posted - 17 Jun 2021 : 22:27:56
quote:
Originally posted by Zeromaru X
quote:
Originally posted by keftiu
I don't think the organized play is canon. I know 4e's explicitly wasn't, and was counteracted even during that edition.
Like a year late, but... 4e's organized play was canon the first two years. All year 1 and some year 2 adventures were supplemented in the Dragon and Dungeon mags, and had lore articles related to them, and WotC had someone hired to read them all and ensure there were no continuity issues with their own products. However, at some point of the year 2 run (2010), WotC gave the project to other people and then all adventures onwards became noncanon (as nobody was hired to police continuity). The support in the mags also stopped. To this day, it isn't clear exactly whose year 2 adventures are canon and whose aren't.
Just wanted to clarify that. 
I don't doubt that this was the intent at the time, but as someone who worked on lore support for the novels, was actively writing material in Dragon and Dungeon at the time a lot of the League adventures came out, and who wrote a large chunk of the Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide, I can state that the AL material for 4E was not treated as canon for the events leading up to or following the Sundering.
Individual items were picked up and carried through, for certain, but as a blanket statement, it's not entirely accurate to call the Adventurer's League material canon, regardless of year. A good deal of the material is only canon if the changes it envisaged are reflected in subsequent lore. (For example, none of the things presented in the CORM adventures made it into canon.) |
| Zeromaru X |
Posted - 17 Jun 2021 : 15:57:17
quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas
Just curious, what year was all the Mulmaster changes?
IIRC, Mulmaster was during the starting AL season (Tyranny of Dragons). It's not part of the LFR content, and since I've never played AL stuff, I don't know about its canonicity.
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
That's very useful information Zeromaru. I don't suppose there's any information as to what 4E organised play adventures were released in those first 2 years? Any pointers would be much appreciated.
-- George Krashos
Let me check my stuff and I will compile a list in no time.
Edit:
No need of doing a list. Here you can download all year 1 and year 2 LFR adventures
https://www.livingforgottenrealms.com/adventures.html
As far as I know, WotC only paid up to the Year2 Q3 adventures (for instance, WATE2-03) and the Raven's Bluff Mini campaign. Which means all Year2 Q4 adventures are of dubious canonicity.
If you have problems downloading some adventure (I guess some got lost in WotC's 404 archive page) just tell me.
|
| George Krashos |
Posted - 17 Jun 2021 : 01:04:59
quote:
Originally posted by Zeromaru X
quote:
Originally posted by keftiu
I don't think the organized play is canon. I know 4e's explicitly wasn't, and was counteracted even during that edition.
Like a year late, but... 4e's organized play was canon the first two years. All year 1 and some year 2 adventures were supplemented in the Dragon and Dungeon mags, and had lore articles related to them, and WotC had someone hired to read them all and ensure there were no continuity issues with their own products. However, at some point of the year 2 run (2010), WotC gave the project to other people and then all adventures onwards became noncanon (as nobody was hired to police continuity). The support in the mags also stopped. To this day, it isn't clear exactly whose year 2 adventures are canon and whose aren't.
Just wanted to clarify that.
That's very useful information Zeromaru. I don't suppose there's any information as to what 4E organised play adventures were released in those first 2 years? Any pointers would be much appreciated.
-- George Krashos |
| sleyvas |
Posted - 10 Jun 2021 : 14:50:45
quote:
Originally posted by Zeromaru X
quote:
Originally posted by keftiu
I don't think the organized play is canon. I know 4e's explicitly wasn't, and was counteracted even during that edition.
Like a year late, but... 4e's organized play was canon the first two years. All year 1 and some year 2 adventures were supplemented in the Dragon and Dungeon mags, and had lore articles related to them, and WotC had someone hired to read them all and ensure there were no continuity issues with their own products. However, at some point of the year 2 run (2010), WotC gave the project to other people and then all adventures onwards became noncanon (as nobody was hired to police continuity). The support in the mags also stopped. To this day, it isn't clear exactly whose year 2 adventures are canon and whose aren't.
Just wanted to clarify that.
Just curious, what year was all the Mulmaster changes? |
| PattPlays |
Posted - 10 Jun 2021 : 03:11:05
Doesn't it get a little odd with the AL or D&DN events in Phlann? I thought the dragon attack was more well founded than things like Graz'zt and his half-demon fire-giantess conquest of some obscure negative energy tower in Cormanthyr.. |
| Zeromaru X |
Posted - 09 Jun 2021 : 16:41:25
quote:
Originally posted by keftiu
I don't think the organized play is canon. I know 4e's explicitly wasn't, and was counteracted even during that edition.
Like a year late, but... 4e's organized play was canon the first two years. All year 1 and some year 2 adventures were supplemented in the Dragon and Dungeon mags, and had lore articles related to them, and WotC had someone hired to read them all and ensure there were no continuity issues with their own products. However, at some point of the year 2 run (2010), WotC gave the project to other people and then all adventures onwards became noncanon (as nobody was hired to police continuity). The support in the mags also stopped. To this day, it isn't clear exactly whose year 2 adventures are canon and whose aren't.
Just wanted to clarify that. |
| keftiu |
Posted - 23 Sep 2020 : 07:39:56
I don't think the organized play is canon. I know 4e's explicitly wasn't, and was counteracted even during that edition. |
| Compaste |
Posted - 23 Sep 2020 : 07:29:28
I doubt any characters or any events found in this campaign are actual CANON. |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 22 Jul 2020 : 23:57:05
I think this question would best be asked at the D&D Adventurers League site itself. The have an active online community.
This campaign seems to involve one or more people who do (or did) work for WotC, and it claims to be "the official campaign".
But I doubt any characters or any events found in this campaign are actual CANON. At least not until they're published by WotC. In a CANON product with official D&D branding. (I'm not a member of the League so I don't know if any such CANON products have yet been published by WotC, or if any will be in the future.) |
| TomCosta |
Posted - 22 Jul 2020 : 16:09:04
No, the modules are not. The Moonshaes supplement and Border Kingdoms supplement are, however. Sometimes AL material gets incorporated into other published works making it canon. |
