• Please note: In an effort to ensure that all of our users feel welcome on our forums, we’ve updated our forum rules. You can review the updated rules here: http://forums.wolflair.com/showthread.php?t=5528.

    If a fellow Community member is not following the forum rules, please report the post by clicking the Report button (the red yield sign on the left) located on every post. This will notify the moderators directly. If you have any questions about these new rules, please contact support@wolflair.com.

    - The Lone Wolf Development Team

Canonicity Request

B

Bidmaron

Well-known member
I have read every manual with the software, and I haven't found a way to do what I believe needs to be done.

I'd like to have a by-snippet flag to deal with canonicity. That is, I want to flag the stuff I make up as 'customized' or 'non-canon,' while the stuff I get out of the PDFs is canon (with a default you can control as canon while you are in cut-and-paste mode). This needs to be by-snippet. We probably need the ability to set something as in-between (e.g. if you take something from a Pathfinder novel, I'm not sure I'd call that canon)

I view this as analogous to the truth flags that are already there.
 
In the meantime you could use a GM note, which would allow you to specify exactly what level of canon-ness plus make notes.
 
Good point, MaxSuper, but you can't filter on GM notes, and that is one of the things you'd like to be able to do.

For example, suppose you want to reuse your campaign once that feature gets added. You would want to review all the non-canon material and strip out some of that in a lot of cases.
 
Bidmaron said:
I have read every manual with the software, and I haven't found a way to do what I believe needs to be done.

I'd like to have a by-snippet flag to deal with canonicity. That is, I want to flag the stuff I make up as 'customized' or 'non-canon,' while the stuff I get out of the PDFs is canon (with a default you can control as canon while you are in cut-and-paste mode). This needs to be by-snippet. We probably need the ability to set something as in-between (e.g. if you take something from a Pathfinder novel, I'm not sure I'd call that canon)

I view this as analogous to the truth flags that are already there.
Click to expand...

I ran into this similar challenge ... but resolved probably differently than most... As Bidmaron suggests a similar feature akin to the truth flags would be helpful, but low on my wish list...

Since I build the majority of canon related material within the story line tab under elements (though not exclusively) I simply flag each "non-canon" element with a "₡" prefix... crude, but allows me to search (search for ₡), and later when there is a feature to utilize a find / replace to remove them.

₡ is simply a nonstandard character that RW or HL is likely to have .. Within the editor there is a symbol choice or Every PC has a character map to define nonstandard characters.. or just enter "HB- for homebrew or NC for noncanon
I preferred the unusual single keystroke for simplicity and its unlikely duplicated elsewhere by accident
 
I like the concept of truth flags for this.

For me, if it's in my campaign it is canon. It doesn't matter what some other person writes/creates before/after/during that point. My world is the center of my universe....

But once we begin sharing material, my universe blurs and I need to play nicely in the multiverse. While I don't have an issue with multiple realities, others will want to remain very pure and I respect that.
 
Just wondering, once sharing/marketplace is enabled, wouldn't it be best to create a campaign that's "canon" and then share it into another campaign that adds on the non-canon stuff?

Of course not something that can be done now, and the question would be "can I tell the difference between shared stuff and local campaign stuff?"
 
Bidmaron said:
If you reveal it to the players, they now know it is non-canon.
Click to expand...
So? There are no canon police..:D:cool: Seriously, as AEIOU stated,,, its your world.... that makes it canon for you... as long as you maintain consistency. I mark non-canon for me should I ever share the info with someone else in the future so they know where it originated from....

For Example, In the WOG (World of Greyhawk) settinig canon dictates a group of heros recovered the Crook of Rao banishing a group of evil minions. This set into motion a change in the course of the war within the realm (Furyondy in this case). TSR and later Wizards of the Coast built many elements around this event, thus making it all "canon" (ie published works). Problem is my Players blew the quest and failed to recover the Crook. Result, no evil minion banish, darker outcome for the forces of good, etc. BUT all those results are "non-canon" compared to the "published" account. I simply use what is published as a baseline and tweek the result based on what my players successes and failures are. That is campaign management.

AEIOU said:
For me, if it's in my campaign it is canon. It doesn't matter what some other person writes/creates before/after/during that point. My world is the center of my universe....

But once we begin sharing material, my universe blurs and I need to play nicely in the multiverse. While I don't have an issue with multiple realities, others will want to remain very pure and I respect that.
Click to expand...
I agree...
And as I write on another site about canon, the lines can get very fuzzy. Being a diehard WOG writer, forum contributor, and DM for nearly 30yrs, that setting has seen its share of Canon, Semi-canon, Fanon.
Some follow it religiously, others as a template, some not at all. As Gygax once wrote, "its your world, and welcome to it".

Ladyofdragons said:
Just wondering, once sharing/marketplace is enabled, wouldn't it be best to create a campaign that's "canon" and then share it into another campaign that adds on the non-canon stuff?

Of course not something that can be done now, and the question would be "can I tell the difference between shared stuff and local campaign stuff?"
Click to expand...
LoD brings a valid point... once sharing of realms is a feature (which will be very nice) How would you know then? via the "source tab" added not so long ago perhaps? But that would still not drill down to the snipit level others have mentioned above... hummmmm:confused:
 
Galen/AEIOU, I understand how YOU want to do campaign management. Great, go do it. I want to know the material I made up and the material that is canon, and I won't be able to remember two days later. As for the source, that won't work because it is on a topic basis, not snippet.

Also, consider this scenario: You run RotR with your group. Now you want to run another adventure path in Varisia. Do you want it to be before or after your RotR adventure? You shouldn't be forced to run it after, and if you want to run it before, you would like to have an easy way to strip out all the non-canon material.

To me canonicity is a basic element of campaign management. If it's something I wrote, I won't feel bad about modifying it later if I think I need to. If it is canon, I'd think a little harder before I modify it.

Anyway, the software tries hard not to force people into a 'my way or the highway mode,' and it should support flagging canonicity. It's not as important as a calendar to me, but it's not too far behind either.
 
I have been thinking about this issue a lot. I first agreed with Galen and AEIOU. It is all canon when it enters my game world.
But, Bidmaron, your latest argument is an important one. The ability to see the topic before and after play is important. I am building my realm while playing (have done this method even without RW). So I would like to know what the original situation was before the players ran around in it and changed things. That way you can reset the setting later.
Of course this is a different approach from when you first create a full grown realm and then let the players into it. Then you can make a copy of the original realm and use that as a way to preserve the original setting (at least when the repository is online).
 
Another benefit of a canonicity flag is when comparing details between to derivatives of the same source material. When my copy and your copy disagree, is my data canon, your data canon, or neither data canon (but in different ways)? The canonicity flag makes it possible to know who has diverged where, which in turn makes it possible start exploring why a change was made, along with its consequences and future implications.
 
This really is an important and difficult issue so I'm glad to see that folks are still thinking aloud about it.

I would really like to identify canon/published/official from my own material so that I can share my material without running afoul of the dread copyright monster. But I'm not convinced that a binary canon/not canon flag would be useful for this.

I would propose that a diff function could be more useful. Then you could compare official published material or your base campaign versus your current campaign with differences highlighted. But this would require a known canon version to compare against.

In regards to "my" canon vs "your" canon, here we can really see that a canon flag is not going to help. If we both say it's canon, then RW must identify both as canon because it has no way of determining veracity; even if they oppose each other. And unfortunately a diff function isn't going to help either unless we enter things verbatim from the same source and create identical snippets. An example that quickly comes to mind is the planet Alderan pre-Republic, Old Republic, Death Star target and new asteroid field -- all are canon and all are true for a period in time.

For me to accept someone else's canon, I would want to be able to check references. Perhaps instead of flags or diffs, what we need is a free text citation field for every single snippet (sort of like the GM text)? Source name and page number; footnotes and endnotes. Wow does that sound time consuming and tedious.... But I can see myself using it to tie multiple sources together for materials that are cross referenced in several documents though.
 
AEIOU said:
This really is an important and difficult issue so ...........

I would propose that a diff function could be more useful. Then you could compare official published material or your base campaign versus your current campaign with differences highlighted. But this would require a known canon version to compare against.

For me to accept someone else's canon, I would want to be able to check references. Perhaps instead of flags or diffs, what we need is a free text citation field for every single snippet (sort of like the GM text)? Source name and page number; footnotes and endnotes. Wow does that sound time consuming and tedious.... But I can see myself using it to tie multiple sources together for materials that are cross referenced in several documents though.
Click to expand...
I can agree with a lot of what is being tabled.... My workaround ONLY is a "stopgap" for my internal use.
I would agree, as RW evolves there is a need to be filled here.
Like AEIOU, I can see myself cross referencing sources... Because even published works are also less than consistent when it comes to time keeping, spell effects, and at times even NPC backgrounds / associations. Lastly I myself have used "canon" as guide not chiseled in stone .... Gygax had crashed spaceships and laser pistols in a "canon" game module that I will never incorporate within my own world.
 
Bidmaron,

I think I know you from the old RPGXplorer forums, if so... Howdy!

The way I solved this was by using flags... I have "Core' and a '3PP' (3rd party publisher) flags which allows me to sort by need. It would be a simple thing to use (or add) a 'Canon' flag.

Have you considered this?
 
The trouble with that is that it applies to the entire topic. We need a flag like the truth level that applies on a snippet basis.

Yes, it is me from RPGXplorer days, Grey Mage! That was a great program in its day, but I'm happy to be a Lone Wolfer now.
 
Now that Content Market is almost upon us, I re-urge folks to consider a canonicity tag, with the values Canon, Third (party), and User. This tag would be automatic for the most part, with imported material retaining the flag value (per snippet, but at the topic level initially and then it atomizes to the snippets once the user has modified any snippet in a canonical topic) of the imported material until the user edits something. Official market material would be either canon (for Paizo materials or the publisher of the system), third (for third party published materials), or user (for either user-created or user-edited material).

And users should be able to force the flag to the other two values when they are entering a module themselves.
 
Last edited:
What about when I'm creating my own world from scratch... Can't I define that as canon? I don't mind the tag, but setting it should be up to the person entering the content. Now, if you want to restrict a tag to publishers as your example of canon and third party suggests... Then I'd suggest 'Publisher-Official' and 'Publisher-Third Party' (or 'Publisher-unofficial').
 
Viking, the user would always have complete control over the canon flag as I see it. Sorry I wasn't clear on that. It would be handy when you create the realm that you can set the default for the canon flag and then as you go you can change the default for future entries.

That way, you could go in and enter a module from a PDF you own with the default of 'canon' and then you could go in and set the default to 'User' after done with the module and go make whatever mods to the module you might want to do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top