Forums: Helping Hand > On Kyuss canonicity

Use the following template for a nicely presented post:

{{Forum post|Write your message here!|~~~~}}

According to Bruce R. Cordell, Nihal and Kyuss are related, or even the same being (Dragon mag 403). I find odd that Kyuss is considered non-canon for the Realms, (seeing he has a Forgotten Realms conversion info in Elder Evils), but Nihal is a canonical character (as it appears in the novel City of Torment, by Bruce R. Cordell).

My question is: How do I have to deal with this piece of information?

Zeromaru X 14:44, January 25, 2017 (UTC)

It might be that the non-canon template stems from the fact, that most of the information in the Kyuss article comes from a non-Wizards of the Coast source: Online supplements from Paizo, which generally bases the adventure in a version of the Greyhawk setting, but gives this information for adaption of this adventure to the Realms. Thus it is kind of doubly removed from "normal" canon material. I am not sure if the non-canon tag should stay, though.

Daranios (talk) 20:29, January 25, 2017 (UTC))

I see. Still, stuff like Elder Evils is not from Paizo, and should not be treated as non-canon. Maybe we can separate the info. Doing a section that have WotC info only, and a second section that have the Paizo stuff, under the non-canon tag.

Zeromaru X 22:54, January 25, 2017 (UTC)

Dear Zeromaru X;

I'm not sure whether it helps, but undeads called "spawn of Kyuss" exist in the Underdark. They are on the random encounter table of the Underdark-source book.

Best Regards


Saya222 (talk) 23:24, January 25, 2017 (UTC)

I'm not sure making two separate sections is the way to go. It smacks of an OOU perspective. Would it not be preferable to make note (however substantial) of the dubious/unlicensed information in an Appendix section? --Ir'revrykal (talk) 05:54, January 26, 2017 (UTC)

Ir'revrykal (talk) 05:54, January 26, 2017 (UTC)

I've updated Kyuss's article. Hope the information is laid in such a manner that respect Realms canon while also allowing in-universe immersion of the article.

Zeromaru X 07:04, January 26, 2017 (UTC)

We do accept Dragon and Dungeon magazines in our Canon policy. That includes adventures and articles, whether printed or online. There were some online supplements for the Forgotten Realms even. So online articles from Paizo are valid—provided they were printed while they had the license from Wizards of the Coast. Anything afterward isn't licensed and thus not canon. I'm broadly in favour of including the Age of Worms, Elder Evils, and other such adventure arcs. They were major storylines at the time, and many people played or still play them. The Forgotten Realms–centric adaptation material is always of interest and valid for the wiki. So I think it can be included on the wiki, but anything from it needs a note explaining its only adaptation material only.
— BadCatMan (talk) 09:46, January 26, 2017 (UTC)

The issue is (the way I see it) that the Forgotten Realms lore on Kyuss that appeared in the Age of Worms campaign was written by Eric Boyd who explicitly stated that it was non-canon. SOME of that lore appeared in Elder Evils, but not all of it. WotC's current direction is to not promote adaptations of content from other settings, but to merge parts of the settings themselves (RE: 'Acererak has a lair in Chult' from the Dungeonology book; 'Count Strahd appears in many historic Torillian legends' from Adventurer's League modules; 'Mordenkainen came to Waterdeep for treatment for an affliction' from Ed's Death Masks novel. I could go on.) For the moment, I'm in full agreement with BadCatMan that this kind of thing requires notes within the article, but I suspect future campaign releases will show more of WotC's hand in this regard.
-hashtalk 18:50, January 28, 2017 (UTC)

That would be the approach for 5th-edition, but adventures written for 3rd and 4th editions tend to rely adaptation suggestions, which is where this is an issue. We have a {{Non-canon}} template that can be easily repurposed to tagging articles derived from adaptation-based lore, just like we do with the video games.
— BadCatMan (talk) 01:43, February 2, 2017 (UTC)

I have no qualms with stating the info from the Dragon magazines as non-canonical. Even the Elder Evils book states that the info in Age of Worms "differ" from what is published in Elder Evils. But that will not make Kyuss non-canon, as his info from Elder Evil is from WotC. It only would make the info that comes from the Age of Worms adventures non-canon.

Zeromaru X 02:34, February 2, 2017 (UTC)

I think I misspoke. The lore may be canon (it comes from an official source, i.e., Wizards and Realms designers) but it's not in continuity (it didn't happen/doesn't exist in the official setting). The non-canon template is a cheap patch until a better solution is decided. It says "should not be taken as a part of the "real" Forgotten Realms universe", which is the main point here.
— BadCatMan (talk) 06:00, February 2, 2017 (UTC)

We could use {{Canon}}, with a message reading "This article or section is about elements from an official Forgotten Realms adaptation of information from a different setting" or something to that effect.
Ir'revrykal (talk) 10:01, February 2, 2017 (UTC)

Something like that might work, yes.
~ Lhynard (talk) 04:39, March 6, 2017 (UTC)

Should we then attach a similar tag to stuff regarding things like the Keep on the Shadowfell & Thunderspire Labyrinth conversions?
-hashtalk 14:09, March 7, 2017 (UTC)

Tales from the Yawning Portal is nearing release, and it contains a bunch of adapted material similar to Thunderspire Labyrinth, etc. I've updated {{Canon}} with a new paramater that accounts for cases like that, seen in action on Kyuss. Is this agreeable? Does the wording need to change?
Ir'revrykal (talk) 14:11, April 3, 2017 (UTC))
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.