I love scifi in general as well but hate Into Darkness and consider it the worst Trek movie ever. 2009 wasn't nearly as bad but I would put it in the lower-middle range of the franchises films.

Lets hope the new one will be a bit more cerebral and less frat boy now that JJ is out of the director's chair. I liked the 2009 but found the main characters to be too unprofessional to be the bridge crew on a starship. ITD was just a bad film.

Apparantly Simon Pegg was ordered to rewrite the third Star Trek movie because it was too "brainy" or something... so expect a dumbed-down movie.

OTOH, I've always found the original cast to be too unprofessional to be the bridge crew of a starship... TNG, not so much, but definately the originals.

Please at least don't do more insane super blood or plotholes I could fly a Death Star through. And maybe give us a ship to ship battle that doesn't consist of a ship being crippled in one or two shots, ramming, or boarding parties. I don't mind occasional battles like this but in 2009 and Into Darkness one or more of these happened literally every time ships were fighting on screen.

As long as the movies and stories let us know if they are in continuity or not, I couldn`t care less about canon! And I have a hard time understanding why it`s so **** important to people to know everything about every little detail about the Galaxy, it`s fiction, fill in the blanks yourself. The Thrawn triology is great, but I don`t care if it`s canon or in its own alternate universe. It`s up to the audience or viewer to decide if it counts or not, everyone will interpret it and view it differently and put different subjective meanings to it, no matter what you call it, canon or legends. Who cares? The RPGs sure aren`t canon and non of our games are! It`s all just fiction anyhow! There are countless versions of Batman and superhero stories and as long as we know which stories are in continuity with eachother, it`s all good, non are worth more than others... Peace

... It`s all Kanan!

I will start by saying, I admittedly have not read all posts of all pages in this rather extensive thread.. however, in my opinion, the reasoning is pretty clear and understandable.

Firstly, through a defined canon a group can have a reasonably clear source of authority as to if something might be acceptable or not within the terms of the game. Your answer to many of the initial responses is: Who cares, play what you want and how you want! But a noted, defined Canon works for GMs and players arbitrating disputes and what is possible or not in much the same way that past legal cases work for lawyers in setting legal precedent. It's a convenient, predefined source of information that can help lend consistency to the stories told. Really, if you are codifying things in any way to provide consistency and continuity to it then you are using Canon. The Canon you are using my be one of your own developing as opposed to the one presented by the creators, but it is still a form of Canon.

Secondly, I would say it is perfectly acceptable and reasonable for any GM or group to define their own version of Canon. There is absolutely nothing wrong with this and I applaud those with the time, creativity and enthusiasm to do so even. However, ostensibly, we are here to play in the Star Wars Universe because we love it. We love the movies and the stories and we want our stories to feel like a believable extension to these same stories. And if we want to carry that forward with the future media being produced by Disney it is convenient to use the Canon they have presented to help maintain a sort of consistency with that. If we go around having a Grand Admiral Thrawn leading the Imperial Remnants and waging an ongoing battle against the raising republic it increases the challenges involved when trying to integrate new content from the new media sources. By all means, if you would rather do that, go right ahead and enjoy your game.. you're not playing wrong. But by the same token, neither is someone who decides to make Canon important because of the consistency it offers.

And finally, and really most likely the biggest reason, they are FANS.. you have called this out even in your first post. Fans, by their very nature, are fiercely loyal to the subject matter of their fandom. They want to know all of it's little ins and outs, they want to be experts in it. They want to know it as well, in many cases even better, than they would know our own history, culture, etc.. They want to be able to believe it like it is real. Thus, to many fans, if it doesn't follow Canon it's not the real thing but an approximation of it. To be able to know something that well and that thoroughly, it needs to be defined.. and thus you have Canon.

I love scifi in general as well but hate Into Darkness and consider it the worst Trek movie ever. 2009 wasn't nearly as bad but I would put it in the lower-middle range of the franchises films.

Into Darkness was certainly disappointing but you're going to have a hard time convincing me that it's worse than Nemesis.

i think if its a part of canon that is very big, it stays. but if its small, like killing a person who someone meets and isn't important. like, say if i kill Doctor Death Before it should of happened, who really cares?....

... all of you? ...

I love scifi in general as well but hate Into Darkness and consider it the worst Trek movie ever. 2009 wasn't nearly as bad but I would put it in the lower-middle range of the franchises films.

Into Darkness was certainly disappointing but you're going to have a hard time convincing me that it's worse than Nemesis.

I actually enjoyed Nemesis more than I did to Into Darkness. I've read articles that say the studio is at fault for Nemesis being bad. It was apparently meant to be the set up for one more film that would tie up lose ends for the TNG crew. But near the end the studio decided that they wanted to cut the movie down some so a lot of scenes that would have improved the movie were dropped. I can't remember what two big films were out at the time, I think one of them was a Harry Potter film, but there was another huge movie out at the time of Nemesis and the study wanted the movie short enough so that you could run two showings of Nemesis during one showing of Potter or that other film that I'm blanking on. The hope being that people who weren't able to get tickets to the other two films would instead settle for Nemesis.

Nemesis was the final swan-song of a film franchise that ignored everything that made ST:TNG a great TV show. Generations was bad and every film after was incrementally worse for trying to turn the TNG cast into action movie stars. The last thing I wanted to see on the big screen was Jean-Luc Picard zipping around in a redneck dune buggy, Deanna Troi getting mind-raped (again), and a weird Romulan-Human clone die in the most hateful and grotesque way possible. And an ending ripped-off from Wrath of Khan (before, y'know, Into Darkness did it overtly but incorrectly...).

Into Darkness was a cluster of studio interference and unnecessary fan-service and callbacks but it, at least, looked nice, was well-acted, and sort of wrapped into contemporary politics. Nemesis was a cheap wrap-up that no one, including the actors, seemed to even care about.

Darmok and Jalad at Tenagra.

This is the perfect response.

Sokath, his eyes open.

i think if its a part of canon that is very big, it stays. but if its small, like killing a person who someone meets and isn't important. like, say if i kill Doctor Death Before it should of happened, who really cares?....

... all of you? ...

Kinda guessing you're not getting the gist of most the responses...

Canon is a useful tool for finding common ground and communication. You can do whatever you want, but other players/fans are gonna be pretty confused (and understandably so) if things are happening that are completely counter to what they though they understood about the setting.

What you do doesn't effect anyone else here, so noone cares if you do that. Not sure why you're trying to reverse and put those words into the mouths of everyone who's responded to this thread.

I love scifi in general as well but hate Into Darkness and consider it the worst Trek movie ever. 2009 wasn't nearly as bad but I would put it in the lower-middle range of the franchises films.

Into Darkness was certainly disappointing but you're going to have a hard time convincing me that it's worse than Nemesis.

I actually enjoyed Nemesis more than I did to Into Darkness. I've read articles that say the studio is at fault for Nemesis being bad. It was apparently meant to be the set up for one more film that would tie up lose ends for the TNG crew. But near the end the studio decided that they wanted to cut the movie down some so a lot of scenes that would have improved the movie were dropped. I can't remember what two big films were out at the time, I think one of them was a Harry Potter film, but there was another huge movie out at the time of Nemesis and the study wanted the movie short enough so that you could run two showings of Nemesis during one showing of Potter or that other film that I'm blanking on. The hope being that people who weren't able to get tickets to the other two films would instead settle for Nemesis.

It was one of the Lord of the Rings movies. I remember this because Decipher had the RPG license for both Star Trek and Lord of the Rings at the time and I couldn't believe that they failed to put a product out for either line when these movies dropped right at the holiday season.

Darmok and Jalad at Tenagra.

This is the perfect response.

Sokath, his eyes open.

Rai and Jiri at Lungha. Rai of Lowani. Lowani under two moons. Jiri of Umbaya. Umbaya of crossed roads. At Lungha. Lungha, her sky gray.

I love scifi in general as well but hate Into Darkness and consider it the worst Trek movie ever. 2009 wasn't nearly as bad but I would put it in the lower-middle range of the franchises films.

Into Darkness was certainly disappointing but you're going to have a hard time convincing me that it's worse than Nemesis.

I actually enjoyed Nemesis more than I did to Into Darkness. I've read articles that say the studio is at fault for Nemesis being bad. It was apparently meant to be the set up for one more film that would tie up lose ends for the TNG crew. But near the end the studio decided that they wanted to cut the movie down some so a lot of scenes that would have improved the movie were dropped. I can't remember what two big films were out at the time, I think one of them was a Harry Potter film, but there was another huge movie out at the time of Nemesis and the study wanted the movie short enough so that you could run two showings of Nemesis during one showing of Potter or that other film that I'm blanking on. The hope being that people who weren't able to get tickets to the other two films would instead settle for Nemesis.

It was one of the Lord of the Rings movies. I remember this because Decipher had the RPG license for both Star Trek and Lord of the Rings at the time and I couldn't believe that they failed to put a product out for either line when these movies dropped right at the holiday season.

Yeah that's it. Nemesis was apparently gutted so that it could be shown twice in the time it took to show LotR once.

I told my players in the first session, Canon is the first 6 films (yes Jar Jar Binks even,, sorry)

Everything else? We all agreed to 'Make It Up As We Go Along'..

It's not just Star wars fans by the way...

I got into Star Wars because of EotE so knowing what's canon was important to me because the EU is so large and much of it is inaccessible to me. It was super-daunting to me so when Disney pruned the canon sources, I was happy!

And, being that I like Jar Jar, ewoks and my GM's take on midichlorians, I have no complaints, either.

I understand that the movies have to be in continuity, the series too. What I don`t get is why anything that isn`t in the movies, series or official material has to be written in stone. The same with anything in the background, why do we have to know what it is? Why does there have to be canonical answers to that? I like the Galaxy more when some of it is open to interpretation.

I guess it`s like this: continuity and story canon = yes. Unnecessary background canon = no!

All I can tell you is why it is important at our table. Or at least why it is important to me as a GM.

It sets a framework in which I can place my campaign, it allows me to add elements from the 'official story' in my game and ground it in something that is familiar to my players. I like giving my players little bits of the saga they know from the side line. They met a few of the cantina dwellers, they visited a Star Destroyer and met up with Ulric Tage. They scouted Endor for a suitable location for a shield generator.

To me it adds to the fun.

I understand that the movies have to be in continuity, the series too. What I don`t get is why anything that isn`t in the movies, series or official material has to be written in stone. The same with anything in the background, why do we have to know what it is? Why does there have to be canonical answers to that? I like the Galaxy more when some of it is open to interpretation.

I guess it`s like this: continuity and story canon = yes. Unnecessary background canon = no!

Human curiosity. This isn't something that is unique to Star Wars. People always want to know more, have more details, know more things about things that matter and are important to them. You're treating all of this as if it was unique to Star Wars and nothing else. But it isn't true. People get just as obsessed over details in Star Wars as some may over the minor details of the Battle of Waterloo or digging into their family tree, to people digging into the minor and mundane details of the lives of their favorite celebrity. Humans do it in all kinds of ways in all kinds of activities. To not do it, denies what we are.

It's all apart of the human condition. It is .... us.

If you want a real answer to your question instead of looking on the forums go to google scholar and look for academic articles that investigate this very human phenomena. There is likely quality research out there that explores this. Sure it's not directed at Star Wars directly, but the root reason for peoples obsession with canon is rooted in human nature and not the Star Wars IP.

Human curiosity. This isn't something that is unique to Star Wars....

Ok, fair enough, I understand the curiosity, I really do. But this is fiction, so there isn`t always an answer to the questions you ask..

I watch a lot of movies and read lots of books and comics where fans do not obsess as much over minor details and need the answer to and explanation for every little unimportant background detail.

Being curious about history is something else, that actually happened! Although even historians disagree, but they do agree that noone really knows if what is written is what really happened(at least in that way).

In fiction, it`s the characters and the story that`s important, not the minor details and the everything about a backdrop that was originaly painted with broad strokes.

Authors paint their worlds with broad strokes and fools the reader into thinking there is a much richer and more detailed world than there really is. I`m paraphrasing, but even George RR Martin said this.

Human curiosity. This isn't something that is unique to Star Wars....

Ok, fair enough, I understand the curiosity, I really do. But this is fiction, so there isn`t always an answer to the questions you ask..

I watch a lot of movies and read lots of books and comics where fans do not obsess as much over minor detail and need the answer to and explanation for every little unimportant background detail.

Being curious about history is something else, that actually happened! But even historians disagree, but they do agree that noone really knows if what is written is what really happened(at least in that way).

In fiction, it`s the characters and the story that`s important, not the minor details and the everything about a backdrop that was originaly painted with broad strokes.

Authors paint their worlds with broad strokes and fools the reader into thinking there is a much richer and more detailed world than there really is. I`m paraphrasing, but even George RR Martin said this.

Sure in comics there may be some that don't obsess over the minor details. But then there are those that do. If you think that comic book fans don't obsess over the details of their favorite comics to the level that some Star Wars fans do then you haven't been paying attention to fandom in general. In the same way that there are Star Wars fans that obsess over the minor details and there are those that don't. Maybe you don't obsess to the level that others do but treating it as if there is something wrong with those that do (which a lot of your post on the matter do) isn't gonna help you understand.

Whether we're talking make believe or real world people want details. It doesn't matter that history was real (and in some cases history isn't as real as we think it is and is just as much fiction as Star Wars is) and Star Wars isn't. There is a root need for details. A root desire to know. If you seriously want to understand this stop looking at Star Wars in particular and broaden your inquiry to the general human desire to know. This entire question isn't about Star Wars, it's about humans. The things you observe in Star Wars can be observed in so many other aspects of daily life. Star Trek fans, Harry Potter fans, history buffs, war renactors, the list could go on. They all have this same basic human desire to know a lot about the thing.

Sure in comics there may be some that don't obsess over the minor details. But then there are those that do. If you think that comic book fans don't obsess over the details of their favorite comics to the level that some Star Wars fans do then you haven't been paying attention to fandom in general. In the same way that there are Star Wars fans that obsess over the minor details and there are those that don't. Maybe you don't obsess to the level that others do but treating it as if there is something wrong with those that do (which a lot of your post on the matter do) isn't gonna help you understand.

Whether we're talking make believe or real world people want details. It doesn't matter that history was real (and in some cases history isn't as real as we think it is and is just as much fiction as Star Wars is) and Star Wars isn't. There is a root need for details. A root desire to know. If you seriously want to understand this stop looking at Star Wars in particular and broaden your inquiry to the general human desire to know. This entire question isn't about Star Wars, it's about humans. The things you observe in Star Wars can be observed in so many other aspects of daily life. Star Trek fans, Harry Potter fans, history buffs, war renactors, the list could go on. They all have this same basic human desire to know a lot about the thing.

You are right, there are lots of fandoms that are obsessive with the minor and unimportant(on that scale), paying atention to things the writer never even thought of. To me that is kind of crazy and really fascinating.

You say people want details, yes I guess that is true. My point is that those details do not exist, not in fiction, not originaly. Those details have to be made up. That is fine, it`s even fun. But what I go on about is I don`t get why those made up details have to be official! Why can`t there be more than one version of those minor details, why can`t fans even make it up themselves, why does little things that doesn`t matter in the story have to be canon?

This is what I am curious about(I`m only human you know..), this is what fascinates me about fans, fanon and fandom..

For me, Star Wars and fiction I love triggers my desire to make stuff up, not to know details that doesn`t even exist within the fictional world itself:p

You are right, there are lots of fandoms that are obsessive with the minor and unimportant(on that scale), paying atention to things the writer never even thought of. To me that is kind of crazy and really fascinating.

You say people want details, yes I guess that is true. My point is that those details do not exist, not in fiction, not originaly. Those details have to be made up. That is fine, it`s even fun. But what I go on about is I don`t get why those made up details have to be official! Why can`t there be more than one version of those minor details, why can`t fans even make it up themselves, why does little things that doesn`t matter in the story have to be canon?

This is what I am curious about(I`m only human you know..), this is what fascinates me about fans, fanon and fandom..

For me, Star Wars and fiction I love triggers my desire to make stuff up, not to know details that doesn`t even exist within the fictional world itself:p

Like I said, if you really wanted answers you wouldn't be on the forums. You'd be on google scholar. You wouldn't be getting peoples opinions on the matter. You'd instead be looking at the very real research that has gone into this subject matter. You'd stop treating this as some kind of thing unique to Star Wars and broaden your inquiry to the general human desire. The root of your question isn't about Star Wars at all. Not if you seriously want an answer. And if you seriously want an answer you're not going to find it on this forum. You're only going to find it by looking into the real research done.

You are right, there are lots of fandoms that are obsessive with the minor and unimportant(on that scale), paying atention to things the writer never even thought of. To me that is kind of crazy and really fascinating.

You say people want details, yes I guess that is true. My point is that those details do not exist, not in fiction, not originaly. Those details have to be made up. That is fine, it`s even fun. But what I go on about is I don`t get why those made up details have to be official! Why can`t there be more than one version of those minor details, why can`t fans even make it up themselves, why does little things that doesn`t matter in the story have to be canon?

This is what I am curious about(I`m only human you know..), this is what fascinates me about fans, fanon and fandom..

For me, Star Wars and fiction I love triggers my desire to make stuff up, not to know details that doesn`t even exist within the fictional world itself:p

Like I said, if you really wanted answers you wouldn't be on the forums. You'd be on google scholar. You wouldn't be getting peoples opinions on the matter. You'd instead be looking at the very real research that has gone into this subject matter. You'd stop treating this as some kind of thing unique to Star Wars and broaden your inquiry to the general human desire. The root of your question isn't about Star Wars at all. Not if you seriously want an answer. And if you seriously want an answer you're not going to find it on this forum. You're only going to find it by looking into the real research done.

I`m not saying it`s unique to Star Wars:) And I do get a lot of interesting replies and view points I didn`t think of in this thread. And I enjoy discussing the subject matter! Like with so much else, I believe that the goal isn`t to agree, but to keep the discussion going. There isn no right or wrong, no one true answer, just different view points. I get your view point and I understand what you say and how you see it! I get the curiosity and the need to know more about something you love and something that inspires and trigger you, I really do! Do you get me and my side of it?

Answers, schmanswers.

Search your feelings.

Canon anchors your stories to the stories we grew up on.

Canon is not important.

It's all just fiction. Pick and choose the parts you like, ignore the rest.

Goes double when crafting characters and campaigns.

Canon is not important.

It's all just fiction. Pick and choose the parts you like, ignore the rest.

Goes double when crafting characters and campaigns.

To an extent. If a player walks up to my table and says, "My character is the last Ithorian, because the Empire destroyed Ithor right before the Battle of Yavin and now I want revenge, and also I'm a Jedi because all Ithorians are Jedi," I would probably say no. When asked for a reason, I can point to canon and say, "look, there's Ithorians all the time. This galaxy is the one I've chosen to set my story in." If there is an established canon with firm details and events, that player is less likely to think I'm denying his creative agency and more likely to see my reasoning for saying no.