Forum:CT Archive/FFG and canon

The situation about Fantasy Flight Games products and the new canon, has been complicated. Members of the Lucasfilm Story Group try to avoid publicly answering on whether it's canon or not.


 * The 1st tweet from Matt Martin bring this to the table: "There are always concessions made for the sake of gameplay but it's probably about as close to canon as you could get? If that makes any sense. I'd say that about any FFG title released in recent years." which means that yes, in his opinion, subjects appearing in FFG products can work inside canon within recent years. It has to be determined on a case by case basis from what point FFG moves away from Star Wars Legends and moves closer to canon.


 * The 2nd tweet mentions: "I wouldn't consider any of them completely canon. Like I said, there are considerations made for gameplay." This means that besides the gameplay implications, FFG products are not 100% exclusively canon.


 * The 3rd tweet now mentions: "There isn't a black and white answer for this question. I know that's what Wook would want, but there just isn't. I, personally, think it's safe to use stuff like your examples for Wook but that's just my opinion." It can be deduced that for the Wook, it would be ideal to paste the canon label at the top and treat it as canon, but we also know that in their opinions, we should keep names from legends until contradicted, which was rejected in a previous CT.


 * The 4th tweet states:"I said essentially that IN MY OPINION for the sake of Wookieepedia I would put FFG in the canon tab unless contradicted elsewhere. If future stories contradict it, consider the new thing as more accurate." This assures that in his own opinion, it would be easier to label canon until is contradicted somewhere else.

The purpose of this CT is for the creation of the following template that was discussed on a previous SH: The creation on a Tales1-20-like template. Basically, it would be the same situation that we had with Star Wars Tales, but in this case, it would be FFG. The template practically states what members of the Story Group have said were their personal opinions on Fantasy Flight Games, in which its content has some level of canonicity ("I wouldn’t consider any of them completely canon" or "it's probably as close to canon as you could get") unless it's contradicted elsewhere ("I would put FFG in the canon tab unless contradicted elsewhere"). With this template, we can tag the information in articles as canon (as many editors already do), but warn readers that it may not be 100% canonical.

The template is going to be used on articles with FFG exclusive characters, locations, etc, as well as possibly articles with some sections derived from information in FFG products if people feel we need something like Talesstart for existing canon characters, which we can implement in the future. This would not be used for obvious Legends content.

The template would be the following:

See here for the usage example

With this CT there is also a proposal to modify the Canon policy. Currently this is the policy on FFG products:

"The canon status of Fantasy Flight Games' ongoing roleplaying systems—Edge of the Empire, Age of Rebellion, and Force and Destiny—are publicly undetermined. Heddle has stated, "We'll figure it out." However, as these roleplaying games are based nearly exclusively in Star Wars Legends material, Wookieepedia treats them as Legends."

and it would change to this:

'''"The canon status of Fantasy Flight Games' ongoing roleplaying systems is publicly undetermined. Matt Martin from the Story Group stated that in his opinion, "It's probably as close to canon, but he wouldn’t consider any of them completely canon," and also mentioned, "That for the sake of Wookieepedia I would put FFG in the canon tab unless contradicted elsewhere. If future stories contradict it, consider the new thing as more accurate." Wookieepedia treats FFG products from recent years as having a level of canonicity within the canon continuity."'''

The support would be for the change of policy, and the creation and implementation of the template above.--DarthRuiz30 (talk) 09:18, January 22, 2019 (UTC)