Talk:Wanshou
Canon changes in Tian Xia World Guide
Wanshou's characterization in Tian Xia World Guide (pp 238-245) clearly differs from that of Dragon Empires Gazetteer and the current state of the wiki article, but the differences are not straightforward to pin down as canon changes. These are the three topics that seem difficult to reconcile to me.
Social hierarchy: Boggards and kappas still live within Wanshou (kappas are only mentioned in a paragraph about Lamashtu's faith, p. 46) but are not described as being part of an elite class. Four non-Zhanagorr named NPCs hold a political position, and they consist of three humans (two of which are nobles) and one merfolk. The noble and working classes do not seem to be divided by specific ancestries.
Slavery: Slavery or compulsive labor by any name is not mentioned or alluded to in Wanshou's section. Citizens are described as working for personal and community survival, not necessarily for any taskmasters. As Meta:Slavery details, Paizo no longer focuses on slavery, but historical slavery is still occasionally referred to, such as in the Valashai Empire. It is unclear if the removal of slavery in Wanshou is a retroactive change or an in-universe change.
Madness: The common citizen's reverence of Zhanagorr is not depicted as wholly irrational but the result of propaganda and social infrastructure that has improved quality of life, as well as the very frequent covert disappearances of potential insurrectionists. This is the norm among common citizenry rather than an exception, and Wanshou's citizens are described as seeming "naive" to outsiders who don't fully understand the situation. There is a divide between this perception and the "zealots" such as Naoki Tanaka and the Tidecallers who seem more cult-like, though they are never referred to as "mad"–possibly a conscious effort to reduce real-world mental illness stigmatization.
For the purposes of this wiki's canon policy, which of these topics are reconcilable and which should be considered to have a canon change or conflict? -Ravenstone (talk) 19:29, 25 March 2025 (UTC)
- If you can find an official clarification from Paizo staff that states the changes are meant to be retroactive, I'd treat them as a retcon.
- Otherwise I'd treat all three as canon conflicts. Update the wiki article as if TXWG overrides DEG since it's the current source of highest tier, flag the conflicts in the article with {{Conflict}} and document them (copy and paste what you wrote above into Talk:Wanshou/Conflicts and that would be sufficient to me), and categorize Talk:Wanshou/Conflicts as Category:Canon conflicts/Unofficially resolved.
- If a future clarification then states that TXWG reflects intentional retroactive changes, move them from the conflict page to Meta:Wanshou (they would no longer be up for potential discussion) and add a {{Revision}} link pointing to the version of the article prior to those changes.
- If a clarification indicates that the change occurred in-universe, reincorporate the relevant parts of the old canon, even if you have to be vague and repetitive about timing ("as of 4711 AR", "as of 4724 AR", etc.). You might still have conflicts to flag, and the conflict page of what's still inconsistent would be categorized as Category:Canon conflicts/Officially resolved instead.
- If a clarification indicates that TXWG is wrong (unlikely), revert the article to the prior state and re-flag the conflicting statements with {{Conflict}}.