@Background Pony #443B  
I don’t see how you can think so. The major events of the comics are enormously contiguous and self-referencing, but they do not share interaction with the events of the show. It’s a one-way street. The two do not explicitly share the same continuity.

@TexasUberAlles: I don’t think there’s anything that suggests that every single official thing relating to MLP G4 that has a story is in its own continuity. Keep in mind, Hasbro says any adaptations that they themselves publish is supposed to show “what happens between episodes”. Suggesting, to me, that the show, EQG, the comics, and the chapter books, all share a continuity. Especially since we’ve seen Maud Pie and the EQG Shadowbolts. Neither of whom originated on the show.

@Background Pony #0AEE  
But it’s still all canon; they’re just separate continuities. The root of the problem is that people keep using the word “canon” like a cudgel to exclude things they don’t like or disagree with, and that’s just not how it works; even if you really really hate something that happens onscreen, it’s still canon, and even if you really love [whatever] fan theory, it still isn’t unless and until it happens onscreen. The only people pitching fits about the “canonicity” of the comics are people who have a burr up their saddle about some aspect of them and want some way to delegitimize them so they can claim geek superiority over anyone who happens to like that aspect (or at least refuses to blanket hate the comics because of that aspect); hardly anyone else seems to have much of a problem just thinking of show and comic as being two separate continuities using the same characters to tell different stories, and taking or leaving whatever aspect from either as suits them.

@Background Pony #443B  
The show has one “canon”, the comics have another. EqG is a different case, since it uses basically the same format as the show. All of them, including even the books, are “official,” but all do not admit the same continuity elements.

@Pagan  
That’s not canon, though, that’s headcanon. There’s nothing at all wrong with that, everyone does it, but it is zero percent something that can be argued about with any legitimacy, because all it amounts to is personal preference and everybody has one of those. There are way too many stupid, pointless arguments around here all over the internet because so %$#& many people seem incapable of just expressing their opinions about [whatever] in the form of, y’know, opinions, and instead have to find a way, no matter how idiotic or obnoxious, to act as if their opinions must also apply to everyone else in the fandom the same way. If it happened in an official source, it’s canon, even if it happens in an alternate reality or mirror universe or whatever; if that gets on your nerves, cool, your opinion is as valid as anyone else’s, not everyone is going to like every little thing and it is absolutely your right to construct whatever headcanon or internal AU you want that makes the story more enjoyable for you, but announce it as headcanon. Some of those are way more interesting than what actually happens onscreen/on paper/whatever, but what actually happens onscreen/on paper/whatever is what makes up canon.
 
I think you’re right that the staff of both show and comics don’t really know, because they mostly don’t care; they’re not responsible for what the other team is doing, so they just do their own things and let Hasbro figure it out.

@Pagan: I think the contradictory statements are more of a result of the show staff trying to avoid any questions regarding the issue than anything.

@Background Pony #443B  
All I said was the staff doesn’t even know, their statements contradict each other.
 
I don’t really care either way I pick and choose what’s canon or not if it’s good it’s canon if it’s shit it’s not simple as that.

@Background Pony #0AEE  

 
Mr. Horrible put it best as for why that’s the case.
 

 
The fact that the comics aren’t referenced doesn’t make them non-canon. Otherwise, you might as well consider EQG and the chapter books non-canon as well, even though the two of them AND the comics have elements that made their way to the show after their debut appearance.
 
@Pagan: Key words: Until the show says otherwise. Which, last I checked, hasn’t exactly happened.

@Background Pony #443B  
Even the staff doesn’t know.
 

 
 

 

@Background Pony #443B  
The proof is that this is always how it is. The continuity of the comics is perpetually self-admitting, while the continuity of the show makes zero reference to the comics. The comics feed off the show while giving nothing back. They are separate entities.

@Background Pony #0AEE  

Do you have proof of that? Because, last I checked, they were.

@Background Pony #0AEE  
Yeah, IDW Celestia has an actual personality and fleshed-out character. Luna has even more character as well. Sombra too. Chrysalis is more respectable. And Spike as well.
 
For all the misteps people feel the IDW comics make, I see all the good they do for the characters.

@Background Pony #D8B6  
Yeah, IDW Celestia and TV Celestia are definitely a little different.

Well.  
Looks like we know what the authors of Fiendship is Magic think the proper ending to Celestia vs. Chrysalis should have been.

@Background Pony #68C1  
That honeymoon didn’t even survive the first issue for me.

@SFaccountant: Don’t forget that they were sealed in a volcano. Only a Goron would find that as a suitable living condition. Maybe magma splashed on some Changelings apart from Chrysalis, and those that lived got the scars to prove it.

@Background Pony #B42F  
Changelings reproducing, at some point, somehow, is another one of those things I’m going to have to just assume happens unless the show/comic specifically says otherwise.

@Background Pony #631A  
I don’t even know if they are immortal that just seems to be the common thing everyone says and they are over a thousand years old which sounds like they are immortal I could be completely wrong but until I here conclusively that they aren’t I’m going to assume they are immortal since that’s what the evidence seems to lean more towards.
 
So yeah the parents?

@Pagan  
Where has it been said they’re immortal? The closest to an official word on the subject we’ve gotten is from The Journal of the Two Sisters, written by one of the main show writers (Amy Keating Rogers) and taking some information from the official show bible, which simply states that Celestia and Luna are extraordinarily long lived.

This is a little off subject here but if celestia and luna are natural born alicorns and are immortal then wouldn’t their parents be as well? Does that mean they were killed off?

Uh, nobody said the changelings actually reproduced. Maybe they always had holes, but after being defeated by Celestia everyone assumes that she caused them. They could all be ancient and been there at the blasting. The normal changeling impersonating Chrysalis in the comic was familiar with all of the myths/history surrounding changelings and did all of the acting to draw Twilight into the trap. The disguised changeling was also familiar with the idiot in the volcano story, or made it up (or was the changeling that inherited the idiot’s position).
 
Ultimately, the only thing we have for the origin of the changelings from the comics is Chrysalis’s own word, and their MO seems to be deceit and misinformation. It seems very likely she is lying. And while who knows how hard the comic writers are trying to keep things consistent, there’s one big piece of evidence that Chrysalis was lying.
 
Remember the This Day Aria? Chrysalis claims she has been dreaming of taking over Canterlot since she was small. She repeats that line after revealing herself as well. This doesn’t really work with the origin she gives in the comics, where she just pops into existence fully formed.
 
…Unless it’s weird and “Queen Chrysalis” is a position that the boss of the changelings takes after establishing dominance. They’re a race of shapeshifters, after all.

@Background Pony #0AEE  
“Canon and “continuity are two different things. This is seriously not a hard concept to understand.
 
The toys don’t even have a continuity  
Sure they do. It’s a severely limited continuity, but the toy blurb ’verse is an internally consistent narrative of extremely flat characterization.

@Background Pony #68C1  
Well, yeah. What, did you expect those days to last forever?

I remember a time when people happily tied comic and cartoon canons together, taking the sensible explanations and cool parts from both and ignoring stuff that obviously didn’t make sense.
 
I guess those days are done.

Um, yeah. According to the alternate canon that is these comics, that’s the idea.