Alright so i've heard this word thrown around a bit, and I'm kind of curious...is it still considered Ret-conning if lore changes due to a piece of information changing later in the story.
Say for instance.
Billy has an orange.
Okay so Billy has an orange, so what?
Later in the story you find out
BUT little did Billy know, because he had never seen an orange before, he was actually holding a peach!
I know this is a very basic example, but would that be considered ret-conning? Ive seen blizzard use plot twist like that and people say it's a ret-con, but to me it's just impossible for one character or any group of characters to know everything, so just because something happens later to contradict what was at the time considered "fact", doesn't mean that it was ret-conned, just means that the something changed.