Is everything in Dragon canon?

[Hawken]

The DM of the game I'm in is running a campaign of fiendish characters. Having a male character, I wanted to become an Incubus (male Succubus) ala Savage Species. However, as of the latest Dragon issue (with Malcanthet), with the introduction of the new Incubus, he says no, that the new Incubus is not the type I was going for and there are no longer any male versions of the Succubus.

Previous to this, he made a statement to the effect that things in Dragon were "optional" much like the rules in Unearthed Arcana. Now, however, he is not stating that this is the way it is for his campaign because he said so but this is the way it is because that is what Dragon says. I let the issue go because I don't want to be pushy, but I don't like that he first treats Dragon as optional, then as canon for the D&D game.

What is everyone else's take on this? Do you view Dragon as optional or canon?

Personally, I think the new Incubus is an interesting monster (except the gazelle horns which make it seem kind of like the pansy of Abyssal creatures and not at all intimidating), but I think the writer of the article (I don't remember the name as I just read it at the bookstore and didn't buy it) just slapped the Incubus name on the monster for lack of a better term. All previous incarnations of D&D--to my recollection--and even 3.5 prior to this Dragon issue (as well as the Fiendish Codex I) portrayed Incubi as pretty much the male version of the Succubus. Even all mythical info about them seem to portray them in this fashion. Now they're like some punk acting tough and itching for a beating.

 

[frankthedm]

Dragon is as cannon as the DM makes it.

And I'll note there are a few kinds of incubi. One that is not that grandma friendly is equipped with an extra large "weapon" designed to cause his "partner" death/horrible injury.

 

[EyeontheMountain]

Ask you DM. His opinion is the only one that matters.

For me Canon is the established history of a campaign setting, not which rules you use. So FR and Evberron have canon, the personalities, countries, history and such that make up the world, and some DMs play a canon game where it is the same as the books and some go for a more personalized world.

As for rules, there is no standard set of rules. If you DM doesn't want to use it, you are out of luck. The opinions of the poeple on htis board should not be used as a stick to try and force them to allow things.

In may gmae, I would not allow Dragon stuff. It is all over the place, balance and feeling wise.

 

[LoneWolf23]

Some stuff in Dragon is cannon, like the stats for the Umbragen presented in Dragon #330. Others, not so much.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

I think "canon" only applies to settings.

For rules, there's core rules, and then there's everything else. GMs who stick strictly to core rules might end up with fewer players, but it's still their choice. My opinion is that the DM can ban anything that's not core; while they should have a reason for it, saying "it's too goofy" or "doesn't fit the setting" should work as valid reasons.

To say that non-core rules can be canon suggests that you think it's okay that a DM can be forced to allow certain non-core material in the game - I'm not saying you actually meant that (my telepathy doesn't work on the internet) but that's how I see it.

 

[GeorgeFields]

Nothing in dragon is canon.

Nothing in any 3rd party book is canon.

Nothing in any WotC products is canon.

The only time ANYTHING is canon is for "Living" campaigns.

If your DM doesn't want to use the Savage Species Incubus, you've got two choices.

1. Change his mind.

2. Play something else.

 

[Kmart Kommando]

My vote is:

Everyone should use cannons. They go BOOM!

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

Canon is what the DM says it is. No more, no less.

 

[Legildur]

My vote is:

Everyone should use cannons. They go BOOM!

I can't see stats for cannons on the weapons table... does that mean they aren't canon?

 

[Hawken]

I've dropped the issue after he made his decision. I don't mind asking for/about things, but I don't like pressing the issue.

It just seemed odd the way he came out with it; at first Dragon is optional, then its canon--my term, not the DM's--for his game. I guess I should have asked him about the Incubus last month! Darn those WotC guys!