Dragonlance WotC Officially Confirms Takhisis and Tiamat Are The Same

It's been an issue in dispute for decades, over various editions of D&D, but WotC has officially confirmed that - at least in 5E - Dragonlance's Takhisis is, indeed, currently Tiamat. In previous editions, Tiamat has varied from being a big dragon to a minor goddess, while Takhisis has been a greater god on Krynn. At times they've been the same entity, and at others different entities. Today, WotC is putting its foot down and saying that Takhisis and Tiamat are, indeed, the same being.



Of course, this is not an opinion universally held. Dragonlance co-creator Margaret Weis emphatically stated that "TAKHISIS IS NOT TIAMAT, DAMN IT!"

Fizban's Treasuryof Dragons confirms that the beings echo across various settings.

D&D 5E - Is Paladine Bahamut? Is Takhisis Tiamat? Fizban's Treasury Might Reveal The Answer!

According to WotC's James Wyatt, Fizban's Treasury of Dragons introduces a new cosmology for dragon gods, where the same beings, including Fizban, echo across various D&D campaign settings with alternate versions of themselves (presumably like Paladine/Bahamut, or Takhisis/Tiamat). Also... the...

www.enworld.org

 

[Stormonu]

I get that, but to me, you can always set a game during a time period that didn't include the things you don't like, such FR pre-Time of Troubles, or Dark Sun pre-death of Kalakaua. Then your campaign can rocket off into its own alternate universe and everyone gets what they want.

It's not that easy to "just ignore" when the lore and new content all assume those changes have taken place. I had some BIG issues with that for the L5R RPG when they suddenly advanced beyond the Scorpion Coup (I hadn't ever followed the card game, only the RPG). For D&D, FR is the absolute worst about that.

 

[Scribe]

I have. And I guess so has Cam.

Not here though.

Or is that what you meant?

Yeah, I mean here.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

the remaining limits are still stringent enough that Sturgeons Law does not guarantee a notable stream of good content on a single property, for any particular person's definition of "good".

well I mean first we would have to agree on what good is (was the man of steel movie good? don't answer that was rhetorical) but yeah some of those limits are you have to 'sell' your plot. Just having Superman or Batman guarantees you a small boost to that chance.

 

[Azzy]

It's not that easy to "just ignore" when the lore and new content all assume those changes have taken place. I had some BIG issues with that for the L5R RPG when they suddenly advanced beyond the Scorpion Coup (I hadn't ever followed the card game, only the RPG). For D&D, FR is the absolute worst about that.

Personally, I feel that DL (Fifth Age) is the worst offender in that regard, followed closely by FR (Spell Plague—I didn't like the Time of Troubles, either, but that's small potatoes comparatively).

It would be one thing to advance a timeline, but blowing up the setting in the process is a bridge too far, IMO. And TSR always chose to blow settings up at the drop of a hat.

 

[Micah Sweet]

It's not that easy to "just ignore" when the lore and new content all assume those changes have taken place. I had some BIG issues with that for the L5R RPG when they suddenly advanced beyond the Scorpion Coup (I hadn't ever followed the card game, only the RPG). For D&D, FR is the absolute worst about that.

For my part, I mostly liked the additions post Coup, and down-played the ones I didn't. They still happened though, and if I were in a game where that timeline was in play, it would be fine.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Personally, I feel that DL (Fifth Age) is the worst offender in that regard, followed closely by FR (Spell Plague—I didn't like the Time of Troubles, either, but that's small potatoes comparatively).

It would be one thing to advance a timeline, but blowing up the setting in the process is a bridge too far, IMO. And TSR always chose to blow settings up at the drop of a hat.

I didn't like Faction War either, and would just play before then. But I have far less of a problem with it than I would with a theoretical 5e Planescape where the planes are all different and no respect to the old material is being paid.

 

[Henadic Theologian]

I've always thought that Tiamat as a multi-headed dragon was also meant to invoke the multi-headed dragon from the Book of Revelation. You know, the one with seven heads, seven crowns, and ten horns.

Could also be related to the God of Evil & natural disasters in Greek Mythology, Typhon, who also had multiple dragon heads.

 

[Gradine]

So what you're saying is that all of my TiaTak shipping is no good?

I distinctly remember telling you to stop making onanism jokes

 

[Dire Bare]

Again, the Age of Mortals moved things forward: they didn't change the past. A reboot doesn't have to be retroactive.

Yes, the Age of Mortals was "additive" and moved the campaign forward. And it was not a popular move among DL fans, although I'm sure there were some who enjoyed the rebooted setting and new game that went along with it.

You're not alone in preferring that settings grow in size and complexity, but never hit the "reimagine" button. And that's okay. It's the constant negativity and just bringing it up over and over again that gets tiresome.

There is a reason why both major comic book houses reboot their settings every couple of years . . . canon, continuity, becomes a bloated, complicated straight-jacket that makes it hard to tell new stories. D&D settings aren't quite as bad as the comic book universes . . . but Dragonlance approaches it with the Age of Mortals, followed by the War of Souls. And guess what? Dragonlance died.

WotC is bringing it back, yes . . . but by going back to the beginning, with very minor tweaks to canon. So minor, most folks, even long-time fans, won't even notice. So minor, that folks are complaining about things that aren't even happening, like WotC adding orcs to the setting or shaving off all the Solamnic mustaches.

You and a few loud folks are unhappy, but I suspect this approach will work better, for more fans (old and new) than simply adding another "age" to the setting and pushing forward that bloated, contradictory, complicated mess of a canon even more into the future.

Thank you WotC, for bringing Dragonlance back to the core experience, the War of the Lance and the struggle against the dragonarmies!

 

[Dire Bare]

Probably true! I'll take a singular vision though over the mess of conflicting reboots. Every time.

What? DC's singular vision of Batman or Superman?