dave2008
Legend
Yep, I only bought the books I mentioned, a dozen or two issue of dragon, 2 adventure modules, and the BECMI boxed sets (and minis - lots of minis) from 1e. So no FR for me.
The King that Crawls
Yep, I only bought the books I mentioned, a dozen or two issue of dragon, 2 adventure modules, and the BECMI boxed sets (and minis - lots of minis) from 1e. So no FR for me.
Paul Farquhar
Legend
It didn't need to be stated, since the idea that campaign settings might feature different rules and monsters hadn't been thought of at the time. It was just assumed that Tiamat was Tiamat, whether your adventure was set in Greyhawk, Waterdeep or Homebrew.
Dark Sun was probably the first campaign setting to state "X does not exist in this setting", and that was around ten years later.
MonsterEnvy
Legend
Just say he's a Demon Lord there.
Dragonlance predates Dark Sun, and doesn't have orcs. Or halflings.
And Dark Sun doesn't originate the idea, although it might be an early published example. The idea that a setting might feature different monsters, and even different rules, was well established by the time that AD&D was published (in the late 70s).
Paul Farquhar
Legend
Quite true, and it dates from the original module in 1984. Still after Monster Manual and the first Forgotten Realms stuff though.
That claim, I see no evidence to support (and I have been playing since 1981). And it was certainly never applied to the Forgotten Realms.
Although Tiamat was presented as a monster, not a deity in the 1st edition Monster Manual, so I think it's fair to say that Tiamat was not originally an FR deity.
Look at Empire of the Petal Throne, which is clearly a D&D variant with different rules and different monsters.
And with all the monsters being published in various magazines and comparable supplements, it was taken for granted that each GM would pick and choose which to include in his/her setting.
Or look at DDG: when that was published it was likewise taken for granted that which deities, monsters etc might exist in a given campaign was a matter of choice. (The idea that they all exist in some sort of multiversal/mega-versal arrangement is something that I'm not aware of before the publication of the MotP - and obviously Planescape has since strongly consolidated that way of thinking.)
Paul Farquhar
Legend
Empire of the Petal Throne was a separate game, not a D&D setting or spin-off. It had similar rules because it emerged from the same roots as D&D.
And sure, it was left up to the DM to decide what to include and not include, as it was up until 1984 Dragons of Despair, and as it is again today.
And sure, it was left up to the DM to decide what to include and not include, as it was up until 1984 Dragons of Despair, and as it is again today.
Last edited:
Azzy
ᚳᚣᚾᛖᚹᚢᛚᚠ
She was treated as a lesser deity in Deities & Demigods, I don't believe she was mentioned as a god in original FR boxed set, though.
ParanoydStyle
Peace Among Worlds
This is true and it's also a return to form for Dungeons & Dragons as that was its attitude way back in the very first editions as well.
I will say I'd never heard of Torog before this thread and I wasn't aware that 4E had actually made any additions to the pantheon.
Tiamat was a regional Untheric deity even in 1e - https://forgottenrealms.fandom.com/wiki/Untheric_pantheon
