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 various version can merge into one single form.

Takhisis is the five-headed dragon god of evil from the Dragonlance setting. Paladine is the platinum dragon god of good (and also Fizban's alter-ego).

Additionally, the book will contain psychic gem dragons, with stats for all four age categories of the five varieties (traditionally there are Amethyst, Crystal, Emerald, Sapphire, and Topaz), plus Dragonborn characters based on metallic, chromatic, and gem dragons.

D&D 5E - Check out Fizban's Alternate Cover!

WotC's James Wyatt talked to Polygon about Fizban's Treasury of Dragons, which also revealed the alternate cover, which you can only get from hobby stores. https://www.enworld.org/threads/fizbans-treasury-the-dragon-book-now-has-a-description-and-a-feat.681399/

www.enworld.org

D&D 5E - Fizban's Treasury: The Dragon Book Now Has A Description... And A Feat

Courtesy of Amazon, we now have a description for Fizban's Treasury of Dragons, the October D&D hardcover. The book introduces gem dragons, dragon-themed player options, and plenty of draconic lore! This joins September's The Wild Beyond the Witchlight, and November's Strixhaven: Curriculum of...

www.enworld.org

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Saridor is included in the Forgotten Realms and Planescape.

Sorry, no one will include him in their games. I'd say he needs a personality transplant, but that would imply he has a personality now.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

However, apparently Hickman and Weis themselves have been on record saying that they oppose the idea of Tiamat being Takhisis or the world of Krynn existing in the same multiverse as other D&D settings.

Bad choice on their part to have a platinum dragon god of good and a multi-headed dragon goddess of evil, in that case.

If I hated halflings, I wouldn't have "schmalflings" in my world who were short, had hairy feet, liked to eat, smoke pipes and were dangerously attracted to magic rings. I'd do something completely different instead.

 

[dave2008]

Ugh. World, cosmology, setting, whatever.

I'm sorry, I don't understand what this means. Can you clarify?

So, fanart and a description in an edition that came how long after the (bad) decision was made to make them the same? Okay?

Fanart just means it is a common perception. That is important. Not for canon, but is canon important?

Or it finally acknowledged a good decision made a long time before. Really it is simple a decision, it is neither good nor bad.

Yeah IMO the planescape version of multiverse is...boring, except as entirely it's own thing with no connection to, say, Eberron or Krynn or Toril.

I'm note sure what the planescape version is, but I find them more interesting if they are connected. Of course, I would be fine if they are not, but something in me prefers they be connected.

I mean I love that stuff, but IMO making all of DnD a setting, rather than truly a collection of separate settings, makes each "setting" less than it would be otherwise, especially when the gods are really just all the same gods.

I disagree that it makes them less, but I completely respect that it feels that way to you. Everyone is different!

Paladine leaving the world or giving up his divinity for the sake of balance means nothing when he is just one of potentially infinite aspects of the cosmic male half of Io.

I get that, that whole story line was never apart of DL lore to me as I essentially stopped with the Twins series and didn't really know there were more books past the Legend of Huma and Kaz the Minotaur.

 

[QuentinGeorge]

I guess Dragonlance fans are salty, so to speak, because the strange hard-on non-DL designers has had for this conflation does nothing for Dragonlance except undermine the key themes and personality of the setting?

I'd dig out my old post on this board but I can't really be bothered searching for it. Suffice it say, these deities share nothing except that they have a dragon form. In personality and goals there is nothing particularly "draconic" about Paladine. Even less so in his Fizban form - he even says he prefers kender! (And what's with the bizarre idea that Fizban is a prominent identity? Paladine has many avatars, incl a warrior (appeared as such in the ancient eras), the priest Brother Jendle (his preferred avatar during the cataclysm). Fizban was just his war of the Lance era avatar. Tellingly, when he became mortal he didn't become Fizban, he became an elf named Valthonis (not a dragon either, notice something there?) He doesn't even exist in a dragon form when he's talking to his wife and children (weird how they are not dragons, right?)

Someone brought up Keith Baker - you know he sees Eberron and similarly existing without any interactions from other worlds right, and has explicitly said that the Tiamat in Eberron has nothing to do with the other Tiamat? (Same with the Eberron Levistus)

Nothing is gained from these nonsensical and ridiculous retcons except to hollow out and destroy the original setting, but since they did it for Ravenloft already, I guess that's what they're going to do going forward.

 

[QuentinGeorge]

So, as far as I can tell, the only time an official D&D adventure ever actually had the possibility of Tiamat being for real killed was in 4E's Last Breath of the Dragon Queen, where the party kills her in her home plane (though in 4E this was Tytherion rather than Avernus). The ending of the adventure features Bahamut himself showing the party visions of how killing Tiamat has destroyed greed and envy and increased the desire to be charitable of all mortals in the multiverse.

You also kill Tiamat in the Bloodstone series of adventures, ps.

 

[darjr]

@QuentinGeorge thank you for that. I do want to understand the issue.

 

[pming]

Hiya!

However, apparently Hickman and Weis themselves have been on record saying that they oppose the idea of Tiamat being Takhisis or the world of Krynn existing in the same multiverse as other D&D settings.

Well, everyone has a brain-fart every now and then...even Hickman and Weis.

It's the only explanation.

That statement they said is akin to Electronic Arts claiming that monetized micro-transactions aren't actually monetized micro-transactions...they are "surprise mechanics".

(for those who don't know... just DuckDuckGo it for "EA surprise mechanics")

But yeah... I've NEVER...as in, in THIS VERY THREAD, have I EVER heard that Takhisis/Paladine are 'different entities from Tiamat/Bahamut! Totally serious! I've NEVER heard anyone claim they are 'different'. Wow. Amazing, actually. Well, you learn something new every day, huh?

PS: They are the same entities. That's my story and I'm sticking to it!

^_^

Paul L. Ming

 

[RealAlHazred]

Someone brought up Keith Baker - you know he sees Eberron and similarly existing without any interactions from other worlds right, and has explicitly said that the Tiamat in Eberron has nothing to do with the other Tiamat? (Same with the Eberron Levistus)

... Unless you want there to be. He always finishes his statements with, "Unless you want it to be different in your setting. That's completely fine!" He also likes to state that his opinions are completely unofficial, and mean nothing when it comes to official Wizards products and storyline directions.

 

[Morrus]

He also likes to state that his opinions are completely unofficial, and mean nothing when it comes to official Wizards products and storyline directions.

He can say that, but when it comes to Eberron, here is the official order of officialdom, officially:

1. Keith Baker
2. WotC
3. Everybody else

 

[RealAlHazred]

He can say that, but when it comes to Eberron, here is the official order of officialdom, officially:

1. Keith Baker
2. WotC
3. Everybody else

I mean... I agree with that order, since I have a high opinion of Mr. Baker's world-building skills, but as he likes to point out, Wizards owns Eberron and can do what they want. He doesn't have a position at Wizards, right? I haven't read anything about gaming news like that...

EDIT: I should mention, my rule of thumb for the 3.5E Eberron products was, "How close is Keith Baker's name to the top of the author list?" If it was at the top, it was a top-shelf product. Near the bottom, still probably good. Not there at all?... Well, there were some stinkers...