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

 

[darjr]

@Morrus @Urriak Uruk
Keith has said that his initial submission only covered part of what became Eberron, that people other than him from WotC contributed quite a lot.
I think that makes it a rather soft argument that he is the ultimate arbiter of “official” Eberron. Though for some (many? most?) they may choose Kieth or WotC as primary. I dint think that makes either objectively true. Unless WotC has said Keith is, or if Keith has said WotC is.

 

[Morrus]

I know, but it is a bit like telling a police officer how you feel about traffic laws!

Don't worry about it unless it's red text or about the site.

 

[PsyzhranV2]

But if he made a Star Wars movie under some license which contradicted the Disney ones (somehow), his version is canon. Same thing. If Keith Baker's book contradicts WotC's, Keith Baker's is 'official'.

I have... very conflicted feelings about that conception of IP ownership, but under our current IP laws, that's not how it works at all, for better or for worse. Probably for worse.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

THe idea that a god isn't transcendent of a world is odd to my brain. If they are not transcedental beings, then are they even gods in any meaningful sense?

They are transcendent of the "world". They're part of the cosmology. The idea that gods must be omnipresent is pretty out of whack with polytheistic ideas about gods, anyway, but even if we ignore that, Takhisis is the ultimate ruler of evil supernatural beings, the high queen of the dark side of the balance, within the universe. That works really well, until you decide that "Krynnspace" is just one part of a larger universe, and Takhisis is a fairly modern goddess that lacks even her own divine realm in the rest of the cosmos, and the balance doesn't actually necessarily matter because plenty of "universes" don't give a damn about it.

The settings should be separate.

I like the idea that everyone is a bit of a berk, that makes sense based on my experience of the actual world. We are all berks.

I find the idea repellent, because it includes beings of supernatural levels of knowledge, who should know the nature of the cosmology. I also find the whole "berk" thing in planescape distastefully classist. It's one of many aspects of the setting that come together to overall cause me to despise the setting.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Uh... I mean, I agree with the sentiment here, but if George Lucas did a press release that said, "Hey guys, only my Star Wars movies are canon. Those Disney movies, and the Mandalorian? That's completely unofficial, none of that happens," I can't exactly take it seriously.

Like it or not, WotC owns the IP and decides what is official. The creations outlasts its creator in some ways.

Do you see this as a good thing?

 

[Morrus]

I have... very conflicted feelings about that conception of IP ownership, but under our current IP laws, that's not how it works at all, for better or for worse. Probably for worse.

I didn't use the words "IP ownership" or "law" anywhere, quite deliberately. I understand that WotC owns Eberron legally, lock stock and two smoking barrels. Despite that, in order of officialdom, the order remains:

1. Keith Baker
2. WotC
3. Everbody else

 

[Umbran]

But if he made a Star Wars movie under some license which contradicted the Disney ones (somehow), his version is canon. Same thing. If Keith Baker's book contradicts WotC's, Keith Baker's is 'official'.

"Canon" is decided by whoever holds the rights. If two entities hold rights, you get multiple canons. And then you could have, like, the Star Wars Wars! That'd be "fun".

To continue with that example, at this point, there are other creators who have had so much influence on Star Wars material and canon, it is working itself into "shared world" territory, and I don't think it fair to say it is only Lucas' take that counts any more. It is... kind of insulting to those other creators who poured their hearts and creativity into their work, too.

 

[Morrus]

"Canon" is decided by whoever holds the rights.

If that's your choice, go for it! As I've made clear, for me the order of officialdom for Eberron is:

1. Keith Baker
2. WotC
3. Everybody else

 

[Parmandur]

They are transcendent of the "world". They're part of the cosmology. The idea that gods must be omnipresent is pretty out of whack with polytheistic ideas about gods, anyway, but even if we ignore that, Takhisis is the ultimate ruler of evil supernatural beings, the high queen of the dark side of the balance, within the universe. That works really well, until you decide that "Krynnspace" is just one part of a larger universe, and Takhisis is a fairly modern goddess that lacks even her own divine realm in the rest of the cosmos, and the balance doesn't actually necessarily matter because plenty of "universes" don't give a damn about it.

The settings should be separate.

I find the idea repellent, because it includes beings of supernatural levels of knowledge, who should know the nature of the cosmology. I also find the whole "berk" thing in planescape distastefully classist. It's one of many aspects of the setting that come together to overall cause me to despise the setting.

I do not think the polytheist Plato would agree about the nature of gods, and I'll just leave it at that. I like this approach, and it works.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Pssst, it's all made up.

This is a bad reply to an argument about contradictions in lore. It being made up is completely irrelevant.