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

 

[doctorbadwolf]

IF there is a crack. Meaning that if you want there to be connection in your game there could be. The standard is no conection, there being a possibility for conection if a DM wants it doesn't change that.

Again, this does not affect the point that I am making in any way. I don't know how else to try to explain this.

The nature of the setting matters, not just to me but to many people interacting with any given fandom. It not mattering to you doesn't change that.

 

[Bolares]

Maybe your games don't interact much with the cosmology and the nature of the universe, but mine sure do.

hey, we're having fun here, please don't assume how I run my games .
Maybe it's that my players don't give a damn what other books tell about the cosmology of the setting in running, maybe it'ss because I explained that Eberron was different, I don't know.

 

[Bolares]

The scenario presupposes that they are

Except it doesn't. People in the world believe they are. But the setting was always very clear that they have as much chance of being made up

 

[Urriak Uruk]

I dont think we should use "Eberron is a small bubble within the Great Wheel" terminology. It deemphasizes Eberron's place. and may be what some folks are objecting to.

Isn't Eberron's cosmology infinite also? So its an infinite expanse within/next to the infinite expanse of the Great Wheel?

Maybe the "bubble" if you do like the term, is where it intersects...

I don't really see how it deemphasizes Eberron itself, although it equalizes it with other worlds like FR or Ravnica. It does deemphasize Eberron's cosmology, but I also think it adds to Eberron's uniqueness to both having its own unique min-cosmology and by being cut-off from other worlds. Mixed bag I suppose.

My personal headcanon is that Eberron's mini-planes actually pull planar material from greater planes. So for example, Thelanis is its own location within Eberron, however if you travel into Thelanis enough you may cross into the Feywild. So they're distinct but can still overlap, and work as doors into the Great Wheel.

 

[Dire Bare]

I prefer the Eberron take on RPG novels. None of them are canon, but could be good ideas for campaigns and nice ways to present interesting NPCs.

The Eberron novels aren't canon? Since when?

 

[Bolares]

The nature of the setting matters, not just to me but to many people interacting with any given fandom. It not mattering to you doesn't change that.

I agree with you there. I'm not trying to convince you that it shouldn't matter to you. We all have our preferences, and probably our preferences are very similar in this topic. I'm just giving you my view of things...

 

[Parmandur]

Feel free to show us where they have said that the Nine Hells don't necessarily have the layers described in official lore, or that Avernus isn't necessarily a broken battlefield, or that fire elementals don't necessarily come from the plane of fire. That is what the Great Wheel actually is, not the damn diagram being used to visualize it. You could use a flow

That's in the first chapter of the DMG, and Perkins and Crawford often go out of their way to describe "canon" being whatever happens at your table.

 

[Maxperson]

Except that if one were to have a character moment where they commune with the ghost of Syberis, or the nascent spirit of Eberron, or the seething Will of Kyber, and are given a vision of the reality of the cosmos, what that character learns is quite different. Unless we also reduce the progenitor wyrms themselves to clueless "berks".

That's a False Dichotomy. There's a lot of ground in-between omniscient and clueless. Those progenitor wyrms exist in a completely isolated portion of the great wheel with a different cosmology. Why would they know about what exists outside of it? And even if they do, why would they tell the person communing with them about it? The reality of the Eberron cosmos is the isolated portion. Heck, they may know about the Great Wheel and were responsible for creating the isolation and unique Eberron cosmology. That would make the Eberron legends(not necessarily truths) "true."

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Except it doesn't. People in the world believe they are. But the setting was always very clear that they have as much chance of being made up

I didn't say setting, I said scenario.

 

[Bolares]

The Eberron novels aren't canon? Since when?

since ever? Baker was always very clear about that.