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

 

[toucanbuzz]

This is going to ruin my DL game.

I just spent hours memorizing the creation story of Krynn, the one where it has its own pantheon that isn't Tiamat and Bahumat, the one where Chaos does this and that and the gods discover souls and Takhisis makes life have needs so it can suffer and be tempted.

Nah, it isn't.

I understand the need to market D&D to a newer audience, but trampling over the inspired creativity of past designers and authors, just seems a bit disrespectful (even if not intended).

 

[dave2008]

..., whereas Tiamat always strikes me as a big monster that just wants to eat everyone and burn everything and doesn't ever bother to talk.

Where did that idea come from? I mean she even helps the heroes take down Venger: The Dragon's Graveyard

 

[dave2008]

We are all stunned at this news.

In any case, it means that this isn't the first time in 5E that we've been told Takhsis and Tiamat are the same entity.

No it says it in the DMG, Orb of Dragonkind:

"While you are charmed by the orb, you can’t voluntarily end your attunement to it, and the orb casts suggestion on you at will (save DC 18), urging you to work toward the evil ends it desires. The dragon essence within the orb might want many things: the annihilation of a particular people, freedom from the orb, to spread suffering in the world, to advance the worship of Takhisis (Tiamat’s name on Krynn), or something else the DM decides."

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

the generic Greyhawk Chromatic Dragon (before she was named Tiamat)

What now?

 

[dave2008]

Because he goes on to state that that wasn't her final iteration as she appeared in Krynn:

Don’t know where Trace got the name Takhisis (May be Indonesian – Neraka definitely is) but part of his decision to rename was to separate DL’s cosmology from Greyhawk’s. (Another possibility – when I built my mythology (a time when Trace was first playing as well) neither Bahamut nor Tiamat were so named in the game books- so the idea of creating new versions of them unique to DL would not be too far a reach)).

He states point blank that her new name was reflective of the fact that she wasn't the same Chromatic Dragon as the one in Greyhawk and that the "new version" of her was unique to Krynn, separate from Greyhawk, separate from his own campaign.

I guess it is one of perspective. What I see is Jeff saying Takhisis was Tiamat with a different name. Whereas a I hear W&H saying there were never the same, where in Jeff's mind they clearly where at some point.

I guess we see what we want to see!

 

[Kai Lord]

What now?

I meant before she was called Tiamat in an official game book (referencing Grubb's comments above.) I should have used the word unofficial instead of generic.

 

[Kai Lord]

I guess it is one of perspective.

I guess we see what we want to see!

Perhaps!

 

[darjr]

Thanks for posting that interview. So now we have Jeff Grubb also confirming that the Dark Queen in official Dragonlance was deliberately separated from both the generic Greyhawk Chromatic Dragon (before she was named Tiamat) and Tiamat herself.

He actually lists two possible reasons. First was as you noted the second was just because there wasn’t much there yet.

 

[dave2008]

What now?

Jeff Grub explains the origin of the dragonlance gods from his own home campaign. What became Takhisis started as the Chromatic Dragon from the D&D pamphlets prior to getting the name Tiamat in the Monster Manual. The Chromatic Dragon was the head evil god in his campaign. I linked to the interview in an earlier post.

 

[Kai Lord]

I'm guessing that Grubb felt enough ownership of the original Chromatic Dragon concept that he felt slighted when Tracy renamed her and ran with the concept to the point that the latter considered her a different character. If I were Grubb I could definitely see myself going, "hey now, that's still just Tiamat!"

But did Tiamat in Greyhawk or FR ever appear as a beautiful human temptress? That's a pretty big aspect of her character in DL and if it's solely unique to DL then to me it does cement Margaret and Tracy's notion that she really is an evolution into something completely separate from the Chromatic Dragon in other settings.