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

 

[Bolares]

I didn't play Eberron. I'm not into magic being that common, so as a setting it just doesn't appeal to me. My comment exclusively pertains to 5e Eberron being sealed away from the rest of the Wheel and having it's own unique cosmology still.

Oh, I get it know . Is there any way we can convince you to listen to the good word of our lord and saviour Keith Baker?

 

[Alzrius]

I don't know where Max got it from, but it jives with an earlier the Dragon article on the nature of deities.

We've even seen that back in AD&D 2E. On Hallowed Ground (affiliate link) explicitly confirms that the Norse god Tyr (an intermediate god) is also the Tyr of the Faerunian pantheon (a greater god).

With regard to Dragon, are you referring to the "Deities and Their Faithful" article from issue #97, by Gary Gygax? Because that's slightly different, if I recall correctly (i.e. it refers to divine hit points varying on each world depending on the number and nature of their worshipers).

 

[Bolares]

Yet at the same time, they include a character from Eberron who lives in Sigil and visits Ravnica and the Forgotten Realms.

Even the official products don't have to agree on things. Rising treats Eberron as separate as a standard, other books, like the tome of foes do not...

 

[PsyzhranV2]

This from the book, though, agrees.

"Eberron is part of the Great Wheel of the multiverse, as described in the Player's Handbook and the Dungeon Master's Guide. At the same time, it is fundamentally apart from the rest of the Great Wheel, sealed off from the other planes even while it's encircled by its own wheeling cosmology."

Being sealed off means nobody gets in or out. So no teleporting there, no knowledge that gods are real, no nothing other than Eberron as it was in 3e.

So how did Vi get to Ravnica, and how was the Cyre 1313 pulled into the Domains of Dread just as the Mourning hit?

 

[doctorbadwolf]

No worries, I just noticed in another post the Eberron is in its own Prime in 5e, so it seems like the idea of multiple primes still exist.

I can see how my attitude could give that impression. Sorry about that, it is not my intent. I will have to think about how to discuss the topic and provide an alternate perspective without being dismissive. I will note that you also treading close to that line as you continue to grapple with the viewpoint that a combined cosmology of some type could be less restrictive.

First, I don't see how such a set up is functionally different from what we have now. That is basically what I work with. In my D&D cosmology some worlds are in the same Prime, some are in different Primes. Some of the different Primes are functionally close and others are extremely remote. The only thing that connects all of this together, the various Primes and cosmologies, is the Far Realm / Blind Eternities. The Far Realm is extremely difficult to travel through, even for deities. Therefore, those Primes that are functionally far away (like Eberron, DL, and (even more so) the MtG worlds) are almost completely cut off and their own separate realities. I know this is not the official stance, but I really haven't see anything yet that contradicts this viewpoint (not that I would care I'm using it regardless).

That is very different from the new canon. There is one Hells, one Abyss, one Feywild, one Shadowfell, etc, and they reach all worlds that aren't somehow cut off from those planes. But even in a setting that is cut off, you could theoretically get around that cutting off and you'd be in the same cosmology as the Descent Into Avernus AP. In Eberron, they strongly suggest that all it would take is a crack in Eberron's crystal sphere (which Eberron shouldn't even need to have) to allow the gods of the Great Wheel to start influencing things in Eberron, and there is a canon NPC who does travel into and out of Eberron, though she is also able to Planeswalk, so I'm fine with her deal.

And that's the thing. set it up like MtG planes, and I'm fine with it. An MtG plane can have whatever cosmology the theme calls for, or none at all and the whole universe is a city.

What you describe would be fine. It just isn't what the 5e lore is changing the dnd multiverse into.

I'm not so sure it does. Now it could be the case that I see what I want to see and don't what doesn't work for me, but I have not see anything in a book that suggest this is 100% true. This could be exacerbated by my tendency to assume lore in books is just one possible version/story and not the definitive truth.

I'm glad you can view the books that way. This isn't sarcasm, which I point out because that phrase is most often used sarcastically. I'm genuinely glad for you. It's not exactly convenient to not be able to see lore that isn't explicitly stated to be that way in that light.

 

[Parmandur]

Every seal has some cracks eventually.

I think they are trying to tread that line to allow people to have complete closed of settings and also give some people an "official" excuse to opening them. @doctorbadwolf seems to think they all wide open connected, but that quote from Eberron, RftLW indicates the it still has its own unique cosmology, with just a tread of a connection to the wheel.

In terms of what is upsetting @doctorbadwolf , you are approaching this as a question of "sure, it's practically impossible to get to Mars, but maybe with the right technology it can happen eventually." What he's saying is that he prefers to treat Eberron interacting with the D&D multiverse as a metaphysical impossibility similar to us really visiting the Forgotten Realms, not a difficult task like space travel.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

So how did Vi get to Ravnica, and how was the Cyre 1313 pulled into the Domains of Dread just as the Mourning hit?

Well Cyre 1313 is a reflection of Cyre, not actual Cyre. At least if we want the whole thing to make any sense, IMO.

 

[Bolares]

I think they are trying to tread that line to allow people to have complete closed of settings and also give some people an "official" excuse to opening them.

I agree that this is how it seems they are doing it. Another possibility is that each book is written, if not by different people, with different intents in mind. And they write what they think is cool in the book, with a lot less regard for canon, continuity and the health of the cosmology as we are having here

 

[Bolares]

Either way, official products give us support for playing connected or all separate, so I can play the way I want, and other people can play the way they want. This is why I have so much trouble picturing places where they connect the worlds as "ruining things" for those who want them connected (unless they stop supporting at all each settings cosmology)

 

[doctorbadwolf]

In terms of what is upsetting @doctorbadwolf , you are approaching this as a question of "sure, it's practically impossible to get to Mars, but maybe with the right technology it can happen eventually." What he's saying is that he prefers to treat Eberron interacting with the D&D multiverse as a metaphysical impossibility similar to us really visiting the Forgotten Realms, not a difficult task like space travel.

Well, not even a metaphysical impossibility, so much as...like going to a paralel universe in a sci-fi story. It's not part of our universe, it's not contained without our universe, it isn't even directly tied to our universe, but it's still theoretically reachable. I've no probably with Sigil being a nexus that occupies the space between realities, and thus has doors into all realities. I've no problem with the Feywild having a forest that works the same way, or the Shadowfell having a house of mirrors in which if you can survive that which hunts your reflection you can find a mirror that you can step into and find yourself in another reality's Shadowfell.

It's putting it all within the Great Wheel that is the problem.