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

 

[Maxperson]

In the 2e Player's Guide to the Dragonlance Campaign I did see this as an alternate name of Takhisis.

Tii’Mhut

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

In older editions, the Ethereal was suggested to basically be the raw material where other planes came from (hence all the demiplanes there, which once included the Shadowfell [Demiplane of Shadow] and Ravenloft [Demiplane of Dread]). This may be a callback to that.

Yeah, I'm not a huge fan of that. IMO, the Elemental Planes work better as the "Building Blocks Worlds" of the Inner Planes. (I kinda like the approach of one of the earlier editions where the Positive and Negative Energy Planes were sorta the 5th and 6th Elemental Planes of the D&D Multiverse, and also enjoy tying it to the Shadowfell and Feywild as being tied to those planes).

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

That would make Eberron fit well with tying Magic Settings to D&D Settings, tied through the "Blind Etetnities"/Ethereal Plane. It fits well enough.

IMO, the Far Realm works better for the Blind Eternities. The Eldrazi were said to be native to the Blind Eternities, after all.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

As the 5e DMG states, gods can have different power levels and even different portfolios in different settings.

I know it says that…but how?

I mean Tiamat/Takhisis don‘t live on Material Plane worlds—she/they live on the Outer Planes!

Greater or Lesser status isn’t relevant to worshippers, because it doesnt effect power of clerics or anything. What it’s relevant to is if two gods personally meet up. The greater power is more powerful.

That’s what it means. So I ask (not you, but the DMG’s claim) how can they have different divine ranks on different worlds, and what does that mean regarding their actual persons in the Outer Planes?

Now I think maybe this First World thing might be an attempt to finally answer that question with its echos thing. Maybe Takhisis is a greater power who lives somewhere on the Outer Planes, the Tiamat known in Forgotten Realms, Greyhawk, Planescape, and many other worlds is a lesser power on Avernus, and there exist many other versions of Tiamat out there for unknown and unpublished settings.

Regardless, it’s an annoyance with the DMG’s insufficient explanation of divinity.

 

[Micah Sweet]

They're never going to explain it better. There's no canon anymore, and more importantly that's not the sort of thing WotC cares about. But there are lots of great ideas for the nature of divinity over the editions. I'm fond of 2e's demi-lesser-intermediate-greater progression myself.

 

[Parmandur]

IMO, the Far Realm works better for the Blind Eternities. The Eldrazi were said to be native to the Blind Eternities, after all.

TBH, the Far Realma can probably be read as the far reaches of the Etheral Plane.

 

[Maxperson]

I know it says that…but how?

I mean Tiamat/Takhisis don‘t live on Material Plane worlds—she/they live on the Outer Planes!

They're gods. One being and multiple beings at the same time. Beyond mortal understanding.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Athas has always been part of the greater cosmology. It's just always been cut off and easy to enter but much harder to leave. The Gith there were originally Githyanki from the Astral that got stranded there.

Here is exactly what is said about Eberron. Eberron's elves would not be children of Correlon as he was not involved with Eberron.

Like I said upthread. They made a derivative work. Whether the elves they made are technically Corellons offspring is irrelevant, they still only exist because Corellon.

 

[Bolares]

Like I said upthread. They made a derivative work. Whether the elves they made are technically Corellons offspring is irrelevant, they still only exist because Corellon.

If Eberron is not a part of the First World, it is also not a part of Corellon's creations. That's how I read it.

We have one book that says Elves in general are Corellon's cration, and now we have two books that specifically mention Eberron as being apart from that. Not only we have more sources saying this, both of them specifically mention Eberron, while Mordenkainen's is broad and general. I for one rack up the Mordenkainen's text as lazy writing that didn't worry about specific settings.

 

[Micah Sweet]

If Eberron is not a part of the First World, it is also not a part of Corellon's creations. That's how I read it.

We have one book that says Elves in general are Corellon's cration, and now we have two books that specifically mention Eberron as being apart from that. Not only we have more sources saying this, both of them specifically mention Eberron, while Mordenkainen's is broad and general. I for one rack up the Mordenkainen's text as lazy writing that didn't worry about specific settings.

The thing is, there's no more canon in D&D anymore. It's the wild west now, and every DM is a homesteader. The ideas in Mordenkainen's are just that. If you dont like them (I dont care for it myself) there's no authority forcing anyone to use them.