Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hexmage-EN" data-source="post: 8347689" data-attributes="member: 79428">I just realized that "Takhisis is the same as Tiamat" had a different context in 4E, where the walls between settings were more strict. In that edition it was made explicit that each setting had it's own unique cosmology and gods, even the gods of a given setting knew little about other settings' gods and cosmology, and gods with the same name and similar traits in other settings were not all parts of the same consciousness.Asmodeus is probably the clearest example here.In the default Points of Light setting he was an angel of He Who Was that guarded the prison of Tharizdun within the Abyss of the Elemental Chaos. Eventually he was convinced by the demon lord Pazuzu to use a shard of the Heart of the Abyss to kill his god. He Who Was cursed Asmodeus and the angels who sided with him, transforming the idyllic plane of Baathion into the Nine Hells of Baator. Asmodeus transformed from an angel to the god of Baator by stealing the spark of divinity originally held by He Who Was.In the Forgotten Realms, Asmodeus had been around for a long time before finally absorbing a god's power during the Spellplague and using his newfound godlike abilities to relocate the Abyss to the Elemental Planes, transforming the Elemental Planes into the Elemental Chaos.Baator and Asmodeus also appeared in Eberron's cosmology during 4E, but he was also explicitly not the same Asmodeus as the one from the Points of Light setting or the Forgotten Realms. Instead, he originally came from the plane of Daanvi and was imprisoned in Baator along with his allies, unable to interact with anything beyond their prison until the Day of Mourning. This Asmodeus is also explicitly not a god, but a warlock patron aiming to collect enough souls to fuel his ascension to godhood.Another example is Bane. Aside from the name, portfolio, and alignment, Points of Light Bane and Forgotten Realms Bane have almost nothing in common.So, in 4E, saying Takhisis is Tiamat has a somewhat different connotation than it does in an edition with one unified Great Wheel cosmology. The three instances of Asmodeus are recognizable as Asmodeus, but they are also clearly distinct versions of him that have different histories and gods they are associated with. The PoL and FR Bane are even more distinct, but they have enough similarities to be counterparts of one another. With this in mind, saying that Takhisis is Tiamat in 4E doesn't preclude Takhisis from also being her own version of Tiamat with a different history and no connection to other worlds than Krynn.I find myself preferring this approach as it gives DMs more freedom to establish who a god is in their own personal take on things without having to worry about if what Asmodeus did in relation to the Forgotten Realms would somehow affect him in the Exandria setting. It also prevents any players from trying to argue that what they read about Asmodeus in some Forgotten Realms novel is canon and that the DM should include that detail in an Exandria game.This last part is a bit of a tangent, but another problem with fitting everything in the Great Wheel is magic itself. I read an account from one DM starting an Eberron game that a potential player was angered when he was told he couldn't play a cleric of the goddess Mystra. The player argued that Mystra is the goddess of magic and oversees the Weave, which all D&D magic is based on (BTW, I feel like I recall seeing a sidebar in the 5E PHB that explicitly says the Weave is how magic works), so therefore if magic exists in Eberron than both the Weave and Mystra do, to.</blockquote>

Verification