D&D 5E Two more Classic Settings to go

I haven't seen the quote, but maybe he meant "Tiamat can't die" because she's core to D&D canon. Sort of like saying, "mind flayers can't be totally eradicated from the D&D cosmos." I mean, technically they could be but...they're mind flayers! We need them ;).

Anyhow, it has never been clear what the nature of the gods is. I think that's where cultural interpretation comes in, and what the DM decides is true for their world. Like our world, each cultural tradition has their own explanation, and perhaps "the truth" is forever unknown to mortals. I think what ends up happening is a lot of folks fall back on an objectivist take, that there's a truth to "how things are," rather than the ultimate truth being unknowable and any "known truth" being particular to the individual and/or culture.

This points to why I'm hoping they include a "build your own cosmology" chapter in any Planes book. DMs would be encouraged to pick from several paths, or hybridize them as they so desire: Either the default/canonical cosmology (whatever that may be); a variant cosmology; or a build-your-own cosmology.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


Perkins has made the distinction in this specific area for 5E official canon between Lesser and Greater Deities. In Descent into Avernus, for example, it is maintained
that he "Dead Three" can be really actually killed because they are now Lesser gods.
I'm not sure what Dead Three he's talking about. A lot more than three gods have been killed over the decades, including several greater gods.
 


In Mesopotamian myth, Tiamat was chaos itself, the primordial waters from which everything else emerged. How can you kill the universe and still exist?
By that logic, there are other gods that also should be unkillable, because they are also chaos, the universe, etc. In D&D where you have multiple pantheons with different gods that embody those things, I think it's pretty reasonable to assume that those portions of those gods are just stories and not fact.
 

By that logic, there are other gods that also should be unkillable, because they are also chaos, the universe, etc. In D&D where you have multiple pantheons with different gods that embody those things, I think it's pretty reasonable to assume that those portions of those gods are just stories and not fact.
Perhaps, but I think it's just as reasonable to assume that those stories are fact, depending on your game style and choices. By saying that Tiamat can't die and Takhesis can't die, WotC devs are setting a new baseline for specific deities that may be considered greater gods. And that would make sense for Tiamat as opposed to say, Corellon; Tiamat is one half of Io who is often considered one of the highest tier gods. So Io couldn't be killed, but it could be split in two by a Primordial and turned into Tiamat and Bahamut, who then would inherit the unkillability but might be further divisible.
 



Bane, Bhaal, and Myrkul are the traditional "Dead Three" of the Forgotten Realms. And their worshipers were featured in the first section of Descent to Avernus.
I had a feeling that's what was being referred to. Even if you accept the retcon of those three into lesser gods, it still doesn't do anything for the myriad of other greater gods who have died over the decades.
 

Bahamut does take a human form across the multiverse in 5E...he's even on the Forgotten Realms Set Boosters for Msgic coming soon as a Human Wizard type.

All of that other "evidence " is just Prime berks being confused, same as on Eberron.
This is precisely why the entire Planescape structure is hot garbage that should never have even been considered as potentially defining the default of D&D .
 

Remove ads

Top