D&D 5E Two more Classic Settings to go

Vague and misleading, especially when weighed against the mountain of evidence that says they aren't the same. It is mainly pointing to a similar conceptual origin for the two.

1) They have different names
2) They have different home planes (Seven Heavens vs Dome of Creation, Nine Hells v Abyss)
3) They have different divine portfolios. (Check the back of the 5E PHB)
4) They have different divine levels. (Lesser Deity vs Greater Deity)
5) They have different holy symbols. (Silver Triangle v Dragon Head)
6) They have independent existences (Paladine becomes mortal, Bahamut doesn't).
7) Bahamut and Takhisis are dragon deities. Paladine and Takhisis are not - their "favoured creations" are elves and ogres respectively.
One's a big bad dragon with five heads and the other is a big bad dragon with five heads.

The rest is trivia :)

You don't even have to buy a new mini.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Tiamat is Eberron is definitely not the Tiamat of Forgotten Realms. They share little except a name. Tiamat in Eberron isn't even a god. And Bahamut might not even exist beyond a constellation.

And how can it be "definitively established" in a book that's not even about Dragonlance.
Eberron isn't necessarily as separated from the multiverse in 5E as all that.

Tyranny of Drsgons goes into detail about how to set it in Dragonlance, and that there is a strict identity between Tahkasis and Tianat, as does the DMG. And the D&D website. And Chris Perkins. That's as canonical as it gets in D&D.
 

Shannon Appelcline is not a WoTC employee, he's not defining lore, he's merely restating that yes, the Platinum Dragon and Chromatic Dragon are the ultimate inspirations for the Krynnish pantheon leaders. Even the adventures here support that since Bahamut doesn't live in Glitterpalace.

I mean, employee or not, this is posted on the D&D website. Seems pretty official.

Even if this is discounted, I'm the DMG actually states Tiamat and Takhisis are the same. It says "Takhisis (Tiamat's name of Krynn)." I personally feel that although they are the same, the god still takes different forms/avatars on different worlds, explaining some differences.

1621660968018.png
 

Vague and misleading, especially when weighed against the mountain of evidence that says they aren't the same. It is mainly pointing to a similar conceptual origin for the two.

1) They have different names
2) They have different home planes (Seven Heavens vs Dome of Creation, Nine Hells v Abyss)
3) They have different divine portfolios. (Check the back of the 5E PHB)
4) They have different divine levels. (Lesser Deity vs Greater Deity)
5) They have different holy symbols. (Silver Triangle v Dragon Head)
6) They have independent existences (Paladine becomes mortal, Bahamut doesn't).
7) Bahamut and Takhisis are dragon deities. Paladine and Takhisis are not - their "favoured creations" are elves and ogres respectively.
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.
 

Shannon Appelcline is not a WoTC employee, he's not defining lore, he's merely restating that yes, the Platinum Dragon and Chromatic Dragon are the ultimate inspirations for the Krynnish pantheon leaders. Even the adventures here support that since Bahamut doesn't live in Glitterpalace.
This was an official article on the D&D web page to tie into the book that more explicitly says "Tahkasis is a local name for Tiamat," so it's pretty official.
 

I mean, employee or not, this is posted on the D&D website. Seems pretty official.

Even if this is discounted, I'm the DMG actually states Tiamat and Takhisis are the same. It says "Takhisis (Tiamat's name of Krynn)." I personally feel that although they are the same, the god still takes different forms/avatars on different worlds, explaining some differences.

View attachment 137255
I mean, it works however a given DM wants it to work. But for official D&D canon, they have chosen a Platonist approach to divine beings, while connecting the different worlds. Eberron characters and elements have even been appearing in official sources and streams, crossing the boundaries. Doesn't mean that has to be true of any given tables Eberron, or Krynn...but that's how WotC is choosing to do the formal canon.
 

Vague and misleading, especially when weighed against the mountain of evidence that says they aren't the same. It is mainly pointing to a similar conceptual origin for the two.

1) They have different names
2) They have different home planes (Seven Heavens vs Dome of Creation, Nine Hells v Abyss)
3) They have different divine portfolios. (Check the back of the 5E PHB)
4) They have different divine levels. (Lesser Deity vs Greater Deity)
5) They have different holy symbols. (Silver Triangle v Dragon Head)
6) They have independent existences (Paladine becomes mortal, Bahamut doesn't).
7) Bahamut and Takhisis are dragon deities. Paladine and Takhisis are not - their "favoured creations" are elves and ogres respectively.
The abyss in dragonlance just referred to any of the outer planes. They had a very incomplete knowledge of planar architecture. Portfolios can change from world to world. Holy symbols can change from world to world. Divine rank can surprisingly change from world to world, which i found strange, probably really crystal sphere to crystal sphere. Now your home game can have them be different if u want. But they are the same until wotc decides to change it again possibly. And what’s a god without contradictions on how they are worshipped in different places.
 




Remove ads

Top