What can you tell me about Tiamat? Bring your imagination!

[doctorhook]

Wow, thanks for all the info, team! And special thanks to Shemeska, for providing me with exactly the kind of information I'm looking for! This is very helpful to me. OTOH, it's also a bit discouraging, because from what you are all telling me, Tiamat hasn't really seen the level of attention paid to her, that I'm looking for; that is to say, I'm more interested in her as a villain than as an evil deity. No matter, though! This is D&D! It's about filling in the blanks as you go along, and luckily, you've provided me with numerous hints about how to do it.

(If anyone with access to the older modules and books noted up-thread, please don't hesitate to post their details about Tiamat; I don't have access to them myself.)

I suppose what I'm really looking for is a detailed description of what it's like to encounter Tiamat in her lair, and to challenge her and her most powerful servants on their home turf. I gather that the Scales of War AP in Dungeon Magazine is apparently building towards a climactic confrontation with Tiamat at Epic tier, but I don't want to wait. Let's think of how it would work, right now.

First, more questions:

• How does Tiamat feel about Hydras? Hydras are quite dragon-y, and they're multiheaded like the Big Girl herself; IIRC, prior to 4E they were even more dragon-y, what with having limbs and breath weapons. In 4E, Hydras are a bit different, but there's still a resemblence; however, the 4E MM ties Hydras' creation to a Primordial (ie: enemy of the gods) called Bryakus.

• How "elementally-powered" is Tiamat? The answer seems to be both "obviously not at all" and "obviously very"; she's divine/immortal/fiendish, and she doesn't live in an elemental plane, but OTOH, she's a super-dragon which itself makes her arguably quite elemental.

• How "elemental" should Tiamat's lair be? She's polychromatic, but she's got plenty of "monochromatic"/energy-biased servants. We've established that her lair is a remote cavern filled with fire and magma, but she's also got an elemental affinity for acid, cold, lightning, and poison, so would it be inappropriate to fill her lair with geysers of acid, electrical storms, blizzards, and clouds of acid, too? For the sake of sprucing things up, I mean. (She's a dangerous deity; why not have a spectacularly dangerous home? All the fire never seemed to bother her White Dragon consorts, after all.)

• If we had to name Tiamat's five Ancient Wyrm consorts, what would they be called? I gathered that there was an "Ephelemon" (Red), as well as an Etiol, an Apsu, and a Kingsu. Which ones ought to be which colours? I'm trying to avoid creating any new continuity issues here with regards to who replaced whom, and whether or not such'n'such was around at the same time as so'n'so. Since it doesn't sound like these names were ever spelled out in the manner that I'm asking for, what would you name five Great Wyrms, one of each of Red, Blue, Green, Black, and White? I prefer longer, draconic-y names; Ephelemon is suitable, the rest seem too short for my tastes.

• I gather most of the posters in this thread aren't really the 4E crowd, but that's okay; I'm curious about Zehir, though I'm not sure he even existed prior to 4E. He's the god of snakes, poison, Yuan-ti, and assassins. Bearing in mind that he shares a dominion with Tiamat, what relationship do you imagine these two deities having? I can see some parallels; both are evil, and both play different angles of the "reptile" domain. Do you think they exist together peacefully, like Bahamut and Moradin do with each other, or are they hostile to one another, as Bane and Gruumsh are (in 4E)? If they exist peacefully, do you think they place minions in each others' service; would some Yuan-ti devotees of Zehir be found defending Tiamat, or might a consort of Tiamat aid Zehir, for example?

• Asmodeus: does he get along with Tiamat? They've got history. She commands some of his Devils. Given that they haven't really been a part of the same pantheon for the majority of D&D's history, (he has only recently become an actual deity, while she has often been dismissed as a "draconic" or "lesser" deity), what might be a good way to develop their shared background, now that they're approximately equals? Obviously evil deities are never too close, but are they close enough that Tiamat can count upon new devilish servants, or does Asmodeus openly war against her for leaving the Nine Hells? (I suppose it's up to us to decide!)

I'm interested in fleshing out Tiamat's capacity as a Big Bad Evil Girl. Let's brainstorm!

 

[Shemeska]

[*]Asmodeus: does he get along with Tiamat? They've got history. She commands some of his Devils. Given that they haven't really been a part of the same pantheon for the majority of D&D's history, (he has only recently become an actual deity, while she has often been dismissed as a "draconic" or "lesser" deity), what might be a good way to develop their shared background, now that they're approximately equals? Obviously evil deities are never too close, but are they close enough that Tiamat can count upon new devilish servants, or does Asmodeus openly war against her for leaving the Nine Hells? (I suppose it's up to us to decide!)

My answer pertains the lore from 1e-3e on the topic:

I figure pretty good between Tiamat and Asmodeus, though they probably don't have direct contact on a frequent basis. Like most other denizens of the 9 Hells, you don't talk directly to the boss unless you're on the other 8 Lords of the 9, and then only when he summons you. Tiamat is already known to have pretty extensive contact and collaboration with the pit fiends of the Dark 8, and they work on Asmo's behalf.

Tiamat has to be doing well in Asmo's eyes, because she's still there on Avernus (unlike Gruumsh and Maglubiyet who were forcibly shunted from Avernus into Acheron because their warring against one another got to be a hinderance to the fiends). Although her relationship to the current and past Lord of the 1st (Bel, Zariel, etc) has sometimes been frosty, she has a place within the expanded hierarchy of Hell, even if not among the direct power structure of the diabolic rank and file or the nobility.

And Asmodeus isn't worried about her. He doesn't need to be. She's a deity who happens to lair in his plane, and outside of possibly any still lingering Ancient Baatorians, he's the single most powerful embodiment of Lawful Evil within the multiverse. Hell and Asmodeus might as well be considered extensions of one another. While crunch-wise, Asmodeus was never usually granted any actual divine rank, etc the fluff text was pretty solidly behind nothing else on the plane being remotely a threat to his power, and Tiamat is no exception. He plays the other archdevils off of one another like puppets, deities exist within Hell by his sufference, etc. Though to be fair, the orc and goblinoid gods were booted from Hell because they caused problems with the Blood War, and Asmodeus hasn't deigned to step into the on and off war between Levistus the Lord of Stygia and the sahuagin deity Sekolah, or the open warfare between Levistus and Set (though to be fair, Set was very slowly losing, as Levistus had actually imposed his will on the layer of Stygia to the extent that it was causing Set's deific domain to contract).

4e alters things a bit and takes a -very- different look on deities and archfiends (and other planar lords). As far as I can tell, the 4e design team went the route of "deity > archfiend always". By making Asmodeus an actual deity in 4e, they try to salvage some of the previous atmosphere of power that surrounded him, without having to break from their stance on gods versus archfiends otherwise. I can't speculate much on his and Tiamat's relationship in 4e, I don't know what they scrapped, what changed, and what hasn't been address in light of other changes.

 

[doctorhook]

My answer pertains the lore from 1e-3e on the topic:

That's just fine! I consider myself reasonably familiar with the cosmology and lore of 4E, so I'm confident I can find a place to put most of whatever you can give me. It's just as well, anyway, because there's isn't much lore that's yet been detailed in 4E.

I figure pretty good between Tiamat and Asmodeus, though they probably don't have direct contact on a frequent basis. Like most other denizens of the 9 Hells, you don't talk directly to the boss unless you're on the other 8 Lords of the 9, and then only when he summons you. Tiamat is already known to have pretty extensive contact and collaboration with the pit fiends of the Dark 8, and they work on Asmo's behalf.

Tiamat has to be doing well in Asmo's eyes, because she's still there on Avernus (unlike Gruumsh and Maglubiyet who were forcibly shunted from Avernus into Acheron because their warring against one another got to be a hinderance to the fiends). Although her relationship to the current and past Lord of the 1st (Bel, Zariel, etc) has sometimes been frosty, she has a place within the expanded hierarchy of Hell, even if not among the direct power structure of the diabolic rank and file or the nobility.

And Asmodeus isn't worried about her. He doesn't need to be. She's a deity who happens to lair in his plane, and outside of possibly any still lingering Ancient Baatorians, he's the single most powerful embodiment of Lawful Evil within the multiverse. Hell and Asmodeus might as well be considered extensions of one another. While crunch-wise, Asmodeus was never usually granted any actual divine rank, etc the fluff text was pretty solidly behind nothing else on the plane being remotely a threat to his power, and Tiamat is no exception. He plays the other archdevils off of one another like puppets, deities exist within Hell by his sufference, etc. Though to be fair, the orc and goblinoid gods were booted from Hell because they caused problems with the Blood War, and Asmodeus hasn't deigned to step into the on and off war between Levistus the Lord of Stygia and the sahuagin deity Sekolah, or the open warfare between Levistus and Set (though to be fair, Set was very slowly losing, as Levistus had actually imposed his will on the layer of Stygia to the extent that it was causing Set's deific domain to contract).

The short version of what I'm getting from what you're saying, Shemeska, is that Asmodeus and Tiamat probably don't talk much, and that overall, they're probably indifferent to one another. To elaborate, they cooperate when their interest coincide, and they war when their interests conflict, but for the most part, they're not playing the same ballgame, and so they have no reason to interact much.

Asmodeus seems like a bad mofo, who wants a proverbial finger in every proverbial pie; in fact, that's pretty much what he's about -- control and domination. To this end, I'm going to say that perhaps (deity) Asmodeus has bargained with (deity) Tiamat to give her access to a few legions of Devils, as well as lordship over all Abishais. In return, Asmodeus gets... what? Information, obviously, from the veritable army of spies he'd then have in Tiamat's service, but what else? Surely Tiamat is wiser than to accept a gift from Asmodeus... Perhaps he demanded her eternal alliegence against the Lawful Good forces of Bahamut; it's perhaps the only thing Tiamat (the goddess of greed) would have agreed to give even for free.

How does that spin sit with you, Shemeska? Tiamat gets armies of Devil and Abishai servants, Asmodeus gets a network of informants and a measure of indirect control over Tiamat's forces, and both Tiamat and Asmodeus get an ally against their mutual hated foe, Bahamut.* (Of course, they still won't interact much, nor very often.)

(*It's important to bear in mind that in 4E, Bahamut is not only the King of Good Dragons, but he's also the main deity of justice and honor; basically, he's the exactly the kind of Lawful Goody-Good that Asmodeus would despise.)

4e alters things a bit and takes a -very- different look on deities and archfiends (and other planar lords). As far as I can tell, the 4e design team went the route of "deity > archfiend always". By making Asmodeus an actual deity in 4e, they try to salvage some of the previous atmosphere of power that surrounded him, without having to break from their stance on gods versus archfiends otherwise.

(Highlighting added.) I think you're mostly correct in your assessment. Making Asmodeus into a deity in 4E was really a gesture to solidify the fact that he is the baddest, most dominating evil-guy around; there's certainly no confusion about that anymore.

OTOH, in 4E "deity status" is almost a formality; there hasn't yet been any really meaningful mechanical difference between deities, primordials, archdevils, demon lords, elder evils, archfey, "stars", or even super-powerful mortals, except insofar as the scope of their worship across the cosmology.* For example, most of the gods have lots of influence because their religions have a ton of followers, but Orcus (a Demon Prince) does too, because of the size of his cult; OTOH, Tharizdun is a deity with limited influence because he has such a small following. Furthermore, deities have control over certain domains, but so do other super-beings; for example, Orcus is the Demon Prince of Undeath, while certain archfey control various natural, seasonal, or environmental domains (though all the domains I can think of here are also duplicated by deities, too). Finally, the mythos of 4E places a lot of emphasis upon the war between the gods and the primordials, suggesting some level of parity between these two factions of super-beings.

In short, in 4E there's not too much difference between being a god and just being ultra-powerful.

(*Technically, deities have an ability called "Discorporation" which allows them to reform at some point after being slain -- unless some ritual was performed to make their death permanent -- but it's functionally a flavour effect. Additionally, deities are also immune to attack by beings of less than 20th level, but in practice they're so much more powerful than 20th level that characters below this threshhold wouldn't stand a chance in combat against a deity anyway. Because neither of these effects has a significant bearing upon they deity's abilities, I say that there's not really any meaningful mechanical difference between deities and other super-beings in 4E.)

Anyway, let me know what you think about my suggestion above (in blue). I think we might yet be able to make this work...

 

[Mouseferatu]

(*Technically, deities have an ability called "Discorporation" which allows them to reform at some point after being slain -- unless some ritual was performed to make their death permanent -- but it's functionally a flavour effect.

I'm going to nitpick here.

I think it's far more than a flavor effect. If you go back and look, it's not "some ritual" that needs to be performed. It's a very specific quest--usually multiple adventures' worth. It means that deities cannot be slain permanently until/unless the DM decides to make it possible and sets up how to do it in advance. Everything else, from demon lords to primordials, is (at least potentially) killable once the PCs find it. (Assuming PCs powerful enough to do so, but that's true of anything, really.) Obviously, a DM can (and should, IMO, if it's appropriate to the campaign) rule by fiat that other beings also require rituals or special circumstances to permanently kill. A good example of this would be the old-edition requirement that an arch-fiend can only be permanently slain on its home plane. But only gods have that fiat built-in, for even the most by-the-book groups.

But also, keep in mind that the discorporation ability means that the PCs will never face the god at full strength until/unless they have the means to slay it permanently. Since the god discorporates at "bloodied," it means the PCs never have to fight it until it drops, unless it's already vulnerable.

I'd argue that those two facets make fights against gods very different than fights against other, even equally powerful, beings.

 

[Morrus]

Though to be fair, the orc and goblinoid gods were booted from Hell because they caused problems with the Blood War, and Asmodeus hasn't deigned to step into the on and off war between Levistus the Lord of Stygia and the sahuagin deity Sekolah, or the open warfare between Levistus and Set (though to be fair, Set was very slowly losing, as Levistus had actually imposed his will on the layer of Stygia to the extent that it was causing Set's deific domain to contract).

I have to give you props for being the only person I've ever seen use the phrase "though to be fair" twice in a single sentence!

 

[doctorhook]

I'm going to nitpick here.

I think it's far more than a flavor effect. If you go back and look, it's not "some ritual" that needs to be performed. It's a very specific quest--usually multiple adventures' worth. It means that deities cannot be slain permanently until/unless the DM decides to make it possible and sets up how to do it in advance. Everything else, from demon lords to primordials, is (at least potentially) killable once the PCs find it. (Assuming PCs powerful enough to do so, but that's true of anything, really.) Obviously, a DM can (and should, IMO, if it's appropriate to the campaign) rule by fiat that other beings also require rituals or special circumstances to permanently kill. A good example of this would be the old-edition requirement that an arch-fiend can only be permanently slain on its home plane. But only gods have that fiat built-in, for even the most by-the-book groups.

But also, keep in mind that the discorporation ability means that the PCs will never face the god at full strength until/unless they have the means to slay it permanently. Since the god discorporates at "bloodied," it means the PCs never have to fight it until it drops, unless it's already vulnerable.

I'd argue that those two facets make fights against gods very different than fights against other, even equally powerful, beings.

Your nitpick isn't totally unfair, Mr Marmell; deities do have the advantage of having this ability enshrined for them. OTOH, those epic ritual-quests usually happen separately from the actual battle against the deity, so does the ritual-quest have any bearing upon the combat at all, beyond being a plot-device? Plus, I really like playing that "DM-fiat/other beings can come back, too" angle, because I don't think it's inappropriate for certain other super-beings, like Demon Princes or Archdevils, for example.

It's pretty clear that these abilities were cleverly designed to make deities feel more powerful, without making them much more dangerous in combat. I think you and I are just looking at it and spinning it from opposite perspectives, Ari.

 

[pawsplay]

Not only does Tiamat have a head of each type of chromatic dragon, but she's multiheaded (like a hydra) and has a stinging tail (like a wyvern). I've always imagined her as a sort of Mother of Monsters, like the Echidna of Greek myth. I really liked her as an archdevil; not only did it make the archdevils more various, but it tied together Tiamat, the chromatics, and the forces of evil.

3e kind of mucked things up. Making her a deity in name removed her from the Infernal hieararchy, and additionally brough to light some problems with the god/archfiend split in 3e. Specifically, gods in 3e had too much raw power, but not enough influence, and archdevils were the reverse. Archdevils had the same relationship with Hell that deities with their home realms, but not the same sorts of powers. The result was that it was hard to imagine how Asmodeus held his own against an entity that was not only deific, but slavishly worshipped by uncountable numbers of powerful dragons.

 

[Shemeska]

3e kind of mucked things up. Making her a deity in name removed her from the Infernal hieararchy,

That predated 3e actually. 2e made her a deity rather than an archdevil, and 3e and 4e stuck with the change.

and additionally brough to light some problems with the god/archfiend split in 3e. Specifically, gods in 3e had too much raw power, but not enough influence, and archdevils were the reverse. Archdevils had the same relationship with Hell that deities with their home realms, but not the same sorts of powers. The result was that it was hard to imagine how Asmodeus held his own against an entity that was not only deific, but slavishly worshipped by uncountable numbers of powerful dragons.

Initially 3e didn't match the flavor with the crunch. They made gods insanely powerful and went with the notion of archfiends as just big monsters, without rationalizing why Special K hadn't yet killed Asmodeus and taken over Hell. Late 3.x finally addressed the topic in the Fiendish Codex series, granting archfiends the ability to manipulate their layers of Hell/Abyss/etc as deities, and also presenting their stats as only the minimum for an avatar, intentionally without defining an upper bound.

I wish that 4e would have stuck with that solution, or even the 2e/3e fluff dichotomy between gods and archfiends, but they've reverted back to more of a 'archfiends are epic tier monsters to kill' sort of thing, which isn't my thing.

 

[Klaus]

Not only does Tiamat have a head of each type of chromatic dragon, but she's multiheaded (like a hydra) and has a stinging tail (like a wyvern). I've always imagined her as a sort of Mother of Monsters, like the Echidna of Greek myth. I really liked her as an archdevil; not only did it make the archdevils more various, but it tied together Tiamat, the chromatics, and the forces of evil.

3e kind of mucked things up. Making her a deity in name removed her from the Infernal hieararchy, and additionally brough to light some problems with the god/archfiend split in 3e. Specifically, gods in 3e had too much raw power, but not enough influence, and archdevils were the reverse. Archdevils had the same relationship with Hell that deities with their home realms, but not the same sorts of powers. The result was that it was hard to imagine how Asmodeus held his own against an entity that was not only deific, but slavishly worshipped by uncountable numbers of powerful dragons.

Don't forget that Tiamat used to be so bloated that she couldn't make claw attacks (making up for that with five bites and a poison stinger).