6
\$\begingroup\$

So, the DMG confirms that Takhisis and Tiamat are the same.

Under the Dragon Orb description in the DMG:

The dragon essence within the orb might want many things: the annihilation of a particular people, freedom from the orb, to spread suffering in the world, to advance the worship of Takhisis (Tiamat's name on Krynn), or something else the DM decides

Is this confirmation that Bahamut and Paladine are one and the same as well? Or if somehow players traveled between worlds (or whatever you might call it), would Bahamut and Paladine be different deities?

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ Are you asking if the deities on krynn are somehow multiversal? What specific problem exists here? \$\endgroup\$ – Brian Ballsun-Stanton May 18 '15 at 4:06
  • \$\begingroup\$ @BrianBallsun-Stanton I am asking if Paladine and Bahamut are multiversal/the same. Tiamat/Takhisis are for sure according to the DM Manual. Theoretically, you could address Takhisis as Tiamat on Krynn. Would this carry over to Bahamut as well? \$\endgroup\$ – dphil May 18 '15 at 4:07
  • \$\begingroup\$ Can you give us more details of your campaign setting, then? \$\endgroup\$ – Brian Ballsun-Stanton May 18 '15 at 4:08
  • \$\begingroup\$ @BrianBallsun-Stanton What exactly do you mean? DND 5e. Normally in Forgotten Realms, but I don't think that's relevant. \$\endgroup\$ – dphil May 18 '15 at 4:09
8
\$\begingroup\$

It's tempting to see this as, finally, confirmation that Paladine is Bahamut. But that temptation is deceptive.

The trouble with citing 5e for Tiamat = Takhisis is that every detail about the gods and planes in 5e is presented as "here's some stuff! DM, it's up to you to decide what's true in your setting." So, as far as establishing setting canon, 5e is useless.

We'll just have to keep waiting for official word on Bahamut and Paladine.

| improve this answer | |
\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ So, you are saying that without them saying direct as a specific statement Takhisis = Tiamat, it's a little risky to try to say that is what they meant, which makes it even riskier to apply to Bahamut/Paladine? \$\endgroup\$ – dphil May 18 '15 at 4:30
  • 5
    \$\begingroup\$ @dphil Pretty much. The 5e DMG is a toolbox for creation rather than a bible for canon. You'd have to see it in Dragonlance book, or hear it from the Hickmans. Even the Takhisis = Tiamat statement is suspect, being in the DMG. \$\endgroup\$ – SevenSidedDie May 18 '15 at 4:44
  • \$\begingroup\$ Actually, that kind of how the whole system is presented. \$\endgroup\$ – CharlieHorse May 18 '15 at 13:52
1
\$\begingroup\$

Your logic is backwards.

The statement:

Takhisis (Tiamat's name on Krynn)

is intended to support play on Krynn, as the dragon orbs are almost certainly going to show up in any high level game there. As campaign-world jumping campaigns exist at the whim of the DM, it's absolutely and positively the DM's call.

Given that (at least in earlier ages) Deities were physically embodied in planets and constellations, there's no basis for asserting the same planar cosmology between games. Therefore, while one of Paladine's names is Bahamut (from old old memory of one of the AD&D splatbooks also talking about fizban/zifnab) there exists no basis for the claim that these divine beings are union, save by DM fiat.

With that said, I'm quite sure that given the power of planejumpers who can break into other crystal spheres, these deities would be quite happy to have a chat to whomever ported in and would likely be willing to work out an arrangement.

Also, this "debate" has been raging for literally over a decade, with the authors themselves rather divided on the issue.

| improve this answer | |
\$\endgroup\$
1
\$\begingroup\$

If they let that slip, then it appears that yes, Bahamut would be Paladine, which makes a ton of sense since Paladine is the Platinum Dragon.

This is further backed up when Fizban (Paladine when dealing with the Heroes of the Lance) tells them that he's known by many names amongst the races.

There is official confirmation from the Dragonlance side of the house as some of the names that Paladine goes by are Bah'mut, the Dragonlord and the Platinum Dragon. In the original D&D, Bahamut was referred to as either the Dragon King or the Platinum Dragon. From there he graduated to Bahamut.

Furthermore, Bahamut spends about a quarter of his time on Oerth in a frail hermit guise. This is directly in keeping with Fizban who is in the guise of a frail old wizard.

So have they officially come out and said they're the same? No. But all of the history and lore point to them being the same, and I would say that the revelation that Takhisis and Tiamat are the same definitively supports that Bahamut and Paladine are also one and the same.

| improve this answer | |
\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ Some good observations there besides the second paragraph. We already know that on krynn they called him several different names so that doesn't really support it though. The rest is good to know assuming that it is all true. \$\endgroup\$ – dphil Jun 3 '15 at 16:30

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.