9
\$\begingroup\$

The DMG confirms that Takhisis and Tiamat are the same. Under the description of the Orb of Dragonkind in the DMG (p. 225):

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 characters traveled between worlds (or whatever you might call it), would Bahamut and Paladine be different deities?

\$\endgroup\$
3
  • \$\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\$ May 18 '15 at 4:08
  • 2
    \$\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
11
\$\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.

\$\endgroup\$
4
  • \$\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
  • 7
    \$\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\$ May 18 '15 at 4:44
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Actually, that kind of how the whole system is presented. \$\endgroup\$ May 18 '15 at 13:52
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Worth to note - several fantasy-based materials have elements with direct analogs to those of another material. Wow's Nightborne elves are somewhat related to the drow in looks and general concept, even including some drider-like spider hybrids, but they are a completely different race lore-wise. A silvery/platinum good dragon battling against a multi-colored evil dragon was also, likewise, beaten to death - including in MTG (Ugin vs Nicol Bolas), D&D, Dragonlance, and a host of other, smaller settings. \$\endgroup\$
    – T. Sar
    Apr 26 at 16:11
10
\$\begingroup\$

Yes, Bahamut and Paladine are one and the same

A number of sections of the new D&D 5e book, Fizban's Treasury of Dragons make this explicit for the setting of Dragonlance, and thus canonical for that setting.

It's also notable, that this book is annotated explicitly with the voice of Fizban, who in previous editions has been explicitly linked as being Paladine. In the fiction of this book existing within the setting (which is something WotC has been doing with a number of their books with named authors [VGtM, MToF, XGtE, TCoE, VRGtR]), this book being written or annotated by Fizban would make this even more explicit in that context.

Where does it say this?

The two chapters of the book with the explicit references are The First World, and Dragons in Play.

The First World

This chapter discusses the origin of dragons, the role of Bahamut and Tiamat in the creation of the First World and Sardior (and subsequent creation of the different dragon families), as well as the brith of the myriad worlds of the Material Plane being

"seedling realities" formed when the First World was sundered [...]

In particular, it has specifics to say about four specific settings: Forgotten Realms, Greyhawk, Dragonlance and Eberron. For Dragonlance, part of what it has to say is making it both explicit and canonical to the setting that Bahamut is Paladine.

Dragonlance

Legends say the world of Krynn (home to the Dragonlance setting) was created in the interplay between the High God and Chaos. Its most important cosmic powers have always been the three children of the High God - Paladine, Gilean, and Takhisis, with Paladine and Takhisis easily identifiable as Bahamut and Tiamat. [...]

Dragons in Play

This chapter discusses how you would roleplay dragons, and gives you a lot of detail to help motivate them. One of the topics it discusses is the relationship of dragons to gods and religion, both in terms of the beliefs of dragons as well as various draconic beings place in religions of the multiverse.

It makes a specific distinction between the Primordial dragons (Bahamut & Tiamat) and the gods (in a metaphysical sense), but also makes it clear that they are worshipped as gods by humanoids on many worlds. One very specific example they give is the world of Krynn.

Gods and Religion

Bahamut and Tiamat, the primordial dragons and the purported creators of the First World, are the closest things to gods among dragonkind. Since they share the same fundamental connection to the Material Plane as their dragon offspring. Bahamut and Tiamat are ontologically distinct from the gods that hail from the Outer Planes. But for practical purposes they are divine [...].

[...]

On many worlds, Humanoids worship Bahamut and Tiamat as gods. On Krynn, they are the greatest among the gods, though they are known there as Paladine and Takhisis and are not always pictured as dragons. [...]

Bonus evidence

Bahamut is also Fizban on Krynn, in addition to being Paladine. This explicit link between Bahamut and Fizban is another nail in the coffin, as previous editions have made the link between Paladine and Fizban a canonical "they are one and the same". By restating this link, it makes it clear that this is an intentional link. This link appears in the Dragons in Play chapter.

Shape-shifting

[...]

Famously, Bahamut traveled the world of Krynn in the guise of a human wizard named Fizban, guiding the peoples of that world as they prepared for war against the evil forces of Tiamat. [...]

But what about planes-hopping characters?

In The First World chapter, under Dragonsight, it is made explicit that dragons are multi-world entities, through their unique feature of having

multiple incarnations of themselves across different worlds of the Material Plane.

Dragons can explicitly become aware, and potentially communicate with, or even gain control of multiple versions of those echoes, or even be regarded as gods by mortals.

Given most people's limited understanding of dragons' beliefs and philosophies, let alone dragonsight, many mortals are quick to describe dragons with dragonsight as "dragonsight". Some dragons have so successfully extended their consciousness across multiple incarnations, and so expertly coordinated their activities across multiple worlds, that they can seem godlike even to younger dragons.

This bit of lore, allows us to make even more concrete. On all worlds where there is a Bahamut, that Bahamut is actually the same being, just in a different incarnation, as the Bahamut on all of the other worlds they exist on. The same holds true for Tiamat.

So, for any planes-hopping characters who met Bahamut on one world, those characters would be known by a Bahamut they met on another world. So Fizban/Bahamut/Paladine on Krynn would know such characters that the Forgotten Realms incarnation of them has met.

\$\endgroup\$
7
  • \$\begingroup\$ Please edit in your source, including page numbers. \$\endgroup\$
    – Trish
    Oct 27 at 13:41
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @Trish The source was in the first sentence but I've made that more explicit. I don't have access to page numbers at the moment (I'm waiting on my physical copy to ship to me, but I also have the Book on D&D Beyond, and that's where these quotes are from). I have listed the chapter names and subsection names within the answer (the heading titles are the references) \$\endgroup\$
    – illustro
    Oct 27 at 13:43
  • \$\begingroup\$ Well, it only took 6 years for OP to get confirmation but they finally got it. \$\endgroup\$ Oct 28 at 15:31
  • \$\begingroup\$ There are numerous typos in some of your quotes (e.g. "creeated", "It's most", "clostest", "putposes"). Are they copied and pasted from D&D Beyond directly (suggesting errors in the book itself), or merely a result of your own typos when retyping that text? \$\endgroup\$
    – V2Blast
    Oct 28 at 16:21
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @illustro: Ah, okay. I'll go ahead and fix those typos for now, then, assuming the sourcebook is accurate. Also, you may want to add links to the relevant sections of the book on DDB when citing those quotes, even if you don't have the physical book yet. \$\endgroup\$
    – V2Blast
    Oct 28 at 16:24
3
\$\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.

\$\endgroup\$
1
  • \$\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
2
\$\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.

\$\endgroup\$
0

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .