How hard is it to put in a little disclaimer "That it is up to the DM discretion if they want Paladine and Takhsis to be Bahamut and Tiamat?" which is what I have done in several campaigns that I ahve been involved with anyway.
dragonlance is an isolated world. as far as the cosmology of DL is concerned, no such beings named bahamut or tiamat exist.
Paladine and Takhisis are based on Bahamut and Tiamat. There are those who say they are the same, others who do not. There are plenty of arguments to support either side.
Does it matter if we establish a connection?
Not really. After all, they'll fill one role in Dragonlance, and other roles in other worlds. Besides, 3e set things up to where each world has its own cosmology.
As for the Abyss and the first level of Hell, that's really a throwback to 2e. Again, the cosmology. The two are, in fact, different places.
My advice is for each DL fan to decide for themselves if they wish to have that connection. I like the connection for the names (but not the Abyss), so that's how I look at it. Others may see things differently.
In the end, it's up to the individual to decide.
Originally posted by DmJoeSolarte
It is well know when they were creating the DRAGONLANCe world, that they used the concept of Tiamat and Bahamut to make Takhisis and Paladien respectively out with.
Tiamat and Bahamut are pale shadows of the true divinities. Created in imitation by a power that would fancy itself the High God but knows nothing of the taming of Chaos.
With the fall from the heavens of Lady Takhisis and Lord Paladine the remaining days of their reflections are rapidly fading.
Tii'Mhut(Istar) name for Takhisis almost looks like Tiamat.
So what is your point?
Just because they are based off those two doesn't mean anything. They are still Paladine, and Takhisis. If you want to say they are Bahamut, and Tiamat its your world.
Now, Tracy Hickman has always said that Takhisis was seperate from Tiamat. Jeff Grubb prefers to think otherwise. This time however, Tracy Hickman is right for these reasons:
1) It complicates the setting by introducing elements that the Dragonlance team can't control. For example, what if they decide to kill Tiamat in another setting line, or vice versa? If Takhisis is Tiamat it has repercussions beyond their setting. If you ignore it, you are pretty much saying that they are seperate entities. If you have been saying that they were one in the same up until that time, it becomes one of those dreaded retcons.
2) Neither Sovereign Press nor WotC have any interest in mentioning or advertising for a gaming line (Planescape) that is out of print. The people that would want Takhisis and Tiamat to be the same creature (or would care) already have bought the 2e books.
Now, as said previously yes, they are pretty much the same. The reasons above however are why it is impractical to even hint that they are the same.
Originally posted by DmJoeSolarte
It is well know when they were creating the DRAGONLANCe world, that they used the concept of Tiamat and Bahamut to make Takhisis and Paladien respectively out with.
They were based on the Tiamat of Babylonian myth and the Bahamut of Islamic myth, so yes. This doesn't mean however that they would be the same as the D&D versions (or the Final Fantasy versions), especially after 3E effectively cut the settings apart from each other. And if it were true, Tiamat would die when the FR timeline finally catches up with DL WoS. ;)
But then my DL game has deviated from canon because the Overlords are the other corrupted dragons.
If you want to include them in your game, then do so. I really think that the majority of games have been altered slightly like that to fit with the imagination of the individual DL (or other setting) DM.
How hard is it to put in a little disclaimer...
There is a disclaimer. It's in the Player's Handbook. Says DM has final say. I asnwered your question, this discussion is now over with.
Originally posted by Naga_Slayer
There is a disclaimer. It's in the Player's Handbook. Says DM has final say. I asnwered your question, this discussion is now over with.
Now, now. There still may be more to be gained from this thread. Let's see what else might come of it.
Actually, I do have a question for you guys. Some of the gods in Dragonlance bear resemblence to deities/powers beyond DL. Do you guys ever make an association?
Originally posted by Dragonhelm
Now, now. There still may be more to be gained from this thread. Let's see what else might come of it.
Actually, I do have a question for you guys. Some of the gods in Dragonlance bear resemblence to deities/powers beyond DL. Do you guys ever make an association?
I always found a little bit of a similarity between the FR god Ohgma(or however the guy's name is spelled) and Gilean.
If I were to actually add to this discussion, I might suggest Deneir from FR as similar to Branchala. But then, there must have been some other source that both places got the song god from. I just wish my knowledge of random gods from mythology was a little more complete. Curse the Christian church for not having a multitude of interestingly named gods!
I'm not sure how worthwhile discussing the similarities between DL and FR gods are, though. For a start, FR has about 10 times as many gods, with more every supplement, and some one has got to have run out of ideas soon enough.
Oh, and this one isn't strictly Dl related, but one of the halfling gods is called Brandobaris. There also happens to be a random hobbit hero called Brandobris (Took), or something like that.
Other than that I never use non-DL deities in my DL games or DL deities in non-DL games..It becomes too messy to keep account of.. besides... Since Paly is now Valthonis on Krynn, he would effectively be missing from every other setting, and the same goes for Thak. It's just something I don't want to worry about.
But then again, I never liked plane-hopping campaigns..except Urban Arcana for d20 modern.
1) Tiamat and Bahamut are always portrayed as being rather minor deities (classed as Lesser Deities in the sourcebooks) as opposed to Paladine and Takhisis who are the heads of the relative pantheons. It could be intpereted that Krynn is just a world where Tiamat and Paladine became the strongest Gods… but the there are radical problems that arise when attempting to mix the cosmology of Krynn with the standard D&D “Great Wheel” or Fauren (and it’s planes).
2) Similarly Bahamut and Tiamat are always portrayed as being pretty much “Dracocentric”, yes they do have a few human followers but nothing very substantial, simarly they sometimes get involved in the affairs of other races but really only focus on Dragons.
Paladine and Takhisis however show a very active interest in pretty much all the races (well Takhisis didn’t care much about Kender and Gnomes… at least up until a certain one came along…). Whilst the Dragons may be viewed as their most favoured, being their first Children, and arguably greatest children. It is clear that the “lesser races” had the real grasp on fate of Krynn (as the Metallic and Chromatic Dragons effectively cancel out each other)
3) Lastly, the character of Paladine and Takhisis has been explored far better in the Novels and Sourcebooks than Tiamat and Bahamut have. Takhisis is an expert at the subtle side of evils; deceitfulness, corruption and betraying, as well as the obvious and overt. She’s been shown as keen to experiment to explore new possibilities to giving her an edge, the creation of the Draconians and the Dragonarmies, and then the Knights of Takhisis, then running away giggling with the world and finally Mina (who incidentally is cool… sorry… digressing…) and the guise as the one God. This is compared to Tiamat, who from the little I’ve seen of her, just seems to be “grr… crush… destroy… eat…yom…yom…”
Paladine is like a benevolent father, trying to Protect all the races from Takhisis. However he too likes to work from behind the scenes. Bahumut however just… um I can’t actually remember anything Bahumut has actually done (apart from vague references to opposing Tiamat, oh and once appeared as an oldman , accompanied by seven canaries and then achieving the truely epic-feat of "female-canine"ed up some trolls who tried to mug him… which is frankly just lame compared to Fizben)
Yep, Tiamat and Bahumut (both D&D and the original Babylonian versions) where around and I have no doubt that Tracy and Margrrett based Takhisis and Paladine upon them, however they (and others who have worked on DL) have developed them far beyond their original bases to deeper and richer entities, what sense would it make to replace them with something far lessdeveloped?
Edit: Sorry, just bypassing the censor in an inoffensive way...
Originally posted by ferratus
Just Chemosh and Orcus, but that was because in prior supplements Chemosh was described as having a goat's head. ;)
Well...I'm pretty sure that his constellation is that of a goats skull.
Coincidence? I THINK NOT!
BTW here's my explanation...
Tiamat and Paladine are the two dragon gods as they will BECOME thanks to the peculiar nature of non-linear divine being. Hence they are the future forms of the gods elevated to Krynnish omnipotence
Originally posted by Charles Phipps
The head of the Dragon pantheon is "Io" and Chaos's name is "Ionathles"
Coincidence? I THINK NOT!
Indeed, that isn't a coincidence.
When Matthew Martin wrote the Martinian Canon (which became part of the appendix to Vanished Moon), he gave Chaos the name Ionthas. IIRC, this was to pay homage to IO. Not the same, but the inspiration was definitely there.
For some other interesting tidbits...
Habbakuk is the name of a book in the Bible.
Hukkukel is derived from "Duke of Hell" (per Jeff Grubb). He is also known as M'Fistos (Mephistopholes anyone?). And his other title of the Prince of Lies just reminds me of Loki.
Morgion is also known as Anthrax Goatlord (Anthraxus?).
There's tons of stuff like this in DL. Very cool.
(A bit of Planescape knowledge for the not PS initiated)
Originally posted by ferratus
Just Chemosh and Orcus, but that was because in prior supplements Chemosh was described as having a goat's head. ;)
Jeff Grubb confirmed this for me on afdl once, actually. The interesting thing is that Demogorgon, the _other_ big-name demon lord from 1E, has showed up in DL as a demon, not a god. :-)
Matthew L. Martin
Iolanthes/Chaos=Io
Paladine=Bahamut
Takhasis=Tiamat
and Chemosh=Orcus
What exactly would this mean for the setting as a whole were they to be combined?
For other worlds were you crossover heavy?
The maddening of Io into the being Chaos would have repurcussions for all draconic beings the breadth of the multiverse. Trapping his madness and banishing him would cause ripples in all draconic beings who see Io as their progenitor being.
The death of Takhisis means that the red dragon pact of the Githyanki is gone and the guardian of the door to the 2nd level of Baator has passed away.
The loss of Bahamut isn't a big thing. He has proxies and champions etc. but is not a particularly important being in the politicing of the mltiverse.
Orcus is also now an Intermediate Deity and Paladine/Takhasis have been ones for some time
Presuming "crossover" in divine rank
Orcus is also now an Intermediate Deity and Paladine/Takhasis have been ones for some time
Presuming "crossover" in divine rank
Originally posted by Ceran
Is Orcus that?
Unlike the links between Bahamut and Paladine, and Tiamat and the Queen of Darkness, which have varied from time to time and product to product, the connection between Orcus and Chemosh has never been more than the former inspiring the latter.
Matthew L. Martin