Post/Author/DateTime	Post
AvonRekaes 11-11-07, 12:25 AM	I know Eberron is supposed to be all newfangled and cool and doing away with old tropes... but did they really have to give Bahamut the shaft? Sure, Bahamut gets to stay an actual god while Tiamat is (arguably) demoted to Rajah status, but I say Bahamut got the short end of the stick. Tiamat can affect things. She exists for certain. She was so powerful even the culture who hated her regarded her as true divinity to appease her (making up a new constellation just for her). Where's Bahamut? Who the hell knows. Sacred Warders of Bahamut exist, sure, but then again so do Clerics of the Lord of Blades. He has no motives or purposes, at least for all intents and purposes, because he can't just out and tell anyone what they are. Because no one is sure he exists. What grates on me the most is that knowledge of him is basically banned from the "lesser beings". The Yuan-ti of Io'vakas were destroyed because they were worshiping the true Draconic Pantheon. So I'm supposed to believe that Sacred Warders of Bahamut, dedicated to his dogma of protection and compassion, would be insulted that humanoids would want to worship such a (completely awesome) god? My opinion of Bahamut is apparently shared by enough people at WotC that he's going to replace Heironeous as the default God of Paladins, like I always considered him myself. But in Eberron, a human paladin of Bahamut would be hunted down for his blasphemy. Even without this "barred from humanoid worship" deal, I still think that Bahamut is strangely absent from his traditional role as Tiamat's counter. I know, I know, Eberron throws most traditions out the window, and usually I'm all for that. I'm not sure if I've been around frequently enough on these boards enough to be known, but I am an avid fan of the setting. Just not of Bahamut's (apparent) place in it.
AstralFireIX 11-11-07, 01:08 AM	Bah to Bahamut and bah to him replacing Heironeous. That's all I have to say.
Belabras 11-11-07, 03:12 PM	Just replace everything in the fluff for your Bahamut classes with "draconic aspect of Dol Dorn". Problem solved. I do take your point, but part of the charm of Eberron, and Dragons of Eberron, is that they don't play by the old rules.
Lord_Tirian 11-11-07, 06:55 PM	If it *really* bothers you, just re-introduce Bahamut in some way. As an part of the Silver Flame, as a traitor Rajah, kick Dol Dorn out of the Sovereign Host and place Bahamut in it... or any other way you like it. It's not like the people here are breaking into your house and hitting you with the ECS - if you're the DM, you're making the world. Cheers, LT.
Hellcow 11-11-07, 07:12 PM	Did they really have to give Bahamut the shaft? We either had to "give him the shaft", or say that he wasn't actually a deity. In Eberron, he can't be both. Tiamat gains a more active role at the expense of actual divinity. With that said, a key point: we say that the existence of the gods is uncertain. You, as a DM, can always decide for yourself one way or the other. We aren't going to ever give stats for Aureon or Bahamut-in-Eberron. But there's nothing stopping YOU from making stats for Aureon and having him physically manifest in Eberron, if that's what you want. You could decide that the Silver Flame is actually the Breath of Bahamut. It's all in the tone that you seek. We aren't saying whether Bahamut exists, because someone else may not want him. But the dragons BELIEVE that he exists, and they're pretty smart. So if you want him to play an active role, have him play a more active role. We won't take away your dice. He has no motives or purposes, at least for all intents and purposes, because he can't just out and tell anyone what they are. Because no one is sure he exists. I completely disagree. WE aren't certain if he exists. The priests of Thir are ABSOLUTELY certain that he exists, and THEY know his motives and purposes. They speak to him with communion. They receive his guidance in visions. The skeptic can argue "How do you know that's really Bahamut?" But the priest knows with absolute certainty. So I'm supposed to believe that Sacred Warders of Bahamut, dedicated to his dogma of protection and compassion, would be insulted that humanoids would want to worship such a (completely awesome) god? No. You're supposed to believe that Eyes of Chronepsis would, or followers of Garyx. The Sacred Warders of Bahamut wouldn't be the ones who would likely take offense or action. On the contrary, those dedicated to Bahamut would likely be the ones most likely TO show compassion to the humanoids - that these are the members of the Chamber who try to help instead of destroy even when the latter approach is more expedient, and the members of the Light of Siberys who risk their lives battling demons to protect all creatures. With that said, it's important to emphasize that in Eberron, dragons simply don't view humanoids as equals. Humanoids are insects or rodents. In our world, there are spiritual people who WILL avoid stepping on a spider out of the belief that it's a crime against karma. But few of these people will actively stop another human from stepping on a spider. That's what you're dealing with here. The dragon may not take offense at a human seeking to understand Bahamut. He may personally show kindness to humans. But he won't fight the other dragon who does take offense and crushes the rebel. Bear in mind also that the yuan-ti had been expressly forbidden from pursuing the draconic mysteries. This wasn't an accident; they knew what they were doing, and they were punished for their defiance. My opinion of Bahamut is apparently shared by enough people at WotC that he's going to replace Heironeous as the default God of Paladins, like I always considered him myself. But in Eberron, a human paladin of Bahamut would be hunted down for his blasphemy. In Eberron, Bahamut isn't the default deity of humanoid paladins. Instead, the dragons have specifically provided human paladins with a dragon to worship: Dol Arrah. She's the intermediary step between humans and Bahamut. The dragons say "We deal with the true gods... we'll let you have our saints. That's the way things are supposed to be." The fact of the matter is that most humans have never even heard of Bahamut, because he is known only to the dragons. So before you get to blasphemy, you have to learn how he found out about Bahamut, and why he has chosen to worship him. Personally, if you had a Seren paladin or a stone giant paladin in the Light of Siberys who had been sanctified as a paladin of Bahamut by a dragon and who served Argonnessen, I wouldn't see him being hunted down for blasphemy... but I wouldn't see him being inducted into the deeper mysteries of Thir, either. Likewise, if you wanted to do dragonborn, it's not the place of a dragon to question a choice made BY Bahamut; on the contrary, dragonborn would presumably be seen as truly blessed individuals, likely commanding the respect of lightbringers. But all of these things would be very rare. Because while the stone giant COULD be trained as a paladin of Bahamut, Dol Arrah is the logical choice. She's essentially Bahamut Jr - his Deputy In Charge Of Humanoid Affairs. The lightbringer follows Bahamut, and he teaches his humanoid allies to worship Dol Arrah. Anyhow, that's the reasoning we followed. But as I said, nothing's stopping you from having Bahamut or any other god physically appearing and stomping around Eberron - it's just not going to happen in official material. And while people CAN debate his existence, no lightbringer of Thir would listen to such an argument; they know he exists, that he guides them and empowers them.
AvonRekaes 11-12-07, 07:21 AM	You make very good points, Keith, as always. And deep down I know they're all true. I know I can pretty much just make whatever I want up, Eberron is more of a sandbox than any other setting (what with the lack of a metaplot), but I think I'm just shocked that Bahamut wasn't made to be special at all in the book. It was nice to see other dragon gods getting some time to shine, like Chronepsis who is pretty freaking important in draconic society (One, having the dragon version of the Trust being devoted to him, and two, being the scribe or even master of the Prophecy). And Lendys was given a mention as being the patron of some of the Light of Siberys. But I thought there would be something, anything, even a little sidebar, detailing Bahamut's role a little more explicitly in dragon society, given how his usual foil was given a unique and very powerful role in the same. As it is, I see a few of his Sacred Warders here and there, in organizations that as a whole wouldn't live up to Bahamut's expectations. (The Light of Syberis does defend the world from demons, yes, but like you say they aren't the most compasionate of militant forces by any stretch of the imagination). I would have liked to see if there was anything hinting at Bahamut's patronage of the metalic breeds, like there was a hint that chromatics are more easily corrupted by Tiamat, and what his devotees think about the minor antichromatic sentiment that still lingers. I would have liked a little mention of an organization, or hell even a sub-organization of the Light that was specifically devoted to Bahamut and was more focused on doing Bahamut-y things (such as specifically try to counter the Talons of Tiamat or even just hunt the Spawn). I guess I realize that the decision to make Tiamat more active than Bahamut was to give the PCs yet another big bad evil thing that THEY had to defeat, and on the flip side of the coin, make Bahamut less active so the PCs aren't constantly bailed out by his worshipers. Still, I don't like how he was more or less ignored. ...To go off on a tangent, I really don't like the idea that even GOOD dragons don't care about humanoids to the extent that they'll want others to stop callously ignoring/abusing/murdering them. Alignment in DnD is supposed to be objective. No matter what your, or your groups, opinions are on what is good behavior or evil behavior, it's supposed to be a tangible force in the multiverse. Saying that even a good dragon can capriciously decide to kill a human would mean that even a good human can capriciously decide to kill a dog or cat (and not cause he's mentally ill and has uncontrollable urges, but just because, say, the dog is barking annoyingly). Whether you agree that either example is within the good alignment or not, what's true for one is true for the other...
Hellcow 11-12-07, 04:21 PM	I think I'm just shocked that Bahamut wasn't made to be special at all in the book. That's fair. We could have done more to explore all of the dragon gods, especially in light of the influence Bahamut has elsewhere. But part of it is that the dragons of Eberron are quite different from their counterparts. The separation of alignment from color has a huge impact. Tiamat isn't the beloved queen of the chromatics; she's their worst nightmare, posing an even greater threat to them than she does to the metallics. She doesn't lead the evil dragons as much as she represents the potential for evil in all dragons. Follow that example, I would see Bahamut as being the conscience of all dragons; the voice that calls on them to show compassion to lesser beings. The point is simply that in Eberron, fewer dragons follow that path; it's not the default direction for metallics. Instead, the dispassionate Chronepsis is more emblematic of the role of dragons in the setting... powerful and final arbiters. I guess I realize that the decision to make Tiamat more active than Bahamut was to give the PCs yet another big bad evil thing that THEY had to defeat, and on the flip side of the coin, make Bahamut less active so the PCs aren't constantly bailed out by his worshipers. Exactly the point I was going to make when I logged on. One of the intentional design decisions of Eberron is that there just aren't many powerful altruistic forces out there. If anything, the greatest challenge with the dragons has always been to explain why they DON'T solve all the world's problems - hence the triune answer that a) it threatens the Prophecy; b) it empowers Tiamat; and c) as a species, they are more concerned about dragons than humans. Thus, the Light of Siberys is the force that protects the world from all-out demonic war... but it doesn't act on a small scale beyond Argonnessen. Again, I don't see anything wrong with you creating a sect of active Bahamut worshippers - an elite branch of the Light of Siberys that takes a more active role in standing against Tiamat. And I look to Bahamut as the force that inspires dragons like Vvaraak, the defenders of Io'lokar, and Chamber agents who do actively help PCs even when it goes against the dictates of the Conclave. But that's sort of my point - to maintain the balance of power in which the heroes are potentially the greatest force for good, it helps to have these dragons be in the minority as opposed to great force. But that's for the setting as a whole - if you want the followers of Bahamut to be a powerful and active force, make it so. I also like the idea of Dragonborn as being another slap in the face to dragons, like the dragonmarked - for all this time they've sought to keep their religion apart from humanity, but now one of their own gods has chosen champions of a lesser race. You can't exactly call it blasphmey if it's the action of the god... Saying that even a good dragon can capriciously decide to kill a human would mean that even a good human can capriciously decide to kill a dog or cat (and not cause he's mentally ill and has uncontrollable urges, but just because, say, the dog is barking annoyingly). But there's countries where people eat dogs or cats. It's all a question of the role they play in your cultural view. Argonnessen is isolated from the humanoid world, and to a dragon, Sharn is like a busy anthill, buzzing around with short-lived, weak creatures with little intellect or understanding of the universe. The sheer multitude of people, yammering and begging and engaging in crimes and struggles for money and comfort is liable to be overwhelming and annothing to a dragon used to the relative tranquility of the Thousand. So first there's that - humanoid civilization is very different from the interaction of dragons in Argonnessen, and with drive a wedge between them. They are both intelligent creatures, but their views of the world and their needs are quite different. Second: I wouldn't expect a good dragon to kill a human out of hand. Despite my insect metaphor, the idea that a good creature would kill another for no reason whatsoever does seem hard to reconcile. My point is that they are willing to sacrifice those lesser creatures for the good of their own. A good human wouldn't just kill a cat for no reason at all. But he might certainly push the cat off the table if it's not supposed to be there. And if there's word of a terrible plague spreading through the feline population that may threaten humanity, would support the killing of all cats in the infected area... even though this may mean losing his own beloved pet? And then there's the example of Winston Churchill allowing the English village to be bombed without evacuated it to as to keep the Germans from realizes they'd broken their codes... a decision made by a human to allow humans to die, in the name of the greater good. Surely this was a tough call. What if it hadn't been a human village, but rather a prarie dog habitat? They're adorable, but would Churchill have even given the preservations of prarie dogs a second thought when he's considering the outcome of the greater war? All this is basically the point of "We don't WANT the dragons to get too involved." If they decide the Dreaming Dark is a threat, they may decide that it's a case of the cats carrying the disease - that humanity has simply become infected by the Quori and that the simplest answer is to eliminate us. It's a harsh thing, but it's born out by their history. In Xen'drik, they didn't save the elves from the giants; they wiped out those elves remaining on Xen'drik along with the giants. The dragons as a whole do what is necessary to protect the dragons. A truly compassionate good dragon won't be given to wanton or random cruelty. But it's still likely to place the good of its own people ahead of lesser beings. A good human may not kill a cow, but many good humans still eat meat. Horrific lab testing, the fur trade, veal - all things that go on in our world and involve the torture of lesser creatures. Of course, you have PETA, Greenpeace, and the like, and that's where you could obviously have followers of Bahamut actively trying to prevent other dragons from abusing humanoids... or dragons like Vvaraak.
Hellcow 11-12-07, 04:54 PM	Where's Bahamut? Who the hell knows. Sacred Warders of Bahamut exist, sure, but then again so do Clerics of the Lord of Blades. He has no motives or purposes, at least for all intents and purposes, because he can't just out and tell anyone what they are. Because no one is sure he exists. I just wanted to touch on this again. Something I see all too often is people jumping to the conclusion that because we don't know if gods exist, and because people can worship things like the Lord of Blades, that it is therefore the case that gods DON'T exist. That's not the intention of Eberron, and certainly not the belief of the vast majority of the people of Khorvaire. When you talk to a priest of the Sovereign Host, HE won't accept that the Sovereigns don't exist simply because they don't walk around or have stat blocks. He'll tell you that you feel Arawai's breath on the warm wind, that Dol Dorn guides every soldier's blade and Onatar every smith's hammer. And he might be right. Only you as a DM can decide. The gods aren't supposed to walk the world. They don't have stat blocks. But it's entirely possible that the tornado IS the work of the Devourer, or that a smith's burst of inspiration is the work of Onatar; there's just no way for a mortal to be certain. "But wait," you may say, "How does this square with priests getting magic from the Lord of Blades?" Good question, and it's the one that the atheist will use. The Lord of Blades clearly isn't a god. He doesn't personally grant spells. But priests who worship him can get spells. Doesn't this prove that divine magic has nothing to do with gods? No. It means that the Lord of Blades is a special case. As someone who believes in deities, I could argue any of the following: The force that grants spells to priests of the Lord of Blades is actually the deity that originally set the creation of the warforged in motion. Some might say this was Onatar, but you could question why Onatar would support such a dangerous movement. But there's another deity of artifice out there... the Traveler. And this is a perfect example of the Traveler's works. The Traveler inspires an artificer with a brilliant idea: the warforged! But now the war is over, the warforged are a source of tension and trouble, and the Traveler empowers the priests of this fringe movement, creating a further wedge and room for greater chaos in days to come. The force that grants spells to priests of the Lord of Blades is the spirit of the warforged itself; the Lord of Blades is simply a convenient lens to tap into this force, which is a god created by the very existence of the warforged. The main question there is if this is a newborn deity, or a force that has lingered since the Age of Giants - and if so, if it has an agenda. Divine magic is a tangible symptom of divinity, but essentially, by divorcing divine powers from stat blocks there's room for deities to have absolutely any level of power you want. Could the Devourer shatter Sharn with an earthquake or tidal wave? Nothing saying he couldn't. Of course, the earthquake could also just be a terrible natural disaster. Anyhow, all I'm trying to say is that what we intended in Eberron was to provide room for people to doubt the existence of gods... to have religion be more like our world. The fact that we don't have a stat block for the Christian god hasn't stopped millions of people from believing in Him, and from believing that He does have motives and purposes, even if he works in mysterious ways. Eberron gives you as DM the power to decide that gods don't exist at all if that's what you want. But you can just as easily decide that they DO exist, and that they are so powerful that they can affect the world in any way imaginable - that the outcome of any war IS in the hands of Dol Arrah, Dol Dorn, and the Mockery, or that the winds are the voice of Arawai and the Devourer. Thus, Bahamut may not walk the world in the flesh - but the priest of Thir certainly believes that he exists and has motives and purposes, and it's just up to you to decide how these may be made manifest in the world.
AvonRekaes 11-13-07, 01:03 AM	My main problem with gods in Eberron is that I feel shackled by the lack of proof. I've already decided that gods in my Eberron games do actually exist. I'm just afraid to make them major players in any campaign beyond NPC and PC divine casters for fear of stripping the setting of the mystique. I don't want to just throw down and say Bahamut has arrived in all his splendor, because then if he does it, all gods can do it, and if they don't then its a major blow against religions still worshiping them. Likewise, if I have a local adept of the Devourer ranting that if people don't stop abusing natural resources the Devourer herself will swallow them... and then after they ignore her a giant tsunami strikes and literally swallows them into the sea.... with no evidence of mortal magic (even epic)... what does that really say? That the adept had prophetic visions of the future completely unrelated to his deity? That it was just a humongous coincidence? Or that a divine hand actually did stir the ocean against her enemies? In the face of evidence THAT damning, I have a hard time maintaining the skeptic's argument with any real effectiveness. But anything less can just be completely denied by atheists. I guess I'm just bad at finding the middle ground, where something can be mysterious and unexplainable even by skeptics, but not immediately point to divine intervention. I liked that Tiamat was demoted from godhood. It was sort of like.... free license to do whatever I damn well pleased with her. I could have a situation where a Chamber agent friendly to the PCs is suddenly stricken with her influence, maybe supernaturally poisoned by the Talons of Tiamat, and is transformed into a Spawn of Tiamat right in front of the PC's eyes. And there would be no question that it was Tiamat's doing. No nonbelievers to say "Oh it was just worshipers mutating dragons in ways that they think their made-up deity would want them to". I guess I was excited to see Eberron's Cool New Take (tm) on Tiamat and was flipping pages ready to see what Cool New Take Dragons of Eberron would have on Bahamut... and then there was none. That makes me a sad, sad paladin. :(
Hellcow 11-13-07, 08:02 AM	I guess I was excited to see Eberron's Cool New Take (tm) on Tiamat and was flipping pages ready to see what Cool New Take Dragons of Eberron would have on Bahamut... and then there was none. That makes me a sad, sad paladin. :( Fair enough! Sorry to let you down.
Tanis_Nightroad 11-14-07, 04:48 PM	Perhaps it's going to be revealed in one of the newer books when they come out?
AvonRekaes 11-14-07, 05:05 PM	Hopefully. I mean, Chronepsis might be the Major Draconic Deity in Eberron because he fits the mindset of Argonessen's society so well, but there's still a lot of questions to be answered about Bahamut. Most importantly, what exactly is his connection to metallic dragons? Traditionally, Bahamut is the creator of the metallics, the most powerful one among them. That isn't possible in Eberron because all dragon breeds were created from the merging of Siberys and Eberron. So are they just going to ignore the metallic connection? I hope not, since they did something cool with Tiamat. Traditionally, she was the mother of the chromatics, and just like Bahamut fathering metallics, that couldn't be in Eberron. However, they did connect her to chromatics by saying they are more easily corrupted by her. So instead of just ignoring the Bahamut-metallic connection, I hope someday they do something cool with it.
Shady314 11-20-07, 06:36 AM	Likewise, if I have a local adept of the Devourer ranting that if people don't stop abusing natural resources the Devourer herself will swallow them... and then after they ignore her a giant tsunami strikes and literally swallows them into the sea.... with no evidence of mortal magic (even epic)... what does that really say? That the adept had prophetic visions of the future completely unrelated to his deity? That it was just a humongous coincidence? Or that a divine hand actually did stir the ocean against her enemies? In the face of evidence THAT damning, I have a hard time maintaining the skeptic's argument with any real effectiveness. :confused: This is exactly the sort of thing that happens in real life. Miracle or coincidence? The debates never been settled here why should that settle it in Eberron? Especially since you bring up prophetic visions. Divination magic REALLY blurs the line. It's damning just because he's an adept? What if he was an adept but he claimed the Great Magoo was behind it? What if he was a Medani prophet and said the exact same thing? Etc. I mean unless you intend for this sort of thing to happen hourly it's hardly definitive proof.
androkguz 11-25-07, 08:44 PM	I haven't read Dragons of Eberron but my recomendation is that this threat should move towards answering: How can we take a new and cool turn in Bahamut?
Wizardman 12-03-07, 02:56 AM	Most importantly, what exactly is his connection to metallic dragons? Traditionally, Bahamut is the creator of the metallics, the most powerful one among them. That isn't possible in Eberron because all dragon breeds were created from the merging of Siberys and Eberron. So are they just going to ignore the metallic connection? I hope not, since they did something cool with Tiamat. Traditionally, she was the mother of the chromatics, and just like Bahamut fathering metallics, that couldn't be in Eberron. However, they did connect her to chromatics by saying they are more easily corrupted by her. So instead of just ignoring the Bahamut-metallic connection, I hope someday they do something cool with it. Hmm... well, I suppose that they could have made Bahamut an unusually powerful couatl, possibly one of the most powerful of them, who was the major liaison with the dragons during the war and had repeatedly sacrificed his life preserving dragon lives whenever they went up against a rajah (this theory, of course, relies on Bahamut being powerful enough to be reborn with his memories rather than reincarnated, but if he was powerful enough to go a few rounds with a rajah then that shouldn't be a problem). He would have been one of the couatls who sacrificed himself to bind the rajahs, but he would have had enough of an impact on the dragons for them to elevate him to godhood much as they did Tiamat; a Son of Siberys to match the Daughter of Khyber. In order for this to really make sense, Bahamut would have had to suffer some very gruesome deaths as opposed to always being killed quickly in a fight. That being said-- we're dealing with the rajahs. I don't think that would have been a problem.
AvonRekaes 12-03-07, 04:13 PM	That's pretty good. In that sense, maybe Bahamut was a sinuous chinese-style dragon in Eberron, and he bears a resemblance to both dragon and couatl. I also like the idea of him repeatedly sacrificing himself going toe-to-toe with Overlords. Though that does seem to paint him as weaker than the Rajahs. Maybe he did slaughter a few of them as well, but they always came back just as he did, and he finally decided (or agreed with other couatls who decided) that the Rajahs had to be bound. I only have two problems with the idea, though. One, it's more or less just a repeat of Tiamat. It mirrors her nicely, but in doing so lacks a bit of originality. Two, it doesn't address Bahamut's connection to metallic dragons. Did he favor them for some reason? Was Tiamat able to pervert chromatics easier because she actually held sway over them or because Bahamut didn't extend his protection to any dragons but the metallic breeds? I think the biggest hurdle in addressing the Bahamut-metallic connection is that there's inherently going to be a sense of... favoritism that seems kinda wrong for a Lawful Good being. Why did this benevolent, compansionate entity, who is willing to bless "lesser beings" with his favor, withdraw protection or guidance from fully half of the draconic beings? Even if he didn't withdraw them, in what way is he more distantly related to Chromatics so that Tiamat may have more control over them? It's odd.
Wizardman 12-05-07, 04:31 AM	That's pretty good. In that sense, maybe Bahamut was a sinuous chinese-style dragon in Eberron, and he bears a resemblance to both dragon and couatl. I also like the idea of him repeatedly sacrificing himself going toe-to-toe with Overlords. Though that does seem to paint him as weaker than the Rajahs. Maybe he did slaughter a few of them as well, but they always came back just as he did, and he finally decided (or agreed with other couatls who decided) that the Rajahs had to be bound. Hmm... okay, there's nothing that says that the couatl's didn't have their versions of the rajahs. In fact, it would make more sense if they did have a few super-couatls in the ranks, if only to explain why the fiends didn't completely overwhelm them before the war started. I only have two problems with the idea, though. One, it's more or less just a repeat of Tiamat. It mirrors her nicely, but in doing so lacks a bit of originality. The mirroring is completely intentional. If Tiamat represents dragonkind's capacity for evil, then Bahamut must represent its capacity for good, and those concepts are mirrors of each other. Tiamat is a rajah, and if we are positing an actual counterpart which both mirrors her and fits the tone of Eberron, then we aren't left with a lot of choice. I suppose that Bahamut could be a powerful dragonlike angel from Syrania or Shavarath, but I don't see one of the lords of the planes coming to Eberron without a compelling reason, and we don't know enough about the planes to extrapolate a compelling reason. Besides-- if Tiamat is a rajah, then it just makes sense to me that Bahamut is some sort of insanely powerful couatl. Two, it doesn't address Bahamut's connection to metallic dragons. Did he favor them for some reason? Was Tiamat able to pervert chromatics easier because she actually held sway over them or because Bahamut didn't extend his protection to any dragons but the metallic breeds? You're about to address why I didn't go into it. I think the biggest hurdle in addressing the Bahamut-metallic connection is that there's inherently going to be a sense of... favoritism that seems kinda wrong for a Lawful Good being. Why did this benevolent, compansionate entity, who is willing to bless "lesser beings" with his favor, withdraw protection or guidance from fully half of the draconic beings? Even if he didn't withdraw them, in what way is he more distantly related to Chromatics so that Tiamat may have more control over them? It's odd. Exactly. The connection just doesn't make sense in a setting where subrace and alignment are completely separate. If I had to posit a reasonable explanation... ... ... okay, how about this: Just as Hezcalipa and Ourelonastrix had a close relationship, so did Bahamut and Dularanahk. Dularanahk became the founder of of a group of like-minded (all LG) dragons who eventually became known as the Platinum Warders of Bahamut, after the colour of Bahamut's scales. The Warders flew beside Bahamut in battle, and the most powerful of them even went up against the rajahs on occasion, such as Dularanahk's epic battle with the rajah Katashka. When the rajahs were defeated and Bahamut raised to godhood (as far as the dragons were concerned), the order changed its name from the Platinum Warders of Bahamut to the Sacred Warders of Bahamut, who later became the elite troops of the Light of Siberys. Over time, the original name was forgotten, but the same could not be said of one of Bahamut's titles: the Platinum Dragon. This was in the back of the minds of those dragons who agreed with Ourenilach's call for an anti-chromatic pogrom. If the chromatics were connected to Tiamat, it logically followed that the metallics were connected to Bahamut, who represented everything that is noble in a dragon's soul (while conveniently overlooking the full meaning of "noble"), and his title "the Platinum Dragon" served as proof to them. The anti-chromatic attitude never spread far, but the possibility of a connection between Bahamut and the metallics slowly took root and eventually became an accepted fact.
Hellcow 12-05-07, 12:53 PM	Hmm... okay, there's nothing that says that the couatl's didn't have their versions of the rajahs. In fact, it would make more sense if they did have a few super-couatls in the ranks, if only to explain why the fiends didn't completely overwhelm them before the war started. This seems plausible to me. And bear in mind that the Overlords of the Age of Demons aren't bound to a single shape; as such, this anti-rajah could be closer to the couatl in terms of his origin, but there's no reason that he couldn't also assume the form of a platinum dragon. This would also mean that Bahamut is a core force within the Silver Flame (perhaps some of the old serpent cults call it the Platinum Flame!). As the Silver Flame is SUPPOSED to be a religion based around principles of compassion - something people often overlook, focusing on the corruption and people who fail to live up to its ideals - this makes sense to me. With that said, I would limit the number of these anti-rajahs... perhaps going as far as to make Bahamut the only one. In general, the power was on the side of darkness, and the reason the couatl-dragon alliance had a chance is because they did work closely together; they had tactical superiority and greater numbers, while the Overlords were overconfident and divided amongst themselves. And even then, they still couldn't have been defeated without the couatl sacrifice. Multiple anti-rajahs would also downplay the role of the first Sovereigns, like Ourelonastrix, who after all were mortal dragons. I can't say if it's the path I'd take (because I haven't really sat down and considered all the possibilities), but I think it's a solid idea.
AvonRekaes 12-06-07, 01:01 AM	I think I liked that, that Bahamut's "metallic status" was in actuality a corruption of his original intent. He never favored the metallics but they just attributed that he did after he was raised to godhood. A minor corruption that adds to the "realness" of Eberron religion. Also, if Bahamut was the ONLY "anti-rajah" I think that would make him.. I dunno.. "special" enough that mirroring Tiamat isn't as much of a problem for me. So awesome ideas all around. Plus it has the quasi-seal of Keith semi-approval :D
eehamburg 12-06-07, 10:10 AM	Plus it has the quasi-seal of Keith semi-approval :D With the baked home goodness right inside. :D
AvonRekaes 12-07-07, 10:44 AM	One last bit about Bahamut being a "couatl overlord". Does that make him psionic, like the couatl? This runs counter to some of the fluff in Dragons of Eberron that basically says "Dragons and Psionics Don't Play Nice". Of course, Bahamut wouldn't really be a dragon (rather, he'd be a native outsider in the general shape of a dragon) so him being psionic doesn't really negate the fluff...
Hellcow 12-07-07, 06:31 PM	One last bit about Bahamut being a "couatl overlord". Well, you really address this yourself. He wouldn't be a couatl any more than he'd be a dragon; he'd be a native outsider of tremendous power drawing on the energies of Siberys. "Overlord" was introduced as a word in part because people often assumed that "Rakshasa rajahs" were essentially high hit-die rakshasas, whereas in fact while they are both native outsiders of Khyber they aren't directly linked. So it COULD mean that he'd be psionic, if you decide that there is psionic potential bound in Siberys. But the fact that couatl are psionic doesn't automatically mean that a Bahamut-as-Siberys-Overlord would have to be psionic... because he's not a couatl. Still, it certainly could if that's what you wanted!
Wizardman 12-08-07, 03:14 AM	This would also mean that Bahamut is a core force within the Silver Flame (perhaps some of the old serpent cults call it the Platinum Flame!). As the Silver Flame is SUPPOSED to be a religion based around principles of compassion - something people often overlook, focusing on the corruption and people who fail to live up to its ideals - this makes sense to me. Bahamut as a driving force of the Silver Flame? Or should I say-- the Platinum Flame? OOH. I think I just had a nerdgasm. Coming from someone who likes the idea of seemingly different faiths being intertwined in reality, I say that yours is a brilliant idea, sir. I can't say if it's the path I'd take (because I haven't really sat down and considered all the possibilities), but I think it's a solid idea. You do? :mymy: :OMG! :bounce: :cloud9: I think I liked that, that Bahamut's "metallic status" was in actuality a corruption of his original intent. He never favored the metallics but they just attributed that he did after he was raised to godhood. A minor corruption that adds to the "realness" of Eberron religion. Also, if Bahamut was the ONLY "anti-rajah" I think that would make him.. I dunno.. "special" enough that mirroring Tiamat isn't as much of a problem for me. So awesome ideas all around. Plus it has the quasi-seal of Keith semi-approval :D Yay for the Quasi-Seal of Keith Semi-Approval! As for the rest... the seeming distance of the deities is one of the big qualities of Eberronian gods. Bahamut wouldn't play favourites, but that wouldn't stop some dragons from saying that he did, and for their idea to (very wrongly) take root. And as you and Hellcow both said, Bahamut would definitely work best as the only anti-Rajah. It makes him much more special. Well, you really address this yourself. He wouldn't be a couatl any more than he'd be a dragon; he'd be a native outsider of tremendous power drawing on the energies of Siberys. "Overlord" was introduced as a word in part because people often assumed that "Rakshasa rajahs" were essentially high hit-die rakshasas, whereas in fact while they are both native outsiders of Khyber they aren't directly linked. So it COULD mean that he'd be psionic, if you decide that there is psionic potential bound in Siberys. But the fact that couatl are psionic doesn't automatically mean that a Bahamut-as-Siberys-Overlord would have to be psionic... because he's not a couatl. Still, it certainly could if that's what you wanted! Going by what the dragons seem to believe, the dragons are the children of Siberys and Eberron (or Siberys and Khyber, as some anti-chromatics believe about chromatics). In contrast, the couatls are the children of Siberys alone. Who is to say that the power they tap is the same as the power that the dragons tap? Maybe it's the "impurities" in the dragons which make psionics bad for them, where it is perfectly okay for all the children of Siberys alone, or of Eberron alone, or maybe even of Khyber alone. Or... what if not all psionics stem from Dal Quor or Xoriat? What if the lingering spiritual energy of Siberys has another application beyond arcane and/or divine magic?
pogrom666 12-10-07, 04:11 PM	A somewhat not associated with this thread but I'll ask it anyway question: What made you decide to change the way that dragons worked? They have a legendary status in the gaming world in that colors are bad and metals are good, but you (Keith) threw that out the window. What prompted that?
AvonRekaes 12-10-07, 05:56 PM	No offense pogrom, but I don't want this thread to devolve into a discussion about whether Eberron should or shouldn't adhere to old tropes when it comes to dragons. I'm only interested in Bahamut's role in Eberron, and the impact he might have given already accepted cannon concerning draconic society. (I.E. "meltallics are good/chromatics are evil" is already accepted as not a part of draconic society, so discussions of why it isn't are irrelevant to Bahamut's role in a society where there is no distinction.) Back on topic, I figured out a good reason why Bahamut is the only "son of Siberys" while Tiamat is just one among many overlords spawned by Khyber. Siberys is described as being noble in all the myths. Even though the energies associated with him (godless clerics, arcane magic, possibly psionics) can be used for both good and evil, it's safe to assume the Progenitor Wyrm himself was Good in alignment. So Siberys fought with Khyber to protect creation from his sibling's evil. When he realized that Khyber was going to kill him he might have had one final thought, that Khyber would next attack Eberron. His final act was to create a being to protect his other sibling, and all of her creations. This being was, of course, Bahamut. (And since he was created by Siberys for the sole purpose of protecting, that is one of his major aspects and portfolios). In fact, this version of the myth sort of dates Bahamut's birth as prior to that of the world itself (and the Rajah Overlords). Perhaps even if Bahamut was to remain a distant god with no direct contact in the world, he could still be the Son of Siberys and the patron of Couatls (his younger siblings).