Bahamut & Tiamat alignment views? - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 Matau99 Mar 17, 2015 18:39:28	So, there have been a couple things that have bothered me. In the Player's Handbook, Tiamat is described as Lawful Evil. But in the RoT adventure, her monster entry says Chaotic Evil. Which is she? Additionally, I've seen dramatically varied interpretations on what Bahamut's idea of "Good" is. Some people say that the extermination of every chromatic dragon in the multiverse would be the best day of his life; others say he's a god of enlightened justice and thus believes in mercy. I even read somewhere that he tries his hardest to never kill an enemy (even a chromatic), but instead to polymorph them into a harmless form. In the same vein, I've seen sources say that Bahamut and Tiamat hate each other, and others which say Bahamut wants to redeem his sister. Finally, is Bahamut god of good dragons, or metallic dragons (and Tiamat evil or chromatic?) I ask because there have been good-aligned chromatics (and probably evil metallics, though I don't know for sure) in official D&D products in earlier editions. Can someone help me out? Thanks in advance!
#2 MonsterEnvy Mar 18, 2015 2:03:34	Tiamat is Lawful Evil and always has been. The entry in th RoT was a mistake. She is stated to be Lawful Evil in the both the PHB and DMG so those should be taken over RoT for 5e as well. As for the rest of your questions I will talk about them later after I rest for a bit.
#3 QwertyAzerty Mar 18, 2015 6:43:39	Matau99 wrote:
#4 Mephi1234 Mar 18, 2015 8:41:41	Matau99 wrote:
#5 Mephi1234 Mar 18, 2015 9:34:13	Yes it's a cool story that succubus who became a Lawfull Good paladin, but those simply cannot exist because demon, devil, and chromatic dragon, Rahkhasa, exist to be evil, and cannot not be evil. They can fake being good, to betray you, but betrayal is consider being evil and usually cancel all the good intention they might had have while faking being good. And undead, the lesser undead (skeleton, zombies) simply follow the command of there creator. The medium undead (vampire, ghouls, ghast), follow there evil instinct and exist only to be evil. The higher undead (vampire Lord, Lich etc...) the transformation or the ritual require to get transform will make them evil. you cannot have a good align Lich, even if the most Lawfull Good Wizard in existance wanted to beccome Lich in order to be able to keep protecting the world, the knowledge require to learn the ritual is evil by definition and just still wanting to go trought the ritual would be enought to make you evil. Then actually doing the ritual make you a real Evil mastermind, then the magic involve in the transformation will shred any part of good left in your being to make you completly evil and as long that you still ahve a shred of goodness in your soul, the ritual cannot be completed.
#6 Mechatarrasque Mar 18, 2015 13:13:03	I always figured Bahamut would be pretty happy to have a red dragon get redeemed into being a good dragon, and Tiamat would be happy to tarnish (to borrow a phrase from Pathfinder) a silver dragon. I prefer to think of the dragons as: White--isolationist Black--really territorial Green--thinks of mortal races as soap operas Blue--migratory (follows big storm systems) Red--status driven Gold--likes to be in charge, but doesn't always care who knows about it Silver--prone to strong religious belief Bronze--likes living as one of the "little people" Copper--mercurial Brass--likes to talk This opens up the dragons for good or evil. A red dragon could be a good but would want to be the most famous hero on the planet (and if she was, even the most evil red dragons would [secretly] applaud because everyone knows who she is.) A bronze dragon could emerse himself into the role of being a really evil dwarf crime lord. I have Tiamat claiming evil dragons, but most dragons don't have strong religious beliefs, she rarely gets to claim their souls (she does create dragonish creatures whenever she can). I have her being the power behind cults and wizards that create dracoliches, as that ties them to her (something that most dragons are unaware of). I have Bahamut being the explemar of "with great power comes great responsibility." He tries to encourage all dragons to be good. He has better luck with the silvers than Tiamat does, and pretty much every gold dragon will swear with a straight face that he is Bahamut's blessing on the world (regardless of how good or bad the gold dragon is acting).
#7 Matau99 Mar 18, 2015 12:35:25	QwertyAzerty wrote:
#8 Mephi1234 Mar 18, 2015 13:38:48	Matau99 wrote:
#9 daspian Mar 18, 2015 16:30:36	Mephi1234 wrote:
#10 Mephi1234 Mar 19, 2015 4:59:52	daspian wrote:
#11 Kazadvorn Mar 19, 2015 7:08:19	One of the big changes in the 4e monster folio was to somewhat disconnect 'alignment' from the 'monster genre'... So, in 4e, while Metallic Dragons tended to be more 'good' than Chromatic Dragons... there were exceptions. If I remember correctly, the Iron Dragon - a Metallic - tended more towards 'evil' or 'selfish' behavior than some of the other Metallics. Chromatics were similarly given a wider range of acceptable behaviors... A Red Dragon might be a more or less benevolent dictator... at least in terms of her treatment of her minions. In my games, I try to avoid racial steriotypes for sentient beings. Goblins are not always evil, Dwarves are not always lawful, Elves are not always good, Orcs are not always chaotic.
(Reply to #8) Mechatarrasque	Mephi1234 wrote:
(Reply to #3) arnwolf666	QwertyAzerty wrote:
#14 Mephi1234 Mar 20, 2015 12:16:17	New... direction? As far as I'm aware, its the old, original direction. I agree that I don't care for the idea of color coded personalities, no matter what race of beings, but its hardly "new."
#15 cbwjm Mar 20, 2015 14:57:22	There have definitely been exceptions to dragons and the tendency towards good and evil in past editions. I tend to think of it as nature vs nurture; It is in the metallic dragon's nature to be good but even they can be shaped by their environment and become evil, same with chromatics. Of course, each campaign is going to be different and in many cases will probably have no exceptions to the standard alignment which is fine, there is no need to change the alignment just for the sake of changing it.
#16 Matau99 Mar 20, 2015 15:16:49	cbwjm wrote:

Post/Author/DateTime

Post

Matau99

Mar 17, 2015 18:39:28

So, there have been a couple things that have bothered me. In the Player's Handbook, Tiamat is described as Lawful Evil. But in the RoT adventure, her monster entry says Chaotic Evil. Which is she?

Additionally, I've seen dramatically varied interpretations on what Bahamut's idea of "Good" is. Some people say that the extermination of every chromatic dragon in the multiverse would be the best day of his life; others say he's a god of enlightened justice and thus believes in mercy. I even read somewhere that he tries his hardest to never kill an enemy (even a chromatic), but instead to polymorph them into a harmless form.

In the same vein, I've seen sources say that Bahamut and Tiamat hate each other, and others which say Bahamut wants to redeem his sister.

Finally, is Bahamut god of good dragons, or metallic dragons (and Tiamat evil or chromatic?) I ask because there have been good-aligned chromatics (and probably evil metallics, though I don't know for sure) in official D&D products in earlier editions.

Can someone help me out?

Thanks in advance!

MonsterEnvy

Mar 18, 2015 2:03:34

Tiamat is Lawful Evil and always has been. The entry in th RoT was a mistake. She is stated to be Lawful Evil in the both the PHB and DMG so those should be taken over RoT for 5e as well.

As for the rest of your questions I will talk about them later after I rest for a bit.

QwertyAzerty

Mar 18, 2015 6:43:39

Matau99 wrote:

Mephi1234

Mar 18, 2015 8:41:41

Matau99 wrote:

Mephi1234

Mar 18, 2015 9:34:13

Yes it's a cool story that succubus who became a Lawfull Good paladin, but those simply cannot exist because demon, devil, and chromatic dragon, Rahkhasa, exist to be evil, and cannot not be evil. They can fake being good, to betray you, but betrayal is consider being evil and usually cancel all the good intention they might had have while faking being good. And undead, the lesser undead (skeleton, zombies) simply follow the command of there creator. The medium undead (vampire, ghouls, ghast), follow there evil instinct and exist only to be evil. The higher undead (vampire Lord, Lich etc...) the transformation or the ritual require to get transform will make them evil. you cannot have a good align Lich, even if the most Lawfull Good Wizard in existance wanted to beccome Lich in order to be able to keep protecting the world, the knowledge require to learn the ritual is evil by definition and just still wanting to go trought the ritual would be enought to make you evil. Then actually doing the ritual make you a real Evil mastermind, then the magic involve in the transformation will shred any part of good left in your being to make you completly evil and as long that you still ahve a shred of goodness in your soul, the ritual cannot be completed.

Mechatarrasque

Mar 18, 2015 13:13:03

I always figured Bahamut would be pretty happy to have a red dragon get redeemed into being a good dragon, and Tiamat would be happy to tarnish (to borrow a phrase from Pathfinder) a silver dragon.

I prefer to think of the dragons as:

White--isolationist

Black--really territorial

Green--thinks of mortal races as soap operas

Blue--migratory (follows big storm systems)

Red--status driven

Gold--likes to be in charge, but doesn't always care who knows about it

Silver--prone to strong religious belief

Bronze--likes living as one of the "little people"

Copper--mercurial

Brass--likes to talk

This opens up the dragons for good or evil. A red dragon could be a good but would want to be the most famous hero on the planet (and if she was, even the most evil red dragons would [secretly] applaud because everyone knows who she is.) A bronze dragon could emerse himself into the role of being a really evil dwarf crime lord.

I have Tiamat claiming evil dragons, but most dragons don't have strong religious beliefs, she rarely gets to claim their souls (she does create dragonish creatures whenever she can). I have her being the power behind cults and wizards that create dracoliches, as that ties them to her (something that most dragons are unaware of). I have Bahamut being the explemar of "with great power comes great responsibility." He tries to encourage all dragons to be good. He has better luck with the silvers than Tiamat does, and pretty much every gold dragon will swear with a straight face that he is Bahamut's blessing on the world (regardless of how good or bad the gold dragon is acting).

Matau99

Mar 18, 2015 12:35:25

QwertyAzerty wrote:

Mephi1234

Mar 18, 2015 13:38:48

Matau99 wrote:

daspian

Mar 18, 2015 16:30:36

Mephi1234 wrote:

#10

Mephi1234

Mar 19, 2015 4:59:52

daspian wrote:

#11

Kazadvorn

Mar 19, 2015 7:08:19

One of the big changes in the 4e monster folio was to somewhat disconnect 'alignment' from the 'monster genre'...

So, in 4e, while Metallic Dragons tended to be more 'good' than Chromatic Dragons... there were exceptions. If I remember correctly, the Iron Dragon - a Metallic - tended more towards 'evil' or 'selfish' behavior than some of the other Metallics.

Chromatics were similarly given a wider range of acceptable behaviors... A Red Dragon might be a more or less benevolent dictator... at least in terms of her treatment of her minions.

In my games, I try to avoid racial steriotypes for sentient beings. Goblins are not always evil, Dwarves are not always lawful, Elves are not always good, Orcs are not always chaotic.

(Reply to #8)

Mechatarrasque

Mephi1234 wrote:

(Reply to #3)

arnwolf666

QwertyAzerty wrote:

#14

Mephi1234

Mar 20, 2015 12:16:17

New... direction? As far as I'm aware, its the old, original direction.

I agree that I don't care for the idea of color coded personalities, no matter what race of beings, but its hardly "new."

#15

cbwjm

Mar 20, 2015 14:57:22

There have definitely been exceptions to dragons and the tendency towards good and evil in past editions. I tend to think of it as nature vs nurture; It is in the metallic dragon's nature to be good but even they can be shaped by their environment and become evil, same with chromatics. Of course, each campaign is going to be different and in many cases will probably have no exceptions to the standard alignment which is fine, there is no need to change the alignment just for the sake of changing it.

#16

Matau99

Mar 20, 2015 15:16:49

cbwjm wrote: