Why is Tiamat weaker than other dragons, like Tchazzar?

[MartianPrince]

In both RoT and Fizban's, Tiamat is said to be CR 30. Now here are some epic-level dragons:

Tchazzar, CR 40
Inferno, CR 40
Palarandusk, CR 36
Raulothim, CR 34

What gives? Even if the "Tiamat" in RoT and Fizban's is an avatar, would her avatar's power level really be so much lower than these epic-level dragons?

I'd prefer in-universe answers. That being said, I've heard it argued that really the way Fizban presents Tiamat is closer to a CR of 35, but in 5e 30 is the cap for CRs, so they just stuck with that. Thoughts?

[Unoriginal]

In both RoT and Fizban's, Tiamat is said to be CR 30. Now here are some epic-level dragons:

Tchazzar, CR 40
Inferno, CR 40
Palarandusk, CR 36
Raulothim, CR 34


This is incorrect for this edition, as no 5e creature can be higher than CR 30.

[PhoenixPhyre]

This is incorrect for this edition, as no 5e creature can be higher than CR 30.

Right. Those other dragons don't exist as started entities in 5e. So their strength is unknown at this time.

Remember, OP, CR is not a world-measurable quantity. It's purely game layer. So whatever else is true, it doesn't translate between editions at all.

[Pixel_Kitsune]

Also neither stat blocks are actually Tiamat last I checked, just aspects of her.

IE, she spins off little pieces of herself that don't weaken the real her in any significant way but are that strong individually.

Think of it like using Wish to toss out Simulacrums.

[Osuniev]

Also neither stat blocks are actually Tiamat last I checked, just aspects of her.

IE, she spins off little pieces of herself that don't weaken the real her in any significant way but are that strong individually.

Think of it like using Wish to toss out Simulacrums.

Chris Perkins is on record saying that CR30 Tiamat is the real Tiamat : https://www.sageadvice.eu/is-the-stat-block-for-tiamat-a-full-representation-of-her-capabilities-as-a-deity/

[T.G. Oskar]

In both RoT and Fizban's, Tiamat is said to be CR 30. Now here are some epic-level dragons:

Tchazzar, CR 40
Inferno, CR 40
Palarandusk, CR 36
Raulothim, CR 34


As Unoriginal said, this is pretty sus.

Based off Fizban's, Raulothim counts as an Ancient Emerald Dragon, so his CR should be vastly lower (21 for starters). Tchazzar's stats match its 3.x incarnation (http://rpg.nobl.ca/archive.php?x=dnd/ex/20060802b&page=2), which is two editions behind. (And even in that edition, Tchazzar has a template and class levels - without Fiendish, its CR would be 38 and without the class levels, his CR would be 28; without both, its CR would be 26, which is just around the ballpark for a Chromatic Greatwyrm without taking into account comparisons between stats.

For starters, Tchazzar has 52 HD, of which 40 are from being a dragon and 12 are from its Prestige Class. For comparison, an Ancient Red has 28 HD and a Chromatic Greatwyrm has 26. That's nearly twice as much Hit Dice as allowed - which means Tchazzar would need to be reduced to 26 HD.

Second, its AC is off the charts, but again we're dealing with 3.x scores - AC 50, compared to AC 22 for an Ancient Red and Chromatic Greatwyrm. At best, Ancient Red Dragons have +12 AC whereas Chromatic Greatwyrms have a +11 based off natural armor alone; Tchazzar has a +39 from natural armor PLUS a +9 from its Charisma (albeit a -8 penalty from size).

Third, 5e has no stats over 30, and even the aspect of Tiamat respects that. 3.x had no stat limit - therefore, Tchazzar has a whopping 46 Str and 31 Con. That translates into a +8 increase in to-hit and damage with its attacks.

Fourth, its bite and claws are far superior than the norm, dealing 4d8 and 4d6 damage respectively. That's a vast improvement over 2d10 and 2d8, which are the damage for bite and claws of Ancient Red and Greatwyrm. (Not to mention that Ancient Reds and Greatwyrms make 3 attacks per turn, whereas dragons in 3.x could make up to 6 - 1 bite, 2 claws, 2 wing attacks + tail slap.)

Fifth, Tchazzar's breath weapon deals 24d10 damage. In comparison, Ancient Reds deal 26d6 damage and Greatwyrms deal 12d12 damage. The averages are way, way lower than expected.

Sixth, Tchazzar has the spellcasting ability of a 19th-level Sorcerer - a 19th level Sorcerer from 3.x, mind you. That means it can cast more 6th, 7th, 8th and 9th level spells than 5e Sorcerers will ever do. Some of those even act as if Paladin smites, except enhancing breath weapons. (Did I mention he also has innate spells?)

Seventh, Tchazzar has a ton of immunities that Ancient Reds and Greatwyrms lack.

Eighth, consider that Tchazzar has the equivalent of Great Weapon Mastery for all its attacks - an extra attack if they take down a target AND the extra damage for to-hit reduction. And also 3.x's equivalent of divine smite, which is vastly more limited but adds Charisma to-hit anyways.

Ninth, the Aspect of Tiamat in 3.x was vastly inferior to the aspect in 5e. Aspects of gods in 3.x were CR 10 at best, and vastly nerfed; aspects of archdevils and demon princes likely so. The official stats for Tiamat, though, make her far superior to Tchazzar; three less HD, three points higher Strength and 4 points higher Constitution, five bites, five different breath weapons with damage ranging from 12d6 to 24d10 damage which can be used in the same turn, spellcasting as a 20th-level sorcerer, and literal divine powers. (And no CR, BTW!)

So, at least for purposes of one of your examples, it's stats are widely misleading. It's most likely the same for the other three - in fact, I also found 3.x's Raulothim (https://www.realmshelps.net/npc/wyrms/raulothim.shtml) and Paralandusk (https://www.realmshelps.net/npc/wyrms/palarandusk.shtml), and even a 5e conversion of Imvaernarho (https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/fz7nyk/imvaernarhro_inferno_of_the_star_mounts_a_cr_40/), which would be "Inferno", which coincidentally fit the CR of all four creatures. (Note that the last one is homebrewed and most likely lifted from Power of Faerun in 3.5.

So...yeah, definitely wrong edition.

[Pixel_Kitsune]

Chris Perkins is on record saying that CR30 Tiamat is the real Tiamat : https://www.sageadvice.eu/is-the-stat-block-for-tiamat-a-full-representation-of-her-capabilities-as-a-deity/

Real books trump sage advice. Perkins said that in 2017.

Meanwhile Fizban's specifically states the stat block is an "Aspect of Tiamat" and to quote the entry "Many of her followers have attempted to break her out of Avernus—and failed—but even while she remains in the Nine Hells, Tiamat can send her aspect to manifest in the Material Plane."

[Chronos]

I like to imagine that a deity's aspect has no single fixed power level. The deity can put whatever fraction of their power into their aspect that they choose, depending on need. The CR 30 one is about right for wiping out a party of pesky high-level mortals, so that's what Tiamat invests in the aspect in Rise of Tiamat, but if she just needed to deliver a message to a faithful follower, she could send a CR 1 aspect, and if she needed to deliver some unrighteous smackdown on a bunch of legendary great wyrms who were disrespecting her, she could send an aspect of CR 40 or 50 as required.

[Mastikator]

Aspect of Tiamat from Fizban's is slightly weaker than Tiamat from Decent into Avernus. So it's fair that the aspect is just an aspect and the Tiamat is the real deal.

[Pixel_Kitsune]

You know, I can't say I agree, but that's personal preference and lore. I'd still argue that the BG is an aspect as well, perhaps that's the most physical a god can get in 5e? Do we have any other Deities taking physical form anywhere? But even in BG it specifies beating the creature doesn't actually kill Tiamat, it mildly inconveniences her. And probably earns you a major enemy.

But then again, I'm looking at the BG Tiamat and... It's not weak, at all. ... And I was going to type more before I re-remembered that for some reason some are comparing 5e stats to 3.X....

[JackPhoenix]

You know, I can't say I agree, but that's personal preference and lore. I'd still argue that the BG is an aspect as well, perhaps that's the most physical a god can get in 5e? Do we have any other Deities taking physical form anywhere? But even in BG it specifies beating the creature doesn't actually kill Tiamat, it mildly inconveniences her. And probably earns you a major enemy.

But then again, I'm looking at the BG Tiamat and... It's not weak, at all. ... And I was going to type more before I re-remembered that for some reason some are comparing 5e stats to 3.X....

Auril in IWD:RotFM is the real deal, though weakened by spending her power to keep the area frozen, and her 3 successive forms are CR 9, 10 and 11.

[Zhorn]

Auril in IWD:RotFM is the real deal, though weakened by spending her power to keep the area frozen, and her 3 successive forms are CR 9, 10 and 11.
And even there; Auril cannot be truly killed. Defeating her just sends her away to be dormant for a while.
"a god who has mortal worshipers can't truly die" [ID:RotFM p261]
So even if they say it's the real deal; it's still functionally an aspect/avatar.
Which I think is the best way to look at it when dealing with any deity level beings.
Don't look at the statblocks and compare them as 'this mortal creature is stronger than a god', because functionally they are not operating in the same game space when one would receive a game-over when they die and the other just gets a respawn countdown.

[JackPhoenix]

And even there; Auril cannot be truly killed. Defeating her just sends her away to be dormant for a while.
"a god who has mortal worshipers can't truly die" [ID:RotFM p261]
So even if they say it's the real deal; it's still functionally an aspect/avatar.
Which I think is the best way to look at it when dealing with any deity level beings.
Don't look at the statblocks and compare them as 'this mortal creature is stronger than a god', because functionally they are not operating in the same game space when one would receive a game-over when they die and the other just gets a respawn countdown.

That's specifically a FR thing. It does not necessarily hold true in other settings.

[Zevox]

That's specifically a FR thing. It does not necessarily hold true in other settings.
It's not even true in the Forgotten Realms, frankly, just sounds like something they made up to justify fighting Auril in that adventure. Gods dying while still having worshippers has definitely happened in FR plenty of times - although outside of extreme circumstances like the Time of Troubles it tends to take a lot more than just some adventuring party to do it.

[Kish]

It's not even true in the Forgotten Realms, frankly, just sounds like something they made up to justify fighting Auril in that adventure. Gods dying while still having worshippers has definitely happened in FR plenty of times - although outside of extreme circumstances like the Time of Troubles it tends to take a lot more than just some adventuring party to do it.
Oh? Which gods have died and not come back in 5ed?

[Mastikator]

Whether a creature counts as a deity is a pretty arbitrary thing in D&D. Creatures like Tharzidun, Hadar and Cthulhu are described as "Elder Evils" and not gods, yet are more powerful than some deities. As far as I can tell whether a creature is a deity is a matter of opinion.

[Zevox]

Oh? Which gods have died and not come back in 5ed?
Why are you excluding ones that they brought back in 5e? It's not like their deaths were retconned to have never happened, they were just resurrected.

Even doing that though, there are a number of them: Mystryl, the first Mystra, Moander, Gilgleam (and most of the Untheric pantheon), Iyachtu Xvim, Eshowdow, Ibrandul, Othea. Debateably Tyche. Technically Karsus. Probably more obscure ones that aren't coming to mind for me.

Heck, I think the only clear cases of deities who died due to loss of worshippers are Auppenser and Amauntor, at least that I know of.

[Unoriginal]

That's specifically a FR thing. It does not necessarily hold true in other settings.


It's not even true in the Forgotten Realms, frankly, just sounds like something they made up to justify fighting Auril in that adventure. Gods dying while still having worshippers has definitely happened in FR plenty of times - although outside of extreme circumstances like the Time of Troubles it tends to take a lot more than just some adventuring party to do it.


Whether a creature counts as a deity is a pretty arbitrary thing in D&D. Creatures like Tharzidun, Hadar and Cthulhu are described as "Elder Evils" and not gods, yet are more powerful than some deities. As far as I can tell whether a creature is a deity is a matter of opinion.

That is incorrect.

Being a deity in 5e means that:

-you gain power from worship

-you can empower mortals into Clerics

-you can only be truly killed by something that has its own divine spark and/or by having all your worshipers annihilated (resurrection not excluded)

Tharizdun is explicitly both a god and an Elder Evil (as well as a Great Old One).

Additionally, the specific FR rule is that incarnating in the Forgotten Realms results in the god only having access to a fraction of their power (because Ao made the decree gods aren't allowed to wreck the setting as much as usual since the last time they did it.

Auril does die if you kill her three incarnations, but since she still has worshipers it just means she has to leave the Material Plane for a while and she will come back next winter.

Unsurprisingly death of their mortal plane body doesn't mean much for extraplanar beings who are known for being able to miracle people back to life.

Heck, you do meet dead, worshiper-less gods in Tomb of Annihilation, and they can still interact with the living (at least when possessing a mortal) and grant some measure of power.


Why are you excluding ones that they brought back in 5e? It's not like their deaths were retconned to have never happened, they were just resurrected.

The Dead Three even takes pride in the fact they came back.

[Zhorn]

That's specifically a FR thing. It does not necessarily hold true in other settings.
Certainly. But the point is in the example you gave of a deity taking a physical form; even though it says it's actually her, the same book establishes it's still functionally an avatar even if they call it something else.
"You can kill Auril in this adventure... though she's not truly dead when you do it... But you did successfully killed a god... only she'll just come back next winter, not undead, but still fully living... But we swear you really killed her!"
Other settings can do other things, sure. But we're talking about the same deity example within the same setting, drawing our info from the same book.

I get people love the idea of being able to kill god in their campaigns. Session one you're skirmishing with Boblin and his giant rat, Phteven, and by session forty you're killing the cosmic manifestation of Time and Waffles. Sure, let folks have their fun.
I just find the whole concept farcical.
I like how the did the Auril confrontation. Her form is weakened (explaining why it is within striking range of the party) and if you beat it back she cannot meddle in that material plane for some time (making the victory functionally meaningful for the adventure). I think as a general approach; that's how most of these combats with deities should be handled. I just think we should be clear and honest on the "this isn't actually killing a god" aspect.
Give a god's avatar stats the party can tango with, sure.
But the god itself is not the statblock, and shouldn't be thought to have one.

Shifting this back to MartianPrince's thread topic is also what I'd like to emphasize. A mortal being (an ancient dragon who is an outlier even amongst their own peers) getting strong enough to throw around their weight better than a deity's avatar on the material plane is an impressive feat. BUT it is not that measurement that matters in the end.
A large enough force martialled to kill the mortal dragon is likely to end that threat forever.
A large enough force martialled to kill the deity's avatar is just a fancy banish with extra steps, one which the deity will be getting back up from given enough time.

[Pixel_Kitsune]

Shifting this back to MartianPrince's thread topic is also what I'd like to emphasize. A mortal being (an ancient dragon who is an outlier even amongst their own peers) getting strong enough to throw around their weight better than a deity's avatar on the material plane is an impressive feat. BUT it is not that measurement that matters in the end.
A large enough force martialled to kill the mortal dragon is likely to end that threat forever.
A large enough force martialled to kill the deity's avatar is just a fancy banish with extra steps, one which the deity will be getting back up from given enough time.

Also of note, if we take Fizban's into account, Tiamat isn't actually a god. Something similar but her and Bahamut are unique. The other dragon gods aren't gods either, they're Dragons who have managed to sync up their echos on different worlds. So in theory something COULD get as strong or stronger than Tiamat if they managed to link all of their Echos together into a singular being. (I'm seeing it as something like Jet Li's The One. Tiamat and Bahamut are what they are because there's not an echo of them on each prime world, they just are, across them all.)

[Zhorn]

Also of note, if we take Fizban's into account, Tiamat isn't actually a god.
Oh? That's a departure to my understanding. Which page am I looking up for a reference. I'd like to read more on this take.

[Pixel_Kitsune]

Oh? That's a departure to my understanding. Which page am I looking up for a reference. I'd like to read more on this take.

I apologize for not having the page number, don't have a physical book with me. But it's the Gods and Religion and to a lesser extent the Echoes Across Worlds sections in Chapter 3 of Fizban's

Of note:
"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—worshiped by mortal creatures, able to grant cleric spells to their followers, and both ageless and immortal."

"Dragons view the primordial dragons differently. To metallic dragons, Bahamut is more like a king than a god. Individual dragons might owe Bahamut allegiance, respect him, pay tribute to him, and strive to emulate him. Similarly, chromatic dragons might fear, respect, envy, and appease Tiamat as a sovereign. But none of those attitudes and behaviors bear any resemblance in a dragon’s mind to the worship that mortals offer to their gods."

And then in regard to some of the other Dragon Gods.
"A few other dragons also command reverence from their kin. These are often greatwyrms who have undergone a sort of apotheosis, joining multiple echoes of themselves into a single powerful form. A few are ancient dragons who have cultivated their dragonsight to such a degree that they can coordinate the actions of their echoes across the Material Plane, influencing events on multiple worlds at once. Humanoids might consider these dragons gods, but as with Bahamut and Tiamat, dragons respect these figures for their wisdom, their might, their magic, and their wealth; they don’t worship them. Such enlightened dragons include Aasterinian (a brass dragon who serves as a messenger for Bahamut and is sometimes identified as a god of invention), Chronepsis (a black dragon who now resides in the Outlands, sometimes imagined as a god of fate), and Tamara (a silver dragon of transcendent beneficence, described as a god of life).

[Mastikator]

Dragons kinda seem to blur the line between mortal and god. The line "These are often greatwyrms who have undergone a sort of apotheosis" is telling because apotheosis means to become a god. There are several creatures that qualify for some of the criteria of what constitutes a god (power from worship, can create clerics, is immortal), does that make them demigods? There are settings where the criteria is very strict (like FR and Theros) but also settings where there aren't any gods, or there are but have no reliance on worship, but these settings still have clerics (eberron, darksun).

For example Orcus is often worshipped as a god, and gives clerics their power, but is canonically not a god. Akadi, Grumbar, Istishia and Kossuth are listed in the SCAG pantheon yet they are primoridals and not gods, yet you can be a cleric of Akadi. Or a warlock of Akadi.

I think it boils down to this: whether Tiamat is actually a god is a matter of opinion.

[Pixel_Kitsune]

I think it boils down to this: whether Tiamat is actually a god is a matter of opinion.

Or it's such a matter of minutia and detail that wouldn't matter to a mortal. Either or definitely not here to argue that part.

More just playing devil's advocate and saying if Tiamat and Bahamut are what they are because they're First Dragons from the first world before the multiverse, and that's why they're so powerful, then in theory could another dragon fusing ALL of their echoes achieve a similar state.

We already know of some examples of things getting close. Chronepsis is not as powerful as those two, but IS a being who has worshippers and grants cleric spells. But despite that, according to the 5e lore, he started as normal black dragon.

[Chronos]

Heck, forget about dragons: Some humans have become gods. Cuthbert and Vecna were both once human, and they're both part of the standard pantheon.

[Arkhios]

Guys... my troll senses are tingling :smallsmile:

[Pixel_Kitsune]

Guys... my troll senses are tingling :smallsmile:

I assumed such a while ago, but it's been a fun discussion so no concern.

[Theodoxus]

Why is Tiamat weaker than other dragon, like Tchazzar?

Because I'm a human endowed with unbelievable power, and I simply willed it so. Sorry if Tiamat is like your favorite, or whatever. I prefer mine with 100% more Marduk.

Man, being a DM is so freeing!

[JackPhoenix]

Certainly. But the point is in the example you gave of a deity taking a physical form; even though it says it's actually her, the same book establishes it's still functionally an avatar even if they call it something else.
"You can kill Auril in this adventure... though she's not truly dead when you do it... But you did successfully killed a god... only she'll just come back next winter, not undead, but still fully living... But we swear you really killed her!"

Coming back after being killed on the Material Plane doesn't make you special in D&D. Half of the Monster Manual does that. Hell, if that makes something an avatar, then mortals are all just avatars too, as their souls will just come back in some form in the Outer Planes after death.

[Zhorn]

Fair enough. In a fiction where so many different authors are making up their own lore with 'like statblock but +1' and 'special OC with double immortality', trying to establish a concrete basis will get mired up in the whataboutisms.
I've expressed my preference as that is what feels right to me and my table, but will concede in a game which can easily devolve into calvinball there will surely be counter examples and special scenarios that won't align. It is what it is.

[Kane0]

Because she couldn't even kill a bunch of pre-teen novices, that's why. We're talking a handful of not even first level PCs here.

[MartianPrince]

Real books trump sage advice. Perkins said that in 2017.

Meanwhile Fizban's specifically states the stat block is an "Aspect of Tiamat" and to quote the entry "Many of her followers have attempted to break her out of Avernus—and failed—but even while she remains in the Nine Hells, Tiamat can send her aspect to manifest in the Material Plane."

But there's also a real book saying it's the real Tiamat. Namely, in RoT, it just says "Tiamat." Unless there was an errata I'm not aware of.

[MartianPrince]

Here's what I don't get. In 3e, ancient red dragons had a CR of 22, or about the same as in 5e (CR 24). If CR doesn't go beyond 30 in 5e, where would they (theoretically) put Tchazzar's CR? Does CR approach 30 asymptotically? Would he have a CR of around 29?

Do we even know if Tiamat was stronger than Tchazzar in older editions? We have her stats in Deities and Demigods, right?

[Mastikator]

For Tchazzar I'd probably go with Red Greatwyrm (CR 27).

[verbatim]

regardless of sage advice, I think using the provided stats as an Avatar/Aspect rather than the real deal fits better in terms of standard lore expectations on how hard it would be to kill a god for realsies (If I ran Frost Maiden I would probably make it an aspect as well).


Were my players to explicitly set out to find and fight the Ur Tiamat in the Astral Plane after in character getting a good sense of how hard that would be I would probably borrow heavily (but not copy over verbatim) from the Epic Monster's thread on enworld (https://www.enworld.org/threads/5e-epic-monster-updates.468639/), just as I did for the secret final boss at the end of Storm King's Thunder, which was parred down to be a very difficult but ultimately doable threat for the combined party + allied NPC's.

That was doable and they won with one PC standing. Should Tiamat herself be killable in a permanent manner? Personally I think only with a very clever plan and a number of powerful allies.