So... where did Tamuz go?

[Asmodai]

So, got my paws on the new Lunars after a couple of years of actively avoiding 3E after souring on the KS. It's something that was near and dear to me and so far I'm liking a lot of what I see.

However... where did Tamuz go?

(And hi folks, long time no write)

[Sith_Happens]

Probably to the land of wind and ghosts.

[Sorcerous Overlord]

What's a Tamuz?

[prototype00]

To your question, so simple, I offer answers, in Triple!

1. He’s possibly still there, they didn’t get around to mentioning every elder Lunar from past editions, after all. (Silver Python and Rain Deathflyer also didn’t make the cut)

2. He’s been written completely out due to the problematic nature of his character. (Who’s Desus?)

3. He’ll make a reappearance in a later supplement covering the region.

[Tikor]

I wrote some fanfiction about Tamuz, before the Lunars 3e came out, in the format of the Aspect/Castebooks which sounds like you may enjoy.

[Blaque]

The general gist I got is he's kind of just not needed anymore. Kind of notable is that the Lunar elders from previous editions presented when they had locations tied with them, kind of had thsoe locations baked-into their descriptions. (ie Raksi with Mahalanka, Ma-Ha-Suchi with the Nameless Lair, Leviathan with Luthe.) That is, the locations they are tied to were kind of introduced with them way back in the day.

Tamuz, along with Rain Deathflyer and Silver Python, were kind of add-ons to locations that had strong thesis that got kind of lost in becoming Lunar things in the game's later periods (2e in Chiaroscuro's case, Kingdomf of Halta in 1e). So instead of focusing on what might be seen as kind of "heat-taking" elders whose relevance ot locations was retroactive, they introduced new locations that had Lunars baked into them basically. This is kind of notable in Tamuz's case since his entire charecterization in 2e was really more or less well, unique ot 2e. And his original presentation in 1e is kind of obsolete in the way that Lunars operate now.

He also has some other issues, generally like playing on stereotypes of gay men being misogynists or only being so due to bad relationships with women, and having that be ingrained in Delzahn society is a bit yikes htere.

Note he probably isn't going to be canonically deleted. But I kind of am skeptical he'll show up anywhere in 3e.

[JohnDoe244]

Flowchart:

Are they woke?
Yes ->They'll be in a future supplement. DONE.
No ->

Are they PG-13?
Yes -> They'll be a Backer Add-on for a future supplement. DONE.
No -> 3E is going in a different creative direction than 2E: the character won't appear in this edition ->

How do you feel about that?
-> Good: they're problematic. DONE.
-> That sucks! -> Use the 1E material. DONE.

[Isator Levi]

Nothing more woke and PG-13 than doing medical experiments on the local population in pursuit of a plague tailored to the extermination of your enemies.

For my money, Tammuz is just kind of dull.

[Lioness]

And his original presentation in 1e is kind of obsolete in the way that Lunars operate now.

I wouldn't say it's obsolete so much as niche.

Tamuz basically wants the revolution to be as civilised as possible, if the fall of the Dragon-Blooded hegemony isn't already happening he's just kind of hanging back and hand-wringing over the more questionable methods of his peers. He's got much more of a potential role if the Silver Pact has already won and has to transition from revolutionaries to leaders - where you've got this qualified looking guy who did exactly none of the heavy lifting.

[Baaldam]

Never really though much about it, but in retrospect must admit Tammuz is probably the 1st Age survivor i got less use from.
Damn, i think Gervesin, Nazri and Jaguar got more cameos in Chiaroscuro on my games than him. The Tri-Khan definitely got more, as being a "mere" mortal ruler it's much simpler to set up an effective back-&-forth dynamic between him and an average group of exalts.

Little sticks to mind beyond "elegant-looking", "social primary elder", "the signature changing moon wolfman - no, wait, ain't the caste sigs supposed to be starting PC-tier?! Some other guy then".

[Kind of have the same "identity problem" with the dude in 1e Lunars cover, thinking of him as Ma-Ha-Suchi in human form, even though i know it's supposed to be Strength-of-Many...]

In hindsight, i'm kind of sorry i have so little to say of him in comparison to Leviathan, Ka-Koshu, Ma-Ha-Suchi & others. Guess i'll take some time to tinker with the "secret father of the glass metropolis" some day.

[HamSandLich]

Tammuz is narratively problematic because he takes agency away from the Delzhan, who, before 2e Lunars, were their own independent people. I imagine he's gone simply because he's a relict of 2e Lunars taking the credit for things that were previously established as their own thing.

[Penelope]

Tammuz is narratively problematic because he takes agency away from the Delzhan, who, before 2e Lunars, were their own independent people. I imagine he's gone simply because he's a relict of 2e Lunars taking the credit for things that were previously established as their own thing.

I agree with you. Also probably because of the stereotype issue. Plus his name is the Babylonian version of Adonis, which implies that he was once the consort of Ishtar/ Aphrodite and thus probably not 100% gay. Maybe they didn’t wanna tie the Lunars too explicitly into RL mythology by using the name of a Babylonian deity.

[Baaldam]

Tammuz is narratively problematic because he takes agency away from the Delzhan, who, before 2e Lunars, were their own independent people. I imagine he's gone simply because he's a relict of 2e Lunars taking the credit for things that were previously established as their own thing.

It's funny, the Delzahn did have a lunar ancestor/patron back in 1e, the Tamas Khan, except he was a distant, kind of vaguely disapproving but non-intervening (for now) one. Some kind of conflation went on there, though to be fair, i remember the 2e writers still keeping both lunars as separate individuals and occasionally citing Tamas Khan (though as a pupil of sorts and mostly ignored). Incidentally, he also had tribes of dholemen descendants - what is kind of funny in that dholes tend to live in places far more forested & humid than i imagine the plains hugging desert i'd associate with the Delzahn. I might be tempted to replace them with jackals if not for "jackal tribes" being the common epiteth of the tribes of disease-ridden mutants.


Tamuz as described in 1e Lunars not only has nothing to do with the Delzahn, but sounds somewhat like a Strength of Many without the clear anti-slavery focus.
The misogyny i suspect evolved from how the relation to his solar wife is described in vague, distant terms and the mentions of potential conflict with her current incarnation over the issue of civilization-toppling, a Silver Pact agenda he's described wholy into, even if doing it with a comparatively softer touch. What, considering that sort of conflict was pretty much par for the course assumption of lunars & solars' relations back in 1ed (even before 1e Lunars, back into the castebooks, for cryin' out loud!), makes such a take a serious case of flanderization and a kind of toxic one at that.

All of that said, his beastman form, a gazelle hound, would make a lot of sense for a lunar with ties to nomadic hunters & herdsmen like the Delzahn, much more than a dhole for sure... (Though i find the idea of a Saluki warform pretty adorable and would suspect the actual reason Tamuz prefers using his human form is sheer embarassment at it - and his solar mate's reactions. It would be far from the only silly dynamic between elder lunar & young solar i've thrown in my games. )

But still, a little Google help just for reference, or fairer assessment:



So people might judge & appreciate the elder's warform pros & cons on their own terms.

Also, it's Tamuz, one "M" only, no correlation with the mesopotamian god intended (apparently).

[Penelope]

It's funny, the Delzahn did have a lunar ancestor/patron back in 1e, the Tamas Khan, but he was a distant, kind of vaguely disapproving but non-intervening (for now) one. Some kind of conflation went on there, though to be fair, i remember the 2e writers still keeping both lunars as separate individuals and occasionally citing Tamas Khan (though as a pupil of sorts and mostly ignored). Incidentally, he also had tribes of dholemen descendants - what is kind of funny in that dholes tend to live in places far more forested & humid than i imagine the plains hugging desert i'd associate with the Delzahn. I might be tempted to replace them with jackals if not for "jackal tribes" being the common epiteth of the tribes of disease-ridden mutants.


Tamuz as described in 1e Lunars not only has nothing to do with the Delzahn, but sounds somewhat like a Strength of Many without the clear anti-slavery focus.
The misogyny i suspect evolved from how the relation to his solar wife is described in vague, distant terms and the mentions of potential conflict with her current incarnation over the issue of civilization-toppling, a Silver Pact agenda he's described wholy into, even if doing it with a comparatively softer touch. What, considering that sort of conflict was pretty much par for the course assumption of lunars & solars' relations back in 1ed (even before 1e Lunars, back into the castebooks, for cryin' out loud!), makes such a take a serious case of flanderization and a kind of toxic one at that.

All of that said, his beastman form, a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saluki"]gazelle hound[/URL], would make a lot of sense for a lunar with ties to nomadic hunters & herdsmen like the Delzahn, much more than a dhole for sure... (Though i find the idea of a Saluki warform pretty adorable and would suspect the actual reason Tamuz prefers using his human form is sheer embarassment at it - and his solar mate's reactions. It would be far from the only silly dynamic between elder lunar & young solar i've thrown in my games. )

But still, a little Google help just for reference, or fairer assessment:



So people might judge & appreciate the elder's warform pros & cons on their own terms.

Also, it's Tamuz, one "M" only, no correlation with the mesopotamian god intended (apparently).

So I guess the name is just a coincidence. Cool. Thanks for clarifying that.

[Robert Vance]

We didn't have any particularly great ideas for Tamuz and his relation to the Delzhan so we didn't do anything with him. He isn't explicitly erased from canon or anything.

Flowchart:

Are they woke?
Yes ->They'll be in a future supplement. DONE.
No ->

Are they PG-13?
Yes -> They'll be a Backer Add-on for a future supplement. DONE.
No -> 3E is going in a different creative direction than 2E: the character won't appear in this edition ->

How do you feel about that?
-> Good: they're problematic. DONE.
-> That sucks! -> Use the 1E material. DONE.

Raksi, Queen of Wokeness :P