So, what if I decide to play as a Hobgoblin?


Ironfang Invasion

1 to 50 of 183 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Suppose I roll up a Hobgoblin PC for this campaign. What would that entail?

I recall that Second Darkness strongly discourages and all but forbids players to play as Drow. This is understandable, given the Drow's origins and their secrecy in the Pathfinder campaign setting. However, while Hobgoblins are almost universally Lawful Evil, they are not bound to evil in the same way that (setting-wise) Drow are.

Thus, one could play as a Hobgoblin in Ironfang Invasion; most plausibly Lawful Neutral or maybe even Lawful Good. He or she could be a defector from the Ironfang Legion or an exile from it. Potential for amusing Star Wars "Traitor!" meme references aside, it could prove to be an interesting option.

Does the AP discourage playing a Hobgoblin? Is there a sidebar explaining why you shouldn't play one or what you should take into consideration if you do?

Silver Crusade

13 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Are you one of those people who want to play paladins in Skull & Shackles or a Cleric of Iomedae in Hell's Vengeance? ;)


3 people marked this as a favorite.

That's the question you should be asking your GM,not us. Consider reading the Player's Guide as well.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
That's the question you should be asking your GM,not us. Consider reading the Player's Guide as well.

That's a question I'd be willing to answer in 6 months, any answer you'll get is pure speculation.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Gorbacz wrote:
Are you one of those people who want to play paladins in Skull & Shackles or a Cleric of Iomedae in Hell's Vengeance? ;)

...what?

No.

Playing the same race as the antagonists is not the same as playing a class or alignment which directly contradicts the theme of the game.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Well, I guess broader question is whether playing as Molthune (or Canorate) aligned character is as viable as Nirmathi aligned character. I thought I had heard that was true, but some material seems to suggest the assumption is Nirmathi biased.

If Canorate-aligned characters are legit, then it stands to reason they have other Hobgoblin mercenaries who didn't revolt with the BBEG... and therefore would be fighting against the BBEG like other Molthuni forces.

Or of course, you could have once served in the BBEG's forces, but deserted once they entered in open conflict with Molthune because you weren't down with that. So you could return to serve either Canorate or possibly the Nirmathis.

Or I guess it's plausible that Hobgoblins have been around Molthune for a while (either naturally or as military/mercenaries), even before the Nirmathi separatism, and happened to live in Nirmathas or retire there... Perhaps they even sided with their Nirmathi neighbors agains Canorate, or simply stayed out of the way.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I like them they are a solid race. Now some adventure paths they wouldn't work so well. Wrath of the righteous they probably would be mistrusted and hated. Still I'd consider playing one depending on what class I was considering


In my game? I only allow core classes so you wouldn't get to play one.

IF, against my better judgement I were to allow an hobgoblin character I would warn the player beforehand he should expect to be widely mistrusted, vilified and face more challanges than a character of a different race. Playing an hobgoblin with me as a DM would be a disadvantage in a game of II.

Dark Archive

Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Axial wrote:
Gorbacz wrote:
Are you one of those people who want to play paladins in Skull & Shackles or a Cleric of Iomedae in Hell's Vengeance? ;)

...what?

No.

Playing the same race as the antagonists is not the same as playing a class or alignment which directly contradicts the theme of the game.

YES!!!

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Axial wrote:
Gorbacz wrote:
Are you one of those people who want to play paladins in Skull & Shackles or a Cleric of Iomedae in Hell's Vengeance? ;)

...what?

No.

Playing the same race as the antagonists is not the same as playing a class or alignment which directly contradicts the theme of the game.

Yes, it's still trying to get a square block into a round hole. Your GM will have to put in lots of additional work into making it work. Why do you want to make your GM's life harder? Running a good game is enough work as it is.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Gorbacz wrote:
Axial wrote:
Gorbacz wrote:
Are you one of those people who want to play paladins in Skull & Shackles or a Cleric of Iomedae in Hell's Vengeance? ;)

...what?

No.

Playing the same race as the antagonists is not the same as playing a class or alignment which directly contradicts the theme of the game.

Yes, it's still trying to get a square block into a round hole. Your GM will have to put in lots of additional work into making it work. Why do you want to make your GM's life harder? Running a good game is enough work as it is.

From my point of view as a GM it's not that I care too much about the extra work. The problem is the player needs to understand not all choices are equal and some have higher costs than others. Playing a human or a dwarf in an Ironfang Invasion is not the same as playing an hobgoblin, the main antagonist race who's marauding around killing and enslaving people and possibly the other PCs families too. The forces fighting against the hobgoblins are going to react badly if one of them shows up (wounded, captured, whatever reason you can come up with for him to join the resistance) on their doorsted claiming to want to help defeating the OTHER hobgoblins.

It's doable if the GM is willing to allow it but it certainly changes the game's theme and tone. Mistrust, paranoia, xenophobia become themes, blind rage, grief and revenge are there as well, which implies you need a GM able to deal with such complicated notions and players mature enough to understand chains of consequences. IF you have a GM who likes such challanges and wants to explore said themes then adding an hobgoblin COULD make for a more enjoyable game, adding spice to the mix AS LONG AS the player understands he's going to have it rough and NOT because the GM is picking on him but because of his own choices. The other players need to be on board with this as well of course.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

The problem is players often don't truly comprehend consequences for their characters.

A thief steals and is caught? They find it annoying that they get tossed in jail. But let's say the thief stole from a noble with connections... and the noble chooses to have the thief's hands chopped off.

Let's go one step further. The GM has established already by showing other thieves having their hands chopped off for their actions the consequences of stealing from nobility. A PC Rogue is arrested and sentenced to having their hands chopped off. The player would be most upset if in fact the GM had their character's hands chopped off. They would consider it quite unfair. They would insist the rest of the party would attack to free them. They would gladly allow the entire adventure come off the rails because they chose to act and are unhappy with the consequences.

If a player wants to run a Hobgoblin PC and it is suggested in the AP that there will be hostility toward the hobgoblins, or the GM decides there would be? Then the GM should tell that player "you will face considerable hostility and attacks against you. The authorities will look at your reactions as provocations." And then some evening after a hobgoblin attack, I'd have some NPC attempt a coup de grace on the sleeping hobgoblin PC.

That said, the first part is letting the player know "there will be consequences and you won't be happy with them. I strongly suggest you don't run a hobgoblin PC."

BTW, the other side of the shoe is this: the hobgoblins attacking will consider the PC a race traitor. They will in all likelihood focus their attacks on taking out the race traitor, especially as such a traitor could potentially know secrets or the like which would lessen the effectiveness of the hobgoblin assault.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Axial wrote:

Suppose I roll up a Hobgoblin PC for this campaign. What would that entail?

I recall that Second Darkness strongly discourages and all but forbids players to play as Drow. This is understandable, given the Drow's origins and their secrecy in the Pathfinder campaign setting. However, while Hobgoblins are almost universally Lawful Evil, they are not bound to evil in the same way that (setting-wise) Drow are.
{. . .}

I can't get my hands on a Second Darkness Player's Guide (this and the one for Legacy of Fire were not available for free download as separate PDFs), but I understand that in part Paizo was (apparently with some real justification) afraid of a flood of Drizz't do'Urden clones. Since such a calamity has not materialized, I would like to see this prohibition removed or at least alleviated when they release Second Darkness Anniversary/Hardcover Edition.

If not for real life issues that have prevented me from playing anything (and will continue to do so at least through October), I would be up for playing a Drow in Second Darkness, or in principle a Hobgoblin in Ironfang Invasion, except that whereas I have a well-developed character concept for the first(*), I don't have one for Ironfang Invasion, and no guarantee that when I get one that it will be a Hobgoblin . . . But I can appreciate the overall concept.

(*)I haven't read any of the Drizz't do'Urden novels, but I checked on Wikipedia to make sure that I hadn't accidentally created a Drizz't do'Urden clone . . . Check.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I highly, highly recommend The Crystal Shard and Streams of Silver, especially Streams of Silver, both incredible books. :-)


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Personally, I loved the other characters in his books, especially Bruenor Battlehammer.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Obligatory link to new Ironfang Invasion Character Posting Thread.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

As someone who is pretty lenient on race selection (my runelord game's party included a kobold, a kitsune, and a Nagaji), I would not allow hobgoblins pcs in Ironfang. It just stretches my credibility a bit too far that a Hobgoblin wouldn't be treated with extreme suspicion if not outright hostility

As for Drow in Second Darkness, it has nothing to do with Drizzt. The whole AP is about the revelation that Drow exist and major plot elements involve the elves trying to cover that information up. That sort of plot...doesn't work really well if a Drow is in the party.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I wouldn't compare a Hobgoblin in this game to someone like Drizzt for the drow. I'd almost say like Finn from the new Star Wars. Or hell...if you really wanted to throw in some major story fodder, perhaps the Hobgoblin player stumbles across the party and wants to use the group to take control for himself xP

As for the problems people mention for playing races that require extra work from the GM to make people hate the PC. I can't speak for everybody, but I, myself, like to play monsterous races and ones generally frowned upon but I personally want difficulty. If it were me, I'd be fully aware people would glare and possibly attack or frame my Hobgoblin, but hey, that makes the world more immerse and fun and makes me feel like I am not just some human. Again, that's just me though.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
MMCJawa wrote:

{. . .}

As for Drow in Second Darkness, it has nothing to do with Drizzt. The whole AP is about the revelation that Drow exist and major plot elements involve the elves trying to cover that information up. That sort of plot...doesn't work really well if a Drow is in the party.

That isn't too hard to get by -- as long as not too many Drow are on the surface, the mystery isn't necessarily broken (for instance, from the point of view of the average people of RiddlePort, prior ro the events of Second Darkness, a Drow who didn't raise more ruckus than normal for the average people there would be just another weirdo who stepped off a ship).

Hobgoblins would still be easier, though. Probably a few Hobgoblin families have gotten to like living among (mostly) Human civilization to get some peace and quiet, especially in the case of those that deserted from Molthune's disposable trops to go live in Nirmathas. When the Ironfang Invasion comes, they will get rounded up and put into internment camps, in an eerie parallel to history of the last century on Earth . . . But in keeping with the same parallel, some may be allowed into the counterinvasion forces (admittedly this parallel doesn't completely hold up, because on Earth, the example involved the other front in a two front war).


Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

I guess you'd also want to play a cleric of Asmodeus in Hell's Rebels and a demon in Wrath of the Righteous, right?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

^No on the Cleric of Asmodeus in Hell's Rebels (they inherently oppose the campaign premise, no matter what anybody else thinks)(*), but not totally off the wall on the Demon in Wrath of the Righteous . . . Except my concept there is a Qlippoth-spawned Tiefling(**) (Qlippoths hate Demons too).

(*)Although in the case of Hell's Vengeance, I see promise in the prospect of starting as a Grey Paladin or Oath Against Chaos Paladin who gets dragged into serving Thrune due to the overriding need to prevent the chaos that will ensue if the Glorious Reclamation wins and unwittingly enables the rise of the Demonic State in Isger and Cheliax, and eventually falls and becomes a Tyrant Antipaladin.

(**)Concept made but not statted out yet.

Shadow Lodge

7 people marked this as a favorite.
Zaister wrote:
I guess you'd also want to play a cleric of Asmodeus in Hell's Rebels and a demon in Wrath of the Righteous, right?

Of course! What is best in life? Trolling the GM and your fellow players with a concept that rejects the story the AP wants to tell out of contrary special-snowflakedom.

The only thing better is leaving only one player to naively make a character that buys into the assumptions of the AP, while the other players and the GM clearly want something different. I know because I've had that happen to me, and the others seemed to enjoy my squirming immensely.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

By the way, I started following (haven't gotten very far into it yet) a PbP of Hell's Rebels in which one of the party members is a member of House Thrune. Not a member in good standing, mind you, but a member nevertheless . . . Although unfortunately the character avatar's name acts as a spoiler.

An ex-Cleric of Asmodeus who's trying to find redemption would also be totally legitimate for Hell's Rebels.

Shadow Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
UnArcaneElection wrote:

By the way, I started following (haven't gotten very far into it yet) a PbP of Hell's Rebels in which one of the party members is a member of House Thrune. Not a member in good standing, mind you, but a member nevertheless . . . Although unfortunately the character avatar's name acts as a spoiler.

The game I referenced was also a Hell's Rebels game, which featured as PCs a Hellknight of the Rack in good standing, an investigator reporting on the party's actions to Barzillai, a feral urchin Summoner who understood nothing political (and who stubbornly ignored explanations), and a cleric of Calistria who could barely be bothered. Somehow, we managed to finish Book 1.


UnArcaneElection wrote:
MMCJawa wrote:

{. . .}

As for Drow in Second Darkness, it has nothing to do with Drizzt. The whole AP is about the revelation that Drow exist and major plot elements involve the elves trying to cover that information up. That sort of plot...doesn't work really well if a Drow is in the party.

That isn't too hard to get by -- as long as not too many Drow are on the surface, the mystery isn't necessarily broken (for instance, from the point of view of the average people of RiddlePort, prior ro the events of Second Darkness, a Drow who didn't raise more ruckus than normal for the average people there would be just another weirdo who stepped off a ship).

Hobgoblins would still be easier, though. Probably a few Hobgoblin families have gotten to like living among (mostly) Human civilization to get some peace and quiet, especially in the case of those that deserted from Molthune's disposable trops to go live in Nirmathas. When the Ironfang Invasion comes, they will get rounded up and put into internment camps, in an eerie parallel to history of the last century on Earth . . . But in keeping with the same parallel, some may be allowed into the counterinvasion forces (admittedly this parallel doesn't completely hold up, because on Earth, the example involved the other front in a two front war).

I guess my issue is...why choose to play a Drow in Second Darkness or a Hobgoblin in Iron Fang? My bigger concern is not making the GM do extra work, but rather someone creating a character who inevitably will steal the focus of the game from other characters. There's plenty of APs where those characters (assuming your GM allows non-core races at all or would allow those specific ones) where those races would be fine. Hell a Hobgoblin would actually be kind of cool in Second Darkness, given their past history with the Elves (I doubt they distinguish much in their hatred between Drow and regular elves). And a Drow in exile keeping a low profile in Nirmathas could make an interesting PC as well. At this point there is...what? 30+ races in Pathfinder, and way more if you start including 3rd party. So why immediately go after the ONE Race that conflicts with the AP.

Dark Archive

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook Subscriber

I think a better analogy would be trying to play an orc or goblin in Giantslayer.

The beginning of that path has an entire town that spends every waking moment prepared to defend and die against an orcish invasion. They literally have a coming of age ceremony where they promise to kill themselves if the city is taken.

A PC character of that race would likely, if not shot on sight, be immediately jailed and tried with a best possible outcome of being exiled.

From that point on any discussion would be assumption...

Are the first encounters part of a surprise attack?

Allies: "That guy/girl is clearly a traitor. Shoot them in the face!"

Hobgoblins: "That guy/girl is clearly a traitor. Shoot them in the face!"

Are the first encounters just a regular war?

Replace traitor with 'spy'.

I guess my largest assumption, given previous experience with players, is that they would beg me as the GM to play a race contrary to the campaign and then either do NOTHING with the extra roleplay options I offer them or...

Chafe under the extreme racism, suspicion, hatred, and intolerance they WILL suffer and then quit the game or beg to play something else.

I guess in the end it depends on your DM. I would only offer the opportunity to the best player in my group or a player I was trying to get rid of.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

I was thinking of the best way to handle this and I decided to play a Hobgoblin paladin of Iomedae.

I think being a paladin would offset a lot of the mistrust and discrimination that would come his way. If nothing else, the sight of a hobgoblin standing tall in shining full-plate with Iomedan regalia would give them pause.

Essentially, I think that having a good-aligned god(dess) who still represents war, militarism, and discipline to follow would make sense as a catalyst to push a hobgoblin to good. He's still a ruthless, obedient soldier like the rest of his cousins, but now he fights for the good guys. And being LG, he makes an excellent foil to the characteristic LE alignment of his race.

Shadow Lodge

Axial wrote:

I was thinking of the best way to handle this and I decided to play a Hobgoblin paladin of Iomedae.

I think being a paladin would offset a lot of the mistrust and discrimination that would come his way. If nothing else, the sight of a hobgoblin standing tall in shining full-plate with Iomedan regalia would give them pause.

Essentially, I think that having a good-aligned god(dess) who still represents war, militarism, and discipline to follow would make sense as a catalyst to push a hobgoblin to good. He's still a ruthless, obedient soldier like the rest of his cousins, but now he fights for the good guys. And being LG, he makes an excellent foil to the characteristic LE alignment of his race.

Doesn't Iomedae appear, in the Nirmathas-Molthune context, more aligned with Molthune? If so, that's just exchanging one bit of contrarianism for another.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I don't care if the character is an Aasimar-Hobgoblin hybrid with a halo, wings, and the most obvious paladin around.

Someone (or rather multiple someones) on the human side would try to kill the hobgoblin PC as a spy or potential traitor. And the hobgoblins attacking would also focus their attacks to take it down. And again, I'd let the player know ahead of time that there will be consequences of their running a hobgoblin.

The exception of course is if there was specific details in the story as to why hobgoblins would be accepted as PCs in the AP itself. And even then, if I as the GM felt this disrupted the campaign, I'd ignore that in-AP advice.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

The Inner Sea World Guide cites Iomedae as being a major religion in Nirmathas, so that part isn't such a stretch.

RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32

9 people marked this as a favorite.
Tangent101 wrote:
And again, I'd let the player know ahead of time that there will be consequences of their running a hobgoblin.

Lisa: Bart, just get out of here.

Bart Simpson: Hey, you get out out. It's a free country.
Lisa: That doesn't make any sense.
Bart Simpson: I know you are, but what am I?
Lisa: Get out, get out!
Bart Simpson: All right. But on my way, I'm going to be doing this...
[windmills his arms]
Bart Simpson: If you get hit, it's your own fault.
Lisa: Okay, then I'm going to start kicking air, like this...
[kicks up her foot]
Lisa: And if any part of you should fill that air...
[kicks up her other foot]
Lisa: It's *your* own fault.
[They shut their eyes and move toward each other, grunting as they flail or kick. Cut to downstairs in the kitchen, where Marge and Homer are. Their grunts soon turn to yells of pain, and sounds of fighting]

Just say no. 'Yes but I'll murder you' is just a less-honest form of 'No, it's unfit for the campaign.'

Trying to punish player choices like this, at best, leaves a bad taste in everyone's mouth. At worst, it backfires because of either letting the offending player succeed in making the campaign all about their character, or being a tactical window that can be exploited (because their character has a 'taunt').

Liberty's Edge Developer

12 people marked this as a favorite.

Whether or not you can play a hobgoblin is left up to you and your GM to decide, but the AP assumes the PCs are all members of the core races and that the residents of Nirmathas hate and fear hobgoblins (who have raided the area for millennia, first as native tribes and later as mercenaries for Molthune).


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Ross Byers wrote:
Tangent101 wrote:
And again, I'd let the player know ahead of time that there will be consequences of their running a hobgoblin.

Lisa on Ice

{. . .}

You forgot the following part where Homer starts doing the same thing, but the thing that is supposed to happen that is not supposed to be his fault is a pie getting eaten . . . Of course, he first ends up whacking his forehead on the cabinet over the pie.

Hmmm . . . Come to think of it, getting hooked on pie might be a legitimate reason for a Hobgoblin to settle with the Humans . . . .


Axial wrote:

I was thinking of the best way to handle this and I decided to play a Hobgoblin paladin of Iomedae.

I think being a paladin would offset a lot of the mistrust and discrimination that would come his way. If nothing else, the sight of a hobgoblin standing tall in shining full-plate with Iomedan regalia would give them pause.

Essentially, I think that having a good-aligned god(dess) who still represents war, militarism, and discipline to follow would make sense as a catalyst to push a hobgoblin to good. He's still a ruthless, obedient soldier like the rest of his cousins, but now he fights for the good guys. And being LG, he makes an excellent foil to the characteristic LE alignment of his race.

What's the advantage? Why not play a non-hobgoblin paladin in Ironfang Invasion and play a hobgoblin in a later campaign where they aren't the main villain?

I've had lots of good games where players have played against type - being claustrophobic dwarves, tree-hating elves, quiet-as-a-lamb barbarians or whatever. However, whenever a player creates a PC that 'goes against the grain' of the campaign mood/style it just tends to dilute the overall plot and desired themes, in my experience. FWIW, I generally allow such things, but my personal view is that it will undercut the campaign rather than enhance it, so why not 'play along' with the intended feel of the story?


You could always play an elf with a hobgoblin fetish.

Bonus points if you're able to capture one and use the rules for redemption from the WotR player's guide.


Crystal Frasier wrote:
Whether or not you can play a hobgoblin is left up to you and your GM to decide, but the AP assumes the PCs are all members of the core races and that the residents of Nirmathas hate and fear hobgoblins (who have raided the area for millennia, first as native tribes and later as mercenaries for Molthune).

Thank you.

The kicker is that Mr. Hobgoblin Paladin Player would probably insist "but my hobgoblin is different!" And it would disrupt the game, because if the hobgoblin is a member of the party then the party is expected to stand up for the hobgoblin despite the legitimate problems the society has with hobgoblins!

It's not about "a challenge in roleplaying" because let's face it. You have an enemy race that the AP focuses on. Why in the blue blazes would a player want to BE running a character that is a part of that race? Outside of disrupting the game itself?

I don't even have a problem with people running races that aren't core! My Hell's Rebels game is going to have a Changeling Magical Child, a Fetchling Swashbuckler, and a Ratfolk Alchemist/Warpriest! (And a half-orc Skald, but we don't talk about her. Black sheep of the group, you know. ^-^) It's about inappropriate races for the AP.

Liberty's Edge

7 people marked this as a favorite.
Gorbacz wrote:
Axial wrote:
Gorbacz wrote:
Are you one of those people who want to play paladins in Skull & Shackles or a Cleric of Iomedae in Hell's Vengeance? ;)

...what?

No.

Playing the same race as the antagonists is not the same as playing a class or alignment which directly contradicts the theme of the game.

Yes, it's still trying to get a square block into a round hole. Your GM will have to put in lots of additional work into making it work. Why do you want to make your GM's life harder? Running a good game is enough work as it is.

Speaking as a DM myself, I don't see a problem with a hobgoblin character. In fact it's FILLED with RP potential, much like Worf in TNG -- being a "defector" from his own kind.

It's not the color of your skin that matters. It's your *actions*. A hobgoblin that wants to work with Nirmathas and the Robin Hoods will be MUCH less disruptive than a human who wants to work with Molthune and the Ironfang tribe.

A paladin in Skull/Shackles would be disruptive because of their *actions*. A cleric of Asmodeus in Hell's Rebels would be disruptive because of their *actions*. A paladin in Hell's Vengeance would be disruptive because of their *actions*.

A hobgoblin eager to work with the party would not automatically be disruptive, unless you fall into the racist trap that hobgoblins are all alike and would automatically work against the party.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

You'd still have a Hobgoblin Drizz't that hogs the spotlight, whether it's intentional or not.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

In all my years of running campaigns, every player who has asked to play an AP-specific race in this manner "because it will enhance my roleplay" has immediately transformed into the player who must be the center of attention at all times, to the detriment of everyone else at the table.

Having never seen an exception, no matter how cogent the player's arguments are before the campaign commences, I would respond with an out-and-out, "No," and I would cite the other players' enjoyment as my reasoning.

EDIT: There are other, equally-valid reasons: Why wouldn't the town guard shoot the hobgoblin on sight? Why wouldn't the party kill the hobgoblin under the assumption that he's a spy the first time they're ambushed? Why wouldn't every opposing hobgoblin target him as a priority target? But Ross put it well upthread: It's a heck of a lot better to just say, "No," at the outset instead of saying, "Yes, but I'll murder you," and then following through on that threat.

Dark Archive

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook Subscriber

If you as a DM think that you can handle it without laying into your player too much so that the game is not fun for them and your player is up to the challenge of playing that character in a way that lives up to the RP potential you envision (without chafing under the NPC scrutiny) then go forth and play I say.

Liberty's Edge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
NobodysHome wrote:
In all my years of running campaigns, every player who has asked to play an AP-specific race in this manner "because it will enhance my roleplay" has immediately transformed into the player who must be the center of attention at all times, to the detriment of everyone else at the table.

That's fair enough, but that's a player problem then, and not a character concept problem.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

There is a lot of role playing potential.

Every time you go to the bar, the smithy, out at night, try to get some grub, etcetera.

But what about the human ranger who just wants to get his sword sharpened, or a drink, what are you going to do for him, what does he get to to do, besides defend his friend from scorn.

Seems like someone has the spotlight there, and it's not the ranger, who struck out with the barmaid because he was too busy trying to convince the innkeeper they were cool, which he wouldn't have had to do, if there was an elf, or even a Half-Orc, instead.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I try to come up with roleplaying situations for each character as it is. Having one character for whom the situations write themselves is one less character to work on. In a four-member party that's a 25% reduction in RP scene construction time. Or if I keep the time constant, then that gives me 33% more time to spend on constructing RP scenes for each of the other characters. Either way it's a good thing.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Samy wrote:
In fact it's FILLED with RP potential, much like Worf in TNG -- being a "defector" from his own kind.

Only that the plot of TNG was not that the Federation was being invaded by the Klingons.

Liberty's Edge

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Not exactly no, but there was a lot of hostility and mistrust. If you want another example, there's Garak in DS9, if you want an exact duplicate scenario.


Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Garak is clearly an NPC, though.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

He still illustrates that it's possible to write the story so that you don't get shot on sight or dominate the story.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

It also depends on the rest of the party. If most of my players would come up with humans with little background, I'd be glad to see an oddball hobgoblin among them. The more complex the other PCs get, the less excited I will be about this hobgobbo, of course. Wouldn't make me disallow it, though.

Some more thoughts:

1) A hobgobbo could put extra effort into disguising himself, to avoid at least some trouble with NPCs. It also makes sense he did this in the past, else he likely would be dead already.

2) To sneak into a hobgobbo camp, who would be better suited than such a creature?

3) A hobgobbo could introduce his race's way of thinking to his fellow PCs. Which means the GM delegates some story work to the player.

4) If the player won't stay around for the full campaign anyway (e.g. he plans to move in 6 months), then it's nice to add a hobgobbo who has a limited goal (e.g. revenge on the boss of book 2) and who will leave the group afterwards.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

And, heck, if your complaint is that Garak is an NPC, then fricking *Odo*. And if you need more examples, TV Tropes has Defector from Decadence, not all of which are applicable of course, but plenty are.


Okaay...

No idea what any of that means...

1 to 50 of 183 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Adventure Path / Ironfang Invasion / So, what if I decide to play as a Hobgoblin? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.