Goblins!

Monday, April 2, 2018

Ever since the goblin song from page 12 of 2007's Pathfinder Adventure Path #1: Burnt Offerings, goblins have been a key part of what makes Pathfinder recognizable as Pathfinder. When we first started looking at what would become the ancestries in the Pathfinder Playtest Rulebook, we knew that we wanted to add something to the mix, to broaden the horizon of what it meant to be a hero in Pathfinder. That naturally brought us to goblins.

The trick was finding a way to let you play a goblin who has the feel of a Pathfinder goblin, but who is also a little bit softer around the edges—a character who has a reason to work with a group of "longshanks," as opposed to trying to light them on fire at the first opportunity. Let's look at an excerpt from the goblin ancestry to find out a bit more.

Illustration by Wayne Reynolds

As a people, goblins have spent millennia feared, maligned, and even hunted—and sometimes for understandable reasons, as some rural goblin tribes still often direct cruelty, raiding, and mayhem toward wandering or vulnerable creatures. In recent decades, however, a new sort of hero has emerged from among these rough-and-tumble tribes. Such goblins bear the same oversized heads, pointed ears, red eyes, and jagged teeth of their crueler kin, but they have a noble or savvy streak that other goblins can't even imagine, let alone understand. These erstwhile heroes roam Golarion, often maintaining their distinctive cultural habits while spreading the enthusiasm, inscrutable quirkiness, love of puns and song, and unique mirth that mark goblin adventurers.

Despite breaking from their destructive past, goblin adventurers often subtly perpetuate some of the qualities that have been characteristics of the creatures for millennia. They tend to flock to strong leaders, and fiercely protect those companions who have protected them from physical harm or who offer a sympathetic ear and sage advice when they learn of the goblins' woes. Some goblins remain deeply fascinated with fire, or fearlessly devour meals that might turn others' stomachs. Others are inveterate tinkerers and view their companions' trash as components of gadgets yet to be made. Occasionally, fellow adventurers find these proclivities unsettling or odd, but more often than not goblins' friends consider these qualities endearing.

The entry in the Pathfinder Playtest Rulebook has plenty more to say on the topic, but that should give you a sense of where we are taking Pathfinder's favorite troublemakers.

In addition to the story behind the goblin, its ancestry entry has a lot of other information as well to help you make a goblin player character. It includes the base goblin ability boosts (Dexterity and Charisma), ability flaw (Wisdom), bonus Hit Points (6), base speed (25 feet), and starting languages (Common and Goblin), as well as the rules for darkvision (an ability that lets goblins see in the dark just as well as they can see in normal light). Those are just the basics—the rules shared by all goblins. Beyond that, your goblin's unique ancestry allows you to choose one ability score other than Dexterity or Charisma to receive a boost. Perhaps you have some hobgoblin blood and have an additional boost to Constitution, or you descend from a long line of goblin alchemists and have a boost to Intelligence. You could even gain a boost in Wisdom to negate your flaw!

Then you get into the goblin ancestry feats, which allow you to decide what type of goblin you want to play. Starting off, let's look at Burn It. This feat gives you a bonus to damage whenever you cast a fire spell or deal fire damage with an alchemical item. On top of that, it also increases any persistent fire damage you deal by 1. Goblins still love watching things burn.

Next up is one of my favorites, Junk Tinkerer. A goblin with this feat can craft ordinary items and weapons out of junk and scrap they can find almost anywhere. Sure, the items are of poor quality and break easily, but you will never be without a weapon if you have this feat.

We could not have goblins in the game without adding the Razor Teeth feat. This grants you an attack with your mouthful of razor-sharp teeth that deals 1d6 piercing damage. To be honest, the target of your attack should probably also attempt a Fortitude save against whatever you ate last night that is still stuck between your teeth, but we'll leave that for the GM to decide.

Finally, there is the appropriately named feat Very Sneaky. This lets you move 5 feet farther when you take an action to sneak (which normally lets you move at only half your normal speed) and potentially renders your target flat-footed against a follow-up strike!

There are plenty of other goblin feats for you to choose from, but that's all we have time for today. Come back on Friday when we'll look at some of the feats from the other ancestries in the game!

Jason Bulmahn
Director of Game Design

More Paizo Blog.
Tags: Pathfinder Playtest Wayne Reynolds
1,551 to 1,600 of 1,765 << first < prev | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | next > last >>

I don't really have an opinion on goblins in core. I'd probably prefer another ancestry than goblins getting the spot of the "bonus ancestry" in the book, but more stuff is fine either way.

The developers obviously want more goblin player characters. Maybe I'll try it at some point.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Guys (and Gals), we should feel lucky the devs give us these pieces of information intead of the silent treatment. it also probably give them some "ah [redacted], we need to word these better" momments.

We are lucky they will do public playtests.

As for "why Goblins instead of x, y, z ???", going by pF1, Goblins are Humanoids, thus subject to the same things as Humans, Elves, Dwarves, Halflings, etc.


MerlinCross wrote:
Telebuddy wrote:
I’m fine with goblins as a core race and as far as “all” goblins as pyromaniac douch canoes is like saying every 1/2 orc is the product of a brutal rape. Can a player play against stereo type and not be annoying? They can. For those who won’t “allow” a goblin pc in their game could be missing out on potentialy great role play in my opinion.

The "Possible Great RP" doesn't seem to sit well with; Paladins, Necromancers, other monsterous races used as dim witted can on fodder, playable undead, Summoners, Leadership, and far more than I'm willing to keep listing or even know of.

I don't understand why "Oh they might be good" is an excuse just for Goblins. By that reasoning, a DM I saw should have let a player have his Rogue. Centaur. In Skulls and Shackles. Because of the RP possibilities outweigh any confusion and balacening of "Oh does this work?"]

And as I posted no one is forcing you to allow goblins in your campaign, If you don’t like it don’t use it, period end of sentence.

Liberty's Edge

Jessex wrote:
As a GM there is literally no chance there will ever be a goblin PC in my campaign. Even in the Golarion setting this makes no sense.

Lol, hope you don't ever GM a Society game. Because then you'll have no choice in the matter.


CrystalSeas wrote:

Can we stop using "half-breeds" to talk about mixed-race characters.

It's an offensive term.

We could always use Mud Blood like Harry Potter series.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Speaking of half-bloods, I wonder if there'll be a half-fey ancestry.

So far almost every major plane has one. Except the 2 energy planes, 2 transitive planes and the fey plane (First World).


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Telebuddy wrote:
MerlinCross wrote:
Telebuddy wrote:
I’m fine with goblins as a core race and as far as “all” goblins as pyromaniac douch canoes is like saying every 1/2 orc is the product of a brutal rape. Can a player play against stereo type and not be annoying? They can. For those who won’t “allow” a goblin pc in their game could be missing out on potentialy great role play in my opinion.

The "Possible Great RP" doesn't seem to sit well with; Paladins, Necromancers, other monsterous races used as dim witted can on fodder, playable undead, Summoners, Leadership, and far more than I'm willing to keep listing or even know of.

I don't understand why "Oh they might be good" is an excuse just for Goblins. By that reasoning, a DM I saw should have let a player have his Rogue. Centaur. In Skulls and Shackles. Because of the RP possibilities outweigh any confusion and balacening of "Oh does this work?"]

And as I posted no one is forcing you to allow goblins in your campaign, If you don’t like it don’t use it, period end of sentence.

Paizo does when they make it Core, and by relation an automatic part of Pathfinder Society, if PFS1 is any indication of what we can expect. For those players, there is no choice except to not play PFS.

Granted, you can say that it's a PFS issue and not a game issue, but when I decide to ban a core 1st party option compared to some backwoods 3rd party option or splatbook supplement for the same reasons, the odds of me attracting players becomes a lot slimmer (largely due to skepticism drawn from my personal choice), and the odds of onlookers crying "Badwrongfun" increase, further deterring the likelihood of attracting players even further.

In fact, a lot of what I described above has happened in this very thread involving multiple forumites, which means that this can be a very real commonplace thing. After all, for every story you actually hear, there are a dozen identical ones you don't hear about (but they still happen).

Grand Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Gorbacz wrote:
Kevin Mack wrote:
On a side note anyone else slightly annoyed at how Goblins are getting a 'Core' Iconic before half-orcs and technically Half-elves?
No.

I mean, why should we even care?

Shadow Lodge

geekjosh wrote:
Jessex wrote:
As a GM there is literally no chance there will ever be a goblin PC in my campaign. Even in the Golarion setting this makes no sense.
Lol, hope you don't ever GM a Society game. Because then you'll have no choice in the matter.

Given that Jessex's last PFS session GMed was in 2016, I'm sure he'll be safe.


Laird IceCubez wrote:

Speaking of half-bloods, I wonder if there'll be a half-fey ancestry.

So far almost every major plane has one. Except the 2 energy planes, 2 transitive planes and the fey plane (First World).

Heroes of the Wild gave the core races a bunch of fey alternate racial traits, so a "Fey touched" ancestry is certainly a possibility.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Expectation on why Goblins are now a Core Ra... Ancestry:
"Something happened that made Goblins more acceptable in society"

Actual reply
"Some Goblins are adventurers, deal with it"

Shadow Lodge

15 people marked this as a favorite.
Unikatze wrote:

Expectation on why Goblins are now a Core Ra... Ancestry:

"Something happened that made Goblins more acceptable in society"

Actual reply
"Some Goblins are adventurers, deal with it"

Actual actual reply

"We have products in the works that expand on how goblins came to be adventurers and not kill-on-sight, but we can't reveal everything yet. Please be patient until we can tell you more."


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

/rubs eyes

flexible ability boost?
on top of the other 2?
so instead of +2+2-2 it is now +2+2+2-2

and I thought a new edition would be a reset of the power creep.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
DropBearHunter wrote:

/rubs eyes

flexible ability boost?
on top of the other 2?
so instead of +2+2-2 it is now +2+2+2-2

and I thought a new edition would be a reset of the power creep.

As long as the rest of the game is balanced with that concept in mind, it would be more along the lines of keeping with the game difficulty.

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Companion, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

It would be power creep if ability score generation worked the same way. I'm pretty sure that ability score adjustments from ancestry are just the first in a series of flat adjustments, rather than augmenting a point buy.

Shadow Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Tangent101 wrote:
Now, #2 seems to state that we will be seeing Goblins as a Playtest race. That said, how people react to the Goblins in the Playtest will also dictate if they remain...

Which would be terrible because playtesting is for mechanics, not flavor. I am very likely to end up playtesting this in at least one of my groups. I will be a goblin and posting my thoughts on the ancestry feats.

I will also be posting about Skill, General, and Class feats. Not of which is playtesting flavor.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
DropBearHunter wrote:

/rubs eyes

flexible ability boost?
on top of the other 2?
so instead of +2+2-2 it is now +2+2+2-2

and I thought a new edition would be a reset of the power creep.

As I understand it they are also getting rid of the obligatory belt/headband for improving your stats and instead are giving people generous stat ups every 5th level (like Starfinder) and point buy is going to be a quite different. So it's not just "more power".


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Nox Aeterna wrote:

So... people actually think they will play goblins, but not be treated like a pest/problem often by pretty much everyone... that is an interesting thought.

Guess better ban the race indeed, players clearly are building up diferent expectations than i would ever GM for the race.

Gip actually look forward to showing long shanks there hypocrisy.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
DropBearHunter wrote:

/rubs eyes

flexible ability boost?
on top of the other 2?
so instead of +2+2-2 it is now +2+2+2-2

and I thought a new edition would be a reset of the power creep.

Depends on what you mean by power creep. They're not doing character creation the same way, so it's very possible this doesn't have the impact you think it does.

That said, in a demo game I saw played, Kyra had Str 14, Dex 12, Wis 18, Cha 14 (Con and Int went unstated, but from context were likely 10). That is a tad bit better (though only a tad) than 20 point-buy on a human in PF1.

That said, I'm not sure having very slightly higher scores counts as power creep in an entirely new edition which works in an entirely different way. If everyone's equally powerful, where's the creep?

Grand Lodge

13 people marked this as a favorite.

The problem with adding goblins to core is how they are going to appear in the rest of the publications, especially APs and modules (and scenarios). There are very few (any) people who restrict the existing core races. Other than a few very isolated cases, the core races are represented in every town in Golarion. If someone wants to exclude alternate races from their game, it has little effect on the narrative. They really weren’t there in the first place. However, by adding goblins to the core, authors will be gently encouraged to treat goblins as citizens in the same vein as half-elves, half-orc, maybe even gnomes or dwarves. Sure in almost all cases, human remains the dominant race, but the others exist in varying numbers. Having goblins treated that way makes it much more difficult on GMs who like goblins as they currently exist. Excising them from the narrative could be quite a challenging task, and neigh impossible in organized play.

One of the main reasons why goblins have become such a favored part of Pathfinder is the way they have been depicted for more than a decade. I fear that monkeying around with that iconic imagery puts the goblin’s position at risk. Will making it a more accepted member of society and even a welcome adventurer “dumb down” their imagery to the point they are no more special than any other race? Will that make them lose their iconic status? It’s hard to say this early in the process, but this is not something that can easily be corrected if it fails to accomplish what Paizo hopes. If it fails to work out in the playtest, they could be removed for the official 2E printing, but once they hit that book, there’s no turning back. And I, for one, am concerned what that will do to the iconography of the goblin in Golarion.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mbertorch wrote:

Oh, and I'm still not convinced by the whole "Charisma is sheer force of personality."

Has no one but me known someone is very talkative, annoying, confident, strong-willed, and inconsiderate? Definitely a strong personality, but if someone called him/her charismatic... no, that'd be wrong. So yeah. Still not buying Charismatic Goblins. AS WRITTEN. After the explanation Paizo is gonna give, well, then, we'll see.

EDIT: To be clear, I don't think Charisma is just appearance. But I DO think it's a strong personality with some significant positive traits.

Someone who brings up divisive topics regardless of how it makes others feel because he/she wants to talk about them, cuts people off to make his or her points, doesn't nuance anything to appeal to his/her audience because he/she can't be bothered, and won't drop a topic when told to, is by no means a weak personality. But Charismatic? Nope. Don't see it.

Your definition of a charismatic person is too limited. A force of personality is someone who can get people to act the way they want. A "charismatic" person is a subset of that, but there are other types. Charisma as the name of an attribute isn't the best full description of this quality, but it's what we have, and to exclude other subsets (eg. liars, intimidating presences) completely from any attribute is unacceptable.

As examples, Bluff and Intimidate key off Charisma, but are not what I would consider key skills of a charismatic person. However, both are skills that help manipulate others into doing what the user wants.

Dark Archive

DropBearHunter wrote:

/rubs eyes

flexible ability boost?
on top of the other 2?
so instead of +2+2-2 it is now +2+2+2-2

and I thought a new edition would be a reset of the power creep.

One thing they have already noted is that there will be a different way of generating your stats that is inspired by the Starfinder system. So, yes, if you still rolled your stats or did point buy THEN applied these bonuses that would be some pretty impressive bonuses. However, it's likely to be more along the lines of everything starts at 10, you apply these bonuses first, have a small pool of points (say 10) to increase them but nothing can be improved beyond 18.. and you get something a little more balanced.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

The only issue (admittedly a minor one) that I have with the Goblin ability score modifiers is that they cannot be deduced from their 1E ability score modifiers -- so any existing race that also does not follow the standard patterns will not have an obvious conversion. Of course, it is possible that we will see the same problem when we see the patterns for the existing core races in the playtest rules, which would leave us with similar problems for the far more numerous races that currently follow the standard patterns.

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Gip wrote:
Nox Aeterna wrote:

So... people actually think they will play goblins, but not be treated like a pest/problem often by pretty much everyone... that is an interesting thought.

Guess better ban the race indeed, players clearly are building up diferent expectations than i would ever GM for the race.

Gip actually look forward to showing long shanks there hypocrisy.

I find it amusing that Gip can spell "hypocrisy" but not "their".

On the other hand, a goblin spelling anything is impressive. Well done Gip!


TwilightKnight wrote:
The problem with adding goblins to core is how they are going to appear in the rest of the publications, especially APs and modules (and scenarios).

For the life of me, I cannot recall a single gnome NPC in a Paizo published adventure. So I don't know if this is going to be a major issue. Sure, you might have to work harder to work a goblin PC into something, but that was always true with some choices (Halflings in Cheliax, Arcane Spellcasters in Ustalav, Clerics in Rahadoum, etc.)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Gorbacz wrote:
Because the people who want to play goblins want to play them as destructive arsonists garnished with baby eating habits roughly 97% of the time.

That needs proof for me to believe it is that low.

Sovereign Court

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber
PossibleCabbage wrote:
For the life of me, I cannot recall a single gnome NPC in a Paizo published adventure.

I can think of a few. The most major ones are the gnome friend-NPCs from book 1 of Serpent's Skull and Skull and Shackles. Weirdly, in my experience, they tend to be hated pretty much from the word go.

PFS has a few here and there, mostly in very minor positions - leading you to the meeting place, etc. Though there was the gnome professor and his animated whale carcass...


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Saying that "Oh no, then we'll have many more goblin NPCs forced upon us!" seems to me to be a huge slap in the face of the people actually writing e.g. the APs and the editors at Paizo. You're basically telling them that they can't figure out to put in appropriate NPCs in the adventures, NPCs that actually fit the story that's being told.
Yes, that might actually be a goblin NPC, but it's just as likely going to be the same as it's been up to now, the most appropriate NPC for that particular role.


PossibleCabbage wrote:

I like the idea of having small characters without a strength penalty, and between goblins, gnomes, and halflings the goblins are probably the best candidates for "wiry strength."

Plus we already had in PF1 "small-sized aasimars and tieflings" so you could have a gnome-sized Angelkin who start out with +4 strength relative to other gnomes (+6 if you use the chart!) I like that there are less "obviously a corner case abuse" options for small characters who want to be strong.

I also like the idea of small characters without a STR penalty (in fact, in my homebrew setting I removed the Halfling's CHA Bonus and STR penalty for this reason).

And obviously a situation where a particular member of a small race has angelic ancestry is a bit different.

My issue here is specifically with Goblins lacking the penalty, as I feel that being physically weak is actually important to how they behave and how they have been perceived by the world.

Grand Lodge

10 people marked this as a favorite.
PossibleCabbage wrote:
you might have to work harder to work a goblin PC into something

Not working them in, working them out. A campaign with a core race restricted is not the norm. Somsay someone hates gnomes. Whatever, it’s their campaign. They have to do the work removing NPC gnomes and any encounters with gnomes out of the narrative. Everyone else doesn’t care. By making goblins core, they will inevitably appear as NPCs and in other situations were it will require significant effort to excise them from the game. If we assume that the majority of people don’t like goblins in core it means a lot of GMs will have to make significant changes to run these products and they may decide it’s not worth the effort. Now, it’s certainly too early to tell which group,is bigger (pro core goblin vs con core goblin) but if they fail to produce a substantial change in the narrative to justify the shift in attitude towards goblins, the cautiously expectant readers will join the group against core goblins. In that circumstance, the con group like likely be much larger than the pro group. It’s rarely a good idea to publish game material that you know is disliked by the majority of the customers.

Historically, it’s also generally proven to be a bad idea to significantly change the imagery of an iconic aspect of your product, whether that be Hollywood, works of fiction, comics, etc. sure there are exceptions but they are rare. This is what concerns me the most.


TwilightKnight wrote:
Not working them in, working them out.

Did you honestly work out the Goblin who wants to be a Hellknight in Council of Thieves? Unless the PCs are in a "Goblin village" it's almost certain that all of the goblin NPCs are just going to be members of a barely-tolerated-because-they-do-the-dirty-jobs-no-one-else-wants underclass, so if the PCs are investigating some nefarious doings and the witness is a traumatized goblin girl who works at the docks who saw something, you're going to take the time to write that out?

Why?


5 people marked this as a favorite.

I, for one, am always happy to welcome more dues-paying members into the fold.

Dark Archive

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Serum wrote:
Mbertorch wrote:

Oh, and I'm still not convinced by the whole "Charisma is sheer force of personality."

Has no one but me known someone is very talkative, annoying, confident, strong-willed, and inconsiderate? Definitely a strong personality, but if someone called him/her charismatic... no, that'd be wrong. So yeah. Still not buying Charismatic Goblins. AS WRITTEN. After the explanation Paizo is gonna give, well, then, we'll see.

EDIT: To be clear, I don't think Charisma is just appearance. But I DO think it's a strong personality with some significant positive traits.

Someone who brings up divisive topics regardless of how it makes others feel because he/she wants to talk about them, cuts people off to make his or her points, doesn't nuance anything to appeal to his/her audience because he/she can't be bothered, and won't drop a topic when told to, is by no means a weak personality. But Charismatic? Nope. Don't see it.

Your definition of a charismatic person is too limited. A force of personality is someone who can get people to act the way they want. A "charismatic" person is a subset of that, but there are other types. Charisma as the name of an attribute isn't the best full description of this quality, but it's what we have, and to exclude other subsets (eg. liars, intimidating presences) completely from any attribute is unacceptable.

As examples, Bluff and Intimidate key off Charisma, but are not what I would consider key skills of a charismatic person. However, both are skills that help manipulate others into doing what the user wants.

I'm with Mbertorch on this one. Goblins might have strong personalities, but they're grating and hard to relate to. Even the advanced race guide calls them "unpleasant to be around", and on the whole I think Golarion's humans would tend to agree.

In a lot of ways it seems to me that racial scores tend to be a comparison regarding humans. So if humanity as a whole finds something unpleasant, that race will probably have a negative charisma modifier. And even if something has made the little guys less murderous, I don't see how on the whole it'll make the other races like them more.
Heck the original post has to sugar coat them so thick I feel like I'm getting diabetes from reading it.
"their distinctive cultural habits while spreading the enthusiasm, inscrutable quirkiness, love of puns and song, and unique mirth that mark goblin adventurers."
In my experiences (YRMV), enthusiasm=mania, quirkiness=violent and stupid, love of puns=accurate, unique mirth=also mania.


Pathfinder Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Laird IceCubez wrote:

Speaking of half-bloods, I wonder if there'll be a half-fey ancestry.

So far almost every major plane has one. Except the 2 energy planes, 2 transitive planes and the fey plane (First World).

Well... I already count the gnomes as that IMHO. That's one reason why I really like Pathfinder gnomes, as I like everything fae.

The Thing From Another World wrote:
[...] Not to mention they would to redo the above art because imo if that is the art being used for Goblin pcs it's anything but promoting good goblins imo....

I'll just mention here that the current Alchemist iconic is a drugged junkie serial killer. EVEN if the iconic Goblin Alchemist is worse than that, it won't be by that much.


Pathfinder Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Ectar wrote:

[...]

I'm with Mbertorch on this one. Goblins might have strong personalities, but they're grating and hard to relate to. Even the advanced race guide calls them "unpleasant to be around", and on the whole I think Golarion's humans would tend to agree.
In a lot of ways it seems to me that racial scores tend to be a comparison regarding humans. So if humanity as a whole finds something unpleasant, that race will probably have...

What if Ancestries only represent the adventurers that actually try to fit in? They already said the monster/NPCs stats will use different rules than players. Maybe the "monster" version will have different stats. And that could be true for all "Ancestries"

[EDIT] Sorry for the double post, I wanted to edit this in my previous post. *bow*


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Crager Muldoon wrote:

I blame Lundeen for this - not Bulmahn. This is exactly the kind of stuff Lundeen would pull when he was a Living Greyhawk campaign administrator back in the early 2000s. And then he's usually kill the thing he gave you in spectacular fashion.

Lundeen's a lawyer - so he knows how to screw over the players legally. And now he's got the biggest audience of them all. (shakes fist) Darn you Lundeen! Darn you to Heck!!!!!

For the record, I worked with Ron back in those days of LG, so I took the opportunity to poke at him a little here. Maybe that's why I have so little issue with some of this. I worked with him and Jason "back in the day" and trust them to do their best to make a good game better. If those charged with maintaining civility on this thread thought that I meant some sort of personal slight or attack, I very much apologize for how that came across. (Although Ron *did* have a wicked streak when it came to some of his traps, and I've yet to see anything that disabuses myself of that notion) :)

Vernon L. Vincent
Living Greyhawk somebody-or-other


5 people marked this as a favorite.

I am reminded of "Beetlejuice" which is one of my favorite films. Michael Keaton's eponymous character is as scene grabbing a character as you will find on camera- 100% of the time he is on screen the movie is about him. He is also incredibly grating so the filmmakers have the good sense to only have the titular character be on screen for about 1/3 of the movie.

A lot of Goblin NPCs operate in that Beetlejuice mode, whereby they are a manic ball of audacious and unpredictable, which is fine since the story is not about NPCs. Most NPCs are disposable, once they've fulfilled their purpose the party need not ever see them again. Probably don't want all of your NPCs to be Beetlejuice but you also don't want all of your NPCs to be goblins.

If you're going to be a PC though- you can't be Beetlejuice, or Jack Sparrow (which is why the later Pirates of the Carribean movies didn't work- he cannot be the main character!), or anyone in that vein. A PC has to defer to the rest of the party and to the plot from time to time- you cannot just make it about you. So you've got to pick your spots to be wacky, and the rest of the time try to be a semi-realistic person who thinks about what they do before they do it and cares about what other people (at least the rest of the party) thinks and wants.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Ectar wrote:
Serum wrote:
Mbertorch wrote:

Oh, and I'm still not convinced by the whole "Charisma is sheer force of personality."

Has no one but me known someone is very talkative, annoying, confident, strong-willed, and inconsiderate? Definitely a strong personality, but if someone called him/her charismatic... no, that'd be wrong. So yeah. Still not buying Charismatic Goblins. AS WRITTEN. After the explanation Paizo is gonna give, well, then, we'll see.

EDIT: To be clear, I don't think Charisma is just appearance. But I DO think it's a strong personality with some significant positive traits.

Someone who brings up divisive topics regardless of how it makes others feel because he/she wants to talk about them, cuts people off to make his or her points, doesn't nuance anything to appeal to his/her audience because he/she can't be bothered, and won't drop a topic when told to, is by no means a weak personality. But Charismatic? Nope. Don't see it.

Your definition of a charismatic person is too limited. A force of personality is someone who can get people to act the way they want. A "charismatic" person is a subset of that, but there are other types. Charisma as the name of an attribute isn't the best full description of this quality, but it's what we have, and to exclude other subsets (eg. liars, intimidating presences) completely from any attribute is unacceptable.

As examples, Bluff and Intimidate key off Charisma, but are not what I would consider key skills of a charismatic person. However, both are skills that help manipulate others into doing what the user wants.

I'm with Mbertorch on this one. Goblins might have strong personalities, but they're grating and hard to relate to. Even the advanced race guide calls them "unpleasant to be around", and on the whole I think Golarion's humans would tend to agree.

In a lot of ways it seems to me that racial scores tend to be a comparison regarding humans. So if humanity as a whole finds something unpleasant, that race will probably have...

The problem is that Charisma is used for so many different things. It's like the way your Wisdom increases as you move up in age categories because it's supposed to represent ability to reason and know true from false that comes with gaining life experience, but increasing your wisdom also improves your perception, which means that you actually see and hear better as you get older.

Shadow Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Vernon Vincent wrote:
{Although Ron *did* have a wicked streak when it came to some of his traps, and I've yet to see anything that disabuses myself of that notion) :)

*looks at Temple of Empyreal Enlightenment* Yup, still going strong.


Pathfinder Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Toblakai wrote:
Elfteiroh wrote:


Ok ok! What if, the final AP was about the group of players, tasked to help a good goblin to reach the Star Stone!? I always wanted to know what was happening in that place, and finishing an AP and everyone become gods!? That would be EPIC! xD

Maybe goblins becoming evil is actually a virus and the AP is to come up with an vaccine. So there are still pockets of evil goblins out there.

It could be called "The Goblin Strain". xD

Haha! I like that too! Could be a fungus. Never thrust the fungus.

Shadow Lodge

Ectar wrote:

I'm with Mbertorch on this one. Goblins might have strong personalities, but they're grating and hard to relate to. Even the advanced race guide calls them "unpleasant to be around", and on the whole I think Golarion's humans would tend to agree.

In a lot of ways it seems to me that racial scores tend to be a comparison regarding humans. So if humanity as a whole finds something unpleasant, that race will probably have a negative charisma modifier. And even if something has made the little guys less murderous, I don't see how on the whole it'll make the other races like them more.
Heck the original post has to sugar coat them so thick I feel like I'm getting diabetes from reading it.
"their distinctive cultural habits while spreading the enthusiasm, inscrutable quirkiness, love of puns and song, and unique mirth that mark goblin adventurers."
In my experiences (YRMV), enthusiasm=mania, quirkiness=violent and stupid, love of puns=accurate, unique mirth=also mania.

To be fair, I purposely only responded to his opinions on Charisma, not whether or not goblins should have a bonus to it. I'm intrigued by Int bonus and Wis penalty myself, given their junk crafting and bomb making traits.

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Goblins as core PC's is one of two items in previews which concern me from a canon/headcanon standpoint (the other being resonance).

That said, it's certainly not something that is make or break for me until I see the entire system. After all, these are designers who have helped me to have a lot of fun with my friends over the last 10+ years.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Telebuddy wrote:
MerlinCross wrote:
Telebuddy wrote:
I’m fine with goblins as a core race and as far as “all” goblins as pyromaniac douch canoes is like saying every 1/2 orc is the product of a brutal rape. Can a player play against stereo type and not be annoying? They can. For those who won’t “allow” a goblin pc in their game could be missing out on potentialy great role play in my opinion.

The "Possible Great RP" doesn't seem to sit well with; Paladins, Necromancers, other monsterous races used as dim witted can on fodder, playable undead, Summoners, Leadership, and far more than I'm willing to keep listing or even know of.

I don't understand why "Oh they might be good" is an excuse just for Goblins. By that reasoning, a DM I saw should have let a player have his Rogue. Centaur. In Skulls and Shackles. Because of the RP possibilities outweigh any confusion and balacening of "Oh does this work?"]

And as I posted no one is forcing you to allow goblins in your campaign, If you don’t like it don’t use it, period end of sentence.

Darksol has an excellent post about the whole "forcing you" idea.

Myself, I was just pointing out that "Maybe good RP" is a flimsy excuse to give when compared to other things in pathfinder that cause problem, some to the point they are banned in most the games(Summoner, Leadership) for mechanics or due to the RP/Character issuses(Paladin and at times Gnomes)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Serum wrote:
Mbertorch wrote:

Oh, and I'm still not convinced by the whole "Charisma is sheer force of personality."

Has no one but me known someone is very talkative, annoying, confident, strong-willed, and inconsiderate? Definitely a strong personality, but if someone called him/her charismatic... no, that'd be wrong. So yeah. Still not buying Charismatic Goblins. AS WRITTEN. After the explanation Paizo is gonna give, well, then, we'll see...

Your definition of a charismatic person is too limited. A force of personality is someone who can get people to act the way they want. A "charismatic" person is a subset of that, but there are other types. Charisma as the name of an attribute isn't the best full description of this quality, but it's what we have, and to exclude other subsets (eg. liars, intimidating presences) completely from any attribute is unacceptable.

As examples, Bluff and Intimidate key off Charisma, but are not what I would consider key skills of a charismatic person. However, both are skills that help manipulate others into doing what the user wants.

Okay. Good points. But as far as force of personality being someone getting another to act how they want, Goblins still fall short for me. As does the (not so) hypothetical person I described. I think Intelligence is just as fitting, if not more so.

1,551 to 1,600 of 1,765 << first < prev | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion / Paizo Blog: Goblins! All Messageboards