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
1,601 to 1,650 of 1,765 << first < prev | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | next > last >>
Lantern Lodge Customer Service & Community Manager

9 people marked this as a favorite.

Temporarily locking this so we can get a handle on the flags

Customer Service Representative

11 people marked this as a favorite.

I have removed several posts and replies to them. I am going to unlock the thread.

This is a topic that many folks are very passionate about. Lets keep that in mind and before we post take a moment to step away from the keyboard, take a breath or 2, and reread our words before posting them. We can disagree on a subject and still discuss it without being snide, sarcastic, or mean spirited. There is a difference between discussing ideas and attacking people. Reread your words before posting and make sure they do the first one, but not the second.

Shadow Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Thank you both.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

i have not decided , will my 1st goblin character be an alchemist , wizard ,cleric of Shelyn or other ...hmmmm


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
jimthegray wrote:
i have not decided , will my 1st goblin character be an alchemist , wizard ,cleric of Shelyn or other ...hmmmm

... no love for bards?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I just need the details on how Paladins work so I can start sketching out how Grolka Humblebrow née Horsebiter, Goblin Paladin of Folgrit is going to work.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Cole Deschain wrote:
jimthegray wrote:
i have not decided , will my 1st goblin character be an alchemist , wizard ,cleric of Shelyn or other ...hmmmm
... no love for bards?

never really been a bard guy, nothing wrong with them but no great urge to play one.

besides a cleric of Shelyn can be rped as a singer also if i went that route.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
TwilightKnight wrote:
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.

One concern is how the image can change to be effective for creating player characters and still serve the same role. Paizo's goblins are quite iconic, and having a change could limit this.

Second Seekers (Roheas)

I wish I could do something stronger than hit favorite on TwilightKnight's two most recent posts, so I guess this is a post saying "yes, among other foreseen problems, this seems like probably the biggest and I worry it hasn't been properly thought through"


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

As far as whether the Charisma boost goes, I'd say they've definitely succeeded at an Intimidate check to convince a lot of players that they're far more terrifying than evidence actually suggests...

Customer Service Representative

2 people marked this as a favorite.

The various goblin threads are moving very quickly. To help us keep up with the moderation of these threads they will be locked overnight and unlocked again tomorrow morning when we are back in the office.

Customer Service Representative

I am unlocking the various goblin threads. Lets remember to keep things civil and friendly!

Silver Crusade

10 people marked this as a favorite.

Flee, Diego! Flee while you can!


Still wishing we'd gotten some answers to the questions that had been posted (outside of the one on hit points) but... we'll have another blog up with Ancestry Feats in a few hours hopefully so maybe that will have more answers.


7 people marked this as a favorite.

Finally!!!!

It's ME, GRAELSIS, YOUR BELOVED GOBLIN, TALL FOKS!!!

No wonder why our ancestors decided to eat your children, look how maddy maddy you go when the great masters allow us to enter in the adventures!!! yooooouuuuuuuuuuuu oooopppppppppprrrresiiivvvee tall folks!!!

I want to say, since things are heated up, that i'm of course joking, and everyone of you that know me or my posts also knows that i love goblins. For the beauty of the sunny sunny goddess, I even act like one in this forum when i answer the topics.

That said, i've a few things to say about this, and i would like (like most of us) to be heared about this. I also understand that we all have different points of view, but you knwo what i allways say. I LOVE YOU ALL, TALL FOLKS (who doesn't when you are so delicious?)

ok, lets go now.

1: Dear world masters/creators. I know my people can be a bit tricky some times. We like to burn things down, kill people (and dogs), eat a lot (and dogs), scream a lot (and dogs), and that stuff. For me, beign a different goblin as a exuse to be in a party is ok, but i would work a bit more in the details about how do people see gob society in the new edition. I'm aware that this is just a blog and there are a lot of details to be revealed, but please, change a bit the situation of the gobs, just enough to make it more attractive rather than "you are different, but people will still try to hunt you down in every city untill you are famous for beign different". Even if that is ok, it seems like the only way to play a gob.

2: Dear world and adventures in general. YES, WE ARE NOW IN DA HOOD, AND WHE'VE COME TO STAY, YO PINKY'S. So...so...sorry, you know, the race. Nah, talking serious now; I can understand that making goblins a core race without any change is hard, even harder if you think that gobs are mostly evil and destructors and the background of the gob characters seem to be focused in just one thing. Maybe we can put our effort in asking for background improvements (i've seen a few awsome suggestions here) instead of fighting for the gobs to dissapear again in the monster manual as the pest they are now.

3: You dont know what a green kiss is, until you have try a goblin kiss.

GOBLIN SUGGESTIONS:

¡I have one!

¡Me too!

¡Shut up Richard, nobody likes your suggestions!

¡EVERYBODY LIKES MY SUGGESTIONS!

¡NOT SINCE YOU KILLED THE BOSS WITH THE LAST ONE, RICHARD!

Sorry for that, hard to contain the guys. Me myself have one suggestion for a new way to understand gobs; look, goblins have been long time despised and hated for the rest of Golarion, that's true. There have been now more than 15 AP's where the adventure's have fight against great evil.

What if, in the last adventure of pathfinder first edition, one goblin decides to change his destiny and joins the group of the official team in the battle?.

That gob doesnt need to be the greatest hero of all times, nor the lamelight focus, he just need three things; land, power and goblins. Maybe that gob can fight a greater evil just to turn himself in the biggest warlord of all times and then, with all that power, create with time, patiente and influence the core race you want to add in the game, a new race of goblins raised under the flag of a hero that believed in a possible change, in a new way of growing as an entire race, instead of just surviving fight after fight.

I think that may allow you to introduce a new type of goblin without the need of changing all the race. Of course there would be evil gobs, of course there would be still dangerous tribes, but there would also be the chance of fighting for a new socciety, for your beloved and your friends, for your family and, maybe, just maybe, for a moment when the people of golarion see you as a shinning beacon of hope, good, and prosperity for everyone.

And all of that without needing to say you are the only one different, but the result of years of effort, training, and the dream of one single goblin.

OOOOOR WE CAN ALL DANCE AROUND AN ALIEN STONE TO TURN INTELLIGENT.

YEAHHH EYAAAAHHH YEAAAAHHHEYEYAAAHH

YEAAAHAHHEYAAHHH

Sigh*...gobs.


9 people marked this as a favorite.

Points for effort but if I have to listen to someone talk Gobbo once a week for a couple hours, I'm going to go mad.

Shadow Lodge

12 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm customer support. I hear worse almost daily.


I mean, if I don't know how to talk "Goblin" should I avoid playing them? I've read examples but it doesn't come naturally. Do I just have to come up with backstories that justify particularly erudite and formal (for goblins) characters?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
PossibleCabbage wrote:
I mean, if I don't know how to talk "Goblin" should I avoid playing them? I've read examples but it doesn't come naturally. Do I just have to come up with backstories that justify particularly erudite and formal (for goblins) characters?

Nope. Quite a few talk better than the others, for any number of reasons. Part of their quirkiness.


Tangent101 wrote:
Still wishing we'd gotten some answers to the questions that had been posted (outside of the one on hit points) but... we'll have another blog up with Ancestry Feats in a few hours hopefully so maybe that will have more answers.

I'm sure we'll get more in the near future. At least by the second Ancestry blog if nothing else.

Is Ancestry Feats confirmed to be next?

MerlinCross wrote:
Points for effort but if I have to listen to someone talk Gobbo once a week for a couple hours, I'm going to go mad.

I dunno, I've been watching Critical Role's second campaign, and Sam has been amazing with his Goblin, Nott the Brave.

CR Campaign 2 Episode 13 spoilers:
For a while, the vibe between Caleb and Nott was often viewed as a familial one, between parent and child. Nott revealing that, contrary to perceptions, she's the parent in that relationship worked so well in hindsight.

Her determination to always keep him well stocked with healing potions, her searching for magical options so he can be fully prepared to defend himself, even her desire to take Fjord's letter to the local magical school so she could change it for Caleb, so he could get that education that could let him live up to the full potential she believes he can be...I felt legitimate emotions during that reveal, helped by the fact that Sam is a talented actor.

Sure, Nott's got her problems (the alcoholism, her "itch" for taking things *which came with being a Rogue I suppose*, and her and Caleb's more subgroup focus), but she's trying her damnedest despite her legitimate fears about how people view Goblins in proper society (hence the mask).

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mewzard wrote:
Tangent101 wrote:
Still wishing we'd gotten some answers to the questions that had been posted (outside of the one on hit points) but... we'll have another blog up with Ancestry Feats in a few hours hopefully so maybe that will have more answers.

I'm sure we'll get more in the near future. At least by the second Ancestry blog if nothing else.

Is Ancestry Feats confirmed to be next?

All they have said was the next blog would go into more about ancestries. I am sure this will at least touch on Ancestry Feats but to what level is hard to say. I'd personally really like to get an idea of things like: Do you start with 1 or more ancestry feats? How often would you likely gain more of these feats? We know every odd level seems to be a class feat, but not really a cadence for Skill Feats and Ancestry Feats.

Mewzard wrote:
MerlinCross wrote:
Points for effort but if I have to listen to someone talk Gobbo once a week for a couple hours, I'm going to go mad.

I dunno, I've been watching Critical Role's second campaign, and Sam has been amazing with his Goblin, Nott the Brave.

** spoiler omitted **

Now, I've not watched the Critical Roll episodes for this season and only a few from the first season. But, they are playing D&D 5e and /technically/ D&D Goblins are quite different from Pathfinder ones. They are weak, downtrodden and not too intelligent but do not tend to be the comedic clowns and punsters they are in Pathfinder normally. It is, however, entirely possible that Sam plays his Goblin in this way regardless. I can see it working quite well. Just as most times I've been in groups with a Goblin being played they were rather more serious and more akin to D&D goblins than classic Pathfinder ones.

Silver Crusade

TOZ wrote:
I'm customer support. I hear worse almost daily.

Ditto.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
MerlinCross wrote:
Points for effort but if I have to listen to someone talk Gobbo once a week for a couple hours, I'm going to go mad.

This fear Primes have of madness is waaaaaay overhyped. Just lean into it. Once you're over the hump, it's not bad, really.

Edit: I'm gonna dig out my old copy of (2e's) Planescape: Faces of Evil and re-read the Xanxost authored section. I think Xanxost-speak would be a pretty close fit for at least some Golarion goblins.

Edit 2: I imagine that Grimlock-speak from the G1 Transformers cartoon could work for some goblins too.

Edit 3: Or Mojo Jojo-speak from the first Powerpuff Girls cartoon could work too, but it's hard to talk in that circular repeating pattern all the time.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
PossibleCabbage wrote:
I mean, if I don't know how to talk "Goblin" should I avoid playing them? I've read examples but it doesn't come naturally. Do I just have to come up with backstories that justify particularly erudite and formal (for goblins) characters?

i have enjoyed the goblins in the varies podcasts that i have heard for pf2 none spoke in the expected goblin cadence but they were fun

Silver Crusade

6 people marked this as a favorite.
Graelsis wrote:

Finally!!!!

It's ME, GRAELSIS, YOUR BELOVED GOBLIN, TALL FOKS!!!

No wonder why our ancestors decided to eat your children, look how maddy maddy you go when the great masters allow us to enter in the adventures!!! yooooouuuuuuuuuuuu oooopppppppppprrrresiiivvvee tall folks!!!

I want to say, since things are heated up, that i'm of course joking, and everyone of you that know me or my posts also knows that i love goblins. For the beauty of the sunny sunny goddess, I even act like one in this forum when i answer the topics.

That said, i've a few things to say about this, and i would like (like most of us) to be heared about this. I also understand that we all have different points of view, but you knwo what i allways say. I LOVE YOU ALL, TALL FOLKS (who doesn't when you are so delicious?)

ok, lets go now.

1: Dear world masters/creators. I know my people can be a bit tricky some times. We like to burn things down, kill people (and dogs), eat a lot (and dogs), scream a lot (and dogs), and that stuff. For me, beign a different goblin as a exuse to be in a party is ok, but i would work a bit more in the details about how do people see gob society in the new edition. I'm aware that this is just a blog and there are a lot of details to be revealed, but please, change a bit the situation of the gobs, just enough to make it more attractive rather than "you are different, but people will still try to hunt you down in every city untill you are famous for beign different". Even if that is ok, it seems like the only way to play a gob.

2: Dear world and adventures in general. YES, WE ARE NOW IN DA HOOD, AND WHE'VE COME TO STAY, YO PINKY'S. So...so...sorry, you know, the race. Nah, talking serious now; I can understand that making goblins a core race without any change is hard, even harder if you think that gobs are mostly evil and destructors and the background of the gob characters seem to be focused in just one thing. Maybe we can put our effort in asking for background improvements (i've seen a few...

So I see posts like this where people defend the Goblins in character, and I want to lay out what goes through my mind as I see it.

"This strikes me as a typical example of the kind of person who wants to play a goblin. He's being very funny and it's amusing, but how naturally can he fit these jokes into a campaign? Is he going to be derailing things to talk about fire and dogs and other Goblin things? Is this going to disrupt the tone of a dramatic campaign I'm trying to run? Am I ever going to be able to run a session including this guy that is not going to be about the fact that he is a goblin? Will anyone else be able to get a word in edgewise? Just how constant are these jokes going to be? With the kind of person who wants to make them be the same kind of person who would think to not make them for the sake of courtesy to other people?"

It should go without saying that I don't know anything about the specific person I'm replying to here, and I'm sure they're wonderful. I'm just trying to get across what my anxieties are as plainly as I possibly can. This post is funny and I like it, but I would not like to experience nothing but it for 4 hours, especially when everyone was trying to do a published module. I emphasize that I am not saying anything about this particular individual, but I do worry that the kind of person who is attracted to playing a goblin is also the kind of person who would be a diva without realizing it.

Is this still too insulting? I swear I'm trying everything I can and do not mean any offense.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
ThePuppyTurtle wrote:
This strikes me as a typical example of the kind of person who wants to play a goblin. He's being very funny and it's amusing, but how naturally can he fit these jokes into a campaign? Is he going to be derailing things to talk about fire and dogs and other Goblin things? Is this going to disrupt the tone of a dramatic campaign I'm trying to run? Am I ever going to be able to run a session including this guy that is not going to be about the fact that he is a goblin? Will anyone else be able to get a word in edgewise? Just how constant are these jokes going to be? With the kind of person who wants to make them be the same kind of person who would think to not make them for the sake of courtesy to other people?"

Allow me to answer those questions, all of them, the same way- by asking one of my own:

"Are you a responsible GM communicating with your players who are also communicating with each other?"

Quote:
This post is funny and I like it, but I would not like to experience nothing but it for 4 hours, especially when everyone was trying to do a published module.

Any single voice monopolizing an entire session is a problem. What do goblins have to do with that?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
ThePuppyTurtle wrote:

So I see posts like this where people defend the Goblins in character, and I want to lay out what goes through my mind as I see it.

"This strikes me as a typical example of the kind of person who wants to play a goblin. He's being very funny and it's amusing, but how naturally can he fit these jokes into a campaign? Is he going to be derailing things to talk about fire and dogs and other Goblin things? Is this going to disrupt the tone of a dramatic campaign I'm trying to run? Am I ever going to be able to run a session including this guy that is not going to be about the fact that he is a goblin? Will anyone else be able to get a word in edgewise? Just how constant are these jokes going to be? With the kind of person who wants to make them be the same kind of person who would think to not make them for the sake of courtesy to other people?"

It should go without saying that I don't know anything about the specific person I'm replying to here, and I'm sure they're wonderful. I'm just trying to get across what my anxieties are as plainly as I possibly can. This post is funny and I like it, but I would not like to experience nothing but it for 4 hours, especially when everyone was trying to do a published module. I emphasize that I am not saying anything about this particular individual, but I do worry that the kind of person who is attracted to playing a goblin is also the kind of person who would be a diva without realizing it.

Is this still too insulting? I swear I'm trying everything I can and do not mean any offense.

I don't think you're being insulting, you obviously worked very hard to get your point across without being demeaning.

Those are valid concerns. But I think they're exaggerated, and more importantly demonstrate how it's not disruptive options that make a character disruptive; it's the player. Having a funny goblin voice and talking goblin things is only going to derail a campaign if the player goes overboard. If the player does it in moderation, knowing when to be funny and when to be serious, it's no problem and makes the campaign more fun for everyone. And nowhere in the goblin description does it say "goblins must make light of every situation".

Even in Graelsis' comment, there were times when they were funny, and times when they were serious.

Silver Crusade

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Malachandra wrote:
ThePuppyTurtle wrote:

So I see posts like this where people defend the Goblins in character, and I want to lay out what goes through my mind as I see it.

"This strikes me as a typical example of the kind of person who wants to play a goblin. He's being very funny and it's amusing, but how naturally can he fit these jokes into a campaign? Is he going to be derailing things to talk about fire and dogs and other Goblin things? Is this going to disrupt the tone of a dramatic campaign I'm trying to run? Am I ever going to be able to run a session including this guy that is not going to be about the fact that he is a goblin? Will anyone else be able to get a word in edgewise? Just how constant are these jokes going to be? With the kind of person who wants to make them be the same kind of person who would think to not make them for the sake of courtesy to other people?"

It should go without saying that I don't know anything about the specific person I'm replying to here, and I'm sure they're wonderful. I'm just trying to get across what my anxieties are as plainly as I possibly can. This post is funny and I like it, but I would not like to experience nothing but it for 4 hours, especially when everyone was trying to do a published module. I emphasize that I am not saying anything about this particular individual, but I do worry that the kind of person who is attracted to playing a goblin is also the kind of person who would be a diva without realizing it.

Is this still too insulting? I swear I'm trying everything I can and do not mean any offense.

I don't think you're being insulting, you obviously worked very hard to get your point across without being demeaning.

Those are valid concerns. But I think they're exaggerated, and more importantly demonstrate how it's not disruptive options that make a character disruptive; it's the player. Having a funny goblin voice and talking goblin things is only going to derail a campaign if the player goes overboard. If the player does it in moderation,...

But in the places where he's serious, he, at least to my eyes, seems to break character and stop talking like a goblin in any way. The only thing he keeps doing is using the word "gobs."

Perhaps part of my problem here is that any PC would have to be more three-dimensional than any Goblin has ever been portrayed as being in order to be functional as one. When I think of goblins, I think of them as having only the one mode. That's something that would get really grading over time, and would constantly demand the attention of everyone both in and out of universe.

I think giving Goblins the capacity not to be Divas is just an aspect of the changes they're going to have to make. Someone Faithfully role-playing a typical Goblin would certainly be forced to act like a diva in order to do so.

Another way of putting it, is it in character for a goblin to stop talking and let the other players and GM have the spotlight? Of course it would be for some goblins, but for those closely following the standard presentation of their race, will that behavior be something they easily accidentally slip into?

Liberty's Edge

3 people marked this as a favorite.

So... if goblins suddenly became populous, civilized, and as common and gnomes and half-orcs... why are they monsterous raiders again in Starfinder?

That really suggests that whatever civilizations and culture they slowly develop, whatever reputation and gains they make as a people, will all be undone in the next few centuries...


Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Jester David wrote:

So... if goblins suddenly became populous, civilized, and as common and gnomes and half-orcs... why are they monsterous raiders again in Starfinder?

That really suggests that whatever civilizations and culture they slowly develop, whatever reputation and gains they make as a people, will all be undone in the next few centuries...

Or that only a few tribes of goblins happened to get off planet, and they were some of the more monsterous ones.


ThePuppyTurtle wrote:

But in the places where he's serious, he, at least to my eyes, seems to break character and stop talking like a goblin in any way. The only thing he keeps doing is using the word "gobs."

Perhaps part of my problem here is that any PC would have to be more three-dimensional than any Goblin has ever been portrayed as being in order to be functional as one. When I think of goblins, I think of them as having only the one mode. That's something that would get really grading over time, and would constantly demand the attention of everyone both in and out of universe.

I think giving Goblins the capacity not to be Divas is just an aspect of the changes they're going to have to make. Someone Faithfully role-playing a typical Goblin would certainly be forced to act like a diva in order to do so.

A lot of that can be chalked up to goblins only being portrayed under specific circumstances. A throwaway NPC will never have the depth of PC, or even a major NPC. You think of them in one mode because we've really only seen them in the one mode. There really hasn't been much said on goblins, culturally. Other than they like fire and trash and don't like reading. We will definitely need more for Core, and players may have to create their own goblin culture.

Jester David wrote:

So... if goblins suddenly became populous, civilized, and as common and gnomes and half-orcs... why are they monsterous raiders again in Starfinder?

That really suggests that whatever civilizations and culture they slowly develop, whatever reputation and gains they make as a people, will all be undone in the next few centuries...

Except making something Core doesn't make it populous, civilized, and common. It just means Paizo wants it to be a main part of their game.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
ThePuppyTurtle wrote:
But in the places where he's serious, he, at least to my eyes, seems to break character and stop talking like a goblin in any way. The only thing he keeps doing is using the word "gobs."

I suspect there may be some confirmation bias there.

When I read the post, I see the entire thing in character. I may be experiencing confirmation bias in a way that makes me read the whole thing in character when the author didn't intend to. In such a case, I would be false attributing positive aspects and diminishing negative aspects to better support my position.

When you read the post, you unconsciously assign the perceived negative parts to the character and the perceived positive parts to the player. You may be experiencing confirmation bias that makes you separate in character and out of character when the author didn't intend to. In such a case, you're impressing all the negatives and stripping out all the positives to better support your position.

We don't know which of us is closer to the truth until the author comes back and makes a statement about which parts of the post is in character and which parts are not.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
ThePuppyTurtle wrote:
Graelsis wrote:

Finally!!!!

It's ME, GRAELSIS, YOUR BELOVED GOBLIN, TALL FOKS!!!

No wonder why our ancestors decided to eat your children, look how maddy maddy you go when the great masters allow us to enter in the adventures!!! yooooouuuuuuuuuuuu oooopppppppppprrrresiiivvvee tall folks!!!

I want to say, since things are heated up, that i'm of course joking, and everyone of you that know me or my posts also knows that i love goblins. For the beauty of the sunny sunny goddess, I even act like one in this forum when i answer the topics.

That said, i've a few things to say about this, and i would like (like most of us) to be heared about this. I also understand that we all have different points of view, but you knwo what i allways say. I LOVE YOU ALL, TALL FOLKS (who doesn't when you are so delicious?)

ok, lets go now.

1: Dear world masters/creators. I know my people can be a bit tricky some times. We like to burn things down, kill people (and dogs), eat a lot (and dogs), scream a lot (and dogs), and that stuff. For me, beign a different goblin as a exuse to be in a party is ok, but i would work a bit more in the details about how do people see gob society in the new edition. I'm aware that this is just a blog and there are a lot of details to be revealed, but please, change a bit the situation of the gobs, just enough to make it more attractive rather than "you are different, but people will still try to hunt you down in every city untill you are famous for beign different". Even if that is ok, it seems like the only way to play a gob.

2: Dear world and adventures in general. YES, WE ARE NOW IN DA HOOD, AND WHE'VE COME TO STAY, YO PINKY'S. So...so...sorry, you know, the race. Nah, talking serious now; I can understand that making goblins a core race without any change is hard, even harder if you think that gobs are mostly evil and destructors and the background of the gob characters seem to be focused in just one thing. Maybe we can put our effort in asking for background

...

in the many years of pathfinder where i have played with goblin pcs "excluding we be goblins series" which can get crazy :)

I have yet to meet a disruptive goblin player,
sure there is usually a little bit of humor or voices, sometimes a bit of minor zanyness.
but no more so then many other classes and races that are being played.
im my experience "and this is just my personal experience" goblins are one of those races that tends to attract players that really like to roleplay.

i have no doubt that there are problem players would pay goblins but again that's a player issue and in my experience the #1 sign of a problem player or dm is when they say some version of this is how my character /npc would act as an excuse for when there messing with other players or dms.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
ThePuppyTurtle wrote:
Malachandra wrote:
ThePuppyTurtle wrote:

So I see posts like this where people defend the Goblins in character, and I want to lay out what goes through my mind as I see it.

"This strikes me as a typical example of the kind of person who wants to play a goblin. He's being very funny and it's amusing, but how naturally can he fit these jokes into a campaign? Is he going to be derailing things to talk about fire and dogs and other Goblin things? Is this going to disrupt the tone of a dramatic campaign I'm trying to run? Am I ever going to be able to run a session including this guy that is not going to be about the fact that he is a goblin? Will anyone else be able to get a word in edgewise? Just how constant are these jokes going to be? With the kind of person who wants to make them be the same kind of person who would think to not make them for the sake of courtesy to other people?"

It should go without saying that I don't know anything about the specific person I'm replying to here, and I'm sure they're wonderful. I'm just trying to get across what my anxieties are as plainly as I possibly can. This post is funny and I like it, but I would not like to experience nothing but it for 4 hours, especially when everyone was trying to do a published module. I emphasize that I am not saying anything about this particular individual, but I do worry that the kind of person who is attracted to playing a goblin is also the kind of person who would be a diva without realizing it.

Is this still too insulting? I swear I'm trying everything I can and do not mean any offense.

this is absolutely untrue , goblin players are and have been for years been portrayed goblins in more then 2 dimensions, as i said a moment ago, the goblin players are often the players that really get into roleplay.

and a goblin does not have to be evil, most goblin pcs are good aligned or N.

if a player is disruptive that's a player issue and one that is easy to resolve.

as for diva players ..those come in all types, but even they are fine if they do not overly hog the game.

Jester David wrote:

So... if goblins suddenly became populous, civilized, and as common and gnomes and half-orcs... why are they monsterous raiders again in Starfinder?

That really suggests that whatever civilizations and culture they slowly develop, whatever reputation and gains they make as a people, will all be undone in the next few centuries...

there not, there space age scavengers. the few in the aps are quite civil,, my party in my online game actually hired them as crew

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
bookrat wrote:
ThePuppyTurtle wrote:
But in the places where he's serious, he, at least to my eyes, seems to break character and stop talking like a goblin in any way. The only thing he keeps doing is using the word "gobs."

I suspect there may be some confirmation bias there.

When I read the post, I see the entire thing in character. I may be experiencing confirmation bias in a way that makes me read the whole thing in character when the author didn't intend to. In such a case, I would be false attributing positive aspects and diminishing negative aspects to better support my position.

When you read the post, you unconsciously assign the perceived negative parts to the character and the perceived positive parts to the player. You may be experiencing confirmation bias that makes you separate in character and out of character when the author didn't intend to. In such a case, you're impressing all the negatives and stripping out all the positives to better support your position.

We don't know which of us is closer to the truth until the author comes back and makes a statement about which parts of the post is in character and which parts are not.

Absolutely every word of that is true. Odds are, my current understanding of how goblins work will cause me to interpret anything serious as inherently ungoblinish. Malachandra made a lot of good points in their post. Goblins as a whole will definitely need to be fleshed out quite a lot in order to function as a core race.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
jimthegray wrote:
ThePuppyTurtle wrote:
Malachandra wrote:
ThePuppyTurtle wrote:

So I see posts like this where people defend the Goblins in character, and I want to lay out what goes through my mind as I see it.

"This strikes me as a typical example of the kind of person who wants to play a goblin. He's being very funny and it's amusing, but how naturally can he fit these jokes into a campaign? Is he going to be derailing things to talk about fire and dogs and other Goblin things? Is this going to disrupt the tone of a dramatic campaign I'm trying to run? Am I ever going to be able to run a session including this guy that is not going to be about the fact that he is a goblin? Will anyone else be able to get a word in edgewise? Just how constant are these jokes going to be? With the kind of person who wants to make them be the same kind of person who would think to not make them for the sake of courtesy to other people?"

It should go without saying that I don't know anything about the specific person I'm replying to here, and I'm sure they're wonderful. I'm just trying to get across what my anxieties are as plainly as I possibly can. This post is funny and I like it, but I would not like to experience nothing but it for 4 hours, especially when everyone was trying to do a published module. I emphasize that I am not saying anything about this particular individual, but I do worry that the kind of person who is attracted to playing a goblin is also the kind of person who would be a diva without realizing it.

Is this still too insulting? I swear I'm trying everything I can and do not mean any offense.

this is absolutely untrue , goblin players are and have been for years been portrayed goblins in more then 2 dimensions, as i said a moment ago, the goblin players are often the players that really get into roleplay.

and a goblin does not have to be evil, most goblin pcs are good aligned or N.

if a player is disruptive that's a player issue and one that is easy to resolve.

as for

...

I think the vast majority of goblin PCS are not evil because the vast majority of PCS are not evil because the vast majority of DM's do not allow evil players for very good reasons.

Maybe I've seen fewer Goblin players than you have, but my experience with them has been pretty 2-dimensional. Still, I have no doubt that what you're saying is true.

I'm using the word Diva as it's defined in the game mastery guide. In this sense, a Diva by definition dominates the game and prevents others from getting a word in edgewise. Otherwise, they're just a devoted role-player.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
ThePuppyTurtle wrote:
Absolutely every word of that is true. Odds are, my current understanding of how goblins work will cause me to interpret anything serious as inherently ungoblinish. Malachandra made a lot of good points in their post. Goblins as a whole will definitely need to be fleshed out quite a lot in order to function as a core race.

Now that I certainly agree with, and I am fully expecting Paizo to provide such details in the playtest and/or wherever goblins will be presented as a PC race, if the intent is to have a goblin PC be available in any given adventure.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jester David wrote:

So... if goblins suddenly became populous, civilized, and as common and gnomes and half-orcs... why are they monsterous raiders again in Starfinder?

That really suggests that whatever civilizations and culture they slowly develop, whatever reputation and gains they make as a people, will all be undone in the next few centuries...

I mean, there was a great civilization in central North America that constructed some of the largest urban centers on the continent prior to colonization that just collapsed after 500 or so years from a variety of factors (many of them related to mismanagement of resources.)

I figure "the Gap" in Starfinder exists precisely so they don't have to worry about what changes happen in Pathfinder releases that Postdate the release of Starfinder. Like if in an adventure path in 2023 all the elves permanently turn various shades of turquoise, that gets undone during whatever caused the Gap.

Silver Crusade

PossibleCabbage wrote:
Jester David wrote:

So... if goblins suddenly became populous, civilized, and as common and gnomes and half-orcs... why are they monsterous raiders again in Starfinder?

That really suggests that whatever civilizations and culture they slowly develop, whatever reputation and gains they make as a people, will all be undone in the next few centuries...

I mean, there was a great civilization in central North America that constructed some of the largest urban centers on the continent prior to colonization that just collapsed after 500 or so years from a variety of factors (many of them related to mismanagement of resources.)

I figure "the Gap" in Starfinder exists precisely so they don't have to worry about what changes happen in Pathfinder releases that Postdate the release of Starfinder. Like if in an adventure path in 2023 all the elves permanently turn various shades of turquoise, that gets undone during whatever caused the Gap.

I have a feeling that some of the changes to goblins are still going to trickle forward into starfinder material once Pathfinder two gets going.

Also, the goblins on Absalom station are all supposed to be the descendants of a single group that snuck onto a single spaceship, so if that group was a traditional Goblin tribe their descendants could have inherited those practices regardless of what happened, and what is still happening, on Golarion.

Grand Lodge

9 people marked this as a favorite.

Initially I didn’t like the idea of Goblins as core. However, after breathing and looking at the facts, I’ve changed my mind.

I wanted to start a post that tracked the arguments against Goblins being offered as a core race and the logical rebuttals to those arguments. Let’s take it as arguing in a court of law. If, after reading this you still are not convinced on the idea, well, then the problem is yours personally, not the system or Paizo’s. It’s fine to have personal preferences, but these should not be imposed on the game as a whole as released by Paizo or imposed on other players. As to the issues people have with the bonuses to the Goblin ancestry, well, it’s likely we’ll need to wait and see how other ancestries work in general and how they playtest. We simply don’t have enough info to make an educated determination on these yet with the little amount that’s been released.

The argument against Goblins as core is ultimately hinged on many false assumptions.

THE CORE ASSUMPTION:

A common refrain on here has been core = common. This assumption is simply incorrect. “Core” has never been defined as “common.” Along these lines, people have stated that more people will play Goblins because they are Core. First, all assumptions that are being made are being done so with PF1 I mind. This is PF2. It’s pretty clear PF2 will be a completely different system, so any notions about Goblins from PF1 can be set aside for now (more on lore later).
If core=common, then that would mean it doesn’t make sense that half-orcs and half-elves are core, because it’s clear by my experience, others’ experience, and lore that half-orcs and half-elves are not common. Shall we also look at the dwarf, who one developer seems to have some disdain for, which is seen to have a very real lack of options?

Core does not equal common. Race availability does not equal commonness with regard to population. There are no limits on how many “non-core” adventurers are allowed in PF1; Aasimars were popular at one point, so much so once that many groups had a majority of them. Yet they were not core and problems weren't caused because of it.

In essence, “core” really doesn’t mean anything. All it means is that what’s included in Core are the beginning options. Later, as more options are released, those new options are available. “Core” truly has no meaning except for, basically, “that which comes first before the other stuff.”

THE MONSTER ASSUMPTION:

This is where it is difficult for us, as people (humans) in the real world, to differentiate between a “monster” and a “civilized person.” There have been plenty of human beings that could be considered “monsters.” There’ve been plenty of “monsters” in games that have been “good guys.” A “monster” to one person may not be a “monster” to another, much like someone’s “freedom fighter” is a “rebel scum” to another. Relegating literally one race as “monsters” is and has been an issue that basically defines what racism is, but I don’t want to get into that mess. Suffice it to say people play this game to get away from these sorts of assumptions.

People have also expressed concerns about the many qualities and traits that Goblins possess. For one, that Goblins would be attacked on sight. This is not the case in lore at all times and in fact may be many GM interpretations, which is fine. But don’t attribute this to PF1 or attribute to PF2 without seeing what Paizo has put out on this. In my experience in PFS and home games, no creature of any kind has ever been “attacked on sight.” I’d argue that it would be a grave mistake to attack anything on sight, because valuable information and communication may be gotten should a conversation take place. The “attacking on sight” rhetoric is silly. Someone also said Goblin PCs would be attacked on sight. This is ridiculous should a GM enact this policy. A Goblin PC will be apart from their counterparts, because PCs are exceptional representations. I’m sure a Goblin PC will look and act far more civilized than one of their brethren. Not to mention, they’ll have several other well-equipped friends with them. Any GM making their Goblin PC get attacked on sight is severely lacking in imagination and empathy. Now, a GM who has guards carefully watch the Goblin PC as they browse wares could make perfect sense. Of course, should that Goblin PC enter a town that has just been attacked horrendously by Goblins, the PC may have some difficulty.

I’ve also seen it stated that Goblin PCs won’t fit into every campaign. Well, duh. Humans don’t fit into every campaign, either. Neither do Elves or Dwarves. Campaigns are usually specifically geographically located, which effects many things. Arguing that Goblin PCs won’t fit into “every” campaign is not a valid argument.
People say Goblins are murderous psychopaths. First, MOST Goblins ARE. However, as stated above, PCs are exceptional. There’s nothing –anywhere- that says Goblin PCs must adhere to being a murderous psychopath, not even in PF1. Second, there are entire books of murderously psychotic creatures: they’re called Bestiaries. Third, has anyone not seen a murderous psychotic human? Just saying “Goblins are murderous psychopaths” is not a valid argument.

They say Goblins are murder hobos. Well, I’m pretty sure every adventuring party falls under that category. So also not a valid argument.

They say there will “definitely be PvP.” Why? You’re telling me it only takes someone playing a Goblin PC (which they can already do in PF1) in PF2 to create PvP? This argument in laughably invalid.

PERSONAL PREFERENCE:

Most people’s arguments against Goblins are Core fall into, simply, “I’m not a fan,” “I hate Goblins,” “I don’t like Goblins,” “Not at my table.” Fine. But realize what you’re doing here. See all the “I’s?” I…I…My...My… The game is about more then YOU. It’s about us. You need to realize you play with others, and if you can’t handle others’ choices, then maybe this game isn’t for you. Now, should your players be fine with the decision to ban a rule, that’s perfectly fine. As a GM myself, I hold every right to ban anything I want. I spend my money, I spend my time, I spend my energy to create, prepare, and play a game. I get to choose. However, as a person who has friends and cares about what they want to do to have fun (and frankly, if my players aren’t having fun neither am I), I am readily able to accept what they would like to play, especially if that option has been deemed ok by the developers of the game.
For those who also say they don’t want “monster” or “strange” builds in their game: PF1 has plenty of these “monsters” and “strange” builds in the game! Do you also shy away from those? I doubt it.

GOBLIN STATS:

Charisma is often misunderstood and some can’t seem to figure out why a Goblin would have any Charisma. Charisma isn't all about how one looks. Just look at some of the charismatic people in history, or look at any fiction character who's hideous but can exercise a lot of power based on how they hold themselves, or interact with others. Charisma is one of the hardest abilities to explain to someone in game terms, let alone real life. Charisma is moxie. Charisma is the ability for everyone to take notice when you walk into a room without even saying a word. Charisma is often just something someone has which can’t be turned on or off. Some, like orators or actors, can train themselves to be more Charismatic. Charisma=personality, and Goblins have sure got a lot of it!

They say Goblins aren’t “good” enough to be with a PC group, or that they are Evil-aligned. Some easy say Chaotically-aligned. Well folks, Goblins aren’t Chaotic Evil, they are Neutral Evil. So the line about them being Chaotic is invalid. So is the line about them being Evil. We don’t know what alignment Goblin PCs are in PF2. Alignment isn’t necessarily restricted to the base monster type, just like with other Core races, they come in all shapes and sizes, from Lawful Good to Chaotic Evil. I’d also like to point out that plenty of Evil-aligned PCs can get along just fine with Good-aligned PCs. Evil doesn’t mean kill everything and ruin everyone’s happiness. Evil takes on a plethora of attributes. For those who don’t want Goblins in Core because they're Evil, well, then I suppose that means all Evil PCs are restricted. By the way, it’s important to note once again that we don’t know the alignment of Goblin PCs in PF2.

Someone also mentioned that playing a Goblin PC means you must adhere to all the worst aspects of Goblin culture. Why? Nowhere does anything say this is so. Do you not know the human condition, the miserable and horrendous ways some humans can behave? Why would we all have to adhere to a strict set of guidelines? That’s what makes PCs exceptional in the first place!

Pretty sure everyone’s had Lawful Good characters suggest burning down a building to get at what’s inside, too. So comparing Goblins to evil acts is an invalid argument, because PCs are different.
Regarding races, how do you treat half-orcs? Most half-orcs were raised in Belkzen in a violent, constant state of war. Orcs are just as violent as PF1 Goblins. Actually, since we have half-orcs, they are especially evil, vile, and repugnant. How do you think the “half” part came? A willing human? Nope. But I bet you don’t kill half-orcs on sight, do you?

ABUSE:

I’ve seen the Kender argument a lot. People seem to be deathly afraid that players will abuse the notion of what they think Goblins should be. But Goblins of and by itself as a race, or any other playable race, is not at fault for abuse. Only arrogant, un-empathetic, immature players play a character to the detriment of the party. This a problem with a player, not the race, not the rules. If you aren’t able to handle this type of player, maybe you should reconsider being a GM, reconsider being the person’s friend, or have an adult conversation with them describing this game as a team game and show how their actions cause disruptions.

Some say Goblin PCs will just play Goblins as the joke character they have been. I think players can readily play well-developed Goblin PCs that can function in a group and in society. Once again, if not, then it’s the player’s issue, not the Core rules issue.

LORE:

This is one sticking point for me, because in order to have Goblins accepted as viable PC races this must mean a shift in thinking in the world. That being said, there’s an entire year worth of lore left to be written in PF1; then we’ve got all the releases of PF2 to include this in.

I think it will take some delicate writing and creating from Paizo. As Jason has stated, this shift won’t be sudden.

In Golarion, it is an undisupted fact that Goblins are numerous and have been on the fringes of society for quite some time. I’d bet nobody in this forum has NOT played in an adventure where a benevolent Goblin encounter took place. Paizo has consistently given us situations and encounters with such Goblins. So the argument that this is a “sudden” shift is invalid.

Paizo has not said Goblins will be universally accepted, anyway! No race is. Different parts of Golarion have different views. Absalom may accept Goblins flitting about, by Sandpoint is likely to keep them at bay (or relegated to the dump). Nowhere has Paizo said Goblins will become universally accepted. Once again, people confuse core with commanility.

I’ve also seen time and again the mention of “better” races to be Core, such a Kitsune, Tengu, or Tiefling. They say these races are more “popular.” I beg to differ and unless you can prove otherwise, this argument is invalid. The popularity of Paizo’s Goblins are reknown. There’s never been a module We be Kitsune, or We be Tengu, Too. They don’t sell Kitsune or Tengu dolls. Paizo doesn’t use Kitsune or Tengu as icons. They do with Goblins, especially because Paizo has made Goblins their own, more so than any other system. I’m a former AD&D2e player and Goblins were never, ever popular and were often after though encounters at level 1.

To further another point, many times people choose those other races because they offer additional cool abilities which the Core races don’t offer. Sometimes this is the ONLY reason people select these races. I’m certain people won’t be selecting Goblins because of their fanastic abilities that make them above the other Core races. People will select Goblin PCs because they want to play a character they can match thematically or even want to try out what the race offers. I doubt Goblins will take over adventuring parties- and the proof is in the pudding, because this hasn’t happened in PF1.

Frankly, I think those who mention other races are mad that they’re preferred race wasn’t selected as Core. So what? Paizo wants to go with their iconic creature, one that is popular enough to sell items with and one that has been made into further play options.

It’s also been said that making Goblins a Core race will dilute Goblins as a monster race. How so? Do “good” Humans dilute the “bad” humans we fight against? No. Of course not.

I also see a lot said about the Goblinblood wars, which supposedly shows how bad Goblins are. You must be forgetting all the other wars by all the other races. Argument: invalid.

GMs always get to choose what’s in the world they’re running and invested in. However, if you don’t like Paizo Core rules and Golarion options, it’s incumbent upon you to delete references to Goblins from the products they release. Paizo wants Goblin PCs, the majority of players are OK with this, and they will be legal in PFS2. It’ll be up to you and your players (except PFS2) to hammer out personal issues with Goblin core PCs.

PFS:

Some have said PFS will be ruined by tables with all Goblin characters. This is invalid because it’s crying wolf. There’s no wolf! Are your home games made invalid by all-Goblin parties? No. They’re not. PF1 already allows Goblins to be played, so this argument is also invalid because your hinging on the above argument that core=common.

Some have even stated that if they play PFS at a table and a person using a Goblin sits down, they’ll get up and leave. Well, so be it. You shouldn’t be playing with others at all, then. Pretty sure PFS is not what that kind of behavior is about.

In closing, most arguments fall on the false assumption that core=common. There is some concern about how lore will portray the (not) sudden shift, but Paizo is fully capable of doing this. Have those of you upset with this aspect actually kept up with all the lore? Have you read all the novels, have copies of most of the material, played much?

Regardless, it’s my hope Goblins stay in Core. If you’re a player and don’t ever want to be one, that’s fine. I’ll never be a Wayang. But I'll certainly allow a player of mine to be one. But if you’re a GM and you ban Goblin PCs, then go ahead and limit your player’s choices because of perceived notions. If your player is ok with that, then I feel bad for everyone at that table will be missing out on some great fun. If you can’t overcome weird personal feelings you have against Goblins as a core race, then maybe it’s a failure of imagination. Social evolution isn’t the right of only certain races in the game. History has shown that the ideas of the “other” “evil savages” have led to some pretty terrible things. I know it’s difficult to overcome long-held beliefs, especially with things we love like this game, but it’s doable.

I take solace in the fact that PFS will adhere to Core and welcome the diversity that will come with it.


7 people marked this as a favorite.

Abuse
It totally is a Player problem. I however feel like I can blame Core/Paizo for opening the door a crack to such behavior.

Also, do games that now feature goblins as cannonfodder suddenly evil, wrong, and a sign of them being terrible people in real life? Cause that seems to be something I keep walking away with from these arguments.

"PFS will adhere to Core" Only their own perceived version of Core. Cause they'll house rule stuff. I don't welcome the annoyance Goblins might bring.


MerlinCross wrote:

Abuse

It totally is a Player problem. I however feel like I can blame Core/Paizo for opening the door a crack to such behavior.

Also, do games that now feature goblins as cannonfodder suddenly evil, wrong, and a sign of them being terrible people in real life? Cause that seems to be something I keep walking away with from these arguments.

"PFS will adhere to Core" Only their own perceived version of Core. Cause they'll house rule stuff. I don't welcome the annoyance Goblins might bring.

I think it depends on the context. If they’ve done something evil or work for someone evil, no worries. But you can’t just walk into an isolated goblin village and slaughter them for experience or loot. Assuming that an entire race of sentient creatures are evil is a little lazy. There are other creatures to fill that niche. Although if that’s the game world someone wants to play in, I don’t think that’s wrong. It’s just bland for me. And more importantly, I don’t think Paizo should have that in a campaign setting.


MerlinCross wrote:


Also, do games that now feature goblins as cannonfodder suddenly evil, wrong, and a sign of them being terrible people in real life?

No? Why would it be? I mean humans get used as Canon fodder all the time and no one seems to bat an eye at that.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Malachandra wrote:
MerlinCross wrote:

Abuse

It totally is a Player problem. I however feel like I can blame Core/Paizo for opening the door a crack to such behavior.

Also, do games that now feature goblins as cannonfodder suddenly evil, wrong, and a sign of them being terrible people in real life? Cause that seems to be something I keep walking away with from these arguments.

"PFS will adhere to Core" Only their own perceived version of Core. Cause they'll house rule stuff. I don't welcome the annoyance Goblins might bring.

I think it depends on the context. If they’ve done something evil or work for someone evil, no worries. But you can’t just walk into an isolated goblin village and slaughter them for experience or loot. Assuming that an entire race of sentient creatures are evil is a little lazy. There are other creatures to fill that niche. Although if that’s the game world someone wants to play in, I don’t think that’s wrong. It’s just bland for me. And more importantly, I don’t think Paizo should have that in a campaign setting.

And yet we keep having races that are Evil. I keep raising up Sahagins if only because I was looking through the Skull and Shackles AP. Yeah they're a replacement for goblins but I can't help but expect someone to go "You're a bad person and probably have serious hang ups in real life" if I actually USE them.

And usally you will walk into a goblin village for EXP and Loot, because the DM put you there, hopefully for a good reason. Or you're just doing Munchkin style of "Kick door, kill, take treasure" which isn't a wrong way to play. It's not my preferred way to play but I'd sit down to try some stupid build without having to think of backstory.

Liberty's Edge

7 people marked this as a favorite.

So, am I the only one that feels like they're going crazy, or senile with some of the arguments that are getting thrown around here? I mean;

Core Rulebook wrote:
From the stout dwarf to the noble elf, the races of the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game ... these seven races comprise the most commonly encountered civilized races in the Pathfinder RPG.

They say it right there that the core races are there because they are common. I thought maybe things have been changing, or maybe I'm just remembering the settlement write ups all wrong. So I went back through all the campaign setting books I have (which is most of them) to look at all the settlement stats. Only 2 settlements even list goblins, Whitethrone and Kaer Maga. Both of those settlements are supposed to be atypical examples of settlements though, in fact both settlements have more trolls than they do goblins. Kaer Maga has as many centaurs and nagas as they do goblins. Orcs, geniekin and gillmen all seem to show up more often than goblins do.

I know that half-orcs and half-elves don't always show up as a notable presence in settlements, if there at all, but even humans, who make up 80-90% of the population aren't on every list. Half-orcs and half-elves still make up 1-2% of the population, which is much more than goblins, who usually don't even make the list of races worth mentioning.

I'm aware that this is a new edition, and things could change. Maybe the core races won't be there just because they are common, or something could happen with the setting to make goblins show up in more places, or more commonly become adventurers. But nothing I've ever seen has shown that to be the case with PF1, or Golarion as it stands.

I'm not even against having goblins as a core race, I would just like a good reason for it. And many of these claims that goblins already are suitable as core don't make any sense to me.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Deighton Thrane wrote:

So, am I the only one that feels like they're going crazy, or senile with some of the arguments that are getting thrown around here? I mean;

Core Rulebook wrote:
From the stout dwarf to the noble elf, the races of the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game ... these seven races comprise the most commonly encountered civilized races in the Pathfinder RPG.

They say it right there that the core races are there because they are common. I thought maybe things have been changing, or maybe I'm just remembering the settlement write ups all wrong. So I went back through all the campaign setting books I have (which is most of them) to look at all the settlement stats. Only 2 settlements even list goblins, Whitethrone and Kaer Maga. Both of those settlements are supposed to be atypical examples of settlements though, in fact both settlements have more trolls than they do goblins. Kaer Maga has as many centaurs and nagas as they do goblins. Orcs, geniekin and gillmen all seem to show up more often than goblins do.

I know that half-orcs and half-elves don't always show up as a notable presence in settlements, if there at all, but even humans, who make up 80-90% of the population aren't on every list. Half-orcs and half-elves still make up 1-2% of the population, which is much more than goblins, who usually don't even make the list of races worth mentioning.

I'm aware that this is a new edition, and things could change. Maybe the core races won't be there just because they are common, or something could happen with the setting to make goblins show up in more places, or more commonly become adventurers. But nothing I've ever seen has shown that to be the case with PF1, or Golarion as it stands.

I'm not even against having goblins as a core race, I would just like a good reason for it. And many of these claims that goblins already are suitable as core don't make any sense to me.

reason , the best ones, there a race that a lot of people like playing and they are paizos mascot


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Deighton Thrane wrote:

So, am I the only one that feels like they're going crazy, or senile with some of the arguments that are getting thrown around here? I mean;

Core Rulebook wrote:
From the stout dwarf to the noble elf, the races of the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game ... these seven races comprise the most commonly encountered civilized races in the Pathfinder RPG.

They say it right there that the core races are there because they are common. I thought maybe things have been changing, or maybe I'm just remembering the settlement write ups all wrong. So I went back through all the campaign setting books I have (which is most of them) to look at all the settlement stats. Only 2 settlements even list goblins, Whitethrone and Kaer Maga. Both of those settlements are supposed to be atypical examples of settlements though, in fact both settlements have more trolls than they do goblins. Kaer Maga has as many centaurs and nagas as they do goblins. Orcs, geniekin and gillmen all seem to show up more often than goblins do.

I know that half-orcs and half-elves don't always show up as a notable presence in settlements, if there at all, but even humans, who make up 80-90% of the population aren't on every list. Half-orcs and half-elves still make up 1-2% of the population, which is much more than goblins, who usually don't even make the list of races worth mentioning.

I'm aware that this is a new edition, and things could change. Maybe the core races won't be there just because they are common, or something could happen with the setting to make goblins show up in more places, or more commonly become adventurers. But nothing I've ever seen has shown that to be the case with PF1, or Golarion as it stands.

I'm not even against having goblins as a core race, I would just like a good reason for it. And many of these claims that goblins already are suitable as core don't make any sense to me.

As to commonality, it's actually extremely likely that there are more goblins in Golarion than humans. They just haven't historically lived in human cities in the Inner Sea region... but they're still everywhere, just not in the cities. Part of the PF2 shift and what we see in the new few adventure paths will likely be addressing that. Another part may be that perhaps goblins are actually reasonably common in cities outside the Inner Sea region, all the areas of the map that have barely been touched on by Paizo to date.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I've seen arguments here about how Charisma is not just looks, or a pleasant personality: I accept and understand them.

I still don't see how the PF1 Goblins fit with Charisma. Of course, the PF2 Goblins totally might.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Fuzzypaws wrote:
As to commonality, it's actually extremely likely that there are more goblins in Golarion than humans. They just haven't historically lived in human cities in the Inner Sea region... but they're still everywhere, just not in the cities.

What makes you think that? It's said that goblins can pop up anywhere because of quick growth rates, and their ability to adapt, but they state that the coastal areas in Varisia and Garund have higher population totals than normal. Taking Sandpoint as an example. It has 5 different tribes in the surrounding area. Most goblin tribes number from a couple dozen to maybe even a hundred members. Even if all 5 tribes happened to have a hundred members each, or 500 goblins total, that's still not even half the human population of Sandpoint, to say nothing of all the surrounding farmland as well. Also, that's both a generous estimation of population numbers, and an area that's supposed to have a lot of goblins.

Humans can, and usually are, everywhere. Even places where it doesn't make a lot of sense. I mean you can't even get away from humans by going to the moon, or the sun.

1,001 to 1,050 of 1,765 << first < prev | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion / Paizo Blog: Goblins! All Messageboards