All We Are Saying Is Give Peace a Chance

Friday, August 23, 2019

Nearly 20 years after the Goblinblood Wars devastated the nation of Isger, an army of hobgoblins marched toward conquest once more. Led by the formidable commander General Azaersi—who had lost everything in the Goblinblood Wars, as so many others had—the so-called Ironfang Invasion swept across the lands of Nirmathas and northern Molthune with what seemed like an unstoppable momentum. Yet the residents of Nirmathas managed to unite in their hour of need, rallied by a group of militia commanders that proved a match for the Ironfang Legion’s legendary general. In a move that surprised nearly everyone, the heroes of Nirmathas chose to show mercy to the merciless, sparing the general and suing for peace. Azaersi agreed and pulled her armies back to her mysterious base of operations, the Vault of the Onyx Citadel, before officially founding the nation of Oprak in the mountains.

Which is a fancy story, but what does that have to do with playable hobgoblins? General Azaersi might have signed temporary non-aggression treaties with Nirmathas (and somewhat ominously, with Nidal), but that’s a far cry from welcoming the hated Ironfang Legion into human cities. In this case, it’s Tar-Baphon’s fault—the rise of the Whispering Tyrant suddenly has the flesh and blood, living and breathing hobgoblins looking like much more pleasant neighbors in comparison. Some highly optimistic diplomats even hope to convince the Ironfang Legion to help fight Tar-Baphon’s forces. After all, what are hobgoblins without a war?

A hobgoblin alchemist clutching a sharp blade in one hand and a bomb with a lit fuse in the other.

Illustration by Klaher Baklaher

That’s the question we’re asking Pathfinder 2E players to help answer while they play in the Age of Lost Omens. Whether Azaersi is simply rebuilding her forces in order to invade again or has instead turned her ambitions toward economic conquest instead of martial, Oprak is currently a nation at peace. For a society comprised mostly of Goblinblood orphans and veterans, who have only known combat and preparation for combat since childhood, this sudden shift has led to a great deal of restlessness, soul-searching, aimless depression… and in some, curious exploration. Where previously the most brutal and efficient hobgoblins were the ones that excelled, less vicious hobgoblins are now carving a place for themselves as explorers and envoys to non-hobgoblin peoples.

Hobgoblins are an Uncommon ancestry. This might seem confusing, as Uncommon usually suggests that something must be found through effort in-game, and PCs can hardly switch ancestries mid-character! In this case, Uncommon is what we use to indicate that a particular ancestry is not necessarily found (or appropriate as PCs) in all areas of the Inner Sea region. A hobgoblin soldier PC would not fit well into the War for the Crown Adventure Path, for example—but that same PC could easily be found in the Eye of Dread meta-region, or even touring the lands of Nidal or Varisia. With that said, Azaersi’s control over the Vault of the Onyx Citadel means a hobgoblin can theoretically be found anywhere, as the general has managed to create magical pathways to regions as far-flung as the hobgoblin nation of Kaoling in Tian Xia!

A Kao Ling hobgoblin in an ornate mask dual-wielding a sword and axe.

Illustration by Klaher Baklaher

Hobgoblins get 8 Hit Points from their ancestry, are Medium, and have a speed of 25 feet. A hobgoblin speaks Common and Goblin, plus any additional languages they might pick up. Hobgoblins have incredible endurance and are trained for physical discipline, giving them an ability boost to Constitution, and they possess keen minds, getting another ability boost in Intelligence. Like most ancestries, they also get one free ability boost to put in any score. Hobgoblins were originally created from goblins, however, meaning the two ancestries share an ability flaw to Wisdom. With these traits, hobgoblins seem like they’d be perfectly suited to be wizards… if not for the absolute, bone-deep loathing they hold toward almost all magic. Oops!

In fact, hobgoblins hate magic so much that they can choose the Elfbane Hobgoblin ancestry, which can help them resist spells:

Elfbane Hobgoblin. Hobgoblins were engineered long ago from the unreliable and fecund goblins, to be used as an army against the elves. Although the elves ultimately freed the hobgoblins from their bondage, some hobgoblins retain ancestral resistance to magic, which they refer to as “elf magic.” You gain the Resist Elf Magic reaction. RESIST ELF MAGIC (reaction). Trigger: You attempt a saving throw against a magical effect but haven’t rolled yet. Your ancestral resistance to magic protects you. You gain a +1 circumstance bonus to the triggering saving throw. If the triggering effect is arcane, you gain a +2 circumstance bonus instead.

The hobgoblin ancestry entry also suggests some Core Rulebook backgrounds you might choose that are common for those of hobgoblin ancestry, but be sure to also check out specific backgrounds from the Lost Omens World Guide for other appropriate options, such as the Onyx Trader or Goblinblood Orphan backgrounds!

Eleanor Ferron
Developer

More Paizo Blog.
Tags: Lost Omens Character Guide Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Pathfinder Second Edition
251 to 259 of 259 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>

PossibleCabbage wrote:

I guess my question is- is Int less valuable for people who don't key class features off intelligence in PF2 than it was in PF1?

It seems like the only sense in which this is is true is that no classes are saddled with the 2+Int skill ranks thing.

Int in PF1 effectively gave you "legendary" proficiency in an additional skill. You got 1 skill rank per level, so you could maximize one other skill. These aren't exactly comparable of course, but I feel that's a reasonable way to look at it. Level to everything (trained) does make this equation significantly different.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
tivadar27 wrote:
Int in PF1 effectively gave you "legendary" proficiency in an additional skill. You got 1 skill rank per level, so you could maximize one other skill. These aren't exactly comparable of course, but I feel that's a reasonable way to look at it. Level to everything (trained) does make this equation significantly different.

I think you're wrong about this. Trained is precisely equivalent to "one rank per level"- it's literally "add your level." Legendary is like "one rank + per level, plus skill focus, plus a class feature like trapfinding or consummate liar."

Liberty's Edge

PossibleCabbage wrote:
tivadar27 wrote:
Int in PF1 effectively gave you "legendary" proficiency in an additional skill. You got 1 skill rank per level, so you could maximize one other skill. These aren't exactly comparable of course, but I feel that's a reasonable way to look at it. Level to everything (trained) does make this equation significantly different.
I think you're wrong about this. Trained is precisely equivalent to "one rank per level"- it's literally "add your level." Legendary is like "one rank + per level, plus skill focus, plus a class feature like trapfinding or consummate liar."

Agreed, though I would have put selecting the feat that gave you a +2 bonus to 2 skills at the end of the equation ;-)

Liberty's Edge

tivadar27 wrote:
We disagree. I think a lot of optimization guides for 2e are going to say "don't invest much in Int unless you are an int-based caster" with maybe the addition of "or would like to be a knowledge buff", but the same could be said for 5e.

We do indeed disagree. Int is never going to be a Fighter's priority, but a heavily armored Fighter might well prioritize it over Dex, and anybody who uses Dex, Con, or Wis as their primary attack will likely prioritize it to some degree (less so if they're interested in Cha but even then).

tivadar27 wrote:
Can you site this "evidence"? The chance for critical failures is still a thing, and you could potentially be doing more harm than good if you're merely mediocre at a skill. As I said, we *don't* have evidence of high-level play at this point, we have virtually none outside of the playtest.

The chance for crit failures is 5% if you've hit a 50% chance of success. Which you can with Trained alone.

And the evidence is inherent in the math. If true optimization gives you a 90% chance, then 8 less than that is definitionally 50%.

tivadar27 wrote:
Listen, I don't necessarily think you're wrong, but I don't think we know anything definitive yet, and this is an issue of degrees. If I have to choose between 2 more points in Constitution and potentially having an 8 Intelligence for a melee-type, I'm going to choose the 2 points in Constitution. I'm likely to choose it simply for the Fortitude saves in a lot of cases...

That's not a choice you ever need to make, though. All characters get +2 to 4 different stats, and then do that again regularly as they level. That means that all your stat points can't be put into physical stats. If you're Str focused you can technically go Str and then the three Save stats, but frankly, Dex is something of a waste in many ways, since it helps Reflex Save and nothing else if you're in Medium Armor or better. The same is true of Cha focused characters, though they're less likely to have Medium or better armor.

But then you get to characters focused on the other stats. Anyone who's Dex or Wis focused can pretty readily invest in Int with no real cost.

Additionally, I'm not sure Con is as important as you're implying. It's good for Fort Saves, sure, but if you're already Expert in those you'll do fine, and it's less necessary for HP than it's ever been before.

tivadar27 wrote:
I really think this comes down to the question of your build. Basically every build is going to want Wisdom and Constitution. If you want/need any two of strength/dexterity/charisma, then I think you want to dump intelligence. This probably holds for a few classes, in general, such as potentially monks (non-mountain stance), rangers (non-crossbow ranged or finesse), sorcerers, bards, rogues (unless they're thief racket), clerics (if they're cloistered)...

Sure, there are certainly builds that have priorities other than Int and will generally leave it at 10 or so, but I'm pretty sure they're outnumbered by builds that could definitely make good use of it (even several of the classes you list I think you're underestimating Int's uses...a Ruffian Rogue needs very little Dex, so they're gonna be raising Str/Con/Wis...and either Cha or Int depending on preference, I think in probably roughly equal numbers in many cases).

Meanwhile, in 5E...it's literally listed as the ideal dump stat in just about every build I've ever seen advocated aside from those who use it for casting.

I feel like that distinction is a pretty big difference.

tivadar27 wrote:
There's enough builds where I can argue pumping points into Intelligence is a bad idea, as it'll hurt you too much in other areas. There are some builds where I can argue dumping another stat is a better idea, especially charisma, but I think that Intelligence is probably one of the more dumpable.

Oh, certainly it is. I wouldn't dream of saying otherwise. The most dumpable stats are Cha, Str, and Int...but probably in that order. I'd definitely argue Str as dumpable on more builds than Int (any caster, most ranged characters, and Thief Rogues).

I'm not saying Int isn't dumpable at all. I'm saying it's a useful stat that provides immediate benefit even if you never raise it above 12.

tivadar27 wrote:
Int in PF1 effectively gave you "legendary" proficiency in an additional skill. You got 1 skill rank per level, so you could maximize one other skill. These aren't exactly comparable of course, but I feel that's a reasonable way to look at it. Level to everything (trained) does make this equation significantly different.

As others note, getting a Skill at Trained is the equivalent of maxed Skill Ranks alone. Going higher than Trained is the equivalent of greater investment, like Skill Focus and Class Features.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
PossibleCabbage wrote:
I think you're wrong about this. Trained is precisely equivalent to "one rank per level"- it's literally "add your level." Legendary is like "one rank + per level, plus skill focus, plus a class feature like trapfinding or consummate liar."

This requires us to assume that Trained is baseline upon which skill usage and DCs are assumed and that the game doesn't really account for higher profiency, but that doesn't really seem to be the case.

Trained is only the baseline at low levels and higher level CR appropriate checks are not something a trained only character can reliably succeed at (with a handful of exceptions, Trained in athletics scales pretty well for instance). Even beyond that, access to skill functionality and feats are sometimes gated behind proficiency too.

PF2 definitely made it easier to invest in Intelligence, but Int is unequivocally weaker, because Trained is no longer sufficient to give you full access to the skill. Tighter system math also means that those extra +s you're missing out on by not being at a higher proficiency tier significantly impact your ability to succeed on checks.

Frankly, it's one of the big headscratchers for me about PF2. In PF1 the general consensus was that Wisdom was incredibly important for everyone, Int was ignorable and Cha was a universal dump stat... so in PF2 they buff Wis, nerf Int and leave Cha basically untouched.


Squiggit wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:
I think you're wrong about this. Trained is precisely equivalent to "one rank per level"- it's literally "add your level." Legendary is like "one rank + per level, plus skill focus, plus a class feature like trapfinding or consummate liar."

This requires us to assume that Trained is baseline upon which skill usage and DCs are assumed and that the game doesn't really account for higher profiency, but that doesn't really seem to be the case.

Trained is only the baseline at low levels and higher level CR appropriate checks are not something a trained only character can reliably succeed at (with a handful of exceptions, Trained in athletics scales pretty well for instance). Even beyond that, access to skill functionality and feats are sometimes gated behind proficiency too.

PF2 definitely made it easier to invest in Intelligence, but Int is unequivocally weaker, because Trained is no longer sufficient to give you full access to the skill. Tighter system math also means that those extra +s you're missing out on by not being at a higher proficiency tier significantly impact your ability to succeed on checks.

Frankly, it's one of the big headscratchers for me about PF2. In PF1 the general consensus was that Wisdom was incredibly important for everyone, Int was ignorable and Cha was a universal dump stat... so in PF2 they buff Wis, nerf Int and leave Cha basically untouched.

I had something longer typed up, but Squiggit basically hit upon all the points, and probably better. Note that they did weaken Dexterity in PF2 a bit, but that came at the benefit of Wisdom, so yeah, I don't really get it either. At least they had a *plan* for making Charisma more important, even if they did end up scrapping it.

Lantern Lodge Customer Service & Community Manager

6 people marked this as a favorite.

Removed a post and replies. So much of what a person likes or doesn't care for with RPG rules and content is going to be pretty personally subjective and declarative, hyperbolic statements about an aspect being an "utter failure" is not helpful on the forums. It leads to arguing and derailing of discussions.

Critiques and expressions of preferences are fine, but when doing so, its helpful for the overall discussion to remember and phrase things as opinions. "I don't see how this works...", "This doesn't work for me because...", "I feel...", "At my table we like...", "I prefer how first edition handled this because..." This allows for more of a collaborative discussion about the materials, rather than an argument about who is right or wrong.


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
Pepsi Jedi wrote:

Maybe I'm the odd one out here, but when I choose to play a race, it's because I want to play that race. Not because of the numbers under the write up.

If I have a character concept. I build that character and that concept. The stats are what they are. Are some races 'better' at some things than others? Sure. That doesn't dictate what I play in the least.

If I want to play a Goblin Barbarian I play one. Even if he's not going to be as 'strong' a barbarian as a human. I simply don't care. I have fun with the character I build. If I'm a point or two behind in this aspect or that aspect, I see it as a challenge to overcome through good roleplay.

I do understand the want to maximize your returns during character creation. I 'get' it. But if you don't like a race, choose another race. If you like one. Use it and accept it's pros and cons.

If you're just choosing a race for the numbers and not for the race itself... Well you're not going to get any sympathy out of me. You're not playing a race then. You're min/maxing a list of stats.

I personally play a character. Not the math equations.

i mean a lot of times a character concept is race neutral and so eventually you look to see what race might be good and fun to play. hobgoblin is mechanically good and i think a lot of people would want to play against the grain wizards.

so it's likely something that'll show up more often than i think most people think is intended. mostly think the int is for alchemists though and I like that they'd make a good alchemist.

251 to 259 of 259 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / Paizo Products / Paizo Blog: All We Are Saying Is Give Peace a Chance All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Paizo Products