Hobgoblins have been in Pathfinder/D&D for as long as I've been playing, but it recently occurred to me that they're kind of redundant. Goblins are small-sized evil humanoids suitable for low level PCs. Orcs are medium-sized evil humanoids that form large armies and can represent a more credible threat. Hobgoblins are...also medium-sized evil humanoids, also militant...aren't they essentially just lawful orcs?
From a GM's perspective, how are Hobgoblins useful as antagonists versus just using Orcs instead? Is it mainly a style issue? Is orange the new green?
Hobgoblins are more evoluted than orcs. Btw, you should think about your campaign. Hobgoblin are useful for game flavour?
Tradition.
Ah, but how did the tradition start? What was the original purpose of Hobgoblins?
Yes, Orcs are chaotic, and more brutish, but they still form tribes and raid villages. I suppose Hobgoblins might be more likely to use siege weaponry to attack a fortified city, but they still seem to fall into a very similar slot to me.
|
I think the default view of orcs are akin to mad-max style apocalyptic biker gangs. Take what they want from whom they can, then move on when there's nothing left that they want to take. Their organization is nothing more than the strong making the less strong do what they say.
The default view of hobgoblins is more akin to LoTR's Uruk-Hai. Disciplined, ruthless, evil warriors who don't at all mind being organized into legions built for conquest and domination.
If you own view of orcs and hobgoblins deviates from these default assumptions there's the potential for overlap. Not to say you SHOULDN'T have different views from the 'default' assumption.. for example I ALSO ignore hobgoblins and use orcs as both 'nihilistic bikers' and 'fighting Uruk-Hai', depending on the tribe/boss.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
hobgoblins come from Lord of the rings, Urukhai were initially called Hobgoblins, only Tolken saw his mistake and renamed them, because from legend hobgoblin are smaller goblins not bigger ones.
It's not an excuse, it's an explanation, but every race should have a right to exist.
I think the default view of orcs are akin to mad-max style apocalyptic biker gangs. Take what they want from whom they can, then move on when there's nothing left that they want to take. Their organization is nothing more than the strong making the less strong do what they say.
The default view of hobgoblins is more akin to LoTR's Uruk-Hai. Disciplined, ruthless, evil warriors who don't at all mind being organized into legions built for conquest and domination.
If you own view of orcs and hobgoblins deviates from these default assumptions there's the potential for overlap. Not to say you SHOULDN'T have different views from the 'default' assumption.. for example I ALSO ignore hobgoblins and use orcs as both 'nihilistic bikers' and 'fighting Uruk-Hai', depending on the tribe/boss.
It is possible that my view of orcs has been colored by my time playing Warcraft, where orcs span a range from "organized military conquerors" to "wild berserkers raiding for supplies".
Bad guys.Tradition.Ah, but how did the tradition start? What was the original purpose of Hobgoblins?
You meant to say more Bad guys.
To add to the mystery, both hobgoblins AND orcs in 1e were both LE. Orcs were orcs, half-orcs were Uruk-Hai (no light blindness, and could take class levels)... and there were STILL hobgoblins.
The major differences between humanoids were in HD: kobold 1/2, goblin 1-1, orc 1, hobgoblin 1+1, gnoll 2, bugbear 3.
from a "back in the day" perspective, here's why there's hobgoblins in the game..
1. kobolds, 1/2 HD
2. goblins 1-1 HD (d8-1)
3. orcs 1 HD
4. hobgoblins 1+1HD (d8+1)
5. gnoll 2 HD
6. bugbear 3 HD
7. Ogre 4+1 HD (why +1? dunno)
8. Troll 6 HD
9. nothing, I think 7 HD
10. Hill Giant 8 HD (could be wrong)
etc....
Ah, I think this is getting close to the answer. Thanks!
Tradition.Ah, but how did the tradition start? What was the original purpose of Hobgoblins?
Yes, Orcs are chaotic, and more brutish, but they still form tribes and raid villages. I suppose Hobgoblins might be more likely to use siege weaponry to attack a fortified city, but they still seem to fall into a very similar slot to me.
Even more similiar pre-3rd edition, back when orcs were still Lawful Evil (3.0 changed them to chaotic evil, maybe to further seperate them from hobgoblins, but most likely to make their favored class Barbarian. Something they partly failed at, as their deity Gruumsh still resided on the same plane - a chaotic deity on a lawful plane.)
Hobgoblins were more structured/organized, more intelligent, and tougher.
You get orcs when you want a horde. You get hobgoblins when you want an army.
To add to the mystery, both hobgoblins AND orcs in 1e were both LE.
Ninja'ed.
It is possible that my view of orcs has been colored by my time playing Warcraft, where orcs span a range from "organized military conquerors" to "wild berserkers raiding for supplies".
Yerps, the majority of the time I see newer players getting confused about the roles of monsters its because they are referencing post-2000 fiction rather then 1970s/1980s. Its part of the reason I like Paizo bestiaries and revised monster books, their takes are both nice refershes while holding to the history of the critter in the game. Goblins, Hobgoblins, and Bugbears are covered in the very first one, along with Orcs. Personally I really like what was done with bugbear.
Also another way to look at them is the stat-base they represent. Orcs are massive brutes that operate best in conditions most humans fear, pitch darkness. With their light sensitivity you rarely find them active out in the open. Hobgoblins by contrast are less brute but can be active and dangerous almost all the time in most conditions save absolute dark.
Orcs are thing you fear when you go into caves, deep forest, and mashes (anywhere dim).
Hobgoblins are things you fear on the plains, hills, and deserts.
Also another way to look at them is the stat-base they represent. Orcs are massive brutes that operate best in conditions most humans fear, pitch darkness. With their light sensitivity you rarely find them active out in the open. Hobgoblins by contrast are less brute but can be active and dangerous almost all the time in most conditions save absolute dark.
Hobgoblins function in total darkness just as well as orcs. Both have 60' darkvision.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In short... Tolkien wrote something down about them.
They do fill a different roll then orcs though. The lawful vs chaotic angle has them operating in very different ways. You can argue that their redundant between goblins and orcs. But then you can also argue that gnomes are redundant between halflings and dwarves.
If you want to merge different races/concepts together for your custom setting that's perfectly valid. Splitting aspects of hobgoblins between goblins and orcs would actually give orcs and goblins more depth. Making them a bit less one dimensional. As well as trim down on the absurd number of humanoid races. Might be worth considering.
"Why hobgoblins" got the same sense of "why not hobgoblins"? If you don't like it don't play :)
In the Kingdom of Kalamar campaign setting hobgoblins rule a couple of kingdoms. There are no orc nations in KoK. One of few settings where hobgoblin lawful side is exploited.
|
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's too bad Paizo didn't redo Hobgoblins to be like they are in Faerie lore. Then they'd be much scarier.
Goblins as twisted shadow-fey unseelie versions of Gnomes and Hobgoblins as twisted shadow-fey unseelie versions of Elves (and *completely* replacing dark elves!) would be awesome.
Taking it a step further and having Bugbears be twisted shadow-fey unseelie versions of a third fey seelie First World race *that doesn't exist anymore, because the Bugbears killed them all,* would also add to the Bugbear's 'street cred.'
"Yes, we hunt the rest of you now because we already killed all of our namby-pamby good counterparts..."
Tying the goblinoids, elves and gnomes more explicitly to the First World (or Plane of Shadow or 'Last World') would also allow for there to be even more magical and fey versions in the various fey realms, and some here on the mortal plane that retain some of their original otherworldly immortal nature, and are to their base races as 'noble drow' are to 'common drow.' Twisted elder goblins with wicked fey powers, and cruelly beautiful hobgoblin 'highbloods' with witch-ly knacks of hex and glamor.
It's too bad Paizo didn't redo Hobgoblins to be like they are in Faerie lore. Then they'd be much scarier.Goblins as twisted shadow-fey unseelie versions of Gnomes and Hobgoblins as twisted shadow-fey unseelie versions of Elves (and *completely* replacing dark elves!) would be awesome.
Taking it a step further and having Bugbears be twisted shadow-fey unseelie versions of a third fey seelie First World race *that doesn't exist anymore, because the Bugbears killed them all,* would also add to the Bugbear's 'street cred.'
"Yes, we hunt the rest of you now because we already killed all of our namby-pamby good counterparts..."
Tying the goblinoids, elves and gnomes more explicitly to the First World (or Plane of Shadow or 'Last World') would also allow for there to be even more magical and fey versions in the various fey realms, and some here on the mortal plane that retain some of their original otherworldly immortal nature, and are to their base races as 'noble drow' are to 'common drow.' Twisted elder goblins with wicked fey powers, and cruelly beautiful hobgoblin 'highbloods' with witch-ly knacks of hex and glamor.
This has a lot of potential...may steal this for my home game.
It's too bad Paizo didn't redo Hobgoblins to be like they are in Faerie lore. Then they'd be much scarier.Goblins as twisted shadow-fey unseelie versions of Gnomes and Hobgoblins as twisted shadow-fey unseelie versions of Elves (and *completely* replacing dark elves!) would be awesome.
This intrigues me very much. I like Drow alot, but replacing them in this fashion is just cool.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think Paizo's take (and this is very vague, I read it once then could never seem to !@#$ing find it again!) was that Goblins existed until a Tribe came into contact with a powerful artefact/staff being used by a Wizard, which caused the tribe to become bigger, smarter and more aggressive, becoming the first Hobgoblins and spawning their innate distrust of Magic.
Where Bugbears came from, I dunno.
Orcs are the "Raaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaagh let's go kick some heads in, I don't care whose!" type of monster. The sort you should feel absolutely little to no regret you've killed them. Hell, it's easier to hide, throw a stone at one Orc, then wait till the brawl is over and go coup-de-grace the surviving Orcs who are now bleeding out on the ground.
Hobgoblins are more "beat everyone, take what made them great, then master and perfect it ourselves, then go beat the next guys" In a very ironic twist, they've very much like most PCs I've played with. They think long-term, don't betray their allies for 'teh lulz' and will gladly work together for the common cause of Hobgoblin Supremacy without needing to be whipped into line very few seconds.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hobgoblins have been in Pathfinder/D&D for as long as I've been playing, but it recently occurred to me that they're kind of redundant. Goblins are small-sized evil humanoids suitable for low level PCs. Orcs are medium-sized evil humanoids that form large armies and can represent a more credible threat. Hobgoblins are...also medium-sized evil humanoids, also militant...aren't they essentially just lawful orcs?
From a GM's perspective, how are Hobgoblins useful as antagonists versus just using Orcs instead? Is it mainly a style issue? Is orange the new green?
Also remember that in Eberron, I believe it was the Hobgoblins who had the largest and most successful mortal empire the planet has ever seen. They ruled the entire world for millenia and made some of the most potent spells and artifacts ever seen in that setting.
It was only due to a cotermination of an outer realm that their empire fell. When an entire outer plane invades, life gets rough.
Also the Artist Claudio Pozas made a painting of Hobgoblins that had them very 'Roman Legionaire' which I thought was great inspiration for a hobgoblin nation concept.
Hobgoblins have been in Pathfinder/D&D for as long as I've been playing, but it recently occurred to me that they're kind of redundant. Goblins are small-sized evil humanoids suitable for low level PCs. Orcs are medium-sized evil humanoids that form large armies and can represent a more credible threat. Hobgoblins are...also medium-sized evil humanoids, also militant...aren't they essentially just lawful orcs?
From a GM's perspective, how are Hobgoblins useful as antagonists versus just using Orcs instead? Is it mainly a style issue? Is orange the new green?
Also remember that in Eberron, I believe it was the Hobgoblins who had the largest and most successful mortal empire the planet has ever seen. They ruled the entire world for millenia and made some of the most potent spells and artifacts ever seen in that setting.
It was only due to a cotermination of an outer realm that their empire fell. When an entire outer plane invades, life gets rough.
Also the Artist Claudio Pozas made a painting of Hobgoblins that had them very 'Roman Legionaire' which I thought was great inspiration for a hobgoblin nation concept.
I was just thinking they'd make a good Legion-esque type of army. And then I saw this. Campaign idea? I think so.
I've had that campaign idea sitting in the back of my DM refrigerator for quite a well. Sometime, somewhere, it's "PC realm is invaded by army of hobgoblins."
A smart, disciplined army. None of this sneaking slowly up the chain of bigger and bigger orc bandits. Players will have to _think_ to defeat this foe.
The more so since, well, hobgoblins don't have magic. (Blessings of their god(s), probably -- still thinking on that one). But hobgoblin women? They do. Not real openly, but there are a lot of pretty decent protective/defensive/buffing hobgoblin spellcasters that PCs might not expect.
As has been said, Hobgoblins have Law and order which allows them to create societies bigger than the reach of the biggest Orc.
in my homebrew, the Hobgoblins have built their nation on taking slaves from one country and selling them to another and back again the other way.
They have used the profits to create a well equipped army and navy and are set to expand out of their current land between the two.
Most chaotics can only ravage and destroy. Hobgoblins have the structure required to create and build. When you put hobgoblins in charge of bands of Chaotics it gets even more fun.
Hobgoblins seem kind of redundant with the competition the orcs pose for "generic evil physical chump race" but here's the big difference:
Orcs are the kind to bash in a wall and throw forward a few stodgy blocks of hit-dice that can make the players feel good about their stats. They have nothing in the way of actual traps or things that can really catch the party off guard such as sneak attacks/sneak skill/solid ranged damage.
Hobgoblins are the kind to try and sneak around back the party's side and nail their cleric with a few well-aimed crossbow bolts, as well as use reach weapons in pairs against fighters. They may not have a lot of two-handed weapon barbarians lying around but they do have reach weapons, crossbows, and the occasional nasty ambush.
It's really all up to the GM after all, how he implements them determines their effectiveness. Some random raider orcs are roughly on par with a group of ramshackle hobgoblins in the early game, but imo hobgoblins can be used in more tricky ways like the kinds listed above. As for actual differences between orcs and hobgoblins on a basic level? I'm not sure but I think that hobgoblins just carry better equipment and weapons.
Tradition.Ah, but how did the tradition start? What was the original purpose of Hobgoblins?
Yes, Orcs are chaotic, and more brutish, but they still form tribes and raid villages. I suppose Hobgoblins might be more likely to use siege weaponry to attack a fortified city, but they still seem to fall into a very similar slot to me.
i remember first of all, the goblin can grow into a hobgoblin like a pokemon or something that was in AD&D 2nd E
youll start a fight with, and after a few time (rounds or something) they become stronger until grow to an hobgoblin
weird, but at least that is what i can remember... maybe my DM do that and i dont know, i like it.
Hobgoblins as a race are far more interesting to me. Lawful Evil in generally is a much more interesting alignment then CE. In my developing setting, Hobgoblins (and their weaker brothers goblins) have their own independent nation that is eternally as war with the main country, but is separated by a string of mountains, making their attacks restricted by season and only really made if there is a clear opportunity (like, say, the whole kingdom being thrown into chaos by a mad cult killing the royal family, but I digress).
I see Hobgoblins as an inverse of humans (even though humans are equally likely to be any alignment, their/our society clearly views LG as the "right" alignment) while orcs are sort of this chaotic, violent offshoot that has no place in the civilized world, and they eventually die off, making half-orc an exotic race.
Tradition.Ah, but how did the tradition start? What was the original purpose of Hobgoblins?
Yes, Orcs are chaotic, and more brutish, but they still form tribes and raid villages. I suppose Hobgoblins might be more likely to use siege weaponry to attack a fortified city, but they still seem to fall into a very similar slot to me.
i remember first of all, the goblin can grow into a hobgoblin like a pokemon or something that was in AD&D 2nd E
youll start a fight with, and after a few time (rounds or something) they become stronger until grow to an hobgoblin
weird, but at least that is what i can remember... maybe my DM do that and i dont know, i like it.
The only similarity they both have is they are enemies of the core races. They're society and approach to fighting their enemies is completely different. They fill a different niche.
I've never heard of goblins growing into hobgoblins, but then I never that edition. I do know this isn't the case now, though.
Also, ever thought that ogres and orcs hold the same "niche"? I think they're definitely closer to orcs thematically. The only really difference being their size.
IF you're willing to spend $3.99 you'll get an excellent perspective on hobgoblins.
The Slayer's Guide series has some really solid insights on monsters. I recall the duregar and hobgoblin entries really changing how I used them.
Hobgoblins have been in Pathfinder/D&D for as long as I've been playing, but it recently occurred to me that they're kind of redundant. Goblins are small-sized evil humanoids suitable for low level PCs. Orcs are medium-sized evil humanoids that form large armies and can represent a more credible threat. Hobgoblins are...also medium-sized evil humanoids, also militant...aren't they essentially just lawful orcs?
From a GM's perspective, how are Hobgoblins useful as antagonists versus just using Orcs instead? Is it mainly a style issue? Is orange the new green?
Do we need halfling AND Gnomes? Do we need Elves AND Half-evles? The answer to your question and mine is no. But, they're part of the game and pretty much not going anywhere.
Do we need halfling AND Gnomes? Do we need Elves AND Half-evles? The answer to your question and mine is no. But, they're part of the game and pretty much not going anywhere.Hobgoblins have been in Pathfinder/D&D for as long as I've been playing, but it recently occurred to me that they're kind of redundant. Goblins are small-sized evil humanoids suitable for low level PCs. Orcs are medium-sized evil humanoids that form large armies and can represent a more credible threat. Hobgoblins are...also medium-sized evil humanoids, also militant...aren't they essentially just lawful orcs?
From a GM's perspective, how are Hobgoblins useful as antagonists versus just using Orcs instead? Is it mainly a style issue? Is orange the new green?
We could just all be humans. It would be easier to roleplay.
|
From what I've done with them they are usually the evil option that's willing to cooperate. Think of them like Sparta, they weed out the weak and believe that only the strong should lead with the weak submitting to the will of their betters. Outside of that they are one of the few that can actually cooperate in numbers great enough to be a threat on a national level and be listened to with respect by other nations.
To me the where the goblinoids and orcs are usually a threat on an individual/local level where they might raid villages or attack small fiefdoms hobgoblins go to war. Hobgoblins work like nations, they will own land and have governments, recognized nobility and well established cultures, and are willing to meet with enemies and go over peace accords. Worst of all they know how to play politics and when to make allies with their neighbors in order to be left alone. They are the tactically brilliant and nationally motivated ones who are willing to play humanities cultural games and follow it's laws in order to promote and sustain themselves. In short villages may fear an orc or goblin assault but a king fears wars with Hobgoblins.
I think the biggest failing we've seen so far with them is the lack of support for them on the grand stage. To me they should be one of the few monster races who is considered a full human in most large cities in towns as they could quite easily get along in most place if the so desired without making trouble. To me I'd think you could see platoons of Hobgoblin mercenaries floating around Cheliax, Osirian, or Qadira where they sell their services to those who would purchase (quite often at cheaper rates in exchange for taking slaves from their victims). If you want some good examples of hobgoblins I would check out kaoling from the dragon empires book to give you more ideas on these guys.
Hope that helps man.
We could just all be humans. It would be easier to roleplay.
Loads easier. But not as fun after a while.
|
As it was said up thread, Goblins, Orcs, and Hobgoblins come from Tolkein.
I think the terms goblin and orc were used almost interchangeably, but someone might know the difference.
The only time I think hobgoblins were mentioned were in the Hobbit when Bilbo was talking to Gandalf, and he was asking if there were any way around Mirkwood. I think Gandalf replied that Mirkwood continued several hundred miles to the north, which "would bring one in to the slopes of the grey mountins which are absolutely stiff with goblins and hobgoblins of the worst sort".
I think Gandalf was implying that Hobgoblins were somehow worse then goblins.
In D&D we also had a division of elves that was talken from tolken: namely the High elf: Elrond's elves, the Wood elf: Legolas's elves, and the Grey Elf: Galadriel's elves. ( although I could be wrong about that one)
Well On the subject of Hobgoblins, I think in the dragon empires there is Kaoling which is a hobgoblin nation.
It's too bad Paizo didn't redo Hobgoblins to be like they are in Faerie lore. Then they'd be much scarier.Goblins as twisted shadow-fey unseelie versions of Gnomes and Hobgoblins as twisted shadow-fey unseelie versions of Elves (and *completely* replacing dark elves!) would be awesome.
Taking it a step further and having Bugbears be twisted shadow-fey unseelie versions of a third fey seelie First World race *that doesn't exist anymore, because the Bugbears killed them all,* would also add to the Bugbear's 'street cred.'
"Yes, we hunt the rest of you now because we already killed all of our namby-pamby good counterparts..."
Tying the goblinoids, elves and gnomes more explicitly to the First World (or Plane of Shadow or 'Last World') would also allow for there to be even more magical and fey versions in the various fey realms, and some here on the mortal plane that retain some of their original otherworldly immortal nature, and are to their base races as 'noble drow' are to 'common drow.' Twisted elder goblins with wicked fey powers, and cruelly beautiful hobgoblin 'highbloods' with witch-ly knacks of hex and glamor.
This is pretty similar to what I've done with Elves in my world - they're an exiled Fey court, the tuatha de Danann, who were once on par with the courts of Summer and Winter until something happened that caused Summer and Winter to team up and kick them out onto the Prime. Since their exile they've devolved into the Elves we know today, except for their queen Danu, who is hidden away somewhere in the depths of their forest, planning gods know what now that her people's power has faded away....
My world also doesn't have Drow, and I use Noble Drow stats with the type changed to Fey for the tuatha in their full grandeur (which a few do still exist, among the Wyldfae), but I hadn't thought of tying Hobgoblins to them until now. This I may have to borrow.
Tolkiein's hobgoblins are the uruks, which more closely resemble Gygax's orcs: very strong but not so bright. However, the aptitude for military order was retained. Gary only borrowed the goblins and orcs in part. The rest was filled in by himself or from other folklore.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I see the Hobgoblins more as the mongol hoards, personally. I know when I played up their military aspects in Murder on the Silken Caravan, the players freaked.
The illusionist 'summoned' an earth elemental. The Hobgoblins' reaction? "Archers! Target caster! Counterbattery fire!" When all the archers fired at him that round, it was not a change in their numbers or anything, more that they were organized and using tactics that made everyone panic. More Lawful than Chaotic, clearly.
PErsonally, I *heart* Hobgoblins.
|
|
IF you're willing to spend $3.99 you'll get an excellent perspective on hobgoblins.
The Slayer's Guide series has some really solid insights on monsters. I recall the duregar and hobgoblin entries really changing how I used them.
It was this book here that changed my whole view on Hobgoblins and is one of the finest bits of fluff & Crunch I've ever bought.
Great examples on how the monster acts and WHY they do it with enough crunchy bits that the went IMMEDIATELY into the campaign I was running. I literally threw away the next 3 adventures I had written and replaced it with this using the free adventure at the back of this guide as the basis.Buy this book, you won't regret it.
It was this book here that changed my whole view on Hobgoblins and is one of the finest bits of fluff & Crunch I've ever bought.
Great examples on how the monster acts and WHY they do it with enough crunchy bits that the went IMMEDIATELY into the campaign I was running. I literally threw away the next 3 adventures I had written and replaced it with this using the free adventure at the back of this guide as the basis.Buy this book, you won't regret it.
Yeah, the hobgoblin fort was very cool.
What I got from the Slayers Guides was that orcs, gnolls, hobgoblins, etc, aren't just cannon fodder. If you set them up with some integrity, they become a very viable entity in the game. IE, duergar are more than just meat to hack in a mine in Neverwinter Nights.