| Kobold Catgirl |
As enemies, they each have their pros and cons. Goblins are unquestionably Golarion's fodder race, being very up-close-and-personal, but kobolds are much-beloved as the more deserving targets. Goblins are funny. Kobolds are a%&@%s. Both are just as evil (hell, kobolds are arguably a bit less so), but goblins are slightly tougher and a little bit less "that one runt rooster you had to take out and wring the neck of because it kept attacking your ankles".
Kobolds are fun when you want to feature a minion race for a draconic creature, when you want a fairly serious (and taking itself seriously) enemy, and when you want to feature especially elaborate fortifications or locations. Goblins are fun when you just want to go and kill some monsters harassing the town. They have little to no tactics, and that's why they're fun. They can get totally crazy.
| Milo v3 |
Kobolds use tactics and take the environment into account when it comes to ambushes and traps and such, so they're better opponents. But, when it comes to PC's kobold stats are just too low. If you do allow people to play as them, give Races of the Dragon a look + the races of the Dragon web-enhancement, which make kobolds more reasonable for PC use.
| MageHunter |
All the kobold trap stuff is better for npcs. For players goblins are better. I had a pc play a goblin rogue and he didn't even bother making stealth checks anymore. For role-play goblins are good blood thirsty pyros. Kobolds are cowards. (I'll shine from a distance thank you!) I like kobold roleplay but goblins can be fun. Mechanically, there's no debate goblins are better.
| PossibleCabbage |
Goblins always set off my "optimizer alarm" when PCs pick them, as do all the races that get +4 to something. I always want to make sure that the player is more interested in "playing as a goblin" than "starting with a 20 to dex" (not that I'll say "no", I just might sideye you a little.) Kobolds are an awful PC race mechanically, so they suffer no such scrutiny; anybody choosing to play a kobold is doing so for flavor not optimization.
As for serving as antagonists, I generally find that weak but nonetheless traditionally "evil" races are best served to get players to question their notions of inherent alignment determined by one's race. Most of the time Goblins and Kobolds offer very little threat to even minimally experienced PCs, yet they are slaughtered gleefully by most groups because the bestiary says they're evil (despite the fact that they're obviously intelligent and free-willed, since you can play as one). I generally find "making the players reconsider the indiscriminate murder of those different from them" is the best use of goblins/kobolds as antagonists.
| Bunnyboy |
I would love kobolds, as it would be relatively easy to use him in any party, but it is frustating that wehenever I try made character, who is good in something, goblin would overshine with better stats, skill bonuses and other stuff.
Even if they could only occupy same square with another ally without hindracing or benefitting each other, would be unique and interesting ability enough. Too bad Shoulder to Shoulder takes away crafty and works only with small allies.
Heck, even if kobold could only share square with another small ally without penalty and squeeze in square of medium sized ally (-4 attack and AC because must be careful to not being stepped on) would make me happy.