Goblins in PF2nd


Prerelease Discussion

201 to 250 of 250 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

2 people marked this as a favorite.
ThePuppyTurtle wrote:
Pillbug Toenibbler wrote:
Ched Greyfell wrote:

Having them playable is one thing. Having them core bugs me to no end.

So they used to be a blight on society, now suddenly they'll be in adventuring groups everywhere?

Ya know, everything I've ever heard about -- {looks around warily} ok, and everything I've read about -- Chelaxians would lead me to believe they're all evil, devil-worshiping slavers trying to create Hell 2.0 here on the Prime. And yet the rest of you Inner Sea humans haven't banded together and tried to completely exterminate them. It's almost like you are able to discern between Chelaxians that would do you harm and those who wouldn't, that you don't blame all Chelaxians for their circumstances of birth and their cruel society, and you will attempt to see beyond the common tales and "lore" about Chelaxians to judge each for their true qualities.

And yet, you humans still see all us gobbos as inherently evil, murderous lunatics. Kinda makes me think the problem isn't with us gobbos at all...

That is an extremely unfitting analogy. Chelaxians are mostly non-evil and this is common knowledge both in and out of setting. Goblins have always been portrayed as mostly evil in Golarion setting books and adventure paths.

Some choice quotes:

"Their pernicious nature makes interacting with civilized races almost impossible, so goblins tend to adventure on the fringes of civilization or in the wilds." (ARG)

"Wherever goblins travel, they leave a path of destruction and mayhem in their wake." (MC)

"Like cockroaches, once goblins gain a foothold on the fringes of society, they're extremely difficult to wipe out completely. Some communities deliberately look the other way when goblins infiltrate their refuse heaps, but a community that grows too complacent soon finds pets and even children in goblin cook pots." (MC)

"Goblins tend to view other beings as sources of food, which makes for poor relations with most civilized races....

Says the books written by humans!

Try and deny that one, goblin hater! I see through your veiled prejudice.

Shadow Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Fun fact: writing steals your soul. Reading doesn't. Don't let souls go to waste, absorb their power through reading and become a vessel for the shreds left behind on paper!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

To those saying "Goblins havent changed. PC goblins are the exception" I can't help but be reminded of Living Forgotten Realms (the 4e organised play program). The adventure had gnome marauders (who were a monstrous race and not accepted by society) raiding farms and the farmers ran to the local adventuring group to ask for help. At the table I was at, half the party were gnolls and orcs. It made no in world sense to run to this party for help and yet the adventure presumed the players wouldn't be a bunch of monsters.

If you don't change the Golarion lore every goblin is going to be Drizzt. In the books Drizzt often lives in the wilderness until he proves himself (that means a player misses out on a lot of game time everyone they go to a new place or the GM just ignores the IV world). If you do change the lore how much will goblins remain goblins?

I get this is being done for marketing reasons, but it kills my interest in playing in Golarion with goblins a core race. I don't want to tell my players no they can't play the brand new race. So I'll most likely just play in a different setting where PC goblins do make sense. This will significantly reduce my chance of buying any setting specific books.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Considering the number of bomb happy, pyromaniac alchemists I've played with, that some of them might be goblins doesn't seem that strange.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Your missing the point: the problem isn't "Goblins as adventurers make sense" or "Goblins as alchemists make sense". The problem is up until now "goblins are not accepted or tolerated in most small towns and cities" has been the canon. If Paizo want to change Golarion to "goblins are actually accepted in most small towns and cities" then that's their right (their books, their company, they can do whatever they want). But without a lot of finesse on this issue, it could very well stick out like a sore thumb as a giant retcon and one I won't enjoy (hence a big chance of me changing settings instead of telling my players no goblins).

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Castilliano wrote:
CorvusMask wrote:

I have to say that I do object to idea of "Either it is x or it isn't x so why you play x" :P You can have goblin spirit in non distruptive character and you can have reason for wanting to play member of race that isn't like stereotype of the race.

Thats like saying "Why would you play a bald bearless dwarf that is smooth talking gardener, you should only play dwarves if you want to play angry scottish stereotypes!"

I actually play an intentionally Anti-Dwarf Dwarf. He's a nature lover who adores Tian culture, doesn't wear armor, and dislikes other Dwarfs because they're racist (even while he understands the hypocrisy of that.) Due to poor hygiene, he hasn't shaved his beard, but neither has he tended it (except poorly for when going to meet Amari Li or attend a social event for PFS). So I can understand being an Anti-Goblin Goblin.

The problem is, isn't that the only type of Goblin suitable for organized play? Which aspect of the "goblin spirit" you mention is non-disruptive? And if you do find such an aspect, would PFS need to add a disclaimer about which goblin aspects are suitably non-disruptive and which aren't?
Sounds like a lot of shoehorning for a CRB presumed race.

what shoe horning ..

player i have a goblin ranger

dm cool remember pfs does not allow evil characters and wants peopel to play well together.

player ..ok cool

its that easy

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Lady Firebird wrote:

They can change the fluff! There's no reason that a game's setting can't evolve a little bit along with its rules.

"Goblins are a chaotic race. Many tribes often form warring bands ruled by the strongest and shrewdest Goblin, but others travel as part of mobile entertainer troupes (the Goblin Circus is a thing to behold), and many other industrious tribes build vast cities held together by bridges, tunnels, and whirling contraptions. Goblin cities are a hive of activity, where traders from neighboring kingdoms meet with avid collectors, arenas host popular sporting events, and inventors meet to display their works."

I mean, you could go into much more detail in the actual core book, but it's really that easy. Still leaves room for warlike or wicked goblin tribes, but doesn't make that the default. Voila. No muss, no fuss, Goblins are now varied and usable as PCs without all having to be Goblin Drizzt.

you mean like xenophobic elves and Neutral humans?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pillbug Toenibbler wrote:
Ched Greyfell wrote:

Having them playable is one thing. Having them core bugs me to no end.

So they used to be a blight on society, now suddenly they'll be in adventuring groups everywhere?

Ya know, everything I've ever heard about -- {looks around warily} ok, and everything I've read about -- Chelaxians would lead me to believe they're all evil, devil-worshiping slavers trying to create Hell 2.0 here on the Prime. And yet the rest of you Inner Sea humans haven't banded together and tried to completely exterminate them. It's almost like you are able to discern between Chelaxians that would do you harm and those who wouldn't, that you don't blame all Chelaxians for their circumstances of birth and their cruel society, and you will attempt to see beyond the common tales and "lore" about Chelaxians to judge each for their true qualities.

And yet, you humans still see all us gobbos as inherently evil, murderous lunatics. Kinda makes me think the problem isn't with us gobbos at all...

As someone who has spent plentiful lives as Tieflings, and found we have been pretty well mistreated across most of Golarion... I kinda agree yeah, it's not inherently an issue with Goblins. Humans can be mean to those that are different sometimes. Maybe if we all work together the adventurer Goblins, Tieflings, Half-Orcs, Changelings, and other such races can band together and end fantastic racism once and for all =D


jimthegray wrote:
Lady Firebird wrote:

They can change the fluff! There's no reason that a game's setting can't evolve a little bit along with its rules.

"Goblins are a chaotic race. Many tribes often form warring bands ruled by the strongest and shrewdest Goblin, but others travel as part of mobile entertainer troupes (the Goblin Circus is a thing to behold), and many other industrious tribes build vast cities held together by bridges, tunnels, and whirling contraptions. Goblin cities are a hive of activity, where traders from neighboring kingdoms meet with avid collectors, arenas host popular sporting events, and inventors meet to display their works."

I mean, you could go into much more detail in the actual core book, but it's really that easy. Still leaves room for warlike or wicked goblin tribes, but doesn't make that the default. Voila. No muss, no fuss, Goblins are now varied and usable as PCs without all having to be Goblin Drizzt.

you mean like xenophobic elves and Neutral humans?

Sure, why not? I mean, I don't think monolithic cultures are good for storytelling, or accurate, really. Even Sam Gamgee questioned whether the Harad soldier he saw die in front of him was really evil, or if he was led from home by lies, threats, and the like, and whether he would have just preferred to stay home and enjoy the comforts thereof.

Like I've said, I'm a fan of opening more doors, for players and for DMs who want to tell varied stories. How many times can you go slaughter a Goblin tribe who are all flat, featureless obstacles to be overcome before it gets to be boring? Compare that to going to a tribe and finding that they have oppressed their own people, and the largest, cruelest warriors keep the others in check, who simply want to live and build in peace. Small change, much more narrative potential.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Lady Firebird wrote:
jimthegray wrote:
Lady Firebird wrote:

They can change the fluff! There's no reason that a game's setting can't evolve a little bit along with its rules.

"Goblins are a chaotic race. Many tribes often form warring bands ruled by the strongest and shrewdest Goblin, but others travel as part of mobile entertainer troupes (the Goblin Circus is a thing to behold), and many other industrious tribes build vast cities held together by bridges, tunnels, and whirling contraptions. Goblin cities are a hive of activity, where traders from neighboring kingdoms meet with avid collectors, arenas host popular sporting events, and inventors meet to display their works."

I mean, you could go into much more detail in the actual core book, but it's really that easy. Still leaves room for warlike or wicked goblin tribes, but doesn't make that the default. Voila. No muss, no fuss, Goblins are now varied and usable as PCs without all having to be Goblin Drizzt.

you mean like xenophobic elves and Neutral humans?

Sure, why not? I mean, I don't think monolithic cultures are good for storytelling, or accurate, really. Even Sam Gamgee questioned whether the Harad soldier he saw die in front of him was really evil, or if he was led from home by lies, threats, and the like, and whether he would have just preferred to stay home and enjoy the comforts thereof.

Like I've said, I'm a fan of opening more doors, for players and for DMs who want to tell varied stories. How many times can you go slaughter a Goblin tribe who are all flat, featureless obstacles to be overcome before it gets to be boring? Compare that to going to a tribe and finding that they have oppressed their own people, and the largest, cruelest warriors keep the others in check, who simply want to live and build in peace. Small change, much more narrative potential.

my wife and I are 100% happy about goblins being made core

:)


2 people marked this as a favorite.
ThePuppyTurtle wrote:
Pillbug Toenibbler wrote:

Ya know, everything I've ever heard about -- {looks around warily} ok, and everything I've read about -- Chelaxians would lead me to believe they're all evil, devil-worshiping slavers trying to create Hell 2.0 here on the Prime. And yet the rest of you Inner Sea humans haven't banded together and tried to completely exterminate them. It's almost like you are able to discern between Chelaxians that would do you harm and those who wouldn't, that you don't blame all Chelaxians for their circumstances of birth and their cruel society, and you will attempt to see beyond the common tales and "lore" about Chelaxians to judge each for their true qualities.

And yet, you humans still see all us gobbos as inherently evil, murderous lunatics. Kinda makes me think the problem isn't with us gobbos at all...

That is an extremely unfitting analogy. Chelaxians are mostly non-evil and this is common knowledge both in and out of setting. Goblins have always been portrayed as mostly evil in Golarion setting books and adventure paths.

Ignore the meta-knowledge that PCs and GMs have access to from Paizo products. Ignore what your average PC, who is an exception to the vast majority of commoner and low-level humans, knows. For the vast majority of non-Chelaxian humanoids in the Inner Sea with little or no ranks in Knowledge skills, I'd bet they do think of all Chelaxians as "evil, devil-worshiping slavers trying to create Hell 2.0". I imagine most commoners compartmentalize all Shoanti or all Keleshites into similarly unfitting and unflattering stereotypes too. That's in the rare moments when they bother to think about it all, as most are too busy just trying to eek out a living for themselves and their family without being killed by a magical hazard or monster.

ThePuppyTurtle wrote:
Some choice quotes:

All of these were written by authors who likely never considered goblins could become a core PC race/ancestry. I would imagine that in PF2e, these in-setting generalizations are still true for most goblins. I would also imagine that in PF2e, these in-setting generalizations are still true for how most Inner Sea humanoids would perceive goblins, and that they would still react accordingly.

But campaign flavor does change as more info comes to light and largely un-detailed areas are explored. The setting evolves. I can think of several campaign setting/flavor bits that changed from early Paizo products to more recent ones. Some of it is from Paizo developers and customers having a rethink, and some is making room for new options from new products. I just don't get why so many are so attached to the old thinking about goblins to the point it is totally unacceptable that some small number of exceptional goblins (aka NPC/PC gobs) have broken from the old preconceptions, proving them imprecise and inaccurate.

ThePuppyTurtle wrote:
goblins are universally illiterate." (B1)

Human barbarians were all illiterate in previous editions too... until they weren't.

ThePuppyTurtle wrote:
Comparing accurate generalizations about a fantasy race to real-world prejudice is insulting to victims of said prejudice.

C'mon, really? I'm simply modeling how prejudice works with a possible in-game example and explanation, not belittling or mocking the very real difficulties and dangers that victims of prejudice face. And some of the unflattering language that you quoted about goblins does come across as very similar to real-world writing about real-world minorities.


Dαedαlus wrote:
Milo v3 wrote:
As long as they don't put their "Goblins are crazied idiots" fluff into the mechanics I'm cool with them being Core.
If they don't put that in there, I'm going to wonder what happened to goblins. Up until now, that's been, to an extent, their defining trait.

Not a defining mechanical trait. Their racial traits are about sneaking, being small, and having high dexterity. I'll be annoyed if PF2e suddenly gives Goblins an Intelligence penalty just because Golarion goblins are dumb.

Silver Crusade

Pillbug Toenibbler wrote:
ThePuppyTurtle wrote:
Pillbug Toenibbler wrote:

Ya know, everything I've ever heard about -- {looks around warily} ok, and everything I've read about -- Chelaxians would lead me to believe they're all evil, devil-worshiping slavers trying to create Hell 2.0 here on the Prime. And yet the rest of you Inner Sea humans haven't banded together and tried to completely exterminate them. It's almost like you are able to discern between Chelaxians that would do you harm and those who wouldn't, that you don't blame all Chelaxians for their circumstances of birth and their cruel society, and you will attempt to see beyond the common tales and "lore" about Chelaxians to judge each for their true qualities.

And yet, you humans still see all us gobbos as inherently evil, murderous lunatics. Kinda makes me think the problem isn't with us gobbos at all...

That is an extremely unfitting analogy. Chelaxians are mostly non-evil and this is common knowledge both in and out of setting. Goblins have always been portrayed as mostly evil in Golarion setting books and adventure paths.

Ignore the meta-knowledge that PCs and GMs have access to from Paizo products. Ignore what your average PC, who is an exception to the vast majority of commoner and low-level humans, knows. For the vast majority of non-Chelaxian humanoids in the Inner Sea with little or no ranks in Knowledge skills, I'd bet they do think of all Chelaxians as "evil, devil-worshiping slavers trying to create Hell 2.0". I imagine most commoners compartmentalize all Shoanti or all Keleshites into similarly unfitting and unflattering stereotypes too. That's in the rare moments when they bother to think about it all, as most are too busy just trying to eek out a living for themselves and their family without being killed by a magical hazard or monster.

ThePuppyTurtle wrote:
Some choice quotes:
All of these were written by authors who likely never considered goblins could become a core PC...

Inner Sea Races has an entry which addresses how people outside of Cheliax to see people of chelaxian ethnicity. They do face prejudice, but not on the scale that goblins do, because you really just have to meet a normal chelaxian to see if they aren't like that. Meeting a normal Goblin will have the opposite effect.

I have no objection to things changing. My objection would be to the changes going unexplained in a way that made them feel like a weird retcon. People have proposed that Goblin Adventures might be babies who are rescued by Adventures who destroyed Goblin tribes, and as silly as it is I would actually be completely happy with that explanation. I do hope they come out and say so rather than leaving it unexplained.

I don't think you're a bad person or that you insulted victims of prejudice intentionally, but it is problematic to draw parallels between fantasy races that really are dramatically different from one another in ways that it's very reasonable to regard some of them as better than others, and real life human ethnicities who use imaginary superiority to justify horrible Behavior toward one another.

In no way have I suggested that you are never allowed to use a real life example when arguing about anything. My problem is with this specific case for the reasons I just outlined.

I also specifically intended to play a goblin Paladin by the way. I rather like paladins in case you couldn't tell from that other thread. The only way I won't do it is if the ability score Loadout goblins end up with makes it prohibitively weak as an option.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
jimthegray wrote:
Castilliano wrote:
CorvusMask wrote:

I have to say that I do object to idea of "Either it is x or it isn't x so why you play x" :P You can have goblin spirit in non distruptive character and you can have reason for wanting to play member of race that isn't like stereotype of the race.

Thats like saying "Why would you play a bald bearless dwarf that is smooth talking gardener, you should only play dwarves if you want to play angry scottish stereotypes!"

I actually play an intentionally Anti-Dwarf Dwarf. He's a nature lover who adores Tian culture, doesn't wear armor, and dislikes other Dwarfs because they're racist (even while he understands the hypocrisy of that.) Due to poor hygiene, he hasn't shaved his beard, but neither has he tended it (except poorly for when going to meet Amari Li or attend a social event for PFS). So I can understand being an Anti-Goblin Goblin.

The problem is, isn't that the only type of Goblin suitable for organized play? Which aspect of the "goblin spirit" you mention is non-disruptive? And if you do find such an aspect, would PFS need to add a disclaimer about which goblin aspects are suitably non-disruptive and which aren't?
Sounds like a lot of shoehorning for a CRB presumed race.

what shoe horning ..

player i have a goblin ranger

dm cool remember pfs does not allow evil characters and wants peopel to play well together.

player ..ok cool

its that easy

Translated:

-I have a goblin ranger.
-Remember that PFS does not allow normal goblin behavior and wants goblins to play well with other races
-don't worry, I only chose it for the mechanics OR
-don't worry, he's one of those numerous goblins with a unique redemption tale.
So why then have goblins in Core again???

And to all of you arguing about diversity among a fictional race...
that's just silly. Goblins were invented, and they were invented as evil to serve a function. If anything, PF amplified that and gave a plethora of specific traits which embody that. A majority of these traits are disruptive to organized play so would have to be stripped out leaving...what?
From the evidence presented, goblins might not only lack empathy (which is instinctual in humans), but they may have a reversed empathy which enjoys others' suffering. Given how much of a hurdle it is for humans to groom their innate empathy (because there are confounding instincts within us), how much harder would it be for a species without it?

It might be like how some animals come domesticated, some can be domesticated, many resist domestication, and some are a danger even to try to domesticate. (I'm looking at you, polar bear!)
From the outset, Golarion Goblins have been on the extreme end, and several adventures address this fact. To have a slew of new goblins not just introduced, but also accepted by civil society...that's not Golarion.

You can see similar traits in trolls, who even back for Gygax were considered among the worst of evil creatures. And the list expands to harpies, evil fey, all the way to devils & demons (which also have non-evil exceptions in DnD lore). Some creatures in fantasy embody evil.
Golarion Goblins historically have been among these numbers.
(Which is again to say, I don't mind CRB goblins from a homebrew perspective.)


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

Goblins are not my first choice to bring into core.

As someone who tweaks all the races and has modified Golarion, adding them doesn't particularly bother me (I already treat Kobolds as a civilized race).

I think the big trick is that all the stuff that makes Goblin's special and unique, are all aspects that I could see being annoying to some or all people. If they are going to be more neutral-ish, please let them continue to be zany singing irrational pyromaniacs.

Silver Crusade

MMCJawa wrote:

Goblins are not my first choice to bring into core.

As someone who tweaks all the races and has modified Golarion, adding them doesn't particularly bother me (I already treat Kobolds as a civilized race).

I think the big trick is that all the stuff that makes Goblin's special and unique, are all aspects that I could see being annoying to some or all people. If they are going to be more neutral-ish, please let them continue to be zany singing irrational pyromaniacs.

Alien Archive has a fuzzy race (they're on the cover) that is essentially a very helpful version of the Pathfinder goblin. I don't think this will be a problem for smart and creative players.

My goblin paladin will probably derive great enjoyment out of holy fire, and think in a very zany way unique to him. I don't think that will stop him from being Lawful Good, let alone simply non-evil.

Nor do I think Paizo will have any difficulty portraying them that way in source-books.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Oh, I don't think that anyone doubts that Paizo could pull off the description for goblins in such a way that they could be non-evil creatures with a fondness for fire and explosions.

The question is how on Golarion they'll do so in a way that doesn't invalidate a decade of lore that describes the race as being 99.9% evil, sadistic, and insane.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
ThePuppyTurtle wrote:
I don't think this will be a problem for smart and creative players.

Or maybe it's got nothing to do with creativity or intelligence. Maybe I genuinely enjoy goblins for how they act and are portrayed in Golarion and I don't want to see that watered down.

It's great that you want to play a race that would ordinarily be killed or driven out of town on sight and you can think of all sorts of creative ways to handle that. I guess I'm not imaginative or intelligent enough to not want a retcon to Golarion to justify that no longer happening :(


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dαedαlus wrote:

Oh, I don't think that anyone doubts that Paizo could pull off the description for goblins in such a way that they could be non-evil creatures with a fondness for fire and explosions.

The question is how on Golarion they'll do so in a way that doesn't invalidate a decade of lore that describes the race as being 99.9% evil, sadistic, and insane.

Yeah. Goblins in Golarian aren't just pyro's, they're pyros who enjoy lighting babies on fire to hear them scream. Getting over anti-goblin racism requires modifying the race to where every other goblin isn't going to try and murder you and burn your house down and not even really have a good reason for it.

And I've always hated that, because Goblin's should be extinct or on their way to extinct. They're stupid, violent, cowardly, and will always antagonize something more powerful than they are. Even evil races shouldn't like them, because they're useless and destroy resources that others can use.

And again, there are a ton of other species in Golarian that are far more interesting. I think Paizo has mistook "we think this is a funny race" for "we think this is a race that needs to become a part of the core."

Silver Crusade

John Lynch 106 wrote:
ThePuppyTurtle wrote:
I don't think this will be a problem for smart and creative players.

Or maybe it's got nothing to do with creativity or intelligence. Maybe I genuinely enjoy goblins for how they act and are portrayed in Golarion and I don't want to see that watered down.

It's great that you want to play a race that would ordinarily be killed or driven out of town on sight and you can think of all sorts of creative ways to handle that. I guess I'm not imaginative or intelligent enough to not want a retcon to Golarion to justify that no longer happening :(

Read the rest of the thread. I am also against the move to make goblins core. I will take advantage of the RP opportunities while I have them, but lament the endless "Ì̴̴̛͜T̷̨̕'͏҉̕͘Ş͘ ̡̛̕W̨̛H҉̛À̴͘̕͡T̷̢͜͝ ̸͏҉̵M̵̸̧͟Y̷̧̛͡ ̨̀͟͡͝C̵͠H̴̛҉Ą̢͏̷͘Ŕ͝A̸̛Ć̵T̴E̢͜͠R̵̀́͜͢ ̛͜͟W̴̨O̷̢̡͜U̷L̵҉̷͡D҉̸ ̷̧́͡͏D̵̛̛͝O̵҉̛" that this will result in.

What I meant was that smart and creative players should be able to, for themselves, come up with ways to make non-evil goblins not lose other aspects of their essential goblininess. By "this" I meant the specific issue the person I was replying to had raised, not the addition of goblins to core as a whole.

Having to sit next to someone who thinks that, because they're a goblin, stealing from people the party needs to avoid pissing off and killing the ranger's dog companion is "W͏͢H͜͝A҉̧T̶͘͘ ̷̡M҉͟͝Y̴̵ ̸̴̛̕͡Ç̡̀H͜͠͠A̴̕R҉̡̛̀A̶͝͞Ç̵̀̕T̛͝E͠҉͘͝R͜͡ ̨̧̡̀͝W̡͘͞Ơ͢͡͡U̴̧͟͠L̵̨͘͠͠D̸̨̢ ͏̵҉́D̴̵́͢O҉̵̨͘͟" will be a problem for everyone, regardless of intelligence or creativity.

(And to cut off an objection I anticipate I disagree that people who would to that would be an a%@~$$+ no matter what. I think a lot of those people, especially the milder-but-still-annoying ones are less out to disrupt the game and more trying to play their character the way they truly think is accurate.)

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'd be quite surprised if "lighting babies on fire just so the scream" is written down somewhere and is not just an exaggeration.


ThePuppyTurtle wrote:
Read the rest of the thread. I am also against the move to make goblins core.

I'm not keeping a spreadsheet of who is for or against. Your post came across as a very passive aggressive "this isn't an issue for intelligent and creative people". If that's not what you intended, that's fine. But that's what you said.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, Pawns, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
John Lynch 106 wrote:
I guess I'm not imaginative or intelligent enough to not want a retcon to Golarion to justify that no longer happening :(

No retcon needed.

The paladins who have been rescuing goblin babies all this time have developed a wonderful education system that teaches them how to behave in ways that allow them to be great adventuring pals. The paladin orphanages will be revealing their new teaching methods for creating civic-minded adults out of all kinds of orphans.

But especially goblin orphans, since they've rescued so many of them.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
CrystalSeas wrote:

The paladins who have been rescuing goblin babies all this time have developed a wonderful education system that teaches them how to behave in ways that allow them to be great adventuring pals. The paladin orphanages will be revealing their new teaching methods for creating civic-minded adults out of all kinds of orphans.

But especially goblin orphans, since they've rescued so many of them.

Again, missing my point (I've said it a few times now, including in 5 posts before this one): The biggest problem isn't PC goblin adventurers acting in a way that isn't full-on goblin (although it is an issue to a degree), the biggest problem is the rest of the world not killing goblins on sight in order to save their horses, dogs and houses from burning down.

Also puppyturtle I did read the rest of your post. Don't see any relevance to what I said. Feel free to point it out.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, Pawns, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
John Lynch 106 wrote:
The biggest problem isn't PC goblin adventurers acting in a way that isn't full-on goblin (although it is an issue to a degree), the biggest problem is the rest of the world not killing goblins on sight in order to save their horses, dogs and houses from burning down.

Are you worried that Paizo can't write a story that explains that without invalidating a decade's worth of storytelling?

Do you have a story arc that does? Or are you simply arguing that you can't imagine a solution, so Paizo should stop what they are doing and drop goblins from Core?

Silver Crusade

CrystalSeas wrote:
John Lynch 106 wrote:
The biggest problem isn't PC goblin adventurers acting in a way that isn't full-on goblin (although it is an issue to a degree), the biggest problem is the rest of the world not killing goblins on sight in order to save their horses, dogs and houses from burning down.

Are you worried that Paizo can't write a story that explains that without invalidating a decade's worth of storytelling?

Do you have a story arc that does? Or are you simply arguing that you can't imagine a solution, so Paizo should stop what they are doing and drop goblins from Core?

Speaking for myself, I'm quite confident they can. Perhaps that will be the subject of the final AP. However, more likely, it will not, and they won't address it sufficiently.

Dark Archive

2 people marked this as a favorite.
jimthegray wrote:
my wife and I are 100% happy about goblins being made core :)

My wife and I are as well.

A few years ago we picked up 2 of the stuffed goblins at GenCon. We brought them home and made a few jokes. Then one weekend one of them sneaked into her luggage for a weekend retreat. StayCee the Wandering Goblin was born, and her brother has been given the name Gobo.

Guess who our first 2 characters will be in PFS after PF2 goes live?


CrystalSeas wrote:
Are you worried that Paizo can't write a story that explains that

I am worried Paizo will not be able to adequately convey the change in a manner that seems plausible and enjoyable, yes. THis is an Inner Sea-wide change and they're steadfast in saying there will be no realms shattering event to herald in the new edition.

Keep in mind: not everyone reads every Pathfinder book (I read zero of them), not everyone plays every AP (In the last 3 years I've played half of Iron Gods, Strange Aeons and started War of the Crown). So whatever way they justify the change it's going to need to seem natural and plausible given what we know of the setting.


ThePuppyTurtle wrote:
(...) "Ì̴̴̛͜T̷̨̕'͏҉̕͘Ş͘ ̡̛̕W̨̛H҉̛À̴͘̕͡T̷̢͜͝ ̸͏҉̵M̵̸̧͟Y̷̧̛͡ ̨̀͟͡͝C̵͠H̴̛҉Ą̢͏̷͘Ŕ͝A̸̛Ć̵T̴E̢͜͠R̵̀́͜͢ ̛͜͟W̴̨O̷̢̡͜U̷L̵҉̷͡D҉̸ ̷̧́͡͏D̵̛̛͝O̵҉̛" (...)

It's not related to the topic, but what on earth is this unholy abomination of a "font" facsimile?

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Lucas Yew wrote:
ThePuppyTurtle wrote:
(...) "Ì̴̴̛͜T̷̨̕'͏҉̕͘Ş͘ ̡̛̕W̨̛H҉̛À̴͘̕͡T̷̢͜͝ ̸͏҉̵M̵̸̧͟Y̷̧̛͡ ̨̀͟͡͝C̵͠H̴̛҉Ą̢͏̷͘Ŕ͝A̸̛Ć̵T̴E̢͜͠R̵̀́͜͢ ̛͜͟W̴̨O̷̢̡͜U̷L̵҉̷͡D҉̸ ̷̧́͡͏D̵̛̛͝O̵҉̛" (...)
It's not related to the topic, but what on earth is this unholy abomination of a "font" facsimile?

Zalgo Text Generator In this specific case, only "f~~* up the middle" is checked, and it's set to "maxi f+&+ up."


As I understand all the current APs are part of the new history. Did perhaps something happen at the end of Ironfang Invasion that might explain the goblin's sudden inclusion? Spoiler any answers please!

My uneducated guess:
Perhaps the hobgolins left a lot of goblins behind that had to adapt to survive. They perhaps learned to get along with others better.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Dragonborn3 wrote:
I'd be quite surprised if "lighting babies on fire just so the scream" is written down somewhere and is not just an exaggeration.

"Fire is often used to torture prisoners, the process fulfilling two aims for the goblins beyond soliciting responses from the victim: the fire amuses the goblins and, in time, cooks the meat for dinner."

Page 5 of Goblins of Golarion

Yep, these guys are going to be great core race.


My guess is that these goblins are simply the exception to the rule. just like any other ancestry, they'll have a paragraph as to why they go adventuring, and any alignment differences and whatnot will be backstory. Kinda like Half-Orcs but more extreme.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Garfaulk Sharpstone wrote:
My guess is that these goblins are simply the exception to the rule. just like any other ancestry, they'll have a paragraph as to why they go adventuring, and any alignment differences and whatnot will be backstory. Kinda like Half-Orcs but more extreme.

I have to totally disagree with the half-orc analogy that I've seen here and in other posts. Paizo has developed a fair body of lore about half-orcs and how they fit into human society, the Pathfinder Society, etc. There are now two half-orc VCs. There's the half-orc society of Averaka in the Ironbound Islands. Many half-orcs are the children of half-orcs, rather than having one orc and one human parent. Desert half-orcs of Garund are treated very differently by local human societies than those from in and around Belkzen. And so on.

I've seen nothing similar in regards to goblins.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Per Pathfinder's own Advanced Race Guide, Goblins could easily be a core race. (I know this is not a favorite publication for many.)

Per the same guide, so could:

Catfolk
Hobgoblins
Ratfolk
Vanaras

With a little work, so could:

Duergar
Lizardfolk
Orcs
Undines

So, instead of freaking out about Goblins, maybe think of them as opening a door to an expanded core of races.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

It's not really a freakout so much as a 'How does this even?'

And you missed all the Featured Races there, Scary.


Garfaulk Sharpstone wrote:
My guess is that these goblins are simply the exception to the rule. just like any other ancestry, they'll have a paragraph as to why they go adventuring, and any alignment differences and whatnot will be backstory. Kinda like Half-Orcs but more extreme.
John Lynch 106 wrote:
The biggest problem isn't PC goblin adventurers acting in a way that isn't full-on goblin (although it is an issue to a degree), the biggest problem is the rest of the world not killing goblins on sight in order to save their horses, dogs and houses from burning down.


Does "Core" really have deeper meaning than "it's in the core rulebook"? I mean, one might expect core rulebook options to be allowed in more games than ones in later books, but Leadership and most of the real problem spells were in the CRB back in PF1, and that didn't stop GMs from putting the kibosh on them if they were so inclined.


They can add or change lore. It's not like they're beholden to what they've written before and can never change it. Retcons, exceptions, and changes all occur in various media. This really isn't that difficult of a thing to make happen.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

And if they change /retcon it in a way that feels hamfisted and not enjoyable, people's interest in the setting can decrease (I know mine will. I love Golarion goblins). For an extreme example, see the Forgotten Realms.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

NOTE: My enjoyment of PF 2nd ed is not contingent on goblins not being in the CRB. My incentive to run a Golarion campaign with PF 2nd ed is contingent on goblins being integrated in a really elegant and fun way. If they fail, I'll take the lemons in the CRB and make lemonade. It just probably won't be in Golarion.

This is a setting issue, not a rule issue.

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
PossibleCabbage wrote:
Does "Core" really have deeper meaning than "it's in the core rulebook"? I mean, one might expect core rulebook options to be allowed in more games than ones in later books,

Well I guess, for most players the unspoken expectation is that everything in the Core Rules is available without the GM having any say in it. It's kinda why I didn't like the Dragonborn being included in 4E, because I knew that even if I could technically ban that option from my game, I would have to discuss this probably for every single game I would want to run.

I'm quite sure that my kids will want to play a goblin if they see that this is in the book. And as I'm running them through RotRL right now and present the goblins there more in a hilarious way not as the creepy terror they can be, I know that I'll probably hate their goblin characters very much. Luckily, I'm more concerned about their fun than about mine.

John Lynch 106 wrote:
My incentive to run a Golarion campaign with PF 2nd ed is contingent on goblins being integrated in a really elegant and fun way. If they fail, I'll take the lemons in the CRB and make lemonade. It just probably won't be in Golarion.

Easily understandable. I like quite some things about Golarion but even before the 2E announcement I was working on my homebrew and on adapting the Paizo APs to my version of the Realms. I don't see that changing with 2E; I still love most of the setting stuff they create, so I'll continue enjoying to read (and steal what I want from ^^) the setting books to come.

Shadow Lodge

This is just a personal anecdote, but the PCs in an AP I'm running have actually brokered peace between goblins, kobolds, and humans, albeit by regiciding the tribe's leader and his power behind the throne, then installing a leader they supported.

The way I'm going with it, other goblins are currently calling those goblins stupid, but are seeing how much more stuff they have. As part of attempts to trade peacefully, the goblins have been importing books to burn, which turn out to be unholy texts on Norgorber and Lamashtu (the irony of this has been lost on them).
So by complete accident, my players and myself have made a handy rationale for Goblins As Core in any Pathfinder 2 APs we run.

...Though we all still prefer kobolds.

Shadow Lodge

pjrogers wrote:
Dragonborn3 wrote:
I'd be quite surprised if "lighting babies on fire just so the scream" is written down somewhere and is not just an exaggeration.

"Fire is often used to torture prisoners, the process fulfilling two aims for the goblins beyond soliciting responses from the victim: the fire amuses the goblins and, in time, cooks the meat for dinner."

Page 5 of Goblins of Golarion

Yep, these guys are going to be great core race.

Well, not to argue over the fact they will be great(but they will), at least one tribe of goblins does not like to hear the screaming of puppies and babies.

"Chase the baby, catch the pup.
Bonk the head to shut it up."


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Dragonborn3 wrote:
pjrogers wrote:
Dragonborn3 wrote:
I'd be quite surprised if "lighting babies on fire just so the scream" is written down somewhere and is not just an exaggeration.

"Fire is often used to torture prisoners, the process fulfilling two aims for the goblins beyond soliciting responses from the victim: the fire amuses the goblins and, in time, cooks the meat for dinner."

Page 5 of Goblins of Golarion

Yep, these guys are going to be great core race.

Well, not to argue over the fact they will be great(but they will), at least one tribe of goblins does not like to hear the screaming of puppies and babies.

"Chase the baby, catch the pup.
Bonk the head to shut it up."

Child abuse, that's really "great."


Wei Ji the Learner:

I didn’t miss the Featured Races. IMHO, some are simply not ready to be core races.

The Shifty Mongoose:

I really like Kobolds too (probably because of Kobold Press). Alas, they are way underpowered to be a core race. (Some will say that does not matter; I say that it will get old and fast.)

My point: that if Goblins and a few others are balanced and ready to become core races, then why not?

This is the Second Edition; Nocticula may ascend and, maybe, a few other cosmic changes as well. I am willing to embrace a whole new fantastic world…with Goblins as core.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
scary harpy wrote:
I really like Kobolds too (probably because of Kobold Press). Alas, they are way underpowered to be a core race. (Some will say that does not matter; I say that it will get old and fast.)

They could just... not make them suck?


Honestly, I can see them changing goblins a bit to still keep their crazy, pyromaniac natures, but turn them more into neutral or chaotic creatures that don't intend any harm, but just like fire for the sake of liking fire.

Best image I have in my head is having these "tame" goblins be like the Pyro from Team Fortress 2-while still a blank slate in terms of personality, that leaves a lot to the imagination, making him range from a crazy person who lives in a candy coated world to a rational person who just burns everything in sight when he's pissed.

Goblins becoming core races makes a lot of sense, since they are the closest thing Pathfinder has to a mascot race. Do I think they could have put a different race instead? Like kobolds (and like Milo said, make them NOT suck), tengu, or aasimars? Yeah. Does it make sense to make goblins a core race? Definitely.

201 to 250 of 250 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion / Goblins in PF2nd All Messageboards
Recent threads in Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion