Public Announcement: Goblins don't make good players bad.


Prerelease Discussion

1 to 50 of 120 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

18 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Struggling to read through the massive complaints thread that is the goblin reveal a recurring issue seems to come up for some people along the lines of "Goblins will give players the excuse to act like a d!*k." This is only a problem if the player wanted to act like one in the first place, and regardless of any core options guess what, a d!*k is going to find a way to be a d!*k. If you need to ban goblins at your table to stop that player from playing one, you really need to think about why that player is at your table. Its about the same as banning Necromancy from your table as that "encourages murder hobo behaviour." NO, murder hobo players are going to strive to be a murder hobo, benefits or "roleplaying" be damned. We've all had that player who just kills something because they got bored of the ongoing social encounter, and we've all dealt with it before.

This might be a problem for PFS, I guess. But with a decently strict Infamy system those characters are going to be forcibly retired quite quickly.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Let's all be open minded about this option, sure. But let's not let our brains fall out either.

The kinds of people who are drawn to playing murderous, erratic, pyromaniac, garbage thieving, baby cooking, pickle-munchers are going to be predominantly those who already have a tendency to be . . . let's call it 'disruptive' because using a more accurate term is against community guidelines. Why give these types of problem players an excuse to be even more of a problem? And not only an excuse, but a rules backed shield to hide behind.

Silver Crusade

11 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
MidsouthGuy wrote:

Let's all be open minded about this option, sure. But let's not let our brains fall out either.

The kinds of people who are drawn to playing murderous, erratic, pyromaniac, garbage thieving, baby cooking, pickle-munchers are going to be predominantly those who already have a tendency to be . . . let's call it 'disruptive' because using a more accurate term is against community guidelines. Why give these types of problem players an excuse to be even more of a problem? And not only an excuse, but a rules backed shield to hide behind.

Those player will play baby-eating dwarfs if goblins aren't an option.

If you have problem players you need to talk to your players about expectations at the table. The rules are not a shield for disruptive behavior.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
MidsouthGuy wrote:

Let's all be open minded about this option, sure. But let's not let our brains fall out either.

The kinds of people who are drawn to playing murderous, erratic, pyromaniac, garbage thieving, baby cooking, pickle-munchers are going to be predominantly those who already have a tendency to be . . . let's call it 'disruptive' because using a more accurate term is against community guidelines. Why give these types of problem players an excuse to be even more of a problem? And not only an excuse, but a rules backed shield to hide behind.

Why do you play with them in the first place?


3 people marked this as a favorite.

MidsouthGuy, I'm willing to bet that you've had bad experiences with goblins at your table?

I've played alongside some fairly entertaining goblins, and some fairly munchkinned ones (+4 dex lends itself to a powerful swashbuckler) but I've never had any disruptive experiences with a goblin PC.

I don't think that allowing goblin PCs is "letting our brains fall out", I've been doing it for years with no problem. I don't think that a goblin is intrinsically more problematic than a half-orc; both have a default flavor of being somewhat barbaric. But it's the player that controls the character.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

The appeal of goblins is the very fact that they ARE murderous, erratic, pyromaniac, garbage thieving, baby cooking, insane little pickle-munchers. I love goblins in the lore for those very reasons. They're hilarious. However, if you tell your players "okay, you can play a goblin, just make sure they don't act like a psycho," when that is the reason they're appealing, why even bother giving goblin as an option? Which goes to further my point that they should not be a standard player option.


6 people marked this as a favorite.

I mean, eh? I think some of this is knee jerk. (Not the OP, but what the OP is talking about.)

The more interesting argument I've seen is "how do you fit a cannibalistic, murderous, fire-loving race into something that WON'T be shot by guards on sight in most towns?"

Which, yeah, the lore of the thing is what I'm most interested in seeing explained.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Midsouth, you have a point; I have some fear that making goblins a core race will somehow detract from their appeal . . . even for me. Humans are not rational creatures. But it'll also mean they get more options, so I think I'm probably ok with it.

I've seen plenty of goblin PCs who are hilarious erratic pyromaniac garbage thieving insane pickle-munchers; they're kept on a very short leash by the rest of the party. But not so short a leash that they aren't hilarious. You'd be surprised what a group of adventurers will put up with if they don't have a frontline without you. x)


13 people marked this as a favorite.

Good players will be good and you don't need to worry. Bad players are always going to be bad, nothing can be done to stop them.

It's the borderline players who will be attracted to goblins and they will see the race as a license to indulge in every disruptive bit of behaviour they are inclined to play.

It's not really a big issue for me at this point. I'll just ban goblins. But this is what people are concerned about.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
John Lynch 106 wrote:

Good players will be good and you don't need to worry. Bad players are always going to be bad, nothing can be done to stop them.

It's the borderline players who will be attracted to goblins and they will see the race as a license to indulge in every disruptive bit of behaviour they are inclined to play.

It's not really a big issue for me at this point. I'll just ban goblins. But this is what people are concerned about.

We found a lot of common ground tonight... XD


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Bard of Ages wrote:

I mean, eh? I think some of this is knee jerk. (Not the OP, but what the OP is talking about.)

The more interesting argument I've seen is "how do you fit a cannibalistic, murderous, fire-loving race into something that WON'T be shot by guards on sight in most towns?"

Which, yeah, the lore of the thing is what I'm most interested in seeing explained.

Trenchcoats and fedoras. It works for turtlefolk (so well we can't even see their PF stats).


3 people marked this as a favorite.

At least we can hopefully all agree on one thing. At least they're not Kender.


Bard of Ages wrote:

I mean, eh? I think some of this is knee jerk. (Not the OP, but what the OP is talking about.)

The more interesting argument I've seen is "how do you fit a cannibalistic, murderous, fire-loving race into something that WON'T be shot by guards on sight in most towns?"

Which, yeah, the lore of the thing is what I'm most interested in seeing explained.

I suspect the answer will be something like "There are enough non-psycho goblins that if one approaches openly they'll just raise suspicions as opposed be killed on sight."

Silver Crusade

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

I’ve seen so much kender bashing in the last 24 hours but I have serious doubts everyone who participated in it has had any personal experience with kender characters.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:
I’ve seen so much kender bashing in the last 24 hours but I have serious doubts everyone who participated in it has had any personal experience with kender characters.

Could say the same thing about Dragonborn in 2008/2009. You don't need to personally experience everything to know that something isn't enjoyable for you.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:
I’ve seen so much kender bashing in the last 24 hours but I have serious doubts everyone who participated in it has had any personal experience with kender characters.

Oh, you'd be VERY, VERY wrong... ANYONE that's has EVER played with ANY player that has played ANY kender even close to the way they are meant to be played will NEVER forget the experience. You really need a support group to get over that kind of PTSD. :P

Really, kenders are just that bad... I really don't understand why genocide hasn't solved the 'kender issue' long ago...


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Malk_Content wrote:
MidsouthGuy wrote:

Let's all be open minded about this option, sure. But let's not let our brains fall out either.

The kinds of people who are drawn to playing murderous, erratic, pyromaniac, garbage thieving, baby cooking, pickle-munchers are going to be predominantly those who already have a tendency to be . . . let's call it 'disruptive' because using a more accurate term is against community guidelines. Why give these types of problem players an excuse to be even more of a problem? And not only an excuse, but a rules backed shield to hide behind.

Why do you play with them in the first place?

Stangers meet online to play by post or a tabletop sim, Some guy yo kinda know at your local game shop is putting a game together, PFS, etc; there a number of reasons why you'd play with them without knowing ahead of time. And if you do know, well "It can't be that bad right?".

That and some haven't heard the mantra "No game is better than bad game"

Side question as its come up here, and I'm showing my newbie card for this; the heck is a Kender?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
graystone wrote:
DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:
I’ve seen so much kender bashing in the last 24 hours but I have serious doubts everyone who participated in it has had any personal experience with kender characters.

Oh, you'd be VERY, VERY wrong... ANYONE that's has EVER played with ANY player that has played ANY kender even close to the way they are meant to be played will NEVER forget the experience. You really need a support group to get over that kind of PTSD. :P

Really, kenders are just that bad... I really don't understand why genocide hasn't solved the 'kender issue' long ago...

Red dragons tried... real hard too.

You are not exaggerating how annoying they are but you are over the top with your reaction I feel. I don't quit peoples games just because one of the players is playing a Kender. I've played in games where it worked out Ok. I just never kept many valuables on me and my sword was far to large for him to deal with. That and bees wax in my ears. Which conveniently saved me from some sirens.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:
I’ve seen so much kender bashing in the last 24 hours but I have serious doubts everyone who participated in it has had any personal experience with kender characters.

For me it's not so much the way they're played (I don't buy the idea that a race will make a good player bad. I'm perfectly fine with PC goblins although I think making them core doesn't make much sense). It's just that the entire concept of them really seems to be "Super annoying race that exist to be super annoying because it's kind of funny for a few minutes. Also makes our halflings not hobbits." They were just a bad joke.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
graystone wrote:
DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:
I’ve seen so much kender bashing in the last 24 hours but I have serious doubts everyone who participated in it has had any personal experience with kender characters.

Oh, you'd be VERY, VERY wrong... ANYONE that's has EVER played with ANY player that has played ANY kender even close to the way they are meant to be played will NEVER forget the experience. You really need a support group to get over that kind of PTSD. :P

Really, kenders are just that bad... I really don't understand why genocide hasn't solved the 'kender issue' long ago...

Spoken like a person who’s never seen a kender played well. :) So many people play up the “klepto to their own party” concept and DMs let them do whatever they wanted to the annoyance of the group that it took on urban legend status.

By the rules back in Dragonlance Adventures, there was nothing that ever said Kender stole meaningful items from their party, mainly trinkets such as combs or costume jewelry; a Kender was more likely to steal your tinder box than your money or magic equipment. In fact most theft was to happen to NPCs off-screen, with a random item table reminiscent of the PC Trinket tables from 5e D&D. Their legendary fearlessness was the bravery of a young child who doesn’t grasp distant dangers, but the rules made it clear that a Kender would not do something that was obviously foolhardy and would obviously mean the end of their or another party member’s life. Finally, their taunting was extremely useful to give an enemy a quick debuff.

I played two Kender by the book back in the 80s and 90s (one thief and one cleric) and no party member ever wanted to strangle me. Kender reputation got the short end of the stick way back when thanks to the same type of “griefers” who would do the same thing to a goblin PC.


I don't have an issue myself with their inclsion. I'm actually playing a goblin in a Shadow of the Demon Lord game right now and having fun with a more wacky character than usual. Our group has played quite a lot in Golarion and see no issue with any player .If a GM doesn't want aparticular race in a game they can just say no.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I’m playing nothing but goblin bards from here on out. My fellow players get to experience the beauty that is my singing voice.

It’s not good.

Anyway, goblins being made a core race is going to be pretty wild and a cool change. The little lore we have suggests they’re sorta like creepy gnomes, as someone I know put it.

Silver Crusade

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
ENHenry wrote:
graystone wrote:
DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:
I’ve seen so much kender bashing in the last 24 hours but I have serious doubts everyone who participated in it has had any personal experience with kender characters.

Oh, you'd be VERY, VERY wrong... ANYONE that's has EVER played with ANY player that has played ANY kender even close to the way they are meant to be played will NEVER forget the experience. You really need a support group to get over that kind of PTSD. :P

Really, kenders are just that bad... I really don't understand why genocide hasn't solved the 'kender issue' long ago...

Spoken like a person who’s never seen a kender played well. :) So many people play up the “klepto to their own party” concept and DMs let them do whatever they wanted to the annoyance of the group that it took on urban legend status.

By the rules back in Dragonlance Adventures, there was nothing that ever said Kender stole meaningful items from their party, mainly trinkets such as combs or costume jewelry; a Kender was more likely to steal your tinder box than your money or magic equipment. In fact most theft was to happen to NPCs off-screen, with a random item table reminiscent of the PC Trinket tables from 5e D&D. Their legendary fearlessness was the bravery of a young child who doesn’t grasp distant dangers, but the rules made it clear that a Kender would not do something that was obviously foolhardy and would obviously mean the end of their or another party member’s life. Finally, their taunting was extremely useful to give an enemy a quick debuff.

I played two Kender by the book back in the 80s and 90s (one thief and one cleric) and no party member ever wanted to strangle me. Kender reputation got the short end of the stick way back when thanks to the same type of “griefers” who would do the same thing to a goblin PC.

Players who make other players upset are their own problem.


Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
MerlinCross wrote:
Malk_Content wrote:
MidsouthGuy wrote:

Let's all be open minded about this option, sure. But let's not let our brains fall out either.

The kinds of people who are drawn to playing murderous, erratic, pyromaniac, garbage thieving, baby cooking, pickle-munchers are going to be predominantly those who already have a tendency to be . . . let's call it 'disruptive' because using a more accurate term is against community guidelines. Why give these types of problem players an excuse to be even more of a problem? And not only an excuse, but a rules backed shield to hide behind.

Why do you play with them in the first place?

Stangers meet online to play by post or a tabletop sim, Some guy yo kinda know at your local game shop is putting a game together, PFS, etc; there a number of reasons why you'd play with them without knowing ahead of time. And if you do know, well "It can't be that bad right?".

That and some haven't heard the mantra "No game is better than bad game"

Side question as its come up here, and I'm showing my newbie card for this; the heck is a Kender?

I'd still maintain those players would be bad regardless of the existence of [core, we already have them playable] goblins. A bad player is a bad player. GMs and players are already dealing with them in all the above situations. I don't see goblins being any worse.


9 people marked this as a favorite.

Ya know, back when I played 2e regularly, we had kenders in our parties. It wasn't disruptive, nor was it particularly a problem. Mostly because the players playing them were actually mature adults and not jerks.

There was some kleptomania, mostly in the form of the DM erasing equipment off other PCs character sheets and writing them on the Kenders between sessions (yes, we used to play that all character sheets stayed with the DM), but when that occurred it was more amusing that not.

People's problems with kender seems to come from one of two sources:

1) They're heard of them, and then decided they're bad without any further investigation or experience.
2) They experienced a jerk player playing one.

Amazingly, it's the exact same problem they're having with goblins. And both can be solved with a little bit of maturity.


MerlinCross wrote:
Side question as its come up here, and I'm showing my newbie card for this; the heck is a Kender?

A race that was invented in the classic Dragonlance campaign and novels by Margaret Weis and Tracy Hickman in the 1980s. Kender are basically a replacement for halflings in the Dragonlance world. They're streetwise, talkative, fun-loving, kleptomaniac and endlessly curious. One of their shticks is to use clever insults to provoke dumb enemies into attacking them.

In the novels, the kender character was utterly hilarious, but when kender were introduced as a playable race, they proved hard to play well in a team.


8 people marked this as a favorite.
Malk_Content wrote:


Struggling to read through the massive complaints thread that is the goblin reveal a recurring issue seems to come up for some people along the lines of "Goblins will give players the excuse to act like a d!*k." This is only a problem if the player wanted to act like one in the first place, and regardless of any core options guess what, a d!*k is going to find a way to be a d!*k. If you need to ban goblins at your table to stop that player from playing one, you really need to think about why that player is at your table. Its about the same as banning Necromancy from your table as that "encourages murder hobo behaviour." NO, murder hobo players are going to strive to be a murder hobo, benefits or "roleplaying" be damned. We've all had that player who just kills something because they got bored of the ongoing social encounter, and we've all dealt with it before.

This might be a problem for PFS, I guess. But with a decently strict Infamy system those characters are going to be forcibly retired quite quickly.

I think the OP is missing the point as far as player problems with this new PC race goblin issue is concerned.

Think about what the goblin has been for RPG enthusiasts since time immemorial. A hideous vermin creature, a grotesque monster to be killed on sight. And then in PF 1st edition they get reduced to comical mascots with this endearing mischievous quality. Definitely not the direction I'd choose but it's funny and at least they take a hit to charisma for being evil, cowardly opportunistic monsters. Then the sneak peeks for second edition come and they're loveable zainy adventurers with a bonus to charisma and any other stat because they're so quirky and loveable and can be whatever they want to be, especially an embassador or a paladin.

A distasteful reaction to this has been fomenting among a huge portion of the player base, and while I'm not sure it's totally conscious, I think there's an actual factor of disgust. This move has radically altered the tone of the game and built a bridge where many felt there should've been a Wall. The game, or at least it's default assumptions, have been contaminated. Many players clearly feel this way, weather or not they fully realize it or have found the words to express it.

There have been other moves in a similar direction, most notably the decision that marshal characters should be able to leap dozens of feet in the air and smack dragons to the ground or swim across entire oceans. Basically we're seeing a battle for the soul of fantasy RPGs, where conservative gamers see the new incarnation of pathfinder as a silly Saturday morning cartoon and open minded gamers saw the old game as a stuffy, rules bloated bore that spent as much time telling players what they couldn't do as what they could.

I'm not saying either side can be objectively right or wrong, but it's certainly an interesting philosophical fight.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

A system gives purpose, guidelines and rules to people. In the real world I know a lot of decent nice people who could have been savages if we did not have the law. Even I sometimes could have been a violent person for example, if I did not had an environnement that encourages to be comprehensive and nice to people.

It is the same in a game of pen and paper. If your system, here the rules and the default setting, encourages people to play jerk Goblins, the chance that they will do it will be higher. They would have not being a jerk with a Dwarf or a Gnome. But they will want to tell a story a play a role. Well Goblins are a dangerous sadistic destructive race with mad scientist and dark humor. Of course there will be problems. And it is really not only because they are « bad players ». And it is worse when like half of the player base already encountered a Golarion Goblin as an enemy. When I ran RotRL I made pretty clear that Goblins are to be exterminated because they are really evil and dangerous, even if they are funny.

So yes they will be a problem. Just like Paladin can be sometimes or Cleric or Monk or evil PCs. Yes it is mostly the player fault but not only, if you give a background to an ancestry you can’t expect people to just play the Drizzt Do’Urden. And to be honest a whole group of Drizzt it not really convincing either.

I love evil PCs in a good/neutral group. They give this Punisher feeling of « I will do what I have to do to kill the BBeG, even if the do gooders are not able to. » I had a lot of Evil PC in my adventures and I never had any problems, because they played races like Drow, who are smart. Or an Asmodeus Cleric, who are also smarts. But a Goblin? Problems incoming. And frankly story wise it sucks. Commercial move that is all.

However ancestries seems fun and strong and I like that!!


3 people marked this as a favorite.

The law is all that matters. If goblins can make for mighty paladins, and keep with their oaths, then I see no issue here. I welcome them to our ranks!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Its funny that your first paragraph basically describes why goblins might be the way they were whilst completely forgoing the idea that a civilizing effect could elevate whole swathes of them.

I also don't think the PF2E core description of Goblins is going to encourage people to play jerk Goblins. Very much the opposite in fact. There are entire games out there in which you play the tropish dick heads but don't suffer the problems people expect to be rife. It seems like Goblins are bizzare place to draw the line seeing as a) we've had Goblin PCs for ages and there isn't rampart complaints about the people who play them and b) anyone who has ever wanted to play a jerk has been as encouraged to do so by letting them write CE in their alignment box and they say they are roleplaying their alignment.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Malk_Content wrote:

Its funny that your first paragraph basically describes why goblins might be the way they were whilst completely forgoing the idea that a civilizing effect could elevate whole swathes of them.

I also don't think the PF2E core description of Goblins is going to encourage people to play jerk Goblins. Very much the opposite in fact. There are entire games out there in which you play the tropish dick heads but don't suffer the problems people expect to be rife. It seems like Goblins are bizzare place to draw the line seeing as a) we've had Goblin PCs for ages and there isn't rampart complaints about the people who play them and b) anyone who has ever wanted to play a jerk has been as encouraged to do so by letting them write CE in their alignment box and they say they are roleplaying their alignment.

I don’t have a lot of monster races PCs. I consider it exotic, and as such you have to provide extra work if you want to play one at my table. Just as I do for Aasimar or Tengu or Dhampir or whatever. I never had a Goblin PC so far. That is why I think they don’t belong in Core but in a supplement on monster ancestry. Hobgoblin would have been a way better choice roleplay wise. The fact that they are Core bothers me because it means it is common to find a Goblin adventurer and that does not make any sense for me in how I describe my Golarion.

And I can’t wait to see the scénaristic loophole for Good Goblins. I am sure that il will be the same that Good Drows in FR. It will be bad. Because you can’t build a whole race to be an ICONIC vilain in a setting for the day after make it a playable race with a strange scenaristic twist. It is like having Stormtrooper as a core career in a Edge of Rebellion game or Chaos Space Marines as a chapter choice for Deathwatch. And I don’t like the idea that all Goblins PC will come from Goblingoodie Town.

I am sure that it can be nice to have, for once in a while, that Goblin adventurer who is a développed character with strong backstory and fun presence. It can be an epic memory for the players and the DM. But once in a while. Not in every campaign because they are fun and have big heads. At convention you will see new players playing Goblins like it is an Elf or a Dwarf and that don’t make any sense at all in my assumptions of Core fantasy in Golarion. Even more when they said that « evil Goblins are still a thing » in their blog. Goblins are the new Drizzt. And it is even more immersion breaking that with the Drows. I think it is a move to attract young player base. So they can play funny big headed monster who can burn things. That can only go in a good way... right?

BUT, it is only an option. And more options are always good. So if I don’t want to use it I can, and it is nice that people who like this idea have the opportunity to play with it. I just have prefered another ancestry.

Liberty's Edge

7 people marked this as a favorite.

Like I said in the previous thread, I require a justification for this. However, I also immediately came up with a good one:

-When PF2 comes out it will have been 12 years since Rise of the Runelords.
-Rise of the Runelords has a 'goblin orphan' problem at one point (or, at least, is very likely to).
-The APs are considered to have canonically occurred in PF2.
-Goblins mature at 13-18 years of age (ie: their minimum age as PCs is 13 to 14, their max usually no more than 18).

These facts together paint a very specific and compelling picture of a group of Goblins likely raised to be non-Evil somewhere in the vicinity of Sandpoint...who may have fond memories of adventurers and are certainly just coming of age.


DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:
ENHenry wrote:
graystone wrote:
DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:
I’ve seen so much kender bashing in the last 24 hours but I have serious doubts everyone who participated in it has had any personal experience with kender characters.

Oh, you'd be VERY, VERY wrong... ANYONE that's has EVER played with ANY player that has played ANY kender even close to the way they are meant to be played will NEVER forget the experience. You really need a support group to get over that kind of PTSD. :P

Really, kenders are just that bad... I really don't understand why genocide hasn't solved the 'kender issue' long ago...

Spoken like a person who’s never seen a kender played well. :) So many people play up the “klepto to their own party” concept and DMs let them do whatever they wanted to the annoyance of the group that it took on urban legend status.

By the rules back in Dragonlance Adventures, there was nothing that ever said Kender stole meaningful items from their party, mainly trinkets such as combs or costume jewelry; a Kender was more likely to steal your tinder box than your money or magic equipment. In fact most theft was to happen to NPCs off-screen, with a random item table reminiscent of the PC Trinket tables from 5e D&D. Their legendary fearlessness was the bravery of a young child who doesn’t grasp distant dangers, but the rules made it clear that a Kender would not do something that was obviously foolhardy and would obviously mean the end of their or another party member’s life. Finally, their taunting was extremely useful to give an enemy a quick debuff.

I played two Kender by the book back in the 80s and 90s (one thief and one cleric) and no party member ever wanted to strangle me. Kender reputation got the short end of the stick way back when thanks to the same type of “griefers” who would do the same thing to a goblin PC.

Players who make other players upset are their own problem.

Agreed, and one which DMs have complete control over, yet some DMs don't have the social experience to manage in a mature way in out-of-game discussion at the table. Regardless of PC Goblins or PC Humans, it's the quality of the players/people who make or break the fun.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Goblin paladins. Aaaaaaaand I’m out.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Tarondor wrote:

Goblin paladins. Aaaaaaaand I’m out.

That.

Silver Crusade

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

*waves*


6 people marked this as a favorite.

Imagine goblin paladins being the reason you drop a system...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
SteelGuts wrote:
Tarondor wrote:

Goblin paladins. Aaaaaaaand I’m out.

That.

Reeta Bigbad serve Lord Abby-Darr now!

Greatstest and Firstest Vault be praised!
Reeta will assistance you!

...Now, gimme coin-coins for helping you! Lotsa Coin-Coins!


4 people marked this as a favorite.

What's wrong with a goblin paladin?

What, you think you humans have all the rights to morality? That everyone else must fit into your world view?

Seems awfully rigid of you to dictate what everyone else must be. As if you alone have the say in what other sentient beings can and cannot be, determining who is the "hero" and who is the "villain."

What's next, claiming by decree that all elves are evil? Well, ok - do that, and I'm on your side.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
SteelGuts wrote:


I I never had a Goblin PC so far. That is why I think they don’t belong in Core but in a supplement on monster ancestry.

I've never had a player be a Gnome or Halfling so far. That is why I think they don't beling in Core but in a supplement on little people ancestry.

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Companion, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

I'll be looking closely at the description of goblin tendencies and behavior in the book. Paizo has done a reasonable job managing those expectations when presenting goblins as a playable race, but the presentation in the Core Rulebook should be even better.

Goblins can be a problem, just like anything else. They are a manageable problem with well-worded descriptions in the book.


Pallys can do whatever now so I dont see why its a big deal to have a gobo one?

Liberty's Edge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Orville Redenbacher wrote:
Pallys can do whatever now so I dont see why its a big deal to have a gobo one?

I've seen no mention of changing Alignment restrictions on Paladins. Source?


It's coming :)


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I mean, you can have Goblin Paladins in PF1. It's just that they are not a good choice because of the CHA penalty, but that problem is solved!

I kinda want to play a Goblin Paladin of Torag now...


2 people marked this as a favorite.
MerlinCross wrote:
Side question as its come up here, and I'm showing my newbie card for this; the heck is a Kender?

Take a 5 year old, give it ADHD, kleptomania, total fearlessness, no sense of personal property, insatiable curiosity and a knack/desire to taunt the most powerful/dangerous creature they could find. They where built from the ground up to be annoying... :P

Vidmaster7 wrote:
Red dragons tried... real hard too.

It's one of the times I want to buy them an ale. If they could pull it off, I welcome our red dragon overlords!

Vidmaster7 wrote:
You are not exaggerating how annoying they are but you are over the top with your reaction I feel.

Quite hionestly, I see your reacyion and think it's not strong enough. JUST reading the description in the rule book give a guttural/visceral 'oh hell no! why are they allowed to live' reaction.

Vidmaster7 wrote:
I don't quit peoples games just because one of the players is playing a Kender.

I usually don't join one unless it's hidden beforehand.

Vidmaster7 wrote:
I've played in games where it worked out Ok.

After reading the race description from the rule book, if you feel that way I can't help but think that they didn't roleplay them correctly. They are literally built to deeply annoy anyone around them other than other kender [who don't know any better].

ENHenry wrote:
Spoken like a person who’s never seen a kender played well. :)

LOL What a coincidence. I was thinking that of your post. I knew someone that was OBSESSED and played countless games of dragonlance and seen multiple characters and players with kender and NEVER EVER seen one that I didn't want to strangle the first time I met them. It was SO tortuous that it should be against the geneva convention...

DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:
Players who make other players upset are their own problem.

The issue with kender is that they were built from the ground up to upset people. They are innately annoying so players either #1 play them as they are meant to be played and upset everyone or #2 they play halflings that pretend to be kenders in a sad caricature. So I don't blame the players: the premise is a no win one where the outcome is always bad... :P


3 people marked this as a favorite.
bookrat wrote:

1) They're heard of them, and then decided they're bad without any further investigation or experience.

2) They experienced a jerk player playing one.

Not so for me... There were jerk CHARACTERS but that's what a kender is at it's immutable core: a walking natural disaster, a race that had to be given plot armor as the only plausible reason every race didn't band together to MURDER them in a holy genocidal purge...

SO I've #1 experienced them MANY times and #2 found them just awful no matter who played them, player or DM. the entire race is just a sin against nature.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Now back to the topic of goblins! ;)

They are in a better place IMO then kender as they DO have exceptions to the 'normal' behavior of the race. As such, I have NO issue with goblin PC's. IMO they don't make a good core race though as those aberrations aren't portrayed as common and IMO common is what core should be. Fringe builds should be in books tailored for that people that are into that oddity.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
John Lynch 106 wrote:
It's the borderline players who will be attracted to goblins and they will see the race as a license to indulge in every disruptive bit of behaviour they are inclined to play.

I will also observe that "I am playing a person who comes from evil, and for whom evil is expected, but nonetheless I am driven to do better" can be reasonable training wheels for players who are not the best RPers but want to get better.

Playing a goblin, tiefling, changeling etc. who wants to be nice, but for whom it doesn't come naturally is a reasonable first step towards playing complex, multidimensional characters with rich inner lives. All we need to do is get the goblin players who crave conflict to turn that inwards and we can turn crappy players into good ones.


Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
graystone wrote:

Now back to the topic of goblins! ;)

They are in a better place IMO then kender as they DO have exceptions to the 'normal' behavior of the race. As such, I have NO issue with goblin PC's. IMO they don't make a good core race though as those aberrations aren't portrayed as common and IMO common is what core should be. Fringe builds should be in books tailored for that people that are into that oddity.

Don't agree on commanility at all. If the corebooks only presented what was common for a race to do it would be a very dull book indeed. I mean what % of any race is anything other than a serf?

1 to 50 of 120 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion / Public Announcement: Goblins don't make good players bad. All Messageboards