| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If Paizo got a nickel for every post arguing about goblins, it could safely dispense with the profit/marketing rationale for including them in Core
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That's my understanding too... which makes it super, super odd that psycho-pyro's that prefer human/gnome flesh get a huge shift in ten years. It's a HUGE shift. The shortest lifespan of the core races is 60+ years so everyone is still going to recall is bob got eaten by goblins or goblins burned down jim's barn.
I will echo the sentiment expressed earlier that it appears that some people have a head canon about goblins that they are unwilling to give up.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Lamashtu worshiping people eaters.
I can quite firmly say that I am of the opinion that Lamashtu worshiping people eaters should be killed on sight. Hide your kids, hide your wife, and hide your husbands, because those guys are screwed up in all of the ways. Do not let them take you alive. Or dead.
Now, that goes for Lamashtu worshiping people eaters of any race, but so far most goblins fall into that category. It's going to take a lot to pull them away from that reputation. It's not like it hasn't been earned, they've been burning bridges for a long time. Change is going to take a lot of work from both goblins and their neighbors. Work that not everyone will even agree is worth doing.
A single, pivotal moment in goblin history might get the ball rolling, but I don't think any one thing is going to fix things to any degree of satisfaction.
That said, I'm kind of ambivalent on goblin in core. I haven't played society yet, so I'm a bit less bound to RAW consumption.
In my home games? None. I will never allow Goblin PCs.
And if it's not Golarion mad-gremlin goblin, but Faerun evolved-species-of-ermine goblin?
If I am forced to play with them in PF2 Society I will check before game and if one is playing... I will resign from the table.
What if he will playing proper LG paladin of Ragathiel?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And if it's not Golarion mad-gremlin goblin, but Faerun evolved-species-of-ermine goblin?In my home games? None. I will never allow Goblin PCs.
The game is infused with Golarion, so the default goblin IS the Golarion one. It's truly impossible to debate someone unknown homebrew race based off the goblin in the game.
What if he will playing proper LG paladin of Ragathiel?If I am forced to play with them in PF2 Society I will check before game and if one is playing... I will resign from the table.
Personally, I find most people don't know a creatures alignment and class. So... it boils down to 'it's a goblin'. IMO, the natural reaction to 'it's a goblin' is to kill it or if that's not possible drive it away. Ask it to join your party isn't the normal reaction.
If my character doesn't know it, the fact that I know it shouldn't change what my character would do. If not, I'd be using MY monster recall instead of rolling Know checks...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't like monsters in core. I have no problem with playing monsters every now and then, but if someone plays an orc as a non-monster, they will probably meet hobgoblins in my game (because hobgoblins are real monsters). I would much rather see goblins in an expansion book, but I'm sure this ship has sailed. I guess it is more orc baddies for my game (until they get added to core). Now I just need to make them small and like fire. Orclings!
Okay, so I have read through this thread and the obvious conclusion is that goblins have become socially acceptable because they make for good pets. Certainly they are less psycho than cats, even Cthulhu Mythos creatures are wary of cats.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
A goblin is going to pass the test of the Starstone. That goblin is going to be the iconic Pirate, a new character class only available if you illegally download a copy of the rules. It won't be published in print.
A goblin is going to pass the test of the Starstone. That goblin is going to be the iconic Pirate, a new character class only available if you illegally download a copy of the rules. It won't be published in print.
That only works if he is a multiclassed ninja-pirate!
My money is on new Goblin gods (whether from the Starstone or awakened from stasis) or maybe an influx of proto Goblins from the First World
Vat grown space goblins from the future, brainwashed by a sentient AI to be sane and totally not stabby! Well at least until they receive a signal from central computer and rise up to serve the computer overlords!!! BWHAAAAAA!!!
Or maybe goblins have hit their preset kill limit and return to factory settings... :P
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't see why it even needs an in-lore explanation. If Paizo decides that Goblins are no longer quite so unbelievably mentalist and future writings reflect this change, then that's all that's necessary.
Well because they've stated that the old lore remains intact. That means EVERYONE Remembers that for endless generations, goblins have been just the worst kind of monsters. Something has to fill in that gap or it just doesn't make any sense.
They might (and it's hinted probably will) include some kind of lore-based justification which all the angry people will no doubt be completely dissatisfied with - regardless of how good it is or isn't.
I'm 100% prepared to be dissatisfied with it as it seems impossible, IMO, to come up with a reason that's sensible and satisfying within the incredibly short time period they've stated.
Me, I welcome their inclusion, for no more reason than I would welcome the inclusion of Tengu, Grippli, Kobold, Orc - I like as many playable races as possible.
I'm ALL for more races, just not those races as core.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So, will they be in the CRB or just in the playtest?
I feel like no top-level options (Class, Ancestry, Background) that are not vetted in the playtest will make it into the CRB. But things that the playtest show to be a problem or in need of more work might be changed for or removed from the CRB.
Like the reason you run a playtest is to identify trouble spots before launch so you can change stuff.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
The first adveture I ran in Pathfinder (in fact in any RPG) was Blackfang's dungeon from the Beginner's Box.
The players are encouraged to negotiate with the goblins in room 8 & come to an agreement with their leader, whose main motivation is his missing sister.
never played it, but it seems a fine reason THOSE characters might have a different outlook on goblins. So you changed the minds of 5-6 people? great... And? Is the idea to run every man, woman and child through the dungeon and talk with them?
The truth is, Goblin's portrayal in PF1 has been a bit inconsistant for many years. They are probably going to emphasise the more sane portrayals & downplay the more extreme ones.
There is a HUGE difference in scope: the bad parts are sweeping statements of badness that affect the vast majority of the known world... And the few 'good' parts are small, personal sized ones. It's an apples and oranges situation IMO. Generations if preconception/lore/history isn't washed away be the experiences of 5 adventurers'.
My point was, they will probably provide some lore to nudge it towards the interpretation that better suits Goblin PCs but that's a courtesy really, they could just wave their wand & change it with no explanation, that would be perfectly legit.
At the end of the day, it's a tiny piece of their setting, nothing major.
I understand your point, but for me, and others is seems based on replies to various threads, a "nudge" is a drop in the bucket of what would need to shift the 'norm' for the world. IMO having a race go from 'almost' universally reviled to 'not surprised to see one accepted in town' is far from a 'tiny piece of their setting' to me.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Fair enough, although for me it's still not necessary. Perhaps they will have something big to explain it - an 'unlikely alliance' like that thing where the Hellknights & various Good-aligned knight orders fought together, or maybe there really will be a Goblin that gets the starstone & becomes a new Goblin deity.
For me, none of the explanations people have come up with really make sense to me.
A famous goblin [deity, hero, ect] JUST proves an aberration and with magic in the world, who can be sure it's not a mental spell, magic jar, shape change ect... For all we know it's a gnome having a joke on us with one of those funny hats that makes you look like a goblin: It's more plausible than thinking a good goblin is a possibility.
For an 'unlikely alliance', you have 2 issues. One is magic again. It could easily be, not good goblins, but magic brainwashing. Secondly, even if you can convince people seeing them that they are changed goblins, how many people actually interact with them? How many people actually would know about them? So IMO, this fails because the average person either never heard of it or if they do, there is no reason to assume it's an actual change in goblins. A rumour of a Good-aligned knight order 5 nations away isn't exactly compelling when last year some goblins burned down your field and ate your cow.
|
For me, none of the explanations people have come up with really make sense to me.
A famous goblin [deity, hero, ect] JUST proves an aberration and with magic in the world, who can be sure it's not a mental spell, magic jar, shape change ect... For all we know it's a gnome having a joke on us with one of those funny hats that makes you look like a goblin: It's more plausible than thinking a good goblin is a possibility.
This assumes such a Goblin doesn't lead their tribe into similar behavior. Which is a large assumption. I'd very much expect a powerful enough heroic goblin to lead their tribe (kicking and screaming if necessary) into more heroic (or at least less unpleasant) behavior.
For an 'unlikely alliance', you have 2 issues. One is magic again. It could easily be, not good goblins, but magic brainwashing. Secondly, even if you can convince people seeing them that they are changed goblins, how many people actually interact with them? How many people actually would know about them? So IMO, this fails because the average person either never heard of it or if they do, there is no reason to assume it's an actual change in goblins. A rumour of a Good-aligned knight order 5 nations away isn't exactly compelling when last year some goblins burned down your field and ate your cow.
This really depends on how widespread the change is, and perhaps more importantly where it is. Anti-goblin prejudice is pretty widespread, but it's gonna be worst in Isger and surrounding areas, so a change in those areas will have a significantly greater impact than one in Nex.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This assumes such a Goblin doesn't lead their tribe into similar behavior. Which is a large assumption. I'd very much expect a powerful enough heroic goblin to lead their tribe (kicking and screaming if necessary) into more heroic (or at least less unpleasant) behavior.
Ok, cool... Then it runs afoul of my second point.
This really depends on how widespread the change is, and perhaps more importantly where it is. Anti-goblin prejudice is pretty widespread, but it's gonna be worst in Isger and surrounding areas, so a change in those areas will have a significantly greater impact than one in Nex.
We're looking at something SO profound that every man, woman and child mades a 180 degree change in their attitude towards goblins... In TEN years... I have SERIOUS doubts that you could effectively make sure the whole of golarion has HEARD rumors of it in that time, let alone have enough evidence to sway minds. If you want to say 'in this area' the attitude changed: GREAT! The bigger that area gets though, the less plausible it gets until it stretches so far it break as you need MORE goblins in MORE areas to illustrate it's happening... I mean is you have an enlightened goblin in every outhouse, 1 horse town and anything bigger then sure but that in itself is a logical inconsistency bigger then 'hugs for goblins' in a super short time span.
PS: "Anti-goblin prejudice is pretty widespread": This seems like a profound understatement. In most places, it's revilied and attempted exterminations.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
If SF's Space Goblins weren't just a continuation of the insanely delightful pyromaniac chaotic agents of mayhem we're used to I'd have an easier time accepting that Goblins could change. Instead we seem to have some redemption event and then the Gap undoing it all.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I mean I don't know if I have encountered the notion that "every one in town picks up a weapon and attacks the goblin whenever they see one." My interpretation of "how peasants react to random goblins" has generally been something like "somebody watch it to make sure it doesn't burn anything, but if it's walking around the market perhaps it has coin and we can sell it the partially rotten fruit and then it will go away."
Like "townsfolk are nervous around the PC" is as fine a way to handle a goblin as a tiefling.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would imagine that goblins who have managed to integrate into human society would be visibly different from the evil maniacs that are more commonly encountered. Their speech, dress, and mannerisms would all show differences that even the most bigoted dwarf should notice.
Still not a fan of goblin PCs... or any of the "monster" races, for that fact.
I already disallow goblin PCs at my table, and will have no compunction against doing so if/when I run a PF2e game. For that matter, I already disallow quite a few non-core races.
It's been my observation that disruptive players tend to be attracted to goblin PCs. In all of the Pathfinder games I've been in that included a goblin PC, I can count on one finger the number of non-disruptive players of goblin PCs.
(Not counting the "We Be Goblins" series, of course...)
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The text on whether people kill goblins on sight (for the record, I think that's ridiculous) is ambiguous enough that nobody is gonna convince graystone that they don't do that.
At least, not until Paizo publishes something that clarifies. Which I'd expect them to do (probably as part of the same thing that changes the perspective ie: a list of before and after opinions on goblins). And no, that won't count as a retcon since the text is already ambiguous.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I mean, no matter what Paizo publishes, individual games are free to play it however they like it best. So even if a kindly Goblin becomes the new emperor of Cheliax canonically, perhaps some people would have the emperor get attacked every time they left their room in the Palace.
I just don't see how "kindly old grandmothers will become overcome with bloodlust whenever they see a goblin" is a way anybody wants to play. Just doesn't seem fun or realistic to me.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think a simple clause in the CRB is enough, something like: "Goblins exist on the fringes of society. Attitudes towards them range from mild annoyance to outright violence, but most of the Inner Sea sees them as pests to be carefully watched, lest their pyromaniacal tendencies get out of hand". No lore change (this can be interpreted as true already for most people on Golarion) and no divine intervention necessary. I think this would work for... most people. Especially if an upcoming AP has any good or neutral goblins playing key roles.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
xenophobic
I wouldn't call it anything close to xenophobic. Not letting something with a know history of burning your field, killing animals and EATING PEOPLE isn't, IMO, prejudice but prudent actions to prevent harm to self, and community.
The text on whether people kill goblins on sight (for the record, I think that's ridiculous) is ambiguous enough that nobody is gonna convince graystone that they don't do that.
I agree this is where we disagree: from all the material, it's pretty clear that goblins are almost universally reviled [it's ACTUALLY stated as such]. On the other side, you have a few isolated instances where they are completely awful... It NOT on the same scale IMO. For every quote about goblins being not completely bad people have posted, I've found 3 or 4 that say people want to exterminate them or hunt them for sport.
And no, that won't count as a retcon since the text is already ambiguous.
I... really can't see the ambiguity. The way people feel about them is pretty stark and in black and white terms with their being seen in a non-bad light few and far between.
individual games are free to play it however they like it best.
No one is debating what happens in a homebrew game. You can make devils made of pure sunshine and happiness if you wish in your own games: the debate of what the unaltered core rules will reflect.
I just don't see how "kindly old grandmothers will become overcome with bloodlust whenever they see a goblin" is a way anybody wants to play.
*shrug* Myself, I don't see the "kindly old grandmothers" ignoring the goblin with a history of eating people and starting random fires to wander around town where their grandchildren live. Love of your town, neighbors, family, ect FAR outweighs the unknown chance this particular goblin might not be like every other goblin in known history.
Goblins exist on the fringes of society. Attitudes towards them range from mild annoyance to outright violence, but most of the Inner Sea sees them as pests to be carefully watched, lest their pyromaniacal tendencies get out of hand".
That added to the existing lore wouldn't change much for me at least. I doubt it'd change the minds of anyone I know or play with. It doesn't touch their other awful tendencies like eating people, stealing your food and defiling your stuff.
|
| 10 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think a simple clause in the CRB is enough, something like: "Goblins exist on the fringes of society. Attitudes towards them range from mild annoyance to outright violence, but most of the Inner Sea sees them as pests to be carefully watched, lest their pyromaniacal tendencies get out of hand". No lore change (this can be interpreted as true already for most people on Golarion) and no divine intervention necessary.
(The following post is entirely personal observations)
There's actually quite a bit of established lore backing this premise up spread across the product lines. Goblins of Golarion has Jurdan's Volunteers, a tribe of goblins working with a Chelaxian nobleman relatively peacefully and willingly (even if said nobleman is performing horrific experiments on them), Pathfinder Society scenarios going back as early as season 3 (I believe) have the Frostfur goblins who first worked with the Shadow Lodge and were then taken into safekeeping as witnesses by the Society proper, the Reefrunner goblin pirates of the Shackles are well known to be less aggressive and allow passengers and crew of ships they raid to take the lifeboats and flee (which is more merciful than many of the human and other core race pirate groups), and Magnimar is a major city whose sewers are known to be packed with goblins, which sets a pretty clear precedent that even cities with the resources to eliminate goblins living all around them find it easier not to do so as long as the goblins generally behave themselves. There's smatterings of other examples scattered throughout the various sourcebooks, which I believe also include a goblin merchant and a goblin ratcatcher, but I'd have to do a little digging on those.As a GM, one of the other things I take particular note of is that some of the most violent and/or well-known goblin tribes, like the Licktoad and Thistletop goblins near Sandpoint, are victims of violent human expansion and colonization. The goblin tribes were the original inhabitants of the lands around Sandpoint and several areas of western Varisia, and their elders and warriors were all killed by humans who thought it was perfectly acceptable to kill goblins for the crime of living in lands the humans wanted to occupy. So while the goblin song about turning babies into jam and such is certainly appalling, the context surrounding it is that these goblins in particular are the result of several successive generations who all grew up without the benefit of wisdom or guidance from elder generations due to human aggressions. Assuming that the canon of your particular play-through of Rise of the Runelords included the party
saving the goblin babies after defeating the goblin army at Thistletop
that might be the first time that any goblin in that region has had a non-violent interaction, or seen any empathy from, a human. It's also worth noting that canonically that particular event is about 10 years prior to the current time in-world, which would mean that in the living canon of Golarion those goblins have had enough time to grow up, reproduce, and raise a new generation who themselves are now full-fledged adults.
I wouldn't call it anything close to xenophobic. Not letting something with a know history of burning your field, killing animals and EATING PEOPLE isn't, IMO, prejudice but prudent actions to prevent harm to self, and community.
It is xenophobic. But rationally so. No every fear is irrational prejudice, sometimes it's prudent and rational prejudice that works 95% of time.
I agree this is where we disagree: from all the material, it's pretty clear that goblins are almost universally reviled [it's ACTUALLY stated as such]. On the other side, you have a few isolated instances where they are completely awful... It NOT on the same scale IMO. For every quote about goblins being not completely bad people have posted, I've found 3 or 4 that say people want to exterminate them or hunt them for sport.
I would say anyone exterminating indiscriminately or hunting for sport sentient beings, even if usually evil, cannot count as Good in Alignment terms... TBh I'd say even hunting daemons for a sport would still be iffy.
As a GM, one of the other things I take particular note of is that some of the most violent and/or well-known goblin tribes, like the Licktoad and Thistletop goblins near Sandpoint, are victims of violent human expansion and colonization. The goblin tribes were the original inhabitants of the lands around Sandpoint and several areas of western Varisia, and their elders and warriors were all killed by humans who thought it was perfectly acceptable to kill goblins for the crime of living in lands the humans wanted to occupy. So while the goblin song about turning babies into jam and such is certainly appalling, the context surrounding it is that these goblins in particular are the result of several successive generations who all grew up without the benefit of wisdom or guidance from elder generations due to human aggressions. Assuming that the canon of your particular play-through of Rise of the Runelords included the party
Oh, THIS. If I ever run RoTRL, that will change a lot.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think a simple clause in the CRB is enough, something like: "Goblins exist on the fringes of society. Attitudes towards them range from mild annoyance to outright violence, but most of the Inner Sea sees them as pests to be carefully watched, lest their pyromaniacal tendencies get out of hand". No lore change (this can be interpreted as true already for most people on Golarion) and no divine intervention necessary.(The following post is entirely personal observations)
There's actually quite a bit of established lore backing this premise up spread across the product lines. Goblins of Golarion has Jurdan's Volunteers, a tribe of goblins working with a Chelaxian nobleman relatively peacefully and willingly (even if said nobleman is performing horrific experiments on them), Pathfinder Society scenarios going back as early as season 3 (I believe) have the Frostfur goblins who first worked with the Shadow Lodge and were then taken into safekeeping as witnesses by the Society proper, the Reefrunner goblin pirates of the Shackles are well known to be less aggressive and allow passengers and crew of ships they raid to take the lifeboats and flee (which is more merciful than many of the human and core race pirate groups), and Magnimar is a major city whose sewers are known to be packed with goblins, which sets a pretty clear precedent that even cities with the resources to eliminate goblins living all around them find it easier not to do so as long as the goblins generally behave themselves. There's smatterings of other examples scattered throughout the various sourcebooks, which I believe also include a goblin merchant and a goblin ratcatcher, but I'd have to do a little digging on those.As a GM, one of the other things I take particular note of is that some of the most violent and/or well-known goblin tribes, like the Licktoad and Thistletop goblins near Sandpoint, are victims of violent human expansion and colonization....
This is why taking single statements about the goblin race as a whole from books written from the point of view of human adventurers is misguided. It discounts that the majority of the population of Golarion has had no experiences with goblins. Of those who have, populations who have been at war with goblins are found in specific areas. So most who know of goblins have never experienced goblin violence, unless they come from an area that has specifically been at war with goblins in the past. Very few people would be willing to kill a child sized humanoid simply because "my friend's brother heard a traveling circus talk about a merchant that once visited a town that was raided by a goblin tribe generations ago". To take a short description of goblin wars in Isger and project that to the attitudes of the entire Inner Sea is a reach.
I know "but Inner Sea Races says this!" and "the Advanced Race guide says that!", but this does not necessarily reflect the entire population's views about goblins. If anything does, it's the statement "most people see goblins as pests". For people who do have the goblins-are-pests attitude, it's been shown that they don't kill on sight and don't have professional goblin catchers(!?!). Guards might turn them away, but these are the same guards who would turn away half-orcs.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would imagine that most of the people in charge of guarding the town are not wholly incompetent and would at least inquire "Hey Gob, what's your business?" when the lone goblin with no weapons approaches the gate, rather than attacking. If there's something going on like "it's market day" the guard could assign an escort to the goblin (to make sure neither the goblin nor any townsfolk start anything.)
Goblin would get nasty looks, but if this keeps happening people would get used to "this goblin comes to market day and buys stuff". After a period of months the goblin might become accepted enough that they can come to market and sell stuff.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I agree this is where we disagree: from all the material, it's pretty clear that goblins are almost universally reviled [it's ACTUALLY stated as such]. On the other side, you have a few isolated instances where they are completely awful... It NOT on the same scale IMO. For every quote about goblins being not completely bad people have posted, I've found 3 or 4 that say people want to exterminate them or hunt them for sport.
Really? Three or four? I've only found one reference each to extermination and hunting for sport and the extermination was historical while the hunting for sport was Dwarf specific.
But that's really beside the point. I've never for a moment argued that goblins weren't nearly universally reviled. I've argued they were viewed as too pathetic to be a threat and thus seldom killed on sight. Which is a very different thing, and one that makes a huge difference in people's treatment of 'potentially heroic' goblins.
Also one I've got quite a lot of textual support for.
I... really can't see the ambiguity. The way people feel about them is pretty stark and in black and white terms with their being seen in a non-bad light few and far between.
People disliking them? Absolutely. People killing them on sight? Not so much.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
As reiterated countless times, Goblins are a monster race specifically created with the intention that they could be killed without qualms. As a whole, they're evil creatures, and the world's better off the fewer there are as they're a tangible danger to everyone around them. Killing a Goblin on sight is not only a justifiable reaction, but usually the right reaction.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
As reiterated countless times, Goblins are a monster race specifically created with the intention that they could be killed without qualms.Where in a book is this stated?
As a whole, they're evil creatures,Where in the Humanoid type (which is what Goblins are) or Goblinoid subtype does it state this?
and the world's better off the fewer there are as they're a tangible danger to everyone around them. Killing a Goblin on sight is not only a justifiable reaction, but usually the right reaction.
This is flat out false.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
As reiterated countless times, Goblins are a monster race specifically created with the intention that they could be killed without qualms. As a whole, they're evil creatures, and the world's better off the fewer there are as they're a tangible danger to everyone around them. Killing a Goblin on sight is not only a justifiable reaction, but usually the right reaction.
I think this opinion is the real root of the difference of opinion. You are saying this because that's how it's been since Tolkien through previous incarnations of the game. But that's not how it is in a setting with any depth, and that's certainly not how it is in Golarion. The bestiary specifically states that alignment is indicative of a general specimen, not every individual. Examples in Paizo's books have been shown to not be NE.
And they are definitely not a danger to everyone around them. They're too ineffective for that.
I'm all for classifications of creature that can be killed on sight (undead, evil outsiders, constructs). And maybe some monsters were that way in the past, but this outlook is outdated at this point.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm all for classifications of creature that can be killed on sight (undead, evil outsiders, constructs).
Hey, those constructs might not have souls, but they've got hearts! Do you know how hard it is to find dire baboon organs that are fresh enough to translate positive energy through a bioconstruct's flesh to stone transmutation arrays?