2E Hobgoblins - What do they look like?


Pathfinder Second Edition General Discussion

1 to 50 of 136 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Like many people, I was opposed to the "new" Hobgoblin art style first introduced in Starfinder, where they become just Goblins with longer legs. When this continued in the Bestiary, I was similarly bummed out. But then I looked at the Lost Omens World Guide, and the Hobgoblin leader is illustrated in the style of 1E Hobgoblins. So which is it? Are there now multiple types of Hobgoblin?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Sure. Why not?

Maybe they will be represented by different heritages in P2E.


I believe they had alternate racial traits in 1E that changed their bodyshape, as well. Giving them longer legs or crooked backs and the like.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

5 people marked this as a favorite.

The official new look for hobgoblins is that they look more like Medium size goblins. Now and then, stragglers will slip through the cracks as we adjust our style for them, which we'll get better at not doing as the edition goes on.


I'm afraid I'm not a huge fan of the new hobgoblins, but it's hardly enough to ruin the experience. And we'll still have all the Ironfang art.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I love the new hobgoblins, they actually feel like they are related to other goblinoids now instead of just being Gray humanoids (1e hobgoblins reminded me a lot of LOTR Uruk-hai, which isn't a great thing as pathfinder goblins are veeerrryyy different to the goblins that uruk-hai are related to).

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I am not in love with the new style either, though some pictures annoy me more than others, I am just not a big fan of the big goblins concept.


Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
James Jacobs wrote:
The official new look for hobgoblins is that they look more like Medium size goblins. Now and then, stragglers will slip through the cracks as we adjust our style for them, which we'll get better at not doing as the edition goes on.

Meh. Nevertheless, I'm goping to see heritages and the like that allow for things like:

Perpdepog wrote:
I believe they had alternate racial traits in 1E that changed their bodyshape, as well. Giving them longer legs or crooked backs and the like.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I like the new look, if lore presents them as related to Goblins it makes sense for that to be visually recognizable.

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
spectrevk wrote:
But then I looked at the Lost Omens World Guide, and the Hobgoblin leader is illustrated in the style of 1E Hobgoblins. So which is it? Are there now multiple types of Hobgoblin?

Azaersi didn't get to General by skipping arm and leg day.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
James Jacobs wrote:
The official new look for hobgoblins is that they look more like Medium size goblins. Now and then, stragglers will slip through the cracks as we adjust our style for them, which we'll get better at not doing as the edition goes on.

Is there anything we can say to change your mind? The medium-sized goblin look is terrible.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Tender Tendrils wrote:
I love the new hobgoblins, they actually feel like they are related to other goblinoids now instead of just being Gray humanoids (1e hobgoblins reminded me a lot of LOTR Uruk-hai, which isn't a great thing as pathfinder goblins are veeerrryyy different to the goblins that uruk-hai are related to).

Goblinoids have never looked alike. Bugbears *still* look totally different from Goblins or either version of the Hobgoblin design.


Rysky wrote:
spectrevk wrote:
But then I looked at the Lost Omens World Guide, and the Hobgoblin leader is illustrated in the style of 1E Hobgoblins. So which is it? Are there now multiple types of Hobgoblin?
Azaersi didn't get to General by skipping arm and leg day.

Don't forget 'head day', gotta get those PF2 Hobgoblin heads buffer!


13 people marked this as a favorite.
spectrevk wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
The official new look for hobgoblins is that they look more like Medium size goblins. Now and then, stragglers will slip through the cracks as we adjust our style for them, which we'll get better at not doing as the edition goes on.
Is there anything we can say to change your mind? The medium-sized goblin look is terrible.

That's a subjective opinion which many people don't share.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Hobgoblins that look more like goblins. Kobolds that look more like goblins. Gnomes that look more like goblins.

2e is starting to feel more like Goblinfinder.

Silver Crusade

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

Kobolds aren’t Goblins they’re plushies!

Paizo Employee Creative Director

13 people marked this as a favorite.
spectrevk wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
The official new look for hobgoblins is that they look more like Medium size goblins. Now and then, stragglers will slip through the cracks as we adjust our style for them, which we'll get better at not doing as the edition goes on.
Is there anything we can say to change your mind? The medium-sized goblin look is terrible.

I get it that it's not something everyone likes, but we like it. It's not really up for a vote. If over the years to come the feedback ends up being "hobgoblins look stupid" then maybe we'll consider it then, but we're pretty pleased with the look in-house at this time.

We'll still be looking at feedback, so by all means keep giving it to us, but don't expect us to change the look for these things suddenly simply because some folks don't like it. Give it time and it'll sort itself out.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

11 people marked this as a favorite.
spectrevk wrote:
Tender Tendrils wrote:
I love the new hobgoblins, they actually feel like they are related to other goblinoids now instead of just being Gray humanoids (1e hobgoblins reminded me a lot of LOTR Uruk-hai, which isn't a great thing as pathfinder goblins are veeerrryyy different to the goblins that uruk-hai are related to).
Goblinoids have never looked alike. Bugbears *still* look totally different from Goblins or either version of the Hobgoblin design.

For what it's worth, the illustration of the bugbear in the Bestiary isn't the final look we're aming at—it's an example of "we ran out of time to adjust." The bugbear illustrated in "Hellknight Hill" is more in line with where we're going there—and there they DO have a goblin through line to their appearance.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
James Jacobs wrote:
spectrevk wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
The official new look for hobgoblins is that they look more like Medium size goblins. Now and then, stragglers will slip through the cracks as we adjust our style for them, which we'll get better at not doing as the edition goes on.
Is there anything we can say to change your mind? The medium-sized goblin look is terrible.

I get it that it's not something everyone likes, but we like it. It's not really up for a vote. If over the years to come the feedback ends up being "hobgoblins look stupid" then maybe we'll consider it then, but we're pretty pleased with the look in-house at this time.

We'll still be looking at feedback, so by all means keep giving it to us, but don't expect us to change the look for these things suddenly simply because some folks don't like it. Give it time and it'll sort itself out.

Fair enough. I think the 1E look works beetter for a group of highly disciplined militant warrior types. The 2E goblins look too much like the more chaotic, slightly humorous goblins, so it kind of undercuts the theme of Hobgoblins, IMO. I think the 2E design could almost work better for Bugbears, who are a bit more wild in their behavior.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

11 people marked this as a favorite.
spectrevk wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
spectrevk wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
The official new look for hobgoblins is that they look more like Medium size goblins. Now and then, stragglers will slip through the cracks as we adjust our style for them, which we'll get better at not doing as the edition goes on.
Is there anything we can say to change your mind? The medium-sized goblin look is terrible.

I get it that it's not something everyone likes, but we like it. It's not really up for a vote. If over the years to come the feedback ends up being "hobgoblins look stupid" then maybe we'll consider it then, but we're pretty pleased with the look in-house at this time.

We'll still be looking at feedback, so by all means keep giving it to us, but don't expect us to change the look for these things suddenly simply because some folks don't like it. Give it time and it'll sort itself out.

Fair enough. I think the 1E look works beetter for a group of highly disciplined militant warrior types. The 2E goblins look too much like the more chaotic, slightly humorous goblins, so it kind of undercuts the theme of Hobgoblins, IMO. I think the 2E design could almost work better for Bugbears, who are a bit more wild in their behavior.

For more background, the WHOLE POINT of making hobgoblins and bugbears look like goblins with the wide head and ear shapes was to justify the fact that they're all goblinoid. If you can't instantly identify a goblinoid via their silhouette, it's not really a goblinoid, it's something else.

Exo-Guardians

6 people marked this as a favorite.
James Jacobs wrote:
For more background, the WHOLE POINT of making hobgoblins and bugbears look like goblins with the wide head and ear shapes was to justify the fact that they're all goblinoid. If you can't instantly identify a goblinoid via their silhouette, it's not really a goblinoid, it's something else.

i for one really like the new more Goblin-y look for the other goblinoid races. it certainly makes a lot more sense than "these creatures are related to Goblins somehow but don't resemble them in any way whatsoever". glad you're sticking to your guns!


11 people marked this as a favorite.

I think the issue is that the bestiary portrayal of hobgoblins is just really bad art. The Hobgoblin General in the bestiary looks ridiculous; she looks like you had physically stretched out a goblin. This woman does not look like a seasoned war veteran and leading officer in a military hierarchy, she looks like someone who is the subject of her subordinates' wacky hijinks and never quite manages to catch them red-handed.

The Hobgoblin Alchemist in the blog post (and which I assume is also in the Character Guide book) is FAR more believable as a member of hobgoblin society. There's nothing funny about this design and he manages to be legitimately intimidating. The muscle bulk really helps with this, though there's a lot more going on with his expression and other details that assist in making him look more serious. He still has the squashed head, long ears, and full set of pointy teeth to make him look more goblin than orc but he has all of those things without it being funny, which is absolutely crucial for hobgoblins.


I agree with Arachnofiend.

TBH the only thing that really stands out to me is that use of footwraps and handwraps feels a bit odd to me. They work for goblins because a scrabbled together aesthetic fits them really well, but hobgoblins have such an emphasis on regimentation and organization it feels like they'd try to dress more cleanly.

IDK I think that alchemist looks good either way.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Just speaking for myself I love love LOVE the new hobgoblin look. And for exactly the above mentioned reason. They look "Goblin-oid" They look like a tougher, more militant breed of Goblin (The Pathfinder design for goblins are what brought me to the game). That the Pathfinder Hobgoblns now look like their cousins is a home run for me, and my group.

Before they looked like halforcs or such for me and just had nothing distinguishing about them visually.

Now, they look like something I'd want to play as a character. (Already loving the pathfinder Goblin design ascetic, this just adds in a larger option).

James, I know you said you wern't taking votes. That said, put me and my entire group (7 people) down for _____LOVING______ the new look for Hobgoblins.

I think it was a magnificent change.

Now... we need them as actual character ancestry!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Squiggit wrote:

I agree with Arachnofiend.

TBH the only thing that really stands out to me is that use of footwraps and handwraps feels a bit odd to me. They work for goblins because a scrabbled together aesthetic fits them really well, but hobgoblins have such an emphasis on regimentation and organization it feels like they'd try to dress more cleanly.

IDK I think that alchemist looks good either way.

To be honest, the prevalence of wraps in fantasy art is an ancient trope that is overused across the gwnre, especially in miniatures which are usually festooned in wraps/bandages (much like the problem comic books once had with pouches)

Exo-Guardians

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Arachnofiend wrote:
I think the issue is that the bestiary portrayal of hobgoblins is just really bad art.

that's an astonishingly rude thing to say to the person in charge of art direction. even by the low standards of this forum.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
spectrevk wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
The official new look for hobgoblins is that they look more like Medium size goblins. Now and then, stragglers will slip through the cracks as we adjust our style for them, which we'll get better at not doing as the edition goes on.
Is there anything we can say to change your mind? The medium-sized goblin look is terrible.

Personally, I agree. For me, the P2E artistic portrayal of hobgoblins is probably my least favorite, going all the way back to AD&D and the 1st edition monster manual.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Saros Palanthios wrote:
Arachnofiend wrote:
I think the issue is that the bestiary portrayal of hobgoblins is just really bad art.
that's an astonishingly rude thing to say to the person in charge of art direction. even by the low standards of this forum.

The bestiary hobgoblins made a terrible first impression of the new art direction. I feel it's more constructive to point out why rather than simply allow Jacobs to be confused as to why people don't like goblinoids who look like goblinoids. I don't claim to speak for everyone upset by the new look but I really do not feel my criticism was out of line.


Saros Palanthios wrote:
that's an astonishingly rude thing to say to the person in charge of art direction. even by the low standards of this forum.

Maybe, but I think there's a point to be made that the hobgoblin general has a sort of awkward look to them, especially compared to the alchemist.

Tender Tendrils wrote:
To be honest, the prevalence of wraps in fantasy art is an ancient trope that is overused across the gwnre, especially in miniatures which are usually festooned in wraps/bandages (much like the problem comic books once had with pouches)

That's fair, though like I said I think they work well enough for regular goblins, but the hobgoblin archetype of highly disciplined warbands seems at odds with the "whatever bits of cloth we could find lying around" aesthetic the wrappings evoke.

Exo-Guardians

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Squiggit wrote:
TBH the only thing that really stands out to me is that use of footwraps and handwraps feels a bit odd to me. They work for goblins because a scrabbled together aesthetic fits them really well, but hobgoblins have such an emphasis on regimentation and organization it feels like they'd try to dress more cleanly.

footwraps (aka portyankis) and legwraps (aka puttees) have been a part of military uniforms around the world for centuries, right up through the 20th century. compared to stockings they're a lot easier to produce, last longer, dry more quickly when wet, and stay up without garters or modern stretchy synthetic fibres.

the Paizo art team knows their military history.

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Arachnofiend wrote:

I think the issue is that the bestiary portrayal of hobgoblins is just really bad art. The Hobgoblin General in the bestiary looks ridiculous; she looks like you had physically stretched out a goblin. This woman does not look like a seasoned war veteran and leading officer in a military hierarchy, she looks like someone who is the subject of her subordinates' wacky hijinks and never quite manages to catch them red-handed.

The Hobgoblin Alchemist in the blog post (and which I assume is also in the Character Guide book) is FAR more believable as a member of hobgoblin society. There's nothing funny about this design and he manages to be legitimately intimidating. The muscle bulk really helps with this, though there's a lot more going on with his expression and other details that assist in making him look more serious. He still has the squashed head, long ears, and full set of pointy teeth to make him look more goblin than orc but he has all of those things without it being funny, which is absolutely crucial for hobgoblins.

Funny, the general is one of my favourite of the new Hob pieces.

... is it the non-blue skin?


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Saros Palanthios wrote:
Squiggit wrote:
TBH the only thing that really stands out to me is that use of footwraps and handwraps feels a bit odd to me. They work for goblins because a scrabbled together aesthetic fits them really well, but hobgoblins have such an emphasis on regimentation and organization it feels like they'd try to dress more cleanly.

Footwraps (aka portyankis) and legwraps (aka puttees) have been a part of military uniforms around the world for centuries, right up through the 20th century. compared to socks they're a lot easier to produce, last longer, dry more quickly when wet, and stay up without garters or modern stretchy synthetic fibres.

the Paizo art team knows their military history.

In both of the examples you linked to, the footwraps and legwraps are being worn with shoes of some sort, not by themselves (as they are in the Bestiary art)

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
spectrevk wrote:
Saros Palanthios wrote:
Squiggit wrote:
TBH the only thing that really stands out to me is that use of footwraps and handwraps feels a bit odd to me. They work for goblins because a scrabbled together aesthetic fits them really well, but hobgoblins have such an emphasis on regimentation and organization it feels like they'd try to dress more cleanly.

Footwraps (aka portyankis) and legwraps (aka puttees) have been a part of military uniforms around the world for centuries, right up through the 20th century. compared to socks they're a lot easier to produce, last longer, dry more quickly when wet, and stay up without garters or modern stretchy synthetic fibres.

the Paizo art team knows their military history.

In both of the examples you linked to, the footwraps and legwraps are being worn with shoes of some sort, not by themselves (as they are in the Bestiary art)

We need to organize a cobbler's guild for Oprak, we'll make a killing.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
spectrevk wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
The official new look for hobgoblins is that they look more like Medium size goblins. Now and then, stragglers will slip through the cracks as we adjust our style for them, which we'll get better at not doing as the edition goes on.
Is there anything we can say to change your mind? The medium-sized goblin look is terrible.

In your opinion.

In my opinion the new look is excellent & is lore appropriate.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Dragonstriker wrote:
spectrevk wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
The official new look for hobgoblins is that they look more like Medium size goblins. Now and then, stragglers will slip through the cracks as we adjust our style for them, which we'll get better at not doing as the edition goes on.
Is there anything we can say to change your mind? The medium-sized goblin look is terrible.
In your opinion.

Yes. By definition, anything I post here is my opinion.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Castilliano wrote:
Rysky wrote:
spectrevk wrote:
But then I looked at the Lost Omens World Guide, and the Hobgoblin leader is illustrated in the style of 1E Hobgoblins. So which is it? Are there now multiple types of Hobgoblin?
Azaersi didn't get to General by skipping arm and leg day.
Don't forget 'head day', gotta get those PF2 Hobgoblin heads buffer!

Do you even nod, bro? *Flexes head*


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Rysky wrote:
Arachnofiend wrote:

I think the issue is that the bestiary portrayal of hobgoblins is just really bad art. The Hobgoblin General in the bestiary looks ridiculous; she looks like you had physically stretched out a goblin. This woman does not look like a seasoned war veteran and leading officer in a military hierarchy, she looks like someone who is the subject of her subordinates' wacky hijinks and never quite manages to catch them red-handed.

The Hobgoblin Alchemist in the blog post (and which I assume is also in the Character Guide book) is FAR more believable as a member of hobgoblin society. There's nothing funny about this design and he manages to be legitimately intimidating. The muscle bulk really helps with this, though there's a lot more going on with his expression and other details that assist in making him look more serious. He still has the squashed head, long ears, and full set of pointy teeth to make him look more goblin than orc but he has all of those things without it being funny, which is absolutely crucial for hobgoblins.

Funny, the general is one of my favourite of the new Hob pieces.

... is it the non-blue skin?

Your insistence on disagreeing with literally everything I post has got to be deliberate at this point right


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Rysky wrote:
Arachnofiend wrote:

I think the issue is that the bestiary portrayal of hobgoblins is just really bad art. The Hobgoblin General in the bestiary looks ridiculous; she looks like you had physically stretched out a goblin. This woman does not look like a seasoned war veteran and leading officer in a military hierarchy, she looks like someone who is the subject of her subordinates' wacky hijinks and never quite manages to catch them red-handed.

The Hobgoblin Alchemist in the blog post (and which I assume is also in the Character Guide book) is FAR more believable as a member of hobgoblin society. There's nothing funny about this design and he manages to be legitimately intimidating. The muscle bulk really helps with this, though there's a lot more going on with his expression and other details that assist in making him look more serious. He still has the squashed head, long ears, and full set of pointy teeth to make him look more goblin than orc but he has all of those things without it being funny, which is absolutely crucial for hobgoblins.

Funny, the general is one of my favourite of the new Hob pieces.

... is it the non-blue skin?

I think it's the hunched posture, the spindly, weak limbs, and the sad, crestfallen facial expression. She just doesn't look comfortable in that outfit, or holding the weapon. Compare it to the posture, limbs, and facial expression of the hobgoblin leader from Ironfang Invasion. Note that both have nearly the same skin tone.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
spectrevk wrote:
Dragonstriker wrote:
spectrevk wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
The official new look for hobgoblins is that they look more like Medium size goblins. Now and then, stragglers will slip through the cracks as we adjust our style for them, which we'll get better at not doing as the edition goes on.
Is there anything we can say to change your mind? The medium-sized goblin look is terrible.
In your opinion.
Yes. By definition, anything I post here is my opinion.

Is it? If you state something

e.g. grass is a plant
Hobgoblins look terrible
The earth is round
Hobgoblins are goblinoids

It comes across as being stated as fact.

If you say "I think hobgoblins look terrible" that then comes across as opinion.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Arachnofiend wrote:
Saros Palanthios wrote:
Arachnofiend wrote:
I think the issue is that the bestiary portrayal of hobgoblins is just really bad art.
that's an astonishingly rude thing to say to the person in charge of art direction. even by the low standards of this forum.
The bestiary hobgoblins made a terrible first impression of the new art direction. I feel it's more constructive to point out why rather than simply allow Jacobs to be confused as to why people don't like goblinoids who look like goblinoids. I don't claim to speak for everyone upset by the new look but I really do not feel my criticism was out of line.

Good point.

For me, the new hobgoblins looks less /capable/, less "lawful", and less virile in general. I, personally, prefer an artistic portrayal of a robust, vigorous, athletic creature seeming more aligned with an organized, disciplined, militaristic culture.

The new hobgoblin, IMO, looks more feral, raw, chaotic, and liable to "go off" at any point. I think they could make fine creatures in their own right, just not what I picture being a hobgoblin.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Tender Tendrils wrote:
spectrevk wrote:
Dragonstriker wrote:
spectrevk wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
The official new look for hobgoblins is that they look more like Medium size goblins. Now and then, stragglers will slip through the cracks as we adjust our style for them, which we'll get better at not doing as the edition goes on.
Is there anything we can say to change your mind? The medium-sized goblin look is terrible.
In your opinion.
Yes. By definition, anything I post here is my opinion.

Is it? If you state something

e.g. grass is a plant
Hobgoblins look terrible
The earth is round
Hobgoblins are goblinoids

It comes across as being stated as fact.

Why? We're discussing art depicting fictional creatures in a shared fictional world. Literally nothing we discuss here, outside of rules and lore written in officially published books, could be reasonably understood as "fact".


2 people marked this as a favorite.

BTW, on topic of historic referents, I like the imagery they went with for some Hobgoblin helmets/weapons and so on,
I noticed on a Paizo stream the staff (rules & marketing, not setting) wasn't sure what it was or thought it was Aztec or something,
but in my eyes it was clearly derived from ancient (~1500 BC) pre-classical Chinese Shang dynasty, or even Shu/Sanxingdui.
Definitely makes sense considering Tian Xia especially Kaoling seems like the pre-eminent Hobgoblin homeland,
events with Oprak in Avistan not withstanding, so having tie-in to "not Asia/China" but unique at same time makes sense.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The general does look kind of uncomfortable... or maybe even dead, with the white eyes and the sort of flat expression I certainly get a vague zombie-ish vibe from that image.

The jaw also have a very pronounced triangular shape to it that strikes me as a bit odd.

Finally uh, the porportions feel a bit off to me. New hobgoblins have spindly limbs with oversized extremities compared to humans, which is fine, but the Hobgoblin general has almost human sized and shaped arms, but very stylized proportions in the legs and feet. The alchemist by comparison seems to be slightly more balanced (hands are bigger, feet are a bi smaller) and I think it works a little better.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Rysky wrote:
spectrevk wrote:
Saros Palanthios wrote:
Squiggit wrote:
TBH the only thing that really stands out to me is that use of footwraps and handwraps feels a bit odd to me. They work for goblins because a scrabbled together aesthetic fits them really well, but hobgoblins have such an emphasis on regimentation and organization it feels like they'd try to dress more cleanly.

Footwraps (aka portyankis) and legwraps (aka puttees) have been a part of military uniforms around the world for centuries, right up through the 20th century. compared to socks they're a lot easier to produce, last longer, dry more quickly when wet, and stay up without garters or modern stretchy synthetic fibres.

the Paizo art team knows their military history.

In both of the examples you linked to, the footwraps and legwraps are being worn with shoes of some sort, not by themselves (as they are in the Bestiary art)
We need to organize a cobbler's guild for Oprak, we'll make a killing.

Mmmm. Cobbler...


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I think the proportions are a willful and purposeful thing. Before some of them looked like half orcs with different colored skin. Very 'human' in the 'humanoid' category.

By purposefully bringing out more of the 'goblin' in the 'golbinoid' the proportions are going to be exaggerated a bit 'on purpose'. To get them that half step closer to goblins and a half step 'away' from "humans with tusks'

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

4 people marked this as a favorite.

I very, very much dislike the direction of the appearance of hobgoblins. Previously, I enjoyed using them as common opponents and empires in my games. Now I'll simply avoid anything to do with them. Simple enough to do, generally speaking.

I liked hobgoblins far more than orcs before. The art change puts them at the bottom of the list of antagonists I'd use, or allies for that part.


Pepsi Jedi wrote:

I think the proportions are a willful and purposeful thing. Before some of them looked like half orcs with different colored skin. Very 'human' in the 'humanoid' category.

By purposefully bringing out more of the 'goblin' in the 'golbinoid' the proportions are going to be exaggerated a bit 'on purpose'. To get them that half step closer to goblins and a half step 'away' from "humans with tusks'

Yeah, this all strikes home for me. Like I love my Ironfang art and all but dang do they just look like half orcs.

I'm pretty into the new look in general, though I kind of wish they had kept shoes. Soldiers without boots feels off for some reason.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Arachnofiend wrote:
Rysky wrote:
Arachnofiend wrote:

I think the issue is that the bestiary portrayal of hobgoblins is just really bad art. The Hobgoblin General in the bestiary looks ridiculous; she looks like you had physically stretched out a goblin. This woman does not look like a seasoned war veteran and leading officer in a military hierarchy, she looks like someone who is the subject of her subordinates' wacky hijinks and never quite manages to catch them red-handed.

The Hobgoblin Alchemist in the blog post (and which I assume is also in the Character Guide book) is FAR more believable as a member of hobgoblin society. There's nothing funny about this design and he manages to be legitimately intimidating. The muscle bulk really helps with this, though there's a lot more going on with his expression and other details that assist in making him look more serious. He still has the squashed head, long ears, and full set of pointy teeth to make him look more goblin than orc but he has all of those things without it being funny, which is absolutely crucial for hobgoblins.

Funny, the general is one of my favourite of the new Hob pieces.

... is it the non-blue skin?

Your insistence on disagreeing with literally everything I post has got to be deliberate at this point right

I don't disagree with everything you post, getting reactions like this is one reason why I don't respond to more of your posts, even if it's something I agree with.

Silver Crusade

9 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
spectrevk wrote:
Tender Tendrils wrote:
spectrevk wrote:
Dragonstriker wrote:
spectrevk wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
The official new look for hobgoblins is that they look more like Medium size goblins. Now and then, stragglers will slip through the cracks as we adjust our style for them, which we'll get better at not doing as the edition goes on.
Is there anything we can say to change your mind? The medium-sized goblin look is terrible.
In your opinion.
Yes. By definition, anything I post here is my opinion.

Is it? If you state something

e.g. grass is a plant
Hobgoblins look terrible
The earth is round
Hobgoblins are goblinoids

It comes across as being stated as fact.

Why? We're discussing art depicting fictional creatures in a shared fictional world. Literally nothing we discuss here, outside of rules and lore written in officially published books, could be reasonably understood as "fact".

That's how language and communication works.

"I don't like the hobgoblin art" and "The hobgoblin art is terrible" are two very different things.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

15 people marked this as a favorite.
Rysky wrote:
"I don't like the hobgoblin art" and "The hobgoblin art is terrible" are two very different things.

This is an excellent way to put it—you're getting the same information across, but the first version doesn't come across as an attack and is more likely to gain traction when providing feedback to something subjective—such as art.

1 to 50 of 136 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / General Discussion / 2E Hobgoblins - What do they look like? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.