Hobgoblin weapons


Rules Discussion


Hi,i'm looking at my Copy of Lost omens character guide and Reading the hobgoblin traits... Thre are traits based on hobgoblins weapons but i can t find any hobgoblin weapons... Where i can find them?

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

They don't exist yet. It's a future proofing measure for when they do.


Yeap, Nothing directly made for them yet. Likely will come out in some of the suppliments and other things. Most races will have similar wording though, for future stuff.

Still nets you some tasty armaments though


Anyone have any guesses on what those weapons might be?

I'm betting on something to let you thorw bombs farther, myself, or some more weapons like the alchemical crossbow.


Hobgoblin dog toy - that arm thing you put a ball in to fling it super far, but for bombs.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
thenobledrake wrote:
Hobgoblin dog toy - that arm thing you put a ball in to fling it super far, but for bombs.

"I call it, The Bomblonger!"


I definitely hope no further range for alchemico stuff, or it will be mandatory.

Like the gnome flickermace, which is the only one reach 1h weapon. If you want a 1h weapon you are forced to take that one.

If you want to increase your alchemical stuff range you could suffer the same.

I would have preferred diversity on the base stuff instead.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
K1 wrote:
Like the gnome flickermace, which is the only one reach 1h weapon. If you want a 1h weapon you are forced to take that one.

One, that's not how things work.

Two, a whip is actually a lot more accessible to most characters.


thenobledrake wrote:
K1 wrote:
Like the gnome flickermace, which is the only one reach 1h weapon. If you want a 1h weapon you are forced to take that one.

One, that's not how things work.

Two, a whip is actually a lot more accessible to most characters.

Ideed, but I was thinking more about a real weapon like a spear.

Unfortunately a whip is out of questions for many characters.

You see, a sword and board with whip and shield shaped like a Chair is not something people will be happy to role with. Not to mention the weapon dice

Even a flickermace is at limit, but less ridiculous than a whip. But stats are nice. Reach and a good dice. Stop.

A hobgoblin granade launcher would be unique in terms of weapon perks, and imo shouldn't exist.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
K1 wrote:

I definitely hope no further range for alchemico stuff, or it will be mandatory.

Like the gnome flickermace, which is the only one reach 1h weapon. If you want a 1h weapon you are forced to take that one.

If you want to increase your alchemical stuff range you could suffer the same.

I would have preferred diversity on the base stuff instead.

No one's forced to take any weapons, though. The flickmace is the best 1h weapon, yeah, but that doesn't make all the other 1h weapons worthless.


Salamileg wrote:
K1 wrote:

I definitely hope no further range for alchemico stuff, or it will be mandatory.

Like the gnome flickermace, which is the only one reach 1h weapon. If you want a 1h weapon you are forced to take that one.

If you want to increase your alchemical stuff range you could suffer the same.

I would have preferred diversity on the base stuff instead.

No one's forced to take any weapons, though. The flickmace is the best 1h weapon, yeah, but that doesn't make all the other 1h weapons worthless.

Nobody is arguing about the effectiveness of the Flickmace.

The point is that if you want to take a 1h with reach you have 2 choices.

1) play with a whip ( it exists but it's not a main weapon. Let's be honest for a second )
2) take the Flickmace ( as a martial user you will need to use a feat to do that ).

Giving a new weapon with a unique perk would be imo a bad idea ( especially if would be mandatory for some classes ).


K1 wrote:
Salamileg wrote:
K1 wrote:

I definitely hope no further range for alchemico stuff, or it will be mandatory.

Like the gnome flickermace, which is the only one reach 1h weapon. If you want a 1h weapon you are forced to take that one.

If you want to increase your alchemical stuff range you could suffer the same.

I would have preferred diversity on the base stuff instead.

No one's forced to take any weapons, though. The flickmace is the best 1h weapon, yeah, but that doesn't make all the other 1h weapons worthless.

Nobody is arguing about the effectiveness of the Flickmace.

The point is that if you want to take a 1h with reach you have 2 choices.

1) play with a whip ( it exists but it's not a main weapon. Let's be honest for a second )
2) take the Flickmace ( as a martial user you will need to use a feat to do that ).

Giving a new weapon with a unique perk would be imo a bad idea ( especially if would be mandatory for some classes ).

Whips are better for rogues, and allow you to trip and disarm with reach. They have their uses.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
K1 wrote:
Salamileg wrote:
K1 wrote:

I definitely hope no further range for alchemico stuff, or it will be mandatory.

Like the gnome flickermace, which is the only one reach 1h weapon. If you want a 1h weapon you are forced to take that one.

If you want to increase your alchemical stuff range you could suffer the same.

I would have preferred diversity on the base stuff instead.

No one's forced to take any weapons, though. The flickmace is the best 1h weapon, yeah, but that doesn't make all the other 1h weapons worthless.

Nobody is arguing about the effectiveness of the Flickmace.

The point is that if you want to take a 1h with reach you have 2 choices.

1) play with a whip ( it exists but it's not a main weapon. Let's be honest for a second )
2) take the Flickmace ( as a martial user you will need to use a feat to do that ).

Giving a new weapon with a unique perk would be imo a bad idea ( especially if would be mandatory for some classes ).

I don't follow your logic at all?

Of course if you want a 1h weapon with reach, you have to select one of the 1h weapons with reach, and there is even an ancestry agnostic weapon in the whip, which is no more or less a "main weapon" (a distinction which has no meaning) than the flickmace. I don't know how that example, even if it was true or meaningful, then follows on to mean that a new weapon with a unique trait would be a bad idea.

Also, the idea of mandatory options only works if you reduce the game to being a competitive combat game and eliminate all of the roleplay and storytelling and everything that makes it different to a video game. There is more to the game then just choosing the most mechanically optimised options (and it is also very debatable whether the flickmace is even the best option given the feat investment required).

Heck, it is also premature to claim that a bomb launching crossbow would be "mandatory" without knowing what the mechanics would be. If it for example, gave you an extra 10 feet of range, but was reload 2 (like the heavy crossbow) I could see a lot of players thinking it is a trash option, in which case it is hardly mandatory.


My point is simple.
I will try to explain it the best I can.

I am all up for diversity.

When I started created my character I happened to see that apart from a whip and the Flickmace there were no other stuff.

So, apart from the whip which was not the weapon I was looking for, I found myself without any other alternative.

I had to decide between taking a whip/Flickmace or to accept that there were only 2 1h weapon with reach.

Now the situation could be even worse.
Currently alchemist has no specific use for a weapon, but if they will introduce a single weapon with a unique trait, then it is probable that all alchemists who want to throw bombs will go for it.

I like how they managed to split weapons by category and sub traits, but when some subtraits are unique to one or eventually 2 ( the 1h reach situation ) then your choices are more limited.

Hope I explained my point better.

Ps: indeed they could introduce different throwers, but my doubts were regards a single item.


as a side note: Whips are pretty great for Alchemnist as well--but getting profiency is a pain. (I see no way other than that general feat I think).
(whip+buckler, and shuriken/bomb open hand is my favorite)

Hmm I could see the hobgoblin could have a bomb launcher. Its not the only method of gaining increased range. Ranger can help bomb range issues as well.
They could easily not "lock" it behind an ancestry by adding in the same line that Alchemical Crossbow has--that it uses the same profiency bonuses. Sure Alchemists would almost positlvey be the ones who use them the most. But every class tends to hve a weapon preference anyway. And chances are they would be pretty painful to use unless it gave you some method to draw and load the bomb first.

I think, more likely. they would have an uncommon recipe for an alchemical item that alters the bombs, or a recipe that just states "alters bomb's range" version of the formula (otherwise it'd be crazy expensive infusion wise)

I think perhaps it would be a nice way to reformat Slings into War Slings. Same with Alch Xbow, you have profiency if you have profiency in slings.
That have reload 0 1+hand for normal slings. Perhaps Reload 1 for when slinging bombs. This would make it a useful Sling for anyone and everyone.

though at that point its not explicitly a hoggoblin weapon


K1 wrote:

My point is simple.

I will try to explain it the best I can.

I am all up for diversity.

When I started created my character I happened to see that apart from a whip and the Flickmace there were no other stuff.

So, apart from the whip which was not the weapon I was looking for, I found myself without any other alternative.

I had to decide between taking a whip/Flickmace or to accept that there were only 2 1h weapon with reach.

Now the situation could be even worse.
Currently alchemist has no specific use for a weapon, but if they will introduce a single weapon with a unique trait, then it is probable that all alchemists who want to throw bombs will go for it.

I like how they managed to split weapons by category and sub traits, but when some subtraits are unique to one or eventually 2 ( the 1h reach situation ) then your choices are more limited.

Hope I explained my point better.

Ps: indeed they could introduce different throwers, but my doubts were regards a single item.

I see your point, and I've been thinking of ways to cheese a flickmace onto a character (although I like the idea of a whippy trippy bard now so that doesn't change).

Here's the issue: the whip and flickmace are 'competing' with the traditional longsword/battleaxe/warhammer d8 trio. A flickmace is in *every* way superior to a warhammer, so for balance ... it's an advanced weapon that you need a really good reason to get your hands on. A whip is a little more feature-laden, and with reach, so it's a weaker hit (and I think that's how it would be if you tried to whip at a swordsman in armour too).

You're waiting effectively for the 'better than normal weapons' space to open up a little more. Whether that's a good thing or not is a game balance issue but that's where we are.


K1 wrote:
1) play with a whip ( it exists but it's not a main weapon. Let's be honest for a second )

Let's be honest for a second... your opinion and experience does not represent the universal truth of the game, and saying things in such a way that suggests it does - even things which are likely to be agreed with by other folks you regularly discuss the game with, like "no one actually uses a whip" as you've done - makes your other opinions less valuable by association.

I've seen plenty of whip-wielding characters over the years, and even have one in one of the two PF2 campaigns I've started since the game officially released. Why? Because in PF2, there are no bad weapon choices.


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Let's be honest for a second. The Gnome Flickmace is a silly weapon, and should rightfully be relegated to the scrapheap of bizarre fantasy.

And giving Gnomes, a small race, a special weapon that is one-handed, reach, and the functional equivalent of a warhammer is beyond silly.

Then again, Gnomes are a silly race to begin with, so if anyone is going to get such a silly weapon, bet on it being a gnome. If any players in my home games tried to cheese their way into being adopted by gnomes, I think I'd project some funky changeling storyline just to mess with their heads. <g>


2 people marked this as a favorite.

This isn't the tilt-at-flickmaces thread.


thenobledrake wrote:
K1 wrote:
1) play with a whip ( it exists but it's not a main weapon. Let's be honest for a second )

Let's be honest for a second... your opinion and experience does not represent the universal truth of the game, and saying things in such a way that suggests it does - even things which are likely to be agreed with by other folks you regularly discuss the game with, like "no one actually uses a whip" as you've done - makes your other opinions less valuable by association.

I've seen plenty of whip-wielding characters over the years, and even have one in one of the two PF2 campaigns I've started since the game officially released. Why? Because in PF2, there are no bad weapon choices.

Though I do underarand your point, the quoted part is out of context.

My point was that in terms of 1h weapon with reach, my only 2 choices were a whip and a Flickmace. And between them the most logic weapon for my sword and board character was the mace ( I couldn't even consider the whip ).

Also if you see I specifically said that it was not a main weapon, and that mostly because of the weapon dice. I still think that 1d8 + fail crit spec + reach is a little bit too much ( I will lower the weapon dice to 1d6 ), but still between them, because of aesthetic and and damage, i had no choice to begin with.

It is not that you can't do a full plate character with shield and whip, don't get me wrong. It just wasn't what I was looking fo ( and a Flickmace was the closest ).


K1 wrote:
thenobledrake wrote:
K1 wrote:
1) play with a whip ( it exists but it's not a main weapon. Let's be honest for a second )

Let's be honest for a second... your opinion and experience does not represent the universal truth of the game, and saying things in such a way that suggests it does - even things which are likely to be agreed with by other folks you regularly discuss the game with, like "no one actually uses a whip" as you've done - makes your other opinions less valuable by association.

I've seen plenty of whip-wielding characters over the years, and even have one in one of the two PF2 campaigns I've started since the game officially released. Why? Because in PF2, there are no bad weapon choices.

Though I do underarand your point, the quoted part is out of context.

My point was that in terms of 1h weapon with reach, my only 2 choices were a whip and a Flickmace. And between them the most logic weapon for my sword and board character was the mace ( I couldn't even consider the whip ).

Also if you see I specifically said that it was not a main weapon, and that mostly because of the weapon dice. I still think that 1d8 + fail crit spec + reach is a little bit too much ( I will lower the weapon dice to 1d6 ), but still between them, because of aesthetic and and damage, i had no choice to begin with.

It is not that you can't do a full plate character with shield and whip, don't get me wrong. It just wasn't what I was looking fo ( and a Flickmace was the closest ).

Why should a one-hand weapon have reach anyway? I'd imagine swinging something three metres long is going to involve some awkwardness. Whips are about the only one I can think of and the game's pretty lenient on letting you ready them again.

To compare what another game company came up with, I looked at a Gurps weapon list. There were very few one-handed weapons that work at Pathfinder's reach range (in Gurps terms, reach of 3 meaning three yards). The lance (which is in the game, and one-handed if mounted), the whip, and the urumi (a literal whippy sword). Anything else with that kind of reach needed two hands. Or is a one-handed ranged weapon like a thrown spear or a hand crossbow.


Qaianna wrote:
K1 wrote:
thenobledrake wrote:
K1 wrote:
1) play with a whip ( it exists but it's not a main weapon. Let's be honest for a second )

Let's be honest for a second... your opinion and experience does not represent the universal truth of the game, and saying things in such a way that suggests it does - even things which are likely to be agreed with by other folks you regularly discuss the game with, like "no one actually uses a whip" as you've done - makes your other opinions less valuable by association.

I've seen plenty of whip-wielding characters over the years, and even have one in one of the two PF2 campaigns I've started since the game officially released. Why? Because in PF2, there are no bad weapon choices.

Though I do underarand your point, the quoted part is out of context.

My point was that in terms of 1h weapon with reach, my only 2 choices were a whip and a Flickmace. And between them the most logic weapon for my sword and board character was the mace ( I couldn't even consider the whip ).

Also if you see I specifically said that it was not a main weapon, and that mostly because of the weapon dice. I still think that 1d8 + fail crit spec + reach is a little bit too much ( I will lower the weapon dice to 1d6 ), but still between them, because of aesthetic and and damage, i had no choice to begin with.

It is not that you can't do a full plate character with shield and whip, don't get me wrong. It just wasn't what I was looking fo ( and a Flickmace was the closest ).

Why should a one-hand weapon have reach anyway? I'd imagine swinging something three metres long is going to involve some awkwardness. Whips are about the only one I can think of and the game's pretty lenient on letting you ready them again.

To compare what another game company came up with, I looked at a Gurps weapon list. There were very few one-handed weapons that work at Pathfinder's reach range (in Gurps terms, reach of 3 meaning three yards). The lance (which is in the game, and...

I think you should address that question to Paizo. They are the ones who decided to implement 1h weapons with reach trait.

As for me, since they decided to do so, I simply wanted to use one of them, because I wouldn't benefit from athletic stuff and other traits ( or to better say it, reach would be the most useful trait, for my character ).


A bomb chucker that traded range for having to be reloaded might have some potential as a non-mandatory cool option. I mean, I could see most alchemsits carrying one in case they need the range but I don't think it would become a regular part of their action routine.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / Rules Discussion / Hobgoblin weapons All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.