I Hate Pathfinder Goblins

[Willie the Duck]

I would like to subscribe to your newsletter good sir.

It's not a newsletter. Just a perspective: Be calm. Be rational. Don't begrudge anyone else having different opinions. Don't assume you're right. Don't assume that you are a genius (you certainly haven't proven yourself so to anyone here). Don't fall into any of the pitfalls of online foruming. Validate opinions. Look for solutions. When I actually stick to it, I do well.

[Psyren]

Firstly, I'm pretty sure their black skin have nothing to do with curse - they were like that from the get-go
And their Darkvision, if standard "evolutionary" explanation don't satisfy you, may be explained by their frequent mating with demons (i. e. Drow are "elven Tieflings")

Also, the Underdark isn't just short on sunlight. It is a gaping maw that's supernaturally linked to the Plane of Shadow, and none save perhaps Shar knows how deep it really goes. A few millennia down there can give your race a hell of a lot more than a tan, curse or no curse.

It's not a newsletter. Just a perspective: Be calm. Be rational. Don't begrudge anyone else having different opinions. Don't assume you're right. Don't assume that you are a genius (you certainly haven't proven yourself so to anyone here). Don't fall into any of the pitfalls of online foruming. Validate opinions. Look for solutions. When I actually stick to it, I do well.

Aye - and for the record, I don't begrudge anyone having an opinion. But starting a thread just to broadcast it, with no intention of changing one's mind or having a position that can be budged regardless of information/explanation, just strikes me as onanism.

[Segev]

That is indeed the sum of it. The reason this is so vexing is because it feels like one of my favorite races was ripped out from under me. The race went from a race I liked to... well, an over the top goofy race of clowns.

(...)

Or I can just 'not play as one of the two races that was my favorite race to play, and make sure I never have anything to do with them'. The weary 'holds up a sign - can you read this?' goblin who has discovered he's the only sane man is... actually okay! But I've done that a half dozen times now and would like to be done with it.

Yeah, my condolences. I definitely can understand your disappointment.

I tend to rewrite things a lot in any game I run, even D&D. Goblins in one game were clever and sneaky jerks who were a second-class race in orcish society...except that they had finagled it so that the orcs left so many unpleasant, tedious tasks to the goblins that goblins were de-facto rulers of the society. Orcs thought they were in charge, but the orc chieftans' orders were only as effective as the goblins made them. If the goblins approved, they were expeditiously carried out, given to the right orcs to get them done, etc. If the goblins disapproved, they wound up not reaching the appropriate ears, and it just never quite got done. If the goblins wanted something done, it quietly was implemented as if it just randomly happened. If the orcs wanted something stopped but the goblins didn't, it just seemed to be a chronic problem with no solution nor end in sight.

[9mm]

Personally I like the Wicked Fantasy version of Goblins: The gods gave their races gifts, Goblins got the gift of bad luck.

[Knaight]

I heard that most of the level adjustments in 3.x were deliberately calculated incorrectly in order to get people to play core races.

This sounds like the designers claiming that they deliberately made crappy feats so that system mastery would be rewarded. It's plausible, but it also works really neatly as a cover story for sloppy design, and I kind of suspect the latter.

Personality seems fine to me, though. There's some silly stuff in there (afraid of horses and dogs?), but also some fun stuff (afraid of writing, can eat nearly anything, love fire). Goblin PCs totally work, just like the (in)famous Drow PCs. I have a Goblin Rogue in my group right now, aside from his insane +23 Stealth (at level 3), there's nothing wrong with his character. He overcame his fear of reading and learned some languages, and if his character has to read something, he even roleplays being afraid of it and muttering the words, which is great.

Have you dealt with big, vicious dogs? A mastiff that gets up in your face and starts barking angrily is dangerous, and that's without them being bigger than you. Even a medium sized dog that gets aggressive can be scary, and that's again without them being much bigger than you. As for horses, there's a reason shock cavalry is a thing, and they tend to be more than a little intimidating. Scale them up a bit, and they could easily be terrifying. On top of that, spooked horses can sometimes be prone to kicking, and when you've got a culture that is very fond of using fire as a tactic, there are going to be spooked horses. It makes a lot of sense.

[Morty]

D&D's treatment of "monster races" has always been some shade of terrible or other, with the sole exception of Eberron. Pathfinder's goblins are also awful, but at least they have some sort of character to them. Said character is "dimwitted pyromaniac comic relief", but it's a mild improvement over conveniently evil and weak little pests.

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by Psyren
What?? Drow aren't typical low-level fodder opponents at all.

I once killed a drow by falling on him. Just sayin'.

Spoiler: Drowfall

Show

We had been trapped in the depths of Undermountain for weeks on end, and had finally found our way up to Skullport, only to be ambushed by a gang of drow as soon as we stepped out of the door.

My druid wildshaped into osprey-form, winged up above the fray, and then shifted back to humanoid shape and dropped onto one of the drow. I'd only been intending to knock him to the ground, but the DM rolled a 6 for falling damage…and the drow had 5 hit points.

When my DM finally stopped laughing, he awarded me 150 XP for a "splat bonus." That was one of my favorite uses of wildshape ever.

Originally Posted by Sporeegg
And Drow don't make any sense. They should be nearly blind and almost white in their skin color - I feel Skyrim's Falmer, a race of blind pale elves were a cool concept.

As it happened, I worked up a race of blind, pallid elves a couple years ago, reimagining the drow to be more in line with other cave-dwelling species. Fairly basic, but it fit what I was looking for.

I don't know anything about the Falmer, so you'd have to tell me how much they have in common.

Originally Posted by ShurikVch
Firstly, I'm pretty sure their black skin have nothing to do with curse - they were like that from the get-go….

According to the 3.0 FRCS, it's a little of both. The first drow in Faerun were "descended from the original dark-skinned elven subrace called the Illythiiri," and later "cursed into their present appearance by the good elven deities for following the goddess Lolth" (p. 13). It's not specified exactly how much they were changed by the curse.

[AslanCross]

I feel for you, but I can't say I hate the PF goblins. They're adorable. But maybe that's what gets your goat, too.

I was always partial to Eberron's treatment of the goblinoids and the monstrous races in general. The goblinoids had an eleven-thousand year empire! Hobgoblins have a bardic tradition! Goblins are ninjas! The orcs saved the world!

I guess you just have to bring it up with the DM.

[Milo v3]

I dislike how dumb they are considering they are as smart as dwarves are....

[Blackhawk748]

I dislike how dumb they are considering they are as smart as dwarves are....

This is what always gets me. Goblins are as smart as any of the core races, so why are they always portrayed as dumber, sometimes even dumber than orcs. Im ok with them being cowardly, as they are a horde army, but dumb kinda goes against everything that they are.

[Segev]

This sounds like the designers claiming that they deliberately made crappy feats so that system mastery would be rewarded. It's plausible, but it also works really neatly as a cover story for sloppy design, and I kind of suspect the latter.

I suspect it's less sloppy, and more over-cautious. It wasn't that they deliberately mis-aligned LAs, but that they did not trust that they would get it right, so if there was even the slightest question, they erred on the side of the monster being too weak for its ECL. Their goal, I believe, was to make sure that nobody would say "this monster race is overpowered." And, mostly, they succeeded. Lots of underpowered ones. The number that are actually overpowered for their ECL can probably be counted on one hand with fingers to spare.

[Wonton]

Do people really think PF goblins are underpowered?

I think Small size, 30 ft speed, +4 Dex, and an additional +4 Stealth (on top of the +4 they already get from being Small) is actually super good for a race. Okay, maybe it shoehorns them into Rogue a little too much, but what would you expect, given then way goblins are described. Of course they're gonna be cowardly little tricksters, not Paladins and Fighters.

I would argue it's one of the strongest Rogue races I've ever seen. Goblin Rogue in my party had +21 Stealth at level 1. Not to mention 22 Dex, which gives him the highest attack bonus in the group with Weapon Finesse, and AC higher than the tank (although that will change once the tank upgrades his Scale Mail).

P.S. Oh, and Darkvision, which is very underrated. Enemy cleric recently cast a Darkness spell, party was only saved from a wipe cause the Half-Orc and Goblin had darkvision.

[Lord Raziere]

I'm a big fan of Warcraft goblins myself. Conniving, greedy and mad, but fiercely intelligent tinkers and consummate businessmen.

Agreed. I personally would just take Goblin stats, get rid of the current ones and give em CHA and INT bonuses with a Con penalty. Best goblin I ever played was a Warcraft one. Mantakax Boomabillion: Inventor, savvy businessman, tactical captain, fire mage, shotgun-user, pulp hero, wannabe noir detective at times, and utterly awesome all the time, even when he was greedy. If it ain't worth a boom, it ain't worth a billion!

[squiggit]

I'm a fan of Warcraft goblins too. Though even in that universe they're still often played up humorously.

Said character is "dimwitted pyromaniac comic relief"

'dimwitted' with average intelligence and wisdom?

[ShurikVch]

I dislike how dumb they are considering they are as smart as dwarves are....

This is what always gets me. Goblins are as smart as any of the core races, so why are they always portrayed as dumber, sometimes even dumber than orcs. Im ok with them being cowardly, as they are a horde army, but dumb kinda goes against everything that they are.

It's not a Pathfinder, but for everybody who like Goblins - check this article
Points of interest:
Goblin Marches (Elminster's Ecologies: The Battle of Bones)

The Goblin Marches and High Moors were much wider and wetter than now. The Great Desert Anauroch's southernmost limits were 50 to 150 miles farther north than now, making the local weather cooler and moister. The Farsea Marsh was a freshwater lake ringed by forests and well-watered fields. The soil was rich, moist, and deep.
The goblins thrived in these lands, building mighty castles and citadels, particularly in the High Moors. Their numbers increased, and they built great armies and raiding parties, using dire wolves and other strange beasts as mounts. In the early centuries, they conquered the ancient kingdoms of Asram and Anauria, and fought with the city-state of Suzail, then only newly founded. Orcs and other so-called "evil" races were recruited as allied forces.
The goblins were wise enough never to attack Cormyr itself. By avoiding their strongest opponent, the goblins easily overcame the defenses of the villages, farms, and caravans bordering their expanding domain.

Dhakaan (Eberron) - wiki articles [1], [2]
Grodd (Into the Dragon's Lair)

The city of Grodd is a hollowed out portion in the center of a demiplane of solid stone. Its origins are unknown. Grodd is difficult to travel to and from with traditional dimensional-hopping magic. At some point over a thousand years ago, the plane became populated with goblins from the Goblin Marches area of Toril. Their first great ruler was a mysterious being known as the Iron One.

Since that time the goblins were taught and ruled by the elf/red dragon Nalavara who elevated their culture beyond the norm for their race. She gave them knowledge in many practices of more civilized folk as well as a pathological hatred for the kingdom of Cormyr.

Thousands of goblins inhabit the city and they maintain shops, mines, temples, and a well-trained military. They raise skunks, crows, and fungus as food. The goblins have lime-green skin and speak an ancient dialect of Elvish. Due to the demiplane’s close proximity to the Plane of Shadow, the goblins also have a strange affinity for shadow magic.

After a failed invasion on Cormyr, Nalavara was slain. The goblins are now engaged in a power struggle after the death of the dragon as well as their High Consul. But they have easy access to the area around the Storm Horns, so it’s likely that Toril has not seen the last of them.

Zakhara (Al Qadim, Land of Fate)

Unlike most settings, there is practically no racial disharmony in Zakhara: humans, elves, and orcs alike share the same culture, lifestyle, and social status, and races traditionally considered evil savages, such as goblins, are instead valued members of society.

Goblins in the Land of Fate have a great affinity for gadgets, especially explosives. They create and use odd devices such as flame-throwers, repeating crossbows, and balloons.

Also, Wanderers Mamluk Society - it's commander, Admiral Dus Abd al-Dawwar, is Goblin

[Morty]

'dimwitted' with average intelligence and wisdom?

Their attributes don't play very well here with their presentations, in which they very much are dimwitted. Mind you, the same applies to their description in the 3.5 Monster Manual.

[thoroughlyS]

What?? Drow aren't typical low-level fodder opponents at all. They're intelligent, sneaky, use tactics, have spell resistance and carry poison, and that's before we get to the wizards and priestesses.

I admit "fodder" is wrong. I remembered reading somewhere that drow were designed to challenge low-level players by curtailing most of the advantages they will usually have in fights. While that was not said by WotC, I still believe it is a valid interpretation. More to the point, I still say that drow are supposed to be "slaughtered en masse by low-level adventurers".

Spoiler: Relevant Quote

Show

The Drow are perhaps the most overused bunch of villains ever. Their entire ability set is one that is supposed to neutralize the advantages of player characters so that characters can have mirror matches against NPC parties without doubling their treasure. With magic items that turn off once they are brought out of Drow controlled regions, spell-resistance, and spell-like abilities designed to specifically negate common player-character tactical advantages, they can easily compete with Player Characters with massively more permanent magical equipment. And that means that they can be fought and killed several times without supercharging party treasure.

Spoiler: Kobolds

Show

They could add without taking away, though. That's what happened to kobolds. They kept all of their original fluff, and had *MOAR DRAGONS* tacked on.

And because of this interference, Kobolds ended up as perhaps the most divisive D&D race apart from Kender, and banned at many tables due to the kinds of dragony exploits people became able to pull off. This point isn't exactly helping your case.

I feel that this argument is reaching. Firstly, kobolds became divisive because poorly written crunch led to exploits, whereas the fluff was not a problem. Secondly, that situation wouldn't have changed if their original fluff was overwritten as opposed to being added on to, which was what my complaint was about.

I disagree, you can't divorce the two. "MOAR DRAGONS" directly led to that power creep, because when a designer thinks "add more dragon", power is the logical result. I certainly didn't see Lizardfolk or Troglodytes getting sorcery, breath weapons, or advancing by age categories.

Except outside of an unintended side-benefit of the epic feat thing that was completely accidental.... the "power creep" was actually "making slightly less awful" since they were literally the weakest race in the entire game, and even with Races of the Dragon they needed to put out the web enhancement which get's them maybe about the same level of power as a halfling. And it's not like they get sorcerery or wings for free, and the book that gave "kobolds" things like wings actually gave them to sorcerers/kobolds/dragonborn/spellscales, kobolds being the weakest of those options.... And that book actually gave breath weapons to Half-Dragons, not kobolds.

I have no doubt it was unintended, but that doesn't mean it was unlikely. If you drive on an icy road, sliding off becomes probable whether you intend to do so or not.

Except it wasn't an icy road. The epic feat thing is the only actual issue, (I don't know how the true dragon interpretation ever happened since races of the dragon has a list of all the true dragons). Dragon fluff does not increase the risk of imbalance or issues.... Friggin generic "magic" fluff is more likely to cause issues than dragon is, nearly all the dragon content for players in the whole game is low in the power scale.

Your taking an anomaly, and then acting as though it was the likely outcome.

I have seen nothing, and I mean nothing, on par with the "True Dragons" debate for any other player race. And as bad as the epic feats are, they aren't even the only point of contention with Kobolds (see also things like Loredrake and Draconic Rite of Passage.) So we'll have to agree to disagree.

I reiterate: the problem with kobolds is not that they are heavily associated with dragons in the fluff, it is the "poorly written crunch" that allows players to argue that dragonwrought kobolds qualify as True Dragons. Giving kobolds 12 age categories (when that was the only RAW qualifier for True Dragons) was a mechanical boo-boo that could be exploited. Yes, it was unarguably the direct result of the dragon association, but that bit of crunch is where it became a problem.
All of this is irrelevant however, because my point was that you can add fluff without replacing what is already there. This can be seen in other cases, such as the aforementioned drow, and their book(s). Or even centaurs and gnolls in Races of the Wild.

I also am... a little up in the air about the suggestions that goblins need to have a particular backstory to be the 'You can just go around stabbing these it's alright' monster.

I mean... really, I've been in a number of games that were: 'I just worked 16 hour shifts on Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday, and it is now Wednesday evening. The mayor tells you that the city is being attacked by bandits, you go to the barn where the bandits are holed up, I didn't even write down what race the bandits are, roll for initiative'. I've played in games where things that are listed as 'sometimes evil' are very, very black and white evil and it is totally okay to stab them.

This is the essence of a "Kick in the Door" game: kill stuff without sweating the details.

Sorry to say it, guys, but if your complaint is that DMs will use the Paizo fluff for their goblins and you don't like it...don't play those games.

That is indeed the sum of it. The reason this is so vexing is because it feels like one of my favorite races was ripped out from under me. The race went from a race I liked to... well, an over the top goofy race of clowns.

Actually, my problem is not with ANYONE using this kind of goblin. If you look back at my original post I only talk about the decisions Paizo made when redesigning goblins. I understand that everyone has their own opinions, and that a lot of people like the direction Paizo went with.
My problem equates to liking Dave Grohl in Nirvana but hating him in the Foo Fighters. My reaction is best summed up as not listening to Foo Fighters at all. (Disclaimer: I have no idea what, if any, differences there are between Dave Grohl's performances with either band. I don't listen to Nirvana or Foo Fighters, but this analogy fits. Assuming the music of Nirvana and Foo Fighters is different.)

You can talk to the DM about it and suggest how to alter it in his world, perhaps, but it's up to him how he runs it. If your DM is willing to work with you, you can write up goblins to be what you want them to be and talk to him about running them that way. Maybe he'll like your ideas and incorporate them instead of Paizo's. Maybe not. But you really don't have a right to say that it's wrong of a game company to present fluff of which you disapprove because DMs will use it by default.

...

Any "refluffing is bad" argument will fall on deaf ears, because frankly, I've yet to see a game which doesn't refluff SOMETHING.

The statement isn't "refluffing is bad". The statement is "re-fluffing is irrelevant".
I take issue specifically with Paizo's decisions and do not support Paizo as a business because of them.
I feel like a lot of people have skimmed over that part in my previous replies.

You're welcome to hate Paizo's goblins. Everybody has things in official fluff they dislike. Certainly, I do. I try to talk my DMs into changing it where I can. You should, too. Or run your own game, with goblins that fit your vision for them.

This is basically where I am, except that I've taken it a step further and do not play Pathfinder at all (nowadays I prefer D&D NEXT over v3.5 anyway). I realize this is an overreaction, and have admitted to it multiple times.

I can understand how this might be upsetting to some, but that doesn't make it the wrong decision even so. This rambunctious and goofy portrayal of goblins have clearly proven popular enough that they became capable of becoming the face of Pathfinder for practical and commercial purposes. Just by changing it they were bound to tick some folks off, but it seems the gamble succeeded, as these goblins are both well-liked and instantly recognizable not just as fantasy, but as Pathfinder.

I'm in the minority that got ticked off, and by a serious degree. I have no problem with other people enjoying this goblin either, I just don't get it.

And quite honestly, I like that they aren't just another generic savage yet noble set of Proud Warrior Race Guys. Let the Orcs and Lizardfolk and Kobolds and Duergar and Hobgoblins etc. carry that mantle; the Goblins are here to Fred Durst everything.

Goblins were never the Proud Warrior Race Guys, they were The Crafty (Yes, I am well aware that this niche is similarly overcrowded). If anything, Pathfinder pushed them all the way to The Savage, forcing them to share design space with orcs (although that kind of makes sense, looking at their Tolkien roots).

Well that's fine. If you have an opinion, are expressing it, and aren't asking for anything to change, and just want to be heard, then good for you.

The basic problem is that it doesn't seem like that's the case.

I started this thread to express my dissatisfaction with how Paizo handled goblins. I HATE PATHFINDER GOBLINS. All the re-fluffing in the world doesn't matter to me in this context. I'm not looking for a fix. I'm not trying to convert others. I just wanted to feel heard. And all of you helped me find some peace with these thoughts.

It seems like you have a genuine problem with the PF version of goblins existing at all. That's not so good.

Because, frankly, there are dozens to hundreds of interpretations* of goblins, none of which are capital 'R' 'Right'. So... Piazo chose one that you wouldn't choose. Okay, now what? Make your opinions known? You've done that. People have said, 'well then, don't play them that way.' and you seem to have a problem with that, like it isn't a good enough solution. What next? Get them to change it? Other than unlikely, their interpretation is just as valid as yours. So, what exactly are you looking for? Validation? We've validated your right to your opinion, that it is a reasonable one, and that some people agree. Where do we go from here?

I understand that no interpretation is THE correct interpretation, but I should be allowed to rant and rave about hating the way Paizo did it. I honestly did not expect this thread to garner so much interest, but I've got to say I'm enjoying it quite a lot. I get to share my views on the subject with a lot of people, and hear their opinions too.
When it comes to not playing goblins that way, I am very clear that I don't, and I am also very clear that that was not the problem I addressed in my original post. It's not that the "solution" isn't good enough, it's that it's not a solution because they're not addressing my "problem". I don't really feel like there is a "problem", I just have a strong opinion.

* - I can think of at least six distinct versions of goblins in A/D&D, pathfinder goblins, WoW goblins, Harry Potter Goblins, OotS goblins, Goblins:life through their eyes goblins, YAFGC goblins, Flaky Pastry goblins, and then there's fairy tale/folklore goblins, which have as much variation as trolls and elves do.

Our Goblins Are Different
And I like most of the interpretations cataloged here. I like goblins in general, not just for roleplaying games. So when the interpretation I HATE is the one most people like, I get worked up. Again, that's not a problem, I just want to vent.

Personally I dislike having "alternate races" like Drow or Blue or Water Orcs. At least when they are a lazy copy that only changes the color or any other miniscule detail of a race.

I'm on the opposite end of that argument. I like that you can have small mechanical benefits that reflect your character's origin. That's why I'm a fan of the Background idea of D&D NEXT.

This thread has given me inspiration to combine Pathfinder Goblins with Shadowmoor/Lorwyn goblins, somehow, but I don't know how to make the reincarnation work...

I actually like that idea, because I really like Boggarts. I know how weird that sounds.

Be calm. Be rational. Don't begrudge anyone else having different opinions. Don't assume you're right. Don't assume that you are a genius (you certainly haven't proven yourself so to anyone here). Don't fall into any of the pitfalls of online foruming. Validate opinions. Look for solutions. When I actually stick to it, I do well.

Aye - and for the record, I don't begrudge anyone having an opinion. But starting a thread just to broadcast it, with no intention of changing one's mind or having a position that can be budged regardless of information/explanation, just strikes me as onanism.

I mean, opinions aren't usually swayed by information/explanation, that's why they're opinions. And everyone likes to feel acknowledged. I also feel like I've validated my opinions where necessary.

Personally I like the Wicked Fantasy version of Goblins: The gods gave their races gifts, Goblins got the gift of bad luck.

In D&D, goblins got the gift of hate.

D&D's treatment of "monster races" has always been some shade of terrible or other, with the sole exception of Eberron. Pathfinder's goblins are also awful, but at least they have some sort of character to them. Said character is "dimwitted pyromaniac comic relief", but it's a mild improvement over conveniently evil and weak little pests.

'dimwitted' with average intelligence and wisdom?

Their attributes don't play very well here with their presentations, in which they very much are dimwitted. Mind you, the same applies to their description in the 3.5 Monster Manual.

Spoiler: COMBAT

Show

Being bullied by bigger, stronger creatures has taught goblins to exploit what few advantages they have: sheer numbers and malicious ingenuity. The concept of a fair fight is meaningless in their society. They favor ambushes, overwhelming odds, dirty tricks, and any other edge they can devise.
Goblins have a poor grasp of strategy and are cowardly by nature, tending to flee the field if a battle turns against them. With proper supervision, though, they can implement reasonably complex plans, and in such circumstances their numbers can be a deadly advantage.

Just the combat passage paints them as devious and conniving. While it does mention a "poor grasp of strategy", that does not mean stupid. In all likely hood, they could just rely too heavily on ambush. And I've seen many discussions online about goblins and kobolds filling the same roles, where people tend to side with the kobolds. In my opinion, kobolds are the more passive: sitting in lairs completely stuffed full of traps. In comparison, goblins are the more active, raiding nearby villages nightly. But that's just me.

Have you dealt with big, vicious dogs? A mastiff that gets up in your face and starts barking angrily is dangerous, and that's without them being bigger than you. Even a medium sized dog that gets aggressive can be scary, and that's again without them being much bigger than you. As for horses, there's a reason shock cavalry is a thing, and they tend to be more than a little intimidating. Scale them up a bit, and they could easily be terrifying. On top of that, spooked horses can sometimes be prone to kicking, and when you've got a culture that is very fond of using fire as a tactic, there are going to be spooked horses. It makes a lot of sense.

According to the reading I did yesterday, Pathfinder goblins hate dogs because they don't think they're as good as goblin dogs. The horses explanation makes sense though.

I feel for you, but I can't say I hate the PF goblins. They're adorable. But maybe that's what gets your goat, too.

I just think Pathfinder goblins are fugly. Like, really fugly. I don't enjoy any of the art I've seen for Pathfinder goblins. After leafing through the beastiary, I feel like a lot of Paizo's artwork doesn't really do it for me. So it goes.

I dislike how dumb they are considering they are as smart as dwarves are....

This is what always gets me. Goblins are as smart as any of the core races, so why are they always portrayed as dumber, sometimes even dumber than orcs. Im ok with them being cowardly, as they are a horde army, but dumb kinda goes against everything that they are.

I like the simple explanation found in the Slayer's Guide: "Other races just THINK goblins are dumb". Confirmation bias leads to people writing off crafty goblins as a fluke, and the instances of goblins screwing up are seen as the standard. Plus, the only people who would live to recount their interactions with goblins are the luckier of the bunch.

Do people really think PF goblins are underpowered?

People think that v3.5 Blues are underpowered.

[Psyren]

The statement isn't "refluffing is bad". The statement is "re-fluffing is irrelevant".
I take issue specifically with Paizo's decisions and do not support Paizo as a business because of them.
I feel like a lot of people have skimmed over that part in my previous replies.

I mean, opinions aren't usually swayed by information/explanation, that's why they're opinions. And everyone likes to feel acknowledged. I also feel like I've validated my opinions where necessary.

Then to this I can only say, if all you want is acknowledgement, then you've got it. "Cool story bro" is indeed an acknowledgement, and where our discussion has to end.

I may reply to others in the thread who wish to discuss further.

[Bohandas]

P.S. Oh, and Darkvision, which is very underrated. Enemy cleric recently cast a Darkness spell, party was only saved from a wipe cause the Half-Orc and Goblin had darkvision.

Darkvision doesn't work in magical darkness unless you're a baatezu

I also am... a little up in the air about the suggestions that goblins need to have a particular backstory to be the 'You can just go around stabbing these it's alright' monster.

I mean... really, I've been in a number of games that were: 'I just worked 16 hour shifts on Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday, and it is now Wednesday evening. The mayor tells you that the city is being attacked by bandits, you go to the barn where the bandits are holed up, I didn't even write down what race the bandits are, roll for initiative'. I've played in games where things that are listed as 'sometimes evil' are very, very black and white evil and it is totally okay to stab them.

Heck, it is a little unusual to be in a game where, say, hobgoblins are not automatically okay for stabbing.

Have I already given my token suggestion to just set the campaign in the abyss, where by custom everything is ok for stabbing (as in, the custom there is to stab [,shoot, cut, maim, kill, butcher, beat, boil...] things/people/animals/etc, not [just] that the things there are ok to stab)

[Yahzi]

Goblins in one game were clever and sneaky jerks who were a second-class race in orcish society...except that they had finagled it so that the orcs left so many unpleasant, tedious tasks to the goblins that goblins were de-facto rulers of the society.

That describes my goblins. They are always "ruled" by some high-level monster, but they arrange things in the background for their own benefit. My goblins are smart, sophisticated, and cruel.

What I can't stand is an entire race dedicated to comic relief. Ugh.

[Kish]

*thread title*

They hate you, too.

[Starbuck_II]

The Goblins in the Huntsman: Winter's War movie were interesting. They had Regen (Gold), tough skin, Strong, cunning savages, loved gold (even though it was their weakness), etc.

.

[Honest Tiefling]

I actually like that idea, because I really like Boggarts. I know how weird that sounds.

Probably because Pathfinder Goblins come across as 'lolzrandom' (even if it can be well explained, I don't think that was what they were going for). Boggarts can be silly, but there's always that hint of a ravenous horde that can not only strip a cow in five minutes, but is going to keep coming back...

[Der_DWSage]

Honestly, I'll agree that they went a little too far in making Goblins the wacky, zany race of dangerous idiots. They chose a direction and ran with it, so I'll respect that much, but I agree with not really agreeing with it-mostly for the same reason that I dislike 'Always evil' races. It makes them one-dimensional, and not really worth exploring further.

Then again, if it was, for example, Bugbears that were the wacky, zany ones, as Bugbears are far less common...maybe it would've worked. When it's not the go-to low level opponent that everyone fights a thousand of, familiarity doesn't breed as much contempt, and the concept works much better. It becomes less 'I'm sick of this' and more 'So they're one-dimensional, but at least it's an amusing direction.'

I'll admit that I partially dislike Goblins being wacky for another, more meta reason-they encourage disruptive players to do things like eat the government official's papers to 'save him from the evil words,' set fire to the Inn you're staying in, and other things of that nature. Someone earlier hit the nail on the head-they're Kender, but at least they're honestly hated in-universe instead of being perfect little angels.

[Blackhawk748]

Someone earlier hit the nail on the head-they're Kender, but at least they're honestly hated in-universe instead of being perfect little angels.

they're Kender

Kender

Kender

AAAAAAAARGGGH!!! KILL IT WITH ALL THE FIRE!!!

[Steven]

Darkvision doesn't work in magical darkness unless you're a baatezu

Welcome to Pathfinder where Darkness doesn't stop darkvision.
"Creatures with darkvision can see in an area of dim light or darkness without penalty."

[StreamOfTheSky]

I agree with you, OP, completely. I find the goblin art atrocious and their fluff is some of the dumbest trite I've ever read.

But....Paizo mechanically buffed them to the point they're on par w/ the core races (+4 Dex!!!) and gave them that sexy Roll With It feat. So I have enjoyed playing a goblin in PF and completely, mercilessly, coldly, with a vengeance ignoring every single bit of the fluff on how goblins are supposed to be. When I DM tries to get me to act like a goblin "is supposed to" or introduces NPC goblins like that, I shut that crap down as hard as crit fumble rules. Because it's just as bad. And crit fumbles are the Ebola of houserules.

[Khartoum]

It's been a long time since this was started but I can relate. I also have loved goblins from the old D&D days and MTG, it's a nightmare to have so much focus on the race you want in the opposite way. Pathfinder 2e now has them as PC races and I can't bare their awful looking red eyes at all.

So yeah, I feel ya. The only thing worst than their artwork is everything they are about in Pathfinder.

[Buufreak]

{scrubbed}

[Peelee]

The Mod on the Silver Mountain: Pathfinder Goblins don't react well to necromancy.