Worldbuilding: Differentiating between goblins, orcs and giants?

[SilverLeaf167]

While obviously related to D&D/PF, the exact edition isn't really relevant. This is more of a brainstorming thing than a mechanical question.

The endless varieties of goblins, orcs and giants are a staple of any D&D, but with the exception of some fancier giants, they all seem to play the very similar role of "barbaric murdering beatstick" in terms of both story and mechanics. The difference tends to be more in size, attitude and maybe a couple gimmicks, rather than any deep worldbuilding, and orcs and hobgoblins for instance overlap a lot, while bugbears are treated like bargain bin ogres, and ogres in turn are just bigger goblins. Bestiaries often offer some insight on tactics and such, but in my opinion not enough to base a coherent division on.

While it can obviously be nice to have some generic beatsticks to throw at your players without either side having to think about it too much, I'd still prefer some worldbuilding, you know? Makes for better roleplay too.


I bet almost everyone has run into this issue (?) at one point or another, so I'm curious: what kinds of takes have you seen on it, or created yourself? Who knows, maybe I'm making an issue out of nothing, and I bet all my own ideas are just amalgams of stuff I've seen elsewhere.


Below are some of my thoughts on the matter in a setting I'm working on/have used in the past.

Spoiler

Show

Goblins or goblinoids, consisting mostly of so-called lesser goblins, bugbears and hobgoblins, are in fact the most organized of the three groups. While lots of smaller, simpler tribes exist as well, there is in fact a major goblin empire that sits right on a critical trade route, founded largely on conquest and happenstance. This empire's society is highly militaristic and stratified, in rising order of importance: Lesser goblins are the clear majority and form the main workforce, though in warfare they can serve either as cannon fodder or hit-and-run skirmishers. Bugbears, though not complete idiots, are encouraged towards brutality and pigeonholed into military roles, serving as the main backbone/shock troops of goblin armies as well as peacetime enforcers. Hobgoblins form the ruling upper class, but even they serve in the military as elite troops, officers or mages. Ideally, every given citizen of the empire could be conscripted if necessary. Given the empire's location, they've abandoned some of their earlier disdain for trade and started to exploit the wealth passing through their territory, but this makes the empire no less fearsome when angered, and they've indeed learned to use economic blackmail as another form of warfare.

Orcs are only distantly related to goblins but often confused with them and viewed with equal or greater suspicion. While goblin society is led from the top and based on caste discipline, orcs have a strong sense of personal honor instead. While they too tend to form warrior cultures, they're also famous for their craftsmanship and fierce loyalty, and generally more capable of integrating with other humanoids than goblins are. Even half-breeds are possible, though often looked down upon. Orcs found outside their native tribes tend to be either soldiers, artisans or mere bandits, but others such as spellcasters play an important role in their society as well. Murdering, pillaging raiders are actually seen as disgraces in orc society as well, yet they tend to dominate other races' perceptions of them. (This orc part is admittedly directly inspired by the Elder Scrolls)

Giants, despite often just looking like big humans, are just different enough to seem a little strange. While goblin or orc society is still recognizably society, giants seem apathetic towards such matters. Though lesser giants like ogres and trolls often end up as "pets" for goblins, enslaved for manual labor or combat, even the more intelligent and powerful ones seem either disdainful or simply uncaring towards smallfolk, who should interact at their own risk. Some form raiding parties just for raiding's sake; some herd livestock (often proportionately sized); some spend centuries mastering arts and crafts; some just like to sit there and think. Not a single giant "state" is known to exist, but every few centuries they may group up for a particularly large onslaught. Some smallfolk tribes (especially goblins) like to ally with lesser giants receptive to such ideas, only to end up dominated by them instead, which is why non-slave giants have been banished from the goblin empire despite having helped create it.

Still quite generic at this point, in my opinion, which is exactly why I'm looking for neat ideas.

[Pelle]

First, I would like to say that I think the world building becomes better if you exclude something. You don't need to include in your setting all different peoples in the MM that fill the "barbaric murdering beatstick" role.

Anyways, for my current setting, goblins and hobgoblins are sub-races of a separate species. Orcs however, have a mixed human and troll heritage (trolls from folklore that turn to stone in the sun etc, not the silly D&D trolls). Hence their sunlight sensitivity, strength and stupidity, and the existence of half-orcs. This was initially to make sense out of the MM stats, but I quite like it now. The PCs in the game are all humans, (half)orcs and (hob)goblins, btw

[awa]

Id argue the difference between the 5 races at least in 3rd edition are much larger than you describe

First ogres are dumb a lot dumber than the others as well as much bigger and stronger

Orcs while similar to the ogres live in much larger groups and tend to have a much more developed culture than the kind cave man thing going for ogres

All the goblinoids have human level intelligent
Goblins have stealth and a connection with wargs as their core traits
Hobgoblins being lawful and are more rigid military hierarchy is their thing.
Bugbears are not rampaging brutes like an ogre their ambush killers, with human intelligence and a good stealth score

Now I’m not saying you can’t do something more interesting with these monster than has already been done its just they really do how more distinction than i believe you are giving them credit.

Now say an ogre an ettin and a hill giant are almost interchangeable except for their different associated numbers

[Pleh]

I actually really like how 5e handled the flavor to these three monster types. Giants benefit from the Ordning caste society, Goblinoids have their monstrous deities and slavery, while Orcs are war-mongering raiders with a few tendencies to mutate and crossbreed with humanoids and ogres.

Maybe other editions have included these elements, but it wasn't til 5e that these deeper elements to the races started to become clear to me.

[SilverLeaf167]

First, I would like to say that I think the world building becomes better if you exclude something. You don't need to include in your setting all different peoples in the MM that fill the "barbaric murdering beatstick" role.

Anyways, for my current setting, goblins and hobgoblins are sub-races of a separate species. Orcs however, have a mixed human and troll heritage (trolls from folklore that turn to stone in the sun etc, not the silly D&D trolls). Hence their sunlight sensitivity, strength and stupidity, and the existence of half-orcs. This was initially to make sense out of the MM stats, but I quite like it now. The PCs in the game are all humans, (half)orcs and (hob)goblins, btw

Oh, don't worry, I'm not going to be overthinking stuff like athachs, ettins and weird bug monster #346. It's just that with the intelligent core races at least I like to at least give it a shot before dismissing them. With the bugbears for instance, I used to consider them pretty useless, but with the goblins' caste-based system, I actually appreciate having them as a third variant besides the main two.

I'd probably like to integrate more folklore-style trolls as yet-another-giant, now that you mention it. I also like the silly D&D ones though.

Id argue the difference between the 5 races at least in 3rd edition are much larger than you describe

First ogres are dumb a lot dumber than the others as well as much bigger and stronger

Orcs while similar to the ogres live in much larger groups and tend to have a much more developed culture than the kind cave man thing going for ogres

All the goblinoids have human level intelligent
Goblins have stealth and a connection with wargs as their core traits
Hobgoblins being lawful and are more rigid military hierarchy is their thing.
Bugbears are not rampaging brutes like an ogre their ambush killers, with human intelligence and a good stealth score

Now I’m not saying you can’t do something more interesting with these monster than has already been done its just they really do how more distinction than i believe you are giving them credit.

Now say an ogre an ettin and a hill giant are almost interchangeable except for their different associated numbers

I think you missed some of the things I said. "Bestiaries often offer some insight on tactics and such", but while that makes for decent encounter fodder, it doesn't tell me anything about their actual place in the world; simple tribal raiders who attack everything on sight, while obviously relevant to adventuring life, are a dime a dozen and frankly pretty boring. If they are to have some larger role, even a mostly hostile one, they need more depth than that. If you look in the spoiler, I realize all the things you say about ogres etc. but simply look for ways to integrate that into a coherent setting.

Even within those tactics, while you're not wrong, I feel that bugbears in particular have a pretty awkward halfway role of being stealthy like goblins yet brutish like orcs yet tactical like hobgoblins, without really getting a clear niche of their own. Hobgoblins admittedly suffer more from under-use than actual lack of personality.

[S@tanicoaldo]

Why go with what everybody does? Goblins are militaristic and tecnological? Why not go with the original tale?

Goblins: Gremlin like pranksters, live in the deep dark regions of forests, sometimes enter in contact with humans, humans see them as mischievous and grotesquely disfigured or gnome-like faries, in most cases, goblins have been classified as constantly annoying little creatures that love malicious pranks. Though they are ugly and dreadful, some are highly skilled with magic and will teach others. Originally, they lived together with humans.

Orcs:
They don't have to be the chaotic evil barbarian race, they can be more original.

I normally don't use standard fantasy races in my games but when I do I try to get away from J. R. R. Tolkien.

Orc coems from Orcus who was a god of the was a god of the underworld, punisher of broken oaths in Italic and Roman mythology. As with Hades, the name of the god was also used for the underworld itself. In the later tradition, he was conflated with Dis Pater.

Because of that I make Orcs a race who lives in the subterranean who take oaths very seriously, he was also a god of riches, minerals and precious gems, so I make my orcs goldsmiths,silversmiths, whitesmiths and jewelers, they are miners who make beautiful artistic works of metal and trade with humans, they seek good food(Since they live beneath the earth they can't grow crops and must feed on mushrooms and other fungi that have terrible tastes), prostitutes(Both male and female), wine, art, horses and donkeys.

That makes them monstruous but human at the same time, they don't have this kind of luxuries but they can buy such things form the surface.

They are fat, ugly and hairy, but also gentle, artistic and clever.

Dispite their bestial apparence they are quite charming and cunning.

So that's how I do orcs, I think it makes them original, closer to the roots and quite unique.

I was partially inspired by this cartoon as a kid:

Giants: Powerful creatures that live in castles in the clouds, able to forge magical artifacts that make even the gods envy. Highly powerful and not really evil per se more like neutral. Some associated with elements of nature can be more destructive and chaotic.

[Mendicant]

Orcs: Don't have them. Half-orcs exist, mechanically (Pathfinder rules) and aesthetically, but are their own thing--a race called the Gu, one of the four kith races. I dumped the "dumb brute" schtick for a set of cultural assumptions and mechanical rules that emphasize restless wanderlust, independence, and agility. Imagine Pecos Bill meets Moana.

Goblins: No hobgoblins. Goblins, (including reskinned kobolds) bugbears, and trolls are manufactured shadow creatures that only make it into the prime Material when they find or are offered a gate into it from their home plane. They don't reproduce, don't die naturally, and heal fast unless injured with silver or burned. (Goblins and bugbears' fast healing is too slow to make a difference in combat w my players. It's more of an issue for NPC's fighting these things off camera.) The only way they die is violence or starvation, and they will happily eat people. As a result they tend to get exterminated once their access point closes, and then fade into legend and scary stories for kids.

Ogres, hill giants and ettins are all variations on the same sort of creature--a devi. (Based on Georgian folktales.) They come from another one of my playable races, the Kaji (also from Georgian folktales; mechanically they're goliaths and aesthetically they look like scaled down oni/ogre magi). They all have blue or red skin and horns, and come from Kaji who undertake certain rituals or make pacts with the fey. These rituals are usually forbidden by the Kaji's elders because Devi tend to lose their minds or become very cruel and violent.

The more elemental giants are either fey or jinn. It's an E6 setting, so a frost giant, say, is a truly mythic creature and wouldn't be a full species.

[The Jack]

I would highly recomend Volo's guide to monsters, I don't care about giants personally, but that book really goes into detail about the societies of goblinoids, orcs and giants.

Hobgoblins see themselves as civilised. Their military forces are disciplined, they strictly adhere to laws, and they live life for conquest. If Hobs take a town, and people surrender/offer a tribute or whatever, they might not be made slaves, though the hobs will administer the town as if it'd become theirs. Hobgoblins are also really polite, and are polite to most others, because they take insults really seriously. When hobgoblins aren't with legions, they'll farm and have normal jobs, though most'd probably prefer slaves to do that for em... preparing for the next great conquest. (also, hobs really excel in recruiting strange things into their armies)

Orcs? They raid because it's practical. They want resources and like violence, but they're not going to murder everything, because that's not good in the long run. Orcs are dumb, and they're not disciplined, but they're not morons. They might lack intelligence but it's still generally within human perameters, and the wisdom isn't that awful. As lifelong warriors, they should have good strategies from all their raiding experience.

The little Goblins? They just care about themselves. They're selfish and want to explot things, but they're not really that driven towards conquest or anything grand.

Bugbears are gorilla guerrillas.

None of these races are really super evil. They're sadistic, sure, but they've got nothing on Gnolls, demons and devils. Straight out, if you see any of these races fighting gnolls, you side with them against the gnolls.


The orcish pantheon's like a family, whilst the goblin pantheon consists of one big scary overlord and the gutted remains of the goblin/hobgoblin specific pantheons which the terrifying overlord decimated and subdued. Both races are scared of their pantheon leaders, but I think the goblinoids have more reason to dissent in private.

[Nifft]

First, I would like to say that I think the world building becomes better if you exclude something. You don't need to include in your setting all different peoples in the MM that fill the "barbaric murdering beatstick" role.

100% agree with this.

The DM's ability to choose what goes into a setting's "monster palette" strongly shapes the flavor & feel of a campaign.


My current setting has goblinoids as tainted Fey, who spring up out of necromantically polluted faerie rings.

Orcs are tainted humanoids (probably former humans but that's not firm yet).

[awa]

i think those racial traits do more then tell you how they fight
ogres live in very small groups 4-7 their not a society their a small family group their big and their mean but their primitive their basically cave men bullies who steal from the smaller races. Their dumb they dont make much on their own wearing "poorly cured hides" and wielding clubs. That tells you a lot about them.

orcs are dumb, and impulsive but they make things and live in larger groups, they have a society. Chaotic and evil inclines them to being raiders or in larger numbers hordes, farming takes planning and hard work. Orc maximum encounter size is 100 warriors +150 non combatants. Light sensitivity means their probably not doing much in the middle of the day.

goblins are small and the mental equal of a man, they are also neutral evil so they have a more organized society, one that has a symbiotic relationship with wargs and wolves. A goblin war band is entirely mounted and a tribe up to 400 warriors and 400 noncombatants will also have dire wolves in its number.
They are cowardly a big difference compared to the previous to entries. The wargs i think are a big deal wargs are sapient with their own language and individually much stronger than goblins. I think that would easily distinguish them from orcs and ogres.

Now i was going to look at hobgoblins and bugbears some more but ive kinda lost interest
the point is even just looking at their srd entries these groups are well distinguished

[johnbragg]

I second those who said "Don't include everything."

My orcs are not born. They were all once human--or elven or dwarvish or goblin. Raiding parties bring captives, and they are made or make each other through a process of brutalization, de-moralization, initiation, intentional torture, casual cruelty, scarring and branding and tattooing. Since Evil-with-a-capital-E is the equivalent of a drug in my campaign, those who survive the process reach the rank or depth of Orcs, with the stat adjustments to go with it.

Goblins are likewise not born. They bud in fungal beds, which makes it fairly easy for their overlords to template them in their likeness.

Ogres and (hill) giants are solitary creatures, too quarrelsome to get along with each other for long and too powerful to really have to. Small family units may be encountered, but if left to themselves these groups will eventually detonate in a violent squabble that sees the weaker members driven off. (These squabbles are usually non-lethal, but not always.)

[Corneel]

For goblinoids (goblins, bugbears, hobgoblins), you can go two ways: separate them or merge them.

Separate them: give each their ecological niche.
- Goblins live on the forest/steppe border zone with their wargs, attacking both the nomads of the steppes and the agricultural societies that live in the cleared areas in the forest zone. Like in between Slavs and Tatars.
- Hobgoblins live in hill fortresses overlooking and raiding the city societies in the low-lying floodplains of rivers traversing the deserts in the subtropics (think the uplands surrounding Mesopotamia).
- Bugbears are mountain dwellers, dwelling in small isolated communities, living a harsh life of hunting, a little goat herding and a bit of raiding of the caravans that cross the mountain passes.

Merge them (the Birthright way): they're all goblins, but goblins are a highly mutable race and bugbears and hobgoblins are just emanations of this.

[FreddyNoNose]

Oh, don't worry, I'm not going to be overthinking stuff like athachs, ettins and weird bug monster #346. It's just that with the intelligent core races at least I like to at least give it a shot before dismissing them. With the bugbears for instance, I used to consider them pretty useless, but with the goblins' caste-based system, I actually appreciate having them as a third variant besides the main two.

I'd probably like to integrate more folklore-style trolls as yet-another-giant, now that you mention it. I also like the silly D&D ones though.



I think you missed some of the things I said. "Bestiaries often offer some insight on tactics and such", but while that makes for decent encounter fodder, it doesn't tell me anything about their actual place in the world; simple tribal raiders who attack everything on sight, while obviously relevant to adventuring life, are a dime a dozen and frankly pretty boring. If they are to have some larger role, even a mostly hostile one, they need more depth than that. If you look in the spoiler, I realize all the things you say about ogres etc. but simply look for ways to integrate that into a coherent setting.

Even within those tactics, while you're not wrong, I feel that bugbears in particular have a pretty awkward halfway role of being stealthy like goblins yet brutish like orcs yet tactical like hobgoblins, without really getting a clear niche of their own. Hobgoblins admittedly suffer more from under-use than actual lack of personality.

I think your core issue isn't with the monsters but with your identity as a GM. You want to be seen as a sophisticated GM don't you? The usefulness of monsters is limited to the imagination of the GM. We could give you suggestions but how does giving you that fish help you tomorrow?

As a GM, you need to know what you want in your game. How you want it to look and how players will experience. If you don't want beatsticks don't use them. If you want to differentiate them, then create differentiations for them. That means you need do the work of it. There isn't a great way of avoiding work. We could suggest various options and you could pick and choose but that is you avoiding doing the work for yourself.

IMO, tactics is a great way to do this. You shot that down, but what do you suggest? Heraldry? Philosophy? Gods they worship? Does this enhance the players experience? Is that a concern?

Ask yourself, what are the beatsticks motivations?

[PhoenixPhyre]

Merge them (the Birthright way): they're all goblins, but goblins are a highly mutable race and bugbears and hobgoblins are just emanations of this.

Is that where I got the idea? Because that's what I do with mine.

Goblins are the base race (and the ancestors of orcs and humans). They have a semi-hive mind (shared memory) but aren't really conscious of this fact: 1 goblin alone is pretty stupid (a smart, verbal housecat). 50 in a tribe are equivalent to a hobgoblin or a human. This caps out at about human-level intelligence.

Hobgoblins happen when the tribe puts its collective energy into a single individual, giving size, strength, and intelligence. Without the tribe, the hobgoblin gradually reverts to its goblin form. Hobgoblins are neuter and not connected to the tribal shared memory.

Bugbears are created when the tribe (as it grows) needs muscle either for war or as heavy lift. Unlike hobgoblins, these transformations are permanent and the resulting creatures are pretty dumb.

None of these are evil.

Humans are hobgoblins with high elven "DNA" added in long ago (as a fast-breeding army). They retain the mutability of their ancestors--that's why they can breed with just about everybody.

Orcs are hobgoblins crossed with animal "DNA" by wood elves as a fast-breeding army (to oppose the high elves and their human armies). They have anger issues (worse in the males), but aren't evil.

Ogres are degenerate giant-kin, hit especially bad by the breaking of the giant's runic magic before the dawn of civilization. Dwarves are also degenerate giant-kin, but different.

[Tvtyrant]

My preference is for Giants to be supernatural and representative of decline. The first giants were born as godlike beings who are immortal and elemental, and each generation declines in intelligence, size, magical powers and longevity. So Ogres are the latest and weakest batch of giants, declined to living for a few centuries and being barely sentient while storm giants live for 100,000 years and can battle angels and demons.

Orcs I make literal pigmen, creatures created like Owlbears, Gnolls and the like as weapons for casters to use as bodyguards. Orcs are 5' and 400 pounds, dull compared to humans but still cunning and impossibly strong.

Goblins are small, sharp witted creatures who have been displaced by the dwarves, elves and humans. They are one of the original races and have lost their place (mostly to humans).

Humans are the descendants of an Ogre and a Goblin.

[Corneel]

I can't find the original 2e Birthright source, but here is the relevant passage of the 3.5e (fan?) adaptation:

Goblins
The most dominant race of these is the goblins, who control vast stretches of land in Anuire, Rjurik, and Vosgaard. The goblin race consists of several species, including goblins, hobgoblins, and bugbears. These species breed interchangeably and are considered to be members of the same race. They're well organized and cruel, and they conduct raids with terrifying regularity. Though they're cowardly when confronted individually, the goblins present a serious threat when they band together. They are fairly intelligent, and even maintain treaties unless it pleases them to violate the terms. They tend to emulate the cultures nearest them in a twisted interpretation, so Anuirean goblins are known to have some honor (or at least understand the concept of honor), while Vos goblins are far more savage than their kin.

[Mastikator]

Don't make monster races into the beat sticks of the players. Humans are perfectly adequate for that job.

Better to only add a single monster race and focus all your attention to make them so cultured and interesting that when you compare them to humans you start to question who the real monsters are.

[PhoenixPhyre]

Don't make monster races into the beat sticks of the players. Humans are perfectly adequate for that job.

Better to only add a single monster race and focus all your attention to make them so cultured and interesting that when you compare them to humans you start to question who the real monsters are.

I prefer lots of races, but none of them as monster races. Individuals or groups may be good or evil, but races aren't.

[SilverLeaf167]

I think your core issue isn't with the monsters but with your identity as a GM. You want to be seen as a sophisticated GM don't you? The usefulness of monsters is limited to the imagination of the GM. We could give you suggestions but how does giving you that fish help you tomorrow?

As a GM, you need to know what you want in your game. How you want it to look and how players will experience. If you don't want beatsticks don't use them. If you want to differentiate them, then create differentiations for them. That means you need do the work of it. There isn't a great way of avoiding work. We could suggest various options and you could pick and choose but that is you avoiding doing the work for yourself.

IMO, tactics is a great way to do this. You shot that down, but what do you suggest? Heraldry? Philosophy? Gods they worship? Does this enhance the players experience? Is that a concern?

Ask yourself, what are the beatsticks motivations?

Well. Dunno if you meant it that way, but it came off as really hostile, and like you didn't even read the OP properly.

I didn't come here to passively whine about their state in the books, nor to ask for ready-made solutions, nor in order to avoid any work. I already decided to make them more than beatsticks (as you suggest), which is why I was thinking about the subject, formulating my own ideas, and figured that it sounded like a subject the Playground would probably have interesting ideas/experiences on that I could use for inspiration... or just read for entertainment, because I enjoy hearing about other people's worldbuilding. I also didn't "shoot down" tactics, I just said that they alone weren't sufficient in my mind. I'm thinking about the beatsticks' motivations and came to ask others who've done the same.

Is this how you respond to every worldbuilding thread?

Thanks to everyone else for the constructive responses.

Don't make monster races into the beat sticks of the players. Humans are perfectly adequate for that job.

Better to only add a single monster race and focus all your attention to make them so cultured and interesting that when you compare them to humans you start to question who the real monsters are.

I prefer lots of races, but none of them as monster races. Individuals or groups may be good or evil, but races aren't.

Yeah, I'm not planning to treat the goblins etc. as "monster races", but certainly ones with habitats and cultures that tend to put them at odds with others, and hence a reputation that gets exaggerated by those others. There's even a player I know really enjoys the idea of playing as a goblin, but has never had the chance, hence my attempts to give them more context and excuses to be somewhat accepted in society without completely erasing their existing archetypes.

[Lapak]

I agree with those saying that you should feel free to cut down the varieties, and I think you’ve got a perfectly fine base to build on.

That said, becuse more ideas is never a bad thing: my play on goblins and certain fantasy tropes for one setting collapses them into a single species with a shared origin and central tragedy. (A nod here to James Maliszewski, from whom a key element is lifted.)

******

The first great civilization was underground. The Underfolk were advanced beyond the dreams of all surface races: in magic, in technology, in philosophy, in art. But eventually, their pursuit of perfection would sow the seed of their own destruction.

Before men built their first structures of stone, the Underfolk had come far enough to guide their own development and evolution. Magically-influenced births led to the formation of castes destined from their first breath for different types of greatness. Orcs, the warriors strong and brave. Goblins, dexterous master craftsmen and artisans. Wise and charismatic kobolds, who led the Underfolk in sorcery and philosophy.

But for a few of the most talented and daring, this was not enough. The Underfolk still grew old and died. Few could match an Orc for might, but why should there not be one who was as just as doughty while also being crafty and wise? These dreamers set themselves to the task of creating the first artificial Underfolk. Hewn from the stone of the earth with Orcish strength, carved into the semblance of perfection by Goblin hands, made flesh and given the breath of life through the will of a Kobold sorceror-scientist.

So the first Dwarf was born, the first of thousands. Brave, deep-minded, tireless, nearly impossible to kill with hardship or poison or even magic, they were both the servants and the paragons of the Underfolk. But though their creators considered them the beloved children of their dreams and their skill, most of the natural Underfolk saw them differently. They feared to be supplanted yet looked down on them as artificial at the same time, and let no opportunity pass to grind the dwarves down.

It ended as such things must, in rebellion and terror and blood. The Undercivilization fell in utter ruin, and the Goblins and Orcs and Kobolds found themselves driven out by vengeful dwarves axes into the wilderness, where poverty and the struggle to survive soon wore away their memories of the society they had built. All that remains is an undying enmity for the dwarves and the sense that something was stolen away, along with the talents for war or craft or magic that their ancestors bred into their bones. There is no particular hostility between goblin-folk and the other surface races, and they can be found now both in settlements of their own and living in human communities. But there are enough tribes, towns and even nations of goblin-folk who have gone to war against the dwarves or attack them on sight that many surface-folk regard all goblins, orcs, and kobolds with suspicion.

Among the dwarves, few of them chose to preserve this history. The heroism of rising above their oppressor/creators was mixed equally with shame and regret. Most new dwarves are taught nothing of this; their only legacy is the process of creating more dwarves from the stone, which has become the driving force of dwarfish industry. It is so costly, difficult, and time-consuming to reproduce that most are lucky to accomplish it more than once or twice a century.

[Kaptin Keen]

I order 'monsters' by IQ. If intelligent, it's hugely unlikely they're dirty savages living in caves.

In other words, goblins and kobolds and so on generally have workable societies. In general, I go for one of two approaches: Either they're clever enough to trick the larger brutes (mainly orcs) into doing their bidding, or they're organized enough to force them. The nature of those workable societies is open for interpretation. No reason there couldn't be an evil goblin democracy, where the General Assembly votes on which human settlement to raid and plunder next. Single-party, evil communist goblin utopia.

Sucks to be the orcs - or any other low IQ race, frankly.

Giants pose another problem: They're simply too big. Far as I can see, a tribe of huge humans would need enomous tracts of land to feed themselves - and that's even assuming farming and animal husbandry. If they're hunter/gatherers, it's even worse. So I also consider giants to be like dragons in that respect - solitary creatures, doing their own thing on distant mountaintops, or whatever. And it will generally cause quite a bit of a stir when a giant decides to cross the lands to look for a mate, or ... trade a barrel of beer for a side of meat.

[SilverLeaf167]

Giants pose another problem: They're simply too big. Far as I can see, a tribe of huge humans would need enomous tracts of land to feed themselves - and that's even assuming farming and animal husbandry. If they're hunter/gatherers, it's even worse. So I also consider giants to be like dragons in that respect - solitary creatures, doing their own thing on distant mountaintops, or whatever. And it will generally cause quite a bit of a stir when a giant decides to cross the lands to look for a mate, or ... trade a barrel of beer for a side of meat.

Gotta agree with this one. Call it arbitrary skepticism or whatever, but I just have trouble imagining giants as coherent communities, or at least not large ones (heh). I mean, I guess economic issues probably shouldn't have a higher priority than the rule of cool, and the apparent impossibility of giant society could in theory add a sense of wonder to it, but for whatever reason giants make more sense/appeal to me more as relatively solitary creatures. I also tend to start over-rationalizing creatures once I try to build communities out of them, so it's a bit easier for me to make giants eccentric and weird this way.

Well, there's also the fact that a party needs to be very high-level before you can actually throw a big group of giants at them instead of making up excuses to only face lone stragglers...

[PhoenixPhyre]

Looking at the default fluff for the three groups, I see differences in the following areas:

Goblins
Group size: swarm/horde
Life-style: Locust swarm. Move in, steal/destroy/eat everything until its gone, move on.
Aggression: Cowardly. Will run instead of fighting unless they have the clear upper hand.

Orcs
Group size: Tribe. Smaller than the goblin hordes, more infighting as well.
Life-style: Raiders. They don't conquer as much as raid and loot, with some farming or hunter/gatherer behavior back home.
Aggression: Super aggressive. Will attack anyone, anytime, and rarely run.

Giants
Group size: Family groups at biggest (except in rare cases, and then the groups are still small).
Life-style: Nomadic, with the bigger ones sedentary and pastoral.
Aggression: Low but not cowardly. Even ogres can be reasoned with or tricked/bribed (unlike orcs, mostly). The smarter giants also tend to be proud and unwilling to bend to others.

They seem very different in social structure to me, just from the default. Orcs raid in war-bands and bring the loot home (or do it for the sake of the fun/blood). Goblins swarm and migrate as they deplete old territories, or are pastoral herders, but rarely just make spoiling raids. A goblin warband isn't a threat--a goblin horde is. Giants don't have enough organization to raid--they're much more aloof and aggressive, but rarely met in groups bigger than 2 or 3 at a time.

[SilverLeaf167]

Looking at the default fluff for the three groups, I see differences in the following areas:

-snip-

Hmm, good notes. When you add other types of goblin to the mix, I get the idea that perhaps "lesser" goblins have a natural tendency for this unorganized swarm behavior you describe, but the addition of the less common hobgoblins can potentially whip them up into a much more confident offensive force. Bugbears, meanwhile, are relatively sedentary people gathering, hunting and raiding near their own territory, until hobgoblins arrive to put their strength to practical use. The hobgoblins themselves can live as ruthlessly effective and calculating raiders, but feel pretty limited without anyone to boss around.

Basically, all the different goblinoids can and do function as separate groups, but hobgoblins are the ones with the potential to bind the groups together into an effective army, like what happened with the empire they founded.

[The Jack]

A fun idea for you, if you like a bit of social comentary;

Use the idea of "monster races" such as Hobgoblins, goblins, orcs and so on to dehumanize people. When the brits took Australia, the aboriginals were considered animals, do the same and have humans/dwarves/elves/hobbits and so on consider Goblinoids, orcs and so on as monsters, thus justifying their inhumane treatments of such races. The act of killing, stealing, rape, genocide, forced resettlement, eugenics, experimentation... they're not so bad when you consider the victim subhuman and thus unworthy of decency. When you describe savage orcs or fierce goblins, the players will all board that train of atrocity all to easily, and you can throw down some harsh lessons if you do this right.

[Tvtyrant]

A fun idea for you, if you like a bit of social comentary;

Because who doesn't love having heavy handed morals applied to them?

I would advise not doing that without talking to your players about it first, for the same reason I wouldn't have the wizard be burned at the stake by pilgrims or a female character forcibly married off.

[halfeye]

What goblins are depends on which book you read, sometimes an author sticks with one description through several books, but sometimes not.

Then again there are the brothers Grimm, who didn't mainly write their own stories but collected folk tales, so each story probably had a different idea of fairies, if fairies existed at all in a particular story.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brothers_Grimm

Then there were the norse, some of whose tales were probably collected by the Grimms.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norse_mythology

From Norway, these:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norwegian_Folktales

This is apparently a synopsis (i.e. SPOILERS) of one of their most famous:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Blue_Belt

I read it in English as a child (I don't think I read exactly the same version, but maybe I forgot). Trolls are the main fey in that one.

[Nifft]

Because who doesn't love having heavy handed morals applied to them?

I would advise not doing that without talking to your players about it first, for the same reason I wouldn't have the wizard be burned at the stake by pilgrims or a female character forcibly married off.

This is a good point.

The DM's social commentary shouldn't impede the player's entertaining power fantasy.

In literature, there's no conflict, because there's no separation between the author of the setting and the author of the character.

But in a game, there is a very important separation -- and if your social commentary forces the PC into a role that the player didn't want to experience, you're doing something wrong.

[Cosi]

Giants are the easiest to differentiate. They're huge, and while that sounds kind of stupid it's probably enough. The fact that when you fight Giants you do it in a castle where everything is twice its normal size at least is probably enough to make Giants stand out in people's minds even if you don't put a huge amount of thought into Giant history or Giant philosophy. This is especially true if Giants live on clouds or something.

I'm not even sure you need to differentiate Orcs and Goblins to be honest. In Tolkien's stories the terms are used largely interchangeably.

Because who doesn't love having heavy handed morals applied to them?

I would advise not doing that without talking to your players about it first, for the same reason I wouldn't have the wizard be burned at the stake by pilgrims or a female character forcibly married off.

I mean, it's not like the established alternative (they are all inherently evil, you can kill them with impunity) is somehow neutral. Having the culture of goblins explicitly be a Culture of Evil and the goblins themselves be Creatures of Evil you can murder with impunity is also a heavy-handed moral, it just happens to be the default for fantasy works.

[Tvtyrant]

Having a world where traditionally monstrous races are not is different from playing gotcha and enforcing "harsh lessons" on your players. The latter isn't just condescending, but it assumes a relationship of power between the DM and players that doesn't exist.

Edit: And again, if players want to do it then it is fine. It is the gotcha nature of that idea that is wrong, not the subject matter.