monsters overly humanized

[Banelord]

i dont care much about game mechanics, i am used to change because i played dnd ever since there was thac0 and the ac was the more negative the better, but something else does bother me.

dnd is in basis sword and sorcery, and there is a clear distinction between animals and monsters. by definition, all monsters are evil.
goblins are monsters.
goblins can barely speak coherently.
yet they are portrayed as some comical and funny beings very similar to good races.

this reminds me of that cat in another Larian RPG, destiny something, when i stopped playing after cat was starting to complain over her marital problems...

another thing that bothers me, is how the game almost berates you when you kill someone that you "shouldnt". my in game companion was supposed to apporve of my actions, but was in fact telling me off, calling me "bloodthirsty" after i attacked a goblin monster in certain temple of selune. another companion on another ocasion was acting similarly after i slew 2 monsters in certain shack that were mating.

if all monsters are evil and they by definition are, and my party is good or neutral, then why this.

somehow not Forgotten realms lore like i know it. bg3 is walking a thin line and just barely remains FR. lets keep the destiny things within destiny and leave fr lore pure.

[skullymex]

The goblins in this game raid, kill, torture, are cruel to animals, they have no regard for other life forms except their own. what more do you want?
"my companion was supposed to approve of my actions". you realize how ridiculous that sounds, right? all your companions have different moral compasses. you'll some disagreeing with you no matter what you do. also they are not good. not a single one of them is aligned good, they are all neutral or evil.
goblins are sentient beings, and that alone might be enough for some to hesitate to kill them instantly.

[lyonesse2]

I have to agree with the OP to some degree.

The goblins seem far too humanized and comical, which to me just feels wrong. Sure, they raid and torture but at the same time don't really feel like the primitive savages they should be.
Also they speak the common too well and sound more like a low-class commoner than I'd expect.

[Gigabyte]

I'm gonna have to agree to some degree that the goblins in this game seem a little to humanized and often feel like there default is to end up as comedic relief.

[Something completely different]

Originally posted by lyonesse2:

I have to agree with the OP to some degree.

The goblins seem far too humanized and comical, which to me just feels wrong. Sure, they raid and torture but at the same time don't really feel like the primitive savages they should be.
Also they speak the common too well and sound more like a low-class commoner than I'd expect.

Goblins have the same intelligence as an average human so there's no reason for them to sound like a savage.
I think you confuse cowardly, backstabbing and treasonous with primitive here.

[your literal mum]

There are so many weird assumptions here I don't even know where to start, but let's just hit the core idea that monsters are, by definition, evil.

No they're not, and that has never been a part of D&D. If I go to D&D Beyond right now and sort by alignment, there are 42 pages of Monsters whose alignment is Good or Neutral. This is not new to 5e: there have always been Good Dragons, there have always been Owlbears and Golems and Oozes.

I mean personally I think "all goblins evil" and the notion of strict alignment at all is lazy and boring writing, but even if we're going to just stick to mechanical D&D you're just wrong.

[Lax]

We also need to take into account that the goblins that we encounter in act 1 are ruled under a very specific cult-like dogma that may not represent their entire race as a whole. For all we know they could be an isolated tribe.

[Banelord]

Originally posted by Something completely different:

Originally posted by lyonesse2:

I have to agree with the OP to some degree.

The goblins seem far too humanized and comical, which to me just feels wrong. Sure, they raid and torture but at the same time don't really feel like the primitive savages they should be.
Also they speak the common too well and sound more like a low-class commoner than I'd expect.

Goblins have the same intelligence as an average human so there's no reason for them to sound like a savage.
I think you confuse cowardly, backstabbing and treasonous with primitive here.

in FR books goblins are cowardly, speak their own guttural language, and evil. they enjoy other people suffering and inflicting pain to others.

here, a certain goblin torturer says " i got no stomach for the torture".

yes goblins are evil, and a good goblin is an exception, just like the drow drizzt and zak were in menzoberanzan.

[dulany67]

The times (and D&D) are a'changin'

[Banelord]

Originally posted by your actual dad:

There are so many weird assumptions here I don't even know where to start, but let's just hit the core idea that monsters are, by definition, evil.

No they're not, and that has never been a part of D&D. If I go to D&D Beyond right now and sort by alignment, there are 42 pages of Monsters whose alignment is Good or Neutral. This is not new to 5e: there have always been Good Dragons, there have always been Owlbears and Golems and Oozes.

I mean personally I think "all goblins evil" and the notion of strict alignment at all is lazy and boring writing, but even if we're going to just stick to mechanical D&D you're just wrong.

in its core and beginnings, dnd was a sword and sorcery thing, where heroes battle and slay monsters with "good" and "innocent" monster not being a concept at all.

in later editions aparently that started to change, due to certain critics about orcs and drow etc, but when we look at larians goblins, it is too distorted and too far astray from the original FR lore, reminding me of Larians destiny series or however its called, which was appaling to me.

[Banelord]

Originally posted by dulany67:

The times (and D&D) are a'changin'

at least i still have tolkien where orcs will always be evil

[Streeja]

We have to acknowledge that a lot of "monsters" are oblivious to alignment concept and are just doing what is in their nature which is not good or evil. A bear, an ooze, a t-rex, shark, they are not evil. They attack because of hunger, protecting their home, etc.

Goblins are sentient and have enough intelligence to be complex. And as pointed out, this tribe could even be more intelligent that the average tribe of goblins. While that seems like liberties Larian is taking, it also makes for a more complex and interesting story.

And we know these are not your average goblins if you look at their hp, attack strategy, and dialogs in game. I am good with this. Slaying and fighting mindless goblins is not nearly as fun in this setting imo.

[Akm]

Originally posted by twotimesfour:

here, a certain goblin torturer says " i got no stomach for the torture".

That's funny though. I think companion wise shadowheart empathizes more with "evil" races. Gale is more difficult to figure out but Wyll definetly appreciates violence. I think there's consistently in their characters, no?

[Chillearth]

Gale is a self-serving, butter you up to get his way, guy.

Shadowheart's objection to you interrupting the lovers in the hut can certainly be viewed as disapproval based in them being so occupied they were oblivious to your party, it was completely unneccesary to first disturb and then fight them. a purely pragmatic objection, rather than a 'good persons' choice.

[your literal mum]

my guy you are not describing sword and sorcery, you are describing bad lit-RPG

[AdahnGorion]

I disagre with your biased view on them, because my own biased view thinks they are suit their original discription pretty well...

But what did you expect? that Goblings could not talk and would just behave like some wild animal´s that rely on impulses?.... In that case I don´t really think you know what a gobling is.