Were the Goblins depicted how you expected?

[Zehm]

When I think of goblins, I think of them as being little savage creatures, kind of like Mephits or Imps. They can talk to a degree, although they aren't really creatures that humans can converse with. They use primitive weapons and can be cunning, showing a degree of intelligence, but it's not really a higher intellect. And culturally, they are a tribal pack which can be dominated and directed by greater creatures like ogres or something like that.

However the Goblins in this game seem basically equal to humans. Cruder maybe, but basically people. Instead of them being goblin with sharp stick, or goblin with slingshot, they seem to have classes, like goblin ranger, goblin warlock, etc. You can talk to them normally and a lot of them seem reasonable, some are even friendly. I can't see much of a difference between goblins and how bandits would be depicted.

I haven't played DnD for maybe 20 year, so my question is does modern DnD depict goblins like they are in BG3? It seems to bring up some moral issues if they are. Wyll for example will leave your party if you go around murdering people, but he doesn't bat an eye if you slaughter every goblin you see despite them clearly being higher sentient beings. You fight Gnolls in this game and they seem like straight up savage, dangerous creatures with limited intellect. I'd expect goblins to be closer in nature to them, rather than what they are.

[Lord Adorable]

They're your standard-fare Goblins and it shows even when you interact with them.

The only reason they're this organized is because of the influence of the Absolute and even other characters are confused by this development. There is one Goblin in the camp that's unaffected by this and he's a funny little scamp.

That and Goblins have been playable on tabletop for 'quite a while' now.

[AzureTheGamerKobold]

Your perception of Goblins is just--- not correct? do you assume kobolds are the same? because i can assure you by lore kobolds are anything but. Kobolds, Orcs, Ogres, ect these races aren't so different from humans really. They have a unique culture, customs, and way of life. Yes they are brutal, and tribal and sometimes uneducated but that doesn't make them incapable of intelligence or empathy.

Long gone are the days when monsterous races were just there to be canon fodder. Hell alot of these races are playable in 5e after all including goblins.

[everybe2]

Depends on universe.

Harry Potter Goblins where smart.

[Captain Worthy]

Goblins and Orcs have been sapient creatures in DnD for a long time with their own cultures and classes, and have their own religions too. The main conflicts with them come from the religious differences as the opposing gods in DnD tend to wage proxy wars through their followers.

So in the setting it's normal for a good Cleric or Paladin to go commit genocide on a tribe of Goblins because "God says it is okay", even though these are just people from a different culture. 👍 The Goblins would be willing to do the same too of course.

It's just a take on how things used to be in our own world back in the day.

There are still plenty of actual monsters and fantasy creatures out there in the setting that are like you described.

[buttawise]

These goblins are stanky, eat poop, and they kill people without a second thought. I think it's stupid if you kill one unprovoked with a Paladin you break your oath.

[Zero McDol]

I mean, they have intelligence and do actually have emotions, empathy and respect when they want to, but are often caught up in and portrayed as a uncaring bad monster.

Like any intelligent humanoid species in this game's world, it really depends on the who and not the what.


Overall though, I liked them in this game.

[Twyt]

I liked it a lot and it is pretty accurate to the DND lore. Even all the way back in 1st edition they were never really mindless monsters. There are races that take the place of "evil" ones, like gnolls, who literally cannot be anything other than barely sentient beasts because of their hunger.

[GamingWithSilvertail]

Originally posted by Zehm:

When I think of goblins, I think of them as being little savage creatures, kind of like Mephits or Imps. They can talk to a degree, although they aren't really creatures that humans can converse with. They use primitive weapons and can be cunning, showing a degree of intelligence, but it's not really a higher intellect. And culturally, they are a tribal pack which can be dominated and directed by greater creatures like ogres or something like that.

However the Goblins in this game seem basically equal to humans. Cruder maybe, but basically people. Instead of them being goblin with sharp stick, or goblin with slingshot, they seem to have classes, like goblin ranger, goblin warlock, etc. You can talk to them normally and a lot of them seem reasonable, some are even friendly. I can't see much of a difference between goblins and how bandits would be depicted.

I haven't played DnD for maybe 20 year, so my question is does modern DnD depict goblins like they are in BG3? It seems to bring up some moral issues if they are. Wyll for example will leave your party if you go around murdering people, but he doesn't bat an eye if you slaughter every goblin you see despite them clearly being higher sentient beings. You fight Gnolls in this game and they seem like straight up savage, dangerous creatures with limited intellect. I'd expect goblins to be closer in nature to them, rather than what they are.

I think you're confusing with kobolds.

[wtiger27]

Sure. Low life scums.

[Jimmy]

yeah, I think they did a good job with them.

[everybe2]

Originally posted by buttawise:

These goblins are stanky, eat poop, and they kill people without a second thought. I think it's stupid if you kill one unprovoked with a Paladin you break your oath.

Again with this low skill Paladin bullshite.

[Lord Adorable]

Originally posted by Twyt:

I liked it a lot and it is pretty accurate to the DND lore. Even all the way back in 1st edition they were never really mindless monsters. There are races that take the place of "evil" ones, like gnolls, who literally cannot be anything other than barely sentient beasts because of their hunger.

Larian depicted Gnolls very accurately as well simply through the mental exchange between you and the pack leader. The fact that it fights against the tadpole's influence and REALLY wants to eat you despite being told it's not allowed to was great.

Honestly it kind of made me feel bad for the creature. Yeenoghu is a bastard I tell ya.

[wtiger27]

Originally posted by everybe2:

Originally posted by buttawise:

These goblins are stanky, eat poop, and they kill people without a second thought. I think it's stupid if you kill one unprovoked with a Paladin you break your oath.

Again with this low skill Paladin bullshite.

Not if you want to play a Dark side Paladin. :)

[Sterling]

Well, it does seem weird that Wyll and Karlach who are up in arms if you murder people are ok with you killing every single goblin, including non-combatants and kids. The absolute-worshiping goblins in this game are a genocidal force on the offensive, so it's okay if there are no ramifications to kill their fighters or anyone else in self-defense, but the part with kid goblins is a bit off.

[The Fool]

Goblins are chaotic evil for the most part. They still have their own needs - such as inflicting pain or gold - but are easily cowed and controlled by the more powerful.