The SHARK HOBGOBLIN

[mmadsen]

Well, I suppose the feats could be trimmed, as desired. However, my rationale for them goes something like the following:

Alertness adds +2 to Listen/Spot
Acrobatic adds +2 to Jump/Tumble
Athletic adds +2 to Swim/Climb

These skill bonuses are simply to not only reflect what many Hobgoblins spend a lot of time doing, but also a natural skill in these activities due to their muscles, coordination, and so on, which are distinctly superior to a Human's, for example.

I think the "problem" here, SHARK, is that you obviously love evocative descriptions, and you naturally move toward Feats with evocative names rather than bland, almost invisible mechanics like levels.

Does a creature with Dex 20 need the Acrobatic Feat to jump and tumble well? No, not at all. (Heck, even a Dex 14 creature shouldn't; it already tumbles at +2.) Does a creature with Str 16 need the Athletic Feat to climb and swim well? No, not at all.

Skill Focus adds +3 to Ride; This seems appropriate for a race that values riding skills, by often putting their young in the saddle starting at the age of five. Thus, 10-15 years of this kind of focused training, to gain +3 in Riding, when they are probably still going to die a swift death anyways, doesn't seem to be overwhelming.

Since Ride is a class skill for Fighters though, a few extra levels in Fighter would handle this quite well -- particularly since you want these Hobgoblins to have lots of hit points and fight well in general. Toughness, Weapon Focus, etc., they're all subsumed by more Fighter levels. Which makes more sense, two or three different Weapon Focus Feats or one level of Fighter?

Side By Side and Team Flanking simply add a modest bonus to Hobgoblins as they engage in mass combat.

And they make some sense for veteran soldiers, especially since you want to emphasize the organized nature of Hobgoblins.

It doesn't seem to me that most of the feats really add a massive edge in combat, and most of the benefits are small enough that their inclusion provides mostly cultural and physiological flavour, that adds an overall small incremental bonus, which is tangible of the race's distinctions, without being overwhelming. The actual number of feats, per se, aren't as important as to what the feats really *DO*, or *EFFECT* The main focus, is does the template accurately reflect the creature's physiology, culture, and upbringing?

I agree with you, and I think the system might work better, at least for your personal style, if it handed out more Feats. Then again, maybe you'd prefer a point-based system where you get to build everything exactly how you like without the constraints (and infrastructure) of classes.

What is the differnce? To me, it would seem that the two 1st level fighters, young as they are, are not the same. They are vastly different, racially, as in their physiology and physical abilities, as well as an entirely different cultural upbringing.

To me, it would seem that the young Hobgoblin is already well beyond 1st level.

Again though, I love your descriptions!

 

[mmadsen]

I thought I might give an alternative stat write-up to match your description, something a bit more mainstream:

Hobgoblin "Dog Soldier"
4th-Level Fighter
Type: Medium Humanoid
Hit Dice: 4d10+4
Initiative: +1 (Dex)
Speed: 20 ft. (Lamellar)
AC: 16 (+1 Dex, +5 Lamellar)
Attacks: Khandar +4 melee; Composite Longbow +5 ranged
Damage: Khandar 1d10 ;Composite Longbow 1d8
Face/Reach: 5 ft. by 5 ft./5 ’ft.
Special Qualities: Darkvision 60 ft.
Saves: Fort +5, Ref+2, Will +1
Abilities: Str 11, Dex 13, Con 13, Int 10, Wis 10, Cha 10
Skills: Hide -3, Listen +2, Move Silently +1, Spot +2, Climb -1, Jump +0, Ride +8, Swim -7
(Racial Bonus of +4 to Move Silently checks, Lamellar armor -4 Armor Check penalty, -7 Swim)
Feats: Alertness, Great Teamwork, Improved Aid, Mounted Combat, Improved Unarmed Strike

Climate/Terrain: Temperate/Warm Land, Underground
Organization:
Gang (4-9)
Band (10-100, plus 50% non-combatants, plus 1 3rd level sergeant per 20 adults and 1 leader of 4th-6th level)
Warband (10-24) or
Tribe (30-300 plus 1 3rd level sergeant per 20 adults, 1 or 2 lieutenants of 4th or 5th level, 1 leader of 6th-8th level, 15-30 Worgs in mountainous/forest areas, or 15-30 Hendar in plains, rolling hills; 2-12 Ogres, or 1-6 Trolls, or 1-3 Wang-Liangs.
Challenge Rating: 4
Treasure: Standard
Alignment: Usually Lawful Evil
Advancement: By Character Class

[Note: I'd like to give Improved Grapple rather than Improved Unarmed Strike -- grappling shouldn't depend on striking -- but the rules don't allow it.]

 

[Axiomatic Unicorn]

SHARK,

First, if you have a fun game and you and your players enjoy it, then cool.

But nothing you stated justifies ignoring the rules, to me.

You have described the feats as being the result of years of training and experience. This concept dhould be captured in the idea of ranks, not feats. Reading your response I am more convinced than ever that you should just say that every adult hobgoblin has gained 3 or 4 levels of fighter by maturity, as a result of his hard life. (as mmadsen has already suggested, though his example should get a couple more feats)

If their muscles and cordination are superior to a human's they should have more bonuses to STR and DEX, which would lead to built in bonuses in Climb, swim, tumble, jump and others. Then you get the same abilities you want, without breaking the rules.

Just because side-by-side and team flanking only add a "modest bonus", it does not follow that every single 1 HD hobgoblin deserves to have them both. Simply state that these are very common feats for hobgoblins to take, and massed groups of them who are all trained to fight using these feats are well known. Giving them to every single hobgoblin not only breaks the rules, but forces a grating homogenity on the race, that makes little sense.

You are also correct that most of the feats are not cross compatible. Most of them will never be used in the 2 to 3 rounds the hobgoblin survives. If you give every hobgoblin weapon focus in the one weapon that hobgoblin is using, they will be just as effective in play as they are now, but will be much closer to staying within the rules. So why not do it?

Also, it is easy to end run the rules in a few places. For example, if you just state that the Khandar is a common weapon for hobgoblins and therefore is a martial weapon for them. But I am not familiar with this weapon's stas. If it is a mechanically superior weapon, that is probably not a good idea. If the weapon requires a feat slot to fairly justify, then it follows that hobgoblins must spend the effort of acquiring the feat. Just because all of his neighbors have also gone to the trouble, does not imply that they should for any reason get it as a free feat. The effort spent mastering this weapon could have gone into something else. "Free Feats" throw this concept away.

Lastly, I would encourage you to seriously re-think the toughness feat. Do you realize that you are actually making the hobgoblins weaker versus PCs? Low level humanoids tend to be cannon fodder. The only chance a single one has to kill a PC is a lucky crit. This chance makes 1 HD MM orcs and hobgoblins a threat to low level parties. Giving the PC fighter and the hobgoblins both this big batch of hit points, takes the hobgoblins biggest combat edge out of play. Also, you have really screwed magi. Spells like magic missile and fireball become far less effective with this, everybody gets 10ish HP extra rule.

 

[SHARK]

Greetings!

Hello my friends! This is great. I really enjoy discussing different approaches and angles to things. I must say that Hong, Axiomatic Unicorn, and Mmadsen, are quite persuasive. MMADSEN, I believe that you understand me reasoning particularly well! My own sense of evocative imagination, in forming the whole "picture" of who and what the Hobgoblins are, is the primary driving force that inspires me to assign particular feats, as opposed to the more "bland" mechanic of "levels." Brilliant insight mmadsen!

I really like improving my design skills, and your thoughts are quite instructive. I trust that you all can see that when comparing the SHARK OGRE, the SHARK ORC, and the SHARK HOBGOBLIN, in looking at the assigned feats, that they are not only different in number, but also not assigned in order to thoughtlessly overpower them.

I can see how reducing some of their feats that my Hobgoblin would still retain their unique identity. Still, I like Toughness!

Hmmm...and the Khandar? The Khandar's description and stats are included in the main body of my Hobgoblin description.

MMADSEN, you and I do seem to think along similar lines in many areas. It's intriguing to be sure!

This is so fun!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

 

[Axiomatic Unicorn]

Hmmm...and the Khandar? The Khandar's description and stats are included in the main body of my Hobgoblin description.

Sorry, I just missed that. Being as it is a bastard sword, I would assume that all hobgoblins know how to use it as a martial weapon, and that the majority learn to use it one-handed, requiring the expenditure of a feat.

 

[SHARK]

Greetings!

Hey Axiomatic! I wish I could draw the Khandar and show it to you! I hope my description of it is evocative, and gives you a sense for what it is like!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

 

[mmadsen]

The Khandar (or Khanda) is the straight Indian sword, in contrast to the much more famous Tulwar (or Shamshir/Scimitar). Although the blade isn't curved, per se, it does widen near the end before coming back to a point; it's weighted a bit toward the point, like a Falchion (but straight, not curved).

 

[SHARK]

Greetings!

Quite right, mmadsen. If I recall from my notes correctly, taken from the Oriental Adventures book, *Khandar* was the name for an Indian sword that was equated with the game stats of the *Bastard Sword.* I noticed also that the Katana does a d10 damage, and also looked cool, so I thought that the Hobgoblins might adopt the standard Khandar, with some design variation introduced. I think it works pretty well. I am quite proud of my Hobgoblin. They now have, I believe, a very distinctive flavour, and they are *generic* enough, that you, my friend, and other DM's can embrace them in your own campaign with but little adjustment.

I'm pleased that I manage to cover so many different nuances and aspects of Hobgoblin society, that whether you are designing a Hobgoblin recon patrol, or wanting a player-character that stands out, all the tools and details are provided to inspire you.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

 

[sword-dancer]

Hello SHARk
do you have ICE Underground Races?

 

[mmadsen]

MMADSEN, I believe that you understand me reasoning particularly well! My own sense of evocative imagination, in forming the whole "picture" of who and what the Hobgoblins are, is the primary driving force that inspires me to assign particular feats, as opposed to the more "bland" mechanic of "levels." Brilliant insight mmadsen!

Hehe. Thanks, SHARK.

This has got me thinking though. Would people enjoy the game system more if it handed out more Feats? I think they would. Feats are certainly more interesting than extra hit points.

MMADSEN, you and I do seem to think along similar lines in many areas. It's intriguing to be sure!

And where we differ, well, I'll just have to set you straight.