Hobgoblin Fluff

[Irda Ranger]

From the 4e News Page:

Hobgoblins have a history of breeding beasts as guards and for battle. Among the few creatures hobgoblins have successfully bent to this purpose remain those still a work in progress. Like hairy-legged, poison-spewing arachnids that must be caged lest they begin snacking on their masters. A word to the wise: If you invade a hobgoblin warren and see a few defenders break for the iron cage rattling in the back room, consider trying to stop them before they open it.

I'm not going to get too upset by this (I'm still riding on the high from the Elf fluff), but I have to say: Do not want. Will not use.

Hobs have always been the "Roman legions" of the goblin world to me, and their regimented existence doesn't jive (for me) with the messy breeding and feeding of strange things. There's also no story precedent for it. It would seem to be a better fit for regular goblins who are physically weaker (they want the beasts to fight for them) and have a history of breeding and riding Worgs.

As long as this beast-thing isn't baked into the rules though, I don't care that much. It's just something I'll ignore.

 

[HeinorNY]

Something tells me hobgoblins will be on the "leader" role.
I can see hobgoblins commanding some ranks of goblins or kobolds or any kind of minios in encounters, like enforcing taskmasters.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Shrug. Seems fine to me -- if goblins have their wargs and spider eaters, why shouldn't hobgoblins have something? IMO most races should have their own kinds of pets, working animals, guard beasts, etc. The Romans used geese, after all.

I wonder if hobgoblin fluff tastes like marshmallow fluff?

 

[Ruin Explorer]

From the 4e News Page:

I'm not going to get too upset by this (I'm still riding on the high from the Elf fluff), but I have to say: Do not want. Will not use.

Hobs have always been the "Roman legions" of the goblin world to me, and their regimented existence doesn't jive (for me) with the messy breeding and feeding of strange things. There's also no story precedent for it. It would seem to be a better fit for regular goblins who are physically weaker (they want the beasts to fight for them) and have a history of breeding and riding Worgs.

As long as this beast-thing isn't baked into the rules though, I don't care that much. It's just something I'll ignore.

Honestly, whilst I like most 4E stuff, yeah, I don't like this. If we're talking Hobgoblins, I want to hear about how they form a shield wall, or have abilities based on their great discipline, etc., not spidery-nonsense.

It's deeply out-of-character for them, and even more wierdly, very in-character for certain other races (Goblin spiderbreeders/riders have been around since the 1980s in various sources), so why attach it to Hobgoblins? So long as Hobgoblins also have more interesting and "skill/discipline"-oriented abilities, it's fine, but if they main Hobgoblin deal is "breeding animals", then jeeeeez...

 

[Rechan]

I'm neutral on this. This easily co-exists with current hobgobbo fluff. These monsters might function as biological siege engines, artillery, or cavalry.

Even so, I think I'm going to move this fluff into the Gnoll territory. Orcs have their savagery, Hobs got their military training, goblins and kobolds each have their version of sneakiness, hit-and-run tactics and clever trapsmithing, lizardfolk have their "look at my MM entry, it says NEUTRAL" schtick, Trogs stink. Gnolls need something, and this seems pretty 'messy' and more their style.

Sidenote: Too many damn humanoids.

 

[Wormwood]

Sidenote: Too many damn humanoids.

Oh laws yes.

 

[FourthBear]

I wonder if this is meant to bring goblins and hobgoblins closer in union. As others have noted, goblins have already been noted for breeding and keeping worgs, spiders and such. Perhaps the hook for goblins and hobgoblins will revolve around how the two races are intertwined in their societies and habits.

 

[Irda Ranger]

I wonder if this is meant to bring goblins and hobgoblins closer in union. As others have noted, goblins have already been noted for breeding and keeping worgs, spiders and such. Perhaps the hook for goblins and hobgoblins will revolve around how the two races are intertwined in their societies and habits.

That would suck. It's hard enough telling them apart merely because of the name. Making them more interchangeable would erase any differences. You might as well delete the "hob" and just have one race of goblins.

Re: Too Many Humanoids

It's much less of a problem if you introduce a "regional" area for certain monsters. "Here there be Gnolls. Over there be Goblins." Keeping them in their proper habitats reduces the mental discomfort from having so many creatures. You don't see them all at once.

 

[Zogmo]

Hobs have always been the "Roman legions" of the goblin world to me, and their regimented existence doesn't jive (for me) with the messy breeding and feeding of strange things.

In my campaign world this is exactly how the the hobgoblins are. Roman legion with this as a part of their overall economy being creature breeders and trainers. They use these beasts for siege, battering riding, transport (above and below ground) and general commerce.

They are so disciplined that they demand it of their beasts and creatures in their homeland to obey the same outlook.

So, business as usual.

 

[mhacdebhandia]

People will complain about anything.

I don't see where "hobgoblins experiment with breeding servitor creatures, not always with the greatest of success" precludes "hobgoblin warriors are disciplined soldiers".

Can you show me where that's found in what Bruce wrote?