Hobgoblin Fluff

[Cadfan]

I recently ran a campaign based around fighting hobgoblins. Yes, they were sort of roman legion-ish.

They also bred creatures for battle.

See, it turns out that sequentially fighting two hundred hobgoblin legionaires is... boring. So I added some other stuff to spice things up.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Given that the actual Romans were big fans of strange menageries of creatures that they turned loose on humans and other animals in the arena, I find the complaint that this is out of character to be a little strange.

If anything, this seems to intensify the Roman qualities of hobgoblins.

This is precisely the sort of fluff I like: Take what was good about previous versions of the monsters -- if there was any -- and then add complimentary cool stuff that in turn provides new hooks for future adventures.

 

[Rechan]

Keeping them in their proper habitats reduces the mental discomfort from having so many creatures. You don't see them all at once.

It's not just that, so much as that many of them feel pretty interchangeable.

The differences in theme, behavior, and just an encounter in general between Hobgoblins, Kou-toa and Yuan-ti. Those differences are very distinct.

I don't feel it's that way when you compare Gnolls and Orcs. Goblins and Kobolds. Lizardfolk and Trogs.

Each one are very similar. I can give you a twelve page paper on kobold tactics, psychology and nest design. But when I say "How do goblins and kobolds differ in style, behavior and encounters in general", I ... can't think of much, aside from kobolds rely more on traps and goblins use worgs.

You have two creatures filling the same niche/theme.

 

[Mouseferatu]

I can't imagine this particular bit of flavor is a big enough deal to get anyone upset.

So hobgoblins breed creatures for war. Okay. That's nice. It neither contradicts nor lessens any of their previous flavor, and it's not a big enough deal to really imply what direction WotC is taking the hobbos in 4E.

In short... It's barely equivalent to a teaser. It's a nifty little tidbit, nothing more.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Each one are very similar. I can give you a twelve page paper on kobold tactics, psychology and nest design. But when I say "How do goblins and kobolds differ in style, behavior and encounters in general", I ... can't think of much, aside from kobolds rely more on traps and goblins use worgs.

You're comparing, essentially, fighting the Viet Cong in their tunnels beneath the forest to fighting mobile mounted Comanche fighting on horseback.

I think that's a pretty significant difference, myself, especially since the two races' cultures grow out of their combat approaches (or vice-versa).

 

[Rechan]

You're comparing, essentially, fighting the Viet Cong in their tunnels beneath the forest to fighting mobile mounted Apache fighting on horseback.

Except that I always hear about goblins using hit-and-run tactics and sneaks. I always hear "Goblin" and "Scout" paired together, which sounds a lot like Viet Cong in the woods.

 

[JoelF]

I'm okay with Hobgobs breeding beasts, but my beef with this is why SPIDERS? We have drows using spiders, duergar using spiders, ettercaps using spiders, and we need another evil humanoid breeding spiders? Some sort of boar or great cat would have been much cooler. Or ankhegs!

 

[Klaus]

"Upon my signal... unleash hell."

 

[mhacdebhandia]

But why do they look so cuddly, Claudio?

 

[FadedC]

I'm okay with Hobgobs breeding beasts, but my beef with this is why SPIDERS? We have drows using spiders, duergar using spiders, ettercaps using spiders, and we need another evil humanoid breeding spiders? Some sort of boar or great cat would have been much cooler. Or ankhegs!

They only mention spiders as a possible example of a failed/incomplete hobogoblin breeding program. There is nothing in that paragraph to suggest that their use of spiders is a racial preference or anything like that.