Why Goblins Had No Deity

[brian 333]

In many conversations on the forums the question has been raised over the issue of goblins and their religions. I have a theory hypothesis guess that may explain why the gods in all three pantheons rejected goblins:

Nobody needed more enemies.

Fenris created the goblins for a zerg-rush strategy that failed, then abandoned them. By that time, the followers of the other gods were enemies with goblins. Any deity who adopted the goblins would have found himself the enemy of every other race and religion. So the goblins became the hot potato on the floor: nobody wanted to pick them up because they would have gotten burned.

[OvisCaedo]

Or the gods just don't typically try to go in and adopt entire races partway into creation. What would that even entail? A god delivering a booming voice to the goblins, "hey you guys should all worship me!"? How much are they even allowed to speak to mortals outside of their clerics or mortals initiating the conversation through magic?

When Durkon used commune to talk to Thor after the Redcloak negotiation failed (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1232.html), Thor says the gods are locked out of trying to enact major changes once the world is made. I'm not sure if trying to convert a whole species to worshipping you counts as that, or not, since he was asked about making the goblin lands better. But then Durkon's commune spell ran out, and Thor... seemingly just had to give up on continuing their conversation.

I suppose a god could have told their own clerics to go be missionaries to the goblins. And maybe they even did! We don't really know, except that if anything was tried, it didn't work.

[Emberlily]

if you're in a world where there's proof gods exist and you're one of the societies that's been at the bottom of the metaphorical food chain for all of history, I can understand a general societal lack of faith in those gods possibly arising(whether that's rejection or just indifference). there's many such societies in the stickworld and presumably in many of the previous worlds, and not all of them on this one ended up that way, but at least one did, which left an opening for the dark one, which was the catalyst to make this world the Interesting One The Story Is About

this sorta interpretation also puts some agency in the goblinoids' court compared to "the gods actively avoid 'adopting' the goblins (whatever that means) so what choice do they have in the matter" which isn't as interesting to me, but I'm not gonna say that's necessarily evidence. but also I guess you could look at the humans who do not seem to have any sorta patron god and yet are very often religious to some degree. I'm actually not really sure if the majority of peoples in the world have patron gods?

[Anymage]

A large part of what Goblins represent in the comic is how many creatures in RPGs just serve as monsters for the PCs to slay for treasure and XP, without anyone thinking past that. So on one level, since this is self-aware fantasy, gods most likely saw goblins as just another monster for their lower level followers to level up on.

On top of that, gods have finite amounts of power and their own flocks to look after. Small pockets of potential believers are not worth the effort to send a major proselytizing push towards. See the Giggles orcs; Durkon made an effort to share the good word of Thor, but otherwise no religions had made major outreach efforts towards them. So while it's not impossible that another friendly critter might have preached to a small group of goblins or even that there were a few goblin clerics to relevant gods before TDO hit the scene, for the most part they were seen as beneath the effort to bring into the fold. It's kind of jerkish, true. This wouldn't be the first time that even the good stickworld gods had rather sizeable blind spots for what the mortals living on the world were actually gong through.

[Tubercular Ox]

Personally I wonder if Rich saw a problem with the Goblins having a god before the Dark One and closed the door on it without necessarily having an alternate plan in mind.

The counter evidence is when we learn there are Goblins who worship demon princes (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0093.html). This scene comes after Loki and Surtur both appeared on panel, but before the plot really took off. Rich had a chance to pick Loki or Surtur as the god who supports drinking the blood of the innocent, a chance to research a Norse god who was appropriate, and a chance to pick an anonymous evil god for this role, but he passed all those up to pick a demon prince.

The sane solutions are: He didn't think Loki and Surtur were drink-the-blood types, he didn't want to do research, and he didn't want an unnamed evil god in a story that already had two named gods. It would have invited the audience to wonder which evil god it was, whereas all demon princes so far have been anonymous and so don't excite as much interest, allowing the joke to stand on its own.

But that's not what we do here.

What if the takeaway from the demon prince scene is that none of the gods see themselves as drink-the-blood types, but the gods have an interest in Goblins being drink-the-blood types because cardboard villainy makes it easier for adventurers to slay them without worrying about moral consequences? So they created the demon princes to be cardboard villains on their behalf, and assigned them to the cardboard villain races for worship.

This scenario heavily favors Redcloak's version of how the world was created, found in Start of Darkness, but it's an eerie fit. In this version, The Dark One is a civilizing force. He asks the Goblins to eschew the cardboard villainy of the demon princes, unfairly thrust upon them by the gods, and embrace a version of Evil that puts them on the same level as Evil adventurers.

Of course, the priest in the example comic clearly works for Redcloak at some distance, so it's a more complicated relationship than just "eschew," but more complicated relationships are not impossible.

Perhaps, with effort, we could mutate this idea into a version that Thor would be more likely to deliver. I dunno.

[Emberlily]

honestly I just interpreted the demon prince worshiping as a rather minor sect; the head priest seemed. t like a low-level and minor entity in Xykon's forces. goblins aren't a monolith after all and unless we're told something is common among them (not worshiping any gods beforehand, having various levels of religiosity towards the dark one now) I don't see a reason to think seeing a couple of them doing something means it's widespread. there's presumably many small groups of goblins who have their own subcultures

[Tubercular Ox]

It's all my imagination anyways, but I was imagining demon princes being much more popular before The Dark One came out, so my impression of the demon prince priest guy is about the same as yours. Unless I want to say it dramatically and claim that worship of the demon princes has dwindled since the advent of The Dark One.

[Tzardok]

And I interpreted that "big demon prince guy" as The Dark One, just through the lense of a deliberately ignorant teen who "couldn't care less" what his father actually worships.

[KorvinStarmast]

Fenris created the goblins for a zerg-rush strategy that failed, then abandoned them. By that time, the followers of the other gods were enemies with goblins. Any deity who adopted the goblins would have found himself the enemy of every other race and religion. So the goblins became the hot potato on the floor: nobody wanted to pick them up because they would have gotten burned. "You break it, you bought it." That was how the other gods responded to Fenris, when he gave up on the goblins. He made them, they are his to take care of.

My take? You are overthinking this.

[Emberlily]

Fenris creating hobgoblins doesn't imply he was ever going to be their patron deity any more than assuming Monkey is the patron god of all ninjas, I don't think. I suppose you could read Thor's "turns his attention to other things" as implying that, butconsidering there's like somewhere around 50 gods I feel like "you make it, they're all yours" would lead to more infighting and snarl-creating due to massive imbalances that would cause in the gods' food supply

[brian 333]

I think the goblins are in a unique position. Unlike humans, who may very well have been created multiple times by multiple deities, goblins in this world were created specifically by Fenris specifically for one purpose. When he abandoned them, the goblins literally had nothing but the enmity of literally everyone else.

I thought of the 'Dark Demon Prince' as TDO once I learned about him, but I realize that the goblins may well have turned to the fiends for support and only began to worship TDO later. Vestigial fiend worship would still be a part of goblin society, in that case.

In any case, overthinking the issue and connecting random dots is what made me a valuable troubleshooter back in the day. It's what I do for fun.

[danielxcutter]

Also, worshipers can influence a god’s nature, so I assume most focus on expanding their preexisting powerbases rather than assimilating other races.

[Tubercular Ox]

Also, worshipers can influence a god’s nature, so I assume most focus on expanding their preexisting powerbases rather than assimilating other races.

So, alternate version of my theory: The gods needed the Goblins to be drinkers of innocent blood but didn't want that belief corrupting them, so no patronage. The demon prince is the Dark One, but the Dark One is a continuation of everything Goblin, except his words are backed by nuclear weapons divine power.

Except that some gods seem okay with blood drinking, Fenrir (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0999.html), so I think I'm toast.

[Errorname]

My assumption would just be that nobody particularly cared about cleaning up Fenris's rejects, at least this time. They've done this before and always lose interest, it's not even out of the question that in some of those earlier iterations you did see some other gods run with the Goblinoids and nobody really felt like doing that this cycle.

Thor's telling of events paints the Goblins as neglected, an aspect of the worldbuilding that the divine authors just didn't care enough to flesh out. I don't think you need there to be a reason one of the Gods couldn't intervene, it works better if none of them cared to.

[Ionathus]

My assumption would just be that nobody particularly cared about cleaning up Fenris's rejects, at least this time. They've done this before and always lose interest, it's not even out of the question that in some of those earlier iterations you did see some other gods run with the Goblinoids and nobody really felt like doing that this cycle.

Thor's telling of events paints the Goblins as neglected, an aspect of the worldbuilding that the divine authors just didn't care enough to flesh out. I don't think you need there to be a reason one of the Gods couldn't intervene, it works better if none of them cared to.

I agree completely with this assessment.

The gods didn't need a reason to not intervene. Not intervening is the default state. They're gods, they're not required to care about another god's stuff. The question should be: what reasons did they have in favor of intervening on the goblinoids' behalf? And the answer there -- an underachieving race with poor resource distribution and low potential for more Soul Power -- isn't compelling enough for anyone to take a chance on it.

Should some of the Good gods still have done it, because helping the downtrodden/disadvantaged is likely a tenet of several Good gods' portfolios? Yes. But they didn't, because they either didn't really consider it (see Thor's response to Durkon's latest Commune) or because it's on their list of tasks but wayyy down on the priority order.

One underlying theme of the goblins' storyline is how some groups can fall through the cracks, and how different people (both internally like Redcloak and TDO, and externally like Thor, Durkon, and Roy) respond to that neglect, even if it's not "their business." In order to tell that story that way, the goblinoids can't be "worth" adopting in a purely mathematical/strategic way, because then some god would have seen the value and snapped them up. And then they wouldn't be neglected.

Helping the goblins can't be the obviously-optimal move for any of the gods. Because helping neglected people in the real world is rarely ever the obviously-optimal move either. But well-intentioned people do it anyway, for a variety of reasons. Exploring those reasons seems to be one of the points of OOTS.


What if the takeaway from the demon prince scene is that none of the gods see themselves as drink-the-blood types, but the gods have an interest in Goblins being drink-the-blood types because cardboard villainy makes it easier for adventurers to slay them without worrying about moral consequences? So they created the demon princes to be cardboard villains on their behalf, and assigned them to the cardboard villain races for worship.

I know you already acknowledged that this was in the 1st book and therefore continuity/consistency is fuzzy. But I still think you're not following that rule hard enough and are overthinking it.

The goblin priest in that strip worshipped a demon prince because demon princes are very obviously Super Evil. The imagery is much more evocative and a lot less nuanced, which makes the joke hit harder. Evil gods in D&D are, for lack of a better term, more nuanced and more tolerated than demon princes. To make the joke punchier, you'd have to spend energy explaining how evil your evil god is (in case the Drinking Blood thing didn't tip people off), and you might even have to name the evil god and give a short explanation. But demon princes are much more obviously pure evil, no questions. Of course they drink blood, they're demon worshippers! And their kid is rebelling by not drinking blood, because all kids rebel regardless of alignment! Ha ha, move on, end of joke.

This is reminding me of when people thought the Priest of Loki in Greysky City was going to be Hilgya. Rich's response is really insightful on the storytelling process:


I think you're looking at the way I do things backwards.

I didn't have a role for a cleric of Loki, then have to choose whether to use a new unnamed character or go back and use an established one. I had a role for a new unnamed cleric, and then had to pick what god he worshipped. There's really only one god of the Northern (Norse) pantheon appropriate to a church working with a thieves' guild in a crime-dominated city, so it became Loki.

No connection was ever intended with any previous clerics of the same god; in fact, I didn't even think about Hilgya until the strips came out and people started speculating. If I had thought of the connection beforehand, the result would have been that I would have changed what god the new unnamed cleric worshipped (though I have no idea what I would have used instead), not that I would have mentioned or used Hilgya.

The joke called for the Most Evil Thing you could ever worship - so evil that they drink blood out of a freaking chalice. None of the gods that had been established thus far (Thor, Loki, Surtur) fit that closely enough. So there was no reason to use any of them.

[Gnoman]

The gods didn't need a reason to not intervene. Not intervening is the default state. They're gods, they're not required to care about another god's stuff. The question should be: what reasons did they have in favor of intervening on the goblinoids' behalf? And the answer there -- an underachieving race with poor resource distribution and low potential for more Soul Power -- isn't compelling enough for anyone to take a chance on it.

Should some of the Good gods still have done it, because helping the downtrodden/disadvantaged is likely a tenet of several Good gods' portfolios? Yes. But they didn't, because they either didn't really consider it (see Thor's response to Durkon's latest Commune) or because it's on their list of tasks but wayyy down on the priority order.


It is also important to remember that these are small-g gods. They're merely powerful, not omnipotent. Deciding to intervene in the favor of goblins would have to come at the expense of the races they created and (presumably, based on Thor's attitude) care for. It isn't "should I help the goblins? Nah, who cares", so much as "Am I willing to hurt the humans/dwarves/elves, who I like in order to help out the goblins, who I kind of feel sorry for in an abstract kind of way if I happen to think about them at all".

You can argue, and it seems like Durkon and Roy are leaning toward doing so, that the Good answer to this question is "yes, of course you should", but it isn't a no-cost situation where the only reason the Good gods didn't do anything was because they couldn't be bothered.

[Ruck]

I agree completely with this assessment.

The gods didn't need a reason to not intervene. Not intervening is the default state. They're gods, they're not required to care about another god's stuff. The question should be: what reasons did they have in favor of intervening on the goblinoids' behalf? And the answer there -- an underachieving race with poor resource distribution and low potential for more Soul Power -- isn't compelling enough for anyone to take a chance on it.

Should some of the Good gods still have done it, because helping the downtrodden/disadvantaged is likely a tenet of several Good gods' portfolios? Yes. But they didn't, because they either didn't really consider it (see Thor's response to Durkon's latest Commune) or because it's on their list of tasks but wayyy down on the priority order.


It is also important to remember that these are small-g gods. They're merely powerful, not omnipotent. Deciding to intervene in the favor of goblins would have to come at the expense of the races they created and (presumably, based on Thor's attitude) care for. It isn't "should I help the goblins? Nah, who cares", so much as "Am I willing to hurt the humans/dwarves/elves, who I like in order to help out the goblins, who I kind of feel sorry for in an abstract kind of way if I happen to think about them at all".

You can argue, and it seems like Durkon and Roy are leaning toward doing so, that the Good answer to this question is "yes, of course you should", but it isn't a no-cost situation where the only reason the Good gods didn't do anything was because they couldn't be bothered.


Or the gods just don't typically try to go in and adopt entire races partway into creation. What would that even entail? A god delivering a booming voice to the goblins, "hey you guys should all worship me!"? How much are they even allowed to speak to mortals outside of their clerics or mortals initiating the conversation through magic?

When Durkon used commune to talk to Thor after the Redcloak negotiation failed (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1232.html), Thor says the gods are locked out of trying to enact major changes once the world is made. I'm not sure if trying to convert a whole species to worshipping you counts as that, or not, since he was asked about making the goblin lands better. But then Durkon's commune spell ran out, and Thor... seemingly just had to give up on continuing their conversation.

I suppose a god could have told their own clerics to go be missionaries to the goblins. And maybe they even did! We don't really know, except that if anything was tried, it didn't work.

I think this all adds up to more or less the correct answer. The gods are indeed limited in power and scope. It's possible that they just don't have the resources to try to recruit a race of new followers rather than develop their own. And it's definite that one of those limitations is that they can't act directly on the mortal plane (or they're not supposed to) once creation is finished. The best they could do is send clerics, and there's a good chance, given general human-goblinoid relationships, that any missionary expeditions would be met with immediate hostility. And I imagine if word got out that signing up to be cleric of a god meant going on a suicide mission to goblin lands, that god would increasingly have trouble recruiting new clergy in the future.

All in all, it seems to add up to "It's at best very difficult for us to do anything about this if we even wanted to, and what we can do is very limited and may not be effective; indeed, we may just be sending our clerics to get killed for no good reason, which would be counterproductive to our own needs and goals."

[Errorname]

Another angle I'm thinking about is that this is not the first world they've done that had Goblins and the vibe I got from Thor was that at least he was kind of sick of Fenris trying and abandoning the concept at this point. Maybe some of them did try and adopt Goblins in a previous cycle when it was still a fresh concept, but it's a lot of effort to fix something that wasn't your idea anyways. Anyone who would have been up for it has probably gotten sick of it and isn't bothering anymore.

[snowblizz]

You can argue, and it seems like Durkon and Roy are leaning toward doing so, that the Good answer to this question is "yes, of course you should", but it isn't a no-cost situation where the only reason the Good gods didn't do anything was because they couldn't be bothered.

I'm reminded of Durkon trying to recruit the Orcs looking for a god to worship Thor. The end result being they jump at Giggles who are more along their own inclinations. Atoning for evil deeds being a drag and all. Goblins having a choice in the matter they are probably unlikely to find the Good gods appealing.

[Kish]

I would venture that that is more likely to speak to the difference in Charisma between Durkon and Elan than inherent evil in orcs and goblins.

[Tubercular Ox]

Not intervening is the default state.

Sure, but they’re not the only ones with a say in the matter. The gods have a complicated noncompete that boils down to, “Clerics work as written,” and the only way to deprive a cleric of spells, as written, is as punishment for breaking ethos. So if a newly minted goblin cleric prayed for spells, would he get any? If not, is it really neglect at that point?

Now it’s a game of tracking down why there are no goblin clerics. Sure, neglect, lack of missionaries, but divine magic is useful and goblins live close to major civilizations. If there are always people like Roy who don’t care for the gods, then there should be goblins that are willing to give it a shot, and divine magic is its own reward. It should spread.

It doesn’t, because Rich said so, but my mind goes to alternatives. Demon princes, clerics with a cause, adepts, there are so many ways to tap that sweet, sweet divine magic. Why not? Either the gods are intervening, and it’s not neglect, or the goblins are refusing, and that’s awkward for The Dark One.

As a mortal, The Dark One was leading a continent-sized war. Even Cure Minor Wounds can turn a casualty into a soldier, if it’s applied in a timely fashion, and there are plenty of opportunities to be timely on a battlefield. The Dark One was facing civilizations that wring their hands over having only one cleric per squad (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0413.html). That’s what he’s giving up if he denies goblins divine magic.

If goblins are denied, what about mercenaries? Stolen wands and potions? The bolder the decision, the weirder it becomes when he ascends, and, surprise, is now a source of divine magic, and the first thing he has to teach his followers is to do as he says now and not as he did in life (if he was strict about it).

I also worry about the cultural component. Redcloak expressed a desire to serve his community when he was ordained, and Durkon demonstrated it at his ordination. If Cleric is the class for people who want to serve the community, what did the Goblins do before the Dark One? I get that things are more fluid in the real world, but every culture Rich shows us has a god hiding in the corner, especially the island orcs, and in D&D, even the Athar (https://dungeonsdragons.fandom.com/wiki/The_Athar) have clerics.

It’s whack-a-mole. Were the gods neglectful? Then the goblins were stubborn. If the goblins were stubborn, The Dark One has to work against the culture to get his worship accepted. If the goblins weren’t stubborn, then they had divine magic, which is good for the Dark One, but bad for being supported by evidence in the story. Or it’s okay for The Dark One to be working against culture, but then goblin culture is a notable outlier in the story. And around and around.

I pick demon princes, and I’m not even going to pretend this is more than a choice of convenience. Neglectful gods led goblins to worship other entities, they had divine magic and a source of community (such as it was) through their worship, it has more references in the story than adepts or clerics with a cause, and The Dark One has the convenience of displacing their worship without fundamentally altering the goblin culture he himself grew up with.

And it's a shame the evidence is kind of flimsy.

[Ruck]

So if a newly minted goblin cleric prayed for spells, would he get any?

There are non-theistic clerics.

[Ionathus]

I pick demon princes, and I’m not even going to pretend this is more than a choice of convenience. Neglectful gods led goblins to worship other entities, they had divine magic and a source of community (such as it was) through their worship, it has more references in the story than adepts or clerics with a cause, and The Dark One has the convenience of displacing their worship without fundamentally altering the goblin culture he himself grew up with.

And it's a shame the evidence is kind of flimsy.

Sure, whatever floats your boat. You can imagine that most goblin clerics were demon-worshippers before TDO came around if that's how you justify the story. I just don't see a need to invent that justification.

You seem to be basing a lot of your logic on assumptions that aren't present in the story. Like Ruck said, non-theistic clerics like the Cult of the Stone exist. Individual goblins could've easily remained Fenris worshippers, or turned to Loki or Hel or Dragon or Tiamat or whoever. Given how important Clerics and Paladins are in OotS-verse for enacting your will as a god, I find it hard to believe that gods would turn away anybody with the aptitude and willingness for being their cleric.

So the Dark One's armies could've easily had scattered clerics: animistic shaman-types, individual worshippers of Evil or Neutral gods, all pitching in as part of a united army. TDO would see the value of that and wouldn't make them renounce their religion or anything. It's just that the goblinoids as a whole didn't have a unified god until The Dark One ascended. He was the first one to take all of the goblinoids under his wing and actively shepherd them (barring Fenris briefly at the very beginning, before losing interest).

Individuals from a neglected group can be uplifted through chance or external support or even hard work and determination. Their individual success doesn't usually make the wider group any less neglected, though.

[Resileaf]

It could also be that if a good god tried to move in on Fenris' territory by adopting the Goblins, Fenris would have lashed out violently and so nobody wants to take that risk. Even if he doesn't care about goblins anymore, he would hate more if someone tried to gain power over him by stealing his monsters.

[Tzardok]

That implies Fenris caring, and we can be pretty sure he doesn't.

[Ionathus]

That implies Fenris caring, and we can be pretty sure he doesn't.

Though in fairness, "I don't want my toys until somebody else wants them, then I get jealous and mean" is plenty common among toddlers, and everything I've seen of Fenris in OotS implies toddler-level decisionmaking process, so ¯\_:smallwink:_/¯

[brian 333]

Apparently overlooked is how rare goblins with levels can be. I have not seen it spelled out on 3.x rules, but in 1st ed. the number of goblins with levels was listed. So many levels 1s per hundred, so many level 2s per 500, so many levels 3's per 750 normal goblins, and so on. I think a community of 5000 goblins had 1 level 9 in it.

[Doug Lampert]

Apparently overlooked is how rare goblins with levels can be. I have not seen it spelled out on 3.x rules, but in 1st ed. the number of goblins with levels was listed. So many levels 1s per hundred, so many level 2s per 500, so many levels 3's per 750 normal goblins, and so on. I think a community of 5000 goblins had 1 level 9 in it.

All goblins in 3.x have levels, there's a specific rule that humanoids without multiple racial HD all have a class rather than racial HD (carefully does not look at any goblin children or teenagers). It's just that the MM entry is for a level 1 warrior.

There is limited demographic information in the organization line.

Gang (4-9), band (10-100 plus 100% noncombatants plus 1 3rd-level sergeant per 20 adults and 1 leader of 4th-6th level), warband (10-24 with worg mounts), or tribe (40-400 plus 100% noncombatants plus 1 3rd-level sergeant per 20 adults, 1 or 2 lieutenants of 4th or 5th level, 1 leader of 6th-8th level, 10-24 worgs, and 2-4 dire wolves)

So a tribe of an average of 220 adult warriors also has 220 noncombatants and 11 3rd levels, and 2 or 3 of up to level 8. No indication of any classes but warrior (which IIRC some races have specific mention of). If anyone wants to pull out their DMG, you can check the frequency with which NPC adventurers are goblins, but IIRC it's pretty low.

[Ionathus]

I think at least for hobgoblins, there's an exception where Rich said that all adults are trained for combat and expected to participate when they go to war. Sort of like using the Ragnarok god power (https://ageofempires.fandom.com/wiki/Ragnarok) in Age of Mythology.

[brian 333]

All goblins in 3.x have levels, there's a specific rule that humanoids without multiple racial HD all have a class rather than racial HD (carefully does not look at any goblin children or teenagers). It's just that the MM entry is for a level 1 warrior.

There is limited demographic information in the organization line.


So a tribe of an average of 220 adult warriors also has 220 noncombatants and 11 3rd levels, and 2 or 3 of up to level 8. No indication of any classes but warrior (which IIRC some races have specific mention of). If anyone wants to pull out their DMG, you can check the frequency with which NPC adventurers are goblins, but IIRC it's pretty low.

Which supports my thesis that goblins with levels are rare, and increasingly more rare as the level increases.

[Kish]

"All goblins have levels" supports your thesis that goblins with levels are rare?

This ain't 1ed.

[brian 333]

All goblins with more than 1 level, I should have said.

Pedantry is fun!

[Kish]

It's not pedantry, man. The way you put it claims a fundamental difference between "monsters" and "people" that doesn't exist in 3.xed.

"Goblins with more than one level are rare" is true, because "People with more than one level are rare" is true. "How rare goblins with levels can be" is "no rarer than humans with levels, which is to say universal."

[brian 333]

No, humans with more than 1 level are common. 1 in 100 have adventurer levels, but every village is filled with experts, guards, and assorted multilevel character.

A goblin can have multiple levels. Goblin adventurers are rare. Humans are mostly single level, but humans with multiple levels and human adventurers are common.

[Precure]

Remember, those goblins were originally part of Right-Eye's community. Considering his recent distaste regarding The Dark One, he probably invented or introduced a new cult based on demon worship into his new ideal goblin community.

[hroþila]

Remember, those goblins were originally part of Right-Eye's community. Considering his recent distaste regarding The Dark One, he probably invented or introduced a new cult based on demon worship into his new ideal goblin community.
.... What?
What makes you think post-DO Right-Eye would turn to a demon?

Anyway. If anything, the little evidence we do have (namely, Kayannara's theological interests) suggests the folks in Right-Eye's village (which by the way, we have no reason to believe was started by him) worshipped the Dark One too.

[Kish]

Yeah, big "wut?" there.

"I think Redcloak's nonevil brother, being disillusioned with his evil god, introduced demon worship to the goblins who were led by Redcloak!" is the kind of hot take I wasn't prepared to encounter this ever.

[Precure]

Technically, Kayannara isn't from that village, and she sounds more like critical of The Dark One's teachings to me, considering her concerns with it.

EDIT: Right-Eye disillusioned with Xykon and The Dark One because he think they don't care about goblin welfare, not because of their alignments.

[Kish]

Because "petty and selfish" are alignment-agnostic traits?

[Precure]

In this case, yes.

[Blue Dragon]

By "goblins" you mean "goblins" or goblinoids? I ask because Beastmistress Oona says that The Dark One is "no big whoop". This could imply that bugbears worship other deities - maybe even Fenrir.

[KorvinStarmast]

Apparently overlooked is how rare goblins with levels can be. I have not seen it spelled out on 3.x rules, but in 1st ed. the number of goblins with levels was listed. So many levels 1s per hundred, so many level 2s per 500, so many levels 3's per 750 normal goblins, and so on. I think a community of 5000 goblins had 1 level 9 in it. And I'll remind you that in the 1e MM each of the Men sub sets (bandits, pilgrims, etc) had similar break downs of x leveled characters per hundred.
And as others have noted, this story is based on 3.x not 1e AD&D.

Which supports my thesis that goblins with levels are rare, and increasingly more rare as the level increases. Which is also true with humans in the edition you refer to.

I ask because Beastmistress Oona says that The Dark One is "no big whoop". This could imply that bugbears worship other deities - maybe even Fenrir. I had not considered how many other deities Oona is, or is not, impressed with. But that's not a bad take.

[Metastachydium]

By "goblins" you mean "goblins" or goblinoids? I ask because Beastmistress Oona says that The Dark One is "no big whoop". This could imply that bugbears worship other deities - maybe even Fenrir.


I had not considered how many other deities Oona is, or is not, impressed with. But that's not a bad take.

I don't think so. She says "nice for weddings and funerals", otherwise "no big whoop" (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1038.html). Big Purple is basically a god of war and radical politics. If he's their best pick for weddings, I suspect they don't have too many deities to pick from. In fact, factoring in the earlier comment about how much respect and patience Bugbear clergy gets, I've always took that to mean 'Bugbears are not particularly religious', rather than 'they have a more complex religion than other goblinoids'.

[KorvinStarmast]

I don't think so. She says "nice for weddings and funerals", otherwise "no big whoop" (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1038.html). Big Purple is basically a god of war and radical politics. If he's their best pick for weddings, I suspect they don't have too many deities to pick from. In fact, factoring in the earlier comment about how much respect and patience Bugbear clergy gets, I've always took that to mean 'Bugbears are not particularly religious', rather than 'they have a more complex religion than other goblinoids'. I am sure that Rich will devote numerous strips to this marginally interesting unknown thing based on a remark in a strip.

[Ionathus]

Yeah, I think bugbears worship the Dark One but, like, culturally. They're not terribly religious, but when they do have a religious function in their society, they pick TDO. No other gods are involved. They have a god already. You want multiple gods? Pfft, tryhard :smalltongue:

Now I'm kind of curious about the bugbear clergy. Are they all like Redcloak, very principled and religious clerics of TDO who are upset that their people don't embrace his warmongering teachings? Or are they also pragmatic slackers with low ambition like Oona and the other bugbears, and they see their relationship with TDO differently as a result?

[Crusher]

Goblin adventurers are rare.

Which is sort of weird if you think about it. Given goblins' violent, conflict and instability-filled lives, you'd think they'd have a much higher % of adventurers than the "civilized" humanoid races. Which are less violent and conflict-filled because "civilized". More opportunities for goblin shenanigans.

Its either a PR thing (goblins are evil only good adventurers count) or the gods really did set the goblins up to fail.

Edit-
Now I'm kind of curious about the bugbear clergy. Are they all like Redcloak, very principled and religious clerics of TDO who are upset that their people don't embrace his warmongering teachings? Or are they also pragmatic slackers with low ambition like Oona and the other bugbears, and they see their relationship with TDO differently as a result?

I'd bet heavily that:

A) We'll probably never find out in-strip, but

B) If someone asked The Giant, he'd answer that it varies enormously from village to village and cleric to cleric and you can't really make a blanket statement about how Bugbears view religion as a species.

[Tzardok]

When a goblin goes out to kill things and take their stuff, he's called a raider or a bandit. :smalltongue:

On the other hand, humans also have bandits, which implies that there is a difference between adventuring and going out to kill things and take their stuff...

[brian 333]

Which is sort of weird if you think about it. Given goblins' violent, conflict and instability-filled lives, you'd think they'd have a much higher % of adventurers than the "civilized" humanoid races. Which are less violent and conflict-filled because "civilized". More opportunities for goblin shenanigans.

Its either a PR thing (goblins are evil only good adventurers count) or the gods really did set the goblins up to fail.

Or it could be that Usually Lawful Evil alignment. Like wolves, lions, hyenas, orcas, and many other pack hunters, goblins may simply crave the company and social hierarchy of their own kind, and therefore would be disinterested, on average, in joining multi-race adventuring parties that take them far from familiar territories and potential mates.

As in nature, exceptions would exist. Lobo wolves often travel great distances alone, but come winter, when big game is on the menu, the packs come together.

[Tzardok]

Goblins in 3.5 are Usually Neutral Evil.

[Kish]

I don't see why that part would matter. A group of adventurers doesn't need to be mixed-race.

But there are underlying setting issues, whether Rich chooses to address them other than in fourth-wall-breaking jokes or not. A Chaotic Evil halfling puts a note on a tavern door saying "kobold menace threatens nearby halfling," and 20 adventurers who can't logically have seen the note smash the kobold. If there are groups of goblin adventurers...humans are still going to call them "bandit gangs," and the setting itself may push them into ambushing travelers or the like.

[hroþila]

Lobo wolves
What kind of Mojo Dojo Casa House **** is this

[brian 333]

What kind of Mojo Dojo Casa House **** is this

Not understanding the question.

Lobo wolves are a subspecies of grey wolf which thrive in the deserts of Northern Mexico and Southwestern U.S.A. They would gather into packs to hunt buffalo, but spread out in the summer to survive on more limited small game. A wolf by itself was called 'lobo' even if it was not of the particular subspecies of that name.

Unfortunately, bison were replaced by cattle, and ranchers virtually exterminated the lobo breed because they don't like wolves eating their livestock.

[Precure]

Lobo wolves are a subspecies of grey wolf which thrive in the deserts of Northern Mexico and Southwestern U.S.A.

I think some of them even active on this forum.

[Metastachydium]

When a goblin goes out to kill things and take their stuff, he's called a raider or a bandit. :smalltongue:

On the other hand, humans also have bandits, which implies that there is a difference between adventuring and going out to kill things and take their stuff...

Bandits are territorial in that they stick to a "hunting ground" and they like to punch down for low effort quick profit, whereas adventurers are demented hobos always on the move looking for level-appropriate challenges?


Lobo wolves are a subspecies of grey wolf which thrive in the deserts of Northern Mexico and Southwestern U.S.A. They would gather into packs to hunt buffalo, but spread out in the summer to survive on more limited small game. A wolf by itself was called 'lobo' even if it was not of the particular subspecies of that name.

Unfortunately, bison were replaced by cattle, and ranchers virtually exterminated the lobo breed because they don't like wolves eating their livestock.

So… Go back in time and give the wolves guns?

[KorvinStarmast]

Go back in time and give the wolves guns? And opposable thumbs.

[Metastachydium]

And opposable thumbs.

…
We're gonna need a bigger time machine.

[Precure]

Bandits and adventurers are like pirates and privateers. The distinction is their target.

[brian 333]

So… Go back in time and give the wolves guns?


And opposable thumbs.


…
We're gonna need a bigger time machine.

This is why juvenile fantasy/romance is a bad idea. It gives people ideas!

Also, I'm certain the posters I cited above have outlined the plot of such a novel. However, rather than romanticize North America's most successful hunter of large game, one should consider the vicious nature of this eater of herbivores. Without the browsers and grazers, plants would grow unchecked in all directions!

[Tzardok]

Cue Metastychidium going "And what would be wrong with that?" in three... two... one... :smalltongue:

[Metastachydium]

No, seriously, what would be the problem with that? (Sorry about missing my cue; planties m-o-v-e s-l-o-w.)

[KorvinStarmast]

... North America's most successful hunter of large game, one should consider the vicious nature of this eater of herbivores. Without the browsers and grazers, plants would grow unchecked in all directions!
Yes, the humans of that region were hungry and effective. (Didn't the pre Columbian humans hunt the megafauna to extinction?)

[brian 333]

Yes, the humans of that region were hungry and effective. (Didn't the pre Columbian humans hunt the megafauna to extinction?)

Common theory, but there was a severe global warming event which eliminated the terrain to which such megafauna had adapted in a timespan far shorter than evolutionary adaptation could compensate. Mastodons, giant sloths, terror birds, and cave bears all died together, in spite of the fact that two on the list were not the prey of humans.

But primitive humans and almost all predators under 100 kilos thrived in their absence.

[No good @ names]

You are overthinking this.

On this forum?! Inconceivable!

[spectralphoenix]

My impression was that most of the deific lack of support happened at creation. In modern times, the gods largely influence the world through clerics, and a goblin could become a cleric of Fenrir (or anyone else) they just tend not to because they don't feel very grateful towards the deities in the first place. I see creation going something like

(Round 1)
Thor: Ok, I'm creating dwarves. Short-but-Medium-size, hardy, penalty to charisma.
Fenrir: HA! I create goblins! They breed fast and come in swarms, and this time they have no size penalties!

(Round 2)
Thor: The dwarven homelands contain abundant mithral and other ores, making mining an important part of dwarven culture.
Fenrir: Um, the goblin homelands has, like, a volcano! An awesome one that erupts all the time!

(Round 5)
Thor: ...and nutritious fungi grow in the caverns of the North, providing a reliable food source even underground.
Fenrir: Eh, screw it, I'm creating a hydra with no limit on the heads.

And once creation was finished, the gods' hands were tied by the rules that prevent them from forming new Snarls or kicking over all the sand castles (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1146.html). So there's probably a case that if the gods were more mature and cohesive as a whole they could have prevented the plight of the goblins, but Thor himself had little direct ability to improve their lot.

[KorvinStarmast]

My impression was that most of the deific lack of support happened at creation. In modern times, the gods largely influence the world through clerics, and a goblin could become a cleric of Fenrir (or anyone else) they just tend not to because they don't feel very grateful towards the deities in the first place. I see creation going something like

(Round 1)
Thor: Ok, I'm creating dwarves. Short-but-Medium-size, hardy, penalty to charisma.
Fenrir: HA! I create goblins! They breed fast and come in swarms, and this time they have no size penalties!

(Round 2)
Thor: The dwarven homelands contain abundant mithral and other ores, making mining an important part of dwarven culture.
Fenrir: Um, the goblin homelands has, like, a volcano! An awesome one that erupts all the time!

(Round 5)
Thor: ...and nutritious fungi grow in the caverns of the North, providing a reliable food source even underground.
Fenrir: Eh, screw it, I'm creating a hydra with no limit on the heads.

And once creation was finished, the gods' hands were tied by the rules that prevent them from forming new Snarls or kicking over all the sand castles (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1146.html). So there's probably a case that if the gods were more mature and cohesive as a whole they could have prevented the plight of the goblins, but Thor himself had little direct ability to improve their lot. The gods may suffer from creation fatigue. They are on their millionth, or their billionth, world at this point.
One should not be surprised at Fenrir's approach.

[Malfarian]

There was a pantheon eliminated by the Snarl right? So maybe the goblin god was among them?

[KorvinStarmast]

There was a pantheon eliminated by the Snarl right? So maybe the goblin god was among them? Maybe one was kindly disposed towards goblins, given the green bit {at the first world's creation}, but per Thor's exposition, Fenrir was the goblinoids' creator for this world. (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1232.html)

And now, the whole Eastern Pantheon and the goblins join together to sing another chorus of "It's Not Easty Being Green"
{EDIT: that was a typo, Easty, but I just now decided that it fits :smallbiggrin: }

[Tzardok]

The eradication of the Eastern Pantheon predates the creation of the current world and with it Fenris making the goblins. I'd be really suprised if any living goblin ever heard of the Eastern Gods's existence, not to mention worshipped them.

[Ionathus]

The gods may suffer from creation fatigue. They are on their millionth, or their billionth, world at this point.
One should not be surprised at Fenrir's approach.

That does make sense.

On the other hand, the gods' mental abilities are beyond mortal comprehension -- Thor can count the nigh-uncountable for example (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots1140.html) -- so the idea of the gods getting "fatigued" might not map to our understanding of the term. They're certainly complacent, as Thor has pointed out, and some of them do treat each new world as just another toy to play with, not worth getting invested in.

The thinking, feeling mortals they've created, of course, feel otherwise about the importance of their own experience, regardless of whether they're members of the first iteration or the millionth billionth one. "But for me it was Tuesday" and all that.

[KorvinStarmast]

and some of them do treat each new world as just another toy to play with, not worth getting invested in. Kind of like how some D&D players who don't engage with a campaign world ... :smallyuk:

The thinking, feeling mortals they've created, of course, feel otherwise about the importance of their own experience, regardless of whether they're members of the first iteration or the millionth billionth one. "But for me it was Tuesday" and all that. Indeed.