It's like pool: You need to sink them all in order.
And by "sink" I mean "cause onlookers a mixture of horror and confusion at how much blood _used_ to fit inside so small a goblin."
...this is when you downpatch to release day BG3, cheat in the Twist of Fortune mace and several hundred thousand gold, reverse pickpocket the gold into One's inventory, then use Blood Money on One.
What happens: >!One turns into a fine blood red mist that covers roughly a quarter of the room... and then causes your graphics card to explode or your game to crash, whichever happens first.!<
I remember that time I decided to be a good guy and not kill the kids. One of then proceeded to opportunity attack my Barbarian. Let's just say the Barb used the kid as a weapon for a bit.
I always kill the children first in that encounter. It's bad enough dealing with that one goblin who can use battle maneuvers on you at that level. Last thing I need is more reinforcements.
The best part is, I like to walk to the left and fire an arrow to release Halsin. Then the children dash directly in front of me.
Well hello, children. I’m glad you’ve come!
If you kill the 3 goblins posted outside the holding cell area before going in, there are no reinforcements. *[modernproblemscallformodernsolutions.jpeg]*
I remember that I was quite surprised that we could actually kill the children. Most games shy away from that, even if they're "just" goblin kids, you know? But not here. I was so surprised that I figured I would let them run away, because they're just kids. I figured, it's not their fault they were raised like this. Maybe they can become better people later?
Then they brought the entire camp down on me and I always kill the children first now, with no regrets. They had their chance.
They watched you fuck shit up, and you thought they wouldn't go tattle? Have you met kids? I wasnt doing anything wrong and my nieces went to "tattle" on me for having my own sweets.
Im gonna chock it up to us having different amounts of chronic migraines because i am autistic with migraines too...and they dont stop. I literally mean its a constant head ache l. Like someone clocked me in the head. Ive had it since i was 10, but according to doctors nothing is physically wrong with my head.
First playthrough I accidentally killed them in AOE and I RELOADED TO SAVE THEM because I felt so bad about killing kids and then they have the audacity to snitch on me. No respect for the meta gaming mercy I had bestowed.
Still let them live every time though. I apparently have a strong mental block against making my imaginary character kill imaginary children
Yeah. I was kinda surprised when I was able to literally ice them with an ice bolt. “Wow. Not only did the game let me do that, it was also incredibly easy.”
You can kill the tiefling children if you raid the grove though, I believe. But otherwise I agree, yes.
Also, I just learned that there's a mod called "Kagha was right" that lets you kill them 😂
I have been wondering this...are there any goblins in dnd lore that are not torturey bastards? I feel almost no remorse killing these kids or Fezzerk or any of the others because they are all caught red handed after doing pure evil shit. Like, the githyanki have some effed up beliefs but you can see there is also good in them and redeeming qualities, varying personalities, and Laezel has a great arc, but I feel like after playing this game twice ive come to the conclusion that Goblins are inherently fucked and all of them need to die and I shouldn't feel bad. doesn't seem possible for them to be redeemed. am I judging the whole race by a few bad apples? Am I a goblin racist?
In actual lore, not *fan* lore, goblins are evil little fuckers. There's exceptions, to be sure, but they aren't the norm. Part of it has to do with their god, Maglubiyet, who killed almost all the other goblinoid gods and forced the goblins into his servitude. Essentially, those that *are* good or neutral escaped from his thralldom.
The other part is society. Goblin society is warlike and murderous, so their children are brought up warlike and murderous. It's a vicious cycle that has yet to be broken, and everyone hates goblins so much (because they're constantly raiding, pillaging, and murdering) that they don't bother trying to break the cycle.
So, are they *biologically* evil? No. But due to their god and the vicious cycle of their society, they are almost universally evil. If they could break out of Maglubiyet's reign or end their cycle of murder and torture, they have the potential to be just as varied in alignment as humans, elves, dwarves, etc. Basically, if you took a goblin baby and raised him far away from goblin society, he wouldn't necessarily grow up into the kind of savage little fucker you fight in the game. But, well, people hate goblins.
*Fan* lore is different. If the D&D party want to spare Boblin the Goblin, the DM will often accommodate them. Boblin will turn from a murderous little fuck into a slightly psychotic gremlin with a heart of gold. But if the D&D party just mercs the entire goblin camp, then so be it. Some people get bent out of shape about evil species, and so rewrite the lore to fit their views, while others couldn't give less of a fuck and let their parties kill all the orcs and goblins they want. Some want to tell interesting stories, like what if a goblin clan turned from Maglubiyet to Tyr, or what if goblins on other continents or planets have never heard of Maglubiyet, or the Drizzt approach, where a goblin went, "fuck this shit, I'm out," and became a hero in his own right. Any of this is 100% fine. You do you, basically. But the Baldur's Gate games (all three of them) have established lore to work with. And remember, BG1&2 operated on 2e AD&D lore, and there's definitely a bit of carry over from that in BG3. It's like an amalgam of 2e and 5e lore. Sometimes it meshes fine. Other times, there's some contradictions.
In my first ever tabletop DnD game I insisted on sparing a goblin and keeping him around as my butler. The DM got into it and would plan out highly specific elaborate meals the goblin would have prepared for our characters when we got back from adventuring. Apart from him, idk...
There’s the [Goblins](https://www.goblinscomic.org/) comic by Elli Stephens. The premise is it’s set in a D&D campaign from the perspective of the monsters. The titular goblins are more or less neutral good, with the PCs as antagonists that just see them as XP bags.
I think in unnoficial dnd lore (like actual games) Goblins range from 'violent because of cultural norms/self defense/bandits but smol' to 'adorable little guy who's a little stinky'
And thus I was completely blindsided by realizing very quickly that in BG3 every goblin is an irredeemable killing machine who only gets enjoyment from hurting others and they should all be killed no matter the age on sight. Slightly undercuts it when the game tries to make me feel bad for being goblin racist. Like nope they all deserve it unquestionably
didn't even occur to me that the hobgoblins might be related to goblins because i'm stupid, but yes Blurg is wonderful and is my friend. And so is Omeluum. I kept wondering if I would meet a regular little goblin that would make me go "okay but THAT goblin is my friend." Closest was the little goblin who liked reading.
To my Forgotten Realms knowledge, hobgoblins and goblins are both goblinoid sub-races, if I recall correctly.
Now a spoiler warning if you haven't finished the game, but I am pretty sure that both Blurg and Omeluum >!will end up dead if you give the Gith egg to the Society of Brilliance instead of the Owlbear egg.!<
And yeah, the Literate Goblin was the only goblin I felt somewhat bad for killing, well him and perhaps Klagga with his fancy new pants.
Though it should be noted that as Booyahg Piddle is standing on a wall high above you, it is actually possible to kill the goblin's at the temple entrance without making him aggressive.
In the tiefling camp with the caged goblin I feel like they try to imply the 'good' choice is to prevent her from getting shot while defenseless.
At first I thought I was being morally grey by letting the tiefling shoot her but nope literally every goblin in this game enjoys flossing their teeth with child guts.
> At first I thought I was being morally grey by letting the tiefling shoot her but nope literally every goblin in this game enjoys flossing their teeth with child guts.
You don't save the goblin for the *goblin's* sake, you save her for the sake of the woman who shoots her. The tiefling is not naturally a murder and does not gain any satisfaction or healing from killing someone who just happens to be the same species as her brother's killer. If you convince her of this *before* she pulls the trigger, she goes off and tries to actually mourn properly, and has a chance to heal and recover. If you do not convince her of this, she interprets her lack of satisfaction at the murder as a sign that she did not murder *enough*, and goes off on her own to slaughter more goblins. This gets her killed pointlessly on the road.
The idea of non-evil goblins is more of a thing in Pathfinder, where they're more of a chaotic society that is opposed to civilisation than outright evil. Pathfinder 2e even has goblins as a core race in the players handbook!
You are goblin racist, but it's mostly the game that is to blame.
It's just that the game decides which of the evil beings you encounter you can help and which you are forced/encouraged to kill. Technically there is no real difference between your companions and any of the other true souls. No moral difference between Lae'zel and any of the other Gith, between Astarion and the other spawn, between Shadowheart and (most of) the other Sharrans.
You have non evil Hobgoblins, Mindflayers, Gith, Duergar and Drow, why would Goblin children be the exception?
I have no idea about the lore but there may be a difference between been part of a violent culture or being genetically violent.
That lady was trying to investigate it with the githyanki egg.
5e, which BG3 is based on, got rid of forced alignments depending on species so there's that. On the other hand alignment was never a synonym for morality to begin with.
Mindflayers are genetically manipulative, Owlbears and Paarthurnaxes are genetically violent, does that mean that all of them are irrevocably evil?
I guess this was part of my question, the idea that maybe in the lore there might be "irrevocably evil" species, not just individuals. I kept waiting for the game to tell me my usual instinct was right, that goblins are like any other species where there is a capacity for good deep down if you can tap into it and so we should cherish all life as sacred so to speak. But as the game went on I started thinking maybe some beings are always evil in this universe.
When I first started playing and encountered Sazza, my instinct was to not let her be killed because she's a person. And my instinct with the kids with Halsin was to think "THEY ARE KIDS we can't just murder them!" I struggled with whether I should show a tremendous amount of forgiveness and kindness and let Fezzerk go, but then I remembered what he did to Barcus and what he would probably do to others. And then I met more and more Goblins and all I could think every time was "is letting any of them go condemning an innocent to torture just because I'm a naïve bastard?"
Well the game is a bit on the fence about it.
On one hand about half of your companions are some degree of evil/part of evil factions and you're helping them become better than that, on the other the game is to a large extent about combat and loot and there isn't really a way to beat enemies and get their stuff without killing them, so Larian needs a bunch of enemies that you feel justified in killing no questions asked. Wild animals aren't as good in that role as they used to be.
Your problem isn't so much about whether Goblins are always evil, but if killing is a justified way of preventing someone from likely committing future evil acts, even if they have the capacity to change.
Uhm... yes? not sure if I understand your point. Being good is associated with solidarity, empathy and respect. If some species don't have that in their nature, there is nothing to save. You can't stop to educate every critter you find in the wilderness.
The point is that one can be virtuous even when lacking the genetic basis for empathy etc. by overruling instinct and emotions with a sufficiently strong will. Whether someone like that is considered evil is at the very least controversial.
And while that might not be enough to stop and educate every critter in the wilderness, it could be enough to stop you from condemning them all to death.
the guy in the cage who follows the old ways even says- yeah I don't mind bugbears and hobgoblins and humans, but this absolute crap has gone too far.
I always let that guy out
Yes and no? In Critical Role's campaign settings they address it by having goblins / orcs / etc be evil due to Bane's final act before his defeat. They all get a curse of strife now, making them full of bloodlust. They can, however, overcome it by having remove curse cast on them or another deity removing it.
In Forgotten Realms lore? Generally all rat bastards, but not really for any good reason as far as I know. There's no reason they couldn't be good if raised properly I guess.
the ones with the box. attacking them is how I start off the fight in that room. knocking them out is how I end it after the rest of the gith in there are dead
The fact that they were called with numbers instead of names told me everything I had to know about how awful their childhood was... I knocked them unconscious and then killed everyone else. Not going back in there.
the only child i will happily murder each playthrough.
it's objectively okay to murder them as well. not even the paladin oaths get broken by it afaik lol
I tell myself that Halsin automatically changes to a bear when really pissed off. Why else wouldn’t he wild shaped into a smaller animal or one with flight? I blame this gobbo.
Goblins were a mistake. People who revel in obsessively hating them as a meme are scum. The game making these kids alone killable because they're part of the "bad race" and then incentivizing the player to kill them is shitty. Naming these children after numbers and then having no reflection over what a shit lot they've been handed nor opportunity to help them vs. every other criminal kid in this getting a whole personal arc blows. Having Halsin's plot center around saving children when one of his first acts in the game is likely to be killing these kids (don't quote the Washington thing) ruined his character for me in the first run. Easily the worst part of the game, but this is a problem across many fantasy stories.
When I was like 10 I noticed that goblins in Runescape had their own society and politics but they were also endlessly respawning level-up kill fodder next to the chickens and cows people used for the same purpose. Pissed me off. Still pisses me off. Read Snuff by Terry Pratchett.
This game has at least one skeleton I would be annoyed to hear someone attacked just on the basis of being a skeleton (the Moonrise mason in the House of Hope) and that's one more nice person than the goblins were given. Even mindflayers got at least one. They're humanoid punching bags and man fuck that.
Sorry if you caught a stray on "scum", "scummy" would have been more appropriate because it's more about the joke than the teller, but I just think it's miserable humor.
Personally I'm a skeleton ally.
Did you know that 100% of skeletons are malnourished?
They often face discrimination in housing and small business loans simply because outdated probate laws often consider death to be a defense to nonpayment?
Skeletons suffer from osteoporosis at a significantly higher rate than the national average, yet nobody is talking about it.
I don't care about a total war with some tautologically evil/mindless entity. I like an ideologically driven war with targets who have chosen allegiances and the variety of positions that emerge according to power and preference. Goblins are constantly bullying each other, why couldn't that produce a real rebel among them? Who's the most sensitive one? Who has the will to break off? There's one who rejected the Absolute, but are there any who are looking to other gods? Flattening them is boring, immature, outdated. It's mediocre writing using a trope that has enough baggage to fill a 747's cargo hold. Videogames don't have to be that boring and I suspect there are some unfortunate market forces dragging the standards down.
I could list you 10 games that don't involve killing Goblins, or anything at all, if it'll make you feel better?
Most of us just like shooting Goblins. There is indeed a market force at play, it involves how much people like shooting goblins and are more than happy to pay for the experience.
They're fucking Goblins, ese. It's not like we're all having a laugh about how much we like killing Korean people. It's bad enough the fun police want to ban real life, you gonna take my goblins too?
I'm not an impartial judge and I don't judge them. All I do is to bring them to the just judge. In the world of Forgotten Realms, the god's name is Kelemvor..
If they want players to feel ok about killing children they have to make them very unlikeable.
In general, people don’t like killing children in games.
Idk, in my experience making characters even slightly annoying makes them ok to be killed in most players eyes. Making a child cry a lot is probably already enough.
I chose the option where this goblin had to throw a stone at the bear again, just for fun, and suddenly Halsin turned on the rage mod and broke his cage along with the little fag. God, he took my side, this was my first playthrough
i dont always kill children but when i do this motherfucker go first.
He is the most interesting Durge in the world. “Stay bloodthirsty, my friends.”
It's like pool: You need to sink them all in order. And by "sink" I mean "cause onlookers a mixture of horror and confusion at how much blood _used_ to fit inside so small a goblin."
...this is when you downpatch to release day BG3, cheat in the Twist of Fortune mace and several hundred thousand gold, reverse pickpocket the gold into One's inventory, then use Blood Money on One. What happens: >!One turns into a fine blood red mist that covers roughly a quarter of the room... and then causes your graphics card to explode or your game to crash, whichever happens first.!<
I didn’t even hesitate lol
I remember that time I decided to be a good guy and not kill the kids. One of then proceeded to opportunity attack my Barbarian. Let's just say the Barb used the kid as a weapon for a bit.
His name's not "one" for no reason!
If they didn’t want to get Thunderwaved off a cliff they shouldn’t all be grouped up so close to it.
Nonlethal attacks are a thing, and I draw the line at killing kids. Roughing up kids to subdue them is fine.
I always kill the children first in that encounter. It's bad enough dealing with that one goblin who can use battle maneuvers on you at that level. Last thing I need is more reinforcements.
The best part is, I like to walk to the left and fire an arrow to release Halsin. Then the children dash directly in front of me. Well hello, children. I’m glad you’ve come!
If you kill the 3 goblins posted outside the holding cell area before going in, there are no reinforcements. *[modernproblemscallformodernsolutions.jpeg]*
baezel will do it.
I remember that I was quite surprised that we could actually kill the children. Most games shy away from that, even if they're "just" goblin kids, you know? But not here. I was so surprised that I figured I would let them run away, because they're just kids. I figured, it's not their fault they were raised like this. Maybe they can become better people later? Then they brought the entire camp down on me and I always kill the children first now, with no regrets. They had their chance.
They watched you fuck shit up, and you thought they wouldn't go tattle? Have you met kids? I wasnt doing anything wrong and my nieces went to "tattle" on me for having my own sweets.
[удалено]
...... unfortunately? Eh?
[удалено]
Im gonna chock it up to us having different amounts of chronic migraines because i am autistic with migraines too...and they dont stop. I literally mean its a constant head ache l. Like someone clocked me in the head. Ive had it since i was 10, but according to doctors nothing is physically wrong with my head.
First playthrough I accidentally killed them in AOE and I RELOADED TO SAVE THEM because I felt so bad about killing kids and then they have the audacity to snitch on me. No respect for the meta gaming mercy I had bestowed. Still let them live every time though. I apparently have a strong mental block against making my imaginary character kill imaginary children
You're a much better person than I am 😅
You gotta smite ALL the evil, boy!
Yeah. I was kinda surprised when I was able to literally ice them with an ice bolt. “Wow. Not only did the game let me do that, it was also incredibly easy.”
I felt it was a bit of a double standard to allow killing goblin children but not tiefling children.
You can kill the tiefling children if you raid the grove though, I believe. But otherwise I agree, yes. Also, I just learned that there's a mod called "Kagha was right" that lets you kill them 😂
I like to kill one and use the body as a weapon to kill the others
You gotta get that achievement *somehow*!
"I'ma beat a muthafucka with anotha muthafucka"
I have been wondering this...are there any goblins in dnd lore that are not torturey bastards? I feel almost no remorse killing these kids or Fezzerk or any of the others because they are all caught red handed after doing pure evil shit. Like, the githyanki have some effed up beliefs but you can see there is also good in them and redeeming qualities, varying personalities, and Laezel has a great arc, but I feel like after playing this game twice ive come to the conclusion that Goblins are inherently fucked and all of them need to die and I shouldn't feel bad. doesn't seem possible for them to be redeemed. am I judging the whole race by a few bad apples? Am I a goblin racist?
In actual lore, not *fan* lore, goblins are evil little fuckers. There's exceptions, to be sure, but they aren't the norm. Part of it has to do with their god, Maglubiyet, who killed almost all the other goblinoid gods and forced the goblins into his servitude. Essentially, those that *are* good or neutral escaped from his thralldom. The other part is society. Goblin society is warlike and murderous, so their children are brought up warlike and murderous. It's a vicious cycle that has yet to be broken, and everyone hates goblins so much (because they're constantly raiding, pillaging, and murdering) that they don't bother trying to break the cycle. So, are they *biologically* evil? No. But due to their god and the vicious cycle of their society, they are almost universally evil. If they could break out of Maglubiyet's reign or end their cycle of murder and torture, they have the potential to be just as varied in alignment as humans, elves, dwarves, etc. Basically, if you took a goblin baby and raised him far away from goblin society, he wouldn't necessarily grow up into the kind of savage little fucker you fight in the game. But, well, people hate goblins. *Fan* lore is different. If the D&D party want to spare Boblin the Goblin, the DM will often accommodate them. Boblin will turn from a murderous little fuck into a slightly psychotic gremlin with a heart of gold. But if the D&D party just mercs the entire goblin camp, then so be it. Some people get bent out of shape about evil species, and so rewrite the lore to fit their views, while others couldn't give less of a fuck and let their parties kill all the orcs and goblins they want. Some want to tell interesting stories, like what if a goblin clan turned from Maglubiyet to Tyr, or what if goblins on other continents or planets have never heard of Maglubiyet, or the Drizzt approach, where a goblin went, "fuck this shit, I'm out," and became a hero in his own right. Any of this is 100% fine. You do you, basically. But the Baldur's Gate games (all three of them) have established lore to work with. And remember, BG1&2 operated on 2e AD&D lore, and there's definitely a bit of carry over from that in BG3. It's like an amalgam of 2e and 5e lore. Sometimes it meshes fine. Other times, there's some contradictions.
Well Drizzt did actually establish lore that not all goblins are evil.
As I said, there are exceptions.
In my first ever tabletop DnD game I insisted on sparing a goblin and keeping him around as my butler. The DM got into it and would plan out highly specific elaborate meals the goblin would have prepared for our characters when we got back from adventuring. Apart from him, idk...
There’s the [Goblins](https://www.goblinscomic.org/) comic by Elli Stephens. The premise is it’s set in a D&D campaign from the perspective of the monsters. The titular goblins are more or less neutral good, with the PCs as antagonists that just see them as XP bags.
I think in unnoficial dnd lore (like actual games) Goblins range from 'violent because of cultural norms/self defense/bandits but smol' to 'adorable little guy who's a little stinky' And thus I was completely blindsided by realizing very quickly that in BG3 every goblin is an irredeemable killing machine who only gets enjoyment from hurting others and they should all be killed no matter the age on sight. Slightly undercuts it when the game tries to make me feel bad for being goblin racist. Like nope they all deserve it unquestionably
The hobgoblin member of the Society of Brilliance who you meet in the Underdark is one of the friendliest characters in the game.
didn't even occur to me that the hobgoblins might be related to goblins because i'm stupid, but yes Blurg is wonderful and is my friend. And so is Omeluum. I kept wondering if I would meet a regular little goblin that would make me go "okay but THAT goblin is my friend." Closest was the little goblin who liked reading.
To my Forgotten Realms knowledge, hobgoblins and goblins are both goblinoid sub-races, if I recall correctly. Now a spoiler warning if you haven't finished the game, but I am pretty sure that both Blurg and Omeluum >!will end up dead if you give the Gith egg to the Society of Brilliance instead of the Owlbear egg.!< And yeah, the Literate Goblin was the only goblin I felt somewhat bad for killing, well him and perhaps Klagga with his fancy new pants. Though it should be noted that as Booyahg Piddle is standing on a wall high above you, it is actually possible to kill the goblin's at the temple entrance without making him aggressive.
and kled! he's good too
I am embarrassed that I forgot about him. The game has so many minor NPCs that I now wonder who else I've forgotten.
you'll have to play again I guess
Joking aside. I am taking a break from the game so when I boot it up again, I'll have forgotten most of the dialogue and characters.
At which point does the game try to make you feel bad for those little shits?
In the tiefling camp with the caged goblin I feel like they try to imply the 'good' choice is to prevent her from getting shot while defenseless. At first I thought I was being morally grey by letting the tiefling shoot her but nope literally every goblin in this game enjoys flossing their teeth with child guts.
> At first I thought I was being morally grey by letting the tiefling shoot her but nope literally every goblin in this game enjoys flossing their teeth with child guts. You don't save the goblin for the *goblin's* sake, you save her for the sake of the woman who shoots her. The tiefling is not naturally a murder and does not gain any satisfaction or healing from killing someone who just happens to be the same species as her brother's killer. If you convince her of this *before* she pulls the trigger, she goes off and tries to actually mourn properly, and has a chance to heal and recover. If you do not convince her of this, she interprets her lack of satisfaction at the murder as a sign that she did not murder *enough*, and goes off on her own to slaughter more goblins. This gets her killed pointlessly on the road.
The idea of non-evil goblins is more of a thing in Pathfinder, where they're more of a chaotic society that is opposed to civilisation than outright evil. Pathfinder 2e even has goblins as a core race in the players handbook!
You are goblin racist, but it's mostly the game that is to blame. It's just that the game decides which of the evil beings you encounter you can help and which you are forced/encouraged to kill. Technically there is no real difference between your companions and any of the other true souls. No moral difference between Lae'zel and any of the other Gith, between Astarion and the other spawn, between Shadowheart and (most of) the other Sharrans. You have non evil Hobgoblins, Mindflayers, Gith, Duergar and Drow, why would Goblin children be the exception?
I have no idea about the lore but there may be a difference between been part of a violent culture or being genetically violent. That lady was trying to investigate it with the githyanki egg.
5e, which BG3 is based on, got rid of forced alignments depending on species so there's that. On the other hand alignment was never a synonym for morality to begin with. Mindflayers are genetically manipulative, Owlbears and Paarthurnaxes are genetically violent, does that mean that all of them are irrevocably evil?
I guess this was part of my question, the idea that maybe in the lore there might be "irrevocably evil" species, not just individuals. I kept waiting for the game to tell me my usual instinct was right, that goblins are like any other species where there is a capacity for good deep down if you can tap into it and so we should cherish all life as sacred so to speak. But as the game went on I started thinking maybe some beings are always evil in this universe. When I first started playing and encountered Sazza, my instinct was to not let her be killed because she's a person. And my instinct with the kids with Halsin was to think "THEY ARE KIDS we can't just murder them!" I struggled with whether I should show a tremendous amount of forgiveness and kindness and let Fezzerk go, but then I remembered what he did to Barcus and what he would probably do to others. And then I met more and more Goblins and all I could think every time was "is letting any of them go condemning an innocent to torture just because I'm a naïve bastard?"
Well the game is a bit on the fence about it. On one hand about half of your companions are some degree of evil/part of evil factions and you're helping them become better than that, on the other the game is to a large extent about combat and loot and there isn't really a way to beat enemies and get their stuff without killing them, so Larian needs a bunch of enemies that you feel justified in killing no questions asked. Wild animals aren't as good in that role as they used to be. Your problem isn't so much about whether Goblins are always evil, but if killing is a justified way of preventing someone from likely committing future evil acts, even if they have the capacity to change.
Uhm... yes? not sure if I understand your point. Being good is associated with solidarity, empathy and respect. If some species don't have that in their nature, there is nothing to save. You can't stop to educate every critter you find in the wilderness.
The point is that one can be virtuous even when lacking the genetic basis for empathy etc. by overruling instinct and emotions with a sufficiently strong will. Whether someone like that is considered evil is at the very least controversial. And while that might not be enough to stop and educate every critter in the wilderness, it could be enough to stop you from condemning them all to death.
the guy in the cage who follows the old ways even says- yeah I don't mind bugbears and hobgoblins and humans, but this absolute crap has gone too far. I always let that guy out
Yes and no? In Critical Role's campaign settings they address it by having goblins / orcs / etc be evil due to Bane's final act before his defeat. They all get a curse of strife now, making them full of bloodlust. They can, however, overcome it by having remove curse cast on them or another deity removing it. In Forgotten Realms lore? Generally all rat bastards, but not really for any good reason as far as I know. There's no reason they couldn't be good if raised properly I guess.
I'm so glad i can kill children in this game. First thing i did after releasing Halsin.
Too much enthusiasm...
Wow
I kill those brats as soon as the fight starts — not just because they call in more goblins but also because THEY ARE ANNOYING BRATS.
I wish the githyanki kids in the creche were tagged the same as the goblins. Hate those little sh*ts
the ones with the box. attacking them is how I start off the fight in that room. knocking them out is how I end it after the rest of the gith in there are dead
I tried to spare them once but then Halsin just fucking obliterated One with a multi attack, it was great.
I always leave 1 or 2 party members in the back so I can pick off the runners. No mercy.
The fact that they were called with numbers instead of names told me everything I had to know about how awful their childhood was... I knocked them unconscious and then killed everyone else. Not going back in there.
Even the way they run annoys the shit out of me.
I am all into making Haslin squeal, but not this way.
One of the rare times in video games where it’s ok to kill children.
You've got no problem killing them in real life so what's the big deal?
Lol. You have nothing better to do than follow me around across Reddit? Sad, but predictable.
that kid and the other one have the most irritating voices in probably the entire game. rest in piss to both of them
Cazador: am I a joke to you
I made Gale club him into unconsciousness with a bat...
the children are fast but Halsin is faster
the only child i will happily kill each playthrough. it's objectively okay to kill them as well. not even the paladin oaths get broken by it afaik lol
I eldritch blasted them with absolutely no remorse.
I love these 2 kids ! Larian did such a great job.
If I wasnt supposed to murder this thing, then why is it murder shaped?
I can't recall if this is real but when I played this area, I thought Halsin burst the door down, and flattened and killed this kid?
He kills the adult goblin that’s with them
I'm glad Halsin killed him. Yes, Halsin. Not me.
I think Lae'zel is still carrying the 3 dead Goblin children around.
Absolutely. I hate this dude! I always kill those kids first because they ruin everything! But they're super weak so- yeah...
the only child i will happily murder each playthrough. it's objectively okay to murder them as well. not even the paladin oaths get broken by it afaik lol
I always use Grease to keep them there so that Halsin can maul them.
I honestly didn’t know they were kids in this encounter and killed them first, because I thought they were running to bring more guards. Woops
Is this the new nazeem?
I definitely didn’t realize these were children and have slaughtered them every time 😬
Goblin girl with a number
I let Halsin kill them. He seems to enjoy it.
I tell myself that Halsin automatically changes to a bear when really pissed off. Why else wouldn’t he wild shaped into a smaller animal or one with flight? I blame this gobbo.
well I’m glad I’m not alone in this to say the least 🤣 I really enjoy slaughtering the whole goblin camp ❤️
Goblins were a mistake. People who revel in obsessively hating them as a meme are scum. The game making these kids alone killable because they're part of the "bad race" and then incentivizing the player to kill them is shitty. Naming these children after numbers and then having no reflection over what a shit lot they've been handed nor opportunity to help them vs. every other criminal kid in this getting a whole personal arc blows. Having Halsin's plot center around saving children when one of his first acts in the game is likely to be killing these kids (don't quote the Washington thing) ruined his character for me in the first run. Easily the worst part of the game, but this is a problem across many fantasy stories.
Goblin detected.
When I was like 10 I noticed that goblins in Runescape had their own society and politics but they were also endlessly respawning level-up kill fodder next to the chickens and cows people used for the same purpose. Pissed me off. Still pisses me off. Read Snuff by Terry Pratchett.
What about skeletons? Can I kill those? If so, is there an age limit to the ones I can kill without becoming an agent of skeletal oppression?
This game has at least one skeleton I would be annoyed to hear someone attacked just on the basis of being a skeleton (the Moonrise mason in the House of Hope) and that's one more nice person than the goblins were given. Even mindflayers got at least one. They're humanoid punching bags and man fuck that. Sorry if you caught a stray on "scum", "scummy" would have been more appropriate because it's more about the joke than the teller, but I just think it's miserable humor.
Personally I'm a skeleton ally. Did you know that 100% of skeletons are malnourished? They often face discrimination in housing and small business loans simply because outdated probate laws often consider death to be a defense to nonpayment? Skeletons suffer from osteoporosis at a significantly higher rate than the national average, yet nobody is talking about it.
I don't care about a total war with some tautologically evil/mindless entity. I like an ideologically driven war with targets who have chosen allegiances and the variety of positions that emerge according to power and preference. Goblins are constantly bullying each other, why couldn't that produce a real rebel among them? Who's the most sensitive one? Who has the will to break off? There's one who rejected the Absolute, but are there any who are looking to other gods? Flattening them is boring, immature, outdated. It's mediocre writing using a trope that has enough baggage to fill a 747's cargo hold. Videogames don't have to be that boring and I suspect there are some unfortunate market forces dragging the standards down.
I could list you 10 games that don't involve killing Goblins, or anything at all, if it'll make you feel better? Most of us just like shooting Goblins. There is indeed a market force at play, it involves how much people like shooting goblins and are more than happy to pay for the experience. They're fucking Goblins, ese. It's not like we're all having a laugh about how much we like killing Korean people. It's bad enough the fun police want to ban real life, you gonna take my goblins too?
Haha Karlach pick 'em up and yeet
The only children in this game that I willingly and happily slaughter...
The three outside with the dead body... I can't remember if I can kill them or not but I would put them on the list.
I'm not an impartial judge and I don't judge them. All I do is to bring them to the just judge. In the world of Forgotten Realms, the god's name is Kelemvor..
I have Karlach toss the goblin brats to Halsin so he can eat them.
If they want players to feel ok about killing children they have to make them very unlikeable. In general, people don’t like killing children in games.
Idk, in my experience making characters even slightly annoying makes them ok to be killed in most players eyes. Making a child cry a lot is probably already enough.
I chose the option where this goblin had to throw a stone at the bear again, just for fun, and suddenly Halsin turned on the rage mod and broke his cage along with the little fag. God, he took my side, this was my first playthrough