Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Suggestions & Feedback Consider... Letting Me Play as a Goblin

Would your average city guard care about this though? What about your average peasant? I think goblins would be murdered outright. And i like that.

Goblins are less "kill on sight" than Githyanki or drow. A single goblin is mostly harmless and, once it is clear they mean no harm, would probably be mostly ignored because of that.

A single Githyanki or drow is probably going to murder some folks though. Or worse.

I hope so ... otherwise there isnt much reasons to play as one.
Simmilar to Gith, or Drow ... im deeply disapointed about how easily you can infiltrate litteraly any place in EA.

Even where goblins aren't 'attack on sight', i feel playing a goblin would still involve plenty more alternative dialogue from the not being taken seriously or reactions to their being a goblin than drow or gith do?
Maybe Hobgoblins as they'd probably only have the same amount as gith/drow, once the initial hey arent you evil gets out of the way. There's not that dismissal goblins/kobolds/etc get.

I consider the aggression against me as a Goblin the possibility of interesting roleplaying.
I already have started to formulate a Goblin Character, a Dour Paladin who is just tired and done with all this, but whose conscience wouldn't let him stop helping people.
Might Also use the Character creation to make him Albino or have Melanism or something for funsies.

It certainly is a possibility ... but also a problem.
Since if you look at game in curent state, it seems like Larian wants whole world to generaly react on our character the same ... yes, there are slight different reactions, like when people first tells your Drow that they usualy dont thrust your kind, and yes there are specific answer you can give them as member of certain races ...

Yet, except this ...
All our characters are seen the same by the world around them, everyone is willing to talk to them just the same, everyone is willing to trade with them just the same, everyone is willing to ask for their help just the same, and in the end, everyone is willing to help them in certain cases just the same.

And personaly i would see that as problem with playable goblin. :-/
Larian would have to either completely ruin whole your goblinity, since you need to enter towns, talk to merchants, and take quests ... or create whole another game just for goblin, ince entire world is suppose to react to you in completely different way ... and that seem like a lot of work, if you concider how many players will ever choose goblin as their main character.
Truth is, that "other side of game" should be used for Drow, Duegars, maybe Hopgoblins ... that may incerase it usefullness ...
But that also implies that there should be hated races, neutral races, and liked races from perspective of one side so called "civilized world" ... possibly turned around for perspective of "savage world" ... so they in the end would need to create at least two entirely different gameplay, with some permutations, where certain characters within certain circumstances, can take both paths (presumabely not at once ).

Honestly, its easier to simply avoid them and let whole world work just the same, with few suspicious sentences in front of every generic conversation.

Well if you consider that the PC would be a goblin wearing civilised clothes, They wouldn't look too weird wanting to interact with the civilised world. Much like the goblin learning how to read in the goblin camp. I think that goblin was even talking about how it's just hard for him to learn among his brethren. Imagine the rope play if you could play a goblin and you could also take goblin armour, and this could be for any race, but as a goblin PC wearing the raggedy and wild goblin armour. You could sneak/act your way into the goblin base and with your companions, pretend that they are your recent captives.

I would like to remind people that Deekin is a thing.

I would not call it a thing, but an exception.
And there is a thing about exceptions, when you start to allow them often, they become a thing. :-/

Exactly.

PCs are meant to be exceptional. So allowing a player to play an exception to a rule is literally baked into the 5e experience. There's a reason goblins have rules to be playable after all.

By what metric?

After I meet Sazza and talked with the various goblins in my first run I get interested in how much potential they have as a race.

In D'nD we've seen the rise of races into non aggressive cooperation (not integration, I can not see that as coherent with a medieval setting): Thieflings, Drow, Hobgoblins, Orcs.

Obviously to me is crystal clear that in this particular and specific set a Goblin character would be so difficult to manage that it would make it almost impossible to create a credible coherent background (it's already difficult to accept that Drows can easily go around without almost no serious reactions), the problem, to me, in this case is not the society fact because full armor, mimetic spells, can allow the Giblin to move without a big red flashy target pointing to them, the problem is to create companions with a background that justify their interactions withe the Goblin.

In BG 3 there is already a lot of criticism about three companions (Astarion, Shadowheart, Laez'el) because of their background, personalities, and motivations.

So in this game I don't think they will implement a playable Goblin (but maybe we would see non aggressive Goblins, or Goblins that left their faith, choose another god, or none, didn't embraced the Absolute and try their own route).

nevertheless it would be a fascinating campaign (both table top and videogame) that centered on the rise of the Goblins from tribal and fractioned to a more complex society and to a race able to interact with others not only by pillaging but also by commerce, spionage, culture exchange (or appropriation) and so on (just like in the Elders Scrolls setting they show the rise of orcs from tribal pillager warriors to a powerful kingdom).

I think it would only require a little bit of difference from other not trusted races like Drow, but I think the variation could be well worth it, even if it was a challenge. It could depend on the NPC/Chraracter. If you were a Goblin PC, Wyll probably would have a harder time trusting you, the Tieflings would likely need a check to trust you with the evidence that you aided them, the goblins might just let you into the camp, so on and so forth. A goblin player character or companion really has the potential for a unique world perspective and an opportunity for people to play what they want.

EXACTLY!
It could be so much fun proving them wrong..........or proving them all oh so right.

A playable goblin would work in an underdark setting where they are part of the flora and fauna, on the surface where civilized races live, it simply doesn't make sense. People hate goblins and they kill them because they are vermin. I personally think playable drow are already a step too far, because they are infamous for their hatred of the surface world.

(Sad drizzt noises)

What kind of Goblins would you all roll.

None. I hate goblins.
I would play a gnoll or lizardfolk in a heartbeat though.

Pretty sure Goblins eat people...could be wrong on this one, thought I ran accross a few lines where it was mentioned.

Rather play a Kobold.