Quote from: Beagle;818099Human history has told us that despite any other humanoids (at least for a very, very long time), that fighting the same thing never gets truly boring. Or at least not boring enough.

Thats because the ones that do get bored either retire, or get dead and the space is filled by fresh minds all aglow with the zeal to go out there and wack the same thing over and over.

Quote from: tuypo1;818098i dont really like that idea when it comes to humanoids kitchen sink is the best way to go when you cut down on numbers things get boring fighting the same things constantly

Only if those things behave in a boringly consistent way. Orc tribes who continue to adapt their tactics and behaviors to a changing world are dynamic. Fighting the Iron Tooth Clan can be radically different than going up against the Stone Hammer Clan. You don't need to scratch out "Orc" and write in "Hobgoblin" to make them interesting. That's just lazy. Keep what you have interesting by making it interesting. Don't want to fight the same thing, stop making them exactly the same. Shaking things up by introducing a new name and slightly different stats is kinda cheap. A good GM should be able to serve up orcs 100 ways and have those each be 100 different experiences.

Quote from: baragei;818168Hob-horse town!

One Hob Town?

There is no stable in One Horse Town. All visitors have to hobble their horses.

Quote from: Bren;818176yEs.It,Is;It:Is?AlSo.KiNd,Of;AnNoYiNg:

That's the point of the affectation.

Quote from: Necrozius;818118Don't get me started on "Gorgons" being bull monsters now.

If by "now" you mean "since the XIII century"...

Here's a link to a 16th century source:

http://wesschneider.tumblr.com/post/92511929906/so-i-have-a-question-about-pathfinders-bestiary

But as Jon Peterson has pointed out, Topsell isn't the oldest reference.

Also, as the guy who wrote the above article didn't know, T. H. White wrote a "Medieval Bestiary" that was based off Topsell, and I know for a fact that Gary had a copy, as have I.  It was reprinted by Dover several times in the 70s and 80s.

That's a heck of a peeve. I'm running a Minarian campaign. There are no orcs, just goblins, bigger goblins, even bigger goblins, and really big goblins.

Come to think of it, there was an incursion of "hobgoblins" from the East; they slammed into hordes of undead raised by the Black Hand. They were mostly undead goblins, actually, because Hand had just overrun the goblin kingdom under the PF rules set (where it's way too easy for undead clerics to just constantly slaughter every living thing in a 30' radius).

"The Great Magic Reset" (i.e., changing to 5e rules) has nuked a great number of magic items, and so the balance of power shifts again...

But who cares what a certain size goblin is called, somewhere?

I think Hobgoblins are my favorite race to play.  They're nasty, smart, tough and hairy.  I like to play fighter / thieves so yeah, the name doesn't bother me I like to pretend my Hobgoblin is friendlier than he really is.  Smile and knife 'em in the back man.

Quote from: Old Geezer;818072Show us on the doll where Gygaxian Hobgoblins touched you in a bad way.

And if you don't like them, change them.

Yeah, no kidding.

So Gygax and Co. decided to change how certain archetypes worked in their proprietary game.  Great, that's artistic license.  They were allowed, then and down the years.

It's not their fault that -- as with so many other elements they changed or created -- a zillion fanboys who'd never willingly been within ten yards of genuine source material parroted their interpretations as the One True Way.

A lot of D&D monsters and races have ossified over the years into very specific versions of whatever they were inspired by. That's on us. If we don't want the ossified versions, we can and should put our own twists on instead. I like that idea upthread of calling hobbits "hobgoblins" in a game to shake off some of the conceptual cobwebs, and that seems to fit the OP's preferences. I've gotten some traction out of calling dwarves "Mine Goblins" in a campaign, having a "Knockers' Guild" of dwarves and goblins who serve as dungeon guides in a megadungeon in another, and saying that dwarves sometimes "go kobold" (start doing things like leading people astray in minds and killing them) in another. Just playing around with D&D ideas is little ways to make it so not all of the tropes are the most ossified versions.  

The OP is kind of right and kind of wrong about what "a hobgoblin is" (or rather isn't) in terms of what the word has meant or used to mean. Yes, it's true that it wasn't historically used to refer to anything like D&D hobgoblins. Then again, D&D humanoids are kind of a new category anyway. But the word "hobgoblin" (in all its spelling variants) is used pretty indiscriminately in early modern English alongside goblin, fairy, elf, ghost, spirit, devil, even werewolf. It isn't nailed down to a particular kind of preternatural being at all. The "friendly household spirit" is a thing (with plenty of possible labels, including sometimes hobgoblin), but not the "true meaning" of the word--whatever that means, since it's an imaginary creature and a folk category to begin with.

Indeed. Like there are werewolves who are cursed. Werewolves who are infected. Werewolves who change with an item (belt). Werewolves who are hereditary (cursed or natural).

Then theres the type of werewolf. Mostly human, hairy toothy human with claws, humanoid wolf, wolf wolf.

Then theres the level of cognizance and control over the form from none at all, to total.

Then theres the level of control over the change, from none, to limited, to total.

Then theres the trigger event.

Then theres the weaknesses.

Then theres the TYPE of animal even as that can vary from region to region.

and so on.

Quote from: Doctor Jest;818185http://www.memidex.com/hobgoblin#etymology

Every etymological source for the word puts it at the 16th century as a nickname for Robin Goodfellow. I can't find a single other source, credible or otherwise, that shows an alternate etymology. Can't wait to see your notes.

So, going through my notebooks (been doing research on faeries since I was 12, which roughly translates to 40 boxes of index cards and 6 shelving units of notebooks in binders at this point, so still searching through. I was less exacting with noting sources when I was younger, which can be frustrating when trying to piece it together). But here's what I've found thus far:

"Goblin" from O.f. "gobelin" makes its way to English via Normand goubelin.  Gobelin is most likely a direct line from Latin cobalus (Greek:κόβαλος , "mountain spirit") , which also led to German Kobold, Dutch Kobeholdo . relationship to huldre).Goblin is the diminutive form of Gobel. But the concept is already being used in Britain by the 10th c via the Anglo-Saxon "cofgodas", which is also derived from cobalus. Cofgodas is translated as "room-gods". This ties into the Roman concept of the tutelary spirit, or "gods of the home".

Its in the 11th century these terms begin to be used interchangeably, as the  Norman culture is gradually assimilated into the native Anglo-Saxon culture. I Wales the common term used is "bwgs", derived from bwc, which later leads to bwcca, anglicised as pooka. Bwgs, or bugs are the closest in concept to the modern fantasy idea of goblins: mis-shapen diminutive humanoid creatures known for mischeviousness. The root of Bwg goes back to a word for goats.

Meanwhile in Norse and Scandinavian culture, which was also spreading into Britain from the time of invasions, "cafgodas" is adopted as the translation of what the Norse called "pukel". Once again tutelary spirits (not only of the home, but also of ships). Basically these "pukel-men" were small carvings of mis-shapen humanoid creatures with exaggerated features (what we would recognize as 'goblinoid' in description) that brought luck/good fortune to the residence/structure they were associated with.

So basically we're talking about 2 inter-related concepts that led to the (slightly more) modern idea of goblins and hobgoblins: mountain-spirits and house spirits. This same divide can be seen in the forest spirits and house spirits of Russian folklore (Domovoi/Leshii, etc), but linguistically thats an entirely different tangent.

Its easy to surmise the cultural evolution here: cobaldus as spirits of the mine. Miners, fearful of cave-ins and other mis-haps begin to carve small idols to represent the spirits of the mountains and offer them "prayers" and platitudes (in Anglo-Saxon and Norse culture taking the form of offerings of milk). This tradition is then carried to the homes(cafgodas), hence the household spirits.

But we're talking specifically about the linguistic evolution here.

I've so far in my notes found 12th century British references to "cobelinus". I've no doubt with a little digging I'm going to find a later or contemporary example of the halfway point between this and hobgoblin. It'll just take a bit more time to dig through these and track my sources.

What is clear though is that hobgoblin was a term in common use at the time of Shakespeare (i.e. he wasn't pulling it out of his ass). What I' suspecting at this point in my readings is that the prefix "hob" is actually in this case a mutated (aspirated) form of "cob".

Anyways, this is just the preliminaries, more to come...

Quote from: Omega;818353Indeed. Like there are werewolves who are cursed. Werewolves who are infected. Werewolves who change with an item (belt). Werewolves who are hereditary (cursed or natural).

Then theres the type of werewolf. Mostly human, hairy toothy human with claws, humanoid wolf, wolf wolf.

Then theres the level of cognizance and control over the form from none at all, to total.

Then theres the level of control over the change, from none, to limited, to total.

Then theres the trigger event.

Then theres the weaknesses.

Then theres the TYPE of animal even as that can vary from region to region.

and so on.

In eastern european folklore there are many terms that mean "werewolf/vampire/witch" or can equally be applied to all three. This concept bears absolutely no relationship to faeries and goblins though.

Quote from: TristramEvans;818358In eastern european folklore there are many terms that mean "werewolf/vampire/witch" or can equally be applied to all three. This concept bears absolutely no relationship to faeries and goblins though.

Until someone makes a game or movie or comic or whatever that DOES link them. Which has allready been done.

Quote from: Omega;818366Until someone makes a game or movie or comic or whatever that DOES link them. Which has allready been done.

Hollywood's reinterpretations doesnt enter into the subject of the thread as to the disparity between creatures as described in folklore and a personal pet peeve regarding nonsensical reinterpretations in gaming that are constantly perpetuated.