Orcs or Hobgoblins /tg/?
>>47046151
Depends on what kind of threat I want the party to face and where they physically are now in the campaign.
Orcs and hobgoblins don't always live in the same areas after all and both certainly have different requirements for their bases.
Depends; in my game we have both, with the former being quarreling pirate empires and the latter a highly effective continent-spanning theocracy. One has the advantage of superior shock-and-awe, one that of getting all tactical up in a bitch.
Go with what feels appropriate would be my answer.
>>47046151
You know what the benefit of having a toolbox is? You have more then one tool.
Using just ONE enemy race and just a few monsters in the M&M even though you have quite a few and the imagination to come up with more just makes you as lazy mentally as you are physically.
>>47046276
I was more asking the question on what you guys prefer or like the most ...
In Pathfinder? I combine the two, making sure "Orc" is the goblin term for them and "Hobgoblin" is everyone else's term for them.
Goblins create them using alchemy. Two goblin volunteers jump into a vat together. A vat full of GOBLIN MAGIC (and maybe some dead bugs), that fuses the two goblins together, body and soul. The end result is pretty much the dolgrim from Eberron, except symmetrical and possessing a few fire-based tricks. Hobgoblins/Orcs swiftly become champions of goblinkind.
Too bad they can't reproduce naturally.
>>47046276
>OP asks a particularly obvious question
>Respond with man-child vitriol
Typical /tg/.
>>47046151
They are just so different. So they are used for so different purposes.
Orc are brutish Barbarian thugs, vying for power in a chaotic mess of tribes and chieftains. They represent the wild combat ferocity of greenskins.
Hobgoblins on the other hand are great at bullying, they are vile, cunning and most importantly disciplined, like the other greenskins they revere power. However they allowed power to be gained through strength of armies, and tacticianship as well as brute strength.
Hobgoblins make such good mercenaries, and assassins, while Orcs make great pseudo-antagonists in barren areas where no human would live.
>>47046151
I run them as two really different species in my games.
Orcs are big, strong, green, and the former ruling nobility of the country of Mantera in not-south-america. One of the party members is the illegitimate heir to the throne. They mostly act as Manteran infantry and knights, and as samurai dudes on the other continent. Very militaristic and focused.
Hobgoblins on the other hand are one of the six subspecies of goblins, live in large plains as farmers, are psychotically xenophobic, and make wicker-man style scarecrow golems to kill trespassers. They're also about four feet tall, built like toothpicks, and have MtG Shadowmoor Kithkin eyes.
I prefer Hobgoblins if we're talking on a general level. They way they operate and how that effects stories is great.
>>47046151
That's interesting. I like my hobgoblins to have facial hair. Kinda like a mix between Axe from Dota 2 and Zeb from Star Wars Rebels.
Why aren't half-hobgoblins more popular?
>>47046151
Here's Zeb for those that don't know.
>>47046276
I understand what you're saying, especially when so many 'tools' are underutilized, but hobgoblins and orcs aren't functionally different enough to warrant using both unless for some reason race is important.
OP is asking what's preferred, not which is better.
>>47046151
he looks really pent up. i wish i could help doff his armor and relieve his stress.
>>47048610
I like using them the way mordor does, with orcs as the majority force while hobgoblins form their officer caste. Just fits with d&d lore a little better and lets me excuse using advanced military tactics when my players get too strong.
Orcs, of course.
>have hobgoblins
>have half-orcs
>but for some reason no orcs
>"Hey DM where are the orcs"
>just shrug "they're gone I guess"
>>47048595
Too many syllables?
Probably because hobgoblins aren't more popular.
>>47046151
I think orcs can fill both their roles. Some semi-nomadic raider orcs, and some organized sorta-civilized dickbag orcs. Having some variation like that within a fantasy race can keep it from seeming too much like a stereotype.
>>47048610
Unless your GM is hugely unimaginative and bad with monsters as anything but star blocks to fight, the differences DO matter.
Orcs tend to use small tribal raiding parties and very rarely gather up in huge hordes. They'll also work with/for/alongside other monsters (such as giant and ogres, and with ogres it's common enough that ogrillions exist) because they don't care about anything except strength and power.
Orc hordes can be broken just by meeting it with enough equivalent power that it smashes their ranks because they're naturally fractious and prone to infighting, or if they serve another group or individual killing them and letting the orcs fuck off. They're also more likely to move if presented with enough of a retaliatory force from the nicer folks.
Hobgoblins are smarter; more organized and better armed and certainly less stupid. Unlike orcs (who actually DO do the stupid LotR "charge in and fight as individuals" thing), they fight like an organized army, albiet one broken up into tribal bands. They're less likely to work with other races they'll use goblins as slaves plenty enough or as expendable shock troops with bugbears. They're also likely to use wargs as cavalry since they take beasts a lot. It's harder for them to get into larger groups because they need to be aware of internal treachery, but once they DO they're much more dangerous because they have actual rank systems and won't just fall apart because you ganked the leader. They also understand fortifications and siege shit better so rather then moving from place to place they'll find a good position and turn it into a fortress. They'll work as mercenaries for some groups, but they aren't very trustworthy in that regard and are literally only in it for the money.
If they're both just enemy stat blocks then the GM basically isn't using them properly at all because there's differences enough to actually matter.
>>47050757
I don't see why you need two whole separate races whose difference can be boiled down to disciplinary temperament. Why not just have one orc/hobgoblin race that, depending on the culture of the group, will behave differently? Why not just have one group of orcs that's smarter/more disciplined than another group?
It may just be me, but I've never been fond of super-hyper-focused sapient races. By this I mean there's a difference between a plant race focusing on plants and a fungus race focusing on fungi, but why does there NEED to be whole different species of sapient creatures to say "this group of CR 1/3 humanoids is irritable and self-destructive, while this group of CR 1/3 humanoids will follow their leader unless they see a moment to take power." If you're going to have orcs and hobgoblins, make them more distinguishable from each other in more interesting ways.
>>47046151
Hobgoblins are more of a threat. Good tactics, good armor, magic weapons. If orcs are the stereotypical barbarian horde, hobgoblins are more like Roman legions.
>>47050757
I'd rather use one or the other interchangeably, honestly, especially for orcs. Not only would it make things easier to explain half-orcs if orcs could be mercenaries, but I feel like it's something most people will do anyways. If you want a race prone to infighting and that's in small tribal raiding parties, you could use goblins or gnolls.
It's sort of like the halflings gnomes debate - most people would rather ignore gnomes because they feel they just step on halfling's fuzzy toes. There's too much overlap and not enough to really differentiate them.
>>47048595
Because they can't interbreed. A rather pleasant bonus they have over the big green rape ape creature that orcs have become.
>>47050364
The "half orcs" are just regular orcs, the "full orcs" of legend were just racist caricatures.
>>47051108
That's a personal taste thing then.
I'm not taking into account personal tastes (or personal settings either) because we're not talking about them on this thread, as the thread didn't specify "in your setting" or "how do you [blank]". The assumption was just base D&D by the extordinarily limited thread opener.
As a point of fact I'm not particularly attached to monofunctionary races either, but sometimes I just want to play or GM regular D&D and not some guy's Malazan knockoff where all races are in it but look and act completely different and I have to re-learn absolutely everything. I have an actual job that takes up a LOT of my time and even my free time is saddled with lots of responsibilities, so I don't always have the time to learn someone's "in my setting" stuff.
I'm only playing D&D maybe about 30 or 40% of the time with my group anyway. Maybe less.
>>47051393
>>47046151
Hobgoblins.
Hobs have a society. Their society has structure and organization and it's own methodologies. They have their own culture. It's more interesting to interact with them, either through their battle tactics or through their conversation on social norms.
Orcs pretty much just run around and hack at stuff. That's their biggest defining train. Everything about them, from their culture to their religion to their society, is about running around and hacking at stuff. There isn't much discourse to have, outside "Stop killing my people."
>>47046203
Thank you oh mighty dependsfag.Bullywugs
>>47046151
Hobgoblins; Orcs are animal scum.
>>47053701
Forgot pic.
>>47053701
Hobgoblins
LE > CE
>>47053778
Yeah, that's quite an impressive picture of a badass space orc.
>>47046151
Orcs are easier to find bara art of. So my vote is for them.
>>47046151
I have been an orcfag since day 1 of my nerdcareer, and although I'm a biased warcraftfag, as well, the course of time has only taught me that 'noble savage' should never just mean 'nice guy who wears animal skins'.
Whenever I get the chance, I flesh orcs out to be lean predators instead of hulking brutefags or sneaky slimefags. Their mindset is all about survival, which makes them generally less honourabru, but allows for a great variety of relationships with other races.
If you actually work smart with the races you're given, you don't need to throw another flavour of [race] in the mix - Which ultimately negates the need for hobgobbos.
