In retrospect you can say Phandelver sucks, but when I bought it there weren't exactly a lot of other options that didn't require conversion. It was designed to be played out of the box, so you spent time playing. I mean yes, I did go out of the way to make a map of northern Karameikos to place it in, but it's not like I HAD to locate it in Mystara.

Quote from: S'mon;1046996(from my blog, a little rant)

Inspired by common recommendations to use it as a GM's first 5e adventure, I have to say I disagree.

The problems start with the very first encounter, and what it says about the world.

Why are 4 goblins ambushing a well armed party of 4-6 larger and likely tougher looking travellers - the PCs?  Answer: To give PCs a starting encounter. From goblin perspective it makes no sense. They would let such go past & wait for easier prey.

Why do the goblins use such sub-optimal tactics, with 2 charging into melee to get slaughtered? Answer: So the PCs can win. Because if the goblins were to use sniping tactics from cover, combined with their racial ability to hide, disengage etc, they might well actually win.

This is a terrible first encounter which sends the message that the world exist for the benefit of the PCs. It would work much better to (for instance) have four drunken goblins lounging around the wagon Paizo-style, a wine butt spilling the last dregs onto the ground - ie the PCs got lucky. Then the goblins can even react in confused & suboptimal manner without straining plausibility.

But don't set up an ambush that is suicidal from the POV of the ambushers.

They're goblins.

They're a low level mung mob high in base instinct & impulse, and low in reason and self discipline.

Their strengths should be unpredictability (stemming from greed & power seeking), and numbers.  

I'd have more of an issue giving new players the idea that the average goblin is a learned student of Sun Tzu, and/or that war simulationism is expected at the gaming table.

Quote from: H0undM@ster;1047942They're goblins.

They're a low level mung mob high in base instinct & impulse, and low in reason and self discipline.

Their strengths should be unpredictability (stemming from greed & power seeking), and numbers.  

I'd have more of an issue giving new players the idea that the average goblin is a learned student of Sun Tzu, and/or that war simulationism is expected at the gaming table.

I was thinking that considering how many player characters have done the same thing. Sure it's okay to play adversaries as smart but it's okay for them to be dumb as well. How often are there news articles about people dying in stupid ways? Monsters should also have the right to rush headlong into stupidity.

Quote from: Krimson;1047943I was thinking that considering how many player characters have done the same thing. Sure it's okay to play adversaries as smart but it's okay for them to be dumb as well. How often are there news articles about people dying in stupid ways? Monsters should also have the right to rush headlong into stupidity.

That's actually a very good point (above and beyond all the other good reasons for this fight to happen).

Seriously, "Leeroy Jenkins" is funny because there is a load of truth in it.

Goblins are literally the stupid monster race. That's their shtick. If they can't be dumb then who can.

But also, that fight is infamous for having a good chance to wipe them out at level 1, so it's not even that dumb.

Quote from: Krimson;1047943Sure it's okay to play adversaries as smart but it's okay for them to be dumb as well. How often are there news articles about people dying in stupid ways? Monsters should also have the right to rush headlong into stupidity.

For me, its as straightforward as:

Many races within a fantasy setting will not think & behave as humans do.

Which personally, makes them more believable. I'm not fond of the habit of humanizing things not human, from the "its a serial killer shark" in Jaws, to goblins in my leisure time make believe

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;1047987Goblins are literally the stupid monster race. That's their shtick. If they can't be dumb then who can.

5e goblins are INT 10 WIS 8, and are statted as shifty tricksters. 5e ogres are stupid.

Quote from: H0undM@ster;1047990Many races within a fantasy setting will not think & behave as humans do.

Darwin Award is a real thing. Behaviour sufficiently contra-survival will get selected against.

Anyway if it was say 2 orcs or hobgoblins & 2 goblins, it'd make sense for the melee brutes to charge while the goblins sniped.

Quote from: S'mon;1048023Darwin Award is a real thing. Behaviour sufficiently contra-survival will get selected against.

Anyway if it was say 2 orcs or hobgoblins & 2 goblins, it'd make sense for the melee brutes to charge while the goblins sniped.

If it's two hobs and two gobs, I'd expect the goblins to be forced into a charge while the hobs try and flank.

Quote from: S'mon;10480225e ogres are stupid.

As are many PC adventurers, excepting Wizards, Eldritch Knight Fighters, and Arcane Trickster Rogues. For everybody else, INT is the king of dump stats in 5e.

Quote from: HappyDaze;1048031As are many PC adventurers, excepting Wizards, Eldritch Knight Fighters, and Arcane Trickster Rogues. For everybody else, INT is the king of dump stats in 5e.

You can't dump any 5e stat below 8 using array or point buy. Ogres are INT 5, compared to Goblin INT 10, Orc INT 7, Hobgoblin INT 10, Bugbear INT 8.

But I agree INT 8 PCs are very common in 5e!

Quote from: Warboss Squee;1048029If it's two hobs and two gobs, I'd expect the goblins to be forced into a charge while the hobs try and flank.

Hobgoblins need to be in close order to use Martial Advantage, while goblins benefit from Hiding each round to get advantage on their attacks. So that'd be bad tactics for both.

Quote from: S'mon;1048023Behavior sufficiently contra-survival will get selected against

Successful survival traits isnt a one answer game, its dependent on environment.
Even then, different successful strategies (solitary, paired & pack) develop within the same regions.    

The actual world is littered with droves of INT 10 humans (many players) that cant, dont or wont approach challenges with that level of tactical priority or investment. A lot of people in my experience, do not associate optimal with "fun".

...and regardless of the present written INT rating for goblins, theres plenty of fantasy material (including D&D) presenting them as a low tier chaotic "king of the hill" swarm race. Which I find much more interesting than the modernly popular habit of re-skinning monsters into acceptable potential player races.

Quote from: H0undM@ster;1047990For me, its as straightforward as:

Many races within a fantasy setting will not think & behave as humans do.

Which personally, makes them more believable. I'm not fond of the habit of humanizing things not human, from the "its a serial killer shark" in Jaws, to goblins in my leisure time make believe

In some species of ants, individuals will sacrifice themselves for the colony. That could be a feature of goblin tribalism. Or maybe they can reproduce fast enough that rushing headlong into stupidity IS their main tactic, making sense in the context that Zerg Rushing your enemies takes advantage of superior numbers, though in 5e the encounter ratios are far lower, but that can be fixed with some minor tweaking and application of a mook rule. Oh geez, Google "Zerg Rush". Riffing off the alien mindset of a nonhuman species, certainly they may have tactics and strategy, but that doesn't mean their tactics and strategy mesh with what we generally understand and accept to be tactics and strategy.

Quote from: S'mon;10480225e goblins are INT 10 WIS 8, and are statted as shifty tricksters. 5e ogres are stupid.

Humans have 10 INT and look how dumb they are in real life.

I think of them as shifty tricksters but about as mature and wise as children.

Imagine if the goblins were 10 year olds.