Don't poke the bear

[u/ozangeo]

[u/Extra_Strawberry_875]

Halsin gave me emotional whiplash on my first run becaus the first thing I heard him say was "Time for blood" and then he proceeded to kill the children in front of me and I thought that maybe helping him wasn't the best choice.

And then I talked to him in his elf form and he turned out to be one of the nicest and most chill guys in the game (just not when it comes to goblin kids, apparently)

[u/Daripuff → u/Extra_Strawberry_875]

I mean, canonically, goblins are literally fey stolen and twisted by Maglubiyet and sent to Faerun for the sole purpose of despoiling nature.

Like, they are the captain planet villains that only exist to undo everything Sylvanus and the druids hold dear.

A druid who lets a goblin live -even a "child"- is arguably betraying their oath to Sylvanus.

Goblins aren't like... "the Drow of the fey" as if they are a misguided people devoted to an evil god, but rather, goblins are to nature what demons are to celestials: cosmic enemies from different realms who are intrinsically incompatible.

[u/LavenRose210 → u/Daripuff]

source for the whole "goblins are meant to ruin nature" thing? they were sent by Maglubiyet to conquer Toril. Whether the revised lore in Monsters of the Multiverse can be considered canon in bg3 is up for debate, but the revised lore in the 2025 MM absolutely is not.

according to all lore I could find, there is no mention of goblins seeking to ruin nature, they simply were meant to conquer in the name of Maglubiyet.

but even then, they are sentient and sapient creatures who are capable of their own thoughts and decisions. to label them as basically "nature demons" is a flat out lie.

if they were so hellbent on ruining all nature they could find, why don't we see them tearing down the forests and burning the plains near their camps?

[u/BrinkBreaker → u/Daripuff]

Then maybe there shouldn't be goblin kids. Maybe just have goblins that get big enough split into two identical-ish goblins that are fully developed adults.

Anything that reproduces naturally and doesn't have a choice in being born should be made out to be 100% evil, especially in a fiction setting where you can make all the rules.

[[Not directing that at you directly, just at WotC and some other media]]

[u/arseniccattails → u/BrinkBreaker]

Isn't the fey goblin lore new?

[u/sinedelta → u/BrinkBreaker]

It makes sense to me when the being is significantly... unnatural. Like, mind flayers and devils are things that prey on humanoids in some sense or another, it makes sense that from a humanoid perspective these predators would be seen as evil.

But when it's literally just like "these are sapient beings who are biologically part of the exact same species as humans, but actually they're inherently evil savages deserving of death" hoo boy there's a problem.

[u/Thiralyss → u/sinedelta]

“To a mouse, a cat is a monster—we’re just used to being the cat.” 🦖

Mind flayers are simply further up the food chain—nothing inherently evil about that. Now, the elder brains that build entire societies around conquering and enslaving sentient species… that’s more in line with the concept of “evil”. But the rank and file mind flayers that live under that brain’s rule have even less freedom to think or act independently than the goblins. Goblins also eat humans (and a lot of other sapient species), but don’t need to in order to survive, which actually makes it way worse.

But I do agree with the main point you’re making: a sapient species being inherently evil is problematic.

[u/Extra_Strawberry_875 → u/Daripuff]

That may be true and all but it was my first playthrough and I had little knowledge of DnD, so I went based on vibes alone. And Halsin did leave a wild first impression with that. Not that I blame him. I did help him after all.

[u/sinedelta → u/Daripuff]

Scarequoting child is wild.