I understand that goblins are tan/gray with red/yellow eyes with pointy ears.
Hobgoblins are red/gray with yellow/brown eyes amd are bigger than goblins.
Orcs are green/grey and look like primative humans
But kobolds are suppose to be dark brown/black with red eyes. Some discriptions say they have a tail some don't mention it or show it in the picture.
Any help?
I understand that goblins are tan/gray with red/yellow eyes with pointy ears.
Hobgoblins are red/gray with yellow/brown eyes amd are bigger than goblins.
Orcs are green/grey and look like primative humans
But kobolds are suppose to be dark brown/black with red eyes. Some discriptions say they have a tail some don't mention it or show it in the picture.
Goblins can range between white to gray or copper complexion. Hobgoblins are tan or coppery. Goblins and Hobgoblins have red eyes.
Orcs vary more, from almost human-like to pale gray, brown, gray or pink and even spotted...
Kobold do have short tails and small horns. They look like small humanoid dogs with scales instead of fur, but they do have hair (on their heads only).
They vary from dark brown to black to dark green or gray.
The "Orcs of Thar" Gaz has all the info, and should be considered the most accurate, IMO, since it's more specific and detailed than other sources.
There are a lot of different pictures of kobolds out there- some of the 2E versions don't look quite like a lot of the other pictures, in particular (the ones I'm thinking of come from the Complete Book of Humanoids, which have the kobolds as less dog-like, and with these giant saucer eyes and no tails, IIRC.)
I've always taken their tails to be very short, stubby little things, but have assumed they are there.
The above is from the AD&D 1st edition Monster Manual.
This is a Tony DiTerlizzi illustration, originally from Dragon Mountain and reprinted in the AD&D 2nd edition Monstrous Manual.
Another one from the Monster Manual.
This is Kurtulmak, the kobold god, from the 1st edition Deities & Demigods book. His tail has a stinger at the end, but most kobold tails do not.
This is the 3rd edition kobold, as rendered by Sam Wood. The description of the monster is still the same as it always was (black scales, doglike, red eyes, ratlike tail) but the illustration is very different.
This last picture, from The Northern Reaches, is the only clear illustration I could find of specifically Mystaran kobolds, and it doesn't show their tails. Note that they do not have hair on their heads, though. Jim Holloway didn't draw any kobolds in The Orcs of Thar. The description of 0D&D kobolds meshes with those of AD&D kobolds. The Orcs of Thar does call their tails "short," but of course kobolds are themselves short, and what's short objectively may be long for a kobold. But whatever you prefer, of course.
"These small, evil, dog-like men usually live underground. They have scaly, rust-brown skin and no hair."
From the 1st edition AD&D Monster Manual: "The hide of kobolds runs from very dark rusty brown to a rusty black. They have no hair. Their eyes are reddish and their small horns are tan to white. They favor red or orange garb."
From The Orcs of Thar: "Kobolds are small, scaly creatures with short tails, various dog faces, and two small horns. When angry, they growl and bark like dogs, and wave their tails when they are happy. Their little horns are either light grey or ivory in color. Canis Minor Militaris: Rusty brown scales. Canis Minor Rapidus: Black scales or very dark green with brown shades; blue, green, or white manes depending on age. Canis Minor Numerus: Scales are dark grey with muddy splotches."
3rd edition Monster Manual: "A kobold's scaly skin ranges from dark rusty brown to a rusty black color. It has two light-colored horns on its doglike head, glowing red eyes, and a non-prehensile tail like that of a rat. Kobolds wear ragged clothing, favoring red and orange, and speak Draconic with voices that sound like yapping dogs."
So apparently the only kobolds with hair are the Canis Minor Rapidus, who have manes. The other two Mystaran breeds seem hairless.
I've always played Kobolds as having short tails, certainly no use in combat. I think the main difference is that in Mystara they derived from the Beastmen, but IIRC in 3e they are Draconic in origin. I've no knowledge of their origin in other editions unfortunately.
Ofcourse Gaz7 suggests that the Kobolds may in fact not be one of the Beastman races, but one of the major races of Mystara, whatever that means. The Dragon idea actually fits quite well with that now that I think about it...
Håvard
The Dragon idea actually fits quite well with that now that I think about it...
Håvard
I've settled with the compromise explanation that kobolds, in the creation epoch of the world, were very intelligent (for dogs, that is), semi-upright bipedal (like primates maybe) cousins of dogs and wolves that somehow became infused with draconic bloodlines. Since they are small, weak and cowardly, I'd say that the events leading to that were accidental, or later considered a failure by whatever dragon ruler or immortal was responsible.
I have a question now that we mention the origin of non-beastman humanoids. What is the origin of trolls and ogres on Mystara? I don't have Orcs of Thar with me anymore, but I think I recall it sais trolls are not beastman decended and that ogres are.
Being doglike could be just a result of convergent evolution.
IMC, all species where either created as is or altered from something else by some power or force. It just seems to be a Mystaran theme; many creatures have an 'origin' and even humans apparently make a rather sudden appearance around 6000 BC.
I remember a discussion about kobolds a while back. I know a few people liked the dog-ish kobold version, even if it was only because there are so many dragon/lizard type creatures compared to canine type creatures.
I have a question now that we mention the origin of non-beastman humanoids. What is the origin of trolls and ogres on Mystara? I don't have Orcs of Thar with me anymore, but I think I recall it sais trolls are not beastman decended and that ogres are.
Gaz10 has ogres and trolls both being descendants of Beastmen. Gaz7, on the other hand, has trolls as being one of the "original" races of creatures- along with giants and gnolls, IIRC.
Gaz10 has ogres and trolls both being descendants of Beastmen. Gaz7, on the other hand, has trolls as being one of the "original" races of creatures- along with giants and gnolls, IIRC.
So there is another problem, as everybody knows that the Gnolls were created by the Nithians using trolls and gnomes...
I like the trolls being one of the original races. IMC they are powers of nature (like fey), oldest embodiments of the more cruel side of nature. This as oposed to the beastmen races corrupted by Hel from human(oid)s.
So there is another problem, as everybody knows that the Gnolls were created by the Nithians using trolls and gnomes...
I like the trolls being one of the original races. IMC they are powers of nature (like fey), oldest embodiments of the more cruel side of nature. This as oposed to the beastmen races corrupted by Hel from human(oid)s.
Gaz7 really likes the "original races" concept. It throws in hints about the Kobolds being one of those too.
With Gnolls, I think their origin is pretty clear.
I like what you are saying about Trolls. The comparison to Fey is interesting. Heck, I could even see trolls being a race of Fey. Another sollution is to have the "root" troll having both Beastman and Great Troll ancestry.
For the Kobolds, I am really warming up to the Draconic ancestry connection. While this was never mentioned in any Mystaran material, it does fit rather well with the information from Gaz7. Also, the Chameleon/Dragon connection comes to mind...
Havard
So a quick GIS for kobold heros gives me the following links:
http://elfwood.lysator.liu.se/art/s/d/sdismukes/kobold_hero.jpg.html
http://elfwood.lysator.liu.se/art/s/d/sdismukes/kurren_bites-like-thorns.jpg.html
http://elfwood.lysator.liu.se/art/s/d/sdismukes/kurren_rolls-in-cowpats.jpg.html
Maybe I'm a little bit biased but I always liked the little furry Kobolds from the "Shadows over Mystara" video game. To my mind, the kobolds are related to the Gnolls rather than to goblins or dragons.
So a quick GIS for kobold heros gives me the following links:
http://elfwood.lysator.liu.se/art/s/d/sdismukes/kobold_hero.jpg.html
http://elfwood.lysator.liu.se/art/s/d/sdismukes/kurren_bites-like-thorns.jpg.html
http://elfwood.lysator.liu.se/art/s/d/sdismukes/kurren_rolls-in-cowpats.jpg.html
Nice images!
It seems to me that there is enough evidence on both sides to warrant for two races of Kobolds on Mystara: Gnollkin Kobolds (Mystaran) and Lizardkin Kobolds.
How about that?
Edit: Maybe the Gnollkin Kobolds were created by the Nithians as well, throwing Lizardkin Kobolds into the formula. This ties them fully into the setting...
Havard
Even before the Thar Gaz, I've considered them more dog-like than lizard-like. I suppose I've just never noticed the horn/scales references before the lizard-kin kobold discussion first came up on this board.
I do like the siggestion of two kobold subraces (or breeds if you prefer). Perhaps dog-kin are more concentrated in the KW (esp. the Broken Lands) with lizard-kin being more common worldwide, but with fewer numbers in each tribe. That way it could account for the differences in kobolds of BL vs. NR and SC.
Roger