Good point about the base set monsters- it's consistent with FFG's policy about expansions being designed to work with the base game independent of any other expansions.

Also, Charmy, you're right that Splig is generally accompanied by goblins. However, just like "Splig's revenge," if FFG wanted Splig's plot deck to be about goblins, they could have done it much more easily than by trying to pick between wilderness/building, and just written "a monster group with 'goblin' in its name." However, that's not the route they went. Those who are displeased with that decision are of course free to houserule.

FFG does says the deck was intended to be played with wilderness, but is this really true, or is it some sort of answer so they do not have to admit they did a mistake ?

Since the base game have goblins and building traits, it is possible that in previous installement or beta test, goblins had wilderness and they "forgot" to change, some sort of "misprint".

it is indeed a possibility

It is a good point about the base set monsters. I am sure this was one of the deciding reasons for FFG to choose to make the Goblin Uprising plot deck so similar to the Tangled Web plot deck. After all it would seem that players who only purchase the base set would be more likely to purchase Splig's lieutenant pack, if the plot deck affected more of the monsters in that set. So thematic appropriateness may have given way to economic viability.

But for those of us who have purchased more or dare I say ALL of the things, the decision to focus Goblin Uprising on wilderness monsters may make Splig's lieutenant pack seem less valuable via thematic confusion and mechanical redundancy. And, for me, understanding the likely reasons why that decision was made, does not invalidate the thematic and mechanical arguments for house ruling the change in focus of the Goblin Uprising plot deck from the "Wilderness" trait to the "Building" trait.

The main argument is that the deck is called "Goblin Uprising," but doesn't really affect goblins. To me, that's a weak argument- did anyone consider that the "goblin" being referred to is Splig? What does it matter what monsters his cards affect?

However an "Uprising" is a revolution or revolt, which implies more than one goblin. Otherwise why not just name it "Monster Uprising" or "Wilderness Uprising" or "Splig's Uprising". When one hears "Goblin Uprising" the first and most natural interpretation is "An uprising of goblins" not "An uprising of miscellaneous monsters led by a goblin."

But it'd be a pretty worthless deck if it focused mostly on goblins - as has been mentioned there aren't many in the base set and two of the things listed as goblinoids in all of these posts are conversion pack only, which I would guess that most people with Descent that aren't on these forums don't have at all.

But it'd be a pretty worthless deck if it focused mostly on goblins - as has been mentioned there aren't many in the base set and two of the things listed as goblinoids in all of these posts are conversion pack only, which I would guess that most people with Descent that aren't on these forums don't have at all.

Yes, I concede the point about the base set monsters above. But for a collector like me who owns not only all of the 2E materials, but most of the 1E materials as well, the house rule changing the focus of the "Goblin Uprising" plot deck from the "wilderness" trait to the "building" trait seems justified.