Why is attacking non hostile NPC's discouraged?

[nemusator]

  Simply because it can bug factions. So if you do this you might bug everything up for a player who will do the quest next. F.e., some crucial NPC's for quest can get taken out, leaving a player stranded, or similar, you may create some not so realistic situations where fawns attack birds, birds attack fawns and players, etc...

 

  Anyway, if it is possible for you, whoever you might be to restrain yourself from such for the sake of everyone's enjoyment, thank you and may Sharessans fulfill all your wishes... 

[Warlord]

Heh, or .. there is also a matter of immersion, too, and we're not only in a complete mechanical world

A PC killing an NPC shouldn't bug the faction for others. NPCs attacking NPCs is unrelated to what a player does against an NPC, that's another back-end matter.

Did something otherwise break recently?

[nemusator]

Just a common sense I guess in not spoiling the fun for others. There are plenty of ways to RP without bugging stuff.

The dungeon in which this occured is Jasminxtor's tower, and previously mentioned wizard didn't stand a chance against all the waves.

[Dobian]

[thearchaeologist]

When you Kill a non hostile NPC (murder), you assume that the countless unrepresented npcs (witnesses) just ignore you.

It had been stated by multiple DMs that the game cannot handle the actual population of Cormyr.

The roads have adventurers and travelers and merchants and commoners walking and riding in various directions.

[Southpaw]

Jun 14, 2020 15:20:35 GMT -5 thearchaeologist said:

When you Kill a non hostile NPC (murder), you assume that the countless unrepresented npcs (witnesses) just ignore you.

It had been stated by multiple DMs that the game cannot handle the actual population of Cormyr.

The roads have adventurers and travelers and merchants and commoners walking and riding in various directions.

While this is true, there are also non-hostile NPC's in areas where it would be reasonable to assume there are not witnesses, such as a prisoner at the end of a dungeon you just cleared.  I could misinterpret the intent of this thread, but I take the original comment to be about those NPC's that don't have other NPC's around them to see, and/or to add the bugging of the system as a second reason not to.  That is, this reason not to attack non-hostile NPC's is not a replacement or contradiction of the very true statement you have made, but in addition to it, even when those unrepresented witnesses can be assumed to not be there.

[shivers]

or late at night...

[lucid]

Yeah well the point here is "could be" and "assumed not to be there" are variables which can only be answered by a DM. Skipping the Witness portion is only part of the issue. You are also not allowing for Vengeful Spirits, for some cleric casting Speak With Dead, or a werewolf ranger picking up your scent and following you.

Just get a DM to witness your murderhobo habits.

[Southpaw]

Jun 16, 2020 7:20:36 GMT -5 lucid said:

Yeah well the point here is "could be" and "assumed not to be there" are variables which can only be answered by a DM. Skipping the Witness portion is only part of the issue. You are also not allowing for Vengeful Spirits, for some cleric casting Speak With Dead, or a werewolf ranger picking up your scent and following you.

Just get a DM to witness your murderhobo habits.

I feel fairly safe in saying that when there are unrepresented NPC’s present, there are also some level of represented NPC’s visible. The issue with unrepresented NPC’s is you can’t knock off three characters who stand there without moving and consider an entire city block cleared of NPC witnesses. But if you can’t count on an absence of NPC’s even in places that look totally clear, then you can’t do anything you don’t want observed, including PVP or even talking about controversial subjects without a DM present. I’d think the “use common sense” rule applies here.