quest givers shud be unkillable unless on your claim/vclaim

[Granger]

how hard it is to implement!

Given loftars track record: I would guess an hour. Multiply with pi to be on the safe side.

[jorb]

I think it's neat that you don't know which trees are quest givers unless you have interactions with them. I don't want to lose that, and I also don't think they should simply move to other trees and lose all identity.

[Field]

What if we get special exp event + monster spawn (a vengeful ghost) after 'killing' NPC?

1) Making life miserable for newbs - check
2) Getting EXP from it - check
Missing hard leather in recipe

[Granger]

I think it's neat that you don't know which trees are quest givers unless you have interactions with them. I don't want to lose that,

Noone here spoke of revealing their host to everyone.

and I also don't think they should simply move to other trees and lose all identity.

That depends on how one views them: in case they're a spirit inhabiting a stone/tree it would be no problem, in case you see them as the object itself (in the way of being a benign twist on tree from 'the evil dead') then you might come to a different conclusion.

I take it that you see it more from the latter perspective, thus are inclined to rather keep the displesantries that come with the current hands-off approach. But maybe you could listen to your users that, abnormally for discussions about changes on this forum, seem to wholehearthly not only agree that 'keep-as-is' isn't what's best for the game (from a players perspective - which, should you need the refresher, are in the end the ones that have to like it as they're a source of food for your children) but also agree on a reasonable way to modify them so the unfun downsides are adverted?

[overtyped]

I think it's neat that you don't know which trees are quest givers unless you have interactions with them. I don't want to lose that, and I also don't think they should simply move to other trees and lose all identity.

personally i see it as more as a spirit, if it moves to another object after losing it's host, that makes sense to me personally, instead of ceasing to exist altogether. What exactly is this "identity" that you think will be lost?

Isn't it just your own bias that allows it being griefable for new players? At least my bias doesn't negatively affect players.
It would be kind of cool to see the spirit move around and become something different.

[shubla]

I think it's neat that you don't know which trees are quest givers unless you have interactions with them. I don't want to lose that, and I also don't think they should simply move to other trees and lose all identity.

But when you interact with quest giver, he will appear as a marker on your map.
Have you devs changed your mind? Do you want us to know which ones give quests or not?

[jorb]

?

Once you have interacted with a questgiver you obviously know it.

[AntiBlitz]

fuking sigh......uuuuuuuugggghhhh fuck whoever was the guy who murdered Gerrick the quest giver. Wasnt a noob just looking for wood, as all the logs are untouched, they just chopped his ass down for whatever stupid reason they came up with. When does it become a crime or something to kill these quest givers? We dont really have ways to protect them atm, other then claiming them, and even thats gets annoying as we have tons of claims strung about everywhere and have to manage them all.

[synaris]

I think it should simply move into another boulder or tree nearby. This would make it impossible to kill them, unless one clears the whole map of trees and boulders.

While at it: they shouldn't like being owned, thus simply relocate in case they get claimed (similar as when their object gets destroyed).

i agree with this.

but how does claiming a quest giver before killing it make it difficult enough that griefers wouldnt bother with it? its not that hard to make an alt and drop down a personal claim.

[Terry6390]

When they are killed it's meant to be a setback, the system works as it is.