I'm searching for the words "non combatants"

[Sergio]

Are there descriptions of non combatants inside D&D manuals, apart from cityscape?

[zlefin]

I'm not aware of any in 3.5;
that verbiage was used in some older editions of DnD iirc, though perhaps in a different context.

it might help with the question to have more background on what exactly you're looking for/why you're looking.

[Sergio]

I was talking with a friend and he told me that cityscape manuals do use terms like that one that aren't used in any of 3.5 manuals and that itself is a clear sign of a 'not professional work' meant as a clear sign of the fact they aren't hired writes by wizard of the coast that do writing job for working.

[Luccan]

I can't really comment on its relevance in cityscape, but "non-combatants" appear in monster manual entries (in tables under Organization), generally for large humanoid groups or other intelligent creatures with some form of social structure.

Edit: For instance, in addition to the adult, classed members of a Goblin tribe (mostly Warriors) a tribe has "100% non-combatants". I think it usually refers to children, but it might also apply to eggs (for kobolds) and maybe(?) just general non-fighters


Edit Again: Here's the line from the first Monster Manual (p.7) about non-combatants:

Noncombatants can include young, the infirm, slaves, or other individuals who are not inclined to fight. A creature's Society section may include more detail on noncombatants.

[Luccan]

From the Monster Manual:

Just edited my post after looking it up, too.

[BloodSnake'sCha]

There is a flaw name non combatants that give you -2 on melee attacks.
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/bu...acterFlaws.htm

[Mr Adventurer]

he told me that cityscape manuals do use terms like that one that aren't used in any of 3.5 manuals and that itself is a clear sign of a 'not professional work' meant as a clear sign of the fact they aren't hired writes by wizard of the coast that do writing job for working.

Utter nonsense.

[Jack_Simth]

Utter nonsense.

Especially when compared to some of the standard texts from WotC....

[Necroticplague]

Especially when compared to some of the standard texts from WotC....

I'm not even sure I follow the logic. Yes, the writers occasionally make mistakes. Heck,I've gotten into RAW debates that mostly hinge on the fact that a term genuinely is undefined in DnD terms (Touch of Golden Ice, for instance, has a multitude of interpretations resting on the fact 'ravaged' is undefined). I fail to see how that means the writers weren't writers.