In summary of what I am saying, these are not features, but rather the absense of features that are not part of the game designer's vision.

Why do you think they have no stats? Because the developers designed towns as some sort of (very unrealistic) oasis, a place a player is happy to find, after facing who knows how many dangers in his/her travels. It's a place to relax/sleep/etc. Not a place where you can find more dangers, you won't ever need to defend yourself (I mean from life-threatening things. Not defending yourself because someone insulted your honor), it's impossible for your enemies to go inside and harm you. It's heaven on earth, a place protected by magic.

Obviously I'm not saying every single jRPG is like that, I'm sure there are exceptions, fortunately. For example, not all jRPGs remove poison damage if you're inside a town, so it's still possible to die.

It doesn't matter if it's not how the devs planed their world to spin, hence why they don't offer you the ability to change things, by inserting the rules in the code of the game or not. The fact that they forbid you of interacting with NPCs in certain ways (whatever the method they used to accomplish this), is putting a limit to the freedom of your character. Like it or not, they are limiting what the player is able to do.

Your example is not the best, because it makes no sense to expect being able to use spells in a game of chess. You're not a mage battling against another, inside a tower, in that game.
But it makes sense to expect to be able to attack or get attacked, in a game where you find hostility while you're exploring the world.
But no, towns are an alternate dimension, no one will dare to hurt you, you suddenly became the pope. Your holy aura will allow you to explore the town calmly.
And not creating criminals, or not giving you the ability to steal stuff, makes the town even more unrealistic. "No no, you can loot only outside the town walls".

These limitations are not a big deal in other genres, like a farm simulator, but we are talking about RPGs.
I don't think that my complaints are out of place.

Personally, when I am playing a JRPG, the idea of attacking townspeople or getting attacked does not even occur to me, for much the same reason that chess players don't even think of spell casting as an option; it's just not part of the game.

Also, by not implementing mechanics for attacking townspeople and having the guards come after you, the developers can put more effort into other aspects of the game, like balancing combat.

In any case, I don't see RPGs as being special in regards to whether such limitations are a big deal. To me, genres are defined by their style of gameplay, and turn-based gameplay where the outcome of actions is defined by character rather than player skill are what separates the genre from others. There's no reason that, say, one would excuse a farm simulator for not implementing theft, but not an RPG.

By the way, it is very common in JRPGs for there to be hidden items in houses and elsewhere in town, but for some reason nobody complains when you steal those items. (Also, there's the whole unrealistic method of stealing during combat, where you can steal items that would not have been dropped had you killed the enemy instead.)

Except that, in many JRPGs, poison damage can't kill you outside of combat, so having poison damage you inside town doesn't necessarily mean you can die there.

Does the original Zelda forbid Link from jumping? It's a similar situation here.

Your chess comparison isn't valid for this case, why you continue to use it?
Did you even read my post? The whole thing?
Oh it never occurred to you, really? I don't buy it.
If you never try to attack in any jRPG, how you know that it's not possible? Or you just assume that it's not possible in every japanese title, you never, ever, checked?

Except that, I'm talking about jRPGs you take poison damage and can die? Like you said "many", but not ALL. :)

Wow, am I speaking in latin or something? How clear do I need to be for you to understand? o.O
What you think forbidding someone of doing something means? Tell me, I'll love to read that. Also, elaborate why you think it's a similar situation (and Zelda? Couldn't you think something more obscure, less popular? Are you a casual gamer? Just curious).

Then you're a special snowflake or something.
Most people that I know are totally fine for a farm simulator to not have murder or theft, because it makes zero sense to have them. In a R-P-G it makes sense!

Farm simulator, for god's sake!

If you can't see why people would expect freedom to steal / attack people in towns you've never played a real RPG (with dices, books, papers, etc) in your life.
One of the reasons I like Fallout 1 and 2, is because it really feels like I'm playing a pen and paper RPG.
Of course it's much more limited, but the feel is there. :)

First of all, I think you are getting too worked up about something that isn't of critical importance. I think you should take a moment to relax.

The chess comparison does make some sense. In chess, the rules enumerate what moves are legal. In a video game, the game code indicates what actions are available.

You suggest that I haven't tried to attack. How would you suggest I do so? Take the original Dragon Quest, for example. I'm in town, how should I go about trying to attack this random townsperson? There's no command in the menu that will allow me to even attempt to perform such an action, as the attack command only appears during battle. (Similarly, the non-combat commands like the one to search for items don't appear during battle; the only shared commands are "item" and "spell" commands.

Not every game in a genre needs to have every feature. The original Zelda, as I mentioned, doesn't implement jumping. Zelda 2 doesn't have any way to push blocks. It's all gameplay aspects that would not fit with the game's design. If you're looking for an RPG, the original Rogue didn't even have (to my knowledge) any towns or shops, so you don't get to attack townspeople or steal in such games, but it's still an RPG.

One other thing: Not every RPG needs to feel like playing a pen and paper RPG. Sometimes, it's nice to play a game that gives you tons of options (and it is perfectly reasonable to enjoy such games), but sometimes one might prefer to play a simpler game. There's a reason I sometimes enjoy going back to games like Final Fantasy Mystic Quest or even the original Dragon Quest; I don't want to have to deal with tons of complexity all the time. (One other observation: Neither game has a skill point system or other character customization system (although in DQ1, your name *does* affect your stats), and hence I don't need to ever worry about making a bad level up choice, because the game does not even present such choices.)

One way of trying to attack, is by pressing keys in your keyboard.
It's not uncommon for developers to create keyboard shortcuts for important actions.
In Arcanum: Of Steamworks and Magick Obscura, you can press 'F2' (to hit your target) if you wish to attack, 'R' (if you just want to initiate combat mode) :
http://www.terra-arcanum.com/forums/index.php?threads/keyboard-shortcuts.1591/
See what I mean? "But how do you know about keyboard shorcuts?" Sometimes they can be found in the game manual, sometimes you have to try the keyboard keys yourself and see what they do. There's no law saying they need to inform players about them.
Anyway, I've concluded my participation here.

In Dragon Quest (originally called Dragon Warrior in the US), you are playing with a game controller, not a keyboard; hence there are no keyboard shortcuts.

In fact, here is the complete list of controls:
Control pad: Move around when not in battle or a menu. In menus, moves the cursor.
A button: Opens the menu outside of combat. When a menu is open (or when you have a YES/NO question to answer), this button confirms your choice.
B button: Lets you back out of the current menu. Does nothing outside of menus. If you try to leave the main combat menu this way, the prompt "Command?" will re-appear. If you have a YES/NO question, pressing B is a shortcut for saying "NO".
Start button: Gets you past the title screen, but has no other function.
Select button: Has no function.

There are no other buttons on the controller, so there are no other actions you can take.

I think you should try some JRPGs, as it sounds like you have no experience with that sub-genre. A good place to start for you might be Dragon Quest 3 (I recommend playing one of the remakes rather than the original here); it's a good game, and it does give you some choices about your main character and party composition, but it's still clearly a JRPG in this respect. Just don't go in expecting another Fallout and you should be fine.

Oh right, I forgot Dragon Quest is the only jRPG, so if it uses a controller that destroys my argument, you win, yaaaay.
Now you're just trolling, I expected more of you.
Ridiculous.

Here's the thing: JRPGs, in general, have been designed for consoles that use game controllers and not keyboards. If you look at any big-name JRPG, you will see that the game is designed for a game console, and is released on said platforms, if not exclusively, before you see it on other platforms. I could argue that this did, in fact, shape the evolution of this sub-genre, and can explain partly why the games are designed the way they are.

I note that the Final Fantasy series is similar in this respect. In Final Fantasy, A opens dialog, B backs out of menus (and otherwise does nothing), Select lets you re-order your party, and Start opens the menu (which takes up the full screen, unlike the one in Dragon Quest). Again, no "try to attack" option.

It really does sound like you don't have any JRPG experience, so as I said, I recommend trying one.

Also, I think you are over-reacting; the fact that RPGs exist that have JRPG-style towns does not prevent you from playing those that have WRPG-style towns.

Welcome to my black list, you are entering no future giveaways from me. Congrats! =D
And no there's no second chances, sayonara.

I have not been trolling; I have just been (trying to) sensibly respond to your posts, and it does sound like you need more experience of JRPGs that are dissimilar to the WRPGs that you (I assume) play heavily.

I think you have been overreacting to a simple discussion. I'm not saying the WRPG approach is bad; I am just saying there is some merit to the JRPG approach.

That went downhill quickly. You jrpg noobs! :P

Can't call me a jrpg noob, I've defeated Fly Beelzebub.

On the topic of rpg town though, I'm fond of the anything goes attitude of Morrowind.

Oddly, I think I prefer the approach taken in Arena and earlier Ultima games. In Morrowind, if you kill someone, that person is dead forever; in earlier Ultima games, if you kill someone, that person will be back as soon as you leave town and re-enter. Arena is a bit odd in that the only killable townspeople are randomly-generated disposable characters, and they will be re-generated if you enter a building and leave. Anyone important (including shopkeepers) doesn't exist as far as offensive action is concerned.

(Also, I am certainly not a JRPG noob; I am actually more familiar with that genre than I am of WRPGs.)

Well, in fantasy RPGs - like Dragon Quest (Ye Olde English and all) - a town is a safe area because they were safe areas in reality during the dark ages (safe so to speak). It is the entire reason castles and fortified walls were built to begin with, for safety and protection so it only makes sense that towns would be safe havens in RPG games.

it isn't limited to JRPGs, Tristram in Diablo is always safe. In Diablo II, the Rogue Encampment, Lut Golhein, the Kurask Docks are all safe places, same with Diablo III. Torchlight is always safe, the different towns in Torchlight II are always safe. In Titan Quest the cities are safe, too.