Woolfe's page

15 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS


Ipslore the Red wrote:


Congrats on necroing a thread,

My pleasure

Ipslore the Red wrote:
and the only major nation in the world other than America is China, and maybe Russia if you want to be generous. Every other nation is nearly irrelevant.

Actually china does use metric, they metrificated in 1925, and Russia was 1918. Like many metric western systems there are still residual usage of their original system in general use.

And I like how you write off the second largest market Paizo has for Pathfinder (EUROPE) as irrelevant. LOL as I said it was the reactionary attitude to having multiple versions.

Ipslore the Red wrote:
If you wanted to know why Paizo doesn't support metric: wordcount. As others have said, most people don't mind it that much, so the profit would be minimal. It's not worth it to give metric translations of every imperial unit. And Pathfinder is an American game, so no, you won't be able to convince Paizo or, more importantly, a good chunk of their customers to replace imperial with metric.

Oh no they can't do that its not worth it!

Really, where are you stats and figures that support your statement? Direct me to the US vs Rest of world sales figures. Direct me to the sales data that shows the difference in sales of a metric vs an imperial system. You can't can you. So how exactly do you know that it is not worth it.

Also just to repeat what I said earlier, I initially was looking at the electronic version, so physical publishing costs don't apply to the same degree there.
Also you are aware the German version is in Metric already. So all the conversion work is already done. Its literally just the wordcount. Which is only an issue because Paizo made a decision to hold their published books so that things don't change pages. A noble yet shortsighted idea.


Guurzak wrote:

You have been flagged HEINOUS for using necromancy!

Your alignment has shifted towards evil.
Warning: you are freely attackable for the next 15 minutes.

I'll take that. As far as many are concerned I probably am evil for my heretical views that publishing both a metric and imperial system would actually be of benefit to Paizo. :lol:

Seriously tho, I won't buy the game until there is a metric version. It's a comment on how much I would like to give them my money, that I come back every 6 months or so to see if they have come to their senses and are now supporting a system that the majority of the world uses.


Pamela Elizabeth wrote:
Just out of curiosity, are players outside the United States annoyed by having all the measurements in feet, pounds, etc., or are there 'translated' resources available? Or do you guys just not care?

I went looking for a new game system last year. I found Pathfinder, I was interested. I noted they had electronic only versions of the manuals etc. So I asked if they had metric, and if not why not?

The reaction I received put me off purchasing the system.

I use metric. I understand Metric.
I understand imperial measures to a degree.
I don't understand imperial weights.
I don't understand Fahrenheit.

To clarify when I say I don't understand, I mean I can't at a glance implicitly know what it is. I have to think about it. As opposed to Metric Weights and Celsius.

In today's day and age, there is no excuse for not supporting metric, every major nation in the world except for the US is now metric.(Yes even the UK)

So long story short. Yes I was annoyed, but I was more annoyed by the reactionary attitudes I received on these forums, and the lack of official comment on it.


This is for the online system. You are not subject to the vagrancies of physical publishing. So there is no reason it could not be done as a simple option.

You define your measurements as variables, and then change it based on locale.

You then choose and design your system to convert automatically.

There exists several different ways to do this, it could be done accurately, or based on a one of the systems that exist in P&P world that round to give "simple" numbers, rather than accurate.

Its not hard(this doesn't mean it won't take work to do). You could even create a whole new set of measurements if you wanted.

Then those who wish to use a measurement that they can understand, can so choose. Those who wish to choose a measurement that feels in line with fantasy can(which is silly anyway, as if it were really to feel fantastical the measurements would be in some completely different format)

This resistance to supporting the population of the rest of the world is reactionary and insane, especially when it is so simple to do. (Oh and before you ask, yes I think companies that are not US based, but sell into the US market should also be offering the same options)


Kolokotroni wrote:
Excluding tables, there are 375 instances of foot and 837 of feet in the core rules (this was done with a quick copy and paste via the lite pdfs so I make no promises about accuracy, but I'm fairly confident). Forgeting about how the numbers would shift simply changing foot to meter, and feet to meters would create an additional 2049 characters. Thats more then enough to screw up layout.

Agreed and now that I know how important the layout is to Paizo, it makes sense.

But my point stands, if Paizo were NOT as concerned by the layout, it would be feasible, logical, and possibly even good business sense. ;)

Kolokotroni wrote:
Quote:

If the pages do get out of whack, you deal with it. <Snip>.

Versioning yes, but as others have said, paizo's layout is super important to it and revisions to the rules that the devs actually wanted were limited due to page count maintenance. So no, dealing with it isnt an issue, and doing it without affecting page count is REALLY hard when paizo takes great pains both to completely fill each page. Seriously, crack a paizo book. You wont see alot of empty space where there are words. Chapter titles sure, but when the text starts, between the art, the words and tables, they cover the whole page, pretty much every time. Even slight shifts in character count could mess that up and require significant revision.

I don't have a Paizo book to crack :( (my whole reason for ending up here is that I asked Paizo Customer Support about a metric version before I bought anything.:LOL:), but I am fast getting exactly that impression.

Kolokotroni wrote:
Doing what you ask would be about as much effort as it took to do the 'lite pdfs' which is...

What are the 'lite pdfs'? Are they just the PDF version of the physical editions?


LazarX wrote:
Woolfe wrote:
Do you have experience in this area, if so I will be keenly interested to hear what you have to say.

I worked at Copytone a graphics company in Manhattan for twenty years and the bulk of that was in it's Quadratone pre-press division as Technical Manager. We did a variety of output, print, multi-media, for corporate customers<More than adequate experience snipped>

Letter counts are not the only issue. different letters, symbols kern differently which again throws in slight adjustments in paragraph structure which become major when cast over a single page, not to mention chapter work.

That makes sense. Who tended to perform that sort of work? Was it something everyone learnt or was it a specialist activity?

LazarX wrote:
You're also overlooking that the various measurements are not only spelled differently but constructed differently in grammar as well. Foot, Feet, Meter, Kilometer, and english measurement will use different terms. Fathoms for ocean depth, instead of feet or yards, whereas metric uses the same terms irregardless of context.

No didn't overlook that. Assumed this would be the main spot that human intervention was required, but these are all "english" rules that can be managed. If scripted controls get a high percentage of the work, then the other is handled by exception. But this sort of thing is not hard. It is "work" but it isn't hard. This is kind of the point I was making. If you can script something then generally it doesn't require complex thought. Often elements that can't be scripted fail, not because of complexity, but because the script has no context, and can't make decisions. (Which incidentally you can build in, but it would be a long and slow process to account for every crazy permutation of the english language)

LazarX wrote:
You also don't take into account that blind substitution would also not account for words used in multiple context. "Foot" is not only a measure of length, it's the description of the terminal appendage of a leg. "Meter" is not only the name for a unit of measurement, but also a measuring device.

Again, yes I do. I keep saying that running the script alone is not enough. There would be work required. But this only requires a knowledge of the English language, it doesn't require the knowledge of the RPG system.

My point is that with the technology available today this has got to be simpler than it was say 15 years ago.

LazarX wrote:
Paizo's on demand customisation is nothing more than the adjustment of a watermark, which is inserted in a blank spot of page on a completely separate graphics layer which does not interact with text. What you would propose involves a search and replace of body text within the text layer, which is considerably more complicated and fraught with minefields.

I wasn't even aware of the "On demand" thing until it was mentioned in this thread. It is not something that factored into my considerations.

I come from a technical background, system administration in IT to be exact. I look at these problems with an eye to automation. Because on a day to day basis this is what I do.
Language is a controllable factor, as are measurements. To me it is logical that you should be able to use the available tools to not only identify the areas that would need change, but to build scripting utilities that make the changes as well. Of course there are always exceptions, ALWAYS. But you build in the facility to address that in your processes.

So a simple search and replace is not actually what I was suggesting. Others assumed that and read it that way. Right from the start I have been talking about script based controls. I am sure a search and replace would be a component of that, but certainly not the only element.
This sort of scripting stuff normally goes through several revisions with manual input before it gets to even an 80/20 point. (That being handling the 80%, and treating the 20% as exception)

My big point was that once you had laid the framework for having both an imperial and a metric version, you should be able to build your master document so that it can be modified between the two in a more efficient manner. For example being less specific in the language used around distance. Not stating distances in the text but having it in the "table" etc.

I don't know the kerning etc requirements around this sort of publishing, this is something that I thought would have been mostly automatic nowadays, because it seems relatively set in its variables etc. But you give the impression that it is much more of a visual/artistic element than purely technical.

Thank you for explaining it.

Most importantly, in all of this, I was not aware of Paizo's decision regarding the pages being the same between revisions. That actually does make it near impossible to do, and is a valid, logical, reason why not to do it.

However if at some point they decide to do a new Version that is going to change the numbering. (Which, assuming they are having that much trouble fitting things like errata in, might not be totally unreasonable)
Then building it to support 2 distance systems right from the outset would be worthwhile. For all the reasons I have already listed.


BigDTBone wrote:
Woolfe wrote:
BigDTBone wrote:
Each print version (ie, 1-5) maintain page integrity from the last version. That way someone with the 3rd print of the CRB doesn't have different pagination of someone with the 1st or the 5th. This is important because supplemental books will often reference earlier books (BY PAGE NUMBER) so they don't have to reprint materials that are already available. When the reader is told the info they need is on page 344 of the CRB, it needs to be there.

Impressive, how do they manage with adding Errata in to newer versions, or do they not do that?

What if there is a significant rule change or an additional component? Or does that generally not happen?

The design team has been on record several times indicating that errata is limited by pagination. This also prevents major system changes. Recently errata was implemented to the stealth rules which was much more abbreviated than the design team wanted but it is what was permitted by the space on that page. (I personally prefer the errata stealth rules to the play test alternate stealth rules.) Also, a bunch of errata is the removal of text rather than the addition.

Ah see now that makes a huge difference. I wasn't aware of that as a decision. It's a massive undertaking, and must be very restrictive for them.

That completely changes the situation, this is something that they have obviously made a conscious decision on, and so they obviously don't want to go back on that decision if they can avoid it. I still think the tables and "Table like" areas would be fine. But certainly any edits to the body text would be very painful, obviously not impossible, but probably hard enough to make it "less worthwhile".

Thank you for explaining that. As I have stated I am new here and have not been following Paizo's efforts for very long. Things like this might be obvious for some of you but are new to me.

The only reason I am on here asking about this is that the customer service people suggested it.


BigDTBone wrote:
Each print version (ie, 1-5) maintain page integrity from the last version. That way someone with the 3rd print of the CRB doesn't have different pagination of someone with the 1st or the 5th. This is important because supplemental books will often reference earlier books (BY PAGE NUMBER) so they don't have to reprint materials that are already available. When the reader is told the info they need is on page 344 of the CRB, it needs to be there.

Impressive, how do they manage with adding Errata in to newer versions, or do they not do that?

What if there is a significant rule change or an additional component? Or does that generally not happen?


Kolokotroni wrote:
As others have said, this isnt just a matter of find and replace. It would change the layout of the entire product. '60ft Cone' doesnt take up the same amount of space as '18m cone'. Meter and Foot, or Meters and Feet take up different space. That might not seem like much, even over the course of a 20 something page document its enought to throw off page counts, and even more so in the multihundred page hard covers. Paizo would have to make such changes to an english version of the product and then re-examine the layout to make sure everything still fits since they work very hard to make everything fit a certain way (like how the spreads work in the bestiary). If it was a flat text or word document it wouldnt be an issue. But as a product with art, specific layouts and is meant to look the same as a particular printed book, its not a simple task.

Sure, this might happen. I think it would be much less than what is suggested.

Tables etc would have been authored in such a way that they could handle larger numbers, because well you know what if there is a larger number. You should be able to make tables fit the same space.

So its really only the in text stuff. I don't have a copy, but how often are measurement's used on any specific page outside of "table like" sections? Especially if you ignore the story "fluff".

So I assume in spell descriptions and Beastiary, and charactr creation, and equipment that there would be references to measurements. But I also assume most of them are in a table like format, which would allow for different sizing etc.
Is that incorrect? (I wish I had a copy to look at)

So if you actually look at the "text" areas, so descriptions or items, descriptions of rules and game mechanics etc. How often do the measurements exist?
Does the PDF version allowing searching of "text".

And even then.

If the pages do get out of whack, you deal with it. OR you do it at the point of the next release. I see it is at "6th printing" so there is obviously some degree of versioning changes done on a large enough basis to require a new set of printing. At which point you manage them in such a way that these differences don't affect the page counts etc.


Matt Thomason wrote:
Woolfe wrote:
Then you purchase the one that you want at Point of Sale. Or maybe they'd be nice enough to just let you have either when you make the purchase.

If it happened, I'd say getting both would be the preferable option. You never know if you're going to want to switch to be able to play with a different group at a later date, and having to repurchase everything just for a few measurements would suck :)

At the moment, we tend to get two or four options for each download (by-chapter and normal/lite variants), so it'd fit into that nicely.

That would certainly make sense.

LazarX wrote:
Woolfe wrote:
I find it odd that with today's technology it is not possible to simply create a script that identifies and modifies the documents to have metric system values instead of imperial. Especially as I understand the German version has already done this.
You've never been in the output area of publishing. I can tell.

Correct. However I have converted documents of technical details from Imperial to Metric, for use within an organisation. This included Tables and Formatting etc. However these documents were all Virtual, and furthermore staying in a technical group, that knew that they were converted documents.

Do you have experience in this area, if so I will be keenly interested to hear what you have to say.
LazarX wrote:
The German version "doesn't do that". It's essentially a totally seperate publication. You can't just go blindly sustituting text within 2 to 300 page document and expect it to come out. It's a virtual guarantee that kerning, paragraph structure, even whole pages will probably go to whack during the process.

And I haven’t suggested that either. At no point have I said this wouldn’t require work to do. I have only stated that it is simple to do. My point with the German edition is that it exists. Therefore not only is it possible, but there is a market for it.

Why would paragraph structure change?
Kerning fair enough, but that is also relatively simple to fix, and would not affect everything.
Whole pages going out of Whack? Maybe, this sort of thing does happen, but they are not exactly insurmountable problems.
Many of the above issues actually can be managed to a lesser degree with a smartly written script. Although you may find the effects are much smaller than you think. Especially if you ignore Story “Fluff” and only focus on Rules and Game mechanics.
LazarX wrote:
The book would have to be reauthored and re-edited twice, as well as re-outputted.

Re-authoring, why? The only thing changing is the system of measurement. The Rules related to those measurements, the story fluff, the actual Game mechanics. These things do not change. They stay the same no matter the measurement used.

Re-editing would of course be required, but you would be able to easily identify the areas that needed editing, and then compare each chapter with the original “master” document.
LazarX wrote:
Which would also mean two print streams for the separate book, and all the supply problems it would entail.

I have already clearly stated that when it comes to the print side of things, there is a major cost, and this is not something that should be done without first knowing your market exists.

However the Virtual product is a completely different thing. If a virtual product fails to sell, then all you have lost is the output to create it. There are no “stock Problems” with virtual.
LazarX wrote:
"I've got three cases of Pathfinder Metric that no one wants to buy!"

Or it could result in “Hey we’ve just sold out of our run of Pathfinder Metric” Strawman arguments work both ways. Neither of us can honestly say we know if or if not they would sell.

Personally if they started with a virtual run, I can’t see how they wouldn’t sell. The vast majority of the rest of the world uses the metric system, and of course English is the most widely distributed language spoken around the world.
LazarX wrote:
And we haven't even touched on the impact on scenarios, modules, setting books, and adventure paths.

Sure, but if you were to say start with the core rulebook, and provide a table like Klaus created for conversion of existing material. You would easily cover this off. If the Metric version did well, then it would make sense to begin converting, if it failed then obviously you would stop there.

Orthos wrote:

I tried explaining that but I got told that... no wait, let me go find the exact quote.

Woolfe wrote:
It is very simple, and no I have not done it with a PDF. But that is because I am not a fan of the format, I have however done it with Word. Any word processsing tool that can handle xml/xhtml/html scripting extensions would be able to do it with ease. I would be very surprised if you couldn't do it natively in PDF, altho maybe I shouldn't as Adobe are well known for their idiocy. Despite that it wouldn't be hard to simply create the document in another format and then convert to PDF for the finalisation. This is honestly the simplest form of "if then else" you could ever do.
... yeah the two are absolutely nothing alike, working with one is so different from working with the other that it's ridiculous to try to compare the two.

How? I was talking about simplifying the methodology used by making use of scripting capabilities within many modern document systems. If your baseline formatting supports that, then it will work.

Orthos wrote:
What you want, Woolfe, is for basically every document on the site to have a separate Metric version for sale.

Well yes, of course I do. I thought that was pretty obvious. Of course I am not expecting that to happen overnight. My assumption would be that they would do a test book, which really could only be the Core rulebook, and then providing it actually is used/sells grow it from there.

Orthos wrote:
You do not seem to realize just how much work this will involve, and keep brushing aside anyone who attempts to tell you just how much work - and time,

Actually the only thing I have rejected outright is that the cost of Virtual publishing being compared to physical publishing.

Otherwise I have suggested that a lot of this work could be scripted and built in such a way as to not require 2 documents. This is true, you could do it. I know because I have. Obviously not on the same scale though, but the base concept it sound.
Of course it may be more efficient and economically sound to simply create a secondary document that sits off the Master. Once you have done it once, you will know most of where your headaches will be and creating a new spawn from the Master would take less time and effort. If you had the resources you could certainly manage the master in such a way that some of the changes would be less manual.
As I have said repeatedly the measurement changes would not affect anything actually creative. You could hire a competent document writer to do it.
Orthos wrote:
and distraction from other, more important projects - it will involve with comments like the above.

Ah, so you are concerned that you won’t get what you want, so who cares about the potential new customers, or the existing customers that might like Metric.

Orthos wrote:
Lazar has it in a nutshell. Between formatting, alignment, design, and editing, your request would basically require every document to be done TWICE. Every. Single. Product. Paizo. Offers. Past, present, and future. And that's not even getting into 3rd party. You want, essentially, to double their workload - that of the designers, the writers, and the editors - for almost nil profit.

And how would you know it is nil profit? What do you base that on? Current existing sales of metric… Oh wait…

Perhaps you should stop and consider the sales potential of this. It is a change that requires no rules/game mechanics/fluff work, simply recalculation and re-formatting. However it has the potential to open up several other markets. First are the countries like Australia, Canada, etc whose primary language is English and who use the Metric system. Then you have the countries like in Europe, where there is a large percentage of English as a secondary language users, who use metric. And then you have those countries where Imperial holds sway, but there may be people who choose to use metric.
Are you suggesting that there is no potential for sales there?
Orthos wrote:
THAT is why we reject your request - not because of any dislike for the Metric system, but because what you request is by definition unfeasible, illogical, and a terrible business decision.

Unfeasible? – Not at all, it is a simple conversion from one system to another. This doesn’t require original content, simply the modification of existing content. Of course it is feasible.

Illogical? – No. If people are asking for it, as I am. If people are saying “Hey I’d like that” which several posters have. And if it doesn’t hurt your business, then why exactly is it illogical?
Terrible business decision – Why? Do you have proof that this wouldn’t sell? Of course there would be risks. But then there are risks in every business decision. In this case let’s look at the pros and cons.
Con – Requires work to do conversion.
Con – Might create version difficulties with potential forking of metric vs imperial systems.
Con – Sheer volume of Paizo product means that the total conversion would take a long time.
Con – Takes away from new Paizo content.

Pro – Work done is purely document management, there is no new content being created story/rules/mechanics.
Pro – Master document can be kept in whichever format, with the Metric version always coming off it, thus removing forking potential.
Pro – Starting virtual means that you can produce for a small number of books, see how they sell, then decide later if you wish to convert the rest.
Pro – Work can be performed by document writer who has no understanding of content. They do not need to create new content(story/rules/mechanics).
Pro – Opens up markets that have traditionally been poorly served in this area.
Pro – Has no effect on existing market.
Pro – Creates a “point of difference” between competitors.
Pro – Starting Virtual means that the only potential “lost” cost is in the initial workload. There are no stocking/physical print issues.

Now I could be way off in the workload that this requires. I don’t have the direct experience in these areas. But surely based on the list of Pros, it would at least be worth looking at, as opposed to being a “terrible business decision”.
So imo feasible, logical, and potentially profitable if managed correctly.
Don’t get me wrong, I am doing this for somewhat selfish reasons. But don’t confuse that with it being a bad decision.


Sissyl wrote:

SI units are so much easier. Prefixes always mean the same thing. By comparison, imperial units are clunky and silly. The only reason to use imperials is that you have been exposed to them for a long time.

That said, I can deal with feet and pounds. It is no big deal, and I CERTAINLY don't want autochanged pdfs, and if I feel the need for a conversion list, I am perfectly capable of printing one out myself.

What is the autochanged PDF?

That is not what I suggested. I apologise if my post suggested that to anyone. I was simply talking about how to do produce 2 documents that are essentially the same except for the measurements, and how to do it from a technical point of view so that it has a minimal amount of work to perform.

Then you purchase the one that you want at Point of Sale. Or maybe they'd be nice enough to just let you have either when you make the purchase.


Matt Thomason wrote:
Woolfe wrote:


Matt Thomason wrote:

<SNIP>

I apologize if it came across that way, it wasn't intended as that.

I'm not suggesting everyone would make a fuss - just that it's likely the difference would cause enough people to for Paizo to consider it as a possible blocker. If was only one person in a hundred, that's still far more customer complaints than there currently are on the boards about only using a single system.

No worries.

Yeah I actually totally understand where you are coming from, but I guess it comes down to maths and customer service.

So on the plus side.
+ New customer's that want to use Metric.
+ Old customer's that always wanted to use metric, but like the system and are willing to pay to replace some of what they have

On the negative side.
- Potential problems with cross information.
- Some new issues in the forums.

In my quick search before I asked the question, I saw quite a few people commenting on the positives of the metric system.
So assuming that the labour was relatively light.
- Do conversion and formatting etc of Core game rules in the virtual PDF format (include conversion tables like Klaus's, for use with additional content)
- Offer for sale
If no one buys it, then you have only lost the time it took to convert the core rules, and you can then say ah well it didn't work so we won't pursue it. But if it causes more sales even over an extended period of time. Where is the loss. If the demand gets high enough to warrant the physical publishing cost then thats good.

As for extra complaints, in one way that is a positive, because it means now you have more customers

Matt Thomason wrote:

EDIT:

** spoiler omitted **...

I work in IT. You usually only hear from people when they have an issue. That's life.


Orthos wrote:

Because it isn't as easy to implement as you keep insisting it is.

"Reject it" all you like, that doesn't stop it being true. It's one thing to go in and stamp a name on a document, it's very much a different thing to go in and change the text based on where the user is downloading the file from. It is not easy. Have you ever made a PDF? Have you ever worked on editing one? It's not a simple task, at all.

It is very simple, and no I have not done it with a PDF. But that is because I am not a fan of the format, I have however done it with Word. Any word processsing tool that can handle xml/xhtml/html scripting extensions would be able to do it with ease. I would be very surprised if you couldn't do it natively in PDF, altho maybe I shouldn't as Adobe are well known for their idiocy. Despite that it wouldn't be hard to simply create the document in another format and then convert to PDF for the finalisation. This is honestly the simplest form of "if then else" you could ever do.

Orthos wrote:

Just at the very minimum, such a thing would have to:

> Track down every mention of any measurement in the text. Every single room proportions. Every mention of traveling distance and speed. Every single creature's description of height and weight.
> Track down every mention of movement speed in every statblock, AND every mention of such things that might pop up in creatures' special abilities.
> AND Track down every notation on maps of distance, which sometimes are part of the map image itself and not PDF text - so even if, by some exceptionally-skilled coding, we managed to have someone pull off the first two, such a "replacement script" wouldn't be able to touch these, or even recognize them as imperial or metric. Every single map would have to be redone to have both measurements, if it doesn't already.

Yes, and as I stated it would take work. Identifying all references would in fact be the hardest part. Statblock etc are easy, they can be done at the table level.

Of course it would take time. I am not suggesting it wouldn't but so what. Are they selling a product or defending a system?

They could start with the core rulebooks and gradually move out from there. Once they have the Core done, a lot of the other stuff wouldn't actually be that difficult to do, as a lot of the scripting would already be there to be "borrowed". Maps are an issue, but if they still have the original documents, they can make any changes they wish.

Orthos wrote:

THEN, ON TOP OF ALL THAT:

The script would have to - after finding these things - remove them from the text, replace them with ACCURATE calculations in the other system (because if it's not accurate, why waste the time and effort?), pray that doesn't screw up formatting and alignment of text (because if it does, you're going to have a huge mess on your hands, and an illegible document in the replacement spot[s]. Redoing PDF formatting can be HELL.), and repeat ad nauseum for the next bit of info to be changed.

This is not a simple system. This is not something that can be solved with a simple program on the spur of the moment.

Wow, ok so now it might screw up the document. As I stated, obviously you would need to do a bit of work to ensure it doesn't do that. But once you have done it once, any other changes are incremental, and you will be able to write all new documents in such a way as to support it.

Orthos wrote:
The only practical way to do this would be to have multiple variants of every document provided on Paizo, one with Imperial units and one with Metric, and to have a IP Address checker built into the personalization program that checks your location, checks a database to see which version you should get (or have a manual checkbox for you to select which one you want, for benefit of say US players in the military stationed out-of-country or some such), and then proceeds with the personalization.

Why do you keep raising the IP address checker? This is odd. You simply create the document and then offer either a Metric or Imperial version at point of sale. I am not talking about the document changing based on its location???? Is that what you thought I meant???????!?!?!?

Orthos wrote:
To do THAT would require a TON of work on the part of the staff and website management crew, work that generally is better spent on other things. And that's the EASY way. Trying to do an automated system like you're suggesting is simply not feasable at this time, if ever.

If your refering to a doco that changes based on location then yes it wouldn't be feasable, but that is not what I am talking about. I am talking about having a Metric version and an Imperial version at point of sale. So someone like me, who wants to buy the system for the first time can purchase it and use it to play my games.

I have not been P&P roleplaying for 15 odd years. So other than my own personal campaign details and my dice, and my gear, I am looking for a new system. Pathfinder looks good, but it doesn't have metric.
If I am to buy a new system. Why would I choose a system that doesn't support me?

Matt Thomason wrote:

<snip>

Okay, lets look at these two statements.
Lets say you buy a PDF, and opt for metric.
Then you join a group, and they're using printed rulebooks in imperial.
You're now running with two different measurement systems, and have to agree to use the same one. The people with printed rulebooks are unlikely to want to change, IMHO.
So - end result, you all end up using imperial measurements. Now why was it worth having a PDF in metric? :)

Well because in my country, if the choice was there, people would buy the metric system. After which the Imperial person would be the odd one out.

The 2 issues with what you are saying :-
If you can't work out in your group a solution to the above problem, there are more issues with your group than simply the system used.

AND what you have said is, everyone else is doing it so why do it different. Oh look everyone is using Windows computers, why would I use a Mac. Everyone is drinking Pepsi, why would I drink Coke. Everyone is playing DnD why would I play Pathfinder...... That is not an argument, it is an opinion.

Matt Thomason wrote:
Woolfe wrote:


I don't understand the opposition to this. I'm not telling you to use metric, I am asking for the metric people to be supported as well!
Unless you have an entirely separate metric edition of the game, they're not going to be supported. People will complain about the PDFs allowing metric but there's no printed version. Then you'll get metric users come to the forums and start asking questions, and get strange looks from the imperial players. Then people will insist on the printed adventures being in metric too and prices will rise to cover it, or they'll just print less adventure modules. Either way, everyone loses.

Ok First, if enough people are asking for the printed version in metric, then that is extra sales. There comes a point where the profit vs manufacture becomes worth it.

Nothing I am talking about fundamentally changes the game. In your system it would say 10 foot in my system it says 3 metres. My players don't have an issue because they live here and understand metres.
Tell me one aspect of the game that is uniquely identified by its measurement.

Your argument here is still "We all do it this way, so you should too". Which isn't an argument.

Matt Thomason wrote:
While you may only be concerned with your gaming group, many of us have a wider concern - that of being able to interact (even if just chatting and not gaming) with other players, worldwide, via the internet.

As for the wider concern, again I repeat what rule in the game is totally defined purely by the unit of measurement used?

Matt Thomason wrote:

If people could be trusted to check a little metric option checkbox on their order that includes a statement "I promise not to make a fuss about the products I can't get in metric, or about the fact I either have to convert to feet to participate on the forums or use a segregated metric area", then it's probably not an issue. People can't be trusted, though - the second you give them a "not quite supported option" as a courtesy they'll just complain it isn't as well supported as the mainstream version. Trust me on this.

End of the day it's not that much bother to implement (if we're just talking PDFs), it's far more of a bother to deal with the inevitable complaints afterwards - there'll be far more people complaining if it's done than there are now about it not being done.

Wow, go back and read that last bit. It comes across massively arrogant. At NO point have I attacked your system, all I have said is "this is something that could be done, and why isn't it?" but now you are suggesting that all metric people would "make a fuss".

I know you are just trying to explain it, and I do not mean to cause offense, but I am honestly astounded by this attitude I am hitting here.

Matt Thomason wrote:
In principle, I say it's long past time the entire world just burned every reference to the imperial system, forgot it ever existed, and converted to metric. In practice, that's not likely to happen. If it doesn't happen, then for any product with a worldwide audience it's best to try to standardize on one system for that product, and not make changes for geographic locations with the exception of language translations (and even they have been known to cause all kinds of problems.)

You know I don't actually care about that. I actually like having choice. But what is happening here is you are actually denying me a choice. And for no reason that I can see. The technology exists to do it. The only real concern raised thus far is the financial aspect. Which as I am on here talking about it personally, obviously there is a market for the Metric system. I am surely not the only person. From what I understand the German version of Pathfinder is in Metric, so there is precedent for it as well.

Matt Thomason wrote:
I'm beginning to see, however, just why GW have moved to a more measurement-neutral system. I wouldn't complain if everything was just specified in "units", with a little box on the first page explaining that a unit can either be an inch or 25mm on the tabletop, and represents either 5 feet or 1.5 metres of actual distance. Due to the change with tradition though, it could still be a bad move for the product.

GW are the market leader, and don't change unless they have to. But as a result their traditional base of users is eroding. You only have to look at the growth of alternate systems like Warmachine to see that. GW make something like 90% of their money off space marines. They have long since abandoned the pretense of being for gamers. They only care about the almighty dollar(or pound in their case)

Are Paizo at that level? Cause they don't appear to be.


Ok... So everyone giving me reasons why the metric system hasn't been accepted in your country, don't take offence, but that has nothing to do with what I was asking.

Orthos wrote:
Quote:
I find it odd that with today's technology it is not possible to simply create a script that identifies and modifies the documents to have metric system values instead of imperial
If you're meaning auto-convert something like a PDF, no we do not have the tech for that. That's a lot more involved than you're probably thinking. They'd basically have to create two completely different PDFs - for every product - and THEN add a script that says "If in US, give this copy; if elsewhere, give that copy" when you click to download.

? No... I am meaning an initial manual task to identify all the spots in which some measurement is used/mentioned, then turn those mentions into variables.

Those fields are then modified based upon some factor.
So for example if metric was selected, it would fill out each variable with the metric answer, which is defined elsewhere.

You would not actually need 2 copies, as you could in theory process it each time some made a purchase. That of course would be silly, and instead you would just store a master copy with the variables, and then have the defined copies available for download based on simple user choice. There would be no need to script "if in US", in fact that would be silly because what if someone in the US wanted a metric copy or someone in Australia wanted an imperial copy.

<Stuff about personalisation snipped as it is unrelated>

Matt Thomason wrote:
There's a good few reasons not to have two systems, the first of which is avoiding problems when the global audience comes together - either on forums like this, or if playing together (e.g. via virtual tabletop software)

Wait what? OK first I am looking at buying this system purely to play with my local friends. Which is I imagine what most people do. Why would it make that huge a difference on a global audience scale? How does me saying 3 metres, vs you saying 10 foot, make it harder? Sorry not meaning to sound rude, I simply don't understand that, is there a big cross culture going on. I haven't played a P&P Rpg for 15 odd years, so maybe I am missing something???

Matt Thomason wrote:
The default for most systems is to use the native measurement system from the publisher's country.

Yes but that is because traditionally the effort to publish variations was too costly. However with modern technology that should not be the case.

Matt Thomason wrote:
Then you're looking at printing and warehousing. <cost of publishing snipped>,<Complexity of ordering and mistakes made snipped>

Ok fair enough with the actual printed copies. I can accept that, as a small company it would be onerous. But I reject it wholeheartedly for the digital PDF versions. There is no printing and warehousing cost there, and if a mistake is made, then they simply fix it.

Matt Thomason wrote:
On top of all that is the problem of accessories. Do you really want to find out the map tiles you ordered from the US don't line up with the ones you bought in Europe due to the grid squares being one inch instead of 25mm? :) <Snip>

This is a non issue. I wargame quite regularly, and it has never caused a problem. Generally you simply make your templates to match the field, or you use the squares themselves to represent the distance. And if it bothers you that much, then you just ensure you get the grid squares from the correct location.

Matt Thomason wrote:
With all those problems, it's simply not worth having two versions of everything. Just look at the forums, we have enough problems getting everyone to agree what the single version of...

How many people actually play with others who would use a different version? Wouldn't that be something you simply work out amongst yourselves in your gaming group. Who cares what the gaming group down the street uses?

Slaunyeh wrote:
The reason it's not easy to "automate" is, as you point out, that it doesn't match up neatly. I'm pretty sure a 5-foot step is five feet because that's an easy unit to remember, and not because it's critically important that you can move exactly 152.4cm.

It is actually. Because I don't know what a 5 foot step is. However I do know how far 152.4cm is. I grew up with metric, and have been forced to use imperial when I gamed. I dealt with it in the past, but with modern technology why do I need to deal with it today?

Slaunyeh wrote:
Personally (and maybe that's just a matter of experience) I find it pretty straightforward to do the conversion on the fly. Certainly easier than inventing a printed book media that can somehow update itself to its user's preference. ;)

This game is available in physical and virtual format.

I can understand the limitations on physical.
But those limitations do NOT apply to virtual. I could purchase the PDF with metric, and then simply take it to a printer and have it printed for me.
What cost is there in publishing then?

I don't understand the opposition to this. I'm not telling you to use metric, I am asking for the metric people to be supported as well!

Woolfe


So I asked this question via email, and they suggested I look here.
"That is a good question, and to be honest it is not one that customer service knows the answer to. You're probably best to ask this question on our messageboards either in your own thread, or on one of the Ask the Developers threads in the Off-Topic Forum. Here's the link to the forum: http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/community/offTopic

If you have any further questions or concerns, please let me know. Thanks!"

I did a quick search before hand, and it looks like there is a fair bit around it but I couldn't find a specific thread on it. (I didn't look super hard I must admit).

SO my question.

First - Why is there no Metric System version in English?

Second - Is anyone looking at this, and if not why not?

I understand that probably the majority of your market is US/UK. However there is a substantial number of other english speaking nations that use the Metric system.

I find it odd that with today's technology it is not possible to simply create a script that identifies and modifies the documents to have metric system values instead of imperial. Especially as I understand the German version has already done this.

I imagine there may well be some fiddling required. Metric and Imperial do not match up neatly in all situations, so it may be that a 10 foot measurement is rounded down to a neat 3 metres, but once you have the basis for that sort of decision surely converting Imperial to metric would be simple.

You could then ask those who have already purchased copies to register there interest, and they could perhaps do checking and play testing to ensure it still works ok. Which I can't imagine it being wildly out of whack.

Anyway. I apologise if this starts any great them and us arguments, it is not aimed at that. I am simply surprised that with today's tech this sort of thing is even an issue.