If square reeks too much of 4E, how about pace?
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
]LOL Well you got your wish in one part of the game. You can always use bulk!!! It conforms to NO standard so you're making it all up as you go! ;)
Just use distance bulk, size bulk, ect... The game doesn't care if you're off by 100%.
GM: You've traveled for many bulk and have finally reached the dungeon. The cave entrance is 2 by 3 bulk and gapes ominously at you. After maybe 5 bulk you hear a 3 bulk loud rumble emit from it, lasting only for a bulk. Then, a freezing wind seeps out, like a slow breath of death, surely at least 5 icy, remorseless bulk cold.
Paladin: Never fear, compatriots! I charge my trusty steed into this den of evil, sword drawn!GM: Your horse runs straight into the cliff face. How did you think it would fit into 2 x 3 bulk? You take 10 bulk of bulk.
Paladin: Bulk it!
On topic, I'm a metric user and I don't mind the archaic measurement system used in this game at all. In fact, for Pathfinder, I prefer it. I just translate the measurements directly to an equivalent out of our own old historic language and get some nice medieval flavour for free. (For any Scandinavians, I use inch=tum, foot = fot, yard = aln, pound = skålpund, gallon = kanna.)
In combat, which is almost the only place where exact range really matters, we talk about squares. Our movement rate isn't e.g. 30', it's 6 squares. Since we use a combat mat this works great. For spells and such, we move the decimal one step to the left on the foot measurement (i.e. 25 becomes 2.5), double the remaining, and there's the amount of squares. As easy, but less painful. as putting your foot in a brodequin!
While we are at it, are those US standard custom units or UK imperial units?
oh, and there is this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XI9w8g4UT2I
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yes please!
I'm guessing 90% of PF players are yankees so it probably won't happen.
If square reeks too much of 4E, how about pace?
I could certainly get behind "paces" as a generic term for 5 ft/1.5m.
In Pathfinder? Nah Feet as a system of measurement fits just fine with the theme of a ye olde time fantasy.
In the Starfinder game I'm running though I switched feet out for metrons where 5 feet = 1 Metron and 1 Mile = 1 KiloMetron. Works out great.
Director of Game Design
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hey there all,
I actually made the case early in our design to change to metric, but as you might have guessed, with the vast majority of the audience being based in the US we could not find a way to make it work.
That said.. the game works pretty smoothly if you call 5 feet equal to 2 meters, and then all diagonal moves are 3 meters.
|
Hey there all,
I actually made the case early in our design to change to metric, but as you might have guessed, with the vast majority of the audience being based in the US we could not find a way to make it work.
That said.. the game works pretty smoothly if you call 5 feet equal to 2 meters, and then all diagonal moves are 3 meters.
The brazilian 3.5 books went with 5 feet = 1,5 meters.
Hey there all,
I actually made the case early in our design to change to metric, but as you might have guessed, with the vast majority of the audience being based in the US we could not find a way to make it work.
That said.. the game works pretty smoothly if you call 5 feet equal to 2 meters, and then all diagonal moves are 3 meters.
As a quick question.. How important is the 'diagonal equals 1.5' rule? Can't that be abstracted away and have a diagonal move count 1:1 to a straight motion?
Of course I play gridless usually so all of that is abstract but the little bit of complex crunch when moving about a mat is annoying to me and I can't imagine it being overpowered to simplifying when playing with minis.
Dear Paizo,
I like your policy to include diversity in the game as this represents our society and what is more important, welcomes everyone to the table.
However, I find pretty difficult using the imperial system as I have never used it. It is pretty tricky to keep in mind the different conversion rates (1 inch 2,54 cm; 1 m 3´, 1 mile 1,6 or 1,8 km depending on what type of mile are you using, gallons - liter, pounds - kg, ...) and googling them slows the game.
What about referring to both systems so the rest of the world have it easier?
Regards,
Jon
Alas, this problem is much bigger than Paizo. :(
That said, if the word count isn't prohibitive, I second this idea. Bulk should even help in this regard.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I actually made the case early in our design to change to metric, but as you might have guessed, with the vast majority of the audience being based in the US we could not find a way to make it work.
That said.. the game works pretty smoothly if you call 5 feet equal to 2 meters, and then all diagonal moves are 3 meters.
Well, that works fine for linear measurements, as has been pointed out, but not for Fahrenheit into Celsius. Given that there appear to be only eight specific temperatures mentioned throughout the playtest (all in section on Temperature), it can't be that difficult to include eight conversions into Celsius. It would take up one extra line, two at most.
Well, that works fine for linear measurements, as has been pointed out, but not for Fahrenheit into Celsius. Given that there appear to be only eight specific temperatures mentioned throughout the playtest (all in section on Temperature), it can't be that difficult to include eight conversions into Celsius. It would take up one extra line, two at most.I actually made the case early in our design to change to metric, but as you might have guessed, with the vast majority of the audience being based in the US we could not find a way to make it work.
That said.. the game works pretty smoothly if you call 5 feet equal to 2 meters, and then all diagonal moves are 3 meters.
T(°C) = (T(°F) - 32) / 1.8
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
T(°C) = (T(°F) - 32) / 1.8
I'm well aware of what the formula is, thanks. I do wonder though, if some people are complaining that they can't work with Bulk because it's abstract or too imprecise or it (allegedly) allows spears to be fitted into belt-pouches, why should they be expected to work with mental arithmetic on the fly? Surely the latter is far more difficult.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm a metric user in Europe, and this is not an issue for me.
The only hard thing to translate is Farenheit to Celsius, and "it's hot" and "it's cold" works well for me.
The brazilian 3.5 books went with 5 feet = 1,5 meters.Hey there all,
I actually made the case early in our design to change to metric, but as you might have guessed, with the vast majority of the audience being based in the US we could not find a way to make it work.
That said.. the game works pretty smoothly if you call 5 feet equal to 2 meters, and then all diagonal moves are 3 meters.
That is almost 100% correct, however 2m square is more easy to calculate and as Jason said, diagonal move as 3m is much better than 2,25m
And 2x2m is minimum for somewhat usefull room, except toilet.
|
Are you implying that metric-users are a minority ?Are you implying that metric users aren't a minority of the sales that aren't translated into another language? Or a minority of the people making the game?
I am implying that Metric-users are a minority of buyers that even being a minority are still worth to be respected and remembered.
I don´t even want to every rule with metric numbers, just a text box showing an official conversion at the end of the book would work for me. Half the people consider 5 feets = 1,5 meters and the other half consider 5 feet = 2 meters.Does the book REALLY need to have a conversion when real life has one that is super easy to use. Type 'feet to meters' into your search engine and it does the work for you.
5'=1.524 meters so round that however you wish. Or you could just check a foreign language book and see how many meters it gets translated to.
Ya, tried that before and didn´t work. There is the easy conversion (5´= 2 meters) and the right conversion (5´= 1.5 meters), half use the former and half use the later. It help if the authors take a stance on that.
T(°C) = (T(°F) - 32) / 1.8I'm well aware of what the formula is, thanks. I do wonder though, if some people are complaining that they can't work with Bulk because it's abstract or too imprecise or it (allegedly) allows spears to be fitted into belt-pouches, why should they be expected to work with mental arithmetic on the fly? Surely the latter is far more difficult.
Because there ISN'T a "formula" to turn it into an actual mutually agreed upon measurement?
Second, who needs to 'mental arithmetic on the fly' for temp? Any computer, tablet, phone, smartwatch, ect can easily and simply to it. Heck a simple/cheap solar calculator does it easily and work just about anywhere you can play without the need for internet or power. What is the formula for bulk to kilograms? Pounds?
I am implying that Metric-users are a minority of buyers that even being a minority are still worth to be respected and remembered.
I can recall that some use the metric system and respect their choice but I don't see how that translates into HAVING to go to the trouble of printing dual stats OR requiring other material to be removed to make room for it.
Ya, tried that before and didn´t work. There is the easy conversion (5´= 2 meters) and the right conversion (5´= 1.5 meters), half use the former and half use the later. It help if the authors take a stance on that.
Here you go. Though it doesn't seem hard to ask 'hey guys, how to you convert distances? 2 or 1.5?'?
the game works pretty smoothly if you call 5 feet equal to 2 meters, and then all diagonal moves are 3 meters.
Also, would characters in game think in meters?
Do characters in game think in HP, BAB and dice rolls?
Also, put speed back to square measure.
And make squares 7by7ft. that is 2,13m
I am fairly sure that every single edition of Pathfinder 1 except English used metric.
The same will likely happen with Pathfinder 2. I am used to Humans having a speed of 9m (I suppose it'd be 7,5m now), Large creatures taking 3m of space, Fireball being a 6m radius explosion and so on. It's been like that forever, since I started playing D&D, because my rulebooks were not in English and so nobody tried to resell me the American edition :)
The base version of the handbook gives 1 square = 1,5m (and yes, we used to say "a 1,5m step" without any confusion or oddity to it).
As for the English version, it would likely be appreciated by many, indeed, but at least we got rid of pounds for good.
One thing is sure, it does feel old timey. The US must be cool. Like a 24/7 LotR convention.
The only downside?
It took me 7 years to understand the joke behind the 3m pole.
Also, would characters in game think in meters?Do characters in game think in HP, BAB and dice rolls?
Well in pathfinder classic, it's possible to find a creatures level, feats and exact HP total as PC's.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
What is the formula for bulk to kilograms? Pounds?
5-10 for lbs; roughly 10-20 for kg. That one was easy.
I can recall that some use the metric system and respect their choice but I don't see how that translates into HAVING to go to the trouble of printing dual stats OR requiring other material to be removed to make room for it.
How much content do you think would have to be removed by adding one to two lines in the temperature section and maybe a sidebar on common Imperial-Metric conversions? The answer is almost certainly far less than you think.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
And in PF2, the Grim Reaper "automatically knows the Hit Points and emotions of all creatures it can see, as well as all conditions and afflictions affecting those creatures."Well in pathfinder classic, it's possible to find a creatures level, feats and exact HP total as PC's.Also, would characters in game think in meters?Do characters in game think in HP, BAB and dice rolls?
The grim reaper is known to cheat. This is why you should never challenge it to a game.
What is the formula for bulk to kilograms? Pounds?5-10 for lbs; roughly 10-20 for kg. That one was easy.
I can recall that some use the metric system and respect their choice but I don't see how that translates into HAVING to go to the trouble of printing dual stats OR requiring other material to be removed to make room for it.How much content do you think would have to be removed by adding one to two lines in the temperature section and maybe a sidebar on common Imperial-Metric conversions? The answer is almost certainly far less than you think.
I actually wouldn't mind at all a small blurb SOMEWHERE when feet for speed is first mentioned that said. "If you wish you can use meters for measuring length or speed in the game at a conversion of 2 meters for every 5 feet"
I still don't really see why moving diagonally can't be simplified and just have it be the same as moving straight :). Seems like a bit of simulational crunchiness that could be removed for no cost. Am I wrong?
What is the formula for bulk to kilograms? Pounds?5-10 for lbs; roughly 10-20 for kg. That one was easy.
I can recall that some use the metric system and respect their choice but I don't see how that translates into HAVING to go to the trouble of printing dual stats OR requiring other material to be removed to make room for it.How much content do you think would have to be removed by adding one to two lines in the temperature section and maybe a sidebar on common Imperial-Metric conversions? The answer is almost certainly far less than you think.
Actually 5-10 lbs would be 2.5-5kg ;-)
But in the end it's bulk and squares
So who cares
Edit
As a metric European I still don't care. To me the size of a square in meters is irrelevant. The only time we need stuff like that we have our square grid anyway
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
They could introduce units that sound archaic but are as unfamiliar to Americans as they are to Europeans. For example, the unit of weight could be a "stone" (a British only unit as best I can tell). Would saying that it is approximately equal to 1 Bulk be too far off?
For length, cubits and spans could be used. I think there are three spans to a cubit, so the distance across a square could either be three cubits and a span or just three cubits. We could use "leagues" for longer distances.
Time seems to be the only measurement that everyone already agrees on.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I mixed up lbs and kg, but I had the right idea. My excuse is that I am indeed British, so we use either or neither as the case demands. :)
One stone is 14 lbs and is typically only used for weighing people. It would be about 2 Bulk.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
GM: You've traveled for many bulk and have finally reached the dungeon. The cave entrance is 2 by 3 bulk and gapes ominously at you. After maybe 5 bulk you hear a 3 bulk loud rumble emit from it, lasting only for a bulk. Then, a freezing wind seeps out, like a slow breath of death, surely at least 5 icy, remorseless bulk cold.
Paladin: Never fear, compatriots! I charge my trusty steed into this den of evil, sword drawn!
GM: Your horse runs straight into the cliff face. How did you think it would fit into 2 x 3 bulk? You take 10 bulk of bulk.
Paladin: Bulk it!
For the Americans: this is what Pathfinder feels like when playing as a European.
Metric units in the English version please! The game is truly less enjoyable to me because of the imperial units.
I mixed up lbs and kg, but I had the right idea. My excuse is that I am indeed British, so we use either or neither as the case demands. :)
One stone is 14 lbs and is typically only used for weighing people. It would be about 2 Bulk.
Let's just complicate matters a bit more and consider that UK pounds and US pounds aren't even the same.
Using Bulk instead of those was a good idea, even different imperial unit users couldn't agree upon their units of the same name.
What is the formula for bulk to kilograms? Pounds?5-10 for lbs; roughly 10-20 for kg. That one was easy.
Easy and totally useless as it swings 100%. That rock could be 50 lbs or 100lbs... That's NOT a useful metric and isn't a mutually agreed upon one for a correct single answer. I can't look at an item and KNOW it's weight and could get dozens of different answers to the question, unlike the formula for F to C.
That rock might be seen by one person as 50lbs, another 60, another 70 another 80, another 90, another 100 or any other weight in between multiples of 10. NOW look at petrified players and see that bulk there goes to 20lbs... So bulk might be 5 to 20 lbs now?
How much content do you think would have to be removed by adding one to two lines in the temperature section and maybe a sidebar on common Imperial-Metric conversions? The answer is almost certainly far less than you think.
I suggested a note in the back of the book with conversions: I have no issue there. My comment was on dual stats for each instance of measurements. Every temp, every range, ect. The books have page counts and formatting so even shifting a line can mess everything up or move pictures, sidebars, ect. I don't want to lose anything for the inclusion of this.
Well, as Bulk is already stated to be 5-10 lbs, picking half a stone (7 lbs) as a fixed point actually seems like a good idea.
My point about temperatures was that they only appear in that one section on temperature, hence an extra line or two would not make a big difference, especially as even just one of the near-full-page artwork just sitting around in the play-test can be adjusted if necessary.
Well, as Bulk is already stated to be 5-10 lbs, picking half a stone (7 lbs) as a fixed point actually seems like a good idea.
I was HOPING that they'd have a fixed conversion for bulk for those of us that prefered lbs and for adjudicating unlisted items. Having it be a range makes it border on useless for me.
My point about temperatures was that they only appear in that one section on temperature, hence an extra line or two would not make a big difference, especially as even just one of the near-full-page artwork just sitting around in the play-test can be adjusted if necessary.
I don't see the point of putting dual measurements that include metric for ONLY one measurement. If anything, I think that would raise more complaints, such as 'why not convert x, y and z too! It's unfair!', than leaving it as/is.
PS: They have been VERY reluctant to shift any item for errata so I can't expect they'd do it for something unnecessary.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, using "Half-Stone" instead of "Bulk" is much more aesthetically pleasing for a fantasy world.
I never buy that smelly argument. If they wanted it to be a exercise in a e s t h e t i c s then they would of created entire different measurement systems along with days and seasons and volumes and portions.
"I hope you have your Ponfanks of water ready for the Zoot-tow Blam we'll be travelling, it should take several Aleyoopahs but we're hoping to cut a few Mergurgles with secret a route. Remember that the cart can only carry Yubyubs of Goinkeets excluding your Bag Of Prangangaranga (Translator note: Prangangaranga means Holding)"
No one ever said "10 kilometers to the Lake of a million liters" and flipped the table because of their 'immersions' breaking.
I still use the correct measurements at the table because players already hate remembering arbitrary values to swords and hats, let alone trying to use a inferior <10% of the population measurement standard.
Pounds are the same (there are 3 types of pounds, but only 1 is commonly used, so I'm assuming that one). You're probably thinking of pints (and gallons).Let's just complicate matters a bit more and consider that UK pounds and US pounds aren't even the same.
Using Bulk instead of those was a good idea, even different imperial unit users couldn't agree upon their units of the same name.
No, I'm thinking of pounds. If they're the same on both sides of the big pond, someone should make an edit on wikipedia then. I'm looking at a table with different values as I'm typing this. They're almost a 1/10th of a milligram off.
Is that supposed to be a joke?