Metric? Keep or change?
 

The original TFT releases used metric measurements because, in the late 1970s, we were being told that really, no kidding, the country was going metric.

Didn't happen.

The metric measurements feel vaguely dated to me now (I realize my European readers will be going "huh?" at this).

I am inclined to change meters to yards, and so on. Actually, meters may be the only metric quantity in the set. I notice that I already describe the naughty minnow as "inch-long."

Comments?

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

How many distances are given in yards/meters as opposed to hexes and megahexes?

If most measurements are given in hexes then I think the question of English or Metric is largely moot.

Otherwise I am used to seeing sci-fi games in metric and fantasy games in English. So I guess I would vote for yards. But it's not a strong vote.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

On one hand, our long-suffering scientifically inclined or European friends have put up with decades of American measurements in GURPS and deserve metric.

On the other, in fantasy games, metric units take me right out of it. If TFT were a generic fighin' game for modern troops and space warriors as well as people in low-tech drag, I'd say stick with meters. But if everybody in the game uses Renaissance-and-earlier technology, using a modern measurement feels anachronistic.

(And, yes, that means I'd be perfectly happy with measurements in cubits as well.)

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

It's a hex. The difference between meter and yard is a rounding error (you get larger errors measuring distance just from hex alignment).

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

I believe that most (if not all the best) RPG use the metric system, and kilos ... and liters...

plus it is a "change" in the very nature of the old TFT and this is clearly against the philosophy of the project "improve and preserve":
it does not improve the game, it does not preserve the old Melee/TFT tradition of the metric system adopted for about 40 years

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

I'd rather see metric for all.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

As frustrating as it is for GURPS to use yards, it would be considerably more frustrating for a system that was already using meters to switch to yards for no particularly compelling reason. People are totally fine using abstract units like squares and encumbrance units. An actual system that everyone in the US learns in school anyway is not a major stumbling block.

Especially since its use of meters is tied to an interesting bit of historical context.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

Everyone is supposed to learn it, but not everyone does. It's not a major item on the standards.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

It really doesn't matter to me. Just include a reference chart for converting English to metric--it will be helpful for players needing to go either way.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

Do we need to have this discussion in 2018?

Metric!

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

I vaguely recall "The US will be metric by 2000" or something like that. Go metric it's what the classic system used.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

(Weights and map distances were also in metric.)

One approach could be to try to push as many measures as possible to generic game-units (hex, megahex, maybe even generic encumbrance units) and then list in one central early place what those are in real-world units, both metric and Imperial.

If not, my personal tendency would be to stick with metric, though it might make sense to take a broad poll of gamer opinions.

Then there's the consideration that a 1.33m hex would be 4 feet 4 inches across, each megahex 13 feet, or you might tweak it. 5-foot hexes and 15-foot megahexes? If you used 1 hex = 1 yard it and the counters/maps/scenarios/etc would be nicely GURPS-compatible, but then bodies should be 2 hexes, horses 3, polearm reach 3, etc... (On the other hand, when I moved my TFT campaign to GURPS, the scale change seemed to have little problematic effect except not being able to use the horse counters for adult horses.)

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

Frankly, it's not that big a deal; however if I were forced to vote, I'd go for yards, pounds, etc., simply because it's a fantasy game and not a Sci-Fi game.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

Ditch it. The vast majority of your players are unfamiliar with the metric system and as you said, the decision was cutting edge for the time. I think the bottom fell out of the metric system when the NFL found out its stadiums wouldn’t accommodate converting yards to meters, but I digress. There’s no advantage at all for most players in using the metric system.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

That's almost certainly untrue; we may not be a metric country, but that doesn't mean most people aren't still taught the metric system or have learned it for other reasons (such as other RPGs, including the previous edition, that used metric), and of course international players will be unfamiliar with US customary units.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

Most Americans do not think or play in metric regardless of what was officially taught in schools.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

Even tough I am used to the metric measuremenbts and weights, I find it logically to use it for modern and sf campaigns.

But for fantasy, I like to use archaic measurements (passes, day's-marches, etc.). Exact measurement is nice info for the GM (absolutely not for PC's if they don't have range finders or spells which tells them exactly how far, how heavy it is) but it lacks the fantasy mediaeval feeling.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

Most Americans are familiar enough with metric that one meter hexes will not confuse them (it's sorta similar to a yard, right?), and unfamiliar enough with the actual weight of armor and weapons that it doesn't really matter if kilograms are confusing.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

I vote keep. Cidri has a science fictional vibe. Plus I've been playing Fantasy Hero in metric for years.

Approximations are good enough. One meter approximately equals one yard. One kilogram approximately equals two pounds. One liter approximately equals one quart.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

I see no compelling reason to change the game from the metric system, personally I think the American system is obsolete and should have been replaced in the 70's anyway.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

If we assume that most TFT players are American - a reasonable assumption - then I think it's reasonable to assume that they are FAR more familiar with US customary units. Yes, I know that's slightly different than what I originally said, but I was speaking (metaphorically) informally. Consider my statement amended.

Most people in the US at least know about how long a yard is. Even if they know a meter is about 3" longer, there's no point in forcing them to think about the conversion. The same is true of kilograms. We know about how much a pound is; there's no point in making us subconsciously divide kilograms by 2.2.

In any case, there's no more reason to use the metric system in TFT than there was to use it in GURPS.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

There's no need to use either system. There's just no particular reason to change.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

Like you or someone else said, they're close enough to work as rounding errors. But if they're close enough one way, then they're close enough the other way. So no one should be getting their pants in a twist, right?
I suppose similar could be said for kilograms being close to twice the size of pounds.
That still leaves the question of why use modern units for fantasy settings. Even if "everyone" can make do with either.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

US customary units are modern too. Might as well use a Roman pace (about 5').

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

Well, you have to have measures for weight and distance. There's no good reason that I can think of not to use the most commonly used (by your audience) system.

And there's particularly no good reason to use a wholly artificial system.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

A game using Planck units would be a big hassle.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

I disagree, for the reasons I stated above. I think it's almost self-evident that the system that is most familiar to the majority of players should be used.

I follow this in my own game design - a 20/21st century miniature wargame. A Fistful of TOWs uses both metric and English, because each is the more familiar to most players in different contexts. Military distances are commonly expressed in meters (even by the US military). So the game scale is 1 inch equals 100 meters. Inches are easier to use by Americans (and none of my European players have demanded centimeters) because they are more familiar and require smaller numbers. It's just a little quicker to divide 10 inches by 2 (to determine close range) or multiply by 1.5 (to determine long range) than it is to divide/multiply 25.4 centimeters. And with hundreds of such measurements in a good sized game, I think it's worth avoiding the accumulated hassle.

Many UK wargames use inches, despite the UK being nominally committed to the metric system, I suspect for the same reason.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

Why would you force a majority of players to divide weight by 2.2 or even 2? What possible advantage is gained? Why use a measurement that is "close to a yard" rather than just using yards?

Other than some quixotic desire to impose the metric system on a culture that has largely rejected it (outside certain scientific areas), I just can't see why you'd insist on keeping the metric system. And imposing something on your customers - for their own good of course - doesn't really make a lot of business sense to me.

I think it's safe to say that most of the TFT faithful play TFT for reasons other than its use of the metric system.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

That's just being willfully inept at unit conversion. Unless for some reason you have 1:3937 scale miniatures, just use different scales depending on the rulers people are using (so a weapon with a range of 1,000 meters is treated as range 10 inches or 25 centimeters). As long as people aren't using two different rulers at one table, it doesn't matter.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

1 inch equals 100 meters...I just don't even know where to start.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

In the full RPG, you can use the rationale that the Mnoren used metric, therefore their world uses metric.

In the arena game, I'm not sure you need to go much deeper than one hex equals one hex, and one turn equals one turn.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

Many miniature games use 1 inch = 100 meters, no big deal. Ground scale is different to model scale too. Most of the time ground scale is irrelevant as you are playing the game, so everything is game related, everything in inches.

Now, for TFT, I think changing it to yards and pounds is sensible to accommodate the majority of the current player base, now metric is used everywhere else, not just Europe, that is also good to have in mind. Still most players will be from USA, so changing may be a good idea.

But change always have a cost, and in some places you will end with measurements in meters needing errata.

That said, I think most players in metric countries will not mind using the archaic measures (as most use them already in other games) meanwhile USA players will be more alienated by the use of metric, in general.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

Well, A Fistful of TOWs 3 is a Gold seller on Wargame Vault; (don't know the Lulu rank for physical books). The earlier versions of the game have been popular with modern wargamers since the late 1990s.

So the the use of dual measurement systems doesn't seem to have hurt sales.

And your solution doesn't really reflect how the game is played. Short range is determined as 1/2 of effective range. Long range is 1.5 x effective range. And no pre-measuring is allowed. Therefore, calculating and eyeballing distance is something players do. As noted, it's easier to multiply 12 by .5 or 1.5 than it is to multiply 25.4 or 25 by .5 or 1.5.

At the end of the day, you haven't really articulated why it is a better idea to use the metric system for a game mostly played by Americans. But you seem to want to do so really badly.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

<shrug> It's a common approach in miniature wargames. And presumably, it's done for the same reason I did - inches are a little easier to use in calculations and American wargamers, at least, are far more familiar with inches than centimeters. Meters are the common way militaries express ranges (and this is carried over into most reference works).

And as noted above, figure scales and ground scales are almost always different in miniature games. FFT, for instance, is designed to be played with 6mm or 1/285 miniatures. A matching ground scale would be 1" = 9.35 meters. With tactical weapons systems ranging as far as 4000m or so, I think you can see the practical problems inherent in using that scale.

So...I'm not sure what the big deal is.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

It's not better. It's just completely irrelevant. The fundamental unit of measure in TFT is the hex.

I've run into RPGs that used the unit of measure "m/y" -- meaning it's either a meter or a yard -- with zero conversion, because in the end all that matters is hexes on the map, and at the resolution of usable maps, the difference between a meter and a yard does not matter.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

I like sticking with metric. It just feels right for Melee, TFT, etc.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

At the end of the day, I don't suppose it really matters WHAT measuring system you use, as long as you are consistent in its use. If your group wants to play that one hex equals a meter, and my group wants to play that one hex equals a yard, it's going to be just fine for each of our groups.

The real issues always crop up when someone insists on analyzing everything for "realism's" sake. If you can avoid that sort of rules lawyering, then the actual total number of inches/centimeters covered in a 42 hex bow-shot really do nothing to add to the game. Hitting someone at 42 hexes is a good (or lucky) shot in TFT, and that's all that really matters.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

Kinda hard to calculate weight in “hexes”, isn’t it? And when getting directions to the Mad Wizard’s Citadel of Doom, things like miles come in handy.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

For weight, what matters is how it compares to the encumbrance rules, and that just requires the equipment chart and the encumbrance rules to use the same units. Similarly, for long distance travel, what matters is comparing the distance to the overland movement rules (because what I really care about is travel time), and again, all that's required is for the map and the movement rules to be the same. Not to mention the possibility that overland movement is measured in hexes.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

Metric for TFT.

(And, later, for GURPS 5e. : )

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

I don't see the nation becoming metric-centric any time soon.
It just seems like demanding everyone speak English as a first language. It would make international communication easier. But when that's necessary, people can just learn it as a second language.
Same for metric and American systems.
Getting upset that most of your prospective American customers want measurements or words different than what the rest of the world prefers seems a bit egocentric and silly. You can't make your audience want something by shoving it down their throats.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

Don’t you think it makes more sense to use weight and distance units that most TFT players are most familiar with?

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

For which game?

For the arena combat game, hexes and turns are sufficient. To the point that I'm not sure it was ever stated in Melee and Wizard what a hex and a turn represented.

For the roleplaying game, players and GMs generally want to know how big a hex is and how long a turn is. The roleplaying game has a history with metric. I don't see any need to change that.

Are you assuming most TFT players are American? Maybe they are, but maybe for the next edition of TFT, Steve plans to go a little more international in scope. (There have certainly been a lot of complaints over the years about GURPS using American units and not metric.)

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

Officially, US measures have been defined in terms of metric for a long time now. An inch is exactly 2.54 cm.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

The major effect of using recognizable units is to lampshade how unrealistic the rules are.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

My question was:

Don’t you think it makes more sense to use weight and distance units that most TFT players are most familiar with?

Your response seems to be "no, we should not use units that are familiar to anyone". That seems, well, absurd, so I wanted to be sure that's what you meant.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

Listing weights in Encumbrance Units is a perfectly viable option, and has the useful side benefit that you can adjust the rating for objects that are unusually convenient or inconvenient relative to their weight.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

But how is it a BETTER option than simply expressing weights, distance, etc., in the most familiar units to most TFT players?

After all, "viable" isn't the same as "desirable".

And seriously - doesn't Steve Jackson have better things to do than create an entirely new, imaginary system of weights and measures??

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

Are most TFT players American?

Are we expecting no one outside of the US to play TFT?

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

Isn't it reasonable to assume so? Most copies were sold in the US, after all. I'd expect that Americans make up the majority of purchasers for GURPS for instance.

And while everyone is of course encouraged to play it, why unnecessarily inconvenience the majority of your players? Are non-Americans so fragile that they'll reject a game that uses pounds and yards? Is there any evidence of that?

I also note that I've played UK rules that used centimeters for measurement - that didn't so deeply offend me that I refused to play the game. I really think non-American gamers are made of equally stern stuff.

Perhaps expressed another way - IF the majority of TFT players are American, doesn't it make sense to use units of measurement that are the most familiar to most of them?

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

Yes, but there are many times where you need to know what something weighs. Encumbrance units wouldn't be an accurate or useful system for that.

I agree, by the way, that weight isn't necessarily correlated to encumbrance. I'd be fine with a separate encumbrance system. At the least, give certain items an adjustment to weight when determining encumbrance.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

It lets you do things like "your carrying capacity is equal to ST".

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

Well, Steve asked if he should use the metric system or the US traditional system. Your final response seems to be "neither; you should make up a new system." Have I accurately paraphrased you?

<shrug> If so, I can't agree.

I'm perplexed by your argument. It seems self-evident to me that in a world of limited resources, Steve has far better things to do than make up an imaginary system of weights and measures. And equally self-evident that there's no benefit in burdening players with converting and learning new, imaginary system.

So I contend that TFT doesn't need the metric system any more than GURPS did. If most TFT players are expected to be American - a reasonable assumption, I think - then it would seem to make the most business sense to use the system most familiar to most Americans. There's no benefit to SJG in trying to force the metric system upon its customers and definitely no useful benefit in wasting time creating a whole new system of weights and measures.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

Are American gamers so fragile that they'll reject a game that uses meters and kilograms?

Around 1985-1990, you could go to a convention, and there'd be as many Champions and Hero games as *D&D games and as many of each of those as all the others combined. Hero uses metric and always has. Never seemed to bother anyone then.

I think that American gamers are pretty tough as well, tough enough not to be offended by metric.

Aren't we?

Any American who went through the public school system in, say, the past fifty years ought to be familiar enough with metric that they shouldn't have any trouble with meters.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

GURPS using US customary measures is actually problematic, so that's not exactly a strong argument (it creates a lot of problems with tech books since basically no-one uses US customary units for science and technology, and it creates problems with international support).

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

Ah, so that's the REAL reason. Got it.

Well, good luck talking Steve Jackson into imposing the metric system on the majority of TFT purchasers Because It's Good For Them. That really doesn't help sales, you know?

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

It sure does seem to be a better argument than arguing that Steve should design a whole new system of weights and measures.

"Problematic" is conclusory, so I really can't respond.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

Hey, you went there first. I'll quote your post that I was responding to, in its entirety, with the relevant bits bolded. That was your wording.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

Cite? I can't see where anyone argued that.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

Well, it seems that you've disclosed your real reason for wanting to keep the metric system.

I am confident that Steve will be able to decide whether it's a good idea to use the system that most TFT players are most familiar with or to impose the metric system on them Because It's Good For Them.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

<blink>

Read the last half dozen posts from Anthony. #45, 47, 52 and 55 particularly.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

TFT, the non-RPG battle game, used unspecified hexes as a measure of distance, and unspecified turns as a measure of time.

TFT-ITL, the RPG, was originally metric. You're still here, so I presume you didn't have a problem with it then.

I don't think TFT, the non-RPG battle game, needs to specify its hexes and turns any more than it ever did. I wouldn't want TFT-ITL to suddenly go US measurements any more than I would want GURPS to suddenly go fully metric. GURPS 4e includes "good enough" metric conversions.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

Why not?

Do you think many folks are TFT fans because it used the metric system?

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

A point someone else brought out is that using a measurement system that has only existed since the mid-19th century destroys a fantasy game's verisimilitude (in addition to being more unfamiliar to most TFT players).

I think that's a fair point. Traveller, a sci-fi game, uses the metric system and I don't object to it. It seems more "science fictiony" or something. That said, it's much more intuitive to state that a sword is 0.8 meters long rather than 800 millimeters. Or that a submachinegun weights 2.5 kg rather than 2500 grams. Other than that, though, I didn't mind the metric system so much. Also, as I noted earlier, the military (and therefore most reference works) uses the metric system. Traveller was an extremely para-military game, so using meters and kilometers felt right.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

Aha. 47 is the only one in which Anthony suggested any kind of made up measurement: Encumbrance Units. I don't recall off the top of my head what TFT the battle game used for encumbrance, nor what TFT-ITL the RPG uses.

My "real reason" that I have "disclosed" is entirely that TFT-ITL the RPG used metric units.

If you can find a quote attributed to me containing anything like that, I'll own up to having said it. But the only reason I've disclosed in multiple messages on this thread, that I'm aware of, is that In The Labyrinth, the TFT roleplaying game, used them.

Because I see it as a pointless change.

I don't know. Lots of people have complained over the years about GURPS not being metric. Other than this thread I haven't heard anyone expressing any opinions either way about TFT being metric.

I'd be quite happy with Cidri continuing to be the world used in In The Labyrinth, the RPG, and for it to continue to use metric, simply because that's what it used originally.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

I disagree that it's unfamiliar to most TFT players.

According to Wikipedia, the metric system was first proposed in 1670, and first adopted in 1799.

For TFT, the battle game, I don't care. Hexes and turns, because that's what the original game used. For TFT In The Labyrinth, the roleplaying game, use metric, because that's what the original game used.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

US customary measures are not significantly older. They're based on a measurement system that's been around since the 11th century, but a bunch of units have come into or gone out of use, and the value of units has also changed.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

Are you sure? He was after all apparently clueless enough to poke at this topic when he surely should have known it was going to explode from the debates shading into flame wars every time it come up about GURPS.

It's a fundamentally minor issue, particularly in the context of a game, that *always* generates para-religious fervor. In both directions. Really I think the best solution is always just pick one - it mostly doesn't matter which - and be prepared to ignore a small number of rabid complainers no matter which you selected. But nothing positive is ever going to come from drawing special attention to it by making it an issue for public debate.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

Perhaps you mean potential new TFT players? As opposed to the TFT players to date (who have already been exposed to the metric in ITL/AM anyway).

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

... that is what I said in my first post on page 1. I believe that this change would go against the philosophy behid the new-TFT project, assuming I have understood Steve's intents: improve & preserve the system i.e. makes only the changes necessary to improve the game.

1) the change does not improve the play, as eveything worked pretty well with the metric
2) the change mutates one of the traits of the orginal game

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

Amazing how a simple thing can get so convoluted.

I also think that the archaic system have some fantasy flavor and may be better for potential new players as most will be from USA.

But I also believe that a change, any change, comes at a cost and may bring future problems in proof reading needing errata (because some monster ability is in meters instead of yards for example), and many things beside (descriptions of Cidri changing because some distances for references where wrongly converted, for example). So, unless there is a lot of agreement and support for the archaic system it is easier, cheaper, and safer, to keep using the original system, metric.

At the end of the day it will have very little impact, so why change it? again, unless there are lots of support for the change, maybe during the kickstarter campaign more people will voice their opinion.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

THIS. As I've said repeatedly here and elsewhere, this is one of those "who cares, pick one" issues that somehow people get so bent out of shape about that they start "attack quoting" and misrepresenting what other people have to say. If this is really that big a deal, then Steve can run a poll here to see how people feel about it. Or he can on Kickstarter. Either way.

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

Just in passing, Steve is the one who asked the question in the first place, so I'm assuming that he doesn't think it would go against the philosophy behind TFT to make the change...

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

Thinking about it a little more, I think I might keep the meters and add a historical note somewhere - something to the effect that when the game was written the Carter administration had a big metrification push on (spoiler alert, it didn't work), so a hex was defined as a meter - but nothing in the game will break if you would prefer to use 1 yard hexes, or for that matter 2 taung, 3 chi or the half ken width of a tatami mat....

Re: Metric? Keep or change?
 

Okay. Comments noted, rising temperature also noted. Thanks for your input, everyone. Locking thread.