Would you play a TTRPG that used Meters instead of Feet?

[Slit518]

Let's say a new TTRPG came out, and for its measurement of moving, ability/spell distance, falling, etc, they used Meters instead of Feet. Would you be fine with that, and would you play it?

Example: You move 10 meters (1 step is 3 feet aka 1 meter).
From pec to the tip of a dagger is 3 feet, aka 1 meter.
Falling 4 meters aka 12 feet (about 1 story in height) deals damage.
Characters occupy a 1 meter hex.

Meters are a standard over most of the world and would I feel be more recognizable.

This is for research, so please vote and discuss.

 

[Morrus]

The measurement unit would not be what determined whether I played a new RPG.

 

[R_J_K75]

Pretty sure most of the Star Wars games I played used meters

 

[Tonguez]

Even though my country has used metric system since the 1960s and I was born in the 70s I still prefer Ft and inches for ‘close units’, though I admit I have no idea what a mile is and us Kilometres for long distances

But yeah as Morrus said - the measuring unit is of very little effect on choice of system (as long as its not squares, leave that for board games)

 

[Aldarc]

Yes. I am from the United States, but I live in Europe.

 

[Slit518]

The measurement unit would not be what determined whether I played a new RPG.

To make it easier, picture D&D or Pathfinder (any editions really) that use Meters instead of Feet.

Would you still play them with that change?
You can move 10 meters, aka 10 squares.
You fall 4 meters and take 1d6 damage.
etc

 

[John Dallman]

To make it easier, picture D&D or Pathfinder (any editions really) that use Meters instead of Feet.

I think what Morrus is saying is that this change is not very important, and the ease or difficulty of working in metres rather than feet would not be significant to him. Like me, he's from the UK, which uses metric units for many things. Most British people, apart from the very old, can work with either system.

 

[Andvari]

In theory, yes. However 5 feet becomes 1.5m, which isn't that clean. You could change it to 1m, but that seems like a ridiculous small space for combatants to occupy, and increasing it to 2m conversely feels too big.

Realistically, a combatant could occupy a 1m square, but then he'd be able to strike over adjacent squares to hit things more than 1m away. (A typical one-handed sword can easily be 1m in length, even if you don't account for arm length)

 

[Deset Gled]

In theory, yes. However 5 feet becomes 1.5m, which isn't that clean. You could change it to 1m, but that seems like a ridiculous small space for combatants to occupy, and increasing it to 2m conversely feels too big.

Realistically, a combatant could occupy a 1m square, but then he'd be able to strike over adjacent squares to hit things more than 1m away. (A typical one-handed sword can easily be 1m in length, even if you don't account for arm length)

It would be interesting to consider the possibility of system where medium creatures occupy a 2x2m square and small creatures occupy a 1x1m square.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

….