I don't like that idea. Feet are easier to grasp.Looks about right for the space a human-sized creature can control in close combat.
Really wish D&D would make the switch to metric. Especially cause you could make squares meters and then it would be 1-1. Maps would be a bit smaller, but I think that’s a worthwhile change.
The system as a whole is superior I agree. But for distances on a map like this I find feet easier.Funny, I’m American and I find meters easier. Decimalized systems are always superior.
Also, again with the ratio of squares to standard units of distance being 1:1.
The issue I always run into is with regards to reach weapons. I really don't want a regular longsword to be a reach weapon, because that affects every combat ever, but I also don't want to say that it's impossible for a 4-foot long blade to hit someone across three feet of intervening distance.Really wish D&D would make the switch to metric. Especially cause you could make squares meters and then it would be 1-1. Maps would be a bit smaller, but I think that’s a worthwhile change.
I can't remember who did them, but I think I got these from Owen K.C. Stephens's social media. It's the same image flipped so you can see the space with two combatants, then photoshopped with sword and shield (though the swords look a bit large, like 2-handed swords being used one-handed).Definitely gives a sense, if you added a sword, of how much space someone swinging round a long pointy stick takes up.