Measurements for ranges and grids

[harlokin]

I'd prefer more abstract. something like:

Close / Melee / Short / Medium / Long / Extreme

 

[CM]

For the sake of backwards-compatibility, I don't see square size for tactical maps changing. I believe it will remain at 5 feet, and am OK with that.

That being said, I'm not opposed to seeing additional conversions in the range descriptors for those who want them, for example:

Range: 15 squares (25 yards)

Simple and gets the point across.

 

[tlantl]

I'm good with feet and yards.

If I never see another combat grid in my life, I'll be happy.

 

[Daven]

New* idea: Split the difference.

One meter is 39.37 inches, so three meters is 118.11 inches: close enough to 120.00 inches (= 10 feet) to not worry about or bother with.

Then one square is 5 feet, or half of 3 meters, or 1.5 meters. Simple.

Of course, they wouldn't do that, because calling "one square" equal to "a meter and a half" would be too finicky for most people.

("Sesquimetric," anyone?)


* new idea not really all that new

In italian 4E handbooks we have squares of 1,5m*1,5m. Feet are impossible thing to imagine for italians.

 

[Ratinyourwalls]

Yeah I hope when we use the new edition's combat grid rules that we can use meters/yards instead of feet.

 

[BobTheNob]

I gotta admit this entire topic has got me bamboozled. I just dont understand people interest in measurement.

What difference does it actually make what measurement unit you use. At the end of the day, relativity of range vs time is all that really counts. In fact, back in 3.0 we gave up on using "real" measurements and started referring to these things as "distance thingies" and "time thingies".

So distance from one point to another was X "distance thingies", so can my bow reach X "distance thingies", or how many "time thingies" will it take me to get there.

Realistically it didn't even matter in game terms that these didn't equate to any real world measurements, the game works no matter what distance unit you use, as long as its consistent through the whole game.

 

[Daven]

I gotta admit this entire topic has got me bamboozled. I just dont understand people interest in measurement.

What difference does it actually make what measurement unit you use. At the end of the day, relativity of range vs time is all that really counts. In fact, back in 3.0 we gave up on using "real" measurements and started referring to these things as "distance thingies" and "time thingies".

So distance from one point to another was X "distance thingies", so can my bow reach X "distance thingies", or how many "time thingies" will it take me to get there.

Realistically it didn't even matter in game terms that these didn't equate to any real world measurements, the game works no matter what distance unit you use, as long as its consistent through the whole game.

The problem is when a character talks to another (in-game) about something that is measured by rules in "distance thingies". For example, Cleric: "Stay 3 m from me to be protected by my spell!" instead of "Stay 2 squares from me to be protected by my spell!"

In Italy saying 2 squares or 10 feet in a dialogue between characters, is almost the same. Obviously for many American and English people using metres is equally strange. D&D is an american game, so... I am resigned to convert on the fly

 

[Bohemian Ear Spoon]

I just want to be able to finally use a weapon's "long range" in an encounter. 1" squares make that all but unlikely, unless playing on olympic sized conference table.

1" = 10' inside, 10 yards outside is my vote

 

[BobTheNob]

Obviously for many American and English people using metres is equally strange. D&D is an american game, so... I am resigned to convert on the fly

Ahh the metric system. So good to be born in Australia and not have to deal with anything else

Kilometers and meters...and no other way

 

[kitsune9]

I think all overland maps should be scaled in furlongs.

And weights should be in stones.