Metric & Markets

[Krensky]

I never called the imperial system stupid —I called it outdated— nor invalid ; It's very "valid", since some 400 million people are stuck using it, because of traditionalism, conservatism, pattriotism and/or chauvinism; because of trade dependency on non-metric economies; and/or —possibly— simply because they don't know any better.

On the matter of aesthetics: the imperial system could have been a thing of beauty if they had stuck with duodecimal throughout the whole thing. This, of course, is the reason why Paul Maclean's 12-fingered aliens in post #7 have that math advantage over us: they likely never had to reconcile a uniform-base numeric system with a radix equal to their digit count —and the uniform measuring system (beneficial for nuclear/spacefaring societies) logically rooted in it— with one which clings to "human scale units" as its main feature and whose only logical claim to superiority is the partial inclusion of a numeric system which has a highly-composite number as a radix (argued to be beneficial for pre-industrial societies).

And why, for argument's sake, is metric better? Explain without using chauvanism, snide comments, or implications that anything else is backwards.

If the pro-imperial faction cannot see that, in the 21st century, it would serve their economical, cultural and scientific development best to employ a system of measurement that favours scientists over one that favours carpenters... sigh. The rest of us prefer looking to the future, not the past.

Scientists use SI in the US all the time. In the lab. I know a number of them. They use imperial for everything other then their notes. And why are scientists more important then carpenters?

In summary: on a global scale, the imperial system is nothing more than a "proud nail". One 4E could have hammered in as well as it did many other ones.

And proceeded to be a massive boondoggle.

Thank you for denigrating the effort we put into creating the details of our campaign world. Fortunately, others can appreciate someone posting the fruits of their labour for others to share in and/or criticise constructively.

How is your campaign improved by inventing new scales of measurement and number systems? Would it be improved more by spending that time and effort on the political and social structure of the world or by making a cool sketch of the villain? I would say yes.

The quote I was thinking of is from David Drake's note in With the Lightnings

 

[Nai_Calus]

How is your campaign improved by inventing new scales of measurement and number systems? Would it be improved more by spending that time and effort on the political and social structure of the world or by making a cool sketch of the villain? I would say yes.

I'm with you on the measurements thing, but this one I can speak on.

The number system I referenced in my last post is something you have to figure out in-game in order to solve a major puzzle, the method of which involves a gloriously disturbing teaching game in a schoolhouse. It's a sort of base 5/base 25 hybrid(5 major symbols, which are rotated and combined in a square to make the numbers 1-24 and a special symbol for the number 25, with place values being multiples of 25).

It is one of the most fascinating elements in the game. The D'ni in game's universe are human-like people enough like us to successfully interbreed with humans. But the number system makes them instantly different, and leaves you wondering 'What inspired this number system? What does it say about the people who invented it? Why this and not base 10? Did they ever use base 10 and then switch? Why?'. And so on. It's simple to grasp and understand the system, making it easily usable by the player, but it's an instant way of differentiating a culture and making you think: These people clearly have some different assumptions than we do.

The players may not care to learn in an RPG about the elves' or whatever's, say, base 16 number system, and you shouldn't force them to if they don't want to, but make it show up when it should and serve purposes when it needs to, and they'll remember it as something different, a neat little detail that reminds that no, they aren't just humans with pointy ears.

 

[Aexalon]

And why, for argument's sake, is metric better? Explain without using chauvanism, snide comments, or implications that anything else is backwards.

We can safely agree that that is impossible. The pro-metric camp maintains that SI is more consistent. The pro-imperial camp maintains that imperial is more convenient in day-to-day use. But even in the unlikely case that both sides agree on eachother's assessments of their own systems (which they don't), they'll likely still wouldn't agree on a superior system, since the pro-metric camp largely favours consistency, while the pro-imperial camp largely favours convenience in day-to-day use.

In the last 200 years 90-95% of the world community switched to metric from local measurement systems that had held (in Europe, the Middle East, and China at least) for several thousand years. This is not coincidence. Why not accept that the imperial system has served its purpose in guiding western civilisation through the middle ages, but has met its match in SI? The days of Empire have come and gone. The global economy dictates shared standards. Hanging on to local measurement systems is little more than veiled protectionism at worst, or an incompentent waste of planetary resources at best.

Scientists use SI in the US all the time. In the lab. I know a number of them. They use imperial for everything other then their notes. And why are scientists more important then carpenters

Besides this still being based on the —imho false— perception that carpenters are less capable of performing their work using the metric system, using the two systems side by side is a recipe for disaster. As for scientists being more important than carpenters, "all are needed by each one", but I don't see carpenters fixing world hunger, solving the impending energy crisis, or mitigating climate change any time soon. And the few that do, prefer to be called engineers.

And proceeded to be a massive boondoggle.

Should I read this as "metricising 4E would have caused it to proceed to a massive boondongle", or as "the proud nails 4E did hammer in caused it to proceed to be a massive boondongle, regardless of metrication"?

How is your campaign improved by inventing new scales of measurement and number systems? Would it be improved more by spending that time and effort on the political and social structure of the world or by making a cool sketch of the villain? I would say yes.

It's called collaborative world building. We leave the villains in the capable hands of the DM. Each contributes to the campaign what he or she is best at.

The quote I was thinking of is from David Drake's note in With the Lightnings

You prefer David Drake. I prefer Frank Drake.

 

[Plane Sailing]

It is illegal in the UK to sell food using imperial measurements.

No it isn't, mate! You're behind the times. Read the BBC link which you quoted in Morrus' post

 

[Plane Sailing]

I never called the imperial system stupid —I called it outdated— nor invalid ; It's very "valid", since some 400 million people are stuck using it, because of traditionalism, conservatism, pattriotism and/or chauvinism; because of trade dependency on non-metric economies; and/or —possibly— simply because they don't know any better.

When my sister was a little girl, she would sometimes say "I don't mean to be rude, but..." and then proceed to be rude.

Your characterisation here of everyone who uses and is happy with the imperial system for a range of foolish and intellectually insecure reasons is calling those people stupid.

Don't do it, or you'll be banned from the thread and possibly suspended.

Regards.

 

[Nifft]

And why are scientists more important then carpenters?

"More important" in some kind of moral sense? Who cares?

Scientists are usually smarter than carpenters, but the moral value of "smart" isn't what we're discussing here.

I'd like to hear the opinion of one of these scientists, who uses both systems. Personally, I like Metric fine, though I use Imperial most of the time since I live in the US. Using both is annoying, but not impossible.

Cheers, -- N

 

[rogueboy]

I'd like to hear the opinion of one of these scientists, who uses both systems. Personally, I like Metric fine, though I use Imperial most of the time since I live in the US. Using both is annoying, but not impossible.

I like to think I qualify as "one of these scientists who uses both systems" (3rd year chemistry undergrad, living in the US). As far as Imperial (US) vs. metric/SI goes, I find metric/SI to be easier to use for volume (I use liters and [especially] milliliters many times every day, so I'm used to those) and Imperial (US) easier for distance (I rarely have to measure things in SI units, so my ability to judge distance in SI units is limited). For temperature, it depends on the context: in terms of weather, I am more comfortable with the Imperial (US) system (since it's what I've used my entire life), but for anything else (including boiling and melting points of water, oddly enough) I'm more comfortable with the Celsius scale. As far as mass goes, I'm about equally comfortable with both pounds and kilograms (even though, technically, pounds are weight and not mass). For converting between mass and volume, I find SI units easier than Imperial (US) units (I find 1L of water weighs 1kg easier than 1 gallon weighs ~8lbs, though that may be that I find 1L easier to visualize than 1gallon).

Hopefully that is something close to what you were looking for .

 

[Ravellion]

4e made me switch to squares. Funny thing is, though we've used feet for 14 years now, I think finally the players and myself are actually getting a sense of how large a room is (mostly because we now always use minis, but still).

I couldn't do an environmental hazard by the book in 3e because fahrenheit to celsius or Kelvin conversions are incredibly annoying. I winged some negative modifiers together with some fort saves instead. Was a bit of a shame at the time. Because temperature is scale in which multiplication makes no sense (20 degrees is not "twice as hot" as 10 degrees in either Fahrenheit or Celsius), while with feet you at least know that 20 feet is, in fact, twice as long as 10 feet, you can over time picture things in feet. I think you actually have to use a different scale for temperature day to day before that scale starts making any sense.

I noticed in the UK that weights (for products) and temperatures tended to be metric, while volume and distance wasn't. After a year there, I still don't know whether a person used to be overweight or not if he or she says "I used to weigh 18/8/88 stone!". I am just glad I knew whether the weather was going to be bad tomorrow or not

What's that "carpenters like imperial" argument about anyway? Mms and cms are actually more precise than inches and 1/8 of inches (hence, less crooked cupboards).

In the game: I'd like metric, but I realize I am playing an American game, so I'll keep to squares. The extra depth in the campaign world is more easily gained elsewhere than in a measurement system.

 

[Krensky]

We can safely agree that that is impossible. The pro-metric camp maintains that SI is more consistent. The pro-imperial camp maintains that imperial is more convenient in day-to-day use. But even in the unlikely case that both sides agree on eachother's assessments of their own systems (which they don't), they'll likely still wouldn't agree on a superior system, since the pro-metric camp largely favours consistency, while the pro-imperial camp largely favours convenience in day-to-day use.

In the last 200 years 90-95% of the world community switched to metric from local measurement systems that had held (in Europe, the Middle East, and China at least) for several thousand years. This is not coincidence. Why not accept that the imperial system has served its purpose in guiding western civilisation through the middle ages, but has met its match in SI? The days of Empire have come and gone. The global economy dictates shared standards. Hanging on to local measurement systems is little more than veiled protectionism at worst, or an incompentent waste of planetary resources at best.

Again, you're calling us stupid. It's not a question of hanging onto it to spite the supremacy of the metric system (which is not SI), it's a matter of the case never being convincing. For two hundred years, ever since the French went crazy and got democratic revolution all wrong and invented metric, people have been adopting it for a variety of reasons. Often it was a need to feel or demonstrate modernity. In the later part of that period it was simple peer pressure. On the other hand, no one (outside of France during the period in question) switched to metric time or dating.

Besides this still being based on the —imho false— perception that carpenters are less capable of performing their work using the metric system, using the two systems side by side is a recipe for disaster. As for scientists being more important than carpenters, "all are needed by each one", but I don't see carpenters fixing world hunger, solving the impending energy crisis, or mitigating climate change any time soon. And the few that do, prefer to be called engineers.

Framing to code in the US is largely impossible using the metric system. Largely because the codes, tools, and supplies are all in US customary. 16 inches on center is far simpler to work with then 40.64 cm.

Should I read this as "metricising 4E would have caused it to proceed to a massive boondongle", or as "the proud nails 4E did hammer in caused it to proceed to be a massive boondongle, regardless of metrication"?

The former.

It's called collaborative world building. We leave the villains in the capable hands of the DM. Each contributes to the campaign what he or she is best at.

And you contribution is phony measurement systems and obscure numerical systems and the esoteric and aesthetic reasons why they're better then real ones?

You prefer David Drake. I prefer Frank Drake.

If we were talking about astrophysics, Frank Drake would get pull. Talking about world building and story telling, I'll take the historian and lawyer turned successful science fiction and fantasy author. Many of his books are great examples of how to take an obscure bit of real history (or no so obscure at times) and make an adventure from it that most people wouldn't recognize the source of. Really, what was the argument there, they have massively different and unrelated fields.

 

[lutecius]

I am not going to go into this at length since we had this discussion not so long ago and i don't really care what system dnd uses (imperial units do have an old fashioned charm that fits the genre) but still...

Just because the imperial system offends you sense of aesthetics doesn't make it stupid or invalid or inferior to metric. SI (which is not the same as metric) is used in science because everything in it is measured to make math straight forward. In the real world, converting from old systems often isn't worth the effort. [...] The customary system continues in the US because, as a group, we never saw a benefit to confusing everyone in order to implement it.

It might not be worth the cost and effort but in today's global economy there certainly are benefits to using the same system as the rest of the world.

Also, since 1960 the SI is the standard metric system. And even before that, the only difference between the various metric systems was the choice of base units. That didn't affect its use "in the real world".

And why, for argument's sake, is metric better? Explain without using chauvanism, snide comments, or implications that anything else is backwards.

Metric is more consistent and makes the math easier in everyday life, not just science. There are obvious advantages to multiplying/dividing by multiples of 10 (rather than 3, 12 or 1760) when converting to smaller/larger units.

Imperial units may be more intuitive in a particular domain but don't represent anything or might even be misleading in most others. And if you need precise measurements, the fact that a unit was based on something more or less related to what you're measuring, somewhere, at some point in time, doesn't help much. That simply doesn't make up for the Imperial system's er... interesting math.

Scientists use SI in the US all the time. In the lab. I know a number of them. They use imperial for everything other then their notes.

yeah, that seems to work just fine