In reply to kark2 (msg # 40):

Seriously, I think it's your reading comprehension that's been at fault here, not BBR's explanation.

I (and it appears most people reading this) knew exactly what he meant: that adding smaller units together to arrive atlarger units is the same concept, whether you're using palms to cubits, reeds to cords, passae to stadium, inches to feet, or centimetres to decimetres.

It's a common practice since the ancient past when a person would rather talk about some distance being "a furlong" away rather than 625 foot-lengths away.


Note that nothing I'm saying implies that a palm, reed, passum, or centimetre equals an inch, nor that a cubit, cord, stadium, or decimetre equals a foot.

Which, of course, is something that I knew beforehand. As I clearly said, I didn't know "HOW" inches were added to become feet. A basic statement that anyone can comprehend.

I know there is a system. I just didn't knew how it worked. And bigbadron's reply was not right at all.

Like, how the people who invented "feet" divided them into inches, or how Foot/12 = inches works?

Think someone forgot to put that don't feed the troll sign up, oh wait yep there it is, it just got knocked over that was the problem. Here let me put that back for your guys *adjusts the don't feed the trolls sign*

In reply to Tortuga (msg # 44):

All I know about the origins of feet is I heard it used to be the literal length of the British kings foot. Idk, it might be worth looking up sometime.

*spit shines the don't feed the troll sign*

Revisiting the original question...

For me, I personally am fine with either metric or imperial. That said, I would say to use whatever the DM is most comfortable with using, since they are the one running things and would have the most to keep track of, so it should be whatever helps them run the game.
If they are fine with either and do not have a preference, then yes, a poll of the players sounds like a good idea, and in this case, my preference is to use whichever the system uses, since that would require the least conversions (if it is a system based game as opposed to freeform).
This message was last edited by the user at 20:06, Mon 27 Oct 2014.

This makes no sense. The "how" is always the same, smaller unit multiplied by some conversion value equals the larger unit. This doesn't change, ever. Thus the how remains the same.

Thus, you just need to know the conversion value. Metric always uses 1 with some number of zeros.

Imperial uses different values .

Doesn't really matter as you are either memorizing how many zeros, or memorizing the conversion value, and either way you are memorizing a simple number.

In reply to DarkLightHitomi (msg # 48):

Whislt I do agree that bigbadron's reply was very clear, I think you're misinterpreting what kark2 means here. If I'm reading it right, what he's saying is, to put it simply, he didn't know how many inches to a foot.

What he said makes perfect sense to me. I can even understand, given what he's said, how he misread what bigbadron said. Doesn't change the fact that he -did- misread it; just that I understand how he could have.

Thing is that you don't expect that people with a star start trolling.

Also, some games already have conversions. For example D&D had a conversion table.
http://archive.wizards.com/def...p?x=dnd/rg/20040323a
Thing is that someone familiar with the two systems told me that the conversion was simplified. As in 10 ft is not really 4 mts, so I prefered to avoid it and keep with the original in-game system when I GM.



The "how" is not always the same and your sentence is proof of that.
Metric system is smaller unit x 10 = next bigger unit.
Imperial system is Inches x 12 = 1 ft
10 is not 12, never was, never will, therefore the "how" is not the same.

This is why you were called a troll. Obviously you miss the point of when it was said "smaller units become a bigger unit" It does not matter if its feet hours lightyears or meters. The point remains.

Now to ignore the thread.

I think the term 'troll' is too lightly thrown about.

Either someone -is- a troll; in which case you should literally just ignore them, not even saying that you are. Or they're not, in which case, rather than calling them one, it would be best to explain them to the issues you're having with their post/manner of speaking/whatever.

I don't think calling people trolls helps anyone, or does anything except potentially cause flame wars.

Dude.

bigger unit * conversion rate = smaller units

smaller units / conversion rate = bigger units

Always.

Every time.

The only thing that changes is the conversion rate. And you can google that in like a minute.
This message was last edited by the user at 02:38, Tue 28 Oct 2014.

I can't believe that this has escalated this far.

I am with kark2 here, not only because he is a friend that I personally know, but because he clarified in his first post that he knew that inches could be sum to get feet. He just didn't know how. We come from a country where metric system is used in everything except TVs, pipes and screws. And noone can take two 3/4 inches tubes to get a 1 1/2 inches tube, so maths are not used with the english system.

If bigbadron's answer was "Oh yes, a bunch of inches make a foot" then noone asked that question. And if his answer was "There is no difference with the metric system" then the answer is wrong, just like tortuga pointed out in msg #53, because the conversion rate is different.

Actually, no he didn't.



He did not state, in his first post, that he knew inches could be added together to get feet. In fact, that post suggests he just did not understand that they could, at all.

So in my view, bigbadron believed he was explaining something kark2 did not understand.

In reply to willvr (msg # 55):

That's exactly right.

The "how" is the formula (people use these everyday without thinking about it).

You change the inputs and you get a different output.

Changing the inputs doesn't change the formula itself, thus the how remains the same, only the inputs change.


---
Interestingly, I bet it will be a long time before you forget how many inches to a foot because of how long this has gone. :)

That quote right there states that he knew that inches can be added to form feet. Otherwise, he wouldn't even wrote the word "added". He just didn't know how. 20 inches is a foot? 15? Now he (we) know that 12 inches make a foot.


Exactly, and the formula for the english system is different than the metric.

Metric: A x 10 = B
English: A x 12 = B

They are similar, but different.

No, the formula is always A * B = AB.

A is the number of longer units (feet or meters)
B is the conversion factor. 10 for metric. 12 for imperial.
AB is the number of the shorter units. (inches or centimeters)

Only the variables change. "How distance conversion works" is constant.

Even I know this, and I had a public American education.
This message was last edited by the user at 05:29, Wed 29 Oct 2014.

This thread is still going on lol?!? That horse is mush now, gross.

You know, I just realized, us americans are always using different conversion factors, but those metric guys only ever use ten. Perhaps that is why they can't understand that the conversion factor is a variable, cause they have it all nice, easy, and constant. While we have to deal with it being a variable so we are better at dealing with it when it changes, but those for whom it never changes have trouble dealing with it when it does change.

Just a hypothesis.

Whilst I won't deny the metric system is simpler; I'm not American (okay -technically- I am, but I haven't lived there since I was three) and have no difficulty understanding the conversion factor is a variable. Where I live, the only time that anything but metric is ever used is for the size of computer monitors and TV screens. Oddly, it's often used for heights as well, but that seems to vary a bit - I know some people who are steadfast for using heights in metric; so I've learnt to approximate what my height is in both. But don't actually ask me what the conversion is for it; I looked it up online once and have memorised it since. (The fact that I'm almost right on 2m makes it easier to remember I suppose.)

I'm actually coming to the conclusion that this whole conversation is just a big misunderstanding and there's not really much point debating it, as it's gotten to the point of being circular. (If it ever wasn't.)

Circular topics are the best though, aren't they? They encourage deep thinking and logical analysis, if you can set aside the urge to reject everything that isn't your own idea anyway (hard for some, easy for others).

So... by your formula:
1 foot * 12 = 1 inch ?

You realize that you are treating a constant as a variable and that noone asked how distance conversion works in general, but in the imperial system?


According to Tortuga it is base 12 O_O
 

I can't believe I fell for this thread.  I am ashamed.

Here's some fun facts:

http://www.factmonster.com/ipka/A0769529.html

Inch: At first an inch was the width of a man's thumb. In the 14th century, King Edward II of England ruled that 1 inch equalled 3 grains of barley placed end to end lengthwise.

Hand: A hand was approximately 5 inches or 5 digits (fingers) across. Today, a hand is 4 inches and is used to measure horses (from the ground to the horse's withers, or shoulder).

Span: A span was the length of the hand stretched out, about 9 inches.

Foot: In ancient times, the foot was 111/42 inches. Today it is 12 inches, the length of the average man's foot.

Yard: A yard was originally the length of a man's belt or girdle, as it was called. In the 12th century, King Henry I of England fixed the yard as the distance from his nose to the thumb of his out-stretched arm. Today it is 36 inches.

Cubit: In ancient Egypt, a cubit was the distance from the elbow to the fingertips. Today a cubit is about 18 inches.

Lick: A Lick was used by the Greeks to measure the distance from the tip of the thumb to the tip of the index finger.

Pace: The ancient Roman soldiers marched in paces, which were the length of a double step, about 5 feet; 1,000 paces was a mile. Today, a pace is the length of one step, 21/2 to 3 feet.

Not really -- only when talking inches and feet.  This is the bad hangover which come from using a mishmash of systems.

        LENGTH                   VOLUME                        WEIGHT              
 12 inches = 1 foot      5 ounces* = 1 gill             16 ounces = 1 pound
    3 feet = 1 yard        4 gills = 1 pint             14 pounds = 1 stone
  22 yards = 1 chain       2 pints = 1 quart              8 stone = 1 hundredweight**
 10 chains = 1 furlong    4 quarts = 1 gallon    20 hundredweight = 1 ton
8 furlongs = 1 mile
   3 miles = 1 league

* note that US and British fluid ounces are different.
** note that in the US and Canada, the hundredweight is 100 lbs instead; aka the "short hundredweight".  This also means that the US and Canadian ton, aka the "short ton" (at 2,000 lbs) is less than the UK ton (at 2,240 lbs).

Thank goodness I moved to a mostly metric country ;-)

edit: to make my chart more clear.  Also, it's amazingly easy to confuse someone by going to home depot and asking for 2.5 chains of rope.
This message was last edited by the user at 18:31, Wed 29 Oct 2014.