yeah exactly. i understand it as follows:

• in the manhattan metric, points have length one if the lengths of their coordinates sum to 1. so you get the points (1, 0), (0, 1), (-1, 0), and (-1, -1). and then you connect these four points with straight lines to get the diamond shape. this follows from the observation that if the x coordinate decreases in length by 0.1, then the y coordinate must increase in length by 0.1.
• in the euclidean metric, the points of length one lie on the unit circle, since x^2^ + y^2^ = 1 is the equation defining the unit circle.
• in the chebyshev metric, points have length 1 if one of the coordinates has length 1 and the other coordinates have a length smaller (or equal to) 1. and these conditions also describe the square with sides x = ± 1 and y = ± 1.

Chebyshev distance can also be called chessboard distance if you want something more descriptive.

I think you’d like how Exalted handles money. (Note: I’m talking about second edition here; I never got familiar with third edition.)

In Exalted, wealth is represented by a Background called Resources. Backgrounds are essentially stats that represent useful things your characters has in a general sense like wealth, fame, contacts, or a mentor. They go from zero to five.

Resources is a vague representation of wealth. At Reduces 1 you’re one meal away from total poverty. At Resources 5 you have something that passively generates substantial amounts of money for your character, whether that’s ownership of a lot of land or an army of accountants maintaining your investment portfolio. Whatever is is, it works without you having to deal with it.

In terms of game mechanics it’s easy to use: Prices are expressed as Resource scores. If you want to buy something you just compare your score to the item’s.

• If yours is higher, you just get the item as the price doesn’t affect your wealth significantly.
• If both scores are the same you get the item but have to reduce your Resources by one. This represents you having to liquidate a large amount of your assets to cover the price.
• If your Resources score is lower than that of the item, you can’t afford it.

It’s a nice system for a game that doesn’t want resource management to get in the way of epic adventure.

Sounds cool, thanks for the explanation!

Of those that has been the least common at my tables.

That’s fair. Perhaps another style of DMing and/or a different system are more your speed.

I’ve always just treated it as a natural 3D extension of the 2D grid rules

I believe that’s how it’s handled in D&D too, or at least how my table has always done it. I meant more as a practical matter, you’re very unlikely to have a vertical wall grid and some kind of stand of the correct height for your minis, so you can’t just count squares like you would for horizontal movement. That’s when the Pythagorean Theorem comes up in my experience.

And there are more then enough systems out there for everyone to find his perfect match and then some.

RAW yes, they’re 30 feet away.

As a home rule, I’ll sometimes run total distance = long distance plus half the short distance. That also correlates nicely with making every other diagonal count as 10’

Reddit API Fallout Crew ️

Ah yes, the “APIcalypse” or “Rexxit”.

The lack of dnd-style multiclassing in Pathfinder was something I struggled with at first, but honestly now (especially with the “free archetype” optional rule) it’s one of my favourite underrated things about having switched. It’s not as flashy as the 4 degrees of success or three action system, but it’s a really great system.