API as a premium feature

Hi, I thought this might be worth putting out, to get some constructive feedback. In my opinion having the API as a premium feature does a disservice to the moddability of the Roll20 platform. By opening up the API to a wider range of users the possibility of enriching the platform with low to no costs to the development team is a big win. With more users of the API there is also a considerable increase in the possibility of mindshare; with tutorials and handy script archives. I for one would love to development some RPG system specific features, which I would be more than willing to make freely available, but I can not justify the Mentor subscription fee. I understand that running this service is not free, but locking the API behind a pay wall seems a wasted opportunity to me. Looking forward to some constructive discussion on this. Michael Edit: Sorry this should probably have went in the Suggestions forum.

Suggestions Forum it is. :) - Gauss

While I agree that it'd be cool to see API as a base level tool, I completely understand you guys wanting to make a profit off of it since it's a HUGE selling point for GM's who want to take their game to the next level. My current understanding of the way API works is that the GM needs to be the one who's a mentor and then he'll get the API tab when he's logged into the VTT. I, as a player, have no access to API scripts or anything else. I'd love to drop $100 for the year to get a mentor level sub, and then play around with API to get out game access to all of the cool stuff involved with it. However, like I said, I'm just a player so I have no reason to drop any money into this. I'd be tempted to just gift the sub to my GM to let him pick it up, but he doesn't have the time to play with the API scripts to make it worth the investment. My suggestion would be to make it so that API works in any game that you are GMing or playing in. That way I could make scripts in a dummy campaign and then just pass em off to my GM to put into his campaign. I love this site, it's exactly the thing I've been looking for to supplement my TTRPG experience. But I have a hard time giving $100 to let one of my friends have access to all the cool new forums and API abilities when he isn't as interested in that stuff as me.

I got . That may be a suitable work around, I'll have to think about it though, haha, I'm also wanting that sweet sweet forum access.

I think there is a similar analogy of the roll20 API to modding tools for computer games. When the ability to mold the product is given to the community they can produce wonderful things, and this can drive uplift of the base product and enrich everyone's experience. It's also now the case that any modding created by the Mentor community is essentially closed off from the other users. There is little point in me looking at it because it is not available for me to try. I believe this makes it unlikely for the user made improvement to actually drive uptake by much.

Michael, If I remember correctly on somethings, while us mentors have the api as part of our subscription, nothing is written in stone that it will stay mentor only. When it comes out of beta (it is still classified as beta) it might be downgraded to supporter or even be moved to the free accounts. Those of us willing to cough up the money for this level are doing several things. We are encouraging the developers to actively work on this program. We are beta testing new aspects being added to this software. We are also building the library of scripts that should the api go to supporter level or free, everyone will have proven scripts already made for them to use. This is equivalent to limited beta's that various video games do. I know there are differences but if you sit back and think about it, there are more similarities than differences. A case in point, dynamic lighting. That was originally mentors only then it was dropped down to include supporters subscription.

Michael C. said: There is little point in me looking at it because it is not available for me to try. Find a friend willing to gift you subscription time? ~_^

Only one person in a gaming group needs to be a mentor. They gotta make money somehow they are running a business here.

Paid access during beta is certainly a viable means of limiting numbers until the product is relatively mature, and often used in the games industry these days. Borrowing a subscription is not really a viable option in my opinion. For me personally I am part of a small group.We are just starting role playing and using roll20; and it is mostly lead by me. From my point of view, what is available with the free account will be just good enough. I would love to develop some system specific plugins but it is not essential, and I find it hard to justify $9.99 a month for the privilege to do so. I don't think opening up the API will severely impact the ability to monetize roll20; there are many strategies for this. But locking away the means for the community to really push the platform forward curtails the possibilities in my opinion. I know this might come across as me just being cheap and having some sort of 'entitlement' complex, but I actually hope I am honestly not being like that. For me there is a lot of potential in roll20. It's main drawing point is the possibility of a large community of gamers on a versatile platform, and I believe that to make it a really great platform the community itself should be leveraged to improve the platform and push it forward

I personally think that the api will do like the DL and move down into the supporter level. I really don't see it dropping more than that for a long period of time. This might happen as other new stuff is developed and added onto the mentor level. Just need to give it time to mature and build a base library of scripts.

Michael C. said: From my point of view, what is available with the free account will be just good enough As I understand it, this is exactly the reason why it's a mentor feature. Much like other subscription features (dynamic lighting, exclusive tokens, etc.) it isn't a required tool, but it can be used to enhance the game. Roll20 provides a bare tabletop with some organizational and graphical tools, allowing just about any game to be run in it in some form or another. Monetization results from providing tools that make the experience better or easier, but aren't exactly necessary. In this way, everyone can play, but those with the dedication to the program and investment in their games are going to get more out of it

Dylan G. said: In this way, everyone can play, but those with the dedication to the program and investment in their games are going to get more out of it I think this ignores the fact that the community can be wider than a collection of autonomous play groups and indeed that there are only people that want to improve their own gaming experience. I imagine that in modding communities there are those that just like to hack on things and share what they have made and get a kick out of having people use those modifications. It's hard to see this community member archetype actually getting involved in scripting for roll20 with the current setup.

I think the API as is is already adding to the things the Devs do. They see scripts being written and what people are using and are saying they are using and add some of these things into basic features. Rolling to turn marker would be my primary example here. This and other new rolling features allow GMs and players at any level to more easily manage their games in ways that formerly were only being done with the API as far as I know. At the same time I would agree that the more good minds you have using a tool the more clever ways you can see it used, however I find the pay wall set up on this site to be one of the best systems for funding an on going project like Roll 20. I think what they have achieved here already is great and that they should do nothing to jeopardize their current status. While many of us would pay whether the features were behind a wall or not there are plenty who would not. Next i say yes even with a small group I am guessing 4 of you, for one in the party to have a subscription thats 2.50 a month each. While there are no shortage of poor in this country my guess is that since you have computer and internet access 2.50 would not substantially effect any of you. This is a solution I have heard other gamers use. Drink tap water not soda during your game. This saves most players I know between 3 and 10 dollars. Anyhow sorry if i ranted a little there. Edit: Not as sorry now that I have read michaels latest post. Oh and ya what Metronight said sounds about right to me as well.

Black War Owl said: Edit: Not as sorry now that I have read michaels latest post. Sorry did I come across offensive? not my intention.

Don't worry Owl. If you look back at the pace of things and how stuff filtered down, the api will move down to supporter level once it is mature and no longer beta. Now 5 dollars a month is not much (in the states that is about Mcdonalds happy meal) so this is where it should drop to for a length of time. I'm figuring once the glitches and bugs have been hammered into submission is when it drops out of beta. When that happens that is up to the dev's. All the talk about the api is mostly a rehash of the talk that happened about the dynamic light. I personally think that a lot of the enhancements should stay at least supporter level (this is a business after all) but giving the mentors for crack at the new enhancements is a good idea for several reasons that I can think of and I mentioned some of them already. Beta testers is one reason. If you are the type that has to have it first then mentor level is for you. Supporters is another reason. You love the program and want to show your support. It doesn't matter if you use all the features, one of the feature, or even none of them. Tinkers is another one. If you just love to tinker with stuff then you would be a mentor more than likely. Those are the top 3 off the top of my head. I'm a supporter iin general. I don't use the api much if at all but as you can see I'm mentor level. I don't have a game on the dev server and probably won't have one. I will probably move down to supporter level after my first yr as a mentor is over because I don't use any of the mentor level features. That is my choice. I wanted to show support by purchasing a year of mentor level. What you chose is up to you but just a thought to think on. If they don't get the support, the site might go away probably. They built this program for them to use personally amongst themselves but decided to try it as a business venture. They didn't have to. To each their own. I was just expressing my view on it.

Michael C. said: Black War Owl said: Edit: Not as sorry now that I have read michaels latest post. Sorry did I come across offensive? not my intention. I didn't see it as offensive nor Owls either. I enjoy a civil discussion that allows each person to express their views without browbeating.

Metroknight said: All the talk about the api is mostly a rehash of the talk that happened about the dynamic light. I didn't participate in that particular debate, but from my point of view dynamic lighting sits very firmly in a premium feature category because it really is only for the benefit of the user. In contrast use of the API can greatly benefit the wider platform and community in the ways I have already mentioned. A lot of important points have been raised. And I'm you all felt like adding to the discussion.

I was not "offended" by anything you said Michael. I simply started to lack a concern for offending you based on something you said. Michael C. said: I imagine that in modding communities there are those that just like to hack on things and share what they have made and get a kick out of having people use those modifications. It's hard to see this community member archetype actually getting involved in scripting for roll20 with the current setup. I am personally friends with a few too many people with said attitude toward life in general. Making me very frustrated with people who think because of the fact they tinker and write code to add to this or that and give it away for free that anyone who writes or does anything should make it all open source. Of course to make all things better for all people. This next statement is the most likely to offend and please understand I am not accusing you of this. I also fin people I know with this view also use it to justify intellectual theft. At any rate my primary point in typical cave man style is paywall setup good no paywall bad. oh and Me Like roll twenty. (Though i do have to say living in colorado I have now been asked twice, while wearing my Roll 20 shirt, roll twenty what?)

Metroknight said: I personally think that the api will do like the DL and move down into the supporter level. I really don't see it dropping more than that for a long period of time. This might happen as other new stuff is developed and added onto the mentor level. Just need to give it time to mature and build a base library of scripts. This wouldn't surprise me at all. Heck, I wouldn't even mind (nor be terribly surprised) if by the time the API makes the shift to Supporter-level, the Dynamic Lighting becomes available to Base accounts. That said, the API is not fully-fledged yet. There are several things it cannot currently do that I think it should. For example, the only things that can be created from within the API are characters, attributes, abilities, and handouts... and the API can't set character/handout images, nor set a character's default token. A script library/database/market is also something many people desire, but does not yet exist.

Michael C. said: Metroknight said: All the talk about the api is mostly a rehash of the talk that happened about the dynamic light. I didn't participate in that particular debate, but from my point of view dynamic lighting sits very firmly in a premium feature category because it really is only for the benefit of the user. In contrast use of the API can greatly benefit the wider platform and community in the ways I have already mentioned. A lot of important points have been raised. And I'm you all felt like adding to the discussion. It is of no concern as I was just using the dynamic light talk and aspect in reference anyway. I was just using it to point out that features do drop in subscription level over a period of time and the api will probably do so also. Even though it would greatly benefit the community if it was free, roll20 is fully functional as it stands. I feel there should be premium features to encourage people to purchase subscriptions. This is to pay the devs for all their hard work. If they didn't make money then what would give them an incentive to improve the software? They are not into spending hours upon hours working on the code for us for free. I couldn't even imagine how many hours they logged in getting the code to this point. The fact that they established a level of free usage is incredible in this time and age. I do see your view of it and in a perfect world the api would be a free feature but in the real world, all the hard work and hours spent on getting it to this point does justify them being rewarded for their work, do you agree? I personally could not even think of working all those hours and not being paid. This is on top of them monitoring the forums and answering various questions or doing some type of debugging as it creeps in. The level of work they are putting in is tremendous and I can not begrudge them a small amount to show them how much they are appreciated.

Brian said: Metroknight said: I personally think that the api will do like the DL and move down into the supporter level. I really don't see it dropping more than that for a long period of time. This might happen as other new stuff is developed and added onto the mentor level. Just need to give it time to mature and build a base library of scripts. This wouldn't surprise me at all. Heck, I wouldn't even mind (nor be terribly surprised) if by the time the API makes the shift to Supporter-level, the Dynamic Lighting becomes available to Base accounts. That said, the API is not fully-fledged yet. There are several things it cannot currently do that I think it should. For example, the only things that can be created from within the API are characters, attributes, abilities, and handouts... and the API can't set character/handout images, nor set a character's default token. A script library/database/market is also something many people desire, but does not yet exist. That is why I think it will stay at mentor level for a while longer. There is still so much work that could and probably be done on it that it will need to stay beta. I think the dynamic lighting will stay supporter level for a good while but it will probably drop in time, when that is up to the devs.

A question to the OP If API would be free to use in the way that anyone could create and test scripts but you'd have to be a Mentor to use API in one of your campaigns would that be ok to you? I mean that way anyone willing to create new scripts would be able to do so (hence theoretically increasing the number of "community-devs" significantly) but only the people willing to pay for it would benefit from those scripts.

Not to get into an open source debate, I get paid to produce proprietary software, but have also contributed to open source projects. Many coders will do so in their free time, Linux is a prime example of this. But I think open source is completely orthogonal to the API discussion, the possibility of any one monetizing API scripts seems slim unless some sort of DRM system is implemented, which in my opinion would be a waste of effort and ultimately futile. The only way to truly know the worth of the API behind a pay wall is to count the number of Mentors that specifically paid for that account feature. Only the devs can really make a guess at this, knowing who many mentors there are, and guessing the second aspect. The API outside the pay wall could buy the roll20 platform new features with next to no cost to the dev team.

Maetco said: A question to the OP If API would be free to use in the way that anyone could create and test scripts but you'd have to be a Mentor to use API in one of your campaigns would that be ok to you? I mean that way anyone willing to create new scripts would be able to do so (hence theoretically increasing the number of "community-devs" significantly) but only the people willing to pay for it would benefit from those scripts. Something along these lines would definitely be a step in the right direction. But it's hard to see how one could properly test outside the context of a campaign.

Michael C. said: The only way to truly know the worth of the API behind a pay wall is to count the number of Mentors that specifically paid for that account feature. Only the devs can really make a guess at this, knowing who many mentors there are, and guessing the second aspect. Well, I can say that the primary reason I purchased a Mentor account was to play with the API. That shouldn't be a big surprise to anyone who's seen me posting on these forums (a large portion of which are either my own scripts, helping others with scripts, or mentioning scripts).

Metroknight said: I feel there should be premium features to encourage people to purchase subscriptions. This is to pay the devs for all their hard work. If they didn't make money then what would give them an incentive to improve the software? They are not into spending hours upon hours working on the code for us for free. I couldn't even imagine how many hours they logged in getting the code to this point. The fact that they established a level of free usage is incredible in this time and age. I do see your view of it and in a perfect world the api would be a free feature but in the real world, all the hard work and hours spent on getting it to this point does justify them being rewarded for their work, do you agree? I personally could not even think of working all those hours and not being paid. This is on top of them monitoring the forums and answering various questions or doing some type of debugging as it creeps in. The level of work they are putting in is tremendous and I can not begrudge them a small amount to show them how much they are appreciated. Just a note: We have not yet moved into the "Primary Project" level of Roll20 income yet. <a href="https://app.roll20.net/account/supporter/?minbarmain&amp;utm_source=inhouse&amp;utm_medium=banner&amp;utm_campaign=minibarmain" rel="nofollow">https://app.roll20.net/account/supporter/?minbarmain&amp;utm_source=inhouse&amp;utm_medium=banner&amp;utm_campaign=minibarmain</a> As for us Moderators, we are volunteers. :) - Gauss

Personally I think of the API in much the same way as mods. You can use a free "light version", but it's not moddable, you can pay a little to get access to the full game and, currently, you can pay a little more (totalling about the cost of a pizza, no soda) you get the game and lots of modability and other features. Eventually maybe everyone will get to play with the modability (me included), but I do not mind that one has to "buy" the game to do so. You have to buy minecraft in order to play Thaumcraft after all ;)

I wonder how hard would it be to set the api to run a limited number of api scripts say 1 or 2. This would give those in the free account an ability to run a script or two and decide if they wish to purchase a subscription to gain access to the full api. I just remembered how my son's games have a crippled mode called demo. Everyone that works or builds software should know that term. I just wonder if that is even possible in roll20.

You only really need one script tab in the API. You could add all you want in that one script.

But I was talking about limiting how many api scripts can be ran at one time. Sure you could right a script that does 4 or 5 or more things but there could be limit on it. I'm trying to think outside the box in a manner that could allow the free accounts a taste of the api while restricting the full api capabilities to subscription level. I'm not a coder but just tossing out ideas.

Metroknight, I don't think that idea would be feasible until and unless we have a distribution center for scripts, rather than copy/paste. If I really wanted to, I could put every single script I've written (12 actual scripts, counting both versions of my Flight script and not counting the various snippets posted in threads here on the forums) into a single on('ready', function() {...}); call.

I do believe honey badgers point is with one page you could run as many API scripts as you could with ten pages due to the way the programming is read by the computer. So maybe you could limit the # of lines allowed but still I think the current system works fine. No need for free access. You put limits on things to make them viable.

True brian and owl. As I said I was just tossing out ideas. I haven't taken programming classes yet so this was mostly just tossing stuff up in the air to see where it would land.

Ya no programming background here either started learning java just for the API.

See Nolan's post here: <a href="https://app.roll20.net/forum/post/341665/#post-342855" rel="nofollow">https://app.roll20.net/forum/post/341665/#post-342855</a>

I am not a designer or coder of API scripts, but I do enjoy having the option to use them as a mentor. I am also on the side of the fence on keeping this a mentor level feature. When you are a non - supporter, you have so many tools at your disposal. And this is all free! Many other virtual table top programs charge you to even use them. I will not name them here but I think most avid virtual table toppers will know which ones I am talking about. I use one script and one only. Does that truly warrant me paying 10$ a month. No, I do not think so. But I do support them because I want to see Roll20 survive and have years of longevity. Please do not take this the wrong way, and I am in no way trying to start any kind of shit out here on the forums but enjoy what is offered. If API goes to non sub level in time so be it. Until then like I said. Enjoy it. Dave

Thank Rabulias. I see it is written in stone about the current future of the api. So all my assumptions about it might drop to supporter level is wrong. I guess it boils down to if you want the api and to support roll20 you go with the mentor subscription otherwise work with all the free tools they provide.

Ok, well Rabulias pretty much answered it. Personally I do believe that a limit on the scripting community will adversely affected the diversity of scripts available. I will continue to use Roll20, it pretty good. I have actually looked around at the alternatives. To be honest the main drawing point of roll20 at the moment for me is the possibility of grouping up with new people. Cheers for the input everybody, good discussion.