GM motivation

While i am still new to the Roll20 system and site, i have noticed that looking for games is hard. In order to just play i have to dm. And most of the games i do find are players looking for a gm and other players.  If there were some kind of motivation to see a game though i think that could change that. something like minor credit for running a game for a curtain amount of time. Nothing huge, but something where you'd have to run like 20 x long campaigns or matches to earn some tokens or maps or something..

Paid GM'ing is permitted by the Roll20 policy listed here, <a href="https://app.roll20.net/forum/post/3735894/code-of-" rel="nofollow">https://app.roll20.net/forum/post/3735894/code-of-</a>... I understand your Suggestion may be more for Roll20 to provide credits to incentivize GM's. Just letting you know that the above option is allowed if you choose to pursue it. Roll20 currently awards Achievements for GM'ing multiple games and the duration of those games. Achievements are icons that appear on your personal Roll20 profile. &nbsp;Wiki docs for this, <a href="https://wiki.roll20.net/Achievements" rel="nofollow">https://wiki.roll20.net/Achievements</a>

Yeah, I've seen that. But there isn't anyway to be sure how a gm plays. I've played a few games off site where the gm sucked. They were too strikes to their story or too lax on the rules. Some games where the gm made it fun and others where I stopped because of how it was ran.&nbsp; And played gm or not, there aren't enough games going on. I have found multiple games that looked awesome. Then reading all the way down the description they don't have a gm. And I'm not necessarily saying they need to pay us. I mean if you look at free to play apps they have goals to get so you never have to spend money. It just takes way longer. Something that would motivate people who want to play free and stay free.&nbsp; maybe even a gm review section. Something about how the game was for the players. Is. Just thoughts.&nbsp; As for the current achievement system. It's just for length. Doesn't really sat if the games were fun, hard, or how players felt about them. If I'm a great dm but only have ran 2 games on here it won't show any reviews for how the games were ran. Good or bad.

Unless it was done carefully, and with lots of checks in place. I think it would be open to abuse for free credit. People starting tons of games and getting friends to sit in them, or if voting is needed having friends/reddit buddies all vote it was a great game so they can run a free premium campaign.Tons of reddit posts: "Vote for me as GM or sit in one of my current games on roll20, and I will run a game for you with dynamic lighting, API scripts, and the works once the credits allow me to go pro." And how would you determine credit? Our game is 2 years long on the same session with the same 7 people. Would that count as a 'lot' of games ran, or would 100 one off games ran for dozens of people count as a lot of games ran? If its the last one, people would just take their current long running game, clone it every week, kick all the players so they have to rejoin as 'new' and have it count as a new game each time to get points towards credit. Plus I think the voting on GM's option has been discussed before. It has one major flaw, peoples preferred game style. What one person loves the other thinks is boring. What one thinks is fun one thinks is tedious. There could be a GM that had nothing but rave reviews by everyone of his current players, and I/you/someone else thinks he's overly long winded, and runs a slow campaign. OR vice versa, think its waay to fast paced, vague, and power gamed. Not against the idea at all. Just I personally can't think of any way to do it that wouldnt be gamed for credit by some people.

As a GM, I would find the obligation to maintain some particular rating level or deal with public reviews to be highly discouraging, not encouraging. Why would I want to run a game for players I don't already know? It becomes a risk and an annoyance when some stranger leaves me a bashing review because they wanted a Holy Avenger at L1, or I didn't let them sleep with _all_ the NPCs, or whatever.... Plus as noted it would be challenging to dodge all sorts of upvote/downvote schemes.

Thanks for the suggestion! After 30 days, Suggestions and Ideas with fewer than 10 votes are closed and the votes are refunded to promote freshness. Your suggestion didn't build the right momentum this time, but feel free to submit it again! We find that the best suggestions describe the problem you are having, and the solution you want. You can learn more about the process of making suggestions on the Roll20 Wiki! More details can be found here .