Why isn't Roll 20 rolling in cash!?

First off let me start by saying, I LOVE ROLL20 and only want to see it grow! I understand the desire or need to have a constant flow of money coming into Roll 20 to keep the lights on but why doesn't Roll 20 go the way of micro transaction's instead of Subscription based accounts. Don't get me wrong It saves me a lot of money that I would have otherwise happily thrown at Roll20 if they had chosen to go that route. 20 dollars for the dynamic lighting feature, 5 dollars for fog of war, 10.00 for spell effect lightning package 20.00 to be able to use API script's then its open for all your campaigns etc. I understand that the Dev's would have to have more free time on their hands and really focus on new content to keep the money coming in but it just seems like a better business model. I go a little over board but for example (and im going to regret mentioning this;-) When neverwinter online, the MMO came out i spent nearly 700.00 dollars on that game in micro transactions buying EVERYTHING my greedy little nerd heart desired. Again I'm not complaining, when you tell me that all i have to do is spend 10.00 dollars a month and get it all for free? that's fine by me. I am looking for ways to throw my money at the dev's but they arent helping me :-)

Buying only the features I want? Yeah I'm down for that! I really want to support this awesome platform but some of the features I wouldn't use and thus I don't feel justifies a subscription for me. But a broader feature store? Yeah I'd get behind that. And as my GM styles changes or I move to different games I could buy more feature to support that too. Just ask Steam how they get my money...impulse buying! LOL

I'm only using a fraction of what a mentor gets so they would actually lose money from people like me. Of everything a mentor gets, I use the dynamic lighting on the production server. I don't use the api (I play around with it but nothing serious), I don't use the dev server, I don't use the extra tokens as I have all the graphics I need on my computer and even then I'm still not even close to the graphics limit of the free accounts. I purchased the mentor account level just to support and help the community otherwise I could just have stuck with the free account so they would have to seriously look things over.

I use Roll20 every single week, sometimes more! Microtransactions work in the video game industry due to the broad audience. Let's face it, Roll20 doesn't get the fraction of traffic that most major online games and wouldn't be able to sustain on a model like that. It's a niche hobby. I think their price is reasonable, especially since all of my players reap my benefits. But I could understand if you were exclusively a player. Also, I just generally love Roll20 and don't mind supporting the devs consistently.

My $.02 I like their model and approach, and greatly appreciate that they do things the "right way" instead of what makes the most money. I'm not a fan of the micro transactions model at all. In today's tight economy I really appreciate the very reasonable price. The Roll20 team is smart, and I'm sure they'll think of other ways to add to funding without resorting to a typical corporate model.

I like the idea of being able to buy features as needed. I would love to use the transmogrier but can't justify upgrading my account just for that. If there was a small change to use it once that would be amazing. Would happily a dollar or two to move my players from one campaign to another.

+1

@Chris there is a small fee to use it once. You can buy a one month subscription for $10. I just wish there was a way for me, as a player, to give my mentor abilities to the one campaign I'm in. Right now I'm just gifting the money to my GM, but I really want to read what's on the mentor forums.

They are doing it the right and proper way I think. I think they just need to really spread their marketing, and remove items from the "alpha/beta" list and get them fully functional. Once they do that, people would really feel that spending the 10 bucks a month for the lighting, and all the other great mentor features would be 100% worth it.

I don't pay for the features. I mean, yes, dynamic lighting makes the games I run 100x better, but I pay for the development. They're letting me use their server space and their platform to entertain myself for 8 hours a week. The least I can do is compensate them for it in some way. Roll20 is in it's infancy. It literally is a very new concept and website, give it time and it'll grow.

The mentor subscription level could be nicknamed betatesters because that is what most mentors do. Waffles hits the nail on the head. If we want this site to grow and expand we have to be willing to support it even if we don't use everything. 10 dollars a month is not that much. You spend that much or more on two value meals from mcdonalds.

Metroknight said: The mentor subscription level could be nicknamed betatesters because that is what most mentors do. Waffles hits the nail on the head. If we want this site to grow and expand we have to be willing to support it even if we don't use everything. 10 dollars a month is not that much. You spend that much or more on two value meals from mcdonalds. Quantifying it: 10 dollars is: 3 gallons of gas 1 hour of work (most median, starter jobs) Two meals at a fast food chain One meal at a higher end fast food chain (Chipotle, etc) One take out pizza, no delivery Half the entrance fee to a movie theater Not enough to log into WoW for a month Most people make twice that in an hour of work. Most stoner college kids spend 10x that in bud every month. Most smoker adults spend 20x that in cigarettes every month. Most new parents spend that in diapers per day. 10x that in groceries each week. 60x that in rent each month. 40x that in car payments. You got a choice to make: are you going to have one delicious Chipotle burrito that will last you 30 minutes to eat, or a website that allows you to play table top games online from the comfort of your computer chair and upon doing so, allows you to incorporate awesome new elements to your games like dynamic lighting. I spend 40 dollars a month for a gym membership that I use five hours a week. I spend 10 dollars a month for Roll20 for a game I play 8 hours a week.

Waffles said: I don't pay for the features ...They're letting me use their server space and their platform to entertain myself for 8 hours a week. The least I can do is compensate them for it in some way. Metroknight said: The mentor subscription level could be nicknamed betatesters because that is what most mentors do. Waffles hits the nail on the head. If we want this site to grow and expand we have to be willing to support it even if we don't use everything. I hear this a lot from that pay for Mentor. As if they are the only ones that want to support this platform. No one on this thread said they DIDN'T want to support Roll20. The OP made this suggestion because he like most that use this site want to see it succeed and grow. And BTW they already use micro transactions...its called the store :) What was mentioned here is how to expand on that by making more features available to a LARGER base of people. Right now the mind set is "how to keep Mentor Subs active & happy?" Which is really counter intuitive to growing a player base. Cater to the few at the expense of the many? Hmm...I think more discussion on this would be benificial.

Joe Y. said: @Chris there is a small fee to use it once. You can buy a one month subscription for $10. I just wish there was a way for me, as a player, to give my mentor abilities to the one campaign I'm in. Right now I'm just gifting the money to my GM, but I really want to read what's on the mentor forums. On that note, there was a thread in the mentor forums recently about how to make subscriptions more attractive to players, since almost all of the subscription features require that you be the campaign owner or GM.

I would +1 this as well, there is a lot of non-subscribers that could be monetized with a different model. There can always still be a subscription of some kind. But I would also like to add that free members are contributing something less tangible but probably just as important as money, and that is community. Without a player population you can have all the shiny features under sun but it will still be a empty experience.

In terms of something to offer subscribers, even if they are not mentors... Something that might incentivize to boost subscriptions... Something simple, cost and time effective to create.... well we aren't asking for much are we? haha. How about a personal Character Database, something where a player could save their character info and transfer copies to multiple campaigns? Not certain how popular or simple to implement this would be, but its an idea anyway... Could be linked for viewing on the profile page as well... One way to bring individuals who are not GM's into the community more? by allowing players to share their work AKA characters? Maybe... idk.. Other ideas for Mentors Listing campaigns with Mentor GM's at the head of the search engine... Makes sense for paid subscribers to be the first games viewed... Offering additional pictures or a better profile page for Campaigns ran by subscribers or mentors? Ha. Who knows if that's really necessary... How about a friends list! Wow, could this site use a friends list! Maybe the ability to send cheese-ball GIF gifts to bribe your GM? lol A like button! and a thumbs down button! But only subscribers can vote down? haha, oh the power of contribution.... A search engine for Campaigns currently in progress but full. With a bit more detailed profiles, and a storyboard of some kind... might be a way for groups to share some of their experiences, maps, questy goodness, pics etc... idk... subscribers would have access to view these successful games and "borrow" some of the ideas, maps etc created within? maybe? kinda? sorta? lol If you're going to take advantage of other peoples work, like facebook or any number of other similar sites these days, might as well jump on the bandwagon! hahaha Okay that's all I got for now. lol

Maybe Roll20 could have Micro Transactions, and a bulk buy format... If you want just Dynamic Lighting, or the Transmogrifier pay $1-3/month. If you want a lot more features, pay the Mentor price, and possibly get some features you don't really want, but you still get more than you'd get paying for it all seperately... Just a thought :D

@joy Y - good idea. Hadn't thought of that. I'm already a supporter so will look in to see if I can do just one month for $5. My issue with it is that's still pretty steep for a one off use. Feels more like its worth $1. In the grand scheme of things $10 isn't much but that's still $120 a year. It comes down to a simple question of value and mentor lvl acces isn't worth that much to me. I think the discussion here is really good and also agree that there is a big danger of over catering to the mentors and over charging the GMs. I'd be very interested in the numbers but my guess is that the mentors are the vocal minority and that non-paying members are the silent majority. Mentors are super important but helping to monetize players could be a good thing. Adding more features for players would be wonderful. The thing my players ask for most is a better character sheets. Maybe add a pay for option to mange either d&d or path finder or other character sheets for a few $.

There is a large update being tested on the dev server and it should roll down into the production (main server) in December. There is a post about it in the on topic forums.

Thought: I get a lot of interest any time I open a new game. I just opened a game last night and am thinking about restricting applicants to supporters or mentors only. Thoughts on this process and policy?

As I said to various people, there is no policy on roll20. People specify specifics all the time in games such as experienced only, experienced with gestalt only, a specific gender only, specific age category only, specific times, etc.. If you want to restrict it to mentors or subscribers only, it is your game setting.

Our policy: <a href="https://app.roll20.net/forum/post/125912/roll20-community-code-of-conduct#post-125912" rel="nofollow">https://app.roll20.net/forum/post/125912/roll20-community-code-of-conduct#post-125912</a> - Gauss

I don't mind (even though the mentor token may make me look biased) that certain games are for mentors only. Typically people who pay for something tend to be more dedicated, which means showing up on time and not dropping games. As for OP, I like the idea of micro transactions as a business model, but more-so I appreciate the way that roll20 really allows it's community to directly fund development. Alot of things are being rolled out for the next major update, and I highly doubt that would be happening if it weren't for the collective "donations" (I say donations, because even though there's a ton of features, I pay primarily to support the devs), that it wouldn't happen.

Great discussion :-)

I think 10$ a month is a little much for me, but if it were a flat fee of like $30 I'd probably do it, especially if that came with a ton of resources like maps and tokens. I said in another thread that they should have modules for different card, board and tabletop games. I bet if they teamed up with some publishers they could sell games on here microtransaction style and become the Steam of board games. Pay $10 and be able to play settlers of catan whenever you want online and invite anyone (only one person needs to own the game, like irl.) Get a decent library of games like agricola, apples to apples, k2 and whatever else and you'll have an easy time gathering a community. Roll20 is already the best way to play tabletop rpg's online, but currently there's no way to run board games except through a lot of personal effort setting it up here. So by allowing us to 'buy' a game, they'd make a lot of people happy and likely rake in some cash. Imagine if you could play netrunner, warhammer, or magic the gathering on here easily. Of course without official licenses they couldn't use trademarked terms or copyrighted art, but I think with proxies you could have a great service. Expanding to wargames, euro/board games, and tcgs and other card games.. $$$. :) (also adding easymode compatibility for different systems, then asking the publishers to endorse.. like I bet they could team with Onyx Path Publishing and get some whitewolf stuff going.)

Shaedi, Roll20 already has the capability to provide modules. If you know of any content creators that wish to do that feel free to send them here: <a href="https://marketplace.roll20.net/home/becomecreator" rel="nofollow">https://marketplace.roll20.net/home/becomecreator</a> - Gauss

I think the service is good enough that a reduced monthly fee should be required to play. $5/month, maybe? I don't think any of my players would mind. I would use none of the current pay features, so I don't pay. I've bought stuff from the marketplace, though.

Bananas D. said: I think the service is good enough that a reduced monthly fee should be required to play. $5/month, maybe? I don't think any of my players would mind. Supporter-level subscription is already $5/mo.

Bananas D. said: I think the service is good enough that a reduced monthly fee should be required to play. $5/month, maybe? I don't think any of my players would mind. I would use none of the current pay features, so I don't pay. I've bought stuff from the marketplace, though. Brian said: Supporter-level subscription is already $5/mo. Subscription costs : Support us url from the top of the page copied here. That page shows what each level gets and how much they cost. We have a free, supporter, and mentor. As Brian stated there is the 5/month level and it fits in the price range that Bananas said is good enough and he didn't think the players would mind.

I love Roll20. Have all my money!

Jared O. said: I love Roll20. Have all my money! lol yes

Yeah, actually, on that note, it was about time I went up from supporter to mentor. So there, have more of my money!

Metroknight said: I'm only using a fraction of what a mentor gets so they would actually lose money from people like me. I'm in a similar boat. This tool is so good, I'm still only using a fraction of its functionality however, because it is so good , I'm glad to subscribe as a mentor! I do plan to take advantage of many of these other features as my experience with it progresses.

The subscriber based model provides a level of income stability to the Roll20 team. With micro-transactions they would have to depend on more items/services being purchased on a regular basis. Which would make development of larger or more long term products a bit riskier unless they had a very large user base. With the current model they know they can take the time to put out a well polished product (especially with mentor access to the dev server for beta testing), instead of rushing features out the door to keep the revenue stream up. Though you may get fewer paying users with a subscription model, income stability has a lot real value. That said, micro-transactions should definitely be taken into consideration (especially for not GM users) as an additional revenue source. Especially since it doesn't seem that the yellow "Support Us" bar has grown much recently. I plan on upgrading to Mentor as soon as my supporter subscription runs out.

Metroknight said: Bananas D. said: I think the service is good enough that a reduced monthly fee should be required to play. $5/month, maybe? I don't think any of my players would mind. I would use none of the current pay features, so I don't pay. I've bought stuff from the marketplace, though. Brian said: Supporter-level subscription is already $5/mo. Subscription costs : Support us url from the top of the page copied here. That page shows what each level gets and how much they cost. We have a free, supporter, and mentor. As Brian stated there is the 5/month level and it fits in the price range that Bananas said is good enough and he didn't think the players would mind. I'm aware of that. My suggestion was making it required to play. I'm not interested in any of the pay features, so I don't pay. If it was required, I wouldn't mind.

I have no subscription because Roll20 doesn't take PayPal. Same reason for some of the Germans I play with. Micro-payments, wouldn't help with that and a requirement to pay would probably push me out.

Don't think that introducing a flat fee for all players is a good idea. I would never have joined (and then upgrading my account) if I hadn't been initially able to play for free and try out the service. Not sure what the add model for this is, but I found the site after an article in pc gamer. I think to get the 'yellow bar' moving they are going to need to get more people using the service. Less clear on the model for that though. Still and advocate of making a few of the premium features enabled via micro transaction. Think that's an easy quick win.

As a paying member I can honestly say that if they made payment a requirement to use roll20, no free level, I would probably just leave. I support this site because it supports players, both those with and those without money, and I seriously doubt they'd ever change to a "must-pay" scheme. :)

The dev stated in the beginning that it will always be free. The paid subscriptions are just getting extras that some people feel they can't game without. I can game without any of the mentor stuff. I only use the DL which means I could drop down to supporter level and not miss anything. I do play with the API a little bit and I sometimes play around with the dev server but none of that is something I would call "must have". If I can't pay for my subscription level when it runs out then so be it. I'm slowly shifting back to player more than GM anyway. Chris A. said: Not sure what the add model for this is, but I found the site after an article in pc gamer. I think to get the 'yellow bar' moving they are going to need to get more people using the service. Less clear on the model for that though. The yellow bar is a ratio of the cost of the servers and bandwidth (first section) and paying for a dev or two to work on the site/code (middle section) mostly fulltime and all the devs to make a living off the site (the end section). I could be wrong on it but that is how I understand it. Chris A. said: Still and advocate of making a few of the premium features enabled via micro transaction. Think that's an easy quick win. They might go to that but probably not in the foreseeable future. Got to remember roll20 is still new and while it seems pretty stable, it is still mostly beta but growing out of that in my opinion.

I like roll20 a lot. And honestly, if you like what you got and you want to chip in some more funds to them, why not go to other people's campaigns account profile pages and use the option to buy THEM a subscription. Not only would you be helping the devs get more money to continue to support this awesome website, but you'd be helping another person out and by extension their players by giving them a chance to test out some of the paid-features. This, in turn, would open up an opportunity to create a long-time subscription as well should they choose to continue using paid-level features.

I wish it wasn't all on the GM. Sure, the players can buy it FOR the GM, but meh. I'd like to see a plan where every player and GM purchases a membership "level" and the features are unlocked by how many membership levels are in the campaign. eg. Fog of War requires 3 total levels. Dynamic lighting requires 10 total levels. The GM could have all 10 levels if they wanted to unlock Dynamic Lighting. Or if your 5 player game has each player paying for 2 levels, then you have 10 total levels and dynamic lighting works. Or any combination. Players then don't have to give their money to the GM. GMs don't have to buy it all themselves.

Paladintodd said: I wish it wasn't all on the GM. Sure, the players can buy it FOR the GM, but meh. I'd like to see a plan where every player and GM purchases a membership "level" and the features are unlocked by how many membership levels are in the campaign. eg. Fog of War requires 3 total levels. Dynamic lighting requires 10 total levels. The GM could have all 10 levels if they wanted to unlock Dynamic Lighting. Or if your 5 player game has each player paying for 2 levels, then you have 10 total levels and dynamic lighting works. Or any combination. Players then don't have to give their money to the GM. GMs don't have to buy it all themselves. Yeah that's true, but then it's a one-time purchase deal. Not to mention for GMs banking on other players to have required levels in order to play you run the risk of features that they have mapped out for not working if a player decides to leave the game or a new game doesn't have the same players. If the GM is going to buy the levels to offset the risk of having a lack of player levels, then it goes back to it all being on the GM itself. Personally, I think the current subscription model is fine, because it's based around a monthly fee that isn't very expensive at all and it's straightforward enough for players to know what they're getting when they pay for it. The added benefit of a player being able to buy subscriptions for the GM is a plus, and it gives a chance for ALL players to chip in if they want to. (With the minimum $5 amount covering enough for a month of subscription with dynamic lighting, which was the main reason why I got the subscription in the first place. Dynamic lighting is boss.) Does the roll20 team have an actual straight up "donations" method for users to be able to give additional funds if they desire?

Ugh. Micro-transactions are the biggest rip-off around. The idea is a boon for companies, but a major fail for the consumer. No easier way to get me to turn on a product than to blatantly admit you're planning on over-charging me while lying to me claiming the process is empowering me. I'd rather pay a larger sum for an actual product than to be nickle and dimed into paying for substandard goods.

Microtransactions are actually a really good business model when you think about it. Most (I repeat, MOST) games with a micro-transaction model allow for a different way to earn the 'points' or etc in order to get the item you were after anyway - The idea being that you either have a lot of time and not a lot of money, because you're a student or unemployed or such, and you can take the time to earn the points. Or you're full time and don't have much time, so you want the faster workaround by buying the points. But again, the 'earn it or buy it' model doesn't really fit into Roll20...