Hi there I wanted to know if it was possible to use the API character sheets as a player in a game. When the DM doesn't have a subscription. Or even if it's possible for me to enable the API by being in the game. It just seems silly to me that the one with the subscription HAS to be the DM or we can't use the fancy macro sheets. I know this is probably to push subscriptions onto DM's but it makes it harder for those who can't afford subscriptions to set up games. Thanks in advance.
Counterpoint: the API also has the potential to enable cheating and literally destroy a game. Would you want someone to join your game and enable a feature that you may not fully understand that could do all that? I realize that you're not asking to be able to load the scripts yourself, but the potential still exists for some serious problems. Also, yes, I'm sure it's part of the business model.
Well I'd say the issue of cheating comes down to who to play with. It's pretty obvious when someone is doing it and they eventually get caught and kicked. Usually I'd then offer their character up to a new player. I think that if someone wants to cheat. They're either going to get caught or they're going to do it anyway. It's not as if most DM's check the sheets with a fine tooth comb. P.S Thank's Pantoufle that was just what I needed to know!
Ramez H. said: subscription HAS to be the DM or we can't use the fancy macro sheets This is not necessary. Your DM can utilize your subscription if you are the one who creates the game and then give GM access to the desired person. Games use the subscription of the creator, not the GM, but this is usually the same person as you have noticed.
You would also run into problems if you had conflicting versions of API scripts installed between Player & GM. Even if an API script is designed as a companion to a sheet, it acts at the campaign level.
Its because roll 20 is a business, as a business I imagine they want to make money. As the website itself is free the subscriptions must be one of the larger profit contributors, so they want as many people they can get to buy into it as possible, which is fair enough. At least they don't do a Civ 5 and make everyone require the subscription to be able to use the features.
I think the reason is far more related to the ones already mentioned: security, utility and compatibility, than profitability expressed within a business model. Otherwise, why would Roll20 care if a player used the API in an non-Pro GM's campaign? If it were profitability, they would tend to side on allowing such an arrangement, simply because it would encourage more people to subscribe. It simply makes no sense from a programming standpoint to allow two sources to control the API of a single instance.
@Kyle G has it right: Create a campaign on your account, invite people, make one of these people the GM. They now have full access to the API, as do you as the campaign creator. Obviously you'd want to work together on which APIs to enable for the campaign. We do this. We have a group that rotates GM duties, so we have three campaigns created, with three different people as GM for "their" campaign, and one subscription being maintained for the entire group. The reality is that if we required each GM to maintain their own subscriptions, we'd only have one campaign with API and two without.