Improving Audio, Storage, and Performance

Victor B. said: Free users will need to look outside of Roll20, which is what all other gaming sites do and give Roll20 time to figure out the future without Fanburst.    I think this is a point that seems to be misunderstood by many...the other streaming services are still around.  The free jukebox stuff isn't going away...only the Fanburst aspect of it.  Even if Roll20 didn't introduce this change, there'd still be 2 or 3 other services that are available for Free for people to use.  This new aspect is not something that was ever offered for free and nothing that was offered for free is going away...one one "store" is going away. In short, free users don't need to "look outside of Roll20," unless those other services don't provide the people with what they want...

Okay I will offer a genuine question: I have uploaded a few songs, and it has taken up space on my storage but I do not know how to delete them and get them off the game to lower said storage. Deleting them from the songs list doesn't work and from what I see (unless I'm blind), there doesn't appear to be an option to get rid of the uploaded songs in the event I need to cycle in a new playlist. Am I missing something? Same goes for playlist creation.

Hey their iv been quiet a long time have over 6k hrs a free userYOU know what ever you guys are doing at roll20 keep up the great work . this is the best sitefor playing games ive ever used and 52 and no kid here jsut at heart. the biggest thanks to all you at Roll20. Sardis

There are certain issues with the 'Free to play players can't complain because they don't pay' arguments being presented here.  Many of those arguments are fallacies - claiming that free players want 'as much or more' than the paying users, which is not something anyone has suggested.  A simple increase of 300% - the same scale applied to the paid users - would alleviate much of the frustration of this situation.  The old numbers were 100mb/1gb/3gb, while the new numbers are 100mb/3gb/6gb.  Making it an increase across the board, to 300mb/3gb/6gb, would solve many issues, annoyances and frustrations free players are having. The common response to this is 'Free players don't deserve more storage space, because roll20 is a business and a business can't survive if it gives storage space away for free, so only paying users deserve this increase.' I will point out this is a fallacy.  Your subscription of $5 a month does not cover the cost of 3gb of storage for you individually, especially not persistent storage.  The cost of storage for 1 month - the hard drive space per gigabyte, the power and maintenance to keep the servers stable and in good state, replacing failing parts and ensuring their continued functioning - exceeds that $5 a month, and even the $10 a month for Pro does not cover these costs on its own.  What it does do is, when combined with the rest of the payments from each paying user, allow them to pay off some of the cost of operation of that storage. Ad revenue isn't as simple anymore as 'You get money paid per ad seen, and bonuses for clicked ads.'  This is a fairly outdated way to operate, as many advertising companies discovered when sites began inflating their user numbers and ads clicked with simple bots.  Ad revenue nowadays is often generated by making deals with advertisers, who look at the userbase of a site like roll20, and offer a certain amount to be allowed to advertise on their site based on complicated math that basically boils down to 'The more people using your system, the more we're willing to pay to have our name on the page every time they look at it.'  So, with the cost per gigabyte of storage often being less than a tenth of a cent per gigabyte, the argument that free users do not 'pay' for our storage is as nonsensical as the claim that $5 per month pays entirely for 3gb of persistent online storage.  Simply by existing in the system and using the platform, we inflate the amount that the advertisers are willing to pay to put their ads on our screens.  This is how free users exist to begin with - our usage is paid for by the advertisers and we agree to see advertisements for their products in exchange for not paying for service. Each user does also not exist within a bubble of space that is clearly identified and earmarked as belonging to 'this user.'  If you have 4 million users, you do not have 4 million neat, tidy partitions across your storage with each one earmarked for a specific user.  You have an amount of space, and an amount of users, so you assign a limit to each user to keep them from doing things like uploading movies to share - and not every user is going to use all of their allotted space.  Every free user has 100mb, but not every free user is using that entire 100mb.  Every subscriber has 3gb - not every subscriber is using that entire 3gb. This further damages the conceit that 'space is expensive and limited so paying users should get 3gb while free users maintain a 100mb limit and that's how life works.'  A far more accurate measurement would be looking at total activity through your entire userbase, which is what roll20 did - but even this method is flawed, because they then applied a set limit based on what sounded like simply saying 'We have so many tb of traffic a month, so divided by the number of users, each one gets X amount, but we need to incentivize paying customers, so we'll triple the storage they previously received!'  The flaw is that relatively few of those users are going to use that storage.  Because on a platform like this, most users use very, very little storage, but other users - a minority, the GMs, DMs and storytellers - require  drastically more space than the other users do. And the amount of space allotted to paying users is, frankly, exorbitantly high for the needs of most of those paying users, while offering little actual increase in usability to them.   What I mean is that we have lost a free service provided through the roll20 system.  This was a popular free service, used by many people...  Most of those people being the free players, who with a 100mb limit, required  that off-system storage of audio files to manage a campaign.  The people who already had 1gb+ of storage were impacted far less by that loss because they already  had a gigabyte of storage to keep that audio in.  By giving these people 3, or 6gb, you compound their having plenty of space in a situation where they already  had plenty of space; by giving free players nothing at all, and making them stay at 100mb despite the same loss of storage space on fanburst, you have compounded their lack of space. It makes an already easy task easier for paying customers, who mostly will not need that much storage space, and makes an already difficult task even more difficult for free users, who require those extra few hundred MB to maintain their campaign far more than the paid users require those few thousand extra mb to maintain theirs in the loss of this free audio storage service. As for the argument 'There are other systems on the jukebox, just use those,' I offer the counter-argument: If those services are sufficient to continue serving everyone's needs, why do the paying customers now require three times the storage space to make up for its loss?  roll20 has made its position on this known by making that increase: they realize that the remaining built-in services are not sufficient, and so have offered a drastic 300% increase in storage space to paying customers, which again: this makes their already easier task even easier, while those who most strongly feel the impact of this loss, those already working with a 100mb limitation, are left to figure out how to make things work with no help at all.

Flunktastic said: Okay I will offer a genuine question: I have uploaded a few songs, and it has taken up space on my storage but I do not know how to delete them and get them off the game to lower said storage. Deleting them from the songs list doesn't work and from what I see (unless I'm blind), there doesn't appear to be an option to get rid of the uploaded songs in the event I need to cycle in a new playlist. Am I missing something? Same goes for playlist creation. In the My Audio tab of the jukebox, click the pencil icon that is used to edit the track name. While in edit mode, a trash can icon will appear. Click that to remove the song from your library.

Awesome I was blind after all. Thanks!

If the DM splits the costs with his players, even a Pro account will only run each person (assuming a 5 person group) $2 a month. Surely that is not too much. And if it is, then I don't think it's reasonable to be indignant about it. roll20 gives us 90% of the functionality we need to run games, for free, with nothing demanded from us. They didn't even have anything to do with fanburst exploding and had no responsibility for replacing it. They could have easily just left us high and dry -- which would've sucked, but they did something that won't bankrupt them instead that solves the problem for people who need it badly enough to do something about it. It would be nice if everyone had more space, but I don't think it's something to -blame- roll20 for. Having some integration with another site yet again would probably fix the issue, at least until that site goes down too.

mAc said: If the DM splits the costs with his players, even a Pro account will only run each person (assuming a 5 person group) $2 a month. Which is all well and good, if you're gaming with people you _know._  I'm willing to bet the majority of games on roll20 are with people you don't know that well, online groups meeting for games that found each other on reddit, or forums. I'm not willing to pay $2 a month to someone to DM a game if I can't verify through knowing them that they aren't going to poof on our campaign but keep running others with the sub I helped pay for. Down that road lies some seriously scammy, shady player behavior that roll20 will have absolutely no  control over.

Scamming over $2? Is the DM living in a cardboard box. Come on man. Obviously you should only pay if it's someone you played with enough to know they're invested in the campaign. A few sessions, etc.

Red Miles said: I will point out this is a fallacy.  Your subscription of $5 a month does not cover the cost of 3gb of storage for you individually, especially not persistent storage.  The cost of storage for 1 month - the hard drive space per gigabyte, the power and maintenance to keep the servers stable and in good state, replacing failing parts and ensuring their continued functioning - exceeds that $5 a month, and even the $10 a month for Pro does not cover these costs on its own.  What it does do is, when combined with the rest of the payments from each paying user, allow them to pay off some of the cost of operation of that storage. If what you are saying is true, how is Roll20 in business?  You are trying to make the case that they can afford it somehow, therefore they should give it to everyone.  Have you seen their profit/loss or balance sheet?  No you haven't.  You truly have no idea what their operating expenses are or anything else, just like the rest of us.   Do you really think they WANT to upset the free subscription base?  I think it safe to say no.  They are doing it this way for a reason.  And it's a safe bet that the reason is a financial one.  Unless of course, you're thinking Roll20 is somehow trying to force everyone to pay?  And to that, I'd say no.  

mAc said: Scamming over $2? Not $2.  $5 or $10.  And if you think people won't scam others for $2 you've clearly never worked in a corporate environment. All it takes is a group of 3 players chipping in to pay for a sub, and all you have to do is say you need a sub to run your campaign.  Then you're out and not bothering. And sure, you should only pay for a sub if you trust the DM.  But that's not most games on roll20.  Most games on roll20 are free users, who met online and barely know each other.  And those DMs trying to manage multiple campaigns each month who now have no storage space for their audio files anymore and got no consideration from roll20 for that fact while the paid users saw a 300% increase in storage space out of consideration for their campaigns are the ones swinging in the breeze.

On the contrary, I've been working in corporate environments for over 10 years. In those places you learn that you have to make trade offs and weigh risks. Different groups have sometimes mutually exclusive needs, and there is no way to get it 100% your way. You have to compromise. Getting something and a way to work out a solution is better than just having nothing. I would be saying this if I was still a free user. I don't know how much space roll20 has to spare, and maybe they'll upgrade the free users in time. But what they've done is a big step forward, not a step back. It could be a step forward with some issues to fix, but they should be lauded for giving us a way out of totally being screwed, even if it costs some money.

Victor B. said: Red Miles said: I will point out this is a fallacy.  Your subscription of $5 a month does not cover the cost of 3gb of storage for you individually, especially not persistent storage.  The cost of storage for 1 month - the hard drive space per gigabyte, the power and maintenance to keep the servers stable and in good state, replacing failing parts and ensuring their continued functioning - exceeds that $5 a month, and even the $10 a month for Pro does not cover these costs on its own.  What it does do is, when combined with the rest of the payments from each paying user, allow them to pay off some of the cost of operation of that storage. If what you are saying is true, how is Roll20 in business?  You are trying to make the case that they can afford it somehow, therefore they should give it to everyone.  Have you seen their profit/loss or balance sheet?  No you haven't.  You truly have no idea what their operating expenses are or anything else, just like the rest of us.   Do you really think they WANT to upset the free subscription base?  I think it safe to say no.  They are doing it this way because it's the safest approach in the uncertain future.    I am making the case that they already  afford it.  They are unlikely to have added drastic amounts of storage to their servers for this, or to have paid for more cloud storage if they use cloud storage.  What they did was look at the storage space they have available, which they already pay for in either case, and re-divide it amongst the userbase.  And by their own implied admission - that fanburst was enough of a loss for the playerbase that 300% increase in storage space was called for in the case of paying users - they have created drastically more trouble for free users, who are still looking at a 100mb limit after the loss of a free service provided through roll20 that, again, was worth a 300% increase to paying user storage, while making an already easier task even easier for the paying players, all at no extra cost to the company, or the paying players.  Do you see the conundrum here?  Do you see the source of this fallacy? The company had X amount of storage. They charged nothing for 100mb, $5 for 1gb, and $10 for 3gb. The company still has X amount of storage, but by their own admission, have users who now require more storage than they were receiving. They charged nothing for 100mb, $5 for 3gb, and $10 for 6gb. Where were these extra GB before?  The same place they always were: there, and available for use. It is not unreasonable for us to ask why they can find the space to offer 300% more space to users who already had drastically more storage, at no cost to those users, to help recover from the loss of fanburst, but can't find the space to offer simply 200 more mb to users to help them recover from the loss of fanburst, at no cost to those users.

It doesn't matter how much it cost a company to make something. You know how much it costs soda companies to make coke? Like almost nothing. But it's a product they have they can decide to charge for selling it. It's theirs, they could choose to just burn those hard drives if they wanted. Furthermore, this is speculation. We don't know what their situation is. In any case, I don't think this thread is going to go anywhere more productive at this point, everything's been said.

mAc said: On the contrary, I've been working in corporate environments for over 10 years. In those places you learn that you have to make trade offs and weigh risks. Different groups have sometimes mutually exclusive needs, and there is no way to get it 100% your way. You have to compromise. Getting something and a way to work out a solution is better than just having nothing. I would be saying this if I was still a free user. I don't know how much space roll20 has to spare, and maybe they'll upgrade the free users in time. But what they've done is a big step forward, not a step back. It could be a step forward with some issues to fix, but they should be lauded for giving us a way out of totally being screwed, even if it costs some money. Nobody reasonable is saying that roll20 didn't help its paying customers when they needed help.  Because that's exactly what they did: By offering DRASTIC amounts of more space.  More than most of those paying customers will need at any given moment.  The flipside to this is that, as I said before, this made an already easier task for those customers even easier, but none of that space was available for the free users?  Really?  They can offer 300% more space to paying users at no additional cost to those users, they can afford to do this because they did this.  They found enough space to feel comfortable offering paying users 300% more space than they had previously, at no additional cost to those users. Let me try it this way: If they could afford to give free players 100mb, $5 users 1gb and $10 3gb, that's fine.  Good on them.  But now they have admitted they have enough space available to them to give $5 users 3gb and $10 6gb, but still can only afford space to give free players 100mb, and that's where people start asking questions.  What changed that they could afford a 300% increase to paying users at no additional cost to those users, but free players still have a 100mb limit in a situation where roll20 itself is admitting that their users are going to need more storage space now?

Correct me if I'm wrong @Red Miles, you are making a case that paying customers are getting too much and free players are too little?  Roll20 isn't a non-profit.  They've been hiring new staff if you've noticed and I'm guessing they'd like to hire more.  Yes they want to incentive customers to pay.  I don't see Apple handing out free Iphones nor do I see people complaining that some people should get better iphones for less while others are paying a premium for other iphones.  This is the nature of business.    I think Roll20 has been pretty damn nice in what they've offered to non-paying customers.  Unfortunately, the hosted music by Fanburst is bye bye.  Now that's going to change things.  This isn't The United (Roll20) Way.  They aren't a charity.  I think you are treading on ice trying to make a case that paying customers are getting too much and non-paying customers too little.  That just doesn't fly.  

Victor B. said: Correct me if I'm wrong @Red Miles, you are making a case that paying customers are getting too much and free players are too little? Roll20 isn't a non-profit.  They've been hiring new staff if you've noticed and I'm guessing they'd like to hire more.  Yes they want to incentive customers to pay.  I don't see Apple handing out free Iphones nor do I see people complaining that some people should get better iphones for less while others are paying a premium for other iphones.  This is the nature of business.    I think Roll20 has been pretty damn nice in what they've offered to non-paying customers.  Unfortunately, the hosted music by Fanburst is bye bye.  Now that's going to change things.  This isn't The United (Roll20) Way.  They aren't a charity.  I think you are treading on ice trying to make a case that paying customers are getting too much and non-paying customers too little.  That just doesn't fly.  I'm making the case that the decision to give paying customers a 300% increase in storage space without subsequently increasing the cost of their subscription to account for that increase in storage space invalidates the argument that free users shouldn't also receive additional storage space because they don't pay for it. Clearly, roll20 has sufficient space to find 300% more space for those people and are comfortable giving it to people without actually charging them for that space.  They gave that space to those users for free .  You were paying for 1gb, you are now receiving 3gb, at the same price you have always paid.  You pay nothing for this additional space. So to present the argument that additional space should not be given to people who pay nothing for it is fundamentally flawed.

Non paying customers DESERVE nothing. I’m glad Roll20 has been generous enough to give free users all that they do, and if they elected to give even more then great, but they are under no moral obligation to do so. The attitude of entitlement in the last few posts is staggeringly appalling.

My issue is that now I have to upload all the music myself, instead of being able to draw from an entire database of audio. Not only do I have to spend a ridiculous amount of time and hard drive space to replace all the tracks I used to use, but there are original pieces that people put on fanburst (as well as existing tracks that people modified to be better on Roll20) that now we don't have access to. Music might not be essential to a tabletop rpg, but it is an incredible tool to enhance the experience, and this limit is honestly making me consider another software...

Alright have you considered for a moment that this happened 2 weeks ago and they don't want to increase rates because they don't know yet how much all of this will cost?  But they also know that music takes up a lot of space, therefore they had to do something.  So they increased space for paying customers because that will mitigate some of the costs.  Where I disagree with you is that I don't believe Roll20 knows all the costs associated with this change yet.  It's only been 2 weeks.  They won't for a few months and we may very well see an increase in rates and/or an entirely new subscription model for music once they've have time to code it into Roll20.  I just get the feeling you are presuming an awful lot, that they should increase everyone, across the board, when the majority are not paying, is assuming these guys are rolling in money.  Something I doubt and even if they were, non-paying customers are not entitled to anything.  This isn't a charity.  Roll20 has been pretty nice so far.   As I've said earlier, give it time.  My guess is that you will get what you want once they've had time to sort through the total costs, etc, involved with this changeover.  It's a lot more than just disk space.  It's servers, load balancers, bandwidth, backup and recover, support and maintenance, etc...tons of other costs.  Roll20 has been pretty dedicated to maintaining their free subscription base.  I don't think they will abandon that.  

Anakin said: My issue is that now I have to upload all the music myself, instead of being able to draw from an entire database of audio. Not only do I have to spend a ridiculous amount of time and hard drive space to replace all the tracks I used to use, but there are original pieces that people put on fanburst (as well as existing tracks that people modified to be better on Roll20) that now we don't have access to. Music might not be essential to a tabletop rpg, but it is an incredible tool to enhance the experience, and this limit is honestly making me consider another software... Fanburst is going out of business.  That's the database you've been pulling from.  Roll20 has NOTHING to do with that.  There's isn't an alternative to Fanburst for Roll20 to go to. And if you think Roll20 should become the next Fanburst, isn't going to happen.   Go ahead, try to find another gaming site.  They will all point you to Discord or Youtube. You'll have the exact same issue, only they won't provide for you an in game ability to play your tracks.  You'll have to do that outside of your game.  

Jason R said: Non paying customers DESERVE nothing. I’m glad Roll20 has been generous enough to give free users all that they do, and if they elected to give even more then great, but they are under no moral obligation to do so. The attitude of entitlement in the last few posts is staggeringly appalling. It's funny, I see a lot of people throwing 'sense of entitlement' around like it's the new buzzword, but seem to ironically misunderstand their own.

How would this work through Discord? Jase said: It's pretty painless to do all the audio through Discord and have a bot like Rythm bot join and play youtube music/ambience into the audio. You don't need a second screen and everyone in the channel will hear it without doing anything on their end.

You aren't paying, yet you are demanding more from Roll20, making claims that they can afford this, when none of know what they can or can't afford.  That's the essence of Entitlement - The belief that one is inherently deserving of privileges or special treatment. 

Victor B. said: Anakin said: My issue is that now I have to upload all the music myself, instead of being able to draw from an entire database of audio. Not only do I have to spend a ridiculous amount of time and hard drive space to replace all the tracks I used to use, but there are original pieces that people put on fanburst (as well as existing tracks that people modified to be better on Roll20) that now we don't have access to. Music might not be essential to a tabletop rpg, but it is an incredible tool to enhance the experience, and this limit is honestly making me consider another software... Fanburst is going out of business.  That's the database you've been pulling from.  Roll20 has NOTHING to do with that.  There's isn't an alternative to Fanburst for Roll20 to go to. And if you think Roll20 should become the next Fanburst, isn't going to happen.   Go ahead, try to find another gaming site.  They will all point you to Discord or Youtube. You'll have the exact same issue, only they won't provide for you an in game ability to play your tracks.  You'll have to do that outside of your game.   You entirely missed the point. I'm not saying they should increase the storage per user to even more, I'm saying they should let us use the music that other people upload. They're storing it all themselves anyway, so it's not like that should be an issue. If anything, not forcing everyone who wants to use Spider Dance in a fight against spiders to individually upload Spider Dance would result in significantly less storage space used.

Anakin  said: You entirely missed the point. I'm not saying they should increase the storage per user to even more, I'm saying they should let us use the music that other people upload. They're storing it all themselves anyway, so it's not like that should be an issue. If anything, not forcing everyone who wants to use Spider Dance in a fight against spiders to individually upload Spider Dance would result in significantly less storage space used. Apologies if this comes across harsh, but my patience with some of these lines of thoughts is growing thin.  You need to read a bit.  Nolan posted about that.  Roll20 can't allow music sharing for legal reasons.   

Victor B. said: You aren't paying, yet you are demanding more from Roll20, making claims that they can afford this, when none of know what they can or can't afford.  That's the essence of Entitlement - The belief that one is inherently deserving of privileges or special treatment.  I am not demanding more from roll20.  I am demanding nothing.  I am pointing out that your argument is a fallacy because if we should not receive anything for free, then you should not receive anything for free either.  This situation has resulted in you receiving 300% more storage space for the same amount - you are getting, as a pro user, 4gb for free.  You are not paying for those gb, because we have established that $10 for 2gb was the value placed upon that 2gb.  Now that this has changed, and your $10 is suddenly worth 300% more storage space than it used to be, you are attacking people who you view as a 'threat' to your additional free storage space and trying to portray them as 'entitled' when in reality, who is more entitled: the free user who wants 200mb or 300mb instead of 100mb from a system that even the system owners now recognize will likely require them to upload far larger files than they did previously, or the paid user who has suddenly seen his payment triple in perceived value and is now lashing out at anyone who he views as trying to devalue this new space he is receiving by saying they need more of it themselves? You're afraid that giving free users storage space will somehow devalue your own storage space, because you 'paid for yours.'  You paid for 2gb of it.  The rest is being given to you out of consideration by roll20 for the loss of fanburst, and it's being given to you for free.  You had plenty and now you have even more, and the people who had little now have even less, and you didn't pay for the excess any more than we paid for this 100mb you say we shouldn't even have. Sure, yeah, we're the entitled ones here.  There's an obnoxious sense of entitlement in this topic, alright, but it's not from the free users.

Chris S. said: How would this work through Discord? Jase said: It's pretty painless to do all the audio through Discord and have a bot like Rythm bot join and play youtube music/ambience into the audio. You don't need a second screen and everyone in the channel will hear it without doing anything on their end. There's a bot on Discord called Rhythmbot, that if I remember right, takes video and audio files and queues them up so that they begin playing at the same time within Discord for everyone in the Discord chat.

Red Miles said: Victor B. said: You aren't paying, yet you are demanding more from Roll20, making claims that they can afford this, when none of know what they can or can't afford.  That's the essence of Entitlement - The belief that one is inherently deserving of privileges or special treatment.  I am not demanding more from roll20.  I am demanding nothing.  I am pointing out that your argument is a fallacy because if we should not receive anything for free, then you should not receive anything for free either.  This situation has resulted in you receiving 300% more storage space for the same amount - you are getting, as a pro user, 4gb for free.  You are not paying for those gb, because we have established that $10 for 2gb was the value placed upon that 2gb.  Now that this has changed, and your $10 is suddenly worth 300% more storage space than it used to be, you are attacking people who you view as a 'threat' to your additional free storage space and trying to portray them as 'entitled' when in reality, who is more entitled: the free user who wants 200mb or 300mb instead of 100mb from a system that even the system owners now recognize will likely require them to upload far larger files than they did previously, or the paid user who has suddenly seen his payment triple in perceived value and is now lashing out at anyone who he views as trying to devalue this new space he is receiving by saying they need more of it themselves? You're afraid that giving free users storage space will somehow devalue your own storage space, because you 'paid for yours.'  You paid for 2gb of it.  The rest is being given to you out of consideration by roll20 for the loss of fanburst, and it's being given to you for free.  You had plenty and now you have even more, and the people who had little now have even less, and you didn't pay for the excess any more than we paid for this 100mb you say we shouldn't even have. Sure, yeah, we're the entitled ones here.  There's an obnoxious sense of entitlement in this topic, alright, but it's not from the free users. Thank god somebody finally said it.

Well, I don't use 10 maps at once.  Usually I have a few overlands, and a few dungeons, plus a world map...so maybe 8 or so per adventure? Devily said: Annamelech said: Garreth M. said: But let's do some back of the envelope math here. I can run a free campaign with 10 maps of the highest possible size allowed on a free account, 5 MB, add in 10 tracks of custom music to pad out the already excellent offerings from the other services, at 26 MB according the dev posting earlier, and still have over 20 MB free for custom tokens, portraits and doodads. Seems to me you can still run a pretty awesome campaign on a free account. And since accounts are free, there is not much reason to run more than one per account. Ten maps. Ten. I mean not to be dismissive except I totally am dismissing this, but ten maps? Come on. I mean for a short campaign, sure. You're mostly right, though, when you raise the free account stuff. A solution could be to just make multiple accounts and make them all the DM. That's...probably against the rules in some way? I'm not totally sure, it's been a while since I read them. I agree. I cannot imagine how you can make an actual campaign with just ten maps.

I am really trying hard to understand how a free user feels there is any room to complain. They don't pay a penny for any of this, but they feel cheated somehow because they don't get as much as they think they should? If you don't like it, don't pay... oh wait, you already don't. Is Roll20 supposed to worry that they'll lose all of the no money they get from you? Of course they're going to gear their updates and content towards people who pay subscriptions. Even at my hardest financial times, I still paid for this. It's next to nothing. It's pennies for access to really amazing tools.

why don't you guys try other alternatives like audiomack or something, or even try to renew the contract with soundcloud, it'd be much more easier tbh.

Am I allowed to use Bring Your Own Beat to upload music that I've purchased from a service such as iTunes?

Whether it’s this or “free to play” video games, there are always free users that believe they’re entitled to something solely on the merit of using/playing it.  And they’ll get venomous over it if you point out the “free” part. Shaurmiath said: I am really trying hard to understand how a free user feels there is any room to complain. They don't pay a penny for any of this, but they feel cheated somehow because they don't get as much as they think they should? If you don't like it, don't pay... oh wait, you already don't. Is Roll20 supposed to worry that they'll lose all of the no money they get from you? Of course they're going to gear their updates and content towards people who pay subscriptions. Even at my hardest financial times, I still paid for this. It's next to nothing. It's pennies for access to really amazing tools.

Red Miles said: Sure, yeah, we're the entitled ones here.  There's an obnoxious sense of entitlement in this topic, alright, but it's not from the free users. We are part of the Gigabyte Illuminati. 

Maybe it would be useful not to try thinking about this in terms of what is or isn't fair. Fair is that roll20, a private company, can charge what it wants for what service it wants to offer, as long as they're honest about it.  Instead, try thinking about it in terms of incentives. With the closing of Fanburst, the user-value of a roll20 subscription dropped. To try and offset this, roll20 added music uploading, and increased storage size to allow that music. The reason they did this was to keep the value of the subscription service from dropping, or else people would have stopped subscribing. It makes no sense to say that paid users got an increase in storage space for "free". The increase wasn't a gift from roll20, and it wasn't free. It costs the continuing subscription price. A larger percentage of a subscribers payment goes to their storage, that's all. Now, what is the incentive for roll20 to allow free GMs? We'll ignore free players, their value in filling games is obvious. Free GMs can be beneficial as they may purchase marketplace assets, may convert to subscribers, and may also introduce players to roll20, who eventually become subscribers. Free GMs are a loss leader. They cost roll20 up front, but may lead to money down the road. I was a free player, and then a free gm, then a plus, then pro (they were called something else back then, mentor maybe, and I forget what plus was called, maybe subscriber).  However, they have to consider how many people do switch over to being paying customers, and what costs they should sink into free players. Quite simply, though, they owe us nothing, other than what was agreed to. If you purchased assets, they owe you those assets. If you purchased a subscription, they owe you the subscription benefits. Allowing free players to GM games isn't an obligation they have, and it isn't charity. It's to let them get their feet wet, get a taste for the system and its possibilities, and hopefully to purchase something eventually. I get the frustration of this change. I'm not even sure I'll be able to keep GMing, as I don't want to spend hundreds of dollars on tracks to upload (and I don't pirate). It sucks, for all of us, not the least for roll20, which is taking a hit both in providing more storage to paying accounts, and possibly still losing value for its subscribers. Really, though, some of these messages could be posted on ChoosingBeggars. Roll20 offers substantial value for free. It's not charity, it's good business, and maybe they will increase the storage for free users. But they certainly don't owe it to anyone. Just because we get used to having a thing, doesn't mean others are obliged to continue providing it. You might as well blame your radio manufacturer because your favorite radio station went out of business.

This would be a great time for you to integrate with Syrinscape (which I use in home games), although as that is a separate subscription service I am sure it has a ton of implementation issues I can't begin to imagine. So...Anyone have tips on where to go to find music that I can then upload (in a way that would be safe and legal)?  I don't download much music as it is, and hardly ever in MP3 format, and what I do download is for my phone, not really game-related.

Speakin' as a dirty freeloader/valiant pauper (who does have an XBox Live Gold subscription and Netflix; no, I don't think all you goofuses are me, but "disingenuous" is the new "egregious" for a reason)... Zedge has audio files. You can go on there, yes on a regular computer and without an account and in Incognito Mode cuz I just did, and download sound effects to upload. Just did it with Wilhelm Scream and the Dark Souls "You Died" sfx. Granted, those aren't songs, but I know without reading that at least one person per page has pointed out that the remaining options (mostly Incompetech IMO cuz I generally prefer music to noise) are, in fact, better than no music at all. Yes, I expect it to be annoying or impossible to get entire memey songs set up for particular sessions like I've gotten used to. No, I'm not going to cuss out the dev team and rip off my Roll20-print underpants over this. (Also psst: Youtube -> Youtube to mp3 converter site like the bad old days -> any audio you want in your game, infinite selection compared to Fanburst) EDIT: NGL tho, if they found yet another site to embed in just like Soundburst and Fanburst before it, I wouldn't complain. Streamlined, but long-term unreliable. Long as we keep the My Audio option available for free, far as I'm concerned the freeloading community has made a net profit on this whole brouhaha.

Yo, I work at a boutique hotel that offers a free continental breakfast, and I feel our free breakfast is giving more to the guests than the free users are getting here. Sure, the guests are paying for a room at the same time, which is by no means a cheap rental (depending on the day). In similar ways, Free users are still bringing in revenue for Roll20, just in the form of ads. Probs not as much as what I pay for the cool toys I get to play with (which I felt was incentive enough without the jump in storage), but they do contribute something. I am quite curious as to how much is made from ads Free users watch on a daily basis. I also wonder if Roll20 is still getting paid for folks who use ad blockers. Anyways, my point is that yes, free service, but I feel if all the paying folk get a bump up, other folks should get a little something as well. Doesn't have to be much, but a little something would be nice in the future. I can't imagine how much more effort would be needed to secure even 100mb more per person when the vast majority of the base is Free. So yeah, my two cents. Also Red Miles said: Victor B. said: You aren't paying, yet you are demanding more from Roll20, making claims that they can afford this, when none of know what they can or can't afford.  That's the essence of Entitlement - The belief that one is inherently deserving of privileges or special treatment.  I am not demanding more from roll20.  I am demanding nothing.  I am pointing out that your argument is a fallacy because if we should not receive anything for free, then you should not receive anything for free either.  This situation has resulted in you receiving 300% more storage space for the same amount - you are getting, as a pro user, 4gb for free.  You are not paying for those gb, because we have established that $10 for 2gb was the value placed upon that 2gb.  Now that this has changed, and your $10 is suddenly worth 300% more storage space than it used to be, you are attacking people who you view as a 'threat' to your additional free storage space and trying to portray them as 'entitled' when in reality, who is more entitled: the free user who wants 200mb or 300mb instead of 100mb from a system that even the system owners now recognize will likely require them to upload far larger files than they did previously, or the paid user who has suddenly seen his payment triple in perceived value and is now lashing out at anyone who he views as trying to devalue this new space he is receiving by saying they need more of it themselves? You're afraid that giving free users storage space will somehow devalue your own storage space, because you 'paid for yours.'  You paid for 2gb of it.  The rest is being given to you out of consideration by roll20 for the loss of fanburst, and it's being given to you for free.  You had plenty and now you have even more, and the people who had little now have even less, and you didn't pay for the excess any more than we paid for this 100mb you say we shouldn't even have. Sure, yeah, we're the entitled ones here.  There's an obnoxious sense of entitlement in this topic, alright, but it's not from the free users. I love you.

Bast L. said: Maybe it would be useful not to try thinking about this in terms of what is or isn't fair. Fair is that roll20, a private company, can charge what it wants for what service it wants to offer, as long as they're honest about it.  Instead, try thinking about it in terms of incentives. With the closing of Fanburst, the user-value of a roll20 subscription dropped. To try and offset this, roll20 added music uploading, and increased storage size to allow that music. The reason they did this was to keep the value of the subscription service from dropping, or else people would have stopped subscribing. It makes no sense to say that paid users got an increase in storage space for "free". The increase wasn't a gift from roll20, and it wasn't free. It costs the continuing subscription price. A larger percentage of a subscribers payment goes to their storage, that's all. Now, what is the incentive for roll20 to allow free GMs? We'll ignore free players, their value in filling games is obvious. Free GMs can be beneficial as they may purchase marketplace assets, may convert to subscribers, and may also introduce players to roll20, who eventually become subscribers. Free GMs are a loss leader. They cost roll20 up front, but may lead to money down the road. I was a free player, and then a free gm, then a plus, then pro (they were called something else back then, mentor maybe, and I forget what plus was called, maybe subscriber).  However, they have to consider how many people do switch over to being paying customers, and what costs they should sink into free players. Quite simply, though, they owe us nothing, other than what was agreed to. If you purchased assets, they owe you those assets. If you purchased a subscription, they owe you the subscription benefits. Allowing free players to GM games isn't an obligation they have, and it isn't charity. It's to let them get their feet wet, get a taste for the system and its possibilities, and hopefully to purchase something eventually. I get the frustration of this change. I'm not even sure I'll be able to keep GMing, as I don't want to spend hundreds of dollars on tracks to upload (and I don't pirate). It sucks, for all of us, not the least for roll20, which is taking a hit both in providing more storage to paying accounts, and possibly still losing value for its subscribers. Really, though, some of these messages could be posted on ChoosingBeggars. Roll20 offers substantial value for free. It's not charity, it's good business, and maybe they will increase the storage for free users. But they certainly don't owe it to anyone. Just because we get used to having a thing, doesn't mean others are obliged to continue providing it. You might as well blame your radio manufacturer because your favorite radio station went out of business. There a lot wrong here, first is the presumption that Free users (of all kinds) make up a very very small portion of the user base, this is simply not true, in fact Pro/Plus are the minority here. What my issue is how this was presented, at the get go it seemed like all  users would require a space bump to allow for sufficient space for Audio, instead we have only Pro and Plus seeing that for QoL.  Now yes, they did say they'd allow for some legacy pricing for subscriptions if necessary to offset the costs which is very understandable, but the majority of all users on the site saw no improvements whatsoever. Additionally, while you state that Pro/Plus were given back for their troubles, exactly why do this for the minority of the site? The other thing you've gotten wrong is that Fanburst and the music services were for all users, they were not part of the value of the subscription before, more of an inherent value and improvement brought to the gaming experience. What many many free users (myself included) want to know is if this space bump will only be for Pro/Plus with no change for Free users in the future. We have been told it's sufficient space but, given the data used it's very dubious if it's maintainable, especially given audio files, images and animations being introduced recently it's difficult to assess the averages now (much less based on the less used Dev Server). Personally? I don't appreciate the Free Users being brought down so much as many are without pay (disability, maternity leave, retired) or are too young to make money yet have aspirations to GM. There are so many Free Users as this is one of the better platforms to use if you play Tabletops with friends from across the globe Additionally, very few are blaming Roll20 directly, those that are being told otherwise by other Free Users, so as much as I appreciate the strawman it would be better to take in the context of this topic and those posting within first rather than jumping on the first you see. Simply put, will Free Users be seeing a potential increase in storage space? If not, will there be any plans to introduce purchasing space ala a one-time payment or simply subscription for only space?

Very disappointed all my upvoted suggestions were closed. Some of them had been open for more than 4 years. It's pretty disillusioning to have this happen after seeing no progress. Should have been a better way.

Meta K. said: There a lot wrong here, first is the presumption that Free users (of all kinds) make up a very very small portion of the user base, this is simply not true, in fact Pro/Plus are the minority here. What my issue is how this was presented, at the get go it seemed like all  users would require a space bump to allow for sufficient space for Audio, instead we have only Pro and Plus seeing that for QoL. Now yes, they did say they'd allow for some legacy pricing for subscriptions if necessary to offset the costs which is very understandable, but the majority of all users on the site saw no improvements whatsoever. Additionally, while you state that Pro/Plus were given back for their troubles, exactly why do this for the minority of the site? The other thing you've gotten wrong is that Fanburst and the music services were for all users, they were not part of the value of the subscription before, more of an inherent value and improvement brought to the gaming experience. I didn't assume that free users are the minority. I don't know how you can get that from my post. As for why they're doing this for the minority on the site (plus/pro), I did answer this. They want to keep them as subscribers (that is, they want money). I also didn't get the idea that Fanburst adds value to subscriptions wrong. Yes, it was available to all users, but as someone who's considering not using the platform because of the hassle of having to find and upload legal tracks, it's loss definitely devalues the site for me as a subscriber (it also devalues the site for non-subscribers, but I was specifically talking about Roll20 keeping the value of a subscription worth it). While this is sufficient explanation, I'll mention also that a pro subscriber gets potentially more value from Fanburst, with the ability to tie in API scripts for sound effects.  What many many free users (myself included) want to know is if this space bump will only be for Pro/Plus with no change for Free users in the future. We have been told it's sufficient space but, given the data used it's very dubious if it's maintainable, especially given audio files, images and animations being introduced recently it's difficult to assess the averages now (much less based on the less used Dev Server). Personally? I don't appreciate the Free Users being brought down so much as many are without pay (disability, maternity leave, retired) or are too young to make money yet have aspirations to GM. There are so many Free Users as this is one of the better platforms to use if you play Tabletops with friends from across the globe It's just a matter of what makes sense for them, isn't it? If they think it's worth it for them to increase the free user storage, they will, if not, they won't. I'm sure they have data tracking subscriber conversion rates, marketplace purchases, etc. I'm not sure what is meant by "free users being brought down". They're not taking anything away as far as I know. They simply can't use Fanburst since it won't exist in a while.  Additionally, very few are blaming Roll20 directly, those that are being told otherwise by other Free Users, so as much as I appreciate the strawman it would be better to take in the context of this topic and those posting within first rather than jumping on the first you see. Simply put, will Free Users be seeing a potential increase in storage space? If not, will there be any plans to introduce purchasing space ala a one-time payment or simply subscription for only space? I'm not sure where I made a strawman argument. "Some of these replies could be posted to ChoosingBeggars"? Should I list them? Or was it the radio station analogy? Because that one seemed pretty apt, given some of the complaints thrown at Roll20 in here, and the circumstances which lead to this. Of course there are reasonable people, free and paid alike, discussing sensible ideas. My first post in the thread included one possible solution for Roll20 to utilize for free users. I made another post about a potential workaround of storage limits. But my last post was an effort to try and get the discussion focused on these sensible ideas, rather than worrying about what's fair, or about anyone's personal situation.  Roll20 is a for-profit company. Perhaps a well-meaning, and decent company, but all the well-meaning decency in the world doesn't keep the lights on. I have no clear idea on storage costs, though I think they're pretty low. But as you said, free users are the majority of the site. So, saying that they should take into consideration this, or that they should be fair about that, doesn't really make a lot of sense. In the end, they have to do what's good for them. My point was simply that we should look at this in terms of incentives, and not worry so much about who deserves what. I think maybe the cause of some of the sniping at each other going on in here is the comment thread style. One person responds to another, and someone thinks they're talking about them instead, and all just assume the worst.  Most Free/Plus/Pro users don't worry about what subscription tier others are on, or hold animosity for them. Some people are getting a bit heated, to be sure (perhaps me as well). I do understand the frustration of a free user, and not being able to access things like sound files. I also see it from the other side, where subscribers (who pay for the free users) are being told it's not fair that they're getting 3x the storage, while the free users get no increase. I was trying to think of how to end this post, and became amused at thinking how quickly a typically pretty friendly community turns on each other when something goes bad. I'm certainly not trying to put down free users though. I was one. Most people using the site were. I got a bit frustrated at some of the arguments above in the thread (Red Miles' in particular), and thought to try and offer a bit of perspective.

Question what will happen to the music we got from fanburst and added to our games? Will all of thst just be gone thus destroying possibly hours if not more of meticulous music selection to make the game more interesting for our players? Im more cinematic and story based in my games making music even more important and because of this i rename all my songs to fit the narrative and to help me sort them. So to any of you who tell me to just find the same song elsewhere just dont bother with it. If i lose all the songs ive saved for a lot of my games then im not sure how im gonna replace everything. Hopefully Roll20 comes up with a solution for this but since is pretty much an issue that free users have i doubt it. Anyways thats my gripe, hopefully i get an answer.

There is merit to both sides of the argument on free to use vs paid use. The free to use users are a large if not majority population of people who play in the games (I wouldn't know, i just host for free with some friends). I've never run into storage problems, just organizational ones. It would be in roll20s best interest to give a minor boost to the free users (not 1 gig but not 1 mb either) to show the appreciation of those dedicated or are active (for those with many long hours each week.). This way, there is more incentive to buy a plus or pro for the storage, dynamics, and such. That being said, roll20 still has a market place it makes money off of and neither the market or subscriptions provide all the money for the lights (as far as i know). An alternative would be to create its own jukebox or establish connections with youtube, sound cloud, etc, and have people play songs like rythem bot on discord does (paid or free idc). A free serviceis just that, free but so is a paid service. The company can still dictate which service gets what, and paid users should have priority however, a good company doesn't ignore the larger picture and Roll20 isn't (from my experience) known to do that. 

Isaiah P. said: Question what will happen to the music we got from fanburst and added to our games? Will all of thst just be gone thus destroying possibly hours if not more of meticulous music selection to make the game more interesting for our players? Im more cinematic and story based in my games making music even more important and because of this i rename all my songs to fit the narrative and to help me sort them. So to any of you who tell me to just find the same song elsewhere just dont bother with it. If i lose all the songs ive saved for a lot of my games then im not sure how im gonna replace everything. Hopefully Roll20 comes up with a solution for this but since is pretty much an issue that free users have i doubt it. Anyways thats my gripe, hopefully i get an answer. Fanburst is shutting down on February 25. The sounds you are using from it are not stored on Roll20, but on Fanburst. When Fanburst shuts down, all files that they host will be gone. 

Loren the GM said: Isaiah P. said: Question what will happen to the music we got from fanburst and added to our games? Will all of thst just be gone thus destroying possibly hours if not more of meticulous music selection to make the game more interesting for our players? Im more cinematic and story based in my games making music even more important and because of this i rename all my songs to fit the narrative and to help me sort them. So to any of you who tell me to just find the same song elsewhere just dont bother with it. If i lose all the songs ive saved for a lot of my games then im not sure how im gonna replace everything. Hopefully Roll20 comes up with a solution for this but since is pretty much an issue that free users have i doubt it. Anyways thats my gripe, hopefully i get an answer. Fanburst is shutting down on February 25. The sounds you are using from it are not stored on Roll20, but on Fanburst. When Fanburst shuts down, all files that they host will be gone.  So im just going to lose everything music wise? I know it isnt Roll20's fault and that they cant really stop Fanburst from shutting down but is there no way they can avoid users from losing all the music they've spent so much time picking out for their games? For GM's like me thats almost enough to ruin an entire campaign especially considering the very very limited choices we're left with once Fanburst is gone. There has to be a way to avoid losing all our music right?

Isaiah P. said: So im just going to lose everything music wise? I know it isnt Roll20's fault and that they cant really stop Fanburst from shutting down but is there no way they can avoid users from losing all the music they've spent so much time picking out for their games? For GM's like me thats almost enough to ruin an entire campaign especially considering the very very limited choices we're left with once Fanburst is gone. There has to be a way to avoid losing all our music right? If you hover your mouse over the name of a track (even if you have renamed it on Roll20) a small cloud icon will appear. You can click on that and it will take you to the Fanburst page for the track. Some (not all) tracks there have downloading enabled, so you could possibly download some of the tracks to upload into Roll20's new system.

Hey all, don't want to take sides in the Free vs Premium debate or pass judgement on anyone, but I would like to inject some realism into the discussion. I have been the product owner for a large (multi-million user) ad-supported freemium site; I have worked as a development lead for several others. Free users may not want to hear this, but I'm here to tell you that it is *overwhelmingly* likely that your financial contribution to Roll20 is exceedingly minimal. Companies like Roll20 do not get major sponsorship deals from others; they are not a YouTube channel or a sports team. Their brand does not have the kind of street-cred where people pay to be associated with it. They pay other people - like Adam Koebel - to amplify their brand, not the other way around. Ad revenues on a site like Roll20 will at best cover the costs of hosting and serving a static site to the users it reaches, with maybe - if you're willing to turn a blind eye to auto-playing video ads and other trashy tricks - a bit left over to pay one person a modest salary once a site gets big enough. Roll20 is not Facebook or Google. They do not have the plain text of every email you ever sent, or your entire social network, combined with billions of users. They are not going to be selling hyper-targeted tranches with strong conversion rates; they're going to be selling bulk display ads based on a broad demographic ("gamer"). This stuff is worth next to nothing. Sure, you could go out and try and sell custom ad partnerships to targeted businesses. But guess what, that means paying a professional ad sales guy to be making calls and building relationships - and in the end it generally costs more to make those sales than you get back. I've watched a company die that way. As soon as you start having to pay a development team, as soon as you have user-uploaded content that needs to be stored, served (bandwidth costs money too), backed up and managed, ad-funded doesn't cover your costs unless you have major clout - which means celebrities and big money advertisers. Why do people think that most of Roll20's ads are for their own service? Because that's where the money comes from guys. With a freemium service, the free users are there to be converted into paying users, because they're what's paying the bills. That's not to say they aren't important - that's why freemium is a thing in the first place - but don't kid yourself that you matter to the bottom line until you put your hand in your pocket and hand over your $$$ - or you persuade someone else to do so. I haven't seen Roll20's financial numbers, but I'd be absolutely astonished if Free users weren't a net cost to the business that is justified as a cost of sales for the premium tiers. To the people saying "if they can afford to double the premium tiers, why don't they do it for the free tier?", the answer is very simple: there are a lot more free users. That's the really tricky thing about freemium: your free users are always numerically the largest group - and so they're the ones who cost you the most money in absolute terms. Even if the per-user cost of doubling the free tier storage is lower, the absolute cost is likely to be *way* higher - and that would have to be justified as being necessary to maintain or improve the conversion rate to premium. It's also a one-way street; once you increase your free storage you can't go back, so it's not something you do lightly. Obviously, what remains to be seen is where the sweet spot is that keeps the costs acceptable without slowing down the rate at which people sign up for premium. Maybe Roll20 will find that people are cancelling/not signing up because the storage is too small and that has a knock-on effect on subscriptions because the site loses momentum + there's a smaller pool of people to convert. But if I'm honest, I somehow doubt it. My suspicion is that  the vast majority of people who pay for Roll20 are GMs who run a few games on free and then decided to upgrade; and that most of those who don't upgrade after a certain period will, on average, never generate meaningful money for the site. Roll20 is unlikely to make concessions to appease those long-term free GMs because their analytics probably tell them that there is simply no return on doing so. Of course, I might be wrong about that last part. Maybe those long-term free GMs are critical to funnelling in new paid users. If that's so then the easiest way out of this particular problem would be for Roll20 to offer some premium credits for referrals for paid sign-ups. If free GMs really are pulling in loads of paid users then they'd get their storage upgrades paid for; and if they're not, then Roll20 loses very little from the experiment. And unless anyone feels like Roll20 has a moral obligation to provide free services - and I sincerely hope no one is delusional enough to believe that - I guess people on the free tier who feel like their value is being under-appreciated should see that as a reasonable bargain too....

Alofen said: . It would be in roll20s best interest to give a minor boost to the free users (not 1 gig but not 1 mb either) to show the appreciation of those dedicated or are active (for those with many long hours each week.). This way, there is more incentive to buy a plus or pro for the storage, dynamics, and such. And this is where you're wrong. The higher the storage, the less incentive it is for free users to upgrade to Plus or even Pro. I tried to do some estimations. Assuming that there are about 3 million users by now, and 95% are free users, then Roll20 has a theoretical storage volume of nearly 500 TB. Nearly 60% of that volume is for free users, paid by the subscribers. Now with the storage volume increased for the subscribers, the storage volume would go up to nearly 900 TB (again, theoretically, as I'm just focusing on the maximum storage needed).  Considering that most Pro and Plus users will never use that additional storage, it's pretty safe to assume that in reality, Roll20 doesn't need to stock up much in terms of additional storage space. If Roll20 would now also triple the storage for the free users, the overall storage volume would jump up to 1400 TB. And opposite to the increase for Pro and Plus users, a lot of free users would definitely use their storage, forcing Roll20 to invest in additional storage - for users that don't chip in a dime. So increasing the storage for free users would be a very stupid thing to do, from an economic point of view: It would cost Roll20 more money, and it would decrease the amount of people that are willing to convert from free to subscription plans. I understand the frustration the free users are feeling right now. And yes, not everyone can afford a monthly subscription, even a low-cost one like the plus. But I am convinced that most free users could. So if you want to help that all free users benefit as well from a storage increase, then more free users should get a subscription. This would give Roll20 the financial wiggle room to help those who really can't afford a subscription, without putting the business model at risk.