A verified badge for officially registered DMs like a roll20 partner system.

I have been thinking deeply about a solution to the issue with paid dms.  paying for a game currently has no standards. what i mean by that is you could pay for a game and not know what you are getting. i've heard alot of mixed results. and i've thought about a rating system. but as some of the devs and product managers have said it would be abused by disgruntled players quite easily. so the next best idea is to have a committee of roll20 staffed dms. who are there solely to do a few one shots with paid dms to see if they have an enjoyable game with the dm whos charging to earn the title of a roll 20 badge displayer on there listings to show others that this person is a trusted source and you'll get a certain standard of play which can ease the minds of people buying into paid games.  having the roll 20 badge should also come with perks such as charging more than non badge holders. it would basically be like a verified check mark by roll20. and id say that people without it couldn't charge more than a certain amount until they are verified something like nothing past 10 bucks per person. then verified could charge more up to whatever they like or have a minimum beginning amount like 20 bucks per person. the process maybe slow but i think it would eventually roll out and then when someone goes to pay into a game they can be like yeh i know that im getting my moneys worth.  The more experienced and better dm gets paid accordingly. and the players can buy into that.  let me know what you think. if you can improve this idea i am more than welcome to spitball something so we can help the community develop better.

It is unlikely that Roll20 will officially sanction paid games, or attempt to control what people can and cannot charged for a game.

Peter B. said: It is unlikely that Roll20 will officially sanction paid games, or attempt to control what people can and cannot charged for a game. for now tho with anything when you pay for something you should expect a standard of what you pay for. at the very least is all im saying.

Which is why Roll20 doesn't want to get involved as far as I know.  Then they are on the hook for anything someone doesn't like from one of their "sanctioned" DMs.  There is also the issue of people making negative comments (or positive) just to boost or run down someone's overall rating if a rating system was created.  Those are things that have come up in the past as reasons that Roll20 doesn't want to be involved or have the need to figure out how to police some system like that. All that being said, I understand the desire for a rating/control system.  I just very much doubt it will happen here.

Kraynic said: Which is why Roll20 doesn't want to get involved as far as I know.  Then they are on the hook for anything someone doesn't like from one of their "sanctioned" DMs.  There is also the issue of people making negative comments (or positive) just to boost or run down someone's overall rating if a rating system was created.  Those are things that have come up in the past as reasons that Roll20 doesn't want to be involved or have the need to figure out how to police some system like that. All that being said, I understand the desire for a rating/control system.  I just very much doubt it will happen here. yeh i thought about the rating system. and i think its not a good idea. but a verified roll 20 badge could work because there are no ratings. just a qualification from roll 20 to say this person isnt a scammer and this person is of a quality worth paying more than your average dm.  it would be similar to how you get a verified check mark on twitter. then if anyone has a problem they can send an email to roll 20 help for any complaints but only valid ones that would violated any tos style stuff with valid evidence. 

Things Could Get Dicey said: this person is of a quality worth paying more than your average dm. Perhaps I shouldn't see statements like this as being horrible.  I have been playing and running games since the mid 80's.  I have run games that lasted for multiple years.  I tend to run a "living" world where previous campaigns have shaped the world that newer games are created in.  I have one currently on Roll20 that has been going for over a year, which was created totally off of things that happened in another game that run about a year or so on Roll20.  I put in the effort to write a character sheet for a system I run because it has been out of print since 94, so if I didn't do it, who would?  Do all players fit with the way I run my games?  Of course not, but some obviously do.  But since I don't charge for my games, I am a sub-par dm. Frankly, I find statements like that horribly offensive.

Kraynic said: Things Could Get Dicey said: this person is of a quality worth paying more than your average dm. Perhaps I shouldn't see statements like this as being horrible.  I have been playing and running games since the mid 80's.  I have run games that lasted for multiple years.  I tend to run a "living" world where previous campaigns have shaped the world that newer games are created in.  I have one currently on Roll20 that has been going for over a year, which was created totally off of things that happened in another game that run about a year or so on Roll20.  I put in the effort to write a character sheet for a system I run because it has been out of print since 94, so if I didn't do it, who would?  Do all players fit with the way I run my games?  Of course not, but some obviously do.  But since I don't charge for my games, I am a sub-par dm. Frankly, I find statements like that horribly offensive. it doesnt apply to you if you are not charging. its only applicable when you are charging for it and trying to get something you are paying for.  if i said ALL dms then youd have a point.

Things Could Get Dicey said: it doesnt apply to you if you are not charging. its only applicable when you are charging for it and trying to get something you are paying for.  if i said ALL dms then youd have a point. Hmm, perhaps I did overreact to that.  My apologies.  That sentiment has sadly been explicitly expressed by paid dms before on these forums.  And I doubt it will end anytime soon.

Kraynic said: Things Could Get Dicey said: it doesnt apply to you if you are not charging. its only applicable when you are charging for it and trying to get something you are paying for.  if i said ALL dms then youd have a point. Hmm, perhaps I did overreact to that.  My apologies.  That sentiment has sadly been explicitly expressed by paid dms before on these forums.  And I doubt it will end anytime soon. i dont have that sentiment. all i want is fairness for people making a purchase. people are getting scammed, paying into games and then not getting one. aswell as if they do they may get an inexperienced dm and someone who hasnt done much to improve the user experience. etc etc. 

Things Could Get Dicey said: Peter B. said: It is unlikely that Roll20 will officially sanction paid games, or attempt to control what people can and cannot charged for a game. for now tho with anything when you pay for something you should expect a standard of what you pay for. at the very least is all im saying. Sure, I don't disagree.  But you're asking the devs to be arbitrators on who is a good GM and who is not, and also asking them to guarantee that the GMs they say are good... are actually good.  This is more effort, and also responsibility, than they will want to do.  It would also cost money to do so... and you've not acknowledged that nor said where that would come from.

Regarding the scamming-part, there is a fairly recent thread about this. <a href="https://app.roll20.net/forum/post/8214878/regarding-pay-to-play" rel="nofollow">https://app.roll20.net/forum/post/8214878/regarding-pay-to-play</a> Perhaps those who have observed this can share some of their experiences?

Peter B. said: Things Could Get Dicey said: Peter B. said: It is unlikely that Roll20 will officially sanction paid games, or attempt to control what people can and cannot charged for a game. for now tho with anything when you pay for something you should expect a standard of what you pay for. at the very least is all im saying. Sure, I don't disagree.&nbsp; But you're asking the devs to be arbitrators on who is a good GM and who is not, and also asking them to guarantee that the GMs they say are good... are actually good.&nbsp; This is more effort, and also responsibility, than they will want to do.&nbsp; It would also cost money to do so... and you've not acknowledged that nor said where that would come from. im not asking devs to be the arbiters. im asking a group of trusted dms that roll 20 endorse or who they believe are trusted dms. to run one shots with other dms to asses their capability to earn the badge.&nbsp; of course it is more effort and responsibility. but they must do it if they are offering a platform to provide paid services.&nbsp; the responsibility falls onto the roll 20 peeps if they do this.&nbsp; from a player perspective id rather pay a little bit more for some sort of security/ admin fee to roll 20 to know that im not going to be scammed and that im going to have a better time with an official roll 20 dm than to be potentially scammed. and have a dm that doesnt deliver.&nbsp;

Things Could Get Dicey said: of course it is more effort and responsibility. but they must do it if they are offering a platform to provide paid services.&nbsp; the responsibility falls onto the roll 20 peeps if they do this. IMO, it is not Roll20's responsibility. Does any other VTT offer such a program of "approved" GMs? Again, IMO, it is up to the GMs looking to be paid to prove themselves a trustworthy provider, either through offering a free first session, offering external methods of contact (e.g., email, Facebook, etc., not just via Roll20), being able to provide references/reviews (on other sites), and/or using a payment vendor that protects buyers and sellers equally. Then any issues between the buyer and seller can be worked out with the payment vendor.

As an alternativ perspective on funding: A more secure site might generate more revenue by attracting more advertisers and/or customers, alternatively might make a larger group more willing to buy either subscriptions or stuff from the marketplace. To change the perspective. A more secure site might make existing customers stay longer. This is especially relevant now, when quarantined people come running to here.&nbsp; Lastly, it is quite possible that some GMs would be willing to pay for a badge, if it helps them in marketing their services. All of these things would of course need to be calculated in more detail to see if it is a valid model

Jens F. said: As an alternativ perspective on funding: A more secure site might generate more revenue by attracting more advertisers and/or customers, alternatively might make a larger group more willing to buy either subscriptions or stuff from the marketplace. To change the perspective. A more secure site might make existing customers stay longer. This is especially relevant now, when quarantined people come running to here.&nbsp; Lastly, it is quite possible that some GMs would be willing to pay for a badge, if it helps them in marketing their services. All of these things would of course need to be calculated in more detail to see if it is a valid model exactly. people will offer to pay for better quality.

It should be clarified that it is a big IF.

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