A CALL TO ARMS! Fantasy Grounds in Social Media, where are you?

[Sunspoticus]

I'm in several facebook groups concerning tabletop roleplaying and VTTs. And while I think we can all agree FG has significant advantages over the other VTT products (even those so-called free ones) I see it getting routinely ignored or tromped on there. And every time, it seems like I'm the only one defending and advocating Fantasy Grounds.

Fantasy Grounds is often mentioned/discussed in these groups (from my list anyway):

The Society of Extraordinary Gamers https://www.facebook.com/groups/SocietyOfExtraordinaryGamers/ (the most pro-FG group on FB I've seen heh)
Old School Gamers https://www.facebook.com/groups/121390094630920/
Old School Roleplaying https://www.facebook.com/groups/oldschoolroleplaying/
The Online RPG Group & Game Finder https://www.facebook.com/groups/OnlineRPGGameGroupFinder/

Where is the FG response, community or otherwise? Well, the "otherwise" at this point seems to be just me and my group. We constantly advocate and evangelize the benefits of Fantasy Grounds. What do you do to spread the word?

Has SmiteWorks ever thought of a affiliate program or even outright sponsoring some gaming groups? We're your best salesmen you know.

I don't know about you, but I refuse to let some crap over-glorified whiteboard stomp on FG, no sir, I won't do it...

[CrimsonCrust]

They should higher a social media coordinator if they have the sales for it.

[Xorn]

To be honest, I don't frequent Facebook groups. Or Google Hangouts. Or pretty much any other social media outlet, save the occasional forum. While reading the D&D Next forums, I absolutely pitched the merits of FG as a VTT application.

But most people arguing on forums about VTTs won't discuss anything that's not "free". So Roll20 & MapTools dominate the conversation. I've literally posted a picture of my entire DM screen, complete with labels (characters, combat tracker, party tracker, fully linked story entries, maps, npcs/encounters, items/parcels, notes, libraries, and tokens), plus a VIDEO of true 3D dice-rolling, then dropped the bomb that it's $40 forever for a DM, or $25 for a player, which you can upgrade later.

Bam. Lost audience. And I'm talking about a 3.5/4E audience, not some off-track left-field ruleset. Directly supported FG rulesets.

Bottom line is--and this is my opinion only--I only really take the time to show FG to DMs, because players are (generally) lazy and take things for granted.

Really, for a player, what is the difference between Roll20, MapTools, or FG? A character sheet. You can point out a lot of awesome stuff for the player with a fully functional combat tracker, modifiers, effects, and powers, but in the end, they have an interactive character sheet.

It's the DM that really gets the toys--Combat Tracker, Party Tracker, Story Entries, NPCs/Encounters, and LIBRARIES. Those are the unique things FG brings, and they only matter (ultimately) to the DM. When D&D Next first came out, I asked my players if they wanted to use FG2, or just tinker around in Roll20 first to see if we even liked the game. Of my four players, only 1 of which DMs in FG2, three said it didn't matter to them (knowing what FG offers) and the other DM said FG would make my life easier, but he didn't care. As long as players can roll dice and see the map, I really don't think they care.

I think that's pretty telling for who SW needs to be pushing their VTT on.

Back when I first saw FG2 (v2 had just come out) I downloaded the demo and played with it for 15 minutes before calling up my players and telling them to get their money out. We got 1 Full + 5 Lite licenses that day (split 6 ways + group discount it was actually like $15 each). It bothers me, too--in the day and age of $15/month MMOs and $10/month DDI subs, paying 1 time for an AMAZING VTT is "too much money".

I hate players. I never hear a DM that's even tinkered with FG complain about the cost. Hell, I think DM's get the Ultimate License so they don't have to instantly hate a new prospective player that instantly vetos the idea of playing because they need to actually pay for something. I mean the DM has spent hundreds or thousands of dollars on the RPG you're going to play, but your lazy *** can't be bothered to actually CONTRIBUTE? (I might be starting to channel what should be another thread. :P)

[Bidmaron]

Well said, Xorn. I think the other point is that FG2 practically screams ROLE playing vice ROLL playing (although it does that nicely too), and the other ones out there don't support role playing quite so well (in my opinion).

[Bubo]

The DM vs Player benefit has been a problem for me as well, and is the major cause for the time it took for me to purchase a license to the software. I first stumbled across Fantasy Grounds a few years back when an RPTools DM went nuclear during a session, and I needed to build a fast campaign for the players that were left with a DM. Fantasy Grounds seemed exceptional to me at the time, and one of my players handed me a cracked copy that we used for a single session. However, my players did not see enough value in Fantasy Grounds to spend money on a player license, and I ended up switching our campaign to RPTools (since I did not want to continue using the cracked copy without buying a license).

Over the years, I've brought up Fantasy Grounds a few times, but always faced the same refusals from my players regarding paying for a license. Last month I finally purchased an Ultimate License (thanks to a few friends who were tired of me always bringing up Fantasy Grounds) simply to end the argument. My players have enjoyed the Call of Cthulhu campaign that I am running, but even with experience the sentiment is that they would not use FG if they actually had to pay for it. They just don't see any player side value over the other VTTs out there.

I've seen quite a few other arguments about different income models that Smiteworks may adopt, and I really don't want to start that argument here.

[damned]

i have to agree with Xorn's sentiment; when it comes to money - players are tight arsed lazy s@#$heads.
they rock up and enjoy your time and efforts and money and complain about having to spend money on anything.
that is the world we live in. they'd rather bend over backwards or pirate something. its really quite sad.
3 or 4 beers would cover their license. a movie and popcorn. a t-shirt. a main course at dinner. and the license is freaking perpetual - not perpetually stuck on whatever version you bought - but upgraded regularly.

[dulux-oz]

I agree: players are cheapscapes. And yet most players I know own at least one set & often more than one set of dice (at between $7 &; $12 a set).

Maybe we can insist that the client version of FG2 is simply another tool that they HAVE to purchase to play in our games.

I'm normally turning away players because I have too many so I never have any complaints when I state this to my players.

Just a thought.

[Callum]

I regularly promote FG on the forums where I'm active - mostly Paizo these days - and have done for years. I hadn't thought about the fact that it's different for players and GMs, in terms of the appeal. My players didn't have any problem paying up front for the software - but that may be because we've been playing together for years face-to-face, and they knew they'd get plenty of play out of it.

[Griogre]

I'll be honest, the main reason I never upgraded to the Ultimate license is I want all my players to have bought a license. Like others, I've found that some players and GMs simply will not spend a dime on a VTT. I'd suggest you just move on from them. Basically treat them as self selecting out of your game. I'd like to point out that despite all the negativity you can get on a post in a different forum that doesn't mean other people don't see you post and become interested in FG.

I agree that from a player perspective, most of the best VTTs give about the same experience. However simply became there are never enough GMs for players, players do tend to follow GMs into a VTT. This is why I believe it makes the most long term sense for Smiteworks to make things as easy as possible for a GM to run a game with FG and to allow the easy creation of new rulesets.

If the GM experience with FG is superior and more GMs use it, the player who want to find a game will follow the GMs.

[CrimsonCrust]

This all sounds like an excuse not to pay for the ultimate license. I bought the ultimate license as a player before I ever even thought of DMing. And saying every player is a lazy sh&t head who is not willing to pay for anything, to me, is abusive towards the player base here at FG.

[Dr0W]

I have to agree with most of the things said here. I've bought my DM license 2 years ago and I've never convinced a group to buy a single player license. I've been discussing in FB groups, trying to find people who are interested and they simply refuse to pay when there are free options. "Roll 20 is much better than this". "Why?" "Because it is. It won some prize. And it's free. ". Hell I've even recorded videos showing FG2 for the brazilian Savage Worlds group( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUfHmAzVrFo and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZXUKA-K0Scc ). Lots of people said "Hey, that's quite interesting!", but none intersted in buying it.

The reason I've never upgraded to Ultimate license, honestly, is because it costs a lot for me. I know "its just $150", $115 in my case actually, but we're in different parts of the globe and $115 is quite a punch for me. I always miss the discount deals.

Fortunately FG2 was Greenlit on Steam and it makes thinks much easier for us brazilians. I hope to convince them to buy it once it gets on Steam or maybe I'll finally grab my Ultimate License using steam's payment choices.

[damned]

This all sounds like an excuse not to pay for the ultimate license. I bought the ultimate license as a player before I ever even thought of DMing.
An excuse to not buy Ultimate? I far and away prefer Griorge's approach - however I have an Ultimate license and the bulk of my players have had no license.


And saying every player is a lazy sh&t head who is not willing to pay for anything, to me, is abusive towards the player base here at FG.
Certainly it could be viewed that way. But I never said "every player" and my over the top response was intended to be - over the top - a bit of a dig.
It still has an element of truth - but is of course just a broad generalisation. If it had no truth to it you would not find so many GMs who have similar experiences nor would you find so many comments by players of other VTTs that they wouldnt ever pay for their VTT etc etc. Even at face to face games - many players dont have any books of their own etc.
But I think you are focusing too much on tight and S$%^. What about lazy? They just have to turn up while you do all the work.
For those of you I offended - ahhh heck - if your offended your too thin skinned or its true :)

Anyways - I love my players even though they are lazy, tight arsed s@#$heads - well some of them anyway because its only a generalisation with a bit of humour.

[damned]

The reason I've never upgraded to Ultimate license, honestly, is because it costs a lot for me. I know "its just $150", $115 in my case actually, but we're in different parts of the globe and $115 is quite a punch for me. I always miss the discount deals.

Fortunately FG2 was Greenlit on Steam and it makes thinks much easier for us brazilians. I hope to convince them to buy it once it gets on Steam or maybe I'll finally grab my Ultimate License using steam's payment choices.

For sure the $$ mean more to some than others. Even in US/EU/AU if you are doing it tough you are doing it tough. If you are in a country where the average income is lower then its gonna be harder to afford and harder to get your players to do the same.
I think the sentiment among many people today though - get it for free, use a free version, if all else fails pirate it.
This isnt just the VTT - far from it.
Music.
Movies.
TV.
Art.
Software.
Anything that can be digitized.

And perhaps one further clarification for my post above in reply to CrimsonCrust - its possible that DMs are just a strange breed and see the value in paying for goods.

And to all the many wonderful great players out there - keep on adventuring - Im only stirring the pot.

[Xorn]

This all sounds like an excuse not to pay for the ultimate license. I bought the ultimate license as a player before I ever even thought of DMing. And saying every player is a lazy sh&t head who is not willing to pay for anything, to me, is abusive towards the player base here at FG.

My grandfather always used to say, "If your halo ain't crooked, stop tryin' to straighten it!" :D

Point therein being, I'm not claiming that every player is a lazy cheap-***. What I am claiming, from roughly 30 years of GMing RPGs, is that my informed observations have shown that most RPG players don't pay anything into the hobby. Most players that have sat at my table did not own anything more a set of dice, if that. I'm not blaming any of my past players for my decision to buy every single Palladium Games book that was ever published, from Palladium Fantasy to TMNT to Robotech to RIFTS to Beyond the Supernatural to Nightbane(spawn). That was my (very expensive) investment into the gaming system I enjoyed. But of the 15-20 people I played those games with, I can't remember more then two or three owning a single book in the library.

In D&D alone, I played BECMI, 1E, 2E, 3E, and 4E. Played with several dozen different people; and maybe... three owned a PHB.

White Wolf games... I even LARP'd in college--there's a shining example: over 100 people in a convention hall, and like... 7 people own the actual rulebook--because they were the Storytellers that had to "referee" a bunch of nerds talking to goth girls that were (mostly) too big for the leather they squeezed into. EDIT: That's not a complaint--that was the primary reason to go to a LARP!

So while yes, I acknowledge that there are in fact players that will pay for a VTT client because they appreciate something being a good deal (for instance, every single one of my current group has their own license, even though I have an Ultimate)--most players interested in a VTT solution immediately dismiss FG because it's not free. Those that actually show interest on a forum--DMs, every time.

[Griogre]

@Crimson Crust I suppose it could be viewed as an excuse, and someday I expect I will get the Ultimate license. Like Xorn though, all my players do have a lite license or better. I've found that using FG is like running at a local game store, only better. If you run a game regularly on the Internet the player base is very, very, deep. It takes time but you will eventually find a group or groups of players that want to play in your game and enjoy your style of GMing. For me, part of someone wanting to play in one of my weekly games is buying a license. I currently have two groups of great players and I think a small part of their commitment to the game is they sprung for a license.

[damned]

+1 if someone has to put their hand in their pocket they are *more* likely to stick around, or more accurately - those that are most likely to stick around are most likely to part with their money on a license.

[viresanimi]

Well. My and the boys all have full licences. I got FGII and just told them to get it, because it was awesome. They had faith in me and did. We've been gaming across countries for a couple of years now and never regretted it. And as for "social media". I don't use them. I view them as pesky things that should go away and die.

Getting old here....

[Sunspoticus]

On the cost of Fantasy Grounds for New Players
I've spent HUNDREDS of dollars on Fantasy Grounds clients & etc. Almost everyone in my group got their client fronted to them in a big gamble on my part (over a year ago) that it would actually work. It did and several of them either kicked the cash back to me or, in two cases, immediately bought their own GM clients and released the copies I bought back to me. If it weren't for these extra clients I had laying around, it would be nigh-near impossible to add members to our Fantasy Grounds-powered gaming group.
I guess my biggest bitch right now is the pricing model. Its making growing a group based around this product a pain in the ***. While we haven't lost anyone to the crap tables (I won't mention any google-based software) having to make someone pony up 25 bucks before they can even sit down at a real game is a serious slap in the face. Might make sense from a profiteering standpoint, but a loss everywhere else. I would encourage SmiteWorks to revisit how player clients are priced, the scope of a demo client, and of course, discounts for CLUBS....

[mattcolville]

I hate players. I never hear a DM that's even tinkered with FG complain about the cost. Hell, I think DM's get the Ultimate License so they don't have to instantly hate a new prospective player that instantly vetos the idea of playing because they need to actually pay for something. I mean the DM has spent hundreds or thousands of dollars on the RPG you're going to play, but your lazy *** can't be bothered to actually CONTRIBUTE? (I might be starting to channel what should be another thread. :P)

This is very much off topic, but if you're right, and I think you are, then the problem is FG2's monetization.

[Zeus]

I run my weekly and fortnightly D&D games like a real world roleplaying club where by players are expected to financially contribute with a weekly subscription fee so for me and my group(s) the funding of FG licenses has never really been a big problem (we used pooled funds to buy players a Lite license when/if required). I simply don't give my players or new players any choice ;) If they want their weekly fix of DrZ D&D goodness then they cough up or they be gone. The subs are used to finance the acquisition of new game and support material (including software licenses and maintenance of the groups hosted web portal). Most of my players now have Lite licenses with only one who has yet to upgrade from the free client (I have Full and Ultimate licenses of FG). His excuse is that he's waiting to buy a new PC at Christmas.

The average age of my players is approximately 35 so I am guessing I may have gotten away with this draconian policy as I have a slightly maturer set of players to manage? Anyhow, none of them have ever complained about the cost of the Lite license. In fact, when I recently mentioned I was working on the 5E ruleset and that it would require FG 3.0 all of them were speechless to learn that its currently planned as a no cost upgrade from 2.9.x to 3. In fact, the only groaning I got, was about having to buy and learn the new D&D 5ed material (again).

[GMTroll]

FG has many good points, but we know that already. Some of FGs strongest points are less tangible and possibly missed so I like to point these out to those who will only consider free options.

The free web-services popping up such as roll20 are all dependant on the availability of the service providers servers. This adds another point of failure to the mix. If the service goes down then its lights out on all users games.

FG is not dependant on SW servers to host and join games, unless you are a player connecting with an unregistered install, then your install needs to check back with SW that the host license is valid.

Free web services are typically not free to run. More users requires more capacity (bandwidth, data storage, servers) pushing up running costs. Want redundancy to mitigate outage mentioned above, more cost. Being free is likely to be the downfall of such services if they do not have infinite funds or a strong commercial model of some kind to generate income. Given many folks gravitate to these service because they are not willing to pay perhaps we can predict the outcome. If the free service you use vanishes what happens to your data, time and effort, and most importantly continuity of your game(s).

I sincerely hope that SW prospers and continues to deliver a quality vtt product, but should anything happen all those paid up license installs of FG will still be there on our computers and work. A financial investment in FG is also an investment in protecting your time, effort and continued and uninterrupted gaming joy as both GMs and players.

So a few things for the unregistered users to consider too.

[Bubo]

With the direction that this conversation is turning, one thing that I've always wondered is why SmiteWorks does not consider an optional recurring subscription model over the current player license?

In my opinion, the price of the two DM options fall into the extremes of reasonable pricing. While I purchased the Ultimate License with the help of my friends, the $150 investment is a heavy chunk of change (the equivalent of 2-3 core paper books or 5-10 supplemental paper books). However, the $40 price tag on the Full License seems a little on the low side to me, unless you consider the Lite Licenses with it. If an alternative to Lite License could be found, then I wouldn't mind paying $50-$75 for a DM license.

In regards to that Lite License, an optional recurring subscription may carry some worth as an alternative option. What I am thinking about is allowing players to connect to DM License owners for free, ala the Ultimate License system. Instead of monetizing each player through the gameplay license, instead start offering optional features via a subscription model. In particular, I'm thinking of a hosted solution. Under this model, a DM would purchase their client license like the current system and players could play with them as if they had the Ultimate License. However, the pitfall both today and under the proposed system is that players can only connect when the DM has their client running. The current solution is to have the player's utilize Lite Licenses, but I propose that a SmiteWorks hosted "sync" solution would be valuable enough to earn subscription money. In essence, when the DM is offline the player can connect to a server synced with the last db.xml / campaign.xml from the DM to allow for player client functionality without a dependence on the DM. Offer a basic sync with just character sheets for a fairly low amount per payment period, but then offer additions such as expanded storage for hosting shared elements (notes, pictures, etc), or the ability to loan DM credentials temporarily to allow other people to DM temporary sessions. It may be possible to expand this into a full social portal, ala the guild forums I see everywhere for MMORPG guilds. With a hosted solution, it would also be possible to develop a universal gamification system (think Achievements) to entice people into more time spent in the Fantasy Grounds product.

Considering the nature of the subscription model that I described, it may be possible to do a trial run by offering both traditional licenses and the subscription option at the same time. If the subscription option income does not justify a full switch, then just disable the renewal options and revert back to the traditional license structure.

[Mgrancey]

This is a complicated topic, and there are people who are cheap, poor, and not-cheap or poor. I have an ultimate license but it was a Christmas gift, and I asked for it so that my friends who were less interested in gaming but enjoying a Savage Worlds campaign would be able to join in should weather interfere (amusingly enough I have only used it once with them and that was to act as a map and init tracker.) I have seen a number of people who invest in a game and then people who only pirate stuff. I will, if unable to view in real person, find an online copy of something to look at it and decide on whether I want to play it or try it out, however IF I do like it I will make sure to purchase it somewhere as I want the people and business that make games to keep making them and adding more to it. There has been 4 or 5 FLGS that went under in the local area and a good sized chunk of why was that a number of the local players would purchase from Amazon, Ebay, etc. where they could get it cheaper then in the store; nevermind that this would and did lead to the closing of the FLGS.

Admittedly, there are a lot of books that I can't afford because most aren't as reasonable as Paizo and actually charge a significant amount less for PDFs then compared to hardcopy. That said I have gotten more use out of FG then I have of any of my boardgames, but then again I live 10 miles from the middle of nowhere.

I am barely getting by, and going to a subscription service would effectively render me unable to use FG unless it was very cheap. I don't pick up a lot of extras but that's partially because of money and partially because of whats added. I have 2 book shelf of gaming stuff, and most of my favorites are either monsters or setting books. I don't like top-down tokens, so they don't interest me.

[Gadreun]

I do not belong to the online milieu of twirps tweets and faceplanting, so I couldn't really comment on the topic. But in terms of understanding the different ethos of players when it comes to paying or not paying, I can see why some players will freeload. It irks me.

I see regular contributors to FG are usually DMs with ultimate licenses. Many players take the free ride option because they do not have to pay anything to play under a ultimate licensed DM. I was proud of the fact I own a full license as a player, the highest rate for someone who will not be DMing (as I can not).

It is a balancing act, do you remove the freeloading (it's how I see it) by changing that everyone who uses FG must have at least a basic license, or do you encourage all comers to try the game out and thus grow your market.

I guess the middle ground is where we are at the moment.

[damned]

I own a full license as a player

**see** I love my players :)

[Ephyzul]

There is a bit of pompous air about in this thread. I think some of you are pretty harsh when it comes to people that have no money. There are people here who are using 10-15 year old computers and don't have the expendable income to purchase a t-shirt let alone a computer gaming resource. Before anyone states anything about maybe they should get a job, well maybe they already have one and it doesn't pay enough for their family to live on, or maybe they live in a country where no jobs are available. There is something to be said for free to play options in gaming nowadays. Why do you think many online gaming companies are going to that business model. Before the ultimate license came out I bought a full license and 5 lite licenses because the people that wanted to get into it either didn't see the value in FG or didn't have the money at the time.

FG is by far my first VTT pick but I have only been in one game since I came back and that was in FG Con. Made many attempts to get in on games and almost was able to finally get into a group for Sundays but the wife decided to join a volleyball team. One day of being on roll20s site and I found many available groups and times and now play in a game over there since I have been unsuccessful to find a game here, one of the benefits of offering a more accessible resource to people that don't have the means.

The ultimate license imo is a great idea and I will more than likely upgrade if my attempts to get into a game through here fail.

Now on topic: I made a few comments before in regards to FG on a couple groups I am in and really never got a response. The only time I ever received any response or interest was someone mentioning the cost I think that even if FG is found more often in social media networks it still won't gain popularity, people won't foot out any money for a product they know nothing about and can get for free somewhere else (of course not knowing the differences between other VTTs and FG). The only people that know how effective FG can be are those that don't mind paying X amount of money for something that is foreign to them or have used the software with someone that paid x amount of money. I would love to see FG become more popular and widely used, it would make my life easier finding games in it. But the truth is with the current payment options, it will stay a niche within a niche resource.

[JohnD]

I am conflicted on this current topic.

I have an Ultimate license and while I don’t necessarily regret having paid for it instead of the Full license, it has been my experience that players with a Lite license are significantly more reliable attendees than those who haven’t invested in the software. Naturally this isn’t meant as a broad brush statement before anyone gets their hackles up.

From the flip side, if I was going to strictly be a player, I’d want some way of knowing that I have a chance of finding a regular game that works with my availability, has a DM with a style I enjoy, and a player roster not made up of mal-adjusted boneheads; if I could find that then I’d have no qualms forking out for a Lite license. But if I have a hard time finding something I like, or run into a few DMs who are flaky and get all hissy if I don’t play the way they want me to and quit, well I’d be questioning the wisdom of a potential purchase.

The whole argument of “maybe people are poor and can’t afford it” doesn’t really hold a lot of validity in my mind.

I want to live in a 10,000 sq. ft. mansion with lithe female servants eager to look after my every need (gigity gigity…). Reality is – that’s not going to happen because I’m not Charlie Sheen and I don’t have his money to blow on hookers and blow. If I don’t have $20 for a Lite license to participate in a hobby I enjoy, then I probably don’t have $20 to head to the local establishment for coffee a few times a week, or have a beer when watching the game on television, or even get lunch at any fast food “restaurant”.

I have other concerns than being able to play a role playing game if the above applies to me. If I want to play, then certainly I’m going to look for a free option. But don’t rationalize it.

If you can’t afford a BMW, not buying one is the correct course of action. You don’t buy one and then complain you’re broke (I suppose some people still do…).

So I see the free version as having a valuable place and role to play. On the other hand, if someone isn’t willing to purchase your product, as a business person, I’d think about doing my best to not allow use for free beyond a reasonable trial period.

Personally I don’t think there is any pricing approach that will satisfy everyone.

[DeeGor]

I have just recently purchased Fantasy Grounds and got my players to purchase licenses as well. After initially downloading the demo and briefly looking at the documentation, I was kind of overwhelmed and a little hesistant in dropping money on a license. The product looked outstanding from the screenshots I viewed, but I didn't want to end up in a situation where I spent a bit of money on software, then never ended up using it because it was too complicated for me and my players. I think what really solidified my decision to purchase the product was all of the great video tutorials this community has been producing. I could see all of the cool things it was capable of, and how to actually use the program to it's fullest. The documentation is ok, but it really helps when you can visualize what's going on. At least for me anyway.

In my opinion, the best way to get more people into FG is to have more of these videos or at the very least link to more of them on the download page so they're in one central location.

[dulux-oz]

Well, as one of those people who DeeGor so nicely praised I don't have a problem at all with people watching, downloading, or linking to the Tutorial Videos I've done - I'd just like a quick note to say that that's what you intend to do.

The only problem I forsee is that SW is only two guys (part-time, I believe) so devoting the resources to do what DeeGor suggests and intergrating it as another page (or 2, or 3, or...) on this site means that it'll take them away from developing the core product - don't get me wrong, its worth doing, I just don't know how SW is going to resouce it.

That goes too for some of the other suggestions I've seen on this thread - proving a hosting service, etc, all requires DEDICATED time, money and other resources - I know, both professionally for my clients and commercially for myself - again, a good idea, but how does SW resouce it PROPERLY - because if its not done properly it'll do more damage to the FG brand then it'll do good.

And, just to round things out because DeeGor mentioned Tutorial Videos: Here's another one of my shamless plugs for mine (see Sig below) :p

[malvok]

Yay, you spent $40 bucks. This elevates you above the "freeloaders"? Get real.

You don't even GM, who's the freeloader?

The whole point of Role Playing Games is sharing. We share our stories, our time, and our effort. To declare that a player's worth is based on how much money he's spent goes directly against the spirit of sharing that permeates the world of role-playing.

[damned]

haha - this page ha opened up even more cans or slimy things :)

@Ephyzul - it certainly could be read that way. its probably not meant that way. it has turned into a bit of a rant but here is another perspective on it. everyone having a rant is still here and still hosting games. some have got their groups all straightened out and others havent. still what they are saying is valid - even if its not valid in every situation. to them and their experience its completely valid.
certainly there are people that cant afford it but the people im bumping into and who are playing rpgs and dont have a license all *could* have a license even the brokest among them if they chose to.
i would never buy an ultimate license if i couldnt afford it. thats different.
Also this is a big point - roll20 and the others certainly make it much easier to find a game quickly and easily and have far more pickup style games. I do think of all the missed opportunities when first timers come here and cant get a game inside 2 weeks - they dont often come back.

@DeeGor - welcome aboard. Doco is the bane of so many products! The doco could/should be better and be more accessible/obvious. There is a project to get the Wiki going but its lurking behind the release of FG3. Once the Wiki is there I think/hope that the community here will help get the doco up to scratch and hope that it will ease the transition for many.

@dulux-oz - keep making those videos man :)

@malvok - put the boot in! rpging is definitely not about how much money you have spent. but the reverse to that is if no one bought these games they would not be the great products they are today. they would be 1-50pages of house rules. money makes things work and makes them better. maybe sad but still true.

[Blacky]

A CALL TO ARMS! Fantasy Grounds in Social Media, where are you?
I don't do so-called social media.

[Xorn]

Anyone that tells me they literally can't afford to purchase a lite license because they are just barely getting by needs to do one of two things:
1. Sit down with their parents and work out some extra responsibilities they can take on in order to get a bigger allowance (this will be good practice for asking for a raise in the real world.)
2. Turn off your internet service, because if $20 is the difference between you paying rent or being homeless, being on this forum (any internet forum) is a luxury you can't afford. While you're at it, get a pre-paid cell-phone, ride the bus to work, stop eating out, turn off your cable, and keep the thermostat set to 65 degrees.

I get if someone doesn't want to buy a Lite License without knowing enough about the application. But like I said, most players in the THIRTY YEARS I've been running RPGs won't spend a wooden nickel on the game. Everyone playing in my current FG game has a license--so I'm not saying every single player, ever. But most of them. That's why targeting players with FG interest isn't very effective.

As stated by several people, when FG is mentioned on a "social media site", the only feedback is from players about cost. I've had people show interest when I link one of my tutorial videos or a stream of one of my games--and every single time, they were GMs, currently using another VTT. I can literally show a prospective player around FG, with the character sheets, hotkeys, dice rolling, effects and mods, and they are like... eh... I don't want to pay to play online.

... the reality is they don't want to pay to play, period.

GMs buy the books. GMs are the ones that have to DEVOTE TIME between games, if it's going to be fun for everyone. That's why GMs are receptive to paying for FG (because it makes running a game online much easier), and players usually aren't interested in the features, because the benefits to them are perceived to be minor.

And yeah, seriously, just don't buy pizza this week, you're license is paid for. If you never buy pizza, then I'm very sorry for you.

[CrimsonCrust]

This is really a joke. Players buy the books, they buy the games. A matter of fact most of the people I play with have money. Why you ask? Because usually only geeks with money play games like this. You guys need to get off your high horses. "Waa Waa Waa I am a GM I have to buy all this stuff, and the players are just so cheap gosh darnit!" I mean give me a break. Every game I have ever played in (in my youth and now that I have started back up as I have kids and I can't do anything else... lol) have had players who have all their own stuff. Every game I have played in it has basically been something you do with out even saying it. It really get's under my skin to hear so many people think that players do not contribute. You really are the lucky ones to have some people who will listen to your wind bagged story's so (insert emoji of tongue sticking out).

This thread should be shut down. As all it is doing is giving people a forum to exercise their rights to being to grandiose in their own minds. And this thread is really nothing but a giant troll thread.

[hangarflying]

Except that players refusing to pay for a VTT is a very real thing. Just go to the Paizo website and hop in any discussion about VTTs and you will see comments along the lines of: "it's nice, but I shouldn't have to pay". Heck, when Paizo announced their own VTT and there was mention of cost associated with some aspects, I thought there was going to be a lynch mob...and some of these comments were coming from people with subscriber tags...so you know they are paying money.

So...is every player a cheap-skate? No, of course not, but we all know that given the option, all of us will go the cheap route. And for players, this usually means that they don't see a reason to pay for a VTT when there are "free" options available.

[Sunspoticus]

Troll thread? Its pretty clear alot of us are having problems growing our games because of a rigid price model, don't see how thats trolling really. From my own experience, I've had half-a-dozen people get immediately turned off to the whole notion because short of watching a few videos the only way to get a feel for the table is to buy it. Thats been the slap-in-the-face I've encountered in my new player recruitment drive.

While there are no changes to entry into FG for new players, it'll continue to lose players/customers to competing products. Sitting on your laurels because your product was king of the hill 5 years ago is suicide in the software business, especially in a market as crowded as the VTT segment has become. The old adage, adapt or die applies here to FG in a major way.

Thats where my frustration comes from.

Signed,
A "Troll"

[Moon Wizard]

I appreciate everyone's ideas and insights, but I'm going to go ahead and close the thread.

The various licensing options and player vs. GM costs are discussed regularly between Doug and I. There are pros and cons to every licensing arrangement. For now, the current license model is workable (but not perfect by any means). We will continue to assess the various options going forward, and removing barriers to entry is very high on our list of things to figure out.

Regards,
JPG