Floating licenses and affiliate program

I have been reading this thread and it seems that the big problem is that the GM pays for everything. The players testing out the system get to playtest for free. That is the problem I would try to fix. If a player wants to try the system for free they can check out the free demo and probably get someone to show them around the demo. Playing in a game, however, is a better way to see if you want to purchase FGII. For that I think the player should pay the cost of the floating license. It is a nominal fee compared to committing to purchase one's own license. If a player isn't willing to put up a little money to test out a real game then they probably aren't serious about buying it at all. Furthermore, maybe the money they put towards the floating license could give them a discount on when they purchase their own license. This way the GM isn't financially burdened and hopefully everyone is happy, except for those who want a free VTT.

-Tristram

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tristram

I have been reading this thread and it seems that the big problem is that the GM pays for everything. The players testing out the system get to playtest for free. That is the problem I would try to fix. If a player wants to try the system for free they can check out the free demo and probably get someone to show them around the demo. Playing in a game, however, is a better way to see if you want to purchase FGII. For that I think the player should pay the cost of the floating license. It is a nominal fee compared to committing to purchase one's own license. If a player isn't willing to put up a little money to test out a real game then they probably aren't serious about buying it at all. Furthermore, maybe the money they put towards the floating license could give them a discount on when they purchase their own license. This way the GM isn't financially burdened and hopefully everyone is happy, except for those who want a free VTT.

-Tristram

---

My issue has nothing to do with the GM paying for the keys, I am looking for a way for me to pay for the keys in fact. The issue is that in the real world when you go an buy a gaming table to play D&D on (I know almost everyone just uses the dinning room table) but still you do not have to buy a new table for every single player you have. You buy just one table and a set of chairs, and sit people down. The same should be true of the VTT community.

The GM buys the table (the full version) and he buys some chairs (floating lite licenses) to go with his table. Then the players sit in those chairs and play their game. Now if they would like to run a game (most of the would) they run off and buy a table and chairs of their own.

The table analogy only holds if you're playing at the GM's house. ;)

And in the real world the players bring snacks and sodas for the GM! I miss that... :D

~P

You bring snacks and sodas for the GM? We live in the same state, would you like to join one of my games?

When I read-

Quote:

---

The GM buys the table (the full version) and he buys some chairs (floating lite licenses) to go with his table. Then the players sit in those chairs and play their game. Now if they would like to run a game (most of the would) they run off and buy a table and chairs of their own.

---

It makes me think that the GM is the only one paying for FGII. The players get to play for free. That doesn't seem right to me. The players should pay instead since its the GM that does most of the work setting up the game.:D And in my 29 years of gaming I have found that few players become GMs. Players like being players and GMs like being GMs. This is especially true if you can play for free instead of paying to GM.

The dining room table analogy is a bit odd. I would use the analogy of the GM who buys all the rulebooks, dice, miniatures, etc. and the players get to use them for free. Been there and done that with no complaint. I didn't, however, expect any gaming company to give me free, or discounted, copies of Players Handbooks to hand out.

My comment was about how it seems the problem is how much this will cost GMs. My suggestion was to have the players pay for the floating licenses. If a GM wants to pay then that is up to the GM.

If a player pays then he gets a month of usage at 5 dollars? That's far cheaper than going to 1 movie. That player could then play in as many games as he could find and try out different GMs and rulesets. He could see how different people use FGII. The only limit would be how many GMs are running demos or one-shot adventures. Some GMs might allow a player to log on to a game and watch without being a PC. Once the player finds he likes FGII then he could buy it and maybe get the 5 dollars discounted from his purchase price. And I'd point out to any prospective player that FGII is a one time buy vs an ongoing monthly subscription and not much more expensive than buying one gaming rulebook. You get free updates, can create your own rulesets, and have access to a lot of great, free, content made by other FGII owners.

-Tristram

I think I am going to try and tell my players that I am switching to a new game system. and that they have to buy the books for me, and see what happens.... This should be interesting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tristram

My suggestion was to have the players pay for the floating licenses. If a GM wants to pay then that is up to the GM.

---

That's my suggestion too, see post 36 above. Though if a player is paying then it isn't really a 'floating' license. I suggested that the model should allow the player to pay for a Lite license in instalments.

Spyke

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by unerwünscht

I think I am going to try and tell my players that I am switching to a new game system. and that they have to buy the books for me, and see what happens.... This should be interesting.

---

Tell me how it goes. In my experience players are just a bunch of freeloaders! They want the GM to buy all the books and stuff. They want the GM to spend hours coming up with interesting adventures and campaigns. The GM has to make sure each player has a good time in the adventure and listen to complaints if they don't like the game. And the GM has to deal with players showing up only when they feel like it.

Now they want to use FGII for free and have the GM foot the bill?

Don't they know they should treat their GMs like gods or, at least, minor celestials that are able to read rules and modules, created by paid writers, and then take the credit for good time had by all?

(The above are the fevered ramblings of a long time GM and do not represent the feelings of the person who wrote them.:confused: :p )

But I digress. Essentially I think the floating license (or rent-to-own license) should have a cost, to pay for the great work of SmiteWorks. Both GMs and players should have the option of paying for the license. And encouragement for new GMs to join will naturally bring in players rather than the other way around.

Sorry, Spyke, for not giving you credit for stating this idea first. I agree with you. And for those who disagree, that's what this forum is about. I'm sure SmiteWorks will take in all the opinions and ideas and come up with a plan that works for the majority.

FGII, like life, is a work in progress.
-Tristram

"Now they want to use FGII for free and have the GM foot the bill?"

I think you raise a valid point - how will they address leechs on the community, e.g. a person that never buys the software, and has no intention, but is happy to keep playing in games with floating licenses.

You identified a valid problem. Its not an issue of fairness either (as you presented it), but an issue for fostering a good community.

If people such as the above join the community in large, I don't think that will good for the long term interests of the developers. If such people were a small minority, of course it would be a big deal, but I'm not sure how you go about predicting that.

EDITING: looking back at the first post of this thread, I see that Ged seems to be aware of this potential problem. He hand waved it away though, lol, see "As it is subscription based, players will probably be more aware that using the floating license seat is not the standard way they should attend games, i.e. GMs should not be expected to provide the seat. " I guess its their prediction that it will "only be a small minority" of people that operate as leechs... I guess we'll see soon enough whether this prediction is correcT!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tristram

When I read-
I would use the analogy of the GM who buys all the rulebooks, dice, miniatures, etc. and the players get to use them for free. Been there and done that with no complaint. I didn't, however, expect any gaming company to give me free, or discounted, copies of Players Handbooks to hand out.
-Tristram

---

You hit pretty close to the mark here. In my group we rotate GMs and play lots of different games. The GM buys all the source books to run a new game - including one player book for the players to share. If a particular player loves the game then he/she may go out and buy a copy for themselves. That is great but doesn't help the GM much, though.

Once a GM buys source books he/she can run the game with many different groups of people. The lack of floating licenses means that I, as GM, have to buy all the lite licenses because my players don't want to spend their money on a game that we may wind up only playing once. No problem. I just bought all the licenses that I expected to need at one time, getting the volume discount. It wasn't cheap, but I have payed as much before to buy rule books for a new game (GURPS Traveller).

Because my FG lite licenses don't float I am forced to install the client for each player (so he/she doesn't know the key) and then uninstall it after we are done. That is pretty tedious and annoying. And actually impossible if my player in Japan participates! (I would have to just give him a license to keep, I guess.) If a player likes FG then he/she may eventually go out and buy a personal copy, which is great if it happens. It doesn't help me much, though.

What I would really prefer is the option to buy a master FG full version (at a higher price than the standard full version) that comes with four crippled lite licenses that can only connect to me. Then if my players decide that they want a personal copy of the lite license that they can customize and use for other games than mine then they can buy it themselves.

The proposed floating license setup would be good for adding an unexpected extra player to a game. If this were in place now I might have only bought three lite licenses. I am not sure if this is a consequence that would benefit SmiteWorks.

It only takes a couple of months of float licenses for the money paid to equal the cost of a bulk purchased lite license. This means that I would only use the float license one month and if the player liked it enough to continue one or the other of us would buy a regular lite license.

As I think about it, I might have just purchased the GM version and run the game entirely on float licenses for one month to test the waters. If FG doesn't work out for us I am out $60 instead of $100. If it does work out, then the money I loose in float licenses and lost bulk purchase discount for the GM copy would be like an "insurance premium". My decision on which way to start would depend on how much confidence I have that my game group will like playing with FG. Likewise, offering this option would indicate SmiteWorks' confidence in their product. :)

-KP