Thinking of Joining Roll20? Lock In Your Sub Now!

Roll20 is increasing its monthly sub from $4.99 to $5.99 per month, but you can lock in the lower price by signing up before July 1st.

• Monthly Plus subs go from $4.99 to $5.99l Annual Plus subs go from $49.99 to $59.99
• Monthly Pro subs go from $9.99 to $10.99; Annual Pro subs go from $99.00 to $109.99

If you subscribe before July 1st, you get locked in to the old price for two years. I can't promise you'll be as good-looking as the folks in the screenshot, though!

Roll20 Announcement – Price Increase · Roll20 Blog

blog.roll20.net

 

[Retreater]

Roll20 certainly helped me game through the pandemic when there was no other valid VTT option for my group, due to our technical limitations. I know a lot of people begrudge it, but Roll20 really clicked with me and was easy for all the players to use.

 

[TheSword]

No, just the initial app start up has more ads and stuff on free. The rest of it is equally non optimal in the paid tiers.

Just today I was feeling frustrated with the instability of the card system (the ability to view other player’s cards is spotty, and it’s a known issue they haven’t done anything about for years), and thinking that if they don’t get that fixed before Foundry has a Torg module I’m jumping ship.

Roll20 is really the kind of thing you use not because you like it, but rather because there isn’t anything else better yet. I think Foundry will soon obsolete that status and then Roll20 will have to up their game or lose a lot of customers.

Foundry need to make access to the system, cheaper and easier first. Having to sign up to a separate hosting system and pay £50 for software up front will slow their growth.

 

[Jimmy Dick]

Good chat.

I've been using Roll20 for the last five years and have been a paying subscriber for the last four. I have purchased a few hundred dollars of digital products through them for 2e. They have lost my business due to their refusal to build more Pathfinder Second Edition content. They seem to be doing just fine for the 5e world which is not surprising since that appears to be their single biggest market sector, but they also have been failing to keep up with changes in the VTT world. They've been determined to waste a tremendous amount of resources on their newer Dynamic Lighting which is still plagued with problems over two years into its implementation.

I've begged them to put in sound integration. They refuse to consider it. We keep getting promised a charactermancer for 2e but here we are almost 2 years later and it is not here, nor does it have a target date. To put it mildly, I am not getting what I am paying for. With Foundry, I am hoping to be part of a community which expands and grows to meet the needs and wants of the whole community.

 

[TheAlkaizer]

Foundry need to make access to the system, cheaper and easier first. Having to sign up to a separate hosting system and pay £50 for software up front will slow their growth.

On the contrary, I'd say that their model is accelerating their growth.

Having to pay 50$ once and never again is much more interesting then having to pay a smaller amount each month indefinitely and not owning anything that you put on their servers.

It does require a bit more tinkering from the part of the GM to set up things the first time though, non-tech savy people will have a harder time.

 

[Retreater]

On the contrary, I'd say that their model is accelerating their growth.

Having to pay 50$ once and never again is much more interesting then having to pay a smaller amount each month indefinitely and not owning anything that you put on their servers.

It does require a bit more tinkering from the part of the GM to set up things the first time though, non-tech savy people will have a harder time.

Foundry seems leaps better for games like PF2 that have only marginal support on Roll20. However it seems dreadful for 5e since it has zip for it - worse than even the free version of Roll20.
I was up and running Rime of the Frostmaiden in minutes on Roll20 after purchasing the module. On Foundry, I'd have to spend hours programming every new creature, aligning maps, drawing line of sight, etc (which is what I have to do with Pathfinder 2 on Roll20).
So the best VTT completely depends on what game you're running. But the worst one is always Fantasy Grounds

 

[BigZebra]

Why the FG hate? What am I missing?
I am evaluating it for some 3.5 and I really like it. The FG 3.5 sheet is 1000 times better than Roll20 ditto. But I notice a lot of displeasure toward FG and am wondering what I am missing.

 

[jaynay27]

Why the FG hate? What am I missing?
I am evaluating it for some 3.5 and I really like it. The FG 3.5 sheet is 1000 times better than Roll20 ditto. But I notice a lot of displeasure toward FG and am wondering what I am missing.

Yeah, I don't get it. I've tried all the main ones (Roll20, D20Pro, etc.) and Fantasy Grounds is great. My group won't use anything else!

I don't mind trying and paying for various VTT to test them out, but pretty sure Roll20 doesn't want my business based on my demographic.

 

[Matchstick]

Whether FG or Foundry, or bare bones Owlbear.Rodeo for that matter, any VTT that you don't subscribe to will inevitably be a better deal than paying for a subscription. I've used both FG and Foundry and had lots of success in both cases. I've never paid for hosting with Foundry; there's no reason in my situation to do so. My upload speeds are fine and my disk space is adequate.

I've had FG since 2006, can you imagine how much I'd have paid if FG was a subscription?!

 

[Superchunk77]

I'm a player in Roll20 and a DM in Foundry. Foundry does take a bit more tinkering and setup but the add-ons are very cool. It just does so much more than roll20. And for those not wanting to pay for a cloud hosted service, you can run your server locally on your own PC. The only downside to that is your players can't login to update their character sheets when your server isn't running.

 

[DammitVictor]

Why the FG hate? What am I missing?
I am evaluating it for some 3.5 and I really like it. The FG 3.5 sheet is 1000 times better than Roll20 ditto. But I notice a lot of displeasure toward FG and am wondering what I am missing.

I don't know why everyone else hates it, but I hate them because all of their default themes are difficult for me to read and even if I could find one that was remotely viable for me, themes are selected on the game level by the GM-- and after repeated inquiries, I have been informed that this level of GM authorship is more important than a basic minimum of accessibility.

It's a garbage product from a garbage company, and I will happily dissuade anyone I can from giving them money.

edit: There are a lot of things that aren't great about Roll20 and people keep trying to talk me into switching to one VTT or another, but at the end of the day, the fact that I can read its output by default and it isn't a goddamned knife-fight to be able to maintain a clean user interface that isn't exhausting means Roll20 is going to win. Since I've never actually met another group of highly intellectual VTT developers that understands this basic concept, Roll20 gets my patronage by default.