MONETIZE. ROLES.

[Nellyfox]

I meant to not fight, if you're confused it doesn't apply to you.

I skimmed the OP so that's my own fault, but still what is this even supposed to do ? Paying to be a role just doesn't seem right to me. Devs have said they wouldn't add anything that influences the game in the shop and I feel this does that.

[Tormental]

Scrolls pretty much already influence the game because buying them reduces everyone else's chance of getting what may be their preferred role. (Jailor, etc.)

But yeah.

The fact that you'd be able to play as the new roles if the Host of the custom round adds them allows people to play the role without buying themselves, so it's bypassing the idea that it 'influences' too much.

Plus as I mentioned there could be special rotating role lists (like Vigilantics, etc.) that feature new roles and let people experience them before buying.


Most of all, this is the concept:

If people want new roles, but we're getting purchasable items instead, make the roles the purchasable items and at least solve PART of the problem.


Edit: Oh! And I should note buying the role gives you access to it. It doesn't mean you get to choose to be Sniper every round, etc.

[Nellyfox]

Scrolls don't really influence the game, if people have a preferred role they can easily buy a scroll. Either way, game isn't influenced if you have a preferred role anyway. If you leave because you get a role you don't like then you're breaking the rules. Just play the role you get, how does this influence the game at all ?

Rotating gamemodes I can see and agree with, but permanently as a shop item I don't like.

[Tormental]

Well then -- Role sales don't influence the game because you can easily buy a role. XD

It seems like adding it as a shop item is negative to you just because payment is involved?

[Jedicode3]

Well then -- Role sales don't influence the game because you can easily buy a role. XD

It seems like adding it as a shop item is negative to you just because payment is involved?

Payment can be a bad thing if done poorly if this ever was to get done it just needs to be done right

[Nellyfox]

Basically, yeah. I just feel all roles should be free.

[Tormental]

I can respect that. Unfortunately I think that's the path to never getting roles we'd like in time-frames that prevent community death.

[Mroz4k]

The potential backslash on this would likely be very bad. I am all up for the BMG trying new strategies but I dont think this is the way.

Many people wouldnt pay for this because they simply cant pay - majority of gamers on this game are still teenagers and they may not even have a bank account to begin with.
While this would generate more money it doesnt neccesarily mean the role output would be increased. While it would be moreless fair, some people will still consider this a
backstabbing from the Devs, with the intend to make the game not free to play.
And, finally if the new roles were limited to a small amount of people (even with the Host allowing it for everyone in the game it would still be small chance) it would mean the potential of the role added this way is wasted, because only few people will actually play it.

This is not the way. Its not a bad idea per say but its not very smart move to take, I believe it would do more damage then good.

Many would consider this a betrayal from the initial Free to play policy, and could even leave the game because of it.


Besides, there is also the problem of it being unfair. Like, lets say Host has three purchased roles. So, he knows these roles may happen in a game. Unless everyone is clearly notified these roles are a possibility, the Host has a clear advantage. And, even then, it may be difficult for others because of all the changes these new roles bring. The Host would have experience with these roles while others wouldnt, I see this as potentially a very big balancement issue as well.

[Tormental]

The potential backslash on this would likely be very bad. I am all up for the BMG trying new strategies but I dont think this is the way.

I don't know how much backlash there would be if we're talking about roles we'd never get otherwise. The alternative would be they didn't exist at all, ever.

"I don't want ice cream unless it's free!" leaves you without ice cream.

Many people wouldnt pay for this because they simply cant pay - majority of gamers on this game are still teenagers and they may not even have a bank account to begin with.

Phone games are massive in part because teens dispose of a lot of family income. Pretty much anything targeted at teens disproves the idea they don't buy stuff.

While this would generate more money it doesnt neccesarily mean the role output would be increased.

For there to be roles in the shop would mean roles have to be produced. Since it's been years and we've gotten TWO roles (with two coming) - again, across the span of years - there is no way that roles in the shop would not mean an increase of output. You can't have roles in the shop and have the output be LESS than it is now.

While it would be moreless fair, some people will still consider this a
backstabbing from the Devs, with the intend to make the game not free to play.

They'd be wrong. Plenty of games release races, jobs, etc. in DLC... and before that, on additional discs.

And, finally if the new roles were limited to a small amount of people (even with the Host allowing it for everyone in the game it would still be small chance) it would mean the potential of the role added this way is wasted, because only few people will actually play it.

Presumes it'd be a small amount of buyers.
Presumes no use of new roles in specialized rotating role lineups.
Host adding a single pay role to their round is a 1/15 chance of getting it, which is actually pretty sweet.
-- Host adding more than one pay role to their round is even better.
Presumes "only a few people" will get to use the role, ever, when this has no basis in any real argument as to why.
-- To elaborate, you're presuming they won't be widely purchased and widely used with no actual basis for that assumption.

This is not the way.

There is no one "way".

Its not a bad idea per say but its not very smart move to take, I believe it would do more damage then good.

It can actually do zero damage.

Many would consider this a betrayal from the initial Free to play policy, and could even leave the game because of it.

They'd be wrong. The game is free to play. Skins, houses, pets, scrolls, etc. aren't free. (Town points, purchases, etc.) The Steam version isn't free. The mobile version isn't free. You're basically picking "roles" as the hill to die on. The one sacred thing that can't be touched and has to remain completely free. Not to repeat myself, but this has no basis on anything other than personal preference.

You can still play the game for free without "The Cannibal" available to you. Your position makes little to no real sense.

Like, lets say Host has three purchased roles. So, he knows these roles may happen in a game.

No. The host can add purchased roles by name. Everyone would see them in the role list.

What you're most likely thinking of is that if a player has purchased the role, they can get it as a random option if there's, say, a "Random Town" in the game and the purchased role is a Town one.

Now - can you explain how it'd be unfair given the fact that "Random Town" can ALREADY be any role no one would know was in the round?

And, even then, it may be difficult for others because of all the changes these new roles bring.

This is how it's likely to go:

"Wait, he was killed by a Goon? What's that?!"
"A Goon goes on alert to kill people who RB or attack the GF."
"Oh."

End of problem. (And this is how it already goes with new and semi-new players.)

The Host would have experience with these roles while others wouldnt, I see this as potentially a very big balancement issue as well.

It's not an issue at all, since players already have lesser or no experience with roles that already exist in the game.

How many times have you seen: "Isn't Doctor a Support role?" or "Sheriff visited the SK and got auto-attacked!"?

Now I'm not saying that sort of thing is good, and not that more confusion should be heaped on.

All I'm saying is that we can't pretend new roles in the shop would somehow miraculously cause confusion when it's already in the game in spades.

The host wouldn't really have any more "experience" with a role than a veteran player has over a noob. So what's the new problem?

[Ansem555]

Just to throw a bit of opinion (I skimmed a lot of this, so forgive me missing any points), I still say it should be done as a group project. Why do I say still when I just got to this thread in particular? Because a long time ago I suggested we follow an example similar to Board Game Online's Donation Thermometer. Honestly, Its given me a few incentives to re-donate when things came up for it I want, new Classes being the big ones. To explain:

- They make a new Thermometer littered with new Classes you could become now and then for them to create.
- Most of those were free to play for all to join a collection of current Classes.
- Some required you to have donated X amount to get them (added to ranks of other Donate Classes).
- Sometimes Class Reworks happened/were put up for them to do to make certain ones better or more balanced.
- When the top goal is reached, anyone can play these Classes even if the thermometer has nothing to do with them for a limited (24 hours) time.

This matters because it doesn't stop the game from being playable for everyone by still having a great majority be free to play as. You can still play roles, a majority could be free to play, and you could get some perks by helping the company by donating and be allowed to see the progress made as a group. Still monetizing, but giving group incentive towards goals for the game and would make the Devs set goals for themselves ("If we put this on the Guillotine bar, we need to st down and work on that. Better UI is at the top, get the artist to start working on that while we get it building"). Note that the parenthesis is not "UI needs update now" but is just an example of something that could be on it.

EDIT: Quick edit, this does work. I have seem them fill up one to two thermometers a month, sometimes only a little less during a slow time. But if there's something everyone really wants, they will chip in. And like ToS, you get Coins to spend on Cosmetics for donating.
EDIT 2: Also, not just new roles. But also new Cosmetics you can buy have been on BGO's Thermometers, re-done art (or art for things that never had any), could also work towards giving people new free maps as well as buyable ones, sort of like the Roles we'd get from this method.

[Jedicode3]

No one really wants to pay anything i really dont want to but when it comes down to i already bought a steam version ive bought skins i mean if we arnt and what i want most is roles id like the chance to make some of my money go towards that improvement as well this idea isnt perfect but none of the idea on this forum are perfect and i dont want this game to die because people are getting bored with nothing new skins are great but they arnt gonna bring in players i mean ooo a dino for pet cool but if people arnt gonna want to play tos when thats all thereis to show for updates

[yonks012]

I like the idea, but I can see this causing a lot of problems in-game. People already head into ranked and don't know the difference between Transporters and Witches, keep night logs, or how WW works, I don't see why they+more will bother to learn roles that they won't be playing.

[Mroz4k]

@Tormental


Well, yes, I presumed a lot of things, but arent you doing the same thing? Just presuming the opposite way.

You used argument that teens buy a lot of things for mobile phones etc - yes, that is true, but you dont usually use bank account to purchase those, you use your phone credit. As such its a lot easier for teens to get something for a mobile game rather then TOS where you have to use a bank account. Most teens dont have a bank account. And while some would use their parent´s ones, I doubt a lot of parents would agree with this. Some would, I am not saying it would be impossible for teens to buy these things, but it would be far from common.

your argument with Goon - That description gives a player an idea what the role is about but doesnt give him idea how to play such role, what else to expect from it, what to look out for... which is things that the Host would know since he would be more familiar with the role in general. And, I kind of doubt someone would even answer that question, its pretty much like saying "hey, I am the Host" and since he have clearly bigger experience with these roles, people are more likely to pick such player off, especially if they were one of these roles.

And, you havent even adressed the fact that there can be new roles in a rolelist which is something only Host would know, and nobody else.

Another problem i see with this - Investigator results. All these new roles would probably have new, unique Investigator results. So, lets say the Sniper says: Your target uses a big rifle. They must be Sniper, 133tNo-scoper or Farmer. So, unless both of those other roles were also in the game, it would be pretty much dead giveaway...

I dont think the game really works with the idea of releasing these Roles on their own, per pay. If anything, it would have to be a balanced Role-pack which would contain a number of new roles, and that would be sold together. Then it would sort of make sense, and it would allow the game to "announce" this in the waiting lobby, that this pack along with these roles is in game.

Something like that I could get behind.

But still an issue with Host having an advantage to everyone else.


There is a bunch of other ways to go around raising money, I think those would be better.
Also your "claim" that this is the only way is a bit egoistic. Its not the only way by far, purchased "subscription" accounts sound a lot better for an idea.

Actually if said subscription brought in a pack of "subscriber-only" chooseable classes it would be a lot better money income and it would emphasize the role development as well (naturally subscribers would have a lot more benefits.)

[ICECLIMBERS]

Devs have said they wouldn't add anything that influences the game in the shop and I feel this does that.

yet they've added scrolls which literally influence the game in the purest definition of the word. don't get me wrong, the OP is a dumb idea but let's not act like the devs haven't already gone back on their promises about things like this

Scrolls don't affect which roles are in play, only the odds of you receiving that role if it is in play.

[Arckas]

yet they've added scrolls which literally influence the game in the purest definition of the word. don't get me wrong, the OP is a dumb idea but let's not act like the devs haven't already gone back on their promises about things like this

Scrolls don't affect which roles are in play, only the odds of you receiving that role if it is in play.

pretty sure that they would influence random role selections like random town and random mafia etc

Yes, they influence the RNG of it. That however is not equal to actually paying for your role specifically, just increasing the odds of it. Remember that scrolls aren't used in ranked either, so the overall consequences are not as dire as you make them out to be.

[Soiyeruda]

I think while the idea of monetizing roles in sensible, it needs a little more further elaboration so that the following doesn't occur:

1) Players who want to play for free don't feel like they need to pay for new content.

I'd argue this is the most important, as a poorly done monetization system can turn players off and away from the game. Personally, I think making the system like League of Legends would make the most sense, in which players have the starting pool of roles, but may purchase additional roles through Town Points, which means allowing players to purchase them either by paying with real money, or by playing the game enough. Roles that do not really change the game experience can be worth something like 300 TP while more complex roles that change the nature of how a game goes would be worth 1000 TP. Granted, this model works largely because of League of Legends' playerbase (it's got a ridiculously low conversion rate of around ~3-4% of players who actually spend money on the game, but 4% of 30 million is a lot better than 20% of 2 million), looking at how other games monetize and using that as inspiration can be good for coming up with a system that works for Town of Salem's playerbase.

Pairing this idea with other ways of enticing players into buying roles would also help out in converting players while also allowing free players to remain free. Eg. after winning a match, you have X% chance of getting a treasure chest that allows you to play a role you haven't unlocked 3 times.

2) It doesn't disrupt the balance of ranked games.

As shown in pretty much any other competitive game, the more characters/roles you add to the mix, the harder it becomes to balance all of them, and ultimately, some characters will be deemed better than others. This is an obvious problem that patch notes should be able to take care of, assuming that periodic balance checks are in place.

I'm more concerned about the possible interaction of people who own a role playing with those who don't own a role. The easiest solution I can think of in this case is for the role pool for a particular ranked game to only be limited to the default in addition to any other roles owned by players. Eg. in ranked game, if Person 3 owns Sniper, Person 12 owns Scientist and Magician, Person 15 doesn't own anything, Sniper, Scientist, and Magician are opened up to everyone in that game, including Person 15 who doesn't own any additional roles.

3) It doesn't cause major issues with already existing roles.
As has already been mentioned, the addition of new roles can severely mess with an Investigator's ability, where balancing after every new role addition may need to be done to ensure that an investigation doesn't give more than three, possible four potential roles. Ultimately, I see this as something that'll occur down the road, and in total, Investigator needs a overhaul anyways so it isn't strictly counterpart based, even when it puts a huge strain on roles like the Godfather and Blackmailer. Adding roles in groups could work to alleviate this.

[DizzyWaddleDoo]

No. No, no, no, fuck no.
This suggestion nearly made me gag when I first read it.
Let me leave you with this hypothetical: Say the devs add a buyable role like this. Some point after that, the role becomes very easy to win as for whatever reason (evolving meta, easy wincon, whatever). The only way you could ever possibly be this role in ranked is if you buy it. Since you've almost certainly secured a win if you receive this role, and you can only be it in ranked if you buy it, ranked has essentially become pay to win.

[Ansem555]

Except then it would be rebalanced, nerfed or re-tuned to not be OP. Happened with Medium during Alpha, people found it Underpowered, but did it stay Underpowered? Nope, it got buffed to be able to talk to all dead and Seance from the grave. It's how a game like this works, if they found the role to be too powerful they would re-adjust it, having it buyable is not the be all end all.

[DizzyWaddleDoo]

It would still be pay to win until they fix it.
Plus, considering how scrolls work, the rolelist must be rolled first before the roles are assigned. So if a random slot in ranked were to roll a buyable role, then the random role assignment can't be completely random. If only a couple people have bought the role, they're almost guaranteed to get it in that round. If multiple buyable roles roll and there aren't enough people who've bought them then what?

[Ansem555]

You'll have to deal with it until they fix it, it's how Free to Play works. League of Legends, champs are OP for a week or so (while they get their numbers to be sure it is OP or just people getting crushed by the new thing they don't understand) or UP until the next patch comes in for a round of balance changes and a lot of people buy those OP Champs for the temporary Freelo. Board Game Online, some Classes require donation while others aren't, the Assassin Class was OP for a LONG time until it got its rework to be more sensible (since it could just freely kill you and then dash ahead, leaving you behind) and the Druid was OP until they gave it a new ability and nerfed its initial power, again while people got used to it existing. Even passtime games like Cookie Clicker and Clicker Heroes have shifts in their balance, cheapening costs, adding things to make it easier, adding new expensive things and nerfing the effectiveness of some.

It's the nature of the beast.

[Tormental]

Well, yes, I presumed a lot of things, but arent you doing the same thing? Just presuming the opposite way.

I'm suggesting possibilities. I didn't really say things like "Teens will love this and purchase a ton of roles." etc.

your argument with Goon - That description gives a player an idea what the role is about but doesnt give him idea how to play such role, what else to expect from it, what to look out for...

That's how all current roles work. You log in to play the game and learn as you go or you read the wiki. What you describe is nothing different from the current game.

[...] since he have clearly bigger experience with these roles, people are more likely to pick such player off, especially if they were one of these roles.

We're back to pure speculation presented as fact, here. Also now sure how you're saying everyone will know they were the host and what their role is in-game.

And, you havent even adressed the fact that there can be new roles in a rolelist which is something only Host would know, and nobody else.

Yes, I did. If you missed it you can look back. I don't want to start repeating things a lot, etc.

Another problem i see with this - Investigator results. All these new roles would probably have new, unique Investigator results. So, lets say the Sniper says: Your target uses a big rifle. They must be Sniper, 133tNo-scoper or Farmer. So, unless both of those other roles were also in the game, it would be pretty much dead giveaway...

This is a problem with any roles BMG adds and has nothing to do with my suggestion.

I dont think the game really works with the idea of releasing these Roles on their own, per pay. If anything, it would have to be a balanced Role-pack which would contain a number of new roles, and that would be sold together. Then it would sort of make sense, and it would allow the game to "announce" this in the waiting lobby, that this pack along with these roles is in game.

Put bluntly - This actually makes no sense. You're saying the problems (or some problems) will be solved if roles are released in packs instead of being released as they're completed. "Per Role" gives people time to learn about that one role together. "Role Pack" releases multiple roles at once, and that can only add to confusion and can do nothing to make it simpler than "per role".

But still an issue with Host having an advantage to everyone else.

This is not an issue at all, actually. Look at release of Werewolf and Forger. Just because someone played it a couple times didn't mean it was a horrible experience for people who hadn't gotten it for weeks after release.

There is a bunch of other ways to go around raising money, I think those would be better.

And? I mean, that has no relation to whether or not this could be done too.

Also your "claim" that this is the only way is a bit egoistic.

I've never said that. This is putting words in others' mouths again, which I don't think you did before but has been requested to be left out of the discussion.

Its not the only way by far, purchased "subscription" accounts sound a lot better for an idea.

Then suggest it outside this thread?

[Tormental]

[...] the OP is a dumb idea [...]

"Dumb" is a bit misleading to use. It's just something you do or do not like/want.

Let me leave you with this hypothetical:

Hypothetical, usually favor the pre-existing position of the hypothesizer.

[VoidRuler]

I don't like this idea. Town of Salem isn't meant to be a Pay-To-Win or Microtransaction based game. Town of Salem already received more than enough money through both of their Kickstarters. I do understand that money won't last forever, but it's definitely enough to not turn this game into a glorified F2P but Pay-To-Win game for PC. I try to purchase whenever I can to help the game, I even bought the Steam client. Not to mention they make revenue off the ads displayed on the browser version each time someone goes to the page, and the fact they added in a way to get points for viewing ads.

Also, I don't think that adding too many roles to the point of where it is hard to remember all of them and what they come up as, as they ruins the purpose of the game and process of elimination. Not to mention, the devs have already been taking their precious time to make the new and previously new roles. It took them several months to come out with Werewolf and Forger, and has taken them around a year now to release Vampire and Vampire Hunter. They won't be able to release new roles every now and then like this would require them to.

There is also the gameplay aspect. If this was implemented, it would have to be in every mode but Ranked, same with scrolls; to keep Ranked as fair as it can be. And even in modes that aren't Ranked, I can see this being a gamebreaking issue. First of all, if they want people to buy it, they have to make them "really powerful", which would most likely make them unbalanced and OP compared to the other roles, basically turning this into Pay-To-Win. People can even say that they have unlocked that role, and that they're confirmed to get that role with a scroll, making them have an unfair advantage. Scrolls are a nice idea to me, as they're optional and you don't need them, but "payed roles" are not.

EDIT: To have payed roles, you would be locking off a portion of the game to people for payment. I do know that this is something done in the industry now-a-days through DLC and micro-transcations, but I really don't want TOS to go down that route. None of the current things that require purchase or TP are necessary or part of the actual gameplay. Scrolls and all the aesthetics from the shop are merely optional, nor take away from the core game itself. This does. People don't even know what exactly they're getting or if they like it or not while purchasing. If I purchased a "Sniper" role, but not knowing the strategies or if I like it personally, then that would be completely useless to me.

[Tormental]

I don't like this idea.

Fair enough. That's basically the valid part.

Town of Salem isn't meant to be a Pay-To-Win

Nothing about this is even vaguely "pay to win".

or Microtransaction based game.

Yes it is.

Town of Salem already received more than enough money through both of their Kickstarters.

Apparently not, according to BMG.

[...] a glorified F2P but Pay-To-Win game for PC.

Again, allowing people to buy a balanced role they can add for ANYONE TO GET in their hosted custom rounds is not pay-to-win in any regard. Being able to possibly get your paid role if you get "Random Town", "Random Neutral", etc. is not pay-to-win in any regard. This has been totally dismissed.

I try to purchase whenever I can to help the game, I even bought the Steam client.

So why comment "they have more than enough money" to bolster your opinion?

You acted as if that greatly mattered for some reason, yet you have no issues paying?

Also, I don't think that adding too many roles to the point of where it is hard to remember all of them and what they come up as, as they ruins the purpose of the game and process of elimination.

Pure presumption that this is what would happen.

Not to mention, the devs have already been taking their precious time to make the new and previously new roles.

If you read the original post, it says that I proposed this in part to help spur the Devs to make more roles quicker.

They won't be able to release new roles every now and then like this would require them to.

100% speculation.

If this was implemented, it would have to be in every mode but Ranked,

This is a non-point, tbh.

And even in modes that aren't Ranked, I can see this being a gamebreaking issue.

There is nothing game-breaking about it. If you disagree, please do cite some likely examples.

First of all, if they want people to buy it, they have to make them "really powerful",

Completely incorrect and based on nothing. Is the Pirate skin pack "really powerful"?

[...] basically turning this into Pay-To-Win.

This is essentially becoming a buzz word for you, isn't it?

People can even say that they have unlocked that role, and that they're confirmed to get that role with a scroll, making them have an unfair advantage.

This statement makes zero sense.

Scrolls are a nice idea to me, as they're optional and you don't need them, but "payed roles" are not.

Incorrect. Extra "extended" pay roles are entirely optional and you don't need them in the method I proposed.

To have payed roles, you would be locking off a portion of the game to people for payment.

Incorrect. I feel as if you did not read the post as this is specifically opposite of what I said.

None of the current things that require purchase or TP are necessary or part of the actual gameplay.

Incorrect. Scrolls affect game play before the game even begins. People also sometimes target basic starter skins/houses like they do randomly chosen names. (Cotton Mather, etc.) It's not as often as the name thing, but hey - it affects rounds.

Scrolls and all the aesthetics from the shop are merely optional, nor take away from the core game itself. This does.

No it absolutely does not. You're simply making a random statement based on nothing presented.

People don't even know what exactly they're getting or if they like it or not while purchasing. If I purchased a "Sniper" role, but not knowing the strategies or if I like it personally, then that would be completely useless to me.

Incorrect. The role would theoretically be explained in the shop. You're simply presuming it wouldn't to suit your wants.

[DizzyWaddleDoo]

Not to mention, the devs have already been taking their precious time to make the new and previously new roles.

If you read the original post, it says that I proposed this in part to help spur the Devs to make more roles quicker.

It takes time for a role to get made. This won't change that, the most it could do is make them want to make more roles and ignore everything else that needs doing.

They won't be able to release new roles every now and then like this would require them to.

100% speculation.

See above

First of all, if they want people to buy it, they have to make them "really powerful",

Completely incorrect and based on nothing. Is the Pirate skin pack "really powerful"?

People probably aren't going to buy a role they think is weak. If medium, for example, was buyable, who would buy it? Almost no one. That's his point. Also LOL at that last part. Of course the pirate pack isn't really powerful. It's an aesthetics pack with some scrolls and coins, it literally can't be powerful.

Scrolls are a nice idea to me, as they're optional and you don't need them, but "payed roles" are not.

Incorrect. Extra "extended" pay roles are entirely optional and you don't need them in the method I proposed.

Yeah, but anyone who exclusively plays ranked, like lots of people do, are forced to buy them if they want to get everything they can get out of the game.

To have payed roles, you would be locking off a portion of the game to people for payment.

Incorrect. I feel as if you did not read the post as this is specifically opposite of what I said.

See above

None of the current things that require purchase or TP are necessary or part of the actual gameplay.

Incorrect. Scrolls affect game play before the game even begins. People also sometimes target basic starter skins/houses like they do randomly chosen names. (Cotton Mather, etc.) It's not as often as the name thing, but hey - it affects rounds.

Scrolls don't affect anything after roll selection though. This does. And the targeting thing is entirely part of the meta, not the game.

Scrolls and all the aesthetics from the shop are merely optional, nor take away from the core game itself. This does.

No it absolutely does not. You're simply making a random statement based on nothing presented.

Again, anyone playing ranked is locked out of these roles if they don't buy them. I'd consider that detracting from the game.

And I noticed you completely ignored my post on how this would mess with ranked.