Character Slot Fee even for your first (only) character?

[captainpicard]

I think the point is:

You wouldn't subscribe unless you had at least one character, ergo, why not simple state the subscription cost in a plain, straightforward, unambiguous way, for example

"The subscription fee is $9.99 per month. If you want more than one character, there is a $3.00 fee for each additional character."

That is a lot more unambiguous.

Plenty of people will reply that "the way they have communicated it is completely clear" but then, if that were true, we wouldn't have seen a number of different threads on this subject, now would we?

[ChiefCurrahee]

I think the point is:

You wouldn't subscribe unless you had at least one character, ergo, why not simple state the subscription cost in a plain, straightforward, unambiguous way, for example

"The subscription fee is $9.99 per month. If you want more than one character, there is a $3.00 fee for each additional character."

That is a lot more unambiguous.

Plenty of people will reply that "the way they have communicated it is completely clear" but then, if that were true, we wouldn't have seen a number of different threads on this subject, now would we?

If you think about it, it gives the player better options.

Your line of thought: "why not charge 12.99 flat out? Because in order to play you need a character"

this is why:
If you ever created more than 1 character you would always pay 12.99 +3.00 a month.

Under the pricing of 9.99 for a sub fee +3.00 for a character fee you are allowed to choose what character you want to main w/o having to pay for the one you aren't currently playing.

You are given the option to choose what character slots you want active instead of always having one autoactive tied to the sub fee.

so i can have this:
Characters:

Hank (not active)
Betty (not active)
Sam (active) +3.00
James (not active)
Jill (active) +3.00
Linda (not active)
Casey (not active)

Sub fee: 9.99

total cost month: 15.99

instead of
Hank (ALWAYS active because tied to subfee)
Betty (not active)
Sam (active) +3.00
James (not active)
Jill (active) +3.00
Linda (not active)
Casey (not active)

Sub fee: 12.99

total: 18.99

[ispano]

If you think about it, it gives the player better options.

Your line of thought: "why not charge 12.99 flat out? Because in order to play you need a character"

this is why:
If you ever created more than 1 character you would always pay 12.99 +3.00 a month.

Under the pricing of 9.99 for a sub fee +3.00 for a character fee you are allowed to choose what character you want to main w/o having to pay for the one you aren't currently playing.

You are given the option to choose what character slots you want active instead of always having one autoactive tied to the sub fee.

I'm not the only one who knew this?

[TinnySnips]

If you think about it, it gives the player better options.

Your line of thought: "why not charge 12.99 flat out? Because in order to play you need a character"

this is why:
If you ever created more than 1 character you would always pay 12.99 +3.00 a month.

Under the pricing of 9.99 for a sub fee +3.00 for a character fee you are allowed to choose what character you want to main w/o having to pay for the one you aren't currently playing.

You are given the option to choose what character slots you want active instead of always having one autoactive tied to the sub fee.

so i can have this:
Characters:

Hank (not active)
Betty (not active)
Sam (active) +3.00
James (not active)
Jill (active) +3.00
Linda (not active)
Casey (not active)

Sub fee: 9.99

total cost month: 15.99

instead of
Hank (ALWAYS active because tied to subfee)
Betty (not active)
Sam (active) +3.00
James (not active)
Jill (active) +3.00
Linda (not active)
Casey (not active)

Sub fee: 12.99

total: 18.99

The only way this scheme offers more options is if the 1st slot were tightly coupled to the sub. They could charge a flat rate for service + 1 active character slot. There is no need for the tight coupling. A company does not regain the faith of its customers by attempting to fool them with unnecessarily complex pricing schemes.

[ispano]

The only way this scheme offers more options is if the 1st slot were tightly coupled to the sub. They could charge a flat rate for service + 1 active character slot. There is no need for the tight coupling. A company does not regain the faith of its customers by attempting to fool them with unnecessarily complex pricing schemes.

And yet, it's not. 9.99 Subscription, $3 per character (and $1 per extra retainer if they keep that)

I fail to see how it's complex. Regardless of whether the character is the first or fifth, it still costs $3 for that character slot.

[Deminia]

The only way this scheme offers more options is if the 1st slot were tightly coupled to the sub. They could charge a flat rate for service + 1 active character slot. There is no need for the tight coupling. A company does not regain the faith of its customers by attempting to fool them with unnecessarily complex pricing schemes.

Exactly. Especially considering this is a company trying to save face after a disastrous launch.

[Deminia]

If you think about it, it gives the player better options.

Your line of thought: "why not charge 12.99 flat out? Because in order to play you need a character"

this is why:
If you ever created more than 1 character you would always pay 12.99 +3.00 a month.

Under the pricing of 9.99 for a sub fee +3.00 for a character fee you are allowed to choose what character you want to main w/o having to pay for the one you aren't currently playing.

You are given the option to choose what character slots you want active instead of always having one autoactive tied to the sub fee.

so i can have this:
Characters:

Hank (not active)
Betty (not active)
Sam (active) +3.00
James (not active)
Jill (active) +3.00
Linda (not active)
Casey (not active)

Sub fee: 9.99

total cost month: 15.99

instead of
Hank (ALWAYS active because tied to subfee)
Betty (not active)
Sam (active) +3.00
James (not active)
Jill (active) +3.00
Linda (not active)
Casey (not active)

Sub fee: 12.99

total: 18.99

While agree with your logic here, I still don't see why they could not simply make the base price include 1 active character slot (which you could select from any of your character slots). If you have paid for a gaming subscription, then 1 active character should be included and not be considered another fee.

I don't see any reason - other than to mislead - to have a separate "service fee" when you can't use the service without yet another fee, only that is nearly half again the price of the service.

Note: And for the folks mentioning $12.99 - the fees have been reduced for the next several months (which you can see if you check the fees article posted on the main Lodestone page). The new fee is $6.99 "service" plus $3 per character slot, at least for those paying in US currency.

[ChiefCurrahee]

While agree with your logic here, I still don't see why they could not simply make the base price include 1 active character slot (which you could select from any of your character slots). If you have paid for a gaming subscription, then 1 active character should be included and not be considered another fee.

That is exactly what they are doing:

they say it costs 12.99 (or what ever the reduced price is to play) per month total.

This is the break down:

you have 9.99 for your service fee
and you pay 3.00 for each character you have active fee.

It always gonna be 12.99.

however they aren't forcing you into having 1 static character always tied to you service fee regardless of wanting or not wanting to play that character. You get to choose which one and when.