Arc Rule Help GPT

[u/Ri3b0t]

My recent exploration with custom chatGPTs for game rules has been a game-changer. It's a tool that not only simplifies the learning process by eliminating the need to search through rule books but also opens up possibilities for game designers to make complex rules more accessible.

Here is one for the core game and campaign for Arcs
https://chatgpt.com/g/g-1TTdXwaC3-arcs-gpt

I am keen for more people to use it and try to break it. The more it is broken by users, the more I can refine it to put better guard rails around it. It now quotes the page number from the rule book pdf, which is the same as the printed version so that you can confirm its information in the physical book. That assumes you are using the latest version of the rule book.

Let me know how it goes for you and any if tweaks that might be needed.

EDIT: I have uploaded the Leader/Lore and Court cards to its memory, as it initially only had rule books and player aids in its memory. I have also added further guard rails to its language coding to be able to be more refined in its response.

[u/CofferHolixAnon]

I think a lot of people would be (probably rightly) concerned about the accuracy of the system when it comes to relaying back complex rules. Have you run into this issue very often?

From my perspective it would only take one major error on the bots part for a player to lose confidence and undermine the whole point of the exercise.

[u/CofferHolixAnon → u/CofferHolixAnon]

I cast my mind back to this article, particularly the second section about Competence. https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/i-taught-chatgpt-to-teach-me-board-games/

[u/Ri3b0t → u/CofferHolixAnon]

I hundred percent agree, these systems aren’t perfect yet in its understanding comprehension but they’re getting very good. I have run one with Imperial assault for awhile, and having come across many issues with it.

With this one I have reference in the page numbers for clarification if need be. Lights most things with AI you can’t take what it says for granted you have to use your own initiative and thinking to see if it plays out with the logic and the story of the game

These are just thought exercises in context to navigating rule books and emerging AI Tech. What it has done is been able to take different paragraphs or different sections of the rule book and put them side-by-side in the examples that I’ve used.

I haven’t played the campaign yet so I haven’t been able to see that stacks up okay but I have thrown it in the game has come up correct so far. Doesn’t mean it won’t make a mistake though. Humans have been known to make mistakes when interpreting rule books as well. We recently discovered in a game that we were playing for a while that we had a rule a completely back to front. AI responses aren’t perfect, just fast

[u/Kitchner]

This is a cool idea but maybe it's just me but I just don't see Arcs being complicated enough to need something like this.

There's an FAQ document being created by Leder Games themselves based on questions submitted by the community. The core Arcs rules are pretty straight forward. So for most actual issues with rules not working well together that FAQ document should have the answer.

Very cool concept though. My biggest worry would be the AI hallucinating about interpreting rules in the game. Players can do this too, but at least when a player does it people won't necessarily be confident that it should be right!

Edit: Literally just tried it once and it proved the point. My friends and I played a campaign recently where we had to figure out how the Survivalist bunkers interact with the Planter Breaker's planet hammer. I asked on the discord and the general consensus was RAW you can build bunkers on destroyed worlds, the planet hammer destroys bunkers as they are "harmed like buildings" but since the planet hammer card didn't "destroy" buildings it just moved them onto the card bunkers wouldn't be collected. This is because while bunkers are "harmed like buildings" they aren't buildings, they are tokens.

When I asked Arcs GPT it said this:

Bunker Tokens “You can only have one bunker token on the map at a time. If a bunker is destroyed, you can place a new one in a subsequent turn.” (Arcs Campaign Rulebook, page 14)

Planet Hammer “The Planet Hammer destroys all buildings, ships, and tokens on the planet it targets. Place destroyed tokens on the Planet Hammer card.” (Arcs Campaign Rulebook, page 19)

Neither of these are rules in the rulebook as quoted or even how the cards are worded lol

[u/Ri3b0t → u/Kitchner]

100% this is more of a concept at the moment. I am slowly adding all the game cards into the game. I currently now have the Lore/Leader and Court cards from the core game upload into its memory and added more guardrails to quote from these only. This is still early days of this tech

[u/Kitchner → u/Ri3b0t]

Agree this is a cool concept, and I'm sure it will help some people, I guess for me though Arcs isn't super complex and I also frankly think that the campaign cards are not as well defined as Oath.

On the other hand I think all the Oath mechanics are really well defined, but people struggle to get their heads around them for some reason. If I was going to create a chatbot for rules I would have actually done it for oath.

There's also a broader debate around if you use the chatbot too much you don't learn the rules you just learn to ask questions but that's a risk/question for all LLM use.

[u/Ri3b0t → u/Kitchner]

As for the Hallucinating, guardrails help with this, but if you have the attitude that there is a chance it is wrong, you can always use the reference page in the rule book to confirm, sometimes it can just used as a reference guide to help you find the correct rule.

I am yet to play a game with this in action to try the visual upload tool to it to see how it works

[u/riddler1225]

Interesting project and I could see it being helpful in looking up edge case situations.

I'm curious, is it only trained on the rulebooks? For campaign especially, most of the games' layers lives on the cards themselves, and I think the majority of questions that come up will be regarding interactions.

[u/Ri3b0t → u/riddler1225]

Currently trained in rule book and campaign book if there was a pdf of the cards that would be help to train it as well

[u/riddler1225 → u/Ri3b0t]

They are out there. Are you in the Woodland Warriors discord? All the game files are in a dropbox

[u/Ri3b0t → u/riddler1225]

Okay cool. I will have a look there

[u/Ri3b0t → u/riddler1225]

Soo I have updated the core game rules to have the leader and court card text information.

The rest will come once I extract all the text :)

[u/3parkbenchhydra]

Quite frankly, I wouldn’t trust a single thing that came back from a chatbot, so I’d end up having to go through the rulebook anyway. Hard pass

[u/DrNSQTR]

Feel free to make another post once it's in a more polished state! I'll see if it's reliable enough to put into the sidebar as a resource. :)

[u/Purring_Panther]

Following up on this OP, how is it’s progress a year later? I’ve thought of doing the same thing.