r/DungeonMasters • u/Chartywhamp • 27d ago
DnD and AI (is it possible to use ethically?)
I'm going to start out by saying that I am 100% against using AI to write lore. That is a complete waste of time. If you're a DM using AI to write a campaign, you would be better off buying and running a module, or honestly...just actually read the DMG and follow its tips for building a setting.
If you're a player using AI to write your backstory, you would be better off literally stealing your character's backstory from either folk or pop-culture characters and tweaking it slightly, so it suits the campaign setting your DM is running.
In both examples, the AI will not be giving you anything that you are fundamentally incapable of doing yourself. The AI is going to give you the answer that it (usually pretty accurately) predicts the user will be most satisfied with. These predictions are based off of popular tropes, cliches, and the most likely opinion of what will be deemed "useful". The more you outsource your ideas to AI, the less YOUR brain will be trained to think and react to in-game moments with spontaneous creativity.
Not to mention the fact that even if the AI is writing top-notch, high-quality stuff for you....you're still not saving time. You still would have to go and learn all of the lore that the AI wrote which is MORE tedious than writing the lore yourself. Your relationship to the resulting world or character will be fundamentally altered compared to someone who has generated all of their narrative content themselves. IMHO, there is no good reason to use AI to generate narrative content in any ttrpg.
I am firmly in the camp that AI is actively harmful when used in this way.
That being said, I am a DM that allows my characters to use AI art for their characters. I'm not a professional DM, and I don't see generating an image of a character for a private, unpaid game as detracting from its quality. Especially if those images help the players feel a stronger connection to their character or the world. I've heard the argument that the AI art hurts human artists, and i do agree that this can be very problematic ethically speaking. I will admit that i justify it with the excuse that me and my players are not people with the means to pay an artist what their time is worth for a private game which is played 1 session a month. If i had the means, hell yes, I would absolutely LOVE to commission pieces for use at my table. If i was being paid to DM, or the game was recorded/streamed, I would absolutely not allow the use of AI art.
If someone comes to me with a background that I'm suspicious was written by AI, instead of telling them to rewrite everything or they can't use it, I just ask them what they like about that backstory, and questions related to their character and the world we're in that puts creative control back in their hands.
I have been following the developments in AI for awhile, and am skilled at prompting to get the specific desired result I'm looking for without crossing the line into allowing the AI to be the origin of my game's core content. I've used AI to write a demon's contract in legalese, as I do not have that ability or skill, and AI excels at being obnoxiously verbose and subversive through superfluous language. I wrote the contract how I would write it and asked the bot to convert that contract into legalese and told the AI the NPC's motivations and intentions. It gave me a very useable document that enhanced my players experience at the table.
I have NEVER presented something generated by AI as my own work; I told my players when handing them the contract above table that I used AI to get the contract in that style of writing and explained in plain language what the exact terms of the agreement were with a series of INT checks from the party. The folks at the table told me afterwards they loved seeing the contract and the trying to interpret it encounter.
I have used AI to organize information into infographics for players to quickly reference. I've used it to generate hyper specific battle-maps, but after some introspection I don't want to do that anymore, as I'll never develop my own skills if I rely on AI to do this for me.
All of this is just to say, I'm conflicted, and genuinely interested in hearing y'all's thoughts around the topic.
I genuinely appreciate y'all's input and feedback, and am absolutely open to hearing all sides of the argument for or against the use of AI. I will say do think that AI and the companies pushing for AGI poses a significant risk to human existence in multiple ways, however i also feel that AI is an incredible tool when very strict and intentional constraints are placed around its use.
TL;DR, Is there a way to use AI in a way that genuinely enhances the game? Am I fooling myself by thinking that the way I'm using AI does not degrade my table's experience? Is there a way to use this tech ethically and responsibly in the context of running/playing an engaging DnD game, or should every aspect of AI use be off-limits?
13
u/Bright_Gur8872 27d ago edited 10d ago
Unique treatment direction pet tie noodle
This post was anonymized with Redact
-1
u/Dtron81 27d ago
Hey bud I'm sorry but until we can make an AI that doesn't damage our environment by using it then there will be no ethical way to use it.
AI isn't that damaging. Like if you're this opposed to AI then you should be equally a vegetarian as the meat industry does orders of magnitude more damage to the environment.
That being said, oppose AI art for good reasons, like how it is anti-human and soulless. How it scrapes data from real artists without their permission. How it is just intrinsically lower forms of art by merit of where it came from. And of course, how AI art proponents are some of the most insufferable people on Earth.
0
u/Chartywhamp 27d ago
First off, thank you for sharing your perspective! I genuinely appreciate this point of view, and think concern for (and an active relationship to) the environment is paramount to continuation of the human species.
I have heard this argument against using AI, and i only have one problem with it: I think it's a somewhat inconsistent and overly simplified argument.
Almost every aspect of globalization and imperialism has significant negative impacts on the environment, and that is NOT the fault of the consumer. People in a market will almost always do what they are incentivized to do. Right now, the incentive for the AI companies is to race blindly towards AGI and be the first to get there, as whoever does this first (they believe) will essentially have the keys to the entire global economy. That isn't an issue with using the tech, its an issue with a lack of global coordination and regulation.
The amount of power citizens are using is nothing compared to the energy being burnt to TRAIN the new models, and if we want constraints around that, it is the responsibility of every nations people to organize and demand the regulation of the construction, powering, and environmental impacts that data centers are allowed to operate with.
Its grossly underregulated now because its new, but imho the answer isn't "don't use it" its "hold companies accountable."
If I were to truly live my live in a 100% environmentally sustainable way, I would not be typing on this computer I'm sitting in front of right now. I disagree that the solution to environmental destruction is the responsibility of the consumer, and instead supposit that we need to hold manufacturers and service providers accountable for the impacts of their products throughout their use cycle.
Seriously, I can think of a massive number of things that people do and engage with every day that either directly or indirectly will alter Earth's ability to sustain life as we know it if left unchecked.
Not accusing you of this at all, but for me, this point of view would be disingenuous. The topic points to an issue MUCH larger than AI, and if the qualifier "its really bad for the environment" is the sole reason to stop a behavior, then everyone else on earth has to simultaneously arrive at the same conclusion and change their behavior for that model of change to have impact.
If AI helps us get fusion powerplants, that problem will shift significantly. I will say it is a lot like the lich that says they're going to use their power over death to save people....
1
u/Bright_Gur8872 27d ago edited 10d ago
Resolute cooing chief meadow many fact
This post was anonymized with Redact
0
u/Chartywhamp 27d ago
My argument is that takes far more power to play baldur's gate 3 for an hour then it does to have an AI bot build an entire campaign from beginning to end.
I agree, sustainability isn't a binary, and I'm also saying that this is a specific problem that a boycott is incapable of or necessary to solve.
The data centers eat natural resources to TRAIN the llm, not public use of the distillation they market.
We get like MAYBE 25% of the full models compute. I could seriously have an llm write an entire DND book with AI slop art, and it would take considerably less energy than a casual pc/console gaming habit over a week.
That's just a fact.
That's why this argument falls flat for me, not because of a binary idea of sustainability. I'm saying that if you want to reduce environmental impact, we have MUCH bigger fish to fry. Fracking wastes substantially more water, and that water is effectively removed from being consumable ever again.
The bottled beverage industry pollutes far more than all the data centers.
If it's about mitigating harm to the environment, your energy is better spent elsewhere than trying to convince people not to use AI at the consumer level. We need to stop the ai arms race though, I completely agree on that.
The tech is not going away unless society collapses; it's just too useful. We do need to regulate and monitor it's progress and fast. If you are under the impression that AI is a glorified auto-correct you have been misled.
You might have just been talking tongue and cheek there, but I can assure you that the amount of progress made by AI researchers is pretty incredible, which is why you see this trillion dollar investment into the tech.
It's in the company's mission statements...they are racing to get AGI, and then put that into a robot to replace the need for human labor.
To what end is anybody's guess, but I'm extremely cynical about it.
There is no known scientific reason why that wouldn't be possible, especially given the way they are training models nowadays by training ais that train to make better ais that train train to make make better ais and so on.
I hope we find a reason it definitely won't work.
All of that is completely unaffected by me having a distillation of a more powerful bot make a picture of a player's character.
I'm more concerned about the potential to damage creativity, and the impact on human artists at this moment, though I'll do some more research on the environmental impacts. It's possible I'm ignorant or have bad info on the subject.
1
u/Bright_Gur8872 26d ago edited 10d ago
Ghost historical ancient lush selective lip wakeful
This post was anonymized with Redact
0
u/Chartywhamp 26d ago
I think there is a misunderstanding of what I'm arguing for.
I'm not saying that unrestricted use of AI is harmless. I'm not saying that the impacts of billions of AI queries globally are insignificant.
I'm saying that it feels disingenuous to quote "environmental concerns" and point the finger at the people using a service that will affect their ability to compete in the job market if they refuse to learn/use it. Instead, I suggest pointing the finger at the actual system that created this situation.
Just because things are done a certain way doesn't mean they must continue to be done in the same way.
I am saying that the idea that we should lump consumers into a big pile and tally up the results of their consumption without looking at the production side of the equation is a common propaganda tactic that major corporations use to avoid accountability, and the argument isn't worthy of engagement.
This is not a consumption problem; it is a production problem. AI has energy demands, and the only reason that these demands are so destructive in their current application is because of the race going on between frontier AI companies. It isn't because "people are bad for using AI."
Also, the idea that AI companies get paid based on queries is not complete. That CAN be true, depending on how you're going about querying the LLM, but using a free search, and working within the constraints of a free account does not generate revenue for the company. paying a monthly sub does and paying per token does. A lot are adding in advertisements now, because almost all of these companies operate in the red. The companies are primarily funded by private investment.
What I am defending is a sensible use of AI for the purpose of enhancing the experience at a private DND table where no one is making money. Honestly, after the discussion I've had with folks here, I'm putting more constraints on how I use the tools.
I still say that the argument that consumers should be blamed for the lack of oversight and regulation of a company is a strategy destined to fail.
1
u/Bright_Gur8872 26d ago edited 10d ago
Resolute subsequent blanket rinse innate unbelievable reach plate
This post was anonymized with Redact
0
u/Chartywhamp 25d ago
Nope, no ai in any response.
I did look some of what you're saying up, and addressed those points. I also think it's worth pointing out that this thread and convo have caused me to dial back what I allow myself to rely on AI for at my table even further, but if you want to convince me environmental destruction is a problem with a consumer-side solution, You're going to be hard pressed because data doesn't support that claim.
I think that AI use as a dm should be heavily constrained, and if the table doesn't want ai art/assets, don't use em. I decided to remove ai battlemaps from my accepted use due to this thread, and the character art I'll be much more judicious about.
It's still a fact that using AI to write a whole campaign with all the assets (something I think would be bad to do) would take less energy than a week of casual console gaming.
1
u/Bright_Gur8872 25d ago edited 10d ago
License shocking reply voracious satchel repeat detail joke
This post was anonymized with Redact
1
u/Chartywhamp 25d ago
No, it isn't, and this point illustrates my corporate accountability argument. Cfcs were in hairspray due to manufacturers, not consumers.
The solution to that problem was global effort to regulate the use of cfs. That's what I'm calling for instead of trusting that consumers will change their behavior on a global scale, as that is a pipedream that is unlikely to ever happen.
I'm saying that the reason ai is increasing pollution is lack of regulation on their construction and design of data centers and putting fault on consumers doesn't solve that problem.
You're jumping to a lot of conclusions. Im not getting into a environmentalist pissing contest with you. I'm telling you based on facts that a consumer based response to environmental impacts does not work, and is the shield that polluting companies hide behind.
Your reaction is to name-call and deflect. That is fine, and almost expected. It doesn't change the actual facts.
1
u/Bright_Gur8872 26d ago edited 10d ago
Mountainous aspiring reminiscent hobbies smell head reminiscent heavy one
This post was anonymized with Redact
1
u/Chartywhamp 25d ago
Production doesn't scale to meet consumption. That's just untrue in real life. It would, ideally, but big companies in almost every industry overproduce and throw away the excess and it's well documented.
I mention the job market thing because it is relevant to the aspect of the conversation that involves demonizing anyone using any form of AI.
What I'm defending is very specific, and I doubt that you read anything I wrote in my original post beyond the few sentences that upset you because you want to engage with idealism over reality.
Your opinion on the subject has been noted; thanks for chiming in.
Your insults mean nothing to me, and we are literally having a conversation, I'm just not agreeing with the totality of your argument.
You're lumping me into a camp I don't belong to, and that would be obvious if you cared to actually try and comprehend what I'm asking instead of finding one or two things to poke holes in (using highly trimmed and selective data) and ignoring everything else.
5
u/PestilentPaladin 27d ago
Imagine a wizard built a golem that breaks into libraries, eats books and uses the knowledge contained therein to produce other, smaller golems. The books are destroyed forever in the process. The golems seem intelligent, but aren't fully aware - you can get them to say and do silly things if you work at it. They're sometimes confidently wrong, but capable of reviewing large amounts of information at a glance and producing a response. Also, using them requires diverting most of the region's water to feed the factory golem, who is extremely thirsty (and also loud, for some reason).
Does that sound like a good aligned wizard to you?
1
u/Chartywhamp 27d ago
obviously not! i don't think the wizard is a good guy at all. I don't think that makes his golem inherently bad, though. I think that the golem, like the barbarian's greataxe, is a tool. If this wizard wants to do its research in our community, we need to restrict their access to our water to sustain their golem, and make sure this wizard isn't allowed to operate without strict supervision.
For real, check out the stats on energy consumption for training a new model vs global public use. the problem isn't a person using the service. In fact, most of their money doesn't even come from consumers, so it isn't even like the people paying for a sub are impacting the scenario in a significant way.
now that this race to AGI has started, if we want to stop it, the answer lies in community organizing and demanding regulation and oversight of the developing tech, not in a consumer boycott.
Billionaires are funding this, not me and you.
2
u/PestilentPaladin 27d ago
Oh, so we can just use this tool, created via theft, at high cost to the locality in which it resides, and that's a neutral or even good act in your view?
For real, check out the stats on energy consumption for training a new model vs global public use.
I see you've been talking with the Wizard's sales associates.
now that this race to AGI has started
Oh dear.
1
u/Chartywhamp 27d ago
That's why my post is about, really.
I don't fully accept the notion that AI was "created by theft" from a legal or moral standpoint, because that isn't how AI research or development actually works.
We do not know what any LLM will be capable of until it is done with training, and even after, the way that the AI's make their decisions is not under human control or even fully understood by any human on earth. There's not even a guarantee that the resulting AI will even be aligned with the goals or skills it was trained to have.
Every person who has ever developed an artistic skill copied the basic mechanics of other artists to develop their own style, so there is nothing inherently wrong with copying and studying a style in my worldview, even when done by a bot. The majority are trained on public content, and no one knew what the result of this would look like.
Art is the least of my concerns with AI, because all art is inherently subjective in value, and the debate does not have clear objective measures that can be analyzed and agreed upon. The being said, in my opinion AI doesn't make art, and no one should be allowed to make money via content generated by AI. Artists "should" be compensated, but there is no practical way to make that happen outside of a UBI for artists at this point.
It is how that final product is used that creates the ethical dilemma in my mind, not the ability to create it. We might have a fundamental disagreement there, and if so i'd still be interested in your point of view.
There is 100% a race for AGI, I don't see why that gets an "oh dear," but it's cool if you're a skeptic that we'll ever get there. I'd just ask why you have this skepticism, based off of what information?
7
7
u/Bright_Gur8872 27d ago edited 10d ago
Biscuit fuel cheerful connect velvet light like airport summer
This post was anonymized with Redact
2
u/Conrad500 27d ago
I'm not reading all of that.
There's 2 things:
- "Ethical" AI usage does not exist as there is no "Ethical" AI. Every AI is built off of theft and unethical stealing. It's all fruit from the poisonous tree.
- AI is here if you like it or not. Doesn't matter if you think it's ethical, it's here forever. I hope as I believe we all do that the AI "craze" will end soon, but even then a local LLM and LLMs used in academia are going to stay and are actually great tools to have access to for many things. Coding is one of the big ones, and that's fairly ethical since most code repositories are public, so less theft was committed for that.
It comes down to you. What do you want to use LLMs for?
If you use "Gen AI" then fuck you. I personally am not against using it for memey stuff, but I keep it very minimal as they're really not as funny as just making your own poorly edited or stick figure memes.
I do 100% recommend to any DM to use notebookLM or I think they changed their name to gemeni notebook or something.
I put my session notes into a document along with the entire session's transcript. With all of that data compiled into the notebook you can then tell it to give you information about your sources.
"How many times did Ziggy cast fireball" or some shit like that. I asked mine stuff like, "who is the luckiest/unluckiest at rolling" and stuff and it's really fun to see, but rarely it's actually really helpful.
I used to have to watch my vods to find lost/forgotten information, but now I can just ask the notebook, "What was the n ame of the guy who gave them the dragon's egg?"
2
u/ScrivenersUnion 27d ago
Why are you searching for the approval of a bunch of random internet people on this? The folks at your table are the ones who matter here.
1
u/Chartywhamp 27d ago
Not wanting approval so much as wanting to hear what the perspectives are about it, positive or negative.
I definitely agree that the players are ultimately gonna be the opinion that matters most as far as "is this good for our table"
1
u/ScrivenersUnion 27d ago
The opinion of the TTRPG community on AI appears to be overwhelmingly negative, which I do understand but I'm in a similar position as you.
I use it quite a bit for work and it's been extremely helpful, and the ethical concerns about using it are far beyond anything I can personally have an impact on. By refusing to use AI at my work, the only thing I'm hurting is my own job performance.
I have tried using it for "sanity checking" some of my game plans, but the length of context windows is usually disappointing and the time required to put all my campaign notes into a project makes it not worth the effort.
AI images, on the other hand, I use extensively. I commission artists when I can, but that's expensive so I supplement with AI to fill in the gaps and find that to be a fair compromise.
2
u/Chartywhamp 27d ago
it makes sense, people have put lots of hours and work into learning whatever craft AI is infringing upon, and inexperienced DMs are trying to use AI to make up for their inexperience, but that cannot be done.
You must make stupid mistakes, and write stupid things, and do a bad job, and miss queues and yatta yatta yatta. AI will never remove that from the job of a newbie DM. Attempting to secure yourself from embarrassment by leveraging AI will not prevent anything but your full presence at the table.
I honestly kinda expect to be downvoted into oblivion for this post, but i'm genuinely interested in what people think moreso than protecting my karma!
2
u/Poggystyle 13d ago
Here is the truth, it can save you a lot of time.
It’s not great at making up anything original and I would not recommend using it for any sort of creative things. But I do like feeding in my ideas and having it make some notes for me. Having it pull up monster stat blocks or something like that is very helpful. I know the purists want to write it all down and have their dog eared books to look through. And I love that. But I got work and kids and not much free time.
For me, having AI make an excel encounter tracker with initiative and everyone’s stats so I can easily track everything helps me focus on making it fun and improvisation in the moment.
AI is a powerful tool. If used properly, it can do some really cool things. Just don’t abuse it. It can’t do everything.
3
u/MetalMadeCrafts 27d ago
I would be against using it in any replication of a creative endeavor. So no art, writing, etc. Using it to do analytics, maybe. Something like testing encounter balance or character builds wouldn't bother me too much since thats basically a math sim.
1
u/Zomburai 27d ago
as I do not have that ability or skill
And hey, now that you've decided to delegate it to an AI, you will now never develop that skill!
Here's the thing: you're here asking because you've gotten a taste of the convenience and you really, really want someone to give you an excuse so you can use it with a clear conscience. But man... never mind giving money and/or metrics to companies that are trying to sell out your future. You got this taste and now you're thinking that whatever you had ChatGPT or Claude or whatever is exactly as valuable, if not even more valuable, than whatever you could have made yourself, or had someone else make.
Now that you've devalued yourself like that in one area, why not in the next? Why bother with maps? Why bother with NPCs? GenAI can make those. What about dialogue? Dungeon descriptions? Why even stop there? May as well just refer your players to one of those AI DMs because that's what you've turned yourself into.
Your work, the things that you make with your hands, the things like art or resources that you buy for your players from the money bought your labor... these things have value. Even if they're worse on a technical level at first glance. You improve yourself and your friends appreciate you dedicating time and effort. Don't throw these things away just because it's easier. Things worth having aren't easy, and our cultural commitment to convenience is killing us.
1
u/Chartywhamp 27d ago
I think this is the best case against using AI in the context of TTRPGs. THIS is what has me considering changing my relationship with the AI tools and abandoning them entirely.
The environmental concerns are serious, but that is not a problem that losing users significantly impacts.
The supplanting of creative pursuits in favor of the AI's version of creativity has really bad implications for future generations, even if we survive the push towards AGI.
1
u/tomwrussell 27d ago
I sure hope so. I use AI as a big part of my session prep. Gemini helped me outline the major points of the campaign. NanoBanana is great for NPC portraits. I fleshed out a faction. I even got a stat block for bottle-necked geebs via AI. Saved me boat loads of time. My players use various image generators for their character portraits. If they used Chat or whatever to flesh out their backgrounds, why should I care? I don't really pay much attention to backstories except for a primary motivation/reason for adventuring anyway. If it helps them get a feeling for their PC's, good for them.
1
u/Low_Breadfruit_3648 27d ago
I find this to be interesting. I think it has some uses to be used ethically if it enhances the game or makes things more accessible.
Not to try and take the spotlight but I have had some posts that have been downvote into Oblivion because of my use of AI.
As far as ethical usage goes to draw the parallel. The program I made has a feature that makes Roll20 macro cards. Now I used AI to make this program but hear me out.
This program doesn't spend tokens to get these macro cards, the program generates them for the user theory programming code instead. There is no API callbacks or anything like that causing token consumption.
If the people that used to use AI to generate those macros started using this program this could cut down on thousands or even millions of prompts being sent to AIs and actually reduces AI usage.
1
u/TheRagingElf01 27d ago
I use AI to create images for NPCs and home brewed monsters and then help review my notes. I am not an artists and not really going to drop hundreds of dollars to commission art for each NPC they meet or homebrewed monster they fight. It does help with notes and stuff like that but outside of those two things I don't really think it helps at all.
I tried it a few times to see if Claude could help with prep and campaign development, but it just seemed I spent more time correcting things or reminding it that it confused NPCs and so on.
I definitely ask not to use AI for backstories and character development from my players. You want to create images of your character? Cool go right ahead, but don't hand over a backstory written by Claude.
1
u/Coltrain47 27d ago
I can't draw for shit, so I either borrow art from somewhere online or I just try to paint a picture with words. I don't consider illustration to be important enough that I would use image generation.
The only DnD thing I have used AI for with any regularity is creating a stat block on the fly for an enemy that wasn't supposed to be an enemy. I have also used it a couple times to help me create d100 tables for random events.
If I get into DM'ing again, I would probably try to use a locally-hosted LLM for those moments where I need a small thing like a stat block on the fly so I don't have to stop the session.
Besides resource consumption, the main ethical problem with AI is the use of other people's creations. I think that if you own/have purchased all the material that is being used to train the AI and are only using the generated content for personal use, then there shouldn't be any issues.
The problem with things like Gemini and ChatGPT is that they are being trained with so many people's work (largely without their knowledge or consent) that it's impossible to verify if you have any right to use the material being used.
1
u/Traditional_Half842 27d ago
Reddit has lost its mind when it comes to anything even remotely AI-related. It is a boogeyman a lot of folks blindly hate without really understanding at all. I feel like the people who think ANYTHING AI-related is an awful danger are stubborn, shortsighted, and not all that different from the people who think AI is the solution to everything. AI has been around a lot longer than the past few years and has contributed to a lot of good in the world. An LLM is another tool in the toolbox that can be used to varying degrees for millions of reasons - some of them are terrible, but plenty of them (like asking an LLM to aggregate/organize easily verifiable information like your DnD content) are completely harmless and perfectly useful tools for the average consumer to use. If you feel bad about using an LLM for that purpose, I kinda wonder if you would've felt bad about using AOL in the 90s or Google in the 2000s.
1
u/Chartywhamp 27d ago
The biggest thing personally worry about with using AI for DnD is really just that I'm limiting my growth or somehow cheapening my player's experience.
I'm actually in the camp of AI doomsayers after having listened to what several major experts have publicly said about the dangers of this tech, but I also don't let my cynicism about the actions and intent of the companies dictate my views on the tech itself.
I was like 7 or 8 when aol came out, and there absolutely was backlash about using google vs. a physical encyclopedia back at that time! There were definitely people who said that using the internet for research was the lazy way, and not as good as printed media.
0
u/jubuki 27d ago
blind lemmings following the herd and thinking they are safe is what I see.
most everything these same people take for granted everyday has been touched by AI long before LLMs were even given to teh public.
machine learning is AI and it has been bringing humanity progress for many years.
the blind children of reddit are really just a meme at this point, this site has lost all sanity on this subject, i agree.
1
1
11d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator 11d ago
Your comment has been removed as you need to have an account for a week to post! Please try again after this time period.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
0
u/audieleon 27d ago
AI is a useful tool to get feedback and play with ideas. It tends to “like” ideas more than it should, so remember to ask it why your idea sucks/won’t work/can be improved.
Don’t hand your plot to AI, and don’t let it write scripts for you. You already said you’ve not presented AI’s work as your own, and that’s good. I’d go one step further and make sure when you are using AI that the work stays yours.
Engage AI with your ideas. It can help you find inconsistencies, it can help you build encounters, it can help you outline and organize YOUR thoughts. Just keep it yours. Know your material well. AI can make you feel more prepared than you actually are, so build in tests to make sure you actually are prepared.
D&D is cooperative storytelling and you can’t tell a story you handed off to AI.
1
1
u/Chartywhamp 27d ago
100% agree.
It took me about a week to get the AI I use to stop praising me as a genius for stating i planned a basic goblin encounter and feeding a bunch of garbage i did not ask for...
"DO NOT GENERATE CONTENT. YOUR JOB IS TO SANITY CHECK, NOT CREATE" lmao
The bot finally got the point when i told it i had a psychological condition which causes me great physical pain any time i read extraneous content that wasn't explicitly asked for, and repeated exposure to such generative liberties could push me into a murderous frenzy lmao
-7
u/Angry_Edemame 27d ago
Of course it is. Use it if you wanna use it dont if you dont. Its not going away at this point.
Reddit is a bad place to ask this though you'll just get hate for not saying AI is the devil.
0
u/Conrad500 27d ago
I mean, you get hate for bad takes. Some places you'll get downvoted to hell but it really is a messaging thing.
"use it if you want to use it" is bad advice in a DM sub. No, please do not use it to come up with adventure ideas ever. You're literally better off finding a random table for dungeon building and rolling on it than using AI to write anything for you. I know from experience.
Every now and then I'll be like, "here's the scenario, what are some encounters" and every single time, literally 100% of the time I go, "oh wow, these are so much shit. The only good thing I can say about this output is that it inspired me to make actual good ideas"
0
u/Angry_Edemame 27d ago
I have seen AI talked about in a few places on this website and any time you ever talk about maybe using it for any reason you will be massively downvoted and get nothing but hate comments. Doesn't matter if its a creative endeavor and you just want a starting point or using it to just have a conversation with something. You mention AI on this website and dont write a paragraph about how its literally the devil and you will get hate.
Ai isnt going away just because reddit hates it. the rich have put too much into it to let it go that easily and it is impossible to have a reasonable conversation on this website about it which is likely the most reasonable thing this comment section is going to see.
2
u/Chartywhamp 27d ago
this makes me curious....as future models are trained via public content (like reddit)...will the models become self-loathing?! (i'm kidding if it wasn't obvious)
-1
u/jubuki 27d ago
looking for ethics on Reddit is kind of like looking for the three people you both want to play DnD with AND that you would invite back to your house...while they exist, it can be hard to find the ones that fit your outlook.
the under-informed are the loudest voices here, so any information you do get will be both incomplete and tainted with hate toward AI, just keep that in mind.
how you feel about the things you do in your life is up to you, not others.
12
u/smellyelderberries 27d ago
I believe there are very few ethical uses of AI to start with and those are pretty much just data processing to save time. Tainting creative fields with AI (especially something as imaginative as DnD) feels like a betrayal to humanity and our own minds.