this post was submitted on 02 Aug 2023
76 points (92.2% liked)

Dungeons and Dragons

11030 readers
31 users here now

A community for discussion of all things Dungeons and Dragons! This is the catch all community for anything relating to Dungeons and Dragons, though we encourage you to see out our Networked Communities listed below!

/c/DnD Network Communities

Other DnD and related Communities to follow*

DnD/RPG Podcasts

*Please Follow the rules of these individual communities, not all of them are strictly DnD related, but may be of interest to DnD Fans

Rules (Subject to Change)

Format: [Source Name] Article Title

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FaceDeer@kbin.social 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I'm fine with it just in general. If they can make an AI that does a good job dungeon mastering it's going to open up the hobby tremendously. New players can jump right in even if they don't know an existing experienced player to hold their hands, the "forever DMs" can be free to play too, groups that just don't have any DM can play.

If it's bad at DMing then nobody will use it. Oh well. If human DMs want to DM, they can do that too. It's just the same as with the art AIs, the existence of these things doesn't stop people from still doing things "by hand" if they want to.

[–] Redsven@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You realize that no one complained that ai art would discourage people from drawing, right? It's because the ai scans other artists works and designs an imitation based on its prompt. It's stops artists from being able to profit from their work because it introduces a free alternative that stole their designs to learn.

I think the bigger concern than whether or not it's good will be what it learned from.

[–] FaceDeer@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Don't be so sure about that "no one", I've seen plenty of hyperbolic arguments along those lines.

Stopping artists from being able to profit is a separate issue, and not particularly relevant to DMing since most DMs don't charge for it.

[–] Redsven@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I'm pretty sure about it. No one who suggested that deserves to be taken seriously. But intellectual property theft is a legitimate concern and comparing them as equal concerns is disingenuous.

Lots of people produce content and make a living off of 5e, and not just 3rd party producers, plenty of people use patreon as a means to distributetheir work. Will the ai be trained exclusively on WOTC playtesting or will it be able to scour the internet for plot hooks and npcs and loot and whatever else it needs? It's inevitable, and well known that some of that content has been reposted and copied in various places across the internet. The damages they suffer from user piracy wouldn't be comparable to an ai running multiple games on an online platform owned by the 'world's most popular rpg' not to mention that they would be charging for at least a onednd or dnd beyond or whatever they're calling it this week, subscription.

It's not as simple as "oh cool, more people could play". It's just their next attempt at eliminating the third party market.

[–] FaceDeer@kbin.social 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Other people and organizations can also train up AIs to do this kind of thing.

[–] Redsven@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

But that's not what the article or the discussion was about, is it?

It also doesn't really matter who builds it, how it learns is still the primary concern.

[–] FaceDeer@kbin.social 0 points 1 year ago

I was responding to your statement that:

It’s just their next attempt at eliminating the third party market.

Since third parties can make AIs too I don't see how this would do that. It's just an innovative new product they might be first to market with, others can also join the market with their own versions of it.

[–] dethb0y@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's my thought basically - theres really no way this can go really wrong.

[–] vzq@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

I suppose it could go wrong if WOTC keeps throwing money down an AI money pit for a system that never works quite right, and then they end up losing market share to a system created by a scrappy startup that does but it’s built on a different fantasy TTRPG system.

Oh no.

[–] dethb0y@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago
[–] anaximander@feddit.uk 1 points 1 year ago

Indeed. That would be terrible. I sure do hope such a thing never comes to pass. Just imagine how bad it would be.

Just imagine.