WotC Hasbro CEO optimistic about AI in D&D and MTG’s future

[Vaalingrade]

I'll just note someone upstream in this thread was clearly lumping those in together with the others, so I think I'll continue to be fussy about it.

Some people in this thread have clearly indicated that AI is a thinking sapient thing ala HAL 9000. Ignore them.

 

[Cadence]

Some people in this thread have clearly indicated that AI is a thinking sapient thing ala HAL 9000. Ignore them.

I wish I thought people were smart enough not to eventually let LLMs make real decisions and be hooked directly to the controls of things that could kill people. But have you seen people... It's not encouraging. People might be the worst thing humanity has ever created.

[Apologies if that is a long week and happy hour speaking. No AI can be blamed. Not even it's baby brother spel... dammit, something just autocorrected.]

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

a kender with a Wand of Wonder?

My DM won't even let my gnome illusionist have one!

/whines

 

[TheSword]

Let’s say, hypothetically, there was a new technology that you genuinely believed posed an existential threat to humanity. Would you not take every possible opportunity to try to persuade anyone who would listen of its dangers? Would you not make as much noise about it as possible in hopes of making your concerns impossible to ignore? Would you ever be content to just stay silent while people who didn’t see the danger discussed it?

To answer your question, this happens because many of us genuinely believe that AI is harmful enough to warrant what you call doomsaying.

So because you don’t approve of the tech you’ll derail any thread that tries to discuss its practical applications.

Well at least you’re honest.

 

[MGibster]

I'm looking forward to a future Paranoia adventuer when friend Computer GM requires you to play a Bard in the latest RPG. You're happy to play a Bard, aren't you? Happiness is mandatory. Failure to be happy is treason.

 

[Scribe]

So because you don’t approve of the tech you’ll derail any thread that tries to discuss its practical applications.

Well at least you’re honest.

This forum has a very easily solution if you desire to use it, the + thread.

 

[Mirrorrorrim]

I may have a controversial opinion.

I've been struggling with the AI thing for a while. And it's not so clear cut from my viewpoint. But here are my thoughts on the matter. Disruptive technology is not inherently bad or evil. But I recognize that it can be very damaging depending on the paradigm you're dealing with. I admit that today, we are living in such a paradigm where everyone is struggling to solicit limited money from everyone else, generative AI art and writing is a threat to such artists because there is an alternative that does not require potential customers to spend their own limited funds on their services.

As a corollary example of disruptive technology, I am quite confident that zero-point (quantum field) energy is a real thing, and technology to access and utilize it exists and is being used in secret, though is kept from humanity because it is disruptive to the status quo. If that technology is released, free to the public, it would destroy our existing petro-dollar-based economy, requiring us to transform everything about our lives that relies on energy. Many jobs and even industries would disappear. People would have to transform how they live. But I advocate for its release, despite its disruptive capability. I want the world to move away from the paradigm where humanity is forced to work in indentured servitude to survive. In such a world, regulated AI could be a boon. Lots of labor can be replaced, and humanity could focus on their passions, including artists.

Now I recognize in the current paradigm, where artists are required to sell their services to survive (by requiring non-artists to pay artists to get what they want), that artists' livelihoods are threatened by generative AI. But on the other side of the coin, if a person does not have artistic or writing talent, why are they forced to pay an artist? Some don't have disposable income to pay for such things, even though they have needs. If they can't pay, are they to be denied? If AI generation can give them what they want, is that so bad? Artists will always have fans who enjoy their art and want to support them, even if AI alternatives exist. Just look at Etsy and other creative marketplaces. Artists will always be supported, if society values them.

But in the world I hope to see, no one needs to pay anyone for anything, and if they do, it is only to support the creatives they want to support. Yeah, yeah, I hope for a "Star Trek" future.

As a final thought, are there any anti-AI folks here who buy 3D printed minis? If so, isn't 3D printing a disruptive technology for sculptors because it replaces sculptor's jobs? Is that sufficiently different from the AI art situation?

 

[Faolyn]

That's a good point. Very few if any of the people I game with have any real interest in the existence of AI art or the presentation of diversity in RPGs.

That's a shame.

 

[Faolyn]

It was a pointless post on Twitter for example cause most people didn’t bother reading the article and just made naughty word up instead.

Like “how dare he support AI art” when AI art is not even mentioned and has nothing to do with the AI stuff he is talking about.

If you follow the link to the VentureBeat interview, he says "D&D has 50 years of content that we can mine. Literally thousands of adventures that we’ve created, probably tens of millions of words we own and can leverage."

It's possible that he wants to use that information to come up with prompts. And I'd consider that to be an acceptable use of AI, no different than an artist using a model to base their work on. But there's also the real risk he wants to use it to come up with entire adventures that have only cursory human oversight.

He also mentions mining 20 year's worth of Peppa Pig, which I really hope is not connected to writing more D&D content.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

If you follow the link to the VentureBeat interview, he says "D&D has 50 years of content that we can mine. Literally thousands of adventures that we’ve created, probably tens of millions of words we own and can leverage."

It's possible that he wants to use that information to come up with prompts. And I'd consider that to be an acceptable use of AI, no different than an artist using a model to base their work on. But there's also the real risk he wants to use it to come up with entire adventures that have only cursory human oversight.

He also mentions mining 20 year's worth of Peppa Pig, which I really hope is not connected to writing more D&D content.

It’s not, he was talking general Hasbro there. and there is no indication he plans to do anything with AI and WotC. He just says he’s optimistic about AI in the future.

I don’t think anything AI related to D&D will happen for a while. Particularly since WotC themselves are not interested.