RPG Evolution: The AI DM in Action

How might WOTC launch an AI-powered DM assistant?

Picture courtesy of Pixabay.​

We know Wizards of the Coast is tinkering with Artificial Intelligence (AI)-powered tools for its multiple properties, including Dungeons & Dragons. But what might that look like in practice?

Interactive NPCs​

Large Language Model (LLM) AIs have been used extensively to create non-player characters of all stripes on Character.AI. It's not a stretch to imagine that Wizards might have official NPCs included as part of the digital purchase of an adventure, with the rough outline of the NPC acting as parameters for how it would interact. DMs might be able to create their own or modify existing NPCs so that the character drops hints or communicates in a certain way. Log outputs could then be available for DMs to use later.

There are several places today where you can create NPC bots powered by AI that are publicly available, although the DM might need to monitor the output in real time to record the conversation. Character.AI and Poe.com both provide the ability to create publicly available characters that players can interact with .

Random Generators​

There are already dozens of these in existence. What's particularly of note is that AI can go deep -- not just randomize what book is in a library, but provide snippets of text of what's in that book. Not just detail the name of a forgotten magic item, but provide stats for the item. For WOTC products, this could easily cover details that no print product can possibly encompass in detail, or with parameters (for example, only a library with books on necromancy).

AI RPG companion is a great example of this, but there are many more.

Tabletop Assistants​

Hasbro recently partnered with Xplored, with the goal of developing a "new tabletop platform that integrates digital and physical play." Of particular note is how Xplore's technology works: its system "intelligently resolves rules and character behaviors, and provides innovative gameplay, new scenarios and ever-changing storytelling events. The technology allows players to learn by playing with no rulebook needed, save games to resume later, enables remote gameplay, and offers features like immersive contextual sound and connected dice."

If that sounds like it could be used to enhance an in-person Dungeons & Dragons game, Xplored is already on that path with Teburu, a digital board game platform that uses "smart-sensing technology, AI, and dynamic multimedia." Xplored's AI platform could keep track of miniatures on a table, dice rolls, and even the status of your character sheet, all managed invisibly and remotely by an AI behind the scenes and communicating with the (human) DM.

Dungeon Master​

And then there's the most challenging aspect of play that WOTC struggles with to this day: having enough Dungeon Masters to support a group. Wizards could exclusively license these automated DMs, who would have all the materials necessary to run a game. Some adventures would be easier for an AI DM to run than others -- straightforward dungeon crawls necessarily limit player agency and ensure the AI can run it within parameters, while a social setting could easily confuse it.

Developers are already pushing this model with various levels of success. For an example, see AI Realm.

What's Next?​

If Hasbro's current CEO and former WOTC CEO Chris Cocks is serious about AI, this is just a hint at what's possible. If the past battles over virtual tabletops are any indication, WOTC will likely take a twofold approach: ensure it's AI is well-versed in how it engages with adventures, and defend its branded properties against rival AI platforms that do the same thing. As Cocks pointed out in a recent interview, WOTC's advantage isn't in the technology itself but in its licenses, and it will likely all have a home on D&D Beyond. Get ready!

 

[Reynard]

I just spent about $2200 on a commission).

Do you think this experience of yours is broadly applicable to the average gamer who wants images to enhance his game?

 

[Raiztt]

Do you think this experience of yours is broadly applicable to the average gamer who wants images to enhance his game?

Since I am opposed to AI in principle (If it could cure cancer tomorrow, I'd still be against it) I am indifferent to the average gamer.

 

[Umbran]

This, however, still works on the basis that teaching machines with large amounts of art is somehow intrinsically different than the large amounts of art, music and writing most people who end up doing that intake in the process of learning their art.

Legally speaking, yes, it is intrinsically different. I'll get to that in a second.

that doesn't mean that the line is clear in the other direction either (and certainly there's reason to look it very questionably when someone says, say "Do X in the style of Patrick Nagel")

Sure. It isn't like human artists' work never infringe - the whole idea of infringement predates computers by centuries! The line between infringing product, and not, is a fuzzy one, and you have to start making weird "points of similarity" arguments to decide which side of the line a work is on.

However, we may not need this to make a case against current generative AI.

I'd suspect its because a bigger part of the quality of the output comes from the tool.

You're looking at the wrong end of the animal. Don't look at the output. Look at the input.

The first (and possibly best) legal argument here has nothing to do with the details of the end product. And the music industry, in trying to kill Napster, did the heavy lifting for us already. And it is this: making an unauthorized digital copy of an artwork is considered copyright infringement.

And, long before the generative AI makes any product, even before it is trained, the folks trying to train it must make digital copies of the artworks to include them in the training set.

This is specifically why most of the early generative AIs were presented to the public "for academic use" - because academic use is usually covered by Fair Use doctrine, so that the training copy could be overlooked.

It is this act - scraping the internet and making digital copies of works as parts of the training set, that is a problem.

Again, just pay the darned artists, and this goes away.

 

[Reynard]

Since I am opposed to AI in principle (If it could cure cancer tomorrow, I'd still be against it) I am indifferent to the average gamer.

Emphasis mine.

Can you explain why?

 

[Dire Bare]

Yes.

You can get world class art for $60. (I've commissioned absolutely tons of D&D art. I just spent about $2200 on a commission).

Good for you.

Seriously, that's cool that you can afford over $2K commissioning artwork for your personal games.

Most of us cannot.

 

[Raiztt]

Emphasis mine.

Can you explain why?

Not in this thread. This isn't a debate forum.

 

[Raiztt]

Good for you.

Seriously, that's cool that you can afford over $2K commissioning artwork for your personal games.

Most of us cannot.

Fortunately, you don't need to!

 

[Dire Bare]

Since I am opposed to AI in principle (If it could cure cancer tomorrow, I'd still be against it) I am indifferent to the average gamer.

Heh, that's been clear through all of your posts. So why should we care about your position on the issue?

 

[Raiztt]

why should we care about your position on the issue?

This question can be asked of literally everyone posting on this forum, I do not see how I would be different.

 

[Clint_L]

I'm interested in a lawyer's thoughts on digital copyright and AI. Where's Snarff, these days? The issue is complicated and ongoing. I also point out that just because the law says something in one jurisdiction of the United States that doesn't make it The Law. AI are going to keep rapidly evolving, regardless.

As far as using generative AI with TTRPGs, that's already widespread. The question is the possibility of using it as more than a DM's personal assistant, but using it as the DM. I think it's inevitable. I mean, it's been done, to varying degrees of success, but as far as I know only by folks experimenting on their own with general purpose generative AI, such as ChatGPT. I've done that myself. As far as I know, there hasn't been a generative AI constructed specifically with DMing in mind, but that's only a matter of time. What happens when a generative AI is specifically built with the memory and constraints in place to run a D&D adventure? I'm interested in the results.