Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="UngainlyTitan" data-source="post: 8946279" data-attributes="member: 28487">Not great but not the worst I have seen. I have seen worse on the Guardian on occasion. About the standard of the more lightweight end of web news. The first one is one of the better ones but a very positive take on Dark Sun and mentions none of the elements a modern audience might have an issue with. There is no editorial position in any of the articles and there is a weaving together of elements with little regard to the weight any element should have.The second article is a good example of this. It looks like a set of bullet points gleaned from an ENWorld thread but of little practical use. It is not that the individual points are invalid but you still would have little idea of how to do the thing. The OGL article is the most misleading since it misses quite a bit of the overall picture and confuses the 5.1 SRD with the various OGL drafts. The representations of the various sides are close but not quite right and there is no mention of the Creative Commons licences.The wilderness encounter is ok but from other examples I have seen of using Chat GPT to create encounters, it really shines when you make multiple passes at the thing.The song is better than anything I would come up with. Is this the future of Bards in D&amp;D. All busy getting Chat GPT to write poetry for them.And Yea the last article seems to have missed the last year.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="UngainlyTitan, post: 8946279, member: 28487"] Not great but not the worst I have seen. I have seen worse on the Guardian on occasion. About the standard of the more lightweight end of web news. The first one is one of the better ones but a very positive take on Dark Sun and mentions none of the elements a modern audience might have an issue with. There is no editorial position in any of the articles and there is a weaving together of elements with little regard to the weight any element should have. The second article is a good example of this. It looks like a set of bullet points gleaned from an ENWorld thread but of little practical use. It is not that the individual points are invalid but you still would have little idea of how to do the thing. The OGL article is the most misleading since it misses quite a bit of the overall picture and confuses the 5.1 SRD with the various OGL drafts. The representations of the various sides are close but not quite right and there is no mention of the Creative Commons licences. The wilderness encounter is ok but from other examples I have seen of using Chat GPT to create encounters, it really shines when you make multiple passes at the thing. The song is better than anything I would come up with. Is this the future of Bards in D&D. All busy getting Chat GPT to write poetry for them. And Yea the last article seems to have missed the last year. [/QUOTE]

Verification