D&D General DMs Guild and DriveThruRPG ban AI written works, requires labels for AI generated art

[Vaalingrade]

This is going to be such a quaint thing a year or two from now, when everyone has AI copilots checking, editing, translating, filtering, converting and sprucing up their content just by virtue of the digital tools they're using daily. Generative AI will be in every smartphone, content-producing app and business tool. I'm sure there will be people who refuse to use it, just as we still have artists using an easle instead of a Wacom tablet and authors swearing by their Olivetti mechanical typewriter. But that'll just be the exception to the rule.

These tools have only been mainstream for a year or so. Using it with artistry and creativity may be hard to imagine for many (especially because the signal to noise ratio is completely out of whack right now) but brilliant use cases are sure to be coming down the pipe as more creators get to grips with it.

It's going to turn some of our best creators into productive powerhouses. I predict it won't be long before we're handing out ENnies to content mostly generated with the help of AI (although it may take a while longer for creators to feel safe openly admit they're using it.) The idea that we can detect generative AI-content or enforce labelling is already an illusion even with the crude models in circulation right now. The only reason we clock the output is because so many people use AI artlessly (e.g. using it for cloning and imitation rather than originality) and publish before reaching a minimal quality treshold.

For now, the safer bet for creators and publishers is to be anti-AI in the RPG space. I don't think that's a sustainable or realistic position long-term.

I remember NFTs saying the same thing in January 2022.

They're never the next big thing. Not being as half-baked and rolled in buzzword breadcrumbs for the doddering shareholders looking to make sure you're chasing the latest things the kids are getting jiggy with.

This isn't the next smart phone, it's not the next personal computer. Not even the next streaming, seeing the problems that's having right now. Those things had plans behind them. Thought and ambition. Viable use cases they could actually be trusted to do, even. Not an elevator pitch for a quick cash in.

To paraphrase Blade, I must've heard a hundred of these rodents say the same thing. Each one died on the end of the next quarter.

 

[Clint_L]

Sure, but my point is that they don’t have to be. We could fix the situation wherein labor is a basic necessity to live for the majority of people. Then there wouldn’t be a need to help people who were put out of work by labor-saving technology, and we could use the wealth that technology generated to improve the basic standard of living, instead of having to use it to help people who can’t maintain a living due to having been put out of work.

That's literally what a guaranteed basic income is. Which is what I suggested. I'm confused - were you responding to someone else?

True. AI can make better art than I can. Can it write better than me? Dunno. I'm OK, but I'm no Shakespeare. Its writing will get as good as its art, and that will probably be better than the average person, but not as good as a genius. The question is where that leaves us non-geniuses in the creative process?

Chat4 is already better at most writing tasks than a typical high school or even college student. This is causing us fits in education.

The short term problem is how to regulate it, and how to assess student work.

The bigger issue is that it poses existential questions for how we have been assessing students for the past 150 years. And how we should teach and assess them going forward, given that an AI is already a better writer than most, and will only improve.

When I read responses to the effect of "no one wants to read an AI novel," my first thought is, "How do you know?" My second thought is, "that's probably wrong." A lot of popular novels are not well written. Similarly, I think television writers have a legitimate worry because most television writing is formulaic crap. It turns out, most consumers aren't looking for challenging, super original art. They are looking for the art equivalent of fast food. Chat4 can already produce scripts that are on par with a typical sitcom, and humans can tweak them.

A lot of professional writing is already being done by AI, and has been for some time. My best friend is a partner at a very large law firm, and they have used AI to produce a lot of their professional writing for several years now. Of course they go over it, but they already employ far fewer people than they would have just five years ago. And that will only accelerate.

I've used Chat4 when prepping sessions - I find it a huge time saver when I am doing background characters, for example. I think it is inevitable that AI will be all through the RPG industry. And I don't think the era of the AI Dungeon Master is far away.

Well, at least AI can't paint the miniatures for my tabletop, or cook the nachos for game night. Yet.

 

[Charlaquin]

This is going to be such a quaint thing a year or two from now, when everyone has AI copilots checking, editing, translating, filtering, converting and sprucing up their content just by virtue of the digital tools they're using daily. Generative AI will be in every smartphone, content-producing app and business tool. I'm sure there will be people who refuse to use it, just as we still have artists using an easle instead of a Wacom tablet and authors swearing by their Olivetti mechanical typewriter. But that'll just be the exception to the rule.

These tools have only been mainstream for a year or so. Using it with artistry and creativity may be hard to imagine for many (especially because the signal to noise ratio is completely out of whack right now) but brilliant use cases are sure to be coming down the pipe as more creators get to grips with it.

It's going to turn some of our best creators into productive powerhouses. I predict it won't be long before we're handing out ENnies to content mostly generated with the help of AI (although it may take a while longer for creators to feel safe openly admit they're using it.) The idea that we can detect generative AI-content or enforce labelling is already an illusion even with the crude models in circulation right now. The only reason we clock the output is because so many people use AI artlessly (e.g. using it for cloning and imitation rather than originality) and publish before reaching a minimal quality treshold.

For now, the safer bet for creators and publishers is to be anti-AI in the RPG space. I don't think that's a sustainable or realistic position long-term.

Stay strong, victim of marketing. One day, you’ll learn to see through the hucksters’ lies.

 

[cbwjm]

I've seen some really cool outputs from midjourney from my friends inputs, it can create some incredible art and some of what he's created via midjourney is inspiration for RPGs. I don't publish anything, but if I did, I'd be trawling through images he's generated for the art.

 

[FrogReaver]

That's literally what a guaranteed basic income is. Which is what I suggested. I'm confused - were you responding to someone else?


Chat4 is already better at most writing tasks than a typical high school or even college student. This is causing us fits in education.

IMO. Given how bad the average high school student is at reading and writing that's not as impressive as it first sounds.

The short term problem is how to regulate it, and how to assess student work.

Doesn't seem that difficult of a problem to solve. Lock them in a room without the AI and have them write.

When I read responses to the effect of "no one wants to read an AI novel," my first thought is, "How do you know?" My second thought is, "that's probably wrong." A lot of popular novels are not well written. Similarly, I think television writers have a legitimate worry because most television writing is formulaic crap. It turns out, most consumers aren't looking for challenging, super original art. They are looking for the art equivalent of fast food. Chat4 can already produce scripts that are on par with a typical sitcom, and humans can tweak them.

On the bright side - ai should also eliminate all tv/movie actor dumb/ignorant stances on political and controversial issues (we can all breathe a sigh of relief) - no more human tv/movie actors no more dumb/ignorant tv/movie actor stances.

I've used Chat4 when prepping sessions - I find it a huge time saver when I am doing background characters, for example. I think it is inevitable that AI will be all through the RPG industry. And I don't think the era of the AI Dungeon Master is far away.

Well, at least AI can't paint the miniatures for my tabletop, or cook the nachos for game night. Yet.

I think it's all far away. Getting 80% of the way there is relatively easy and that's where I think we are at the moment. That last 20% though, that's going to be the real challenge.

 

[cbwjm]

Chat4 is already better at most writing tasks than a typical high school or even college student. This is causing us fits in education.

One of the funniest things with AI is when someone asks AI to write their answers for their test or to write their essay and they just do a copy/paste without checking the answer leading to sentences that start with "As an AI..."

 

[TheSword]

Consumers, in general, have frustratingly low standards. that is the real problem with AI generated entertainment: people won't actually care as long as it fills a few hours of their otherwise painful lives. Formulaic entertainment in particular, like sitcoms and crappy D&D adventures, will be the first conquered.

And let's not underestimate the greed of artists themselves, some of whom will absolutely license their work to generative AI. James Earl Jones already did so.

Those of you planting your flag on the hill of "generative AI is theft and therefore always bad" are failing to see that laws and circumstances will change and this stuff is going to become NORMAL in very, very short order. And, yes, if you are a normal (ie not famous) commercial artist of any sort (visual, musical, writing, whatever) you are pretty much screwed.

I think you’re being somewhat unfair to consumers. Ethical industries are quantifiably marketable and do carry more value and in some cases immense value for those that share those views. Free-range/red tractor meat, ethical banking, clothing, cosmetics guaranteed not to be tested on animals etc have lasted in the market place. The problem is that if you don’t have much money these values can become a luxury you can’t afford.

To the wider points, the market for RPG products have expanded exponentially - particularly for amateur publishers - which has created many new opportunities to sell. Almost certainly not full time jobs for most people but still supplementary income/subsidizing their hobby. If the available technology allows this to expand then I am all for it as long as it’s labeled as such and kept up front. Technology can broaden access to things that will improve quality of life that they otherwise couldn’t afford or wouldn’t be accessible… health care, education, opportunities.

Our marketplaces are already flooded with cheap products from the Far East. Sometimes that ok, but a lot of the time we go with local, authentic, artisan, ethically sourced items that cost more. I see no reason it won’t apply here - certainly for wholly AI generated images. Of course if over time it becomes more like a augmentation and an artist is actively creating and then polishing with AI then it seems no different morally to me than a spell checker or auto-tune.

 

[Moonmover]

Lol. I'm thinking bread and circuses.

UBI is a way to guarantee the bread.

 

[gamerprinter]

As a creator known to be a reputable artist and author, of course I'll never use AI in the generation for anything. So these new rules will have no impact on me. Not that I never purchase other people's products, as I rarely do, and usually it's for some rules content I'm interested in art, setting, nor fiction - as I do all that myself. I'd rather see a total ban on AI generation, but at least it's the start of line in the sand...

 

[Reynard]

A great many covers of old pulp magazines are now in the public domain. What is the difference between me a) using one as a cover of my own publication, b) me using photoshop to make a composite image from multiple covers and using that, and c) me putting those covers in a generative AI blender and then tweaking prompts until I get something I like?