ENnies To Ban Generative AI From 2025

history-1030x232.jpg

The ENnie Awards has announced that from 2025, products including content made by generative AI will not be eligible for the awards.

Established in 2001, the ENnies are the premier tabletop roleplaying game awards ceremony, and are held every year in a ceremony at Gen Con. They were created right here on EN World, and remained affiliated with EN World until 2018.

The decision on generative AI follows a wave of public reaction criticising the policy announced in 2023 that while products containing generative AI were eligible, the generative AI content itself was not--so an artist whose art was on the cover of a book could still win an award for their work even if there was AI art inside the book (or vice versa). The new policy makes the entire product ineligible if it contains any generative AI content.

Generative AI as a whole has received widespread criticism in the tabletop industry over the last couple of years, with many companies--including D&D's owner Wizards of the Coast--publicly announcing their opposition to its use on ethical grounds.

The new policy takes effect from 2025.

The ENNIE Awards have long been dedicated to serving the fans, publishers, and broader community of the tabletop role-playing game (TTRPG) industry. The ENNIES are a volunteer-driven organization who generously dedicate their time and talents to celebrate and reward excellence within the TTRPG industry. Reflecting changes in the industry and technological advancements, the ENNIE Awards continuously review their policies to ensure alignment with community values.

In 2023, the ENNIE Awards introduced their initial policy on generative AI and Large Language Models (LLMs). The policy recognized the growing presence of these technologies in modern society and their nuanced applications, from generating visual and written content to supporting background tasks such as PDF creation and word processing. The intent was to encourage honesty and transparency from creators while maintaining a commitment to human-driven creativity. Under this policy, creators self-reported AI involvement, and submissions with AI contributions were deemed ineligible for certain categories. For example, products featuring AI-generated art were excluded from art categories but remained eligible for writing categories if the text was entirely human-generated, and vice versa. The organizers faced challenges in crafting a policy that balanced inclusivity with the need to uphold the values of creativity and originality. Recognizing that smaller publishers and self-published creators often lack the resources of larger companies, the ENNIE Awards sought to avoid policies that might disproportionately impact those with limited budgets.

However, feedback from the TTRPG community has made it clear that this policy does not go far enough. Generative AI remains a divisive issue, with many in the community viewing it as a threat to the creativity and originality that define the TTRPG industry. The prevailing sentiment is that AI-generated content, in any form, detracts from a product rather than enhancing it.

In response to this feedback, the ENNIE Awards are amending their policy regarding generative AI. Beginning with the 2025-2026 submission cycle, the ENNIE Awards will no longer accept any products containing generative AI or created with the assistance of Large Language Models or similar technologies for visual, written, or edited content. Creators wishing to submit products must ensure that no AI-generated elements are included in their works. While it is not feasible to retroactively alter the rules for the 2024-2025 season, this revised policy reflects the ENNIE Awards commitment to celebrating the human creativity at the heart of the TTRPG community. The ENNIES remain a small, volunteer-run organization that values the ability to adapt quickly, when necessary, despite the challenges inherent in their mission.

The ENNIE Awards thank the TTRPG community for their feedback, passion, and understanding. As an organization dedicated to celebrating the creators, publishers, and fans who shape this vibrant industry, the ENNIES hope that this policy change aligns with the values of the community and fosters continued growth and innovation.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

You show the artist’s process—the initial sketches, up to the final piece.
And if the "initial sketch" is the final piece?

Not all artists follow a sketch-refine-finish pattern, nor do they all record the steps in their work as they go. That said, some types of art produce evidence of authenticity as part of the process e.g. for anything that looks like a relief print, mezzotint, or similar there has to be a plate somewhere that was used to print from (I live with a printmaker which is why I know this).

Even harder to vet would be writing. When I write something it's usually done in one pass, and if it's something written directly into the computer (e.g. this post) there's no "original" to fall back on.

Personally, I think AI is here to stay and we're sooner or later just gonna have to accept it.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

These things aren't AI. The term is used too often to describe things which are just basic computer functions. Spellchecks have been around for decades--they weren't AI then, and they aren't now.
That's just it - 40 years ago we looked at spellchecks as being "cheats". 20 years ago we looked at Photoshop and other image editors as being "cheats". Today we're looking at generative AI as a "cheat", but in 20 years it'll be considered a basic computer function just like those other things are now.
 

That's just it - 40 years ago we looked at spellchecks as being "cheats". 20 years ago we looked at Photoshop and other image editors as being "cheats". Today we're looking at generative AI as a "cheat", but in 20 years it'll be considered a basic computer function just like those other things are now.
A lot can happen in 20 years. There’s no need for an industry award to be on the bleeding edge of technology.
 

A lot can happen in 20 years. There’s no need for an industry award to be on the bleeding edge of technology.
Fair enough. My point is more in response to those who seem to see AI as the Ultimate Evil, which while in some ways it may be (follow the money) in other ways it - at least the art side of it - opens up whole new worlds of creative possiblities to those of us who have ideas but no talent.
 


Fair enough. My point is more in response to those who seem to see AI as the Ultimate Evil, which while in some ways it may be (follow the money) in other ways it - at least the art side of it - opens up whole new worlds of creative possiblities to those of us who have ideas but no talent.
Sure, it’s a tool, though one with significant repercussions and questionable inputs (whose work is it using exactly and are they being paid for that?) that we are all still trying to grok.
 


Not all artists follow a sketch-refine-finish pattern, nor do they all record the steps in their work as they go.

Well, they more than likely ARE doing that if they are hired / contracted by a game company to produce art for an RPG book etc.

The artist receives an art brief, produces one or more sketches based on that brief, changes and revises the sketch until approved, and then moves on to various intermediary stages until eventually reaching a color rough stage. Once approved the final art is completed and submmitted.

It would be pretty difficult to go through all those steps if an artist was trying to use AI …

The artist also almost certainly signed a contract, and if the company is anti-AI produced art, that contract absolutely has a clause spelling out that position along with verbiage spelling out that the artist may not use AI in any way. If an artists knows a company will not tolerate AI art, signs a contract stipulating that he or she will not use it, and then somehow tries to sneak it past the company anyway … man, that artist has some rough days ahead …
 
Last edited:

That's just it - 40 years ago we looked at spellchecks as being "cheats". 20 years ago we looked at Photoshop and other image editors as being "cheats". Today we're looking at generative AI as a "cheat", but in 20 years it'll be considered a basic computer function just like those other things are now.
Not so much as a "cheat", but as plagiarism.

Gen AI doesn't actually create anything new, it effectively copies bits and pieces of its source material. Several early versions had recognizable watermarks from existing sources show up pretty frequently, because they took watermarked works to crib off of (as part of the source data set).
 

That's just it - 40 years ago we looked at spellchecks as being "cheats". 20 years ago we looked at Photoshop and other image editors as being "cheats". Today we're looking at generative AI as a "cheat", but in 20 years it'll be considered a basic computer function just like those other things are now.
I hate that comparison.

Spell checkers and Photoshop were tools to enhance your pre-existing work. Clippy spotted typos and recommended active voice. Photoshop let you fix mistakes, remove blemishes, or blend pre-exising works together.

AI creates the work for you. You don't have to write, draw, paint, compose. The AI does it all. If anything, AI is making us all into editors (making US into Clippy).
 

Related Articles

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top