D&D General Would It Matter To You if D&D Books Were Illustrated by AI Instead of Humans?

[Argyle King]

Artificial Intelligence will eventually replace the Game Master. I think 2023 is a safe prediction for when well see that, if it isn't already a thing now. Hasn't AIDungeon already been tasked with that?

This is all part of the Second Digitization.

How is that different from video games?

 

[D1Tremere]

I'm seeing a lot of "the artist deserves" arguments, but who really deserves anything? It's subjective. Either everyone deserves to be able to make a living doing the thing they love, or no one does. I say give everyone a universal income and let artists make are because they love it, let AIs make product because we want it, and everyone somewhat wins.

 

[gnarlygninja]

I'm not a lawyer but I don't think the people making my DnD books don't have the power to institute UBI

 

[Lakesidefantasy]

How is that different from video games?

Well, the First Great Digitization of the Hobby has already happened (not that it's over); and, one of the products of that process, video games, has become it's own thing separate from the Hobby.

The Second Digitization is similar. It is heavily dependent on computers and graphics, however it seems to be more of a social media development with tools built to help with that experience.

I'm curious to see what will come out of the Second Digitization. What will it be when/if it separates from the Hobby and becomes it's own thing.

 

[Benjamin Olson]

This morning I read the the post title, and dismissed it offhand, because the only AI generated art I had ever encountered was novelty things done by friends of mine.

Then today I read the NYTimes article about the fellow, James M. Allen, who won a State Fair art competition with a Midjourney submission, which got me to read up on the world of AI generated art (and playing around with generating a little). But particularly what sent me back here was the revelation that the reason Mr. Allen got into Midjourney was that he has a tabletop games studio (Incarnate Games, seems to be a board game start-up).

Even if resistance from the ttrpg buying public will keep big players like WotC away from AI generated or AI assisted art, many of the little indy players are going to go heavily to AI generated art real soon. Having dirt cheap art created instantly to order is an amazing thing for a small time creator, and sometimes having something presentable that fulfills your precise needs is more important than having something actually good.

I think pure AI art is going to be the province of small time players, but I think some AI art will find its way into most rpg releases in the not too distant future. I think it may ultimately end up being less a matter of expense and more a matter of needing things generated last minute to fit particular specifications.

 

[fluffybunbunkittens]

I like that AI generating is really exploding right now, because it actually feels magical and enables anyone to quickly visualize their concepts by rolling the neural network dice a few times... and of course there's heavy push by big companies to use it in order to pay creatives even less.

 

[J.Quondam]

Yes, it matters, not least because the legalities and ethics surrounding these AIs are nowhere near resolved. WotC won't go near it, and I wouldn't want them to for the sake of professional artists.

I think pure AI art is going to be the province of small time players, but I think some AI art will find its way into most rpg releases in the not too distant future. I think it may ultimately end up being less a matter of expense and more a matter of needing things generated last minute to fit particular specifications.

I think this is right. This sort of "AI" tool will be detrimental to freelance artists, but a boon for writers/creators with limited budget, time, and/or artistic ability. One group benefits at the expense of another. In that sense, it's just another chapter in the book of automation.

That said, there are certainly huge ethical question marks hanging over the issue. Using generic or "self-orchestrated" AI art is one thing, but using AI art to mimic the style of a specific artist is something else entirely, like if someone created a Planescape-y setting using AI art that looks deTerlizzi-esque. That would be a definite no-go for me.

I can see these tools going in so many directions with respect to monetization models; royalties; protections for artists and corporate IP; variant training data sets (eg, cheaper ones trained only on public domain, pricier ones include copyrighted imagery?); user interfaces; consent for models; and so forth.

It's certainly an intriguing development, with ramifications that go far beyond D&D books.

 

[Lakesidefantasy]

I answered "Yes" it will bother me, but that's probably just the human in me talking. To tell you (and myself) the truth, I probably won't pay that much attention. By the time such a publication is released I'll probably find myself surrounded and inundated by artificially generated art anyway.

 

[MNblockhead]

Can someone suggest links to some of the better, publicly available, AI art generators?

As for the OP, I'm in agreement with most of the posts. Unless we have a post-scarcity society with UBI, I think we need to be very careful about how we use AI. There certainly can be ethical applications, but I prefer humans get paid for the work rather than the AIs that are creating art for large samples of work by human artists.

 

[MNblockhead]

Though, it's worth noting, it does secondary faces much, MUCH more poorly than primary faces. The face at the center of the frame will almost always look perfect. A face at the edge of frame will almost always look wrong.

Argh! You're correct. Just tested with thisisnotaperson....

...well at least ONE of them is not a person.