WotC Would you buy WotC products produced or enhanced with AI?

[The Firebird]

if I already know what the result is, why do I ask an AI? If I have to double check everything it says, does it really save me any time?

I get it, for D&D some hallucinations rarely matter, in some other fields they could endanger lives however

It is much faster to verify than to produce.

 

[Scribe]

Just because it's AI-made doesn't make it slop. Some AI art is IMO very good.

I prefer the things I can have generated, to most of the art from 5 or 5.5.

That doesnt mean its

1. Good, objectively, as art.
2. Good, ethically.
3. Good, for our species for any number of reasons.

This is very much a 9/10 Children Voted for Candy, or 9.5 Players out of 10, voted for buffs.

These tools will not innovate. They will not develop a new style. They will not do anything, that has not been done 10000000 times already.

Can we prefer the style, because Wizards is afraid of doing something like it? Sure. Should we encourage it? Absolutely not.

 

[Incenjucar]

It is much faster to verify than to produce.

That is very often not the case.

 

[The Firebird]

That is very often not the case.

Maybe. It very often is, and that's enough for LLMs to have a use case.

 

[jasper]

At what point do you draw the line? That's an honest question, don't think it's being provocative.

If I write an adventure and ask the AI to correct the mistakes, that's one thing. But what if I just determine the main elements of the plot (for the sake of the discussion, let's assume that my idea is world-shakingly original and not a regurgitation of other plots I might have read in fiction) and ask the AI to develop it by adding, say, elements not central to the idea of the adventure to make it more flavourful, for example by writing the "boxed text"? And what if I write it entirely but asks the AI to translate it to English? Or, in the other way round, if I ask an LLM for a plotline and events and I manually do all the description, monster design and balancing?

Which would you consider "enhanced", which would you consider "AI writing" instead of enhancing?

I said NO to AI writing. And turning on grammar and spell check is not AI. Translation is Not AI. more later.

 

[mamba]

It is much faster to verify than to produce.

that will vary by case

 

[Jfdlsjfd]

OK, sure.

Now why should I buy this person's AI product when I can use AI to do the exact same thing?

You shouldn't. The point of having tool empowering more people to put their campaign notes on the Internet by turning them into a more finalized product with AI is to increase the amount of free material being available.

I mean, seriously, what am I paying for? More importantly, what am I paying him for? He didn't do anything but stick some text in a textbox and click a button. Anyone can do that. Lots of people have haphazard notes for a campaign, after all. If anything, I should pay the AI, because it did the work. (Except the AI isn't actually a sapient being.)

Why would you pay? Right now, there are lots of people offering their scenarios and maps for free on the Internet. They'd continue to do so, especially with a much lower entry bareer.

This hypothetical example wouldn't be worth more than maybe a dollar or two if the actual campaign idea was particularly innovative, because that would be the only part that was actually created by a person. The art and actual text would all be fake AI slop.

No, the text and art would be equal to human, that's the premise of the thread, and the OP reiterated it: the AI is supposed to be able to replace WotC current product (well, maybe you think it's slop already, in that case...)

 

[Jfdlsjfd]

I said NO to AI writing. And turning on grammar and spell check is not AI. Translation is Not AI. more later.

You might be surprised. I have colleagues who just cut and paste their professional writings and ask an AI to remove grammar, stylistic and spelling errors routinely. They find that more efficient that the spellchecking found in office products. And they just drop their text into the same AI and ask for a translation in other language and get good enough results for their goal (enabling conversation with colleagues speaking another language). It might not be equal to a professional translator, but it is enough to do the job.

Or did you mean "it's not AI-made, it's AI-enhanced"?

 

[Reynard]

I said NO to AI writing. And turning on grammar and spell check is not AI. Translation is Not AI. more later.

It is if you use AI for it.

 

[Art Waring]

I don't think you will like my answer. I understand that they are resource intensive technologies. I think that is acceptable given the benefits of them. Compare something like crypto, which has far fewer positive impacts.

So, in your opinion, the environmental impact is justified? I would like to hear why you think this is the case, as we are getting closer and closer to the point of no return for the environment, and environmental protections are being dismantled across the board.

Regarding the ethics of web scraping for training, I don't find it ethically suspect. Perhaps this is a consequence of my background in the sciences, where greater accessibility is good thing. I would love for a LLM to scrape everything I ever produced and to use it as training data. But it includes my (limited) created output as well--anything I write for RPGs, any resources I prepare, any character builds, mechanics--feed it all in, as far as I'm concerned.

Thanks for proving my point, that people with no intellectual property or copyrighted materials at stake, and nothing at all to lose, have no qualms about stealing the work of others that have worked very hard their whole life to make something of their own.

In so many words, to you this is justified, because to you the ends justify the means?