I have begun development and training on a GPT model , built from scratch. With the ultimate goal of it becoming and aid to players and Dungeon Masters. When ready it will be released under the Open Gaming License. as DnD-GPT. It will be fully open source.
Since you asked, to be brutally honest, I think it's an awful idea. Generative AI tools like this are actively responsible for an immense amount of environmental and sociological harm, are usually based on blatant theft of other people's hard work, and have yet to show that they can actually solve any problem better than cheaper and less harmful tools that already exist. Because I love D&D, I think that things like this should be kept as far away from it as possible.
Since you asked, to be brutally honest, I think it's an awful idea. Generative AI tools like this are actively responsible for an immense amount of environmental and sociological harm, are usually based on blatant theft of other people's hard work, and have yet to show that they can actually solve any problem better than cheaper and less harmful tools that already exist. Because I love D&D, I think that things like this should be kept as far away from it as possible.
While I don't agree with your sentiment I thank you for your candor. The initial data the model is being trained on is in the public domain, and as for the D&D data that it will eventually be trained on. I have already contacted WOTC and they have already confirmed that this project fits within the terms of their Open Gaming License. I am actually purchasing the Core Rules and not using already pirated materials to acquire the D&D data.
While I don't agree with your sentiment I thank you for your candor. The initial data the model is being trained on is in the public domain, and as for the D&D data that it will eventually be trained on. I have already contacted WOTC and they have already confirmed that this project fits within the terms of their Open Gaming License. I am actually purchasing the Core Rules and not using already pirated materials to acquire the D&D data.
My other objections still stand. Creating and using tools like this is actively harmful to humanity as a whole. Please reconsider your actions.
We will just have to agree to disagree then. Every person is responsible for their own actions and any harm that comes to them is generally their fault. An alcoholic knows that they are an alcoholic, it's not the alcohol's fault that the alcoholic doesn't care what it is doing to them. The same can be said of lots of other things in life. At one point when D&D was new, it got blamed for societal ills and considered the work of the Devil. It wasn't Gary Gygax's fault certain delinquents did bad things and drew attention to D&D which got the blame for their bad behavior. At some point humanity is going to have to take responsibility for its own failings, and stop blaming life's ills on other things that they, themselves created. AI is just the latest in a long line of scapegoats.
We will just have to agree to disagree then. Every person is responsible for their own actions and any harm that comes to them is generally their fault. An alcoholic knows that they are an alcoholic, it's not the alcohol's fault that the alcoholic doesn't care what it is doing to them. The same can be said of lots of other things in life. At one point when D&D was new, it got blamed for societal ills and considered the work of the Devil. It wasn't Gary Gygax's fault certain delinquents did bad things and drew attention to D&D which got the blame for their bad behavior. At some point humanity is going to have to take responsibility for its own failings, and stop blaming life's ills on other things that they, themselves created. AI is just the latest in a long line of scapegoats.
I think, from this response, that maybe I haven't been sufficiently clear about what my objection is. I'm not talking about some nebulous "moral panic" here. I'm talking about the real, concrete damage to the environment that's caused by the use of AI tools like this.
The rise of this kind of technology in the last couple years has basically wiped out decades of progress we've made toward slowing or stopping climate change. You are actively contributing to that by creating this thing you're creating. Do you think that's worth it?
Honestly I find the sociological issues of AI to be overstated, though I haven’t looked into the issues of power draw, waste heat and other emissions, and similar ecological concerns. But regardless of all that, everything I’ve seen about Gen AI says that about the only benefit it can contribute to narrative crafting is the speed it spits out words, but its inability to actually hold a concept in mind and create a rational structure mean it cannot contribute as more than a boondoggle to actually running a game. You can’t ask it to plot a narrative, play a consistent character in dialogue, or adjudicate rules- particularly if the rules issue involves any qualitative elements or really requires more than reading a single section from a rule book. It certainly can’t DM and is maybe only slightly more effective than a program that just pulls a set of entries from premade tables like the ones the put in sourcebooks for generating character design/personality prompts.
Honestly I find the sociological issues of AI to be overstated, though I haven’t looked into the issues of power draw, waste heat and other emissions, and similar ecological concerns. But regardless of all that, everything I’ve seen about Gen AI says that about the only benefit it can contribute to narrative crafting is the speed it spits out words, but its inability to actually hold a concept in mind and create a rational structure mean it cannot contribute as more than a boondoggle to actually running a game. You can’t ask it to plot a narrative, play a consistent character in dialogue, or adjudicate rules- particularly if the rules issue involves any qualitative elements or really requires more than reading a single section from a rule book. It certainly can’t DM and is maybe only slightly more effective than a program that just pulls a set of entries from premade tables like the ones the put in sourcebooks for generating character design/personality prompts.
Yes, exactly. Even if the environmental issues were somehow magically solved, generative AI tools still can't create anything new, reliably answer a factual question, or do anything that existing tools can't do better. So what benefit do they provide?
I think a good AI model could be a very useful tool for a DM when there is a need to quickly describe stuff that hasn't been planned in advance. I'm sure there are people who can come up with a detailed tavern (staff included) on the spot, but that sort of thing shouldn't be a requirement for running a game.
"Even if the environmental issues were somehow magically solved, generative AI tools still can't create anything new, reliably answer a factual question, or do anything that existing tools can't do better. So what benefit do they provide?"
Environmental issues aside for a moment. So your whole objection is that AI is not good enough at this point in time so what's the point? That's it? Let's break this down a bit: 1. AI tools still can't create anything new. Humanity has this very same issue, most things these days are derived from other people's work. D&D keeps evolving based on Gary Guygax's work. Home Brew stuff all based on the intellectual property that belongs to WOTC, the quality of which depends greatly on the individual talents of the creators. But it really isn't anything new, it's a derivative work to solve a particular problem or scratch an itch. I would counter this argument with AI tools still can't create anything new, yet. 2. Reliably answer a factual question. No sure what you mean by a factual question, I mean a question is asked because you either don't know the answer or maybe you want to confirm what you already suspect. As far as reliability is concern that's on the user to check the response for accuracy. Even humans can be unreliable and when it comes to the reliability of AI or any piece of software really it comes down to how reliable are the people that built it? 3. Or do anything that existing tools can't do better. What's your basis for comparison? What tool for D&D exists that can take a natural language input like: Give me a list of monsters with at least 5HD and no more than 9HD and generate an encounter table; then execute the request?
It seems you expect perfection when we mere mortals are far from perfect. Even the tools we create are imperfect and often have a steep learning curve, where AI only requires the ability to type a coherent and concise input to receive a desired output. And as with most things involving computers, garbage in, garbage out.
The benefit is clear - D&D has always had a DM shortage.
I'm not advocating for this; I share many of the same concerns. At the same time, AI development is a runaway train and there's not really anyone who can stop it at this point. It's like burning the Amazon rainforest so we can graze cattle for a few years before the soil gives out - any sane, reasonable person would object to it but here we are. So we need to do what we can to call for regulations and guardrails but also be prepared for the big players to do whatever the hell they want to anyway.
As for OP, I think you should take a hard look at what concrete benefits your model would have over a more powerful generalized one, because those exist and people are already using them. The industry is brutal with a lot of billionaires fighting to corner the market and the one that wins is going to try their best to stomp out any smaller, specialized tools like the one you're aiming to make. Or they won't even have to because everyone just uses HAL (or whatever it will be) for everything, including their D&D game.
On a more personal note, I'm not interested in AI assistance in D&D because there's nothing about the process I want to replace. I love using real art for my games and AI images are off-putting to me. I love coming up with storylines and creating monsters. I even love looking up rules during the game instead of just asking a chatbot. Yes, it's hard to come up with detailed descriptive info on the spot, but I believe that putting my brain through those paces is extremely good for my ongoing cognitive function. It's all a part of the game for me. I could see how a new person coming into the hobby may not have the same concept of what D&D is and what it can provide them, but to me AI in D&D feels like getting a robot to play the game for you when playing the game is the whole point in the first place.
Since GPT already has been found to have pillaged from artists and writers, I am not sure that you can actually make an ethical AI based on the model. Thumbs down.
"Even if the environmental issues were somehow magically solved, generative AI tools still can't create anything new, reliably answer a factual question, or do anything that existing tools can't do better. So what benefit do they provide?"
Environmental issues aside for a moment. So your whole objection is that AI is not good enough at this point in time so what's the point? That's it? Let's break this down a bit: 1. AI tools still can't create anything new. Humanity has this very same issue, most things these days are derived from other people's work. D&D keeps evolving based on Gary Guygax's work. Home Brew stuff all based on the intellectual property that belongs to WOTC, the quality of which depends greatly on the individual talents of the creators. But it really isn't anything new, it's a derivative work to solve a particular problem or scratch an itch. I would counter this argument with AI tools still can't create anything new, yet. 2. Reliably answer a factual question. No sure what you mean by a factual question, I mean a question is asked because you either don't know the answer or maybe you want to confirm what you already suspect. As far as reliability is concern that's on the user to check the response for accuracy. Even humans can be unreliable and when it comes to the reliability of AI or any piece of software really it comes down to how reliable are the people that built it? 3. Or do anything that existing tools can't do better. What's your basis for comparison? What tool for D&D exists that can take a natural language input like: Give me a list of monsters with at least 5HD and no more than 9HD and generate an encounter table; then execute the request?
It seems you expect perfection when we mere mortals are far from perfect. Even the tools we create are imperfect and often have a steep learning curve, where AI only requires the ability to type a coherent and concise input to receive a desired output. And as with most things involving computers, garbage in, garbage out.
1. By the nature of what these tools are, they cannot create new ideas. Human minds can.
2. By "factual question", I mean a question with a definitive factual answer, such as "How many HP does an adult red dragon have?" in contrast to an opinion question like "What is the best Fighter subclass?" AI tools are notoriously unreliable at the former, for reasons that The_Ace_of_Rogues spelled out above.
3. Random table generating tools that do exactly the thing you're talking about, but do not involve generative AI technology, have been around for over thirty years. They can do exactly the same thing you're describing, but with getting all the facts right every time and without destroying the environment. That's the kind of thing I'm talking about.
I am not "expecting perfection". I am saying that if a new tool can't do anything better, cheaper, or faster than an existing tool, and destroys the environment in the process, then that new tool shouldn't exist.
I have begun development and training on a GPT model , built from scratch. With the ultimate goal of it becoming and aid to players and Dungeon Masters. When ready it will be released under the Open Gaming License. as DnD-GPT. It will be fully open source.
What do you all think?
I think that people who announce projects rarely, if ever, finish them.
Your GPT model will be outdated and practically useless by the time you finish training and customizing it.
And then you will find that you will never be able to market it.
Your observations about AI are all true, for now. A day may come where one won't be able to tell if the person they're talking to online is a flesh and blood human or and AI. If it does let's hope it doesn't decide that humanity is a threat. It take a lot of effort for a DM to create a decent campaign with encounters and such. My goal here aside from learning how to develop AI is to ease some of that burden. I look at AI as a really sophisticated data base with natural language capability. It can help give you ideas if you are experiencing a creative block. Produce the stats, even help polish up a narrative you created.
I don't know if this project will be practical or not, or if anyone would use it once it's finished, but the only way to find out is to do it an see what happens. I don't know how to solve the environmental issues, and to be honest it's hard to tell what is or is not true when most everyone is so emotionally charged. I get that they are passionate about certain issues, but no problem is ever solved until cooler heads prevail. But AI is the future and you can't stop the future, it will be on top of us before we know, for good or ill.
AI development is a runaway train and there's not really anyone who can stop it at this point
Nobody needs to. It's already collapsing under its own weight
Somewhat like blockchain, AI is a solution desperately searching for a problem to solve to justify its own existence and make its investors money
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
But AI is the future and you can't stop the future, it will be on top of us before we know, for good or ill.
The thing is that when you get right down to it, this is the argument that people promoting AI tools always make. Because their products provide no actual value, it's the only thing they can offer as a reason why you should use them. It screams of desperation and, as AntonSirius pointed out, it's already become incredibly obvious that it's completely false.
For what it's worth, Deepseek 3's recent release is kind of blowing the doors off the story we've been told about how energy-guzzling AI has to be. There is potential for massive efficiency improvements to be made, they are just not prioritized by the big players in the US. I do believe there's a possible future where AI results in overall reduction in energy consumption, if we can avoid destroying ourselves and others long enough to get there.
For what it's worth, Deepseek 3's recent release is kind of blowing the doors off the story we've been told about how energy-guzzling AI has to be. There is potential for massive efficiency improvements to be made, they are just not prioritized by the big players in the US. I do believe there's a possible future where AI results in overall reduction in energy consumption, if we can avoid destroying ourselves and others long enough to get there.
The idea that heavy use of generative AI could actually reduce energy consumption seems like pure fantasy to me, but if it actually happens I'll be pleasantly surprised.
Then we'll have a plagiarism machine that doesn't do anything useful, instead of a plagiarism machine that doesn't do anything useful while destroying the environment. Yay.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
pronouns: he/she/they
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I have begun development and training on a GPT model , built from scratch. With the ultimate goal of it becoming and aid to players and Dungeon Masters. When ready it will be released under the Open Gaming License. as DnD-GPT. It will be fully open source.
What do you all think?
Since you asked, to be brutally honest, I think it's an awful idea. Generative AI tools like this are actively responsible for an immense amount of environmental and sociological harm, are usually based on blatant theft of other people's hard work, and have yet to show that they can actually solve any problem better than cheaper and less harmful tools that already exist. Because I love D&D, I think that things like this should be kept as far away from it as possible.
pronouns: he/she/they
This. I don't want AI anywhere near my tables.
Birgit | Shifter | Sorcerer | Dragonlords
Shayone | Hobgoblin | Sorcerer | Netherdeep
While I don't agree with your sentiment I thank you for your candor. The initial data the model is being trained on is in the public domain, and as for the D&D data that it will eventually be trained on. I have already contacted WOTC and they have already confirmed that this project fits within the terms of their Open Gaming License. I am actually purchasing the Core Rules and not using already pirated materials to acquire the D&D data.
My other objections still stand. Creating and using tools like this is actively harmful to humanity as a whole. Please reconsider your actions.
pronouns: he/she/they
We will just have to agree to disagree then. Every person is responsible for their own actions and any harm that comes to them is generally their fault. An alcoholic knows that they are an alcoholic, it's not the alcohol's fault that the alcoholic doesn't care what it is doing to them. The same can be said of lots of other things in life. At one point when D&D was new, it got blamed for societal ills and considered the work of the Devil. It wasn't Gary Gygax's fault certain delinquents did bad things and drew attention to D&D which got the blame for their bad behavior. At some point humanity is going to have to take responsibility for its own failings, and stop blaming life's ills on other things that they, themselves created. AI is just the latest in a long line of scapegoats.
I think, from this response, that maybe I haven't been sufficiently clear about what my objection is. I'm not talking about some nebulous "moral panic" here. I'm talking about the real, concrete damage to the environment that's caused by the use of AI tools like this.
The rise of this kind of technology in the last couple years has basically wiped out decades of progress we've made toward slowing or stopping climate change. You are actively contributing to that by creating this thing you're creating. Do you think that's worth it?
pronouns: he/she/they
Honestly I find the sociological issues of AI to be overstated, though I haven’t looked into the issues of power draw, waste heat and other emissions, and similar ecological concerns. But regardless of all that, everything I’ve seen about Gen AI says that about the only benefit it can contribute to narrative crafting is the speed it spits out words, but its inability to actually hold a concept in mind and create a rational structure mean it cannot contribute as more than a boondoggle to actually running a game. You can’t ask it to plot a narrative, play a consistent character in dialogue, or adjudicate rules- particularly if the rules issue involves any qualitative elements or really requires more than reading a single section from a rule book. It certainly can’t DM and is maybe only slightly more effective than a program that just pulls a set of entries from premade tables like the ones the put in sourcebooks for generating character design/personality prompts.
Yes, exactly. Even if the environmental issues were somehow magically solved, generative AI tools still can't create anything new, reliably answer a factual question, or do anything that existing tools can't do better. So what benefit do they provide?
pronouns: he/she/they
I think a good AI model could be a very useful tool for a DM when there is a need to quickly describe stuff that hasn't been planned in advance. I'm sure there are people who can come up with a detailed tavern (staff included) on the spot, but that sort of thing shouldn't be a requirement for running a game.
"Even if the environmental issues were somehow magically solved, generative AI tools still can't create anything new, reliably answer a factual question, or do anything that existing tools can't do better. So what benefit do they provide?"
Environmental issues aside for a moment. So your whole objection is that AI is not good enough at this point in time so what's the point? That's it? Let's break this down a bit:
1. AI tools still can't create anything new. Humanity has this very same issue, most things these days are derived from other people's work. D&D keeps evolving based on Gary Guygax's work. Home Brew stuff all based on the intellectual property that belongs to WOTC, the quality of which depends greatly on the individual talents of the creators. But it really isn't anything new, it's a derivative work to solve a particular problem or scratch an itch. I would counter this argument with AI tools still can't create anything new, yet.
2. Reliably answer a factual question. No sure what you mean by a factual question, I mean a question is asked because you either don't know the answer or maybe you want to confirm what you already suspect. As far as reliability is concern that's on the user to check the response for accuracy. Even humans can be unreliable and when it comes to the reliability of AI or any piece of software really it comes down to how reliable are the people that built it?
3. Or do anything that existing tools can't do better. What's your basis for comparison? What tool for D&D exists that can take a natural language input like: Give me a list of monsters with at least 5HD and no more than 9HD and generate an encounter table; then execute the request?
It seems you expect perfection when we mere mortals are far from perfect. Even the tools we create are imperfect and often have a steep learning curve, where AI only requires the ability to type a coherent and concise input to receive a desired output. And as with most things involving computers, garbage in, garbage out.
The benefit is clear - D&D has always had a DM shortage.
I'm not advocating for this; I share many of the same concerns. At the same time, AI development is a runaway train and there's not really anyone who can stop it at this point. It's like burning the Amazon rainforest so we can graze cattle for a few years before the soil gives out - any sane, reasonable person would object to it but here we are. So we need to do what we can to call for regulations and guardrails but also be prepared for the big players to do whatever the hell they want to anyway.
As for OP, I think you should take a hard look at what concrete benefits your model would have over a more powerful generalized one, because those exist and people are already using them. The industry is brutal with a lot of billionaires fighting to corner the market and the one that wins is going to try their best to stomp out any smaller, specialized tools like the one you're aiming to make. Or they won't even have to because everyone just uses HAL (or whatever it will be) for everything, including their D&D game.
On a more personal note, I'm not interested in AI assistance in D&D because there's nothing about the process I want to replace. I love using real art for my games and AI images are off-putting to me. I love coming up with storylines and creating monsters. I even love looking up rules during the game instead of just asking a chatbot. Yes, it's hard to come up with detailed descriptive info on the spot, but I believe that putting my brain through those paces is extremely good for my ongoing cognitive function. It's all a part of the game for me. I could see how a new person coming into the hobby may not have the same concept of what D&D is and what it can provide them, but to me AI in D&D feels like getting a robot to play the game for you when playing the game is the whole point in the first place.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
Since GPT already has been found to have pillaged from artists and writers, I am not sure that you can actually make an ethical AI based on the model. Thumbs down.
DM mostly, Player occasionally | Session 0 form | He/Him/They/Them
EXTENDED SIGNATURE!
Doctor/Published Scholar/Science and Healthcare Advocate/Critter/Trekkie/Gandalf with a Glock
Try DDB free: Free Rules (2024), premade PCs, adventures, one shots, encounters, SC, homebrew, more
Answers: physical books, purchases, and subbing.
Check out my life-changing
1. By the nature of what these tools are, they cannot create new ideas. Human minds can.
2. By "factual question", I mean a question with a definitive factual answer, such as "How many HP does an adult red dragon have?" in contrast to an opinion question like "What is the best Fighter subclass?" AI tools are notoriously unreliable at the former, for reasons that The_Ace_of_Rogues spelled out above.
3. Random table generating tools that do exactly the thing you're talking about, but do not involve generative AI technology, have been around for over thirty years. They can do exactly the same thing you're describing, but with getting all the facts right every time and without destroying the environment. That's the kind of thing I'm talking about.
I am not "expecting perfection". I am saying that if a new tool can't do anything better, cheaper, or faster than an existing tool, and destroys the environment in the process, then that new tool shouldn't exist.
pronouns: he/she/they
I think that people who announce projects rarely, if ever, finish them.
Your GPT model will be outdated and practically useless by the time you finish training and customizing it.
And then you will find that you will never be able to market it.
I would quit now while you are ahead.
Your observations about AI are all true, for now. A day may come where one won't be able to tell if the person they're talking to online is a flesh and blood human or and AI. If it does let's hope it doesn't decide that humanity is a threat. It take a lot of effort for a DM to create a decent campaign with encounters and such. My goal here aside from learning how to develop AI is to ease some of that burden. I look at AI as a really sophisticated data base with natural language capability. It can help give you ideas if you are experiencing a creative block. Produce the stats, even help polish up a narrative you created.
I don't know if this project will be practical or not, or if anyone would use it once it's finished, but the only way to find out is to do it an see what happens. I don't know how to solve the environmental issues, and to be honest it's hard to tell what is or is not true when most everyone is so emotionally charged. I get that they are passionate about certain issues, but no problem is ever solved until cooler heads prevail. But AI is the future and you can't stop the future, it will be on top of us before we know, for good or ill.
Nobody needs to. It's already collapsing under its own weight
Somewhat like blockchain, AI is a solution desperately searching for a problem to solve to justify its own existence and make its investors money
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
The thing is that when you get right down to it, this is the argument that people promoting AI tools always make. Because their products provide no actual value, it's the only thing they can offer as a reason why you should use them. It screams of desperation and, as AntonSirius pointed out, it's already become incredibly obvious that it's completely false.
pronouns: he/she/they
For what it's worth, Deepseek 3's recent release is kind of blowing the doors off the story we've been told about how energy-guzzling AI has to be. There is potential for massive efficiency improvements to be made, they are just not prioritized by the big players in the US. I do believe there's a possible future where AI results in overall reduction in energy consumption, if we can avoid destroying ourselves and others long enough to get there.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
The idea that heavy use of generative AI could actually reduce energy consumption seems like pure fantasy to me, but if it actually happens I'll be pleasantly surprised.
Then we'll have a plagiarism machine that doesn't do anything useful, instead of a plagiarism machine that doesn't do anything useful while destroying the environment. Yay.
pronouns: he/she/they