Why is it so hard to find an ai free campaign?

Quote from Caerwyn_Glyndwr >>

Quote from IKVAvenger1 >>

I'm not sure what the issue is with a DM using AI for some artwork?  Not everyone is an artist (I am actually but that's not the point) and not everyone can afford to hire an artist.  Since it's just a game meant for enjoyment, why would it ruin someone's day for their DM to present a scene or diagram or whatever that was generated by AI?

Not an AI proponent at all but if a simple tool forwards the story then I don't see the negatives. 

 
This is a question that understandably gets some folks on this forum upset, but often leads to threads getting locked due to the tensions it can raise. I will try to answer this with limited editorial and sticking to the factual counter arguments:

- First, AI is built on theft.  Models need to be trained on content, such as art, writings, etc. and they do so more often than not without the consent of the original creator.  AI models are also not creative - they do not generate anything truly new, but rather synthesize from their largely stolen databases a conglomeration of the stolen content.

- Second, AI is extremely resource intensive, particularly in terms of power consumption, water (for cooling), and technological components (hence the RAM crisis hurting countless other industries).  Under present technology, the generative AI being widely used is hurting the planet in exchange for little real gain. (To be clear, I am talking about GenAI here - obviously there are places like medicine where AI has incredible utility). 

- Third, while not everyone can afford an artist, GenAI takes some of those who can afford artists and then makes it so they no longer feel the need to commission art.  Fewer consumers means less work for artists. 

- Fourth, AI is incredibly disruptive to the general workforce and has already resulted in mass layoffs, with more very likely to come.   Seemingly harmless things like GenAI art normalize usage of AI and thus help prop up support of more disruptive GenAI usage.

- Fifth, AI is demonstrably making us dumber.  Gen Z is already the first generation in history to score cognitively worse by every conceivable measure than the one prior, with a lot of that measurably attributed to technology use in education, including GenAI directly.  This problem is expected to be exacerbated for generations to follow.  That is before we even get into the significant issues of AI induced psychosis and other mental health problems.

All told, GenAI art might seem harmless, but it is built atop an objectively dangerous and disruptive industry.  It is not hard to see why folks might be against supporting such businesses.

I'll add a sixth to this -- if my DM was consistently using AI art for tokens, maps etc., I'd wonder what else in the campaign they were using AI for, and whether the campaign was ultimately worth my time if the DM was putting that little effort into it

I appreciate the detailed responses.  I don't necessarily agree and feel that it's an over-reaction.  I think it would be a stretch to assume a DM is putting little effort into a campaign because they showed a picture of a trapped door, puzzle on the floor or other visual aid that lends to the immersion of the game. However, folks are entitled to feel the way they want.  That's why we have so many flavors of ice cream.  :)

Quote from IKVAvenger1 >>

that lends to the immersion of the game.

Well, that's the thing, isn't it -- AI art would significantly decrease my "immersion", not add to it. I would much rather do TOTM than look at shitty plastic-y AI art 

Quote from AntonSirius >>

Quote from Caerwyn_Glyndwr >>

Quote from IKVAvenger1 >>

I'm not sure what the issue is with a DM using AI for some artwork?  Not everyone is an artist (I am actually but that's not the point) and not everyone can afford to hire an artist.  Since it's just a game meant for enjoyment, why would it ruin someone's day for their DM to present a scene or diagram or whatever that was generated by AI?

Not an AI proponent at all but if a simple tool forwards the story then I don't see the negatives. 

 
This is a question that understandably gets some folks on this forum upset, but often leads to threads getting locked due to the tensions it can raise. I will try to answer this with limited editorial and sticking to the factual counter arguments:

- First, AI is built on theft.  Models need to be trained on content, such as art, writings, etc. and they do so more often than not without the consent of the original creator.  AI models are also not creative - they do not generate anything truly new, but rather synthesize from their largely stolen databases a conglomeration of the stolen content.

- Second, AI is extremely resource intensive, particularly in terms of power consumption, water (for cooling), and technological components (hence the RAM crisis hurting countless other industries).  Under present technology, the generative AI being widely used is hurting the planet in exchange for little real gain. (To be clear, I am talking about GenAI here - obviously there are places like medicine where AI has incredible utility). 

- Third, while not everyone can afford an artist, GenAI takes some of those who can afford artists and then makes it so they no longer feel the need to commission art.  Fewer consumers means less work for artists. 

- Fourth, AI is incredibly disruptive to the general workforce and has already resulted in mass layoffs, with more very likely to come.   Seemingly harmless things like GenAI art normalize usage of AI and thus help prop up support of more disruptive GenAI usage.

- Fifth, AI is demonstrably making us dumber.  Gen Z is already the first generation in history to score cognitively worse by every conceivable measure than the one prior, with a lot of that measurably attributed to technology use in education, including GenAI directly.  This problem is expected to be exacerbated for generations to follow.  That is before we even get into the significant issues of AI induced psychosis and other mental health problems.

All told, GenAI art might seem harmless, but it is built atop an objectively dangerous and disruptive industry.  It is not hard to see why folks might be against supporting such businesses.

 

I'll add a sixth to this -- if my DM was consistently using AI art for tokens, maps etc., I'd wonder what else in the campaign they were using AI for, and whether the campaign was ultimately worth my time if the DM was putting that little effort into it

I get where you're coming from, but let me offer another perspective.

Art is a specialized skillset. Not everyone is a Da Vinci or Picasso. A while back while writing notes for something I want to run eventually (takes that group forever to meet so who knows when I'll finally get to use it) I did use a generator to get some images of various NPCs and monsters in addition to searching Google for images. But that's because art is a skillset I lack.

Whereas when it comes to other things, figuring out questlines / custom stack blocks is a skillset I can actually work with. It's much easier for me to be able to write down a paragraph to remind myself of an NPCs motives or the lore of an area than it is to draw. So in my case the use of generative AI was to cover a hole in a skillset I lacked, not because I wasn't interested in putting effort in overall. So that campaign I'll run some time did have a lot of effort put into it.

But, to contrast, there's been cases where I've put off prep for a one-shot until the day-of. In those cases I've searched DMs Guild for something pre-made and skimmed through to see if it interests me. So despite the lack of AI in those one-shots, there's a lot less effort I've put into making it. (Though I will say if I didn't have enough experience I wouldn't be able to pull it off. And the group has enjoyed them quite a bit too.)

So while I get where you're coming from, I wouldn't say AI = less effort. 

So I have this great Kurt Vonnegut quote that is super relevant here: "When I was 15, I spent a month working on an archaeological dig. One of the archaeologists asked those kinds of 'getting to know you' questions you ask young people: 'Do you play sports? What's your favorite subject?' And I told him, 'No, I don't play any sports. I do theater, I'm in choir, I play the violin and piano, I used to take art classes.' And he went, 'That's amazing!' And I said, 'But I'm not good at any of them.' And he said something then that I will never forget and which absolutely blew my mind: 'I don't think being good at things is the point of doing them. I think you've got all these wonderful experiences with different skills, and that all teaches you things and makes you an interesting person, no matter how well you do them.' And that honestly changed my life. Because I went from a failure, someone who hadn't been talented enough at anything to excel, to someone who did things because I enjoyed them. I had been raised in such an achievement-oriented environment, so inundated with the myth of talent, that I thought it was only worth doing things if you could 'win' at them."

It ties in with another piece of wisdom I picked up some years ago: Anything worth doing is worth doing poorly. Doing something poorly is better than doing nothing at all, and it's a step to doing better. Nobody should be expecting their DM to be cranking out visual aids on par with the Dutch masters. I mean, if you're a DM and you have the time and have put in the practice to illustrate every scene with a realist painting on par with Rembrandt, more power to you. But I'm not going to ding anyone for just using the illustrations that come with the adventure they're running. Or doing what the Outside Xbox and Outside Xtra folks used to do and using existing art, stock art, and video game screenshots. Or drawing some basic stick figures. Because those are all earnest creative efforts. Ugly art is better and shows more investment than slop every time.

We know that using AI even for brief periods erodes the ability to persist in challenging situations. It removes the opportunity for productive struggle, which is where learning, growth, and development occur. So for my players' development as players and as people I would rather see them do a stick figure or hastily edit a stock photo or snip part of a screenshot from a work of art. But I also wouldn't mind if they went with no character art because it isn't necessary and they would rather just describe their character to the group and to me as the DM. Because I want my players to be interesting people who make interesting characters. And that's not going to happen if they're engaging in cognitive surrender.

Same goes for how the players generate their characters' backstories and for how DMs generate worlds, adventures, encounters, etc. I don't need overwrought literary grandeur for character backstories, nor do I need a meticulously plotted 20-part epic cinematic universe for the setting. I'm perfectly happy when players hit me with their sad orphan growing into a power fantasy character archetypes and when DMs hit me with "you meet at an inn" adventures as long as I know they're the ones putting in the creative efforts and I get to see them exercise those creative muscles and get more confident and more creatively adventurous over time.

I've sworn off generative AI completely because of all the ethical issues anyway, but as a DM I know that my players want me to keep DMing because they want more of my storytelling. If I gave them slop instead they would have every right to be upset with me. Generative AI can never match the idea I have in my head. It doesn't have access to my mind. What it does have access to is a very large body of work stolen from others. So probability heavily favors the AI spitting out aspects of others' works mashed up together instead of anything approximating the creative idea I have in my head. And even if I just wanted to use it as a brainstorming tool to build off of, it takes so much effort to turn the slop into something worth while that it behooves me to just do it myself from the get go, and thereby do it right the first time.