WotC losening AI restrictions.

[Justisaur]

https://www.dndbeyond.com/posts/1642-updated-statement-on-ai

The text:

"
For 50 years, D&D has been built on the innovation, ingenuity, and hard
work of talented people who sculpt a beautiful, creative game. That
isn't changing. Our internal guidelines remain the same with regards to
artificial intelligence tools: We require artists, writers, and
creatives contributing to the D&D TTRPG to refrain from using AI
generative tools to create final D&D products. We work with some of the
most talented artists and creatives in the world, and we believe those
people are what makes D&D great.
"

It's not entirely clear what they mean about "final D&D products," but
they also laid off most of their art staff.


--
-Justisaur

ø-ø
(\_/)\
`-'\ `--.___,
¶¬'\( ,_.-'
\\
^'

[iron...@gmail.com]

Another reason to distance myself from WotC. There are other games.

[Spalls Hurgenson]

On Wed, 20 Dec 2023 07:38:45 -0800, Justisaur <just...@yahoo.com>
wrote:

Heh. I thought you were just giving us the highlights of their
statement, but no, that's the entirity of it.

What was their previous policy? Because their current one seems to say
that AI-generated tools /aren't/ to be used, which seems fairly
strict. Was it the same, except they threatened to kill your dog if
you tried? Otherwise, I don't see any loosening of the rules ;-)

Other than that... I don't really have issue with the policy. But I
came from an era when making D&D adventures was completely analog, so
I've obviously biased and old-school. Still, I'd much prefer the human
element to remain the primary contributor to the hobby, especially
since AI generated material (which, I admit, I've used in other
mediums) is just a regurgitation of existing ideas. Keeping humans in
the loop ensures the possibility of NEW ideas.

Then again, this is WOTC D&D. New ideas aren't their forte. You'd
think they'd be embracing AI.

Was there a point to my comments? I've sort of lost track. I'm just
ramblin' here...

[Justisaur]

Yeah, probably people overreacting at the 'not in final product' which
is fairly ambiguous. That could mean anything from using it as
placeholders (which there's some reports of, but it's not clear if that
was their doing or done without consent by artists) to using AI to make
the art and artist touching it up, or not using AI at all.

I do find it odd they're firing everyone before they release the next
version of D&D they're calling "one" (the "one" ring!) does that mean
they're done making it and just editing? What if they need to change
some art?

In any case I think the hubub about AI is (far) overblown after trying
it out a little. I am interested in seeing where suits from artists
who's art was used for training especially in instances of people using
prompts such as "In the style of {artist}" go.

- Justisaur

[gbbgu]

On 21 Dec 2023, Justisaur wrote:

> It's not entirely clear what they mean about "final D&D products," but
> they also laid off most of their art staff.

I think we've just seen the answer to what they mean by final products (eg
marketing material doesn't count as a "final product"):

Magic: The Gathering publisher Wizards of the Coast has been forced to admit
that it published a marketing image for the game featuring "some AI
components," despite an initial insistence that the art was "created by humans
and not AI."

https://www.polygon.com/24029754/wizards-coast-magic-the-gathering-ai-art-marketing-image

Magic the Gathering DID Use AI | Nerd Immersion:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-P3rsW3eDc


--
gbbgu

[kyonshi]

the question would be why I would pay for trading cards if those are
just AI generated. So I can just make the stuff myself and save some money?

(yeah I know, then it wouldn't be official, but I am only playing
kitchen table MTG, if at all)