ChatGPT & Roleplay

[Basementfellow]

schlock written by humans: based, soulful, fun
schlock generated by a language model: cringe, soulless, boring

write shamelessly. don't give in to babylon's latest psy-op.

[Achsah]

i'm only saying that since microsoft is a world wide reality at the moment and a semi monopoly governments will regulate what an ai can suggest to its user. the typical things paranoid and aggressive governments hate is speech that embarrasses them such as" the virus started in China which has no bad issues happen to them in anyway. or political speech wich contradicts the prevailing propaganda and religious speech which usually results in death. the software will be international and thus will be limited to only say what is correct in those realms by governments resulting in a company, even if in a free-speech country to limit its own ai's to comply so as to beable to even do business in their paradise country at all. or we will get ai's that limit speech directly from the paradise its self. ie china's tik tok for example. dont even begin to tell me they are not governed by bejing. i recomend improvised rp based on one's own inclination as opposed to a politically correct machine no matter how smart. in the end if one wants to use the ai for expression it will be quiet and suggest correct things for the player to say and do. if that means i remain in 20th century so be it!
in fact i tested my theory today by insulting china in every line of questioning. the result was an ai that said i cannot answer that to make long story shorter. cheers

[-XXX-]

IMO the quality of writing doesn't directly translate into the quality of RP.

Best RP tends to lend agency to other characters - provides a reason to do something or at least offers a topic for heated conversations, but most importantly offers room for CHOICES that can MEANINGFULLY INFLUENCE THE OUTCOME of the joint narrative.

One does not need masterpiece works of literature or lengthy novels for that. As a matter of fact D&D can be rather action packed so brevity in expression might often be appreciated.

TBH I couldn't care less whether somebody's using any tools to enhance their writing style. What I DO care about is this:

• are they pointlessly forcing me to read endless walls of text?
• does the interaction between our characters actually lead somewhere?
• can my character actively participate in the plot or am I being relegated into the role of a passive spectator?

[Peachoo]

cracks knuckles

Okay. So, this is something that I, as both an artist and a writer, feel strongly about when it comes to using AI in roleplay, music, and art.

The way I see AI, I see them as a wonderful potential tool that artists, writers, and musicians could use in the future as a way to sound ideas off of, experiment, or enhance the work they've already created.

However, AI should never be used to replace actual work or care taken to creating something from scratch. Not only is it lazy, but it's also ethically wrong.

The Ethical Use of AI - Why is it wrong?

Well, firstly, there are basically almost no laws around AI right now because it's a relatively new invention - at least in America. And the way that AI work is they draw from a database of collected work. However, a majority of this datapool are stolen from the artist without permission or even care for the artist. And that goes beyond visual art, but also written and musical pieces as well as writers and musicians are also artists.

So, basically, we are met with this morally awful yet legally grey area where ai bots are stealing the work of real people- sometimes people who rely on their craft to pay bills. It's wrong.

And I know the arguments, 'isn't that no different from 1 artist being inspired by another's work'. In fact, it is insanely different than this. Where 1 artist will craft a piece and start from scratch - perhaps taking inspiration from another and incorporating perhaps a color palette or a style of painting-.... the ai will straight up steal entire works of art and then merge them with other elements. Then the ai will claim it 'made it up on its own'- all the while this couldn't be further from the truth. A lot of the times, these generated pieces can even look near exactly like the piece they've stolen from.

My work, actually, has been stolen in this way. In fact, one of the commissions I did here in the Arelith Community- a kobold pc- was stolen straight from one of my online art portfolios where I have it written that I do NOT want my work used in ai generated art. Yet, without my permission, the image was stolen and submitted to a database of over 5 million other stolen work.

AI and Roleplay

Chat GPT in particular can actually be a great 'sounding board' when it comes to things like stories, fixtures or even your own written work. From time to time, I've even used it to spruce up work I have already written or to see if it'll help me think of an idea of how to rewrite something better.

I think this is absolutely okay. As you are using your own written work as the basis for the writing. Which is intellectually your property and you can do with that writing what you want.

However, using Chat GPT to completely replace your roleplay or to allow it to come up with every post you want to post in role play is, in my opinion, incredibly lazy and unrealistic. Not only will it ruin the immersion because there are social queues, notes, and other things that'll make it incredibly obvious what you're doing... but it's also not your own work.

In my opinion, Chat GPT is not capable of reaching quality level of rp and cannot 'read the room' or 'add to an ongoing narrative as it happens in real time'.

While Chat GPT may not be as 'bad' as other AI, it still should only really be used as a tool to empower your own writing and nothing more. If you rely on it too heavily like a crutch, your own writing will never get better either.

Take care all.

[Cthuletta]

cracks knuckles

Okay. So, this is something that I, as both an artist and a writer, feel strongly about when it comes to using AI in roleplay, music, and art.

The way I see AI, I see them as a wonderful potential tool that artists, writers, and musicians could use in the future as a way to sound ideas off of, experiment, or enhance the work they've already created.

However, AI should never be used to replace actual work or care taken to creating something from scratch. Not only is it lazy, but it's also ethically wrong.

The Ethical Use of AI - Why is it wrong?

Well, firstly, there are basically almost no laws around AI right now because it's a relatively new invention - at least in America. And the way that AI work is they draw from a database of collected work. However, a majority of this datapool are stolen from the artist without permission or even care for the artist. And that goes beyond visual art, but also written and musical pieces as well as writers and musicians are also artists.

So, basically, we are met with this morally awful yet legally grey area where ai bots are stealing the work of real people- sometimes people who rely on their craft to pay bills. It's wrong.

And I know the arguments, 'isn't that no different from 1 artist being inspired by another's work'. In fact, it is insanely different than this. Where 1 artist will craft a piece and start from scratch - perhaps taking inspiration from another and incorporating perhaps a color palette or a style of painting-.... the ai will straight up steal entire works of art and then merge them with other elements. Then the ai will claim it 'made it up on its own'- all the while this couldn't be further from the truth. A lot of the times, these generated pieces can even look near exactly like the piece they've stolen from.

My work, actually, has been stolen in this way. In fact, one of the commissions I did here in the Arelith Community- a kobold pc- was stolen straight from one of my online art portfolios where I have it written that I do NOT want my work used in ai generated art. Yet, without my permission, the image was stolen and submitted to a database of over 5 million other stolen work.

From one artist to another, this. ALL OF THE THIS.
Doing commission artwork is my only personal income, and not only have my commissions severely declined with the rise of AI art ('because it's free, duh!'), but having my art used in AI when I don't want it to be is very upsetting. I'm lucky in that it's not the sole income of my household.
Writers and musicians are also artists... and I saw a meme the other day that at first made me chuckle, but then made me sad.
'The robots making music and painting while real people struggle with minimum wage jobs is not the future I wanted.'

AI Chat as a sounding board isn't that bad... YET. But it could be a slippery slope, we just don't know. So, couldn't agree with you more, Peachoo, very well written and well said.

[Old Lies Die Harder]

Something I will point out is that I have worked multiple times with a handful of individual artists (4-5, if I were to guess) on commissioned pieces.

About 3/4 of the time, they ask specifically for reference images. Images. Drawings, paintings, or photographs (ie, art) that are used in designing the composition. The level of difference between the finished product the artist produces and the reference image/images varies from artist to artist and commission to commission, but I've had pieces done where a casual glance can easily catch the presence of the reference image in the piece.

In all cases, I have never seen or heard an artists or models in reference images, and in many cases I know explicitly they haven't gained consent to use the image from the original creator because I provided the images, including some that were my own photographs or basic sketches.

So the question I pose here is how is AI using 'reference images' to assemble a derivative composition with elements remixed from other references any different than artist using a pose reference from photo they skimmed from Instagram, 2-3 pieces of character kit from photos on Pinterest/Etsy, stark mountains and rocky landscapes from good 'ol Ansel Adams, and a still from a movie?

[Inordinate]

So the question I pose here is how is AI using 'reference images' to assemble a derivative composition with elements remixed from other references any different than artist using a pose reference from photo they skimmed from Instagram, 2-3 pieces of character kit from photos on Pinterest/Etsy, stark mountains and rocky landscapes from good 'ol Ansel Adams, and a still from a movie?

It's an issue of scale. ChatGPT and the vast majority of AI-generated images are scraping millions of samples for their work. Someone commissioning an artist in your example is not.

[Cthuletta]

Something I will point out is that I have worked multiple times with a handful of individual artists (4-5, if I were to guess) on commissioned pieces.

About 3/4 of the time, they ask specifically for reference images. Images. Drawings, paintings, or photographs (ie, art) that are used in designing the composition. The level of difference between the finished product the artist produces and the reference image/images varies from artist to artist and commission to commission, but I've had pieces done where a casual glance can easily catch the presence of the reference image in the piece.

In all cases, I have never seen or heard an artists or models in reference images, and in many cases I know explicitly they haven't gained consent to use the image from the original creator because I provided the images, including some that were my own photographs or basic sketches.

So the question I pose here is how is AI using 'reference images' to assemble a derivative composition with elements remixed from other references any different than artist using a pose reference from photo they skimmed from Instagram, 2-3 pieces of character kit from photos on Pinterest/Etsy, stark mountains and rocky landscapes from good 'ol Ansel Adams, and a still from a movie?

The main difference is that if you took three reference images, say a screenshot, a still from a movie, and some rocky landscapes, and take those images to an artist, there's an infinite amount of poses or compositions that can be done with it. Style is also unique to every artist, even if it's in a minor form. No matter who that artist is, you'll have something completely unique that is unlike anything else out there because it was made specifically for you with you in mind.
Give a computer three images, there's probably a pretty limited amount of images they can spit at you, and anyone can replicate it with the same program. It'll be common, in my opinion. If anyone can do it, it's just not as special, but that might be a personal bias/hang up.
Personally, I very rarely if ever get 'reference images' that are from another artist, unless it's an image that person has PAID FOR of the same character I am now drawing. Given I commonly draw people from real life, or characters from games, it's usually screenshots of that character, a picture of the person, or an expression on an actor that they want their character to portray the same 'feel' of.

Not to mention... I put years upon years of hard work, practice, and passion into my craft, and still do because it's what I love and what I want to do, so I can improve. An AI can't replicate that, no matter how hard it 'tries'. There's also a pretty big difference in me using a reference sketch or even a picture of my own hand to draw a hand pose I want, and straight up stealing someone else's art that they worked hard on to poorly mimic it in most ways, from the hand poses, to the hair, to the shading style, and the proportions. Can it be cool? Sure. There are programs out there that only use pictures where artists have consented to have their pieces used- I support THAT and find no issue with it.

... But mine can reliably have five fingers on each hand, I'm just sayin'.

[magistrasa]

I care very much about fostering an environment that encourages better roleplay, and I think examining the role that this new tool can play in our craft is a worthwhile discussion. I'm not interested in discussing the implications of AI's presence in artistic fields for broader society - at least, I'm not interested in discussing it here - so if you engage in this topic, please try to keep it focused on how you think AI interacts with Arelith and with roleplay in general, whether good or bad.

Please. I'm so tired and I ask for so little.

[Peachoo]

cracks knuckles

Okay. So, this is something that I, as both an artist and a writer, feel strongly about when it comes to using AI in roleplay, music, and art.

The way I see AI, I see them as a wonderful potential tool that artists, writers, and musicians could use in the future as a way to sound ideas off of, experiment, or enhance the work they've already created.

However, AI should never be used to replace actual work or care taken to creating something from scratch. Not only is it lazy, but it's also ethically wrong.

The Ethical Use of AI - Why is it wrong?

Well, firstly, there are basically almost no laws around AI right now because it's a relatively new invention - at least in America. And the way that AI work is they draw from a database of collected work. However, a majority of this datapool are stolen from the artist without permission or even care for the artist. And that goes beyond visual art, but also written and musical pieces as well as writers and musicians are also artists.

So, basically, we are met with this morally awful yet legally grey area where ai bots are stealing the work of real people- sometimes people who rely on their craft to pay bills. It's wrong.

And I know the arguments, 'isn't that no different from 1 artist being inspired by another's work'. In fact, it is insanely different than this. Where 1 artist will craft a piece and start from scratch - perhaps taking inspiration from another and incorporating perhaps a color palette or a style of painting-.... the ai will straight up steal entire works of art and then merge them with other elements. Then the ai will claim it 'made it up on its own'- all the while this couldn't be further from the truth. A lot of the times, these generated pieces can even look near exactly like the piece they've stolen from.

My work, actually, has been stolen in this way. In fact, one of the commissions I did here in the Arelith Community- a kobold pc- was stolen straight from one of my online art portfolios where I have it written that I do NOT want my work used in ai generated art. Yet, without my permission, the image was stolen and submitted to a database of over 5 million other stolen work.

From one artist to another, this. ALL OF THE THIS.
Doing commission artwork is my only personal income, and not only have my commissions severely declined with the rise of AI art ('because it's free, duh!'), but having my art used in AI when I don't want it to be is very upsetting. I'm lucky in that it's not the sole income of my household.
Writers and musicians are also artists... and I saw a meme the other day that at first made me chuckle, but then made me sad.
'The robots making music and painting while real people struggle with minimum wage jobs is not the future I wanted.'

AI Chat as a sounding board isn't that bad... YET. But it could be a slippery slope, we just don't know. So, couldn't agree with you more, Peachoo, very well written and well said.

Thanks. I honestly feel like I only touched/summarized on the issue. I think a lot of people don't realize how big of a deal AI bots are on the creative community. Artists of all kinds, whether you be an actor, musician, content creators, writer, or visual artist, are consistently undercut in terms of fair pay and benefits all over the world because it has been normalized to treat artists like crap.

We already must deal with the fact that if you go into an art field, you most likely will not have a stable income and it will likely be contractually based.

I, professionally, work in insurance and do my artwork on the side because I am not confident enough to reasonably make a consistent income from painting alone in this economy/society.

If you are curious if your own work has been stolen, https://haveibeentrained.com is one of the larger databases that many AI use and you can check to see if it's stolen your work. I think there is a way to opt out of your work being used, but they should really ask that BEFORE they steal it.

I have a lot of friends who are in your same position, and it really makes me mad how this issue is pretty much treated as a non-issue by those outside the art community a lot of the time. I'm really sorry you're having to deal with it in your professional life.

[Peachoo]

Something I will point out is that I have worked multiple times with a handful of individual artists (4-5, if I were to guess) on commissioned pieces.

About 3/4 of the time, they ask specifically for reference images. Images. Drawings, paintings, or photographs (ie, art) that are used in designing the composition. The level of difference between the finished product the artist produces and the reference image/images varies from artist to artist and commission to commission, but I've had pieces done where a casual glance can easily catch the presence of the reference image in the piece.

In all cases, I have never seen or heard an artists or models in reference images, and in many cases I know explicitly they haven't gained consent to use the image from the original creator because I provided the images, including some that were my own photographs or basic sketches.

So the question I pose here is how is AI using 'reference images' to assemble a derivative composition with elements remixed from other references any different than artist using a pose reference from photo they skimmed from Instagram, 2-3 pieces of character kit from photos on Pinterest/Etsy, stark mountains and rocky landscapes from good 'ol Ansel Adams, and a still from a movie?

The Ethical Use of AI - Why is it wrong?

Well, firstly, there are basically almost no laws around AI right now because it's a relatively new invention - at least in America. And the way that AI work is they draw from a database of collected work. However, a majority of this datapool are stolen from the artist without permission or even care for the artist. And that goes beyond visual art, but also written and musical pieces as well as writers and musicians are also artists.

So, basically, we are met with this morally awful yet legally grey area where ai bots are stealing the work of real people- sometimes people who rely on their craft to pay bills. It's wrong.

And I know the arguments, 'isn't that no different from 1 artist being inspired by another's work'. In fact, it is insanely different than this. Where 1 artist will craft a piece and start from scratch - perhaps taking inspiration from another and incorporating perhaps a color palette or a style of painting-.... the ai will straight up steal entire works of art and then merge them with other elements. Then the ai will claim it 'made it up on its own'- all the while this couldn't be further from the truth. A lot of the times, these generated pieces can even look near exactly like the piece they've stolen from.

I have already touched on this before in my post. However, I will elaborate a little more here while AI bots do not 'take inspiration'. What AI bots do is not the same thing as artists looking at others for inspiration. This is copy pasted from something that I wrote a few days ago on this very topic:

I understand the argument that some artist take 'inspiration' from other artists all the time. And some people may argue that this is what a bot does.

However, this is not what a bot does.

A bot is a program, not a person. It doesn't have a conscious. It doesn't have the ability to discern right from wrong. It doesn't have the ability to look at a technique and then create their own artwork from scratch utilizing that technique. It can't be 'inspired'. It can't tastefully take notes or inspiration from another artists work and then make their own work using techniques or colors they saw another artist do.

What a bot does, is it collects a data pool in which it literally takes from any art posted on the internet. No effort is given to ask permission from the author. An Ai is not only incapable of asking permission, but it also is incapable of knowing what to 'draw' from. It literally cannot make anything from nothing.

It doesn't do preliminary sketches. It doesn't study the subject of their work. It doesn't take pieces from nature or numerous sources to create. It just takes pre-existing stolen artwork and slaps them together with little effort. Often times, this product looks nearly exactly like the artwork it's stolen, and is a rip off. A majority of the time, if these pieces of 'ai art' were actually made by a person, that person could be sued for plagerism/copyright infringement in the court of law.

However, similar to how ai-driven cars, there are basically no laws right now on AI bots or regulation of them. So, there is virtually nothing legally that can be done about this theft.

Real artists, people, do not do this when they take inspiration from another persons art. From personal experience, I may come across someone's artstyle that I fall in love with and want to try.
I may study their style but I will never, ever, straight up steal that work from their portfolio. I will spend anywhere from a few hours to sometimes weeks, looking for real life photos of poses or scenery that I may want to paint in that style. Then I may make some preliminary sketches of the character or scene I want to paint in that style. Then I will spend days or weeks experimenting with the style and putting my own spin on it. In this way, it isn't plagiarism or copyright infringement, but using a new technique to create a new piece of artwork. An artist, a human, may create something brand new by utilizing that color palette or some style of something they saw.

I would like to note that this is just a summary of the time, work, and planning that goes into each new piece of artwork that is very standard in the art community when it comes to visual pieces using paint as a medium. I would argue that even more time is spent when it comes to the writing medium. It straight up takes the piece, copies it, and then pastes it as a baseline. Many times some of these pieces are straight up nearly copy pasted pixel by pixel and then minutely photoshoped or blended with a different stolen piece of work. That is extremely different than what an artists does when they 'take inspiration' Artists who straight up copy and paste others work are often vilified and socially shunned, as they should be. Because this is plagiarism.

Artists, too, who take inspiration but also end up creating a work far too close to the original can also be considered to be plagiarizing too. There is a balance here that Ai bots are incapable of achieving because they do not make anything from scratch- like people do.

Ultimately, regardless if it is paintings or written word, these pieces are not even good, often just straight up plagiarism/copyright infringement, and are harmful.

Hopefully that makes more sense.

For anyone who would rather watch a video or would like to learn more, here is a helpful video that I think explains it very well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Viy3Cu3DLk

[magistrasa]

Can we at least try to connect this discussion to the original topic?

No?

Alright, fine. Let's talk about AI art, I guess.

how is AI using 'reference images' to assemble a derivative composition with elements remixed from other references any different than [a human] artist

Well, firstly, there are basically almost no laws around AI right now
[...] ai bots are stealing the work of real people
[An] artist will craft a piece and start from scratch - perhaps taking inspiration from another and incorporating perhaps a color palette or a style of painting-.... the ai will straight up steal entire works of art and then merge them with other elements.

[...] What AI bots do is not the same thing as artists looking at others for inspiration.
[...] some people may argue that this is what a bot does. However, this is not what a bot does.
A bot is a program, not a person. It doesn't have a conscious.
[...] What a bot does, is it collects a data pool in which it literally takes from any art posted on the internet.
It doesn't do [preliminary research as part of the artistic process]. It just takes pre-existing stolen artwork and slaps them together with little effort.
[...] Real artists, people, do not do this when they take inspiration from another persons art.
[...] In this way, it isn't plagiarism or copyright infringement, but using a new technique to create a new piece of artwork.
[...] It straight up takes the piece, copies it, and then pastes it as a baseline.
[...] That is extremely different than what an artists does when they 'take inspiration'
[...] There is a balance here that Ai bots are incapable of achieving because they do not make anything from scratch
[...] these pieces are not even good, often just straight up plagiarism/copyright infringement, and are harmful.

I'm going to single you out here because 1) I'm admittedly a little annoyed at how you're hijacking my thread, and 2) you're supporting a cause I believe in but are kinda doing a bad job of it. I don't think you realize how little of an argument you've just spent several paragraphs hammering out. This is essentially just an attempt at moral hypnotism - an emotionally charged repetition of the same basic concepts that are already well-understood - "AI aren't people" and "actually this is plagerism" - without actually establishing why this should be a relevant consideration. Worse, you're actually setting up the idea that artists do actually do the same thing, and the primary difference is that they're just trying harder at it and taking longer with it.

In my estimation, this is the actual strength that artists have over AI: Symbolic literacy. When French painter Theodore Gericault made the protagonist of "The Raft of the Medusa" a dark-skinned man, that meant something. When Artemisia Gentileschi painted the face of her rapist into "Judith Slaying Holofernes," that meant something. Hieronymus Bosch's "Garden of Earthly Delights" isn't just a silly little ha-ha circus of obscenities, it is full of interconnected scenes and vignettes that individually and collectively mean something. An artist can act with the intentionality to draw forth meaning and revelation in their work that may incite its audience and provoke thought and reflection. A character's expression, color scheme, attire, hairstyle, accessories, are all deliberately chosen to convey a deeper level of the subject's personality. Conversely, an AI artist will just throw in whatever they've been taught by their algorithms "looks cool" and - at least for now - isn't capable of incorporating meaningful symbolism in their work.

That being said, this isn't an effective argument against the original query either. The average character commissioner isn't usually all that interested in seeing their character illustrated into a "message," they're not expecting profundity in the piece they're paying anywhere from $50 to $150 for. "Looking cool" is about all they want from the illustrator, and they probably wouldn't care whether or not the artist themselves plagerized the whole thing if it meant they could get that experience. Look at how many people use uncredited art for character portraits in our very own Arelith community, or post random Twitter finds to the discord #art channel saying, "omg this is so [insert character]," even though it's obviously not meant to be the character they're naming. Most people just want the experience of "seeing" their creation come to life, and will be satisfied with whatever version of that experience is most accessible to them. That's why AI art has such widespread appeal - art has been considered inaccessible to the common person for so long that there's a genuine starvation for creative expression, and all the commissioned artists in the world could never satisfy the demand.

That's also something that bothers me about the moral argument, by the way. Tossing around words like "hurtful" and "unethical" attributes a malicious intent to the pursuit of a fulfillment that every human being desperately needs and yearns for. No one's a worse person for using AI image generators instead of requesting or commissioning art from a human. This is ultimately a consequence of the fact that most people don't have the time or resources to fulfill their need for creative expression without the help of free software. It's like blaming the communities who live in food deserts for their unhealthy eating habits. "You must not realize that your McDonald's hamburger was made using unethical factory farms that are causing irreparable harm to the environment." Uh, dude, everyone knows that - but what are they supposed to do to change the system when they're just trying to get by?

I'm not a great artist. Maybe I'm hypercritical of myself, but I'd say I've never made anything that one could consider "cool" without a generous spirit. In spite of my low-to-mid-tier abilities, I've still made something of a name for myself in at least this community, and I've gotten way more commission work than an artist of my skill level rightly deserves. I haven't actually drawn anything in months and the quality of my recent work has been sort of terrible as a result, and yet I still regularly receive commission requests that I wish to god I could accept because I need the money so bad. The reason for this, as far as I can tell, is because art isn't just a creative experience, but also a highly social experience. To feel a sense of fellowship from the fact that your money is going to support someone you know and cherish within your community, to work together with someone on crafting the final piece, to share it with friends and be able to point at a person you all know and say, "That's the one who made this beautiful thing that I love!" There's an element of prestige to it, I think - but more than that, it's about sharing an identity with someone and connecting on that deeper level. Commissioning art for a character you love, discussing ideas with an artist you admire, sharing art you've taken the time to make, is all an act of vulnerability. All of that is a valuable part of the art experience, and that's something AI will never replicate. Maybe I'm just speaking for myself here, but I think that's where the real terror that lies in our visions for the future. When we live in a post-artist world, what happens to the communities that have been granted unity and identity by the art we once shared?

More importantly... How am I going to now connect this post back to the main topic?

Let's try this.

AI generated art and poetry lack the symbolic fluency that gives meaning to the words and images they're based off of. I think over time people will come to realize this through the oversaturation of key-word "cinematic, hyper realistic, moving, epic, 4k, sharp, trending on art station" images and rudimentary poetry that resembles the craft only in its ability to spit out rhymes, and begin to hunger for something deeper than what an AI provides. As has been stated in this thread, when someone writes something in-game with AI, people who are paying any kind of attention can tell. The way they can tell is from the fact that an AI will use a lot of words to say very little. I think the chatbots are an interesting tool to examine because I imagine it's significantly less gratifying than the image generators to use and claim as your own creation, since authorship is arguably an even more personal form of expression than illustration. Copying and pasting straight from a chatbot and claiming the text as your own, I would imagine, can only be a means to an end - a way to glorify oneself in the eyes of their audience as someone intelligent and well-spoken and possessing a broad body of literature to their name so as to impart a sense of authority on a subject matter. "I'm the best Enchanter who ever graced these isles, gaze upon my 32-volume series on enchantment magic and see for yourself how dedicated I am to the craft." And I can definitely see that causing Problems, especially since I've experienced in-game how reluctant librarians are to throw away books that are straight garbage. The last time someone put one of my characters in charge of organizing a private library, I almost got PvP'd because I was throwing away all the module books that were just taking up space and weren't relevant to the stated interests of the library and served no audience. Libraries in game are already widely mocked as vanity projects, little more than a pointless book collection that no one, not even the librarian, bothers to actually read. The point of literature has been twisted by the culture. The objective is not to have something to say, but to be seen saying it. Therefore, it does not matter whether your work is read or not. And when the reading is irrelevant, who cares what did the writing?

Anyways, speaking of not bothering to read things.

if you engage in this topic, please try to keep it focused on how you think AI interacts with Arelith and with roleplay in general, whether good or bad.

[Nelly Hope]

Things I've used chatgpt for in game...

1. Character descriptions in different formats (most recently an illisionist mage description written in Iambic pentameter)

2. Fixture descriptions - with editing and rewriting

Things I haven't or failed to use chatgpt for in game:

1. Conversations
2. Character songs
3. Emotive exposition
4. Anything else done in real time.

Chatgpt and any LLM for that matter requires effort. Less effort than writing a compelling 3 paragraph item description, but effort nonetheless. You have to try different prompts, different ideas, substitute words, or rework entire sentences. Several times I've scrapped a prompt and started from scratch. I've also written my own descriptions that I'd typically use and asked it to rewrite it with more of something.

I'll provide a quick example:

(My version) An altar for Grumbar, using the broken granite alter placed in a cave:

The fractured altar stands against a wall, dirt falling out of the cave's wall. The dirt fills cracks and the altar seems to be receeding into earth. Down the sides and around its base, glyphs and pictures are etched into the side depicting the history of a village that this altar once belonged to: bountiful harvests, large feasts, and a wedding. The missing fragments and cracks obscure any history that may once have been displayed.

(The prompt)
Rewrite the text at an 11th grade level, using descriptive language. Use only 2 paragraphs. Make sure to highlight the assumed age of the altar. An altar for Grumbar, using the broken granite alter placed in a cave:

(The result with zero edits:)
Nestled clandestinely within the dim embrace of a subterranean cave, a fractured altar, ostensibly aged by untold centuries, leans wearily against the rugged wall, seemingly engaged in a perpetual struggle to withstand the ravages of time. Granules of earth, dislodged from the slowly eroding cave wall, cascade gently downwards, silently filling the altar's crevices and gradually welcoming it into the bosom of the very element it seeks to resist. Gentle shadows flicker and dance across the aged, broken granite, weaving an ephemeral tale of decay and forgotten epochs, while the altar, a once-proud symbol of faith, gradually succumbs to an inevitable reclamation by the unyielding earth.

Upon closer observation, the remnants of a bygone era are meticulously etched into the sides and around the base of the altar, revealing glimpses of the rich tapestry of a village that once drew unity and purpose from its now-crumbled visage. Depictions of bountiful harvests, exuberant feasts, and a poignant wedding ceremony elegantly unfold upon the granite canvas, providing a silent testament to the vitality that once pulsed through the community that venerated Grumbar, the Earthlord. Alas, the missing fragments and sprawling cracks, like missing pages from a delicate historical manuscript, shroud the complete history in an enigma, allowing only fragments of tales and half-told stories to whisper through the silent, rocky cavern.

Now, would I edit this, absolutely, especially in the first paragraph. But it is several steps above what i made in but in a few seconds vs my 5+ minutes.

[Captain_Siix]

Things I've used chatgpt for in game...

1. Character descriptions in different formats (most recently an illisionist mage description written in Iambic pentameter)

2. Fixture descriptions - with editing and rewriting

Things I haven't or failed to use chatgpt for in game:

1. Conversations
2. Character songs
3. Emotive exposition
4. Anything else done in real time.

Chatgpt and any LLM for that matter requires effort. Less effort than writing a compelling 3 paragraph item description, but effort nonetheless. You have to try different prompts, different ideas, substitute words, or rework entire sentences. Several times I've scrapped a prompt and started from scratch. I've also written my own descriptions that I'd typically use and asked it to rewrite it with more of something.

I'll provide a quick example:

(My version) An altar for Grumbar, using the broken granite alter placed in a cave:

The fractured altar stands against a wall, dirt falling out of the cave's wall. The dirt fills cracks and the altar seems to be receeding into earth. Down the sides and around its base, glyphs and pictures are etched into the side depicting the history of a village that this altar once belonged to: bountiful harvests, large feasts, and a wedding. The missing fragments and cracks obscure any history that may once have been displayed.

(The prompt)
Rewrite the text at an 11th grade level, using descriptive language. Use only 2 paragraphs. Make sure to highlight the assumed age of the altar. An altar for Grumbar, using the broken granite alter placed in a cave:

(The result with zero edits:)
Nestled clandestinely within the dim embrace of a subterranean cave, a fractured altar, ostensibly aged by untold centuries, leans wearily against the rugged wall, seemingly engaged in a perpetual struggle to withstand the ravages of time. Granules of earth, dislodged from the slowly eroding cave wall, cascade gently downwards, silently filling the altar's crevices and gradually welcoming it into the bosom of the very element it seeks to resist. Gentle shadows flicker and dance across the aged, broken granite, weaving an ephemeral tale of decay and forgotten epochs, while the altar, a once-proud symbol of faith, gradually succumbs to an inevitable reclamation by the unyielding earth.

Upon closer observation, the remnants of a bygone era are meticulously etched into the sides and around the base of the altar, revealing glimpses of the rich tapestry of a village that once drew unity and purpose from its now-crumbled visage. Depictions of bountiful harvests, exuberant feasts, and a poignant wedding ceremony elegantly unfold upon the granite canvas, providing a silent testament to the vitality that once pulsed through the community that venerated Grumbar, the Earthlord. Alas, the missing fragments and sprawling cracks, like missing pages from a delicate historical manuscript, shroud the complete history in an enigma, allowing only fragments of tales and half-told stories to whisper through the silent, rocky cavern.

Now, would I edit this, absolutely, especially in the first paragraph. But it is several steps above what i made in but in a few seconds vs my 5+ minutes.

While the description is good it's unreasonably long-winded. I see these characters with descriptions where I have to scroll 20 times to get to the bottom. Most players do not care and instead of getting a brief description of your character the player gets nothing. This week I have seen 2 descriptions and I'm 90% sure they were AI generated. You curated it to 2 paragraphs but most let it print out the entire story book.

I guess my main point is that less is more and if it's short it'll get read if it's long it wont.

[great balls of fire]

nothing is more insulting then roleplaying with people and someone breaks out the AI generated content. i put a lot of care and attention into my writing (and not all of it even ends up being 'good') but i bring it to the table and share it ic anyway because i did my best. so when i come to the potluck with my carefully prepared baked goods and somebody brings a bag of half-eaten fritos from the gas station, i'm going to be disappointed.

i will always prefer your bad out of meter poetry and cringey rambling stories over AI swill. the only concession i'll make is using it to help you edit or rearrange something you, the player, wrote initially.

if i wanted to rp with robots i'd get a replika.

[Kuma]

Things I've used chatgpt for in game...

1. Character descriptions in different formats (most recently an illisionist mage description written in Iambic pentameter)

2. Fixture descriptions - with editing and rewriting

Things I haven't or failed to use chatgpt for in game:

1. Conversations
2. Character songs
3. Emotive exposition
4. Anything else done in real time.

Chatgpt and any LLM for that matter requires effort. Less effort than writing a compelling 3 paragraph item description, but effort nonetheless. You have to try different prompts, different ideas, substitute words, or rework entire sentences. Several times I've scrapped a prompt and started from scratch. I've also written my own descriptions that I'd typically use and asked it to rewrite it with more of something.

I'll provide a quick example:

(My version) An altar for Grumbar, using the broken granite alter placed in a cave:

The fractured altar stands against a wall, dirt falling out of the cave's wall. The dirt fills cracks and the altar seems to be receeding into earth. Down the sides and around its base, glyphs and pictures are etched into the side depicting the history of a village that this altar once belonged to: bountiful harvests, large feasts, and a wedding. The missing fragments and cracks obscure any history that may once have been displayed.

(The prompt)
Rewrite the text at an 11th grade level, using descriptive language. Use only 2 paragraphs. Make sure to highlight the assumed age of the altar. An altar for Grumbar, using the broken granite alter placed in a cave:

(The result with zero edits:)
Nestled clandestinely within the dim embrace of a subterranean cave, a fractured altar, ostensibly aged by untold centuries, leans wearily against the rugged wall, seemingly engaged in a perpetual struggle to withstand the ravages of time. Granules of earth, dislodged from the slowly eroding cave wall, cascade gently downwards, silently filling the altar's crevices and gradually welcoming it into the bosom of the very element it seeks to resist. Gentle shadows flicker and dance across the aged, broken granite, weaving an ephemeral tale of decay and forgotten epochs, while the altar, a once-proud symbol of faith, gradually succumbs to an inevitable reclamation by the unyielding earth.

Upon closer observation, the remnants of a bygone era are meticulously etched into the sides and around the base of the altar, revealing glimpses of the rich tapestry of a village that once drew unity and purpose from its now-crumbled visage. Depictions of bountiful harvests, exuberant feasts, and a poignant wedding ceremony elegantly unfold upon the granite canvas, providing a silent testament to the vitality that once pulsed through the community that venerated Grumbar, the Earthlord. Alas, the missing fragments and sprawling cracks, like missing pages from a delicate historical manuscript, shroud the complete history in an enigma, allowing only fragments of tales and half-told stories to whisper through the silent, rocky cavern.

Now, would I edit this, absolutely, especially in the first paragraph. But it is several steps above what i made in but in a few seconds vs my 5+ minutes.

yeah but it sucks

like

i don't care how much "effort" went into the prompt (functionally nil, but nevertheless), that's a bad, overwrought description.

if a person wrote that i'd feel more charitable, because effort, care, and intention went into that - and because every effort they make may result in them getting better! that's practice! that's a net gain!

this, however, is stagnant.

i prefer your original. unironically, it's better. it's more concise, still gets what you wanted across, and isn't pissing at me with a thesaurus to stretch out the same singular idea over two huge paragraphs.

one thing i tell my writers is that brevity, punchiness, conciseness, are GOOD. they are also hard! and i can genuinely tell you your original description fits in with what i'd expect and desire far more than what you got a robot to do.

do i have feedback? absolutely. could i offer you input and suggestions on your paragraph to improve your writing? absolutely.

but instead of wanting to improve your writing, you turned to the robot and got it to squeeze two giant paragraphs of bad writing out instead

[Second Breakfast]

Generally, you can tell when something is written by a generative AI… especially songs or poetry. Some pieces of it will make no sense, rhymes are something that it does at a fourth-grade level, and the entire thing just lacks pathos and soul because it’s just a language model regurgitating what you put into it. No amount of refinement to the prompt will change that.

As someone who plays creative-minded characters, nothing is more heartbreaking than discovering someone used generative AI for something they are passing off as written by their character. On another server, I witnessed a play that was written entirely by generative AI and it was the saddest thing that I have ever sat through. It was made even more sad by the fact that the person who “wrote” the play was a very capable writer and did not need to rely on such a thing as a crutch.

Trust me, I would much rather those whose writing isn’t strong soldier through it and produce something that’s nevertheless authentic and genuine than turn to a hollow, soulless writing factory.

[Windows95 CD-ROM]

Hello guys. I've seen chat GPT descriptions on players and placeables and they're usually:

1. Too long and verbose
2. Typically have a whole lot of nothing to say and doesn't flow very well.

It's usually very easy for me to tell that something is chat GPT. It has a certain cadence and repetition to it that I usually can tell right away, and usually says a whole lot of nothing. It also gives me an uncanny valley feeling of soulessness. I like things with soul. I want to interact and RP with... personality and creativity. It's genuine to me.

As a rule of thumb as well, I find most chat GPT descriptions and write ups far too verbose for my liking. If it exceeds two paragraphs, I will not read a description. In the amount of time I could have read such a verbose and long-winded description, I could have walked up and started RPing with someone and found out what they were about in those same 2-3 minutes, and enjoyed it far more.

[Eyeliner]

Six-paragraph long rambling descriptions that could have been quick and to the point were common long before ChatGPT. I'm not surprised it's being used for that now but it's not a new thing.

It exists, it's not going away and I am pretty sure it's too difficult to police to make a hard rule against it. If you use it hopefully it will be as a tool to help shape your own writing (which it is good for) and you don't just cut and paste without heavy editing and reworking.

[Perplexia]

i've used an AI language model a couple of times now to aid in writing descriptions, particularly with item/fixture descriptions which i feel i otherwise struggle with

my approach so far has been to:

• write something to the best of my ability
• have the AI rewrite it but with its usual sickeningly flowery prose, maybe repeat a few times until i get a few good results
• take what little usable writing it provides to lightly enhance my initial writing

this helps me to give things a certain flair that i otherwise wouldn't have come up with myself - sort of like using a thesaurus, but for sentences

generally it doesn't do a very good job of it, and most of the time i'd be better off looking at others' works for inspiration, but it's certainly a nice tool to assist in the less creative parts of the writing process

i would never consider using it for anything i was truly passionate about, though, such as any form of in-character writing like songs or poetry, or a description for something intended to have any sort of sentimental value

[Curve]

When I describe an item or fixture in game it is because I find it fun to do so and I have always assumed that others do so for the same reason. Using one of these programs to write or assist in your writing does not seem that fun or challenging.

I can understand using the programs for a school assignment or job that you don’t really care about. I fundamentally don’t understand using them for a thing you are passionate about.

Is the joy for some people placing the finished item or being seen as someone who makes cool items rather than the act of writing it yourself?

I am genuinely confused.

[great balls of fire]

over use of adjectives and adverbs are a common trend in arelith descriptions. i sense it's usually done to convey a certain style (the wordy purple prose of the romance era) or to convey how very attractive/masterfully crafted/mysterious/trait they are by reminding the reader of these traits at every opportunity.

as kuma's said, longer descriptions do not mean better quality. it's much better to have a short paragraph that readily explains everything the writer is trying to convey about [the thing] then 20 paragraphs of prose. brevity is wit. on the same hand, it's also much harder to write a single paragraph description of a thing that conveys the character.

if you're looking for examples to inspire yourself, next time you read a book, pay attention to how the author introduces a new character. you might notice only 2-5 sentences committed to talking about how they look. everything else you need to know about the character is conveyed throughout the rest of the story and their actions/behavior/scene context.

[Yma23]

When I describe an item or fixture in game it is because I find it fun to do so and I have always assumed that others do so for the same reason. Using one of these programs to write or assist in your writing does not seem that fun or challenging.

I can understand using the programs for a school assignment or job that you don’t really care about. I fundamentally don’t understand using them for a thing you are passionate about.

Is the joy for some people placing the finished item or being seen as someone who makes cool items rather than the act of writing it yourself?

I am genuinely confused.

I can sort of see why. You don't want your house/shop filled with fixtures that have the automatic description on them, you want something that suggests a little more than that.

That said I'm not really sure that ChatGPT is needed for that.

If it's a fixture I don't care much about (e.g. a random chair) then I don't think one needs much in the way of description for it. Just have 'This is an oak chair, the legs are shaped like little lions paws, and it has a red cushion on it.' And there- done. You don't need twenty thousand words of how this is the most chairy chair in the entire world of chairs and hw it's super amazing. Because honestly - for the most part? It's just a thing for people to sit on. No one is going to read that.

If on the other hand it's something with a very important description - one intended to inspire some sort of reaciotn, one that matters - a picture of your characters lost love perhaps? A magical gadget that does A Cool Thing, a special sword that was forged somewhere awsome and your pc is super attatched to, the grave of your father, whtever- something very important to my pc , which I WANT people to pay attention to then... well honestly then I'm probably inspired enough that I don't /want/ ChatGPT to write it. Maybe give me some ideas sure ,but not out and out type it in and write it.

Of course everyones milage varies and I don't really object to people using ChatGPT in moderation. I agree, with also the sentiments on character descriptions. Super long ones rarely help. It's far better to give some basic information, and then maybe a few details for a character to go 'Ooh, what's that?' to.

I don't think I like the idea of someone roleplaying entirely though it. That feels... cheep and lazy to me? I mean maybe using it to check the very, very occasional sentence if you're not sure how to put something, sure I suppose. But it does kinda feel... insulting? Lazy or even deceptive? IDK, just my take on it. And again possibly just over wordy, I imagine. More isn't always better.

Anyway, just my opinion.

EDIT: I've just thought up the best kinda analogue for how I feel emotionally about such heavy use of ChatGPT in roleplay.

Imagine that, as a family tradition, you all decide to make each other presents for christmas. Doesn't matter what, doesn't matter how good or bad it is - but you each /make/ something. And every year this happens. It's a gift of skill, of time, and of live, rather than money.
Then one year a family member confesses to you: 'Yeah you know those socks I gave everyone that I said I knitted? Well I got them from a shop.'

Or another example - Say you have a habit of going over to each other's houses for a meal. Maybe a christmas meal -where you get a hice home cooked dinner. But one day one of your family members after the meal goes 'Yeah - I didn't cook this, I just heated it up in the microwave.'

In RP, I'm kinda expecting something personal, something crafted, and someone using chat GPT doesn't... feel like that?

And that isn't really accusing those who are using it of base deception. It's not really something you can introduce in a IC conversation, and some folk may have good reasons. But even if it's not /meant/ to be deceptive, it sorta... feels deceptive? At the moment?

IDK, maybe in the long run, the take away is that home cooked meals are lame, Just use a microwave. or that handmade items are stupid - they won't be as proffessional as stuff made by machines after all. And I think there's arguments for these things too. I buy lots of stuff from shops, eat a fair amount of microwaved food. But I also value stuff that isn't like that, And when you can't easily distinguish one from another - due to the nature of the internet it makes me feel... uneasy?

[Marsi]

GPT descriptions are REALLY obvious. They are always structured the same. GPT can swap adjectives in and out but it's as though it has only a few templates for structure and voice it can work with.

Whenever someone shows me "ok" output (if we suspend critique about form and voice) I will notice they've accidentally written something brief and evocative in the prompt itself.

If you are a weak, unsure writer, use the exercise of prompt -> output to see if you have written coherently enough that the language model is able to digest it into tokens. Never use the generated text itself though.

[Perplexia]

I am genuinely confused.

i don't know if this was in response to me or the topic in general, but i'll clarify regardless

i do enjoy making cool items, but - having not read much literature or done a whole lot of creative writing - i often find it difficult to write descriptions beyond the most plain of prose; anybody who has ever had the misfortune of interacting with my PCs knows just how limited my vocabulary tends to be

and sometimes this is fine! because the item itself is interesting enough in its own right, such as various gifts my characters have given to people, so i write whatever i can and just roll with that

but for other things with which i'm less familiar, such as writing custom descriptions for food, clothes, or furniture, i find using the AI generated text as a point of reference to be helpful, and really no different to examining another person's work (to which i have already admitted would likely give better results, anyway)

at the end of the day, all of my amateur writing comes from emulating things that i think are cool and applying my own personal touch to it