One D&D

[Acmegamer]

Oh shit [looks at some of the skulls and textures more closely] I think you're right. How disappointing.

I have such a hard time telling that something is AI anymore. I was easy for me in the recent past when the fingers/hands looked so odd. What makes the textures and skulls feel more like AI to you?

Edit: Ok, I now see it. After the numerous posts after yours breaking it down. Wow. Not sure I see it with the textures but I definitely see it on the angles and perspectives. I can't unsee it. lol

 

[Urdlen's best boy]

I have such a hard time telling that something is AI anymore. I was easy for me in the recent past when the fingers/hands looked so odd. What makes the textures and skulls feel more like AI to you?

If you look closely, they're nonsensical. The size is also absurd (is this orc 60 ft tall?)

 

[Acmegamer]

View attachment 73604
If you look closely, they're nonsensical. The size is also absurd (is this orc 60 ft tall?)

Yeah, if the shoulder guards were huge I'd think they were riffing off of World of Warcraft. But he'd need an hugely oversized penis weapon as well to complete that. I mean WoW is full of the nonsensical/absurd. lol Thanks for pointing it out though.

Edit: Also, reading the list of changes, honestly in my opinion that there are enough changes to merit that it would be called DnD 5.5e if not DnD 6e.

 

[Fenris-77]

View attachment 73604
If you look closely, they're nonsensical. The size is also absurd (is this orc 60 ft tall?)

He is Waz'grakka, Death of Squirrels. Don't hate.

 

[TJS]

To me it just looks AI.

I didn't examine it too closely when I asked initially - it just has that soulless derivative quality.

 

[Acmegamer]

To me it just looks AI.

I didn't examine it too closely when I asked initially - it just has that soulless derivative quality.

Honestly, that's how I feel about most everything that they've released in the last couple years.

 

[Urdlen's best boy]

"Hello fellow human I am a human too here is my very human photo to engage human social pattern recognition. I am very D&D fanatic D&D fans have expressed moderate inconvenience at D&D. D&D is a game that is played by disclosing your credit card numbers into ServoDM TM for a monetarily optimal experience of D&D fanatic. D&D is going to be a great and unique vision of the future of D&D."

 

[Mankcam]

I believe that the entire site is AI-generated. The text and the articles.

This thought also crossed my mind…

 

[Voros]

Honestly, that's how I feel about most everything that they've released in the last couple years.

I'm starting to doubt this art is from WotC, as other have said most likely the images and copy are AI-generated by the website. Not that the recent art I have seen from WotC is any good either.

 

[Toadmaster]

No idea how precise this tool is or how it does the determination, but it's pretty common to touch up contrast and luminosity after digitalizing a physical original or when reposting it. Might be that's throwing it off.

According to this guy it's not the best of these tools (70% accurate answer vs 97% for "AI or not") : https://originality.ai/blog/do-ai-image-detectors-work-accuracy-study
Tbh even 97% is marginal gain over eyeing it.

AI also seems to claim a lot of work that isn't AI. Last year some college professor got into trouble after flunking most of his class for using AI to do their school work. He ran their work through an AI, AI detector, and most came back saying it had been done by AI. The students were able to prove they did the work, creating a sticky situation.

I think AI just has an ego issue, all your work belongs to AI now.

 

[Baulderstone]

I'm starting to doubt this art is from WotC, as other have said most likely the images and copy are AI-generated by the website. Not that the recent art I have seen from WotC is any good either.

No, I don't think it is either.

 

[Turkey Lurkie]

A lot of the recent use of the term 'AI' is vague waffle that is intended to just attract sucker investors, often with little practical or even existent plans about how the 'AI' will be used.

yes, "A.I." doesn't yet exist. We don't even have good expert systems yet.

 

[Telok]

View attachment 73604

My biggest issue is with that stupid goblet. That's not how you make a shull into a drinking cup. Its a shit knockoff that took a goblet and stuck a skull on top. Fucking amateur crap.

 

[burbles]

Whilst I'm not going to disagree with anything said above, I do wonder as to whether 5.0's artwork wouldn't have been identified as AI created as well.

I seem to remember that the halfling figure has problems with problematic leg lengths etc.. So I'm not convinced this can all be blamed on AI (unless people are suggesting that WOTC were innovators with this sort of thing years ahead of everyone else).

 

[Ladybird]

Interesting stuff I've found
https://dungeonsanddragonsfan.com/new-dnd-video-game-starbreeze/
View attachment 73595

Dungeons & Destiny.

AI also seems to claim a lot of work that isn't AI. Last year some college professor got into trouble after flunking most of his class for using AI to do their school work. He ran their work through an AI, AI detector, and most came back saying it had been done by AI. The students were able to prove they did the work, creating a sticky situation.

I think AI just has an ego issue, all your work belongs to AI now.

AI detection software doesn't detect the things it claims to, it detects what it's creators tell it the thing they want to find looks like; this means that any biases of the developer get replicated and magnified in the detector, along with the false authority people give such programs. In the particular case of AI text detection, this has led to numerous false-positives including text being written by non-native english speakers and autistic people.

Whilst I'm not going to disagree with anything said above, I do wonder as to whether 5.0's artwork wouldn't have been identified as AI created as well.

I seem to remember that the halfling figure has problems with problematic leg lengths etc.. So I'm not convinced this can all be blamed on AI (unless people are suggesting that WOTC were innovators with this sort of thing years ahead of everyone else).

Sometimes, art is just bad, and the halfling is one of those times.

 

[Endless Flight]

No, I don't think it is either.

Yeah, the art for all of their articles is similar. It’s just a generic fantasy “placeholder”.

 

[Acmegamer]

Speaking of the AI driven art. I'm on The One Ring Discord and man under the "ai-content" channel, there are some really nice pieces posted there. Which makes me think that they're so nice (I'm comparing it to the drek that's been posted above in comparison) because the AI's been fed a lot of great art by some really talented artists.

For those interested, this is the channel on The One Ring unofficial Discord.

Discord - A New Way to Chat with Friends & Communities

Discord is the easiest way to communicate over voice, video, and text. Chat, hang out, and stay close with your friends and communities.

discord.com

 

[hawkeyefan]

So this art is all from the article, right? It doesn’t say that the art is from the books. I don’t expect that WotC would really share this much art… all of it clearly AI generated… with a website none of us ever heard of until now.

 

[Voros]

So this art is all from the article, right? It doesn’t say that the art is from the books. I don’t expect that WotC would really share this much art… all of it clearly AI generated… with a website none of us ever heard of until now.

Yeah I think we mostly agree on that now, moving on...

 

[hawkeyefan]

Yeah I think we mostly agree on that now, moving on...

Okay, good. Not that there isn’t plenty to fault WotC for, but I’m not gonna hate on them for something they didn’t do.

I think the artwork from 5e has generally been good (although there are plenty of bad examples, too). My familiarity is with the core books and some of the earlier books, so I haven’t seen most of what’s been in the last couple years.

Art seems to me one of the areas where their budget aids them compared to most smaller publishers.

 

[Voros]

Okay, good. Not that there isn’t plenty to fault WotC for, but I’m not gonna hate on them for something they didn’t do.

I think the artwork from 5e has generally been good (although there are plenty of bad examples, too). My familiarity is with the core books and some of the earlier books, so I haven’t seen most of what’s been in the last couple years.

Art seems to me one of the areas where their budget aids them compared to most smaller publishers.

Yeah I've mostly been one of the few defenders of 5e's art on here. I'll include some of what I've liked before as I find using examples is a good way to avoid easy, vague generalities.

 

[Baulderstone]

Art seems to me one of the areas where their budget aids them compared to most smaller publishers.

Which is one reason big companies like Hasbro worry about AI rather than see it as a way to reduce cost. If AI gets good enough that WotC can use it for its art, every other RPG producer can make art on the level of Hasbro. If AI becomes acceptable and commonplace, it's hurting big companies more than little ones.

 

[Voros]

Also dug the cartoon artstyle they used for the Acquistions Incorporated book. I wish they'd experiment with artsyles like that from book to book but for a big corp. and branding purposes I can see why that's unlikely.

 

[Jetstream]

Also dug the cartoon artstyle they used for the Acquistions Incorporated book. I wish they'd experiment with artsyles like that from book to book but for a big corp. and branding purposes I can see why that's unlikely.

View attachment 73661View attachment 73662

That art is straight up Mike Krahulik. Gabe from Penny Arcade.

 

[Voros]

That art is straight up Mike Krahulik. Gabe from Penny Arcade.

Oh I know, so it obviously tied into the 'IP' they were using but I'd still appreciate more experiments like it!

 

[Malckuss]

Well hey, at least 6e appears to be including this proper old-school-looking orc:

Whatever else may be going on in the lore and fiddly character-build nonsense, you can be sure this guy was born to lift and has a controversial foreign policy!

That said, sorry, I'm still boycotting you this year WotC (and I don't use orcs anyway).

Emphasis mine. They are touting this as "the new 5th Edition," which is stupid as hell. It is, at the least, 5E Revised, if not 5.5; anything else is ridiculous. I love how they clearly state this isn't as drastic as the difference between 3.5 and 4th edition as that is clearly the way they worry it will be received.

He's not pig faced. He's not old school.

He's a Warcraft Ork. No thank you.

 

[Dr Jack]

Judging from the play test rules, it's very clearly 6e. Probably similar to the 1e->2e shift, I think.

 

[AsenRG]

Judging from the play test rules, it's very clearly 6e. Probably similar to the 1e->2e shift, I think.

Well, you never know with D&D, especially of the WotC variety. The differences between B/X and AD&D1e are probably less than (or at least on par with) those between 3.0 and 3.5, given how many people complained about needing to re-learn the system for 3.5...

 

[Dr Jack]

I found 3.5 annoying. Enough changes that all your acquired knowledge was uncertain, not enough changes to really fix any of the more substantial problems. And I recall not liking some of the changes, although I don't recall which.

 

[VisionStorm]

It's going to be a new book, totally rewritten, with rule changes and new options. Not a copy/paste of the old text with just minor updates and corrections. That is by definition a new edition. Insisting that it ain't is just marketing trickery and a symptom of an age where governments and corporations consistently LIE to the public and expect them to believe it and shut their insolent mouths.

 

[sharps54]

It's going to be a new book, totally rewritten, with rule changes and new options. Not a copy/paste of the old text with just minor updates and corrections. That is by definition a new edition. Insisting that it ain't is just marketing trickery and a symptom of an age where governments and corporations consistently LIE to the public and expect them to believe it and shut their insolent mouths.

Is it backwards compatible? I mean the Rick and Morty set had extensive layout changes and rewrites as well, was it a different edition?

 

[finarvyn]

I get the impression that most of the playtest material was taken back out, as the feedback was negative. Maybe I missed something.

The biggest changes I have seen are mostly in character creation, where a lot of the benefits come from background instead of class or type (race). In that light the game would likely be highly backwards compatible, as it doesn't matter where you get the plusses as long as the same number of plusses are acquired by characters.

 

[sharps54]

I get the impression that most of the playtest material was taken back out, as the feedback was negative. Maybe I missed something.

The biggest changes I have seen are mostly in character creation, where a lot of the benefits come from background instead of class or type (race). In that light the game would likely be highly backwards compatible, as it doesn't matter where you get the plusses as long as the same number of plusses are acquired by characters.

If it is backwards compatible I can see it being considered “5.5” but not a totally new edition.

 

[robertsconley]

It's going to be a new book, totally rewritten, with rule changes and new options. Not a copy/paste of the old text with just minor updates and corrections. That is by definition a new edition. Insisting that it ain't is just marketing trickery and a symptom of an age where governments and corporations consistently LIE to the public and expect them to believe it and shut their insolent mouths.

Except as a result of gaming we now have two definitions of editions. One the traditional version which for the most part car considered printings in the RPG worlds. And editions which involve substantial changes to the system.

For the moment all the play test material I have are not substantial changes . Rather they are shuffling around lists like races, backgrounds, class abilities, etc. The heart of is tile the same old 5e we had since 2014.

 

[robertsconley]

I get the impression that most of the playtest material was taken back out, as the feedback was negative. Maybe I missed something.

The biggest changes I have seen are mostly in character creation, where a lot of the benefits come from background instead of class or type (race). In that light the game would likely be highly backwards compatible, as it doesn't matter where you get the plusses as long as the same number of plusses are acquired by characters.

The change is combining race and background. Mechanics wise players are still getting the same amount and type of “stuff” just worded differently.

 

[VisionStorm]

Backwards compatibility is irrelevant to whether a book is a new edition. AD&D 2e was mostly backwards compatible with 1e. It was still a new edition. Same with 90%+ of every TTRPG with multiple editions that isn't D&D. Even 3.5 was arguably a new edition, though, a lot of the text was copy/paste IIRC. But there were still significant changes to some of the material. Refusing to call it a new edition was just a marketing gimmick that the public just swallowed hook and sinker, and so is this. This is just artificial redefinition of terms with the public going along with it, cuz the authorities told them to ignore their lying eyes.

 

[sharps54]

Backwards compatibility is irrelevant to whether a book is a new edition. AD&D 2e was mostly backwards compatible with 1e. It was still a new edition. Same with 90%+ of every TTRPG with multiple editions that isn't D&D. Even 3.5 was arguably a new edition, though, a lot of the text was copy/paste IIRC. But there were still significant changes to some of the material. Refusing to call it a new edition was just a marketing gimmick that the public just swallowed hook and sinker, and so is this. This is just artificial redefinition of terms with the public going along with it, cuz the authorities told them to ignore their lying eyes.

So what you are saying is that it is all

 

[Urdlen's best boy]

In general 5e art looks like it's made by competent artists that were not paid generously or that had serious time constrains - same thing, really. The same-y-ness of say MM illustrations comes from WOTC's demand that it'd be somewhat uniform.

On the weird site topic i'm trying to find out if there's a link to WOTC. They seem to have been up for a year or so and do display the D&D logo, which I'd think WOTC would C&D with nuclear power on sight if they didn't agree/were behind it.

Their privacy page says hey're owned by D&D Fan Inc., which I can't seem to find anywhere online
https://dungeonsanddragonsfan.com/privacy-policy-2/

Though the date of their older articles seem to coincide with the first Internet Archives of this page
https://dnd.wizards.com/resources/fan-site-kit

One of the most popular and convenient ways to share is on websites owned or operated by our fans, collectors and commentators ("Fan Sites"). For that reason, we have developed this website to provide you with trademarks and logos, product images, artwork, and other trademarked and/or copyrighted materials that have been pre-approved by Wizards ("Wizards Materials") for your use on your Fan Site.

Could there be a link, after all? Someone using this kit independantly? Or the site is itself some sort of covert marketting device?
I don't know, but it looks like a whole operation, with social media botwork and all the jazz.

 

[Ladybird]

In general 5e art looks like it's made by competent artists that were not paid generously or that had serious time constrains - same thing, really. The same-y-ness of say MM illustrations comes from WOTC's demand that it'd be somewhat uniform.

On the weird site topic i'm trying to find out if there's a link to WOTC. They seem to have been up for a year or so and do display the D&D logo, which I'd think WOTC would C&D with nuclear power on sight if they didn't agree/were behind it.

Their privacy page says hey're owned by D&D Fan Inc., which I can't seem to find anywhere online
https://dungeonsanddragonsfan.com/privacy-policy-2/

Though the date of their older articles seem to coincide with the first Internet Archives of this page
https://dnd.wizards.com/resources/fan-site-kit

Could there be a link, after all? Someone using this kit independantly? Or the site is itself some sort of covert marketting device?
I don't know, but it looks like a whole operation, with social media botwork and all the jazz.

Almost zero engagement on Twitter, amateurish site design, no real CMS... honestly this feels more like someone's portfolio project, with content padded out by AI. I suspect the real owner is one of the people on the About page, although I wouldn't trust those bios.

That said...

 

[Urdlen's best boy]

Almost zero engagement on Twitter, amateurish site design, no real CMS... honestly this feels more like someone's portfolio project, with content padded out by AI. I suspect the real owner is one of the people on the About page, although I wouldn't trust those bios.

That said...

Have you seen the weird Twitter follower count? 1200 to 600. That doesn't say portfolio to me, it looks like someone wants to get eyes on it and is ready to cheat and psyop their way to the top. It's also typical content farm behaviour to upload a dozen+ articles over a year or so before starting to market it, so it looks more trustworthy. Checks out with the fact it seems to spring out of nowhere.

The only monetization avenue talked of on the site is amazon affiliate program. No direct sales or advertising banners. Very weird for a content farm, but that's the terms of the kit, so...

I suspect this "Fan site kit" is really a content farm kit. Wizturd gets free ads (and a free testing the waters for AI garbage with plausible deniability), grifters get easy set up grift for amazon affiliate money.

That's my tinfoil theory.