Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

My kids and I just played D&D with ChatGPT4 as the DM

obie.medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 256 posts

Re: My kids and I just played D&D with ChatGPT4 as the DM

#241

Post by BizarroLand »

swid wrote: post #175
bee_rider wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That sort of struck me with the linked story. They saw some wolf footprints, and then essentially summoned the monsters to fight by setting up an ambush in their current location.

I noticed they bought four horses without enough money to do so. (It correctly said two characters would have to borrow 20 gold each, but only 10 gold remained in the party, leaving them 30 short).

Yeah, there needs to be some interface where you the human can set certain values or a source of truth for both you and the AI to reference and possibly manipulate if the prompt requires it.

Re: My kids and I just played D&D with ChatGPT4 as the DM

#242

Post by fauxpause_ »

TheCleric wrote: post #200
fauxpause_ wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re not equally good at things. But you only roll for things that matter. Persuasion is the worst offender because rookie DMs use dice to replace actual role play. And it makes their npcs into props that are largely controlled by the party face. Persuasion checks should be used when the party is actually persuading someone to do something that they don’t want to do. Terrible DMs treat it as mind control because yo…

What I dislike about this way of doing things is you've moved the game mechanic into real life. It's not good enough for the character to persuade, now the player must persuade. Are you also going to make me stab someone to see if I'm a good fighter? The whole point (for me) of RPGs is to have fun playing a character who isn't me, and has different strengths than me. When I DM, if someone wants to roleplay, they can.…

That is why persuasion is not a good thing to resolve with stats. Because you’re playing a role playing game. You inevitably have to come up with an argument to engage in persuasion.

“Hey guard, give me the keys”

Is not an argument that works ever.

“Hey guard, give me the keys so I can save your friend” is a substantially different scenario.

“Hey guard, give me the keys because we’re lifelong friends, and I’m going to save your friend, and you’ll probably die otherwise, and you owe me a debt, and because I have a solid reputation for keeping promises” is even more so.

If we’re already in agreement that version 1 should be all but impossible, 2 is plausible, and 3 is narratively obvious then what’s the point of the dice? If you roll poorly are you just forgetting to say those things in 3? Because that’s just a dumb way to take agency away from the player.

Persuasion isn’t meant to replace the merit of the argument. It’s meant to affect the articulation of it. But charismatic people aren’t mind controllers.

Re: My kids and I just played D&D with ChatGPT4 as the DM

#243

Post by fauxpause_ »

jameshart wrote: post #213
fauxpause_ wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that’s not much different. Players don’t want to hear the local shopkeeper’s thoughts and feelings imo. It’d be tedious. They canonically don’t have any useful information for you. It would just mean that they take a long time to talk to and worst case require you to respond with a level of sequitur and politeness. I could see it for waifus I guess. I’m prepared to be wrong on this.

As a human DM, your shopkeepers 'canonically' don't know anything because you would have to devote brainpower to animating them with lives and relationships and things. You're thinking... 'Oh no, they're asking him about his family, and if I give him a brother, I have to give him a job and if I'm not careful, I might say something like "he says his brother has a job in the city watch", and someone will write that dow…

We were talking about computer rpgs there. It’s different, because computer rpgs need more structure to fit in the game mechanics.

I also just disagree. Open ended stories are not good for D&D. Especially in a group. An LLM, including this one it seems, can have a structure it wants to follow.

Players should not be trying to guess what the DM was thinking. It should be placed in front of them quickly.

Downtime in the city is just bad

Re: My kids and I just played D&D with ChatGPT4 as the DM

#244

Post by red-iron-pine »

rcarr wrote: post #199
WastingMyTime89 wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn’t keep it but GPT-4 once pitched me a very convincing cross-over between Die Hard and Jurassic Park culminating in a tense face off between a machine gun armed John McLane and a T-Rex. The heartbreaking World War 1 movie involving Pokémon was less good however.

All's Quiet On The Diglet Front

The Good Soldier Slowbro

Re: My kids and I just played D&D with ChatGPT4 as the DM

#245

Post by TheCleric »

fauxpause_ wrote: post #242
TheCleric wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I dislike about this way of doing things is you've moved the game mechanic into real life. It's not good enough for the character to persuade, now the player must persuade. Are you also going to make me stab someone to see if I'm a good fighter? The whole point (for me) of RPGs is to have fun playing a character who isn't me, and has different strengths than me. When I DM, if someone wants to roleplay, they can.…

That is why persuasion is not a good thing to resolve with stats. Because you’re playing a role playing game. You inevitably have to come up with an argument to engage in persuasion. “Hey guard, give me the keys” Is not an argument that works ever. “Hey guard, give me the keys so I can save your friend” is a substantially different scenario. “Hey guard, give me the keys because we’re lifelong friends, and I’m going t…

No, this is where we disagree.

It should suffice it to say that the player can say "I would like to attempt to convince the guard to give me his keys."

THEY don't have to come up with the reason. THEY don't have to be persuasive. Just their character.

> Because that’s just a dumb way to take agency away from the player.

It's not taking away agency, it's allowing for the random element that is inherent to the game. If the player is a lawyer by trade, but their character has the charisma of a rock, why should they gain some sort of advantage that another player wouldn't have?

Explain to me the difference between these two things:

1) Allow a character to succeed on a persuasion check because their player can personally, in real life, come up with a good argument.

vs.

2) Allow a character to succeed on a strength check because their player can personally, in real life, bench press 300 pounds.

In other words, why should a player's "real life" stats have an effect on their character's in game ability?

Re: My kids and I just played D&D with ChatGPT4 as the DM

#246

Post by jameshart »

fauxpause_ wrote: post #243
jameshart wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a human DM, your shopkeepers 'canonically' don't know anything because you would have to devote brainpower to animating them with lives and relationships and things. You're thinking... 'Oh no, they're asking him about his family, and if I give him a brother, I have to give him a job and if I'm not careful, I might say something like "he says his brother has a job in the city watch", and someone will write that dow…

We were talking about computer rpgs there. It’s different, because computer rpgs need more structure to fit in the game mechanics. I also just disagree. Open ended stories are not good for D&D. Especially in a group. An LLM, including this one it seems, can have a structure it wants to follow. Players should not be trying to guess what the DM was thinking. It should be placed in front of them quickly. Downtime in the…

Stupid roleplaying game players, wanting to role-play.....

You get that there are different things different groups get out of a D&D campaign right? It has a number of systems - combat, magic, role-play, world building, character development, and, yes shopping... many games don't use all of them, and how they balance time among them is going to vary according to taste. Right now, someone seeking a GPT4 DM is not looking for a beautifully crafted narrative arc and a satisfyingly escalating series of intricately balanced encounters; they are looking for a DM who will take player ideas and run with them in a way that a human DM would not tolerate.

That means they're foregoing the guidance of a competent DM who knows how to craft a narrative, and taking some of that responsibility on themselves.

And if they're having fun doing it, then isn't that okay? Even if they end up playing a game that isn't like one you would run, or want to participate in?

Re: My kids and I just played D&D with ChatGPT4 as the DM

#247

Post by fauxpause_ »

TheCleric wrote: post #245
fauxpause_ wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is why persuasion is not a good thing to resolve with stats. Because you’re playing a role playing game. You inevitably have to come up with an argument to engage in persuasion. “Hey guard, give me the keys” Is not an argument that works ever. “Hey guard, give me the keys so I can save your friend” is a substantially different scenario. “Hey guard, give me the keys because we’re lifelong friends, and I’m going t…

No, this is where we disagree. It should suffice it to say that the player can say "I would like to attempt to convince the guard to give me his keys." THEY don't have to come up with the reason. THEY don't have to be persuasive. Just their character. > Because that’s just a dumb way to take agency away from the player. It's not taking away agency, it's allowing for the random element that is inherent to the game. If…

So what’s the DC of the check to get the guard to agree? Is it hard because that’s a baseline very dumb request? Or is it exceptionally easy because all of the facts from v3 are true?

Putting together basic facts does not require you to be a charismatic person. The problem with relying on checks is you create situations where NPCs behave according to the Charisma stat of the PC they’re interacting with rather than the context of the conversation. Which is dumb. NPCs should not act against their own interest because they’re talking to someone who is not charismatic. And it should be exceptionally hard to get people to act clearly against their own interest.

This also creates a bad habit where DMs make people roll for trivial skill checks where they have a 95% chance of succeeding and a 5% chance of a fun but dumb exaggerated failure. It also encourages the non RAW interpretation where players roll HUGE numbers on trivial tasks and DM think that means they’re supposed to succeed by wider margins.

Re: My kids and I just played D&D with ChatGPT4 as the DM

#248

Post by MiddleEndian »

kingkawn wrote: post #232
MiddleEndian wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the other hand, AI Dungeon seems to have been trained heavily on erotic fanfiction. I remember telling it something like "I request a potion from the goblin king" and it respond with something like "As the goblin king turns around to grab the potion, you check out his tight little ass." So I can see why other AIs might put on guardrails. Entertaining either way lol

at least it was funny

Certainly not complaining lol just that I understand why another org might not want that. No solution needs to be one-size-fits-all.

Re: My kids and I just played D&D with ChatGPT4 as the DM

#249

Post by TheCleric »

fauxpause_ wrote: post #247
TheCleric wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, this is where we disagree. It should suffice it to say that the player can say "I would like to attempt to convince the guard to give me his keys." THEY don't have to come up with the reason. THEY don't have to be persuasive. Just their character. > Because that’s just a dumb way to take agency away from the player. It's not taking away agency, it's allowing for the random element that is inherent to the game. If…

So what’s the DC of the check to get the guard to agree? Is it hard because that’s a baseline very dumb request? Or is it exceptionally easy because all of the facts from v3 are true? Putting together basic facts does not require you to be a charismatic person. The problem with relying on checks is you create situations where NPCs behave according to the Charisma stat of the PC they’re interacting with rather than th…

> So what’s the DC of the check to get the guard to agree?

Depends on the situation. In situation 3, if all those things are factual and known, then for me it's a non-roll. Guaranteed to succeed. Otherwise it would depend on what's going on in the game. Are the guards on alert? Drunk? Etc.

I'd start with a harder baseline (say 15-18 since guards aren't in the habit of handing out keys), and adjust from there. On alert? +7-10. Drunk? -5.

If the situation renders something impossible, then it's a non-roll and I explain why.

So not everything is a roll, but things that have a chance of success or failure (at DM's discretion) should be given a chance at that success or failure. Just like adjudicating anything else (I want to tame this wolf; I want to jump out of this 2nd floor window; Etc.)

All I'm saying is I don't like factoring in the player's ability (or inability) to perform those tasks in the outcome, as that's unfair.

Re: My kids and I just played D&D with ChatGPT4 as the DM

#250

Post by peter_d_sherman »

First of all, absolutely brilliant!

And, well played (pun intended!)

Future Prediction: I think the far end of all of this will be for people to eventually roleplay their own favorite characters from their favorite movies -- in those fictional movies' "movie universes"...

Everything would be 3D virtual reality and rendered in real-time... we have that now for some games -- but we don't have that yet for AI adapting a fictitous movie universe (and its rules) for character-in-that-fictitious-universe roleplaying (and the AI acting as the "DM")...

I think it will be tremendously interesting in the future when all of those aspects of current technology -- are all hooked together perfectly and seamlessly integrated...

Post reply on HN