4 ms·

I played a RPG session with GPT-3 and it was quite fun. The problem was the combat part, as describing violent events is against the TOS (just when me and a par

I played a RPG session with GPT-3 and it was quite fun. The problem was the combat part, as describing violent events is against the TOS (just when me and a party of villagers had prepared an attack against an orc encampment!) I guess that something that involves "animated violence" like pokemon might be a good idea to get around that.

causality0 4y ago
One interesting weak point I've noticed with GPT is that if you ask it to give examples from a category which in the real world has hundreds or thousands of different possibilities, it will give you the same half dozen answers every time. You ask it to give you "opponents" and it will always give you male humans. You ask it to give you "monsters" to kill and it always gives you orcs, giant spiders, skeletons. If a chest is supposed to have "useful items", it's always a healing potion.
- asddubs 4y ago
  I guess it's giving you the most likely answer in the same way the most likely answer to the question "what color is the sky?" is blue, according to its training data.
- swatcoder 4y ago
  Yup. I think this is one of the places where the sheen will come off after a while. While temperature can mix things up a little, we’ll quickly start to see how the depth of LLM output is tied to the depth of LLM input — and people’s prompts are not all that varied and deep at the end of the day. We’ll start to notice signatures to each generation of model in its responses to tiringly common prompts — especially in stuff like blog spam, homework essays, email punchups, casual fiction, etc There are certain poles that it gravitates to that end up reading like verbal tics or lazy ideas, and those will be more obvious as we begin to get inundated with generated content. Careful prompt work can evade those poles and tics, but most people won’t have the skill or drive to bother with that.
  - bgroat 4y ago
    >> Careful prompt work can evade those poles and tics, but most people won’t have the skill or drive to bother with that. I absolutely agree with this. Furthermore, I've come to believe that "careful prompt work" doesn't really save much time relative to just writing/coding the output I want. Especially after QA/edits
    - flangola7 4y ago
      > Furthermore, I've come to believe that "careful prompt work" doesn't really save much time relative to just writing/coding the output I want. The real magic happens when you train a better AI using those perfected prompts.
  - dingclancy 4y ago
    There would be parameters to evade the obvious picks. temperature can actually go up to 2 in the API and you can also go use top_p < 1. but for the more out of this world stuff, this is where fine tuning will come in. The main model will always come in as vanilla anyway.
- madelyn 4y ago
  I think this is where something like the reAct framework would be super helpful. A human dungeon master doesn't pull a random enemy from the aether super well (or at least I don't!!). When I pick monsters I either logically think what makes sense for the area, pick something that's cool or vaguely humorous that I'm feeling the vibe of, or... use a random encounter table. For treasure and rewards... if it's not something hand picked, I'm again getting the loot tables out and rolling. And heck even for gold rewards and things, I'm rolling the dice. After trying basic stuff with langchain, an AI integrated with these types of tools is really promising. I think more systems on top could make it into a passable DM- at least until context becomes an issue.
- capableweb 4y ago
  If you set it up with some ground rules and rules around it's behavior (or more like guidelines), you can make it be more creative. Something like: "We're gonna start a text RPG game. Every animal we meet should be a made-up animal composed of joining two existing ones, with creative names being made for them. Don't use any usual fantasy tropes. Make encounters have surprising but logical outcomes" and so on.
serf 4y ago
> I guess that something that involves "animated violence" like pokemon might be a good idea to get around that. I feel like this is a bigger thing than people realize. Changing creative output to match the proposed ethical boundaries of a corporation that you're beholden to by using their tool seems like such a new leap to hoist onto the public en-masse. I presume somewhere there is an agreement that forbids the use of 'notepad.exe' in matters of anti-state espionage, homicide, whatever; but this is the first time that a tool is actually good at self-checking to make sure that the license /whatever is upheld rigidly -- and I feel as if that has far-reaching effects on not just the creative output but the thinking structures for those that are involved in the use of such tools. If you know that the tool that you're using forbids certain things, you're either going to think about using it for other things or pursue other tools; given that openAI is effectively the only game in town right now they seem to be in a unique position to affect change in the way people are thinking about using these tools. this could be good or bad, I don't really sway one way or another, but it seems important .
- MagicMoonlight 4y ago
  It doesn’t take a certificate in applied shoulder massage from lancaster technical college to work out that it’s bad for society. We’ve seen how much social media and manipulation has destroyed the fabric of society. Now imagine those same evil people can control all creative output for their own purpose. Every single thing and person you interact with will be whatever they want. When you whatsapp people they might not even be real anymore, but they’ll certainly tell you why you should vote for president zuckerberg to be reelected. They’ll promise that they’ll only use their control to stop nazism or whatever. But the nazis made the same promise about communists.
squeaky-clean 4y ago
I had ChatGPT (not gpt4) semi-succesfully play a session of D&D where I played the dungeon master and it had no problems with violence against goblins. It did however constantly try to take over and play as the goblins as well, and I had to keep telling it that I was the DM, not it. It was fun in the "look at what AI Is doing" novelty way. But it was pretty uncreative and generic.

causality0 4y ago

One interesting weak point I've noticed with GPT is that if you ask it to give examples from a category which in the real world has hundreds or thousands of different possibilities, it will give you the same half dozen answers every time. You ask it to give you "opponents" and it will always give you male humans. You ask it to give you "monsters" to kill and it always gives you orcs, giant spiders, skeletons. If a chest is supposed to have "useful items", it's always a healing potion.

asddubs 4y ago
I guess it's giving you the most likely answer in the same way the most likely answer to the question "what color is the sky?" is blue, according to its training data.
swatcoder 4y ago
Yup. I think this is one of the places where the sheen will come off after a while. While temperature can mix things up a little, we’ll quickly start to see how the depth of LLM output is tied to the depth of LLM input — and people’s prompts are not all that varied and deep at the end of the day. We’ll start to notice signatures to each generation of model in its responses to tiringly common prompts — especially in stuff like blog spam, homework essays, email punchups, casual fiction, etc There are certain poles that it gravitates to that end up reading like verbal tics or lazy ideas, and those will be more obvious as we begin to get inundated with generated content. Careful prompt work can evade those poles and tics, but most people won’t have the skill or drive to bother with that.
- bgroat 4y ago
  >> Careful prompt work can evade those poles and tics, but most people won’t have the skill or drive to bother with that. I absolutely agree with this. Furthermore, I've come to believe that "careful prompt work" doesn't really save much time relative to just writing/coding the output I want. Especially after QA/edits
  - flangola7 4y ago
    > Furthermore, I've come to believe that "careful prompt work" doesn't really save much time relative to just writing/coding the output I want. The real magic happens when you train a better AI using those perfected prompts.
- dingclancy 4y ago
  There would be parameters to evade the obvious picks. temperature can actually go up to 2 in the API and you can also go use top_p < 1. but for the more out of this world stuff, this is where fine tuning will come in. The main model will always come in as vanilla anyway.
madelyn 4y ago
I think this is where something like the reAct framework would be super helpful. A human dungeon master doesn't pull a random enemy from the aether super well (or at least I don't!!). When I pick monsters I either logically think what makes sense for the area, pick something that's cool or vaguely humorous that I'm feeling the vibe of, or... use a random encounter table. For treasure and rewards... if it's not something hand picked, I'm again getting the loot tables out and rolling. And heck even for gold rewards and things, I'm rolling the dice. After trying basic stuff with langchain, an AI integrated with these types of tools is really promising. I think more systems on top could make it into a passable DM- at least until context becomes an issue.
capableweb 4y ago
If you set it up with some ground rules and rules around it's behavior (or more like guidelines), you can make it be more creative. Something like: "We're gonna start a text RPG game. Every animal we meet should be a made-up animal composed of joining two existing ones, with creative names being made for them. Don't use any usual fantasy tropes. Make encounters have surprising but logical outcomes" and so on.

serf 4y ago

> I guess that something that involves "animated violence" like pokemon might be a good idea to get around that. I feel like this is a bigger thing than people realize. Changing creative output to match the proposed ethical boundaries of a corporation that you're beholden to by using their tool seems like such a new leap to hoist onto the public en-masse. I presume somewhere there is an agreement that forbids the use of 'notepad.exe' in matters of anti-state espionage, homicide, whatever; but this is the first time that a tool is actually good at self-checking to make sure that the license /whatever is upheld rigidly -- and I feel as if that has far-reaching effects on not just the creative output but the thinking structures for those that are involved in the use of such tools. If you know that the tool that you're using forbids certain things, you're either going to think about using it for other things or pursue other tools; given that openAI is effectively the only game in town right now they seem to be in a unique position to affect change in the way people are thinking about using these tools. this could be good or bad, I don't really sway one way or another, but it seems important .

MagicMoonlight 4y ago
It doesn’t take a certificate in applied shoulder massage from lancaster technical college to work out that it’s bad for society. We’ve seen how much social media and manipulation has destroyed the fabric of society. Now imagine those same evil people can control all creative output for their own purpose. Every single thing and person you interact with will be whatever they want. When you whatsapp people they might not even be real anymore, but they’ll certainly tell you why you should vote for president zuckerberg to be reelected. They’ll promise that they’ll only use their control to stop nazism or whatever. But the nazis made the same promise about communists.

squeaky-clean 4y ago

I had ChatGPT (not gpt4) semi-succesfully play a session of D&D where I played the dungeon master and it had no problems with violence against goblins. It did however constantly try to take over and play as the goblins as well, and I had to keep telling it that I was the DM, not it. It was fun in the "look at what AI Is doing" novelty way. But it was pretty uncreative and generic.