Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Adeptekon wrote:
But she wants to try traditional DnD.

Which brings us back to not using an AI DM. If you want a soulless, lonely simulacrum of the D&D experience it might work, but there is nothing "traditional" about an AI DM.

 Ahtman wrote:

 Adeptekon wrote:
But she wants to try traditional DnD.

Which brings us back to not using an AI DM. If you want a soulless, lonely simulacrum of the D&D experience it might work, but there is nothing "traditional" about an AI DM.

Echoing this.

You've never played Oregon Trail or read a choose your own adventure book?

 Adeptekon wrote:
You've never played Oregon Trail or read a choose your own adventure book?

Neither of those things are a TTRPG, nor are they "traditional D&D".

Playing Baldur's Gate 3 on split-screen with my wife was actually the closest a video game came to actual TTRPG experience for me. Yes, the GM was artificial, but interactions between players are exactly like during a real session.

Cyel wrote:
Playing Baldur's Gate 3 on split-screen with my wife was actually the closest a video game came to actual TTRPG experience for me. Yes, the GM was artificial, but interactions between players are exactly like during a real session.

How does BG3 splitscreen work? Are you controlling different characters within the party like in old Neverwinter Nights multiplayer 20 years ago?

 warboss wrote:

Cyel wrote:
Playing Baldur's Gate 3 on split-screen with my wife was actually the closest a video game came to actual TTRPG experience for me. Yes, the GM was artificial, but interactions between players are exactly like during a real session.

How does BG3 splitscreen work? Are you controlling different characters within the party like in old Neverwinter Nights multiplayer 20 years ago?

Just like in Divinity Original Sin 1/2 (games superior to BG3 in our opinion btw) both of you control one main character - in this case ones created by us - and one extra party member. It may be changed in options, but playing 2 characters each works best. They can go in totally different ways within the limits of the same map and its submaps (like dungeons), doing different things (dialogue, combat, exploration, character/inventory management etc) or team up to face challenges together.

The conversations between us during the game are exactly like ones between players in an actual TTRPG (some in some out of character, discussing how to approach challenges and make choices mechanically or narratively). It's just that our Game Master is the gaming console.

Honestly, if someone never played DOS1/2 or BG3 in couch co-op, they are missing on one of the most mind-blowing video game experiences of my 40+y gaming career It's unique and rich in ways that are hard to compare to anything else.

Cool. Is that only split screen or can you do that online as well? The original releases.of NWN basically just had modded levels running on a host server that folks could.join like a proto-small mmo.

Afaik you can play with up to 4 players total online (full party, one character per player). But you lose the social aspect of having direct interactions with them that you have in split screen.

If she doesn't have a group it might be to much to want to play something specific. Any already established group of role-players will have some system or campaign they prefer so then the best is to join in on that.

She should be willing to try a bit but also be willing to drop if it doesn't work out. Groups have highly variable quality they could be donkey-caves or just the game isn't what she wants. So 2-3 sessions and then if it doesn't work out it doesn't.

If it's at uni there should be people she can ask if she doesn't know what clubs there is.

RPGs can be great if everything works but finding that perfect storm of qualities is pretty rare.

All the AI sadness is really over the top. Is there slop? Yes, just like there are ishy websites. It's a tool. Use it. We would have been exstatic back in the day to have a DM on demand so we could get through a module without an arguement.

Speaking as the Forever GM for my group, the plagiarism bot isn't a replacement for what I bring to the table(top), and it's going to give a far less 'traditional D&D experience' than playing a well-made video game with your friends. Which also isn't really a substitute, but it's closer! The point is playing with your friends. It's not even as good as a solitaire journaling game.

The best way to do it is to find a group of equally interested buddies, work out what system you want to use (5e is good and newbie-friendly, but there's a lot of simpler, equally interesting stuff - I love Worlds Without Number for a more old-school but still accessible D&D experience, Blades in the Dark makes a great heist game, I hear good things about Monster of the Week) and make whatever dark sacrifices need to be made to align your schedules.

Look I understand about authenticity. You can't simple rely on what the AI spits out verbatim you need to consider it and then put it into the words you want or just use it for research.

I use it all day at work. I'm very familiar with it's flaws. But it can save me hours of time, it just requires time to proof and tweak and or throw out altother as you rule out ideas.

Now for the gaming aspect, it could roll dice, and read through a module well enough to return some basic, but colorful responses. Not all AI is equal either.

So if she's hard up for a taste of what it could be like I hardly think running a solo game with AI if you can take the time to lock in rules for what it should or should not return to us isn't a bad idea.

But each to his or her own on that.

Sure, your mileage may vary, that always goes without saying.. I don't think you'd get a particularly satisfying game of D&D, is the thing. I haven't tried it. Maybe I'm wrong. From what I understand, they're bad at actually challenging players, bad at keeping consistency in places and characters, and of course run into the issue where the underlying tech is looking for the statistically most likely word, so what you're playing is going to trend to the generic. I genuinely think the time and effort that would be spent trying to get it to run a set module would be far more rewarding if it were put toward finding a group of interested players.

(All setting aside ethical issues, which I don't think you should anyway)

The big issue is that D&D is a fundamentally social game, with someone crafting the world and experience and inviting their friends to take part in it. That's what it's designed for, and if you chop that out, you're left with something that I think rings hollow. There's other games designed around solo play that lean into the inherent solitude of that kind of experience, or work to push the player's creativity through the game. I've had a wonderful time with journaling RPGs like Thousand-Year-Old-Vampire, The Merchant, and Carved by the Garden. They often end up drawing you in directions you wouldn't have considered, and they're designed to do that. It's an exercise in storytelling as much as anything.

Of course, the OP's already taken people's advice to her, so this is all a bit of a moot point.

I agree with you, since I've recently started using different AI for fun as opposed to work I've had frustration with writing things, if you don't lock certain things in when you start or along the way it can forget things and change directions. You really have to be involved in guiding it yourself or the slop becomes evident. That said if you spend the time training it, you can get some pretty interesting things.

I can't say that I've tried it for d&d, but only suggesting it as an option if she has no group. I personally have always preferred multiplayer anything. That's probably why I got started.

Half the time we couldn't even get a game off the ground because we were still writing up characters for 3 hours later

I don't want to be rude, but 'it's a tool, use it' is kind of a wild thing to say if you...haven't. It just doesn't seem workable or even time-saving to me. There's never been more of a drive to form D&D groups, especially at college. It's mainstream! There's hugely popular shows not just based around it, but based around the act of playing it!

Ozymandian wrote:
I don't want to be rude, but 'it's a tool, use it' is kind of a wild thing to say if you...haven't. It just doesn't seem workable or even time-saving to me. There's never been more of a drive to form D&D groups, especially at college. It's mainstream! There's hugely popular shows not just based around it, but based around the act of playing it!

You're not being rude. I know it sounds like a contradiction. I do use it at work. I just recently started for fun. As for d&d I assume it could handle it, but not without the time to train whichever model you're using, and they are not all the same. You can create AI agents with special instructions almost like an NPC with a personality you don't have to imagine.

Some are non-learning, glorified search engines though, and you can't use those very well for this.

I want to imagine my NPCs and their personalities, though, that's the whole point of it. I want to play the game, I don't want the chatbot to do it for me. To me, it sounds like what you're recommending and enjoying is the act of tinkering with AI programs, rather than the creative experience of a role playing game.