105

I've been reading about the user revolt on the Twin Peaks subreddit calling for a ban on AI art. As best I can tell we don't really have people posting AI stuff here yet, but I'm wondering if it would be a good idea to ban it before it becomes a problem. I'm soliciting feedback from y'all on this, please let me know what you prefer.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] pteryx@dice.camp 5 points 2 days ago

Or willing to, y'know, use stock art or not include art, and damn the people who think TTRPG books only have value insofar as they have lots of new pictures.

[-] INeedMana@piefed.zip 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

I share the view that rpg content mostly does not need images. But I can bet it sells better and gets better reach

[-] Skua@kbin.earth 4 points 2 days ago

I have personally found that art from fairytale stories that's too old to have copyright can be a fun way to fill in little margins and decorate things. There are some sites that make them available with an explicit "this is way out of copyright, you can use this for whatever you want but please credit us for supplying it"

[-] INeedMana@piefed.zip 1 points 2 days ago

That's great. And it should be encouraged. But what about modern+ settings?

[-] Skua@kbin.earth 4 points 2 days ago

Oh definitely, it's not a universal solution. Just figured I'd mention a less obvious option that has helped me out before

[-] wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 days ago

So... you have no concrete support except a gut feeling?

[-] INeedMana@piefed.zip 1 points 2 days ago

I have an example where I'm sure the dry presentation does a disservice to the content. For someone who does not care about AI vs no-AI, it will look less professional than the titles next to it. But I don't want to turn this into a vivisection of a particular example

[-] pteryx@dice.camp -1 points 2 days ago

Hence my calling out the "necessary evil" excuse.

[-] INeedMana@piefed.zip 0 points 2 days ago

I'm afraid it's not an excuse but the reality. Whatever the reason one does content for, whether it's additional income, trying to change career or just clout, without reach you don't have an audience. In order to have reach, someone has to choose to click on that link in the feed. I am sure that an image does help with that And stock art places often either have non-stock art pirated anyway, or there's nothing in there

[-] pteryx@dice.camp 1 points 2 days ago

Just because you generally need a cover image doesn't mean that it's good to support systems whose primary use case is to drive real artists into hiding.

[-] INeedMana@piefed.zip 0 points 2 days ago

Sure. But wouldn't such rule mean we dismiss also those who do bring something to the table but just try to get anyone's attention?

[-] pteryx@dice.camp 0 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Not if they don't scam people to get that attention.

[-] INeedMana@piefed.zip 0 points 2 days ago

I'm afraid that's a very high bar ATM

[-] pteryx@dice.camp 2 points 2 days ago

It's meant to be a high bar forever.

"Generative AI" is a scam perpetrated by people who hate artists, while envying their capacity to create art, while also not understanding what art really is. Period.

this post was submitted on 26 Sep 2025
105 points (100.0% liked)

rpg

4204 readers
44 users here now

This community is for meaningful discussions of tabletop/pen & paper RPGs

Rules (wip):

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS