Just putting this out there: there are so many excellent public domain art resources out there for you to use instead of something that is harming the planet!
For sure. I will continue to use public domain art, but (like I say in the article) those images don’t always capture the world in my head (not even with photo bashing).
but, you could just. do the work? and that work would inspire your writing as well. and the work is as deep as you'd like it to be.
there are tons of people willing to collaborate, for free, on indie ttrpg projects and provide art for things they enjoy the writing of.
this whole thing reads as incredibly anti-social really, and indicative of a grander issue in your approach to art and the creative process.
anyone can look at those images and prompts and note how they copy styles from previous decades, that first samurai looks like 2017. the "hopepunk girl" looks like 2019. these things are not capturing the moment of now, because YOU arent in the art. if you looked up "jelly fish in coral reef", you'd find tons of images that would be suitable to use, and even just playing with the saturation/filtering in a simple program like krita or whatever would be enough to establish CHARM, which is what actually sells / gains a following in the entertainment/art world. especially the indie ttrpg space. Noone is impressed by generative AI, and that wont change as time goes on, even if it is "normalized". People want things that reflect now, and the only way to transmute that into existence is to make it yourself, as you ARE. Flaws and all.
On one hand, you lament the lack of funds to "get professionals", but you yourself are not a "professional" writer, so whats the problem with working with others? there are a ridiculous amount of communities that you can explore to find and make things with people that are willing to collaborate with you (for free!) to make something come together as a GROUP.
You said, "There are a ridiculous amount of communities that you can explore to find and make things with people that are willing to collaborate with you (for free!) to make something come together as a GROUP."
I would like to work with a group, and I hope (and plan) to do so in the future. Afterall, one of my goals in starting this Substack blog was to "collaborate" with others. I've met some cool people on here, too! I gotta say, though, I have been unable to locate compelling artists who are willing to work for free.
Maybe there are some folks out there willing to give away their "janky" human-made images, but I just don't get excited about putting that artwork on my product. I get that others like that (even look for that quirky/human touch)... but that's not my vision. AI art isn't perfect... but, if you ask me, it looks better than that.
The problem with public domain art is that it lacks consistency. If I want, say, to represent the same character in multiple drawings (like how, say, Driz'zt Do'Urden was depicted on multiple book covers on R.A. Salvatore's novels), that is not something that you can do with public domain images. It is something you can do with AI though. The result is not going to be as good as what you would get from one drawn by a professional artist, but the end result is still going to look better than anything you can find on public domain.
Maybe to you but you'll have a hard time convincing me that a geberic oil paint landscape looks better than one actually depicting the chars in a plot-significant scene. And, thankfully, this is probavly only goibg to get better as AI models improve. Maybe, in 5-10 years, we won't even be abe to tell the difference.
I also grappled with this early on, back when some TTRPG communities still had spaces to share AI generated stuff, because no one really knew all the ugly downsides yet.
I landed on the opposite side as you, ripped out all AI art from any of my games, publicly shared that I was doing that, and promptly commissioned art from a real artist to replace the AI art in the games where it made sense. Here's the post I made talking about my reasoning and how to avoid AI art while still making cool stuff: https://rpgfeed.com/how-to-avoid-ai-art-a-helpful-guide-for-indie-ttrpg-creators/.
It is -so- tempting for those of us doing this as a hobby to take the shortcut.
But I finally realized that as a consumer, I'm not interested in consuming things made by an LLM. It's like when someone sends you an email that they clearly didn't bother to write - if you didn't invest in this, why should I? It's a negative value signal. Skip. Next.
It also excels at the average. That means everyone using AI art in their games ends up looking exactly the same. I'm not here in the indie TTRPG space for sameness. I'm here for whacky, weird, soulful creations by other little freaks like myself.
And that's putting aside all of the other issues, like the data center going up a few miles from my house that'll likely raise the local temperature by a few degrees, might wreck my well water that I depend on, and is going to bring my rural town a grand total of... maybe 5 jobs.
Then you have the intellectual property issues where these companies have been caught scraping non-public sources. The fact that sometimes these things spit out exact copies of protected works. The fact that they're a black box controlled by a corporation with no interest in humanness or our well-being, who can tweak the system prompt in subtle ways to control public opinion. The fact that they're non-deterministic and you can never get the same output twice, even with the same input. The fact that the over-investment in a tech that can never do what the CEOs claim it will has caused an economic bubble that will likely harm all of us, caused shortage in electronics that we need to do our jobs, and driven the price of computer components sky high.
Everyone wants to compare this tech to something like a calculator or a camera. I don't think that holds up.
It's like they invented a camera that said... "Instead of doing the hard work, the stuff that makes memories, the trudge through the forest, the early wake up at sunrise, the anxiousness of trying to capture that special moment - just describe it to me, and I'll do everything for you, and give you something that looks LIKE a thing you worked hard for, without any of the growth associated with creating that thing." And then, after making those promises, it spits out an image that 70% of the time looks like what you wanted, 20% of the time looks like something completely different (resulting in re-prompts and more power/water consumption), and 10% of the time just takes someone else's picture that they DID work hard for and gives it to you and says "here you go, this is yours now."
A bit of a brain dump, but this is where I landed after going through exactly what you've expressed in this post. I hope it helps you continue to think about the topic and land somewhere defensible that you can feel comfortable with, but I don't think the TTRPG community at large will ever accept this tech, and using it in games is probably going to hurt your ambitions to distribute those games to people who would enjoy them.
As always, Elijah... you push me to think. I've always valued your feedback.
And this: "Instead of doing the hard work, [AI will] do everything for you, and give you something that looks LIKE a thing you worked hard for, without any of the growth associated with creating that thing." This is something I didn't get into because... there was already too much. But it's something I'm worried about. I don't know... Maybe this concern is more for language models like Chat-GPT.
But... as an educator I see all my high school students gleefully skipping past "learning" and simply having AI create a "product" (an essay, response, answers, whatever). Our school, though, isn't outright blocking these sites, and (for better or for worse) my school feels like it needs to embrace AI, to teach students how to use AI with a "human-first" approach and with "integrity." The idea is that our students will have to do this in the workplace of tomorrow. I have realized that we, the teachers, don't even know how to do it! And exploring AI on my own, professionally and creatively, is me figuring that out (or if that's even possible).
Side Note: I remember your games with AI art, and I never thought less of them for it. You had interesting concepts, and that's what pulls in the audience. For sure, I've seen some products (using AI) that did make me question the contents... I get your point. For me, though, I'm less likely to buy a product with low-quality human art than I am a product using AI art.
"I'm less likely to buy a product with low-quality human art than I am a product using AI art" is the polar opposite of how I feel about the topic. I'm simply exhausted of seeing people use AI to churn out low-effort material and if a person uses even just a little AI for the cover art, I can only assume that means they were comfortable using it for more. As a teacher, surely you must be aware of how AI is damaging literacy and critical thinking skills.
My philosophy is that I engage in this hobby to celebrate human creativity and the creative process, even if it's low-quality. It sort of feels like dropshipping: You buy something on Etsy thinking you're getting handmade product of that creator only for you to later realise that it was mass-manufactured and imported for a bulk price of $2 each.
This right here is a great point. "[AI] sort of feels like dropshipping: You buy something on Etsy thinking you're getting handmade product of that creator only for you to later realize that it was mass-manufactured and imported for a bulk price of $2 each."
And... it, kind of, reminds me of all the (obviously fake) commercials that are made to look like some social media/influencer post.
I don't want to fool anyone. Consumers don't want to be fooled, either. This is not what anyone wants! But this hopefully won't happen if it's clearly labeled as "AI."
If creators are using AI art, they have to be upfront about it. I see way too many people on the web (even selling it) just quietly sliding it in to their work. I'm experimenting with it, so I'm going to label it as such. I'm hoping that maybe this post will move others (who are OK with using AI art) to be more open about this.
I still follow a few people who use AI stuff but I mostly unsubscribe and unfollow them and certainly won’t purchase anything they make.
We can only vote with attention and the dollar, so that’s how I choose to do it - and this can still be done without being cruel or hard on folks who choose that route.
I decided to follow your because of your writing not because of the Art you choose to display.
I would be more on board with LLMs if they could guarantee that Artists aren't being stolen from but then you still have the environmental impact...
"It's not going away" is something a lot of AI-pilled/Tech-bro people say and I think thats a pretty circular reasoning. In the TTRPG and creative space people will push back on your choice to use LLM art, at least in their current iteration. Using generated art will situate you with a group of people who predominately use LLM generated images, scammers, hustlers and people who care more about output than craft. But thats just how I see it.
Yes. "I would be more on board with LLMs if they could guarantee that Artists aren't being stolen from..." I looked at Adobe Firefly which claims to do use only it's own stock images to train it's AI model. However, it does not feel ready as a product: really tough to use and doesn't put out great images. And... they've faced some controversy because, apparently, they were not exactly following that only-images-we-own training model. I'm on the lookout for a generator that uses only ethically obtained images for training. This what consumers want!
This had me thinking, though: "[AI is] not going away" is... pretty circular reasoning." I don't have an answer for that. But I'm not disagreeing with you either. I need to chew on that.
You also say that, "using generated art will situate you with a group of people who predominately use LLM generated images [and who could be soulless] scammers [and] hustlers." You might be right. I hope not. I care about craft, and there's gotta be others out there like me.
Adobe Firefly sounds like an interesting experiment. If it mostly used its own stock images and its output is not great, perhaps this means you’re unlikely to get an AI image generator that can make images well if only legitimately obtained images are used to train it. Perhaps an AI image generator needs so much data, the only way to get a large enough database is to use other people’s art and pictures without their permission. The same goes for chatbots. They only work, for the most part, because they are trained on a huge amount of data.
Another thing about Firefly that really turned me away from it was a particularly shifty feature. It makes all kinds of AI generation models available for use besides the Firefly engine (like Gemini or Nano Banana). Whenever you put in a prompt and hit enter, I noticed that my selection would switch from using Firefly (the one trained on Adobe owned art) to something else. So, unless I paid really close attention and changed it every time… I would, in fact, not be using the Adobe model. It felt like a bait and switch.
Hm, perhaps the shifting to other AI models was Adobe's way of hiding how bad their image generator was, by making the user generate images through better-trained models like Gemini or Nano Banana.
Comments like these make me wonder if people knew what goes into creating AI art - yes there’s a lot of rubbish out there but there are also some incredible work that requires imagination - writing the prompts isn’t some one two lines of “create a image of a woman in red and white walking a dog on a street”. To create something dynamic a lot more works goes into the creative process. In terms of the energy needed to use AI art or anything, I do agree with you.
This is so disappointing to read about. AI is awful for so many reasons. You aren’t doing anything good by utilizing it to generate images. I hope you come to understand how incredibly harmful it is and stop using it.
I know you’re a great writer because I read the whole thing and all of your points kinda made sense. They made sense to the small voice in the back of my brain that would love an excuse to justify using AI.
Im no artist and I certainly can’t pay someone for art, so I understand the temptation. An article like this is food for people who want the shortcut method. As concise and thoughtful your points are, they still come off as justification to use a thing you know you probably shouldn’t be using.
Just look at the comments. It’s either well known game designers who are disappointed, or game designers who are upset they spent $75 on real art for their game that didn’t make any money, and thanking you for justifying them using AI.
I’ve never designed a game before. I make dungeon synth. I spent about 6 hours making the thumbnail for my album. About an hour and a half to draw a skeleton dude, and around 4 hours mixing and mashing old art into an album cover. Was that time I could have used making more music? Sure. But am I genuinely proud of the art attached to my music? 100%.
I’m also attempting make my first ttrpg adventure. Am I confident in my art skills? No. Can I afford to pay an artist? No. Do I want to use old art? Not really.
I’m just gonna get better at drawing. I practice a little everyday, and slowly but surely I can get better. And I’ll know my adventure is fully MINE. Without any disclaimers.
You said you love to make art and sketch and doodle. I would legitimately love to see those doodles made by YOU, than the midjourney prompts you have to asterisk.
Thanks for the kind words on my writing (and the thoughtful response).
You say that my points appear as "justification to use a thing you know you probably shouldn’t be using." And this made me think. Is that really what's going on? Maybe.
I'm genuinely happy that creators on here can feel satisfied with their own art, satisfied with that result (even though it may be "janky"). I don't feel that way. Weak art, in fact, actually stops me from downloading someone's product (more than AI). For this reason, I've been interested in experimenting with AI images for some time. Of course there's lots of AI slop, but I've actually seen some compelling images, as well. I was trying to capture that in my approach to this post, but I realize now that I fail to state this clearly/directly.
Look, in the past few months, I've watched stock image sites like Freepik (and Rawpixel, initially a public domain image source) and Pintrest literally fill up with AI images. I can't be the only one that's intrigued by AI art.
And... since I've been on Substack, I've seen many users share notes and posts including AI art... but most don't present any sort of admission or credit. Even when it's obvious, I don't agree with this. On the other hand there are a few that post angry rants condemning anyone who uses AI. I don't agree with them. I am willing to bet there are more people on Substack who fall somewhere in the middle. That's where I am, and that's why I wrote this. So, I don't know if folks commenting here are necessarily "thanking me" for "justifying" their use of AI art.... It's just that we are finally talking about it out in the open.
I mean... I'm certainly not the kind of person that gets a kick out of firing people up. That's not what I'm trying to do here. I'm also not the kind of person that doesn't care if I've "disappointed" folks (especially good people that I admire). But... I AM the kind of person who can't help but reject norms (rules, expectations, etc.) and try a thing until I've figured out the answer myself (it's frustrating... just ask my mother).
The bottom line? Some creators (like me) are using AI art. They 100% need to own that. Be open about it. I refuse to take the "I hope they don't notice" approach. Meanwhile, some consumers (and some creators) are not going to like it. Of course, they 100% can choose not to purchase that AI product or not to follow/support (or unfollow) that AI user. And... I think I'd rather face that response than live in fear of it.
Read properly, please. I have not written I was upset I spent $75 on real art for my game that didn't make any money. I wrote I spent the money, but the game didn't even make me that much.
I don't know if you notice the difference in tone, but it matters.
Really appreciated this. You managed to write about AI art without grabbing a pitchfork or wearing a “future is now” cape, which is honestly rare.
I’m still deeply conflicted about AI art, but your approach feels thoughtful: use it transparently, don’t rip off living artists, don’t pretend the ethical mess isn’t there, and don’t generate 400 versions of “cool dragon guy” just because the button is shiny.
The indie creator angle also matters. Not everyone using these tools is a soulless corporation trying to replace artists; sometimes it’s just a tired person with a weird little world in their head and zero illustration budget.
No perfect answers here, but I like the idea of treating AI less like a magic vending machine and more like a questionable goblin assistant: useful, tempting, occasionally cursed, and definitely in need of rules.
The rules: Use AI "transparently, don’t rip off living artists, don’t pretend the ethical mess isn’t there, and don’t generate 400 versions of “cool dragon guy” just because the button is shiny."
The mindset: "[Treat AI] less like a magic vending machine and more like a questionable goblin assistant: useful, tempting, occasionally cursed, and definitely in need of rules."
This is a little disappointing as AI centers are killing our planet.
"While electricity demands of data centers may be getting the most attention in research literature, the amount of water consumed by these facilities has environmental impacts, as well.
Chilled water is used to cool a data center by absorbing heat from computing equipment. It has been estimated that, for each kilowatt hour of energy a data center consumes, it would need two liters of water for cooling, says Bashir."
"There are also environmental implications of obtaining the raw materials used to fabricate GPUs, which can involve dirty mining procedures and the use of toxic chemicals for processing."
As we grapple with this new tech, all of these things must be considered. I want to go into this eyes open, and I’ve learned so much just from researching this post.
The planet started dying with the Industrial Revolution - do you drive a car? Gas or electric? Travel by plane? All the factories spewing out chemical waste? AI energy use is one more technology ruining the plane, close factories and stop driving cars, using computers, mobile phones etc ( that alone would be the end of AI! )
You can’t place the fault of the environmental strain of AI on individual consumers. AI fulfills a function that cannot be replaced. I will continue using LLMs as I see fit, without being persuaded by the environmental impact that artificial intelligence has. For one, my own use of AI won’t have much impact, just like me driving a car won’t do much damage to the planet either. Secondly, I am not someone who designs chatbots. I don’t have any involvement in the way they operate. I hope chatbots will be made as efficient as possible, so that they use less resources (such as water). But that is literally not my job.
I have a similar position to you on AI art I use it too and wrote a similar article on my substack. I think we need to he grown up about it and use it responsibly. I do small products on DTRPG and I have no budget for art so NanoBanna is my go to.
Thanks for sharing your thought process, it was interesting to hear and I really like your code of conduct.
I'm still firmly in the 'no AI' camp, but I think its brave of you to open an honest discussion. If more people were willing to have a respectful debate we could probably reach the right conclusion far more quickly.
I'm so sorry to see you go the AI route. Your strengths should be your draw card, not a quick fix to your weakness.
I want to be remembered for what I do well, and I've found there are many many solutions that don't go to AI for resolving weakness. If this is a hobby, let it be a hobby.
Reach out to friends and family, spotlight their art.
Offer an artist a share on the profits.
Use great cover designs and unique fonts.
Use words to paint the picture.
Offer a fan contest for who's art gets chosen.
Just ask for free art.
I created an entire Western town with over a dozen poi and all just because a stranger needed maps for his campaign. I own the maps, he gets great first use.
There are better options, and I believe you are a better person. Show us who you want to be.
I so get this issue, both sides and TBH I’m glad I’m not a game designer. I admire how much you explored both sides. While I wish and hope AI doesn’t take more jobs as we speak, (sigh, it will) as long as someone is honest about using AI art, then I still may give the product a chance. Thank you for putting yourself out there with your decision. It’s not a popular choice but it’s a good choice for your circumstances.
I'm sure that many jobs will be replaced with AI (why hire five accountants when one who can use AI well can do all that?). And, of course, there will be new jobs created: AI coders and trainers, for example, and computer chip designers/manufacturers. And... if you happen to be in data-center-building, constructing these centers (as well as figuring out how to make them smaller, more efficient, etc.) is going to keep you busy.
Overall, though, I think that all of us will be invited, if not expected, to use AI programs in most jobs. I have a feeling that it will eventually be like email... and ubiquitous to the modern-day work place.
It's important that we figure out how to it with a "human-first" approach.
Thank you for this post! I'm an rpg writer and publish my games for $1 to $4 a pop. My sales numbers are ridiculous, but I'm writing what I love. Both GMing and writing rpgs are creative endeavors for me.
I'm using AI art, as well. Once, I wrote an rpg and hired a really good artist to draw the cover image for it. He was a kind soul and only charged $75 for it. I still ended up spending more money for that game than I made. For small publishers like myself, AI is indeed a viable alternative.
Yes... if you're into this hobby, it's probably not for the money. Indie game design should be fun, and we have the tools to make our ideas a reality in a way that wasn't possible five or ten years ago.
But one big question still remains. Can AI image generators be used to make decent art? How do we avoid the "slop" that people complain about?
Im sorry but I would never knowingly spend money on a product that used AI, especially AI images. Even if you think you can’t draw, I would much rather have pencil doodles on a game than AI slop.
The problem is that everything made by AI is deemed "Slop" regardless of the actual content or quality. I've watched artists employ AI in their work, and they put in just as much effort as they did when they were doing it by hand, only now the quality is better and the workflow is faster.
The Anti-AI sentiment is painfully childish: "F*ck this thing I don't like and f*ck you for getting any enjoyment from it."
Bit of a strawman there at the end, but I won’t strawman your argument. Even if you grant that making AI art takes just as much effort (which I guarantee it usually does not. but there are probably edge cases where someone was really particular about the prompts or post processing) that doesn’t change the fact that AI can only ever output some of the most average boring soulless images I’ve laid eyes on.
My argument is more like this:
And AI models are data-hungry, which is a huge privacy worry as these corporations are spending hundreds of billions on harvesting more and more human data.
AI companies like Palantir and Anduril and Flock using AI to get better at killing people and learning what you personally do every day, where you drive your car, your biometric data, etc so that they can make more money. It’s all tied in together, you can’t separate ChatGPT’s fun little image generator from this stuff.
Talk about a strawman at the end... but, if you think my statement is untrue, I invite you to spend some time on any of the AI related subreddits.
Palantir and Anduril are not AI-Companies, they're private armies and weapons manufacturers who employ AI. But at the end of the day, I do agree with you that the people currently holding the reigns of AI, are not the people that should be leading humanity.
As for data privacy... are you kidding me? If you were born, ever went to the hospital, went to school, graduated, went to college, got married, opened a bank account, applied for a license, applied for a passport, bought/rented a car, bought/rented a house... your data is already out there. Hell, if you're an American like me your SSN is out in the wild because of the Social Security admin hack! We know for a fact Elon and his DOGE minions spent 10 months digitally looting every government database they could get their hands on!
Not all AI is the same. Palintir, Anduril, and Flock aren't connected to Midjourney at all. And even if they were, that's like saying I shouldn't support the automotive industry because Ferrarri cheats at F1.
Late-stage Capitalism is literally the root of all of our problems, including the ones with AI.
Thank you for your thoughtful take on the matter. I, for one, emphatically support your decision.
As a solo-player/game master who tried to break into TTRPG publishing before the advent of AI, I find it legitimately hilarious that people are telling you to beg an artist to work for free or "exposure". This used to be sacrilege in the artist communities. Amazing how that's suddenly changed after a tool that democratizes illustration is created.
Your rules are a good moral foundation to employ the technology in spite of it's flaws. All technology is refined with time, not just the software capabilities, but the hardware specs too.
You've articulated a lot of the issues so very well. Of course there's a vast amount of public domain images out there. Of course there are artists you can hire to do the work. But what a lot of the people saying those things don't understand is that for some creators, those options simply do not work well. As you say, hiring an artist is out of the budget for a lot of us. And if you're working in speculative fiction, public domain and CC images just don't convey scenes from the imagination without a lot of tweaking. Bravo for saying this.
I appreciate that you put some thought into it, and you have fair points. I'm not going to get mad or even disappointed that you are going that route. That said, for me, the ethical quandries of it are still too muddled.
I can think of probably 6-10 reasons to not want anything to do with AI.
1. Ecological concerns. You covered this, I'm not going to belabour the point.
2. Artist erasure. I like seeing artists paid when I'm buying a project. I worry that the normalization of AI art will erode art more.
3. I worry about it infecting other areas, not just art. And I think about it as both a consuner and as a creator. A lot of people see AI art and think the whole thing is disposable. We (humans) judge books by their covers. If I see AI art, it makes me wonder what other parts of the process were made with AI.
Using AI art makes me wonder if I'll eventually let it do other things too, when I'm bored or unmotivated to write.
4. Built on theft. The whole thing feels wrong to me. Even if the courts find it to be fair use, I know better. What is law is not always what is right.
5. Corporate brinkmanship. AI has caused a huge spike in energy costs, GPU costs, RAM costs, Storage cost, negative human health effects due to data centers, etc. I don't want to support companies that make life more difficult for the people around me. Granted there are ways to mitigate that by using local agents, but I still don't care for it.
6. Public domain. Everything AI makes is essentially public domain. That means as a creator, if I use AI regularly, I can't build unique brand recognition. Anyone that wants it can just take it. And by muddying the waters with art, people might think my writing is AI generated and attempt to take that without permission. It leads to a place where all my time is spent fighting copycats, instead of doing what I enjoy.
You do you, but this is disappointing to read.
I get it.
I knew this would be disappointing to some, and that’s why I felt the need to be up front and think out loud about it.
Thanks for reading.
Just putting this out there: there are so many excellent public domain art resources out there for you to use instead of something that is harming the planet!
For sure. I will continue to use public domain art, but (like I say in the article) those images don’t always capture the world in my head (not even with photo bashing).
but, you could just. do the work? and that work would inspire your writing as well. and the work is as deep as you'd like it to be.
there are tons of people willing to collaborate, for free, on indie ttrpg projects and provide art for things they enjoy the writing of.
this whole thing reads as incredibly anti-social really, and indicative of a grander issue in your approach to art and the creative process.
anyone can look at those images and prompts and note how they copy styles from previous decades, that first samurai looks like 2017. the "hopepunk girl" looks like 2019. these things are not capturing the moment of now, because YOU arent in the art. if you looked up "jelly fish in coral reef", you'd find tons of images that would be suitable to use, and even just playing with the saturation/filtering in a simple program like krita or whatever would be enough to establish CHARM, which is what actually sells / gains a following in the entertainment/art world. especially the indie ttrpg space. Noone is impressed by generative AI, and that wont change as time goes on, even if it is "normalized". People want things that reflect now, and the only way to transmute that into existence is to make it yourself, as you ARE. Flaws and all.
On one hand, you lament the lack of funds to "get professionals", but you yourself are not a "professional" writer, so whats the problem with working with others? there are a ridiculous amount of communities that you can explore to find and make things with people that are willing to collaborate with you (for free!) to make something come together as a GROUP.
Thanks for the comment!
You said, "There are a ridiculous amount of communities that you can explore to find and make things with people that are willing to collaborate with you (for free!) to make something come together as a GROUP."
I would like to work with a group, and I hope (and plan) to do so in the future. Afterall, one of my goals in starting this Substack blog was to "collaborate" with others. I've met some cool people on here, too! I gotta say, though, I have been unable to locate compelling artists who are willing to work for free.
Maybe there are some folks out there willing to give away their "janky" human-made images, but I just don't get excited about putting that artwork on my product. I get that others like that (even look for that quirky/human touch)... but that's not my vision. AI art isn't perfect... but, if you ask me, it looks better than that.
The problem with public domain art is that it lacks consistency. If I want, say, to represent the same character in multiple drawings (like how, say, Driz'zt Do'Urden was depicted on multiple book covers on R.A. Salvatore's novels), that is not something that you can do with public domain images. It is something you can do with AI though. The result is not going to be as good as what you would get from one drawn by a professional artist, but the end result is still going to look better than anything you can find on public domain.
I agree that it’s less consistent but I strongly disagree that it looks better
Maybe to you but you'll have a hard time convincing me that a geberic oil paint landscape looks better than one actually depicting the chars in a plot-significant scene. And, thankfully, this is probavly only goibg to get better as AI models improve. Maybe, in 5-10 years, we won't even be abe to tell the difference.
I also grappled with this early on, back when some TTRPG communities still had spaces to share AI generated stuff, because no one really knew all the ugly downsides yet.
I landed on the opposite side as you, ripped out all AI art from any of my games, publicly shared that I was doing that, and promptly commissioned art from a real artist to replace the AI art in the games where it made sense. Here's the post I made talking about my reasoning and how to avoid AI art while still making cool stuff: https://rpgfeed.com/how-to-avoid-ai-art-a-helpful-guide-for-indie-ttrpg-creators/.
It is -so- tempting for those of us doing this as a hobby to take the shortcut.
But I finally realized that as a consumer, I'm not interested in consuming things made by an LLM. It's like when someone sends you an email that they clearly didn't bother to write - if you didn't invest in this, why should I? It's a negative value signal. Skip. Next.
It also excels at the average. That means everyone using AI art in their games ends up looking exactly the same. I'm not here in the indie TTRPG space for sameness. I'm here for whacky, weird, soulful creations by other little freaks like myself.
And that's putting aside all of the other issues, like the data center going up a few miles from my house that'll likely raise the local temperature by a few degrees, might wreck my well water that I depend on, and is going to bring my rural town a grand total of... maybe 5 jobs.
Then you have the intellectual property issues where these companies have been caught scraping non-public sources. The fact that sometimes these things spit out exact copies of protected works. The fact that they're a black box controlled by a corporation with no interest in humanness or our well-being, who can tweak the system prompt in subtle ways to control public opinion. The fact that they're non-deterministic and you can never get the same output twice, even with the same input. The fact that the over-investment in a tech that can never do what the CEOs claim it will has caused an economic bubble that will likely harm all of us, caused shortage in electronics that we need to do our jobs, and driven the price of computer components sky high.
Everyone wants to compare this tech to something like a calculator or a camera. I don't think that holds up.
It's like they invented a camera that said... "Instead of doing the hard work, the stuff that makes memories, the trudge through the forest, the early wake up at sunrise, the anxiousness of trying to capture that special moment - just describe it to me, and I'll do everything for you, and give you something that looks LIKE a thing you worked hard for, without any of the growth associated with creating that thing." And then, after making those promises, it spits out an image that 70% of the time looks like what you wanted, 20% of the time looks like something completely different (resulting in re-prompts and more power/water consumption), and 10% of the time just takes someone else's picture that they DID work hard for and gives it to you and says "here you go, this is yours now."
A bit of a brain dump, but this is where I landed after going through exactly what you've expressed in this post. I hope it helps you continue to think about the topic and land somewhere defensible that you can feel comfortable with, but I don't think the TTRPG community at large will ever accept this tech, and using it in games is probably going to hurt your ambitions to distribute those games to people who would enjoy them.
As always, Elijah... you push me to think. I've always valued your feedback.
And this: "Instead of doing the hard work, [AI will] do everything for you, and give you something that looks LIKE a thing you worked hard for, without any of the growth associated with creating that thing." This is something I didn't get into because... there was already too much. But it's something I'm worried about. I don't know... Maybe this concern is more for language models like Chat-GPT.
But... as an educator I see all my high school students gleefully skipping past "learning" and simply having AI create a "product" (an essay, response, answers, whatever). Our school, though, isn't outright blocking these sites, and (for better or for worse) my school feels like it needs to embrace AI, to teach students how to use AI with a "human-first" approach and with "integrity." The idea is that our students will have to do this in the workplace of tomorrow. I have realized that we, the teachers, don't even know how to do it! And exploring AI on my own, professionally and creatively, is me figuring that out (or if that's even possible).
Side Note: I remember your games with AI art, and I never thought less of them for it. You had interesting concepts, and that's what pulls in the audience. For sure, I've seen some products (using AI) that did make me question the contents... I get your point. For me, though, I'm less likely to buy a product with low-quality human art than I am a product using AI art.
"I'm less likely to buy a product with low-quality human art than I am a product using AI art" is the polar opposite of how I feel about the topic. I'm simply exhausted of seeing people use AI to churn out low-effort material and if a person uses even just a little AI for the cover art, I can only assume that means they were comfortable using it for more. As a teacher, surely you must be aware of how AI is damaging literacy and critical thinking skills.
My philosophy is that I engage in this hobby to celebrate human creativity and the creative process, even if it's low-quality. It sort of feels like dropshipping: You buy something on Etsy thinking you're getting handmade product of that creator only for you to later realise that it was mass-manufactured and imported for a bulk price of $2 each.
This right here is a great point. "[AI] sort of feels like dropshipping: You buy something on Etsy thinking you're getting handmade product of that creator only for you to later realize that it was mass-manufactured and imported for a bulk price of $2 each."
And... it, kind of, reminds me of all the (obviously fake) commercials that are made to look like some social media/influencer post.
I don't want to fool anyone. Consumers don't want to be fooled, either. This is not what anyone wants! But this hopefully won't happen if it's clearly labeled as "AI."
If creators are using AI art, they have to be upfront about it. I see way too many people on the web (even selling it) just quietly sliding it in to their work. I'm experimenting with it, so I'm going to label it as such. I'm hoping that maybe this post will move others (who are OK with using AI art) to be more open about this.
The thing is in 10/20/30 years these same students will only use AI and anything else will be history.
Great comment. Applauded.
I still follow a few people who use AI stuff but I mostly unsubscribe and unfollow them and certainly won’t purchase anything they make.
We can only vote with attention and the dollar, so that’s how I choose to do it - and this can still be done without being cruel or hard on folks who choose that route.
Eh, you should reconsider.
I decided to follow your because of your writing not because of the Art you choose to display.
I would be more on board with LLMs if they could guarantee that Artists aren't being stolen from but then you still have the environmental impact...
"It's not going away" is something a lot of AI-pilled/Tech-bro people say and I think thats a pretty circular reasoning. In the TTRPG and creative space people will push back on your choice to use LLM art, at least in their current iteration. Using generated art will situate you with a group of people who predominately use LLM generated images, scammers, hustlers and people who care more about output than craft. But thats just how I see it.
Thanks for the support of my writing.
Many great points here!
Yes. "I would be more on board with LLMs if they could guarantee that Artists aren't being stolen from..." I looked at Adobe Firefly which claims to do use only it's own stock images to train it's AI model. However, it does not feel ready as a product: really tough to use and doesn't put out great images. And... they've faced some controversy because, apparently, they were not exactly following that only-images-we-own training model. I'm on the lookout for a generator that uses only ethically obtained images for training. This what consumers want!
This had me thinking, though: "[AI is] not going away" is... pretty circular reasoning." I don't have an answer for that. But I'm not disagreeing with you either. I need to chew on that.
You also say that, "using generated art will situate you with a group of people who predominately use LLM generated images [and who could be soulless] scammers [and] hustlers." You might be right. I hope not. I care about craft, and there's gotta be others out there like me.
Hey, found this youtube short by DenUngeHerrHolm (great guy) and I think it could be relevant for thsi discussion: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/af0sXc3JiaA
<3
Adobe Firefly sounds like an interesting experiment. If it mostly used its own stock images and its output is not great, perhaps this means you’re unlikely to get an AI image generator that can make images well if only legitimately obtained images are used to train it. Perhaps an AI image generator needs so much data, the only way to get a large enough database is to use other people’s art and pictures without their permission. The same goes for chatbots. They only work, for the most part, because they are trained on a huge amount of data.
That might be the case.
Another thing about Firefly that really turned me away from it was a particularly shifty feature. It makes all kinds of AI generation models available for use besides the Firefly engine (like Gemini or Nano Banana). Whenever you put in a prompt and hit enter, I noticed that my selection would switch from using Firefly (the one trained on Adobe owned art) to something else. So, unless I paid really close attention and changed it every time… I would, in fact, not be using the Adobe model. It felt like a bait and switch.
Hm, perhaps the shifting to other AI models was Adobe's way of hiding how bad their image generator was, by making the user generate images through better-trained models like Gemini or Nano Banana.
Comments like these make me wonder if people knew what goes into creating AI art - yes there’s a lot of rubbish out there but there are also some incredible work that requires imagination - writing the prompts isn’t some one two lines of “create a image of a woman in red and white walking a dog on a street”. To create something dynamic a lot more works goes into the creative process. In terms of the energy needed to use AI art or anything, I do agree with you.
This is so disappointing to read about. AI is awful for so many reasons. You aren’t doing anything good by utilizing it to generate images. I hope you come to understand how incredibly harmful it is and stop using it.
Thanks for sharing this. It's a message from one decent human being to another, and it's truly moving. I hear you.
I will keep these words in mind as I navigate this new tech.
I know you’re a great writer because I read the whole thing and all of your points kinda made sense. They made sense to the small voice in the back of my brain that would love an excuse to justify using AI.
Im no artist and I certainly can’t pay someone for art, so I understand the temptation. An article like this is food for people who want the shortcut method. As concise and thoughtful your points are, they still come off as justification to use a thing you know you probably shouldn’t be using.
Just look at the comments. It’s either well known game designers who are disappointed, or game designers who are upset they spent $75 on real art for their game that didn’t make any money, and thanking you for justifying them using AI.
I’ve never designed a game before. I make dungeon synth. I spent about 6 hours making the thumbnail for my album. About an hour and a half to draw a skeleton dude, and around 4 hours mixing and mashing old art into an album cover. Was that time I could have used making more music? Sure. But am I genuinely proud of the art attached to my music? 100%.
I’m also attempting make my first ttrpg adventure. Am I confident in my art skills? No. Can I afford to pay an artist? No. Do I want to use old art? Not really.
I’m just gonna get better at drawing. I practice a little everyday, and slowly but surely I can get better. And I’ll know my adventure is fully MINE. Without any disclaimers.
You said you love to make art and sketch and doodle. I would legitimately love to see those doodles made by YOU, than the midjourney prompts you have to asterisk.
Thanks for the kind words on my writing (and the thoughtful response).
You say that my points appear as "justification to use a thing you know you probably shouldn’t be using." And this made me think. Is that really what's going on? Maybe.
I'm genuinely happy that creators on here can feel satisfied with their own art, satisfied with that result (even though it may be "janky"). I don't feel that way. Weak art, in fact, actually stops me from downloading someone's product (more than AI). For this reason, I've been interested in experimenting with AI images for some time. Of course there's lots of AI slop, but I've actually seen some compelling images, as well. I was trying to capture that in my approach to this post, but I realize now that I fail to state this clearly/directly.
Look, in the past few months, I've watched stock image sites like Freepik (and Rawpixel, initially a public domain image source) and Pintrest literally fill up with AI images. I can't be the only one that's intrigued by AI art.
And... since I've been on Substack, I've seen many users share notes and posts including AI art... but most don't present any sort of admission or credit. Even when it's obvious, I don't agree with this. On the other hand there are a few that post angry rants condemning anyone who uses AI. I don't agree with them. I am willing to bet there are more people on Substack who fall somewhere in the middle. That's where I am, and that's why I wrote this. So, I don't know if folks commenting here are necessarily "thanking me" for "justifying" their use of AI art.... It's just that we are finally talking about it out in the open.
I mean... I'm certainly not the kind of person that gets a kick out of firing people up. That's not what I'm trying to do here. I'm also not the kind of person that doesn't care if I've "disappointed" folks (especially good people that I admire). But... I AM the kind of person who can't help but reject norms (rules, expectations, etc.) and try a thing until I've figured out the answer myself (it's frustrating... just ask my mother).
The bottom line? Some creators (like me) are using AI art. They 100% need to own that. Be open about it. I refuse to take the "I hope they don't notice" approach. Meanwhile, some consumers (and some creators) are not going to like it. Of course, they 100% can choose not to purchase that AI product or not to follow/support (or unfollow) that AI user. And... I think I'd rather face that response than live in fear of it.
Read properly, please. I have not written I was upset I spent $75 on real art for my game that didn't make any money. I wrote I spent the money, but the game didn't even make me that much.
I don't know if you notice the difference in tone, but it matters.
Really appreciated this. You managed to write about AI art without grabbing a pitchfork or wearing a “future is now” cape, which is honestly rare.
I’m still deeply conflicted about AI art, but your approach feels thoughtful: use it transparently, don’t rip off living artists, don’t pretend the ethical mess isn’t there, and don’t generate 400 versions of “cool dragon guy” just because the button is shiny.
The indie creator angle also matters. Not everyone using these tools is a soulless corporation trying to replace artists; sometimes it’s just a tired person with a weird little world in their head and zero illustration budget.
No perfect answers here, but I like the idea of treating AI less like a magic vending machine and more like a questionable goblin assistant: useful, tempting, occasionally cursed, and definitely in need of rules.
Well said.
The rules: Use AI "transparently, don’t rip off living artists, don’t pretend the ethical mess isn’t there, and don’t generate 400 versions of “cool dragon guy” just because the button is shiny."
The mindset: "[Treat AI] less like a magic vending machine and more like a questionable goblin assistant: useful, tempting, occasionally cursed, and definitely in need of rules."
That’s a good way to put it, less magic vending machine, more tool that needs context, judgment, and boundaries.
This is a little disappointing as AI centers are killing our planet.
"While electricity demands of data centers may be getting the most attention in research literature, the amount of water consumed by these facilities has environmental impacts, as well.
Chilled water is used to cool a data center by absorbing heat from computing equipment. It has been estimated that, for each kilowatt hour of energy a data center consumes, it would need two liters of water for cooling, says Bashir."
"There are also environmental implications of obtaining the raw materials used to fabricate GPUs, which can involve dirty mining procedures and the use of toxic chemicals for processing."
https://news.mit.edu/2025/explained-generative-ai-environmental-impact-0117
Thanks for your comment!
As we grapple with this new tech, all of these things must be considered. I want to go into this eyes open, and I’ve learned so much just from researching this post.
Do you use AI at all? For life or work?
The planet started dying with the Industrial Revolution - do you drive a car? Gas or electric? Travel by plane? All the factories spewing out chemical waste? AI energy use is one more technology ruining the plane, close factories and stop driving cars, using computers, mobile phones etc ( that alone would be the end of AI! )
You can’t place the fault of the environmental strain of AI on individual consumers. AI fulfills a function that cannot be replaced. I will continue using LLMs as I see fit, without being persuaded by the environmental impact that artificial intelligence has. For one, my own use of AI won’t have much impact, just like me driving a car won’t do much damage to the planet either. Secondly, I am not someone who designs chatbots. I don’t have any involvement in the way they operate. I hope chatbots will be made as efficient as possible, so that they use less resources (such as water). But that is literally not my job.
I have a similar position to you on AI art I use it too and wrote a similar article on my substack. I think we need to he grown up about it and use it responsibly. I do small products on DTRPG and I have no budget for art so NanoBanna is my go to.
I am with you!
Would you be willing to link your article here? Expand the conversation?
I will once I'm on my PC later tonight
https://neillwhyborne.substack.com/p/a-confession-about-ai-authorship?utm_campaign=post-expanded-share&utm_medium=web
First this about my position on using AI &
https://neillwhyborne.substack.com/p/the-great-ttrpg-amnesia
and this discussing AI slop
Thanks for sharing your thought process, it was interesting to hear and I really like your code of conduct.
I'm still firmly in the 'no AI' camp, but I think its brave of you to open an honest discussion. If more people were willing to have a respectful debate we could probably reach the right conclusion far more quickly.
I'm so sorry to see you go the AI route. Your strengths should be your draw card, not a quick fix to your weakness.
I want to be remembered for what I do well, and I've found there are many many solutions that don't go to AI for resolving weakness. If this is a hobby, let it be a hobby.
Reach out to friends and family, spotlight their art.
Offer an artist a share on the profits.
Use great cover designs and unique fonts.
Use words to paint the picture.
Offer a fan contest for who's art gets chosen.
Just ask for free art.
I created an entire Western town with over a dozen poi and all just because a stranger needed maps for his campaign. I own the maps, he gets great first use.
There are better options, and I believe you are a better person. Show us who you want to be.
I so get this issue, both sides and TBH I’m glad I’m not a game designer. I admire how much you explored both sides. While I wish and hope AI doesn’t take more jobs as we speak, (sigh, it will) as long as someone is honest about using AI art, then I still may give the product a chance. Thank you for putting yourself out there with your decision. It’s not a popular choice but it’s a good choice for your circumstances.
Thanks for reading (and your understanding)!
I worry about the job thing, too.
I'm sure that many jobs will be replaced with AI (why hire five accountants when one who can use AI well can do all that?). And, of course, there will be new jobs created: AI coders and trainers, for example, and computer chip designers/manufacturers. And... if you happen to be in data-center-building, constructing these centers (as well as figuring out how to make them smaller, more efficient, etc.) is going to keep you busy.
Overall, though, I think that all of us will be invited, if not expected, to use AI programs in most jobs. I have a feeling that it will eventually be like email... and ubiquitous to the modern-day work place.
It's important that we figure out how to it with a "human-first" approach.
True, new jobs will be created and yes, a humanistic approach is a must!
Thank you for this post! I'm an rpg writer and publish my games for $1 to $4 a pop. My sales numbers are ridiculous, but I'm writing what I love. Both GMing and writing rpgs are creative endeavors for me.
I'm using AI art, as well. Once, I wrote an rpg and hired a really good artist to draw the cover image for it. He was a kind soul and only charged $75 for it. I still ended up spending more money for that game than I made. For small publishers like myself, AI is indeed a viable alternative.
Yes... if you're into this hobby, it's probably not for the money. Indie game design should be fun, and we have the tools to make our ideas a reality in a way that wasn't possible five or ten years ago.
But one big question still remains. Can AI image generators be used to make decent art? How do we avoid the "slop" that people complain about?
Im sorry but I would never knowingly spend money on a product that used AI, especially AI images. Even if you think you can’t draw, I would much rather have pencil doodles on a game than AI slop.
The problem is that everything made by AI is deemed "Slop" regardless of the actual content or quality. I've watched artists employ AI in their work, and they put in just as much effort as they did when they were doing it by hand, only now the quality is better and the workflow is faster.
The Anti-AI sentiment is painfully childish: "F*ck this thing I don't like and f*ck you for getting any enjoyment from it."
Bit of a strawman there at the end, but I won’t strawman your argument. Even if you grant that making AI art takes just as much effort (which I guarantee it usually does not. but there are probably edge cases where someone was really particular about the prompts or post processing) that doesn’t change the fact that AI can only ever output some of the most average boring soulless images I’ve laid eyes on.
My argument is more like this:
And AI models are data-hungry, which is a huge privacy worry as these corporations are spending hundreds of billions on harvesting more and more human data.
AI companies like Palantir and Anduril and Flock using AI to get better at killing people and learning what you personally do every day, where you drive your car, your biometric data, etc so that they can make more money. It’s all tied in together, you can’t separate ChatGPT’s fun little image generator from this stuff.
Talk about a strawman at the end... but, if you think my statement is untrue, I invite you to spend some time on any of the AI related subreddits.
Palantir and Anduril are not AI-Companies, they're private armies and weapons manufacturers who employ AI. But at the end of the day, I do agree with you that the people currently holding the reigns of AI, are not the people that should be leading humanity.
As for data privacy... are you kidding me? If you were born, ever went to the hospital, went to school, graduated, went to college, got married, opened a bank account, applied for a license, applied for a passport, bought/rented a car, bought/rented a house... your data is already out there. Hell, if you're an American like me your SSN is out in the wild because of the Social Security admin hack! We know for a fact Elon and his DOGE minions spent 10 months digitally looting every government database they could get their hands on!
Not all AI is the same. Palintir, Anduril, and Flock aren't connected to Midjourney at all. And even if they were, that's like saying I shouldn't support the automotive industry because Ferrarri cheats at F1.
Late-stage Capitalism is literally the root of all of our problems, including the ones with AI.
🤷♂️
Thank you for your thoughtful take on the matter. I, for one, emphatically support your decision.
As a solo-player/game master who tried to break into TTRPG publishing before the advent of AI, I find it legitimately hilarious that people are telling you to beg an artist to work for free or "exposure". This used to be sacrilege in the artist communities. Amazing how that's suddenly changed after a tool that democratizes illustration is created.
Your rules are a good moral foundation to employ the technology in spite of it's flaws. All technology is refined with time, not just the software capabilities, but the hardware specs too.
https://andymasley.substack.com/p/the-ai-water-issue-is-fake?r=1rmsc2&utm_medium=ios
Thanks for posting here. Lots of info to unpack in that article!
It’s a huge one. I think it’s a side we don’t hear often. Definitely worth a read. Made me less scared
You've articulated a lot of the issues so very well. Of course there's a vast amount of public domain images out there. Of course there are artists you can hire to do the work. But what a lot of the people saying those things don't understand is that for some creators, those options simply do not work well. As you say, hiring an artist is out of the budget for a lot of us. And if you're working in speculative fiction, public domain and CC images just don't convey scenes from the imagination without a lot of tweaking. Bravo for saying this.
I appreciate that you put some thought into it, and you have fair points. I'm not going to get mad or even disappointed that you are going that route. That said, for me, the ethical quandries of it are still too muddled.
I can think of probably 6-10 reasons to not want anything to do with AI.
1. Ecological concerns. You covered this, I'm not going to belabour the point.
2. Artist erasure. I like seeing artists paid when I'm buying a project. I worry that the normalization of AI art will erode art more.
3. I worry about it infecting other areas, not just art. And I think about it as both a consuner and as a creator. A lot of people see AI art and think the whole thing is disposable. We (humans) judge books by their covers. If I see AI art, it makes me wonder what other parts of the process were made with AI.
Using AI art makes me wonder if I'll eventually let it do other things too, when I'm bored or unmotivated to write.
4. Built on theft. The whole thing feels wrong to me. Even if the courts find it to be fair use, I know better. What is law is not always what is right.
5. Corporate brinkmanship. AI has caused a huge spike in energy costs, GPU costs, RAM costs, Storage cost, negative human health effects due to data centers, etc. I don't want to support companies that make life more difficult for the people around me. Granted there are ways to mitigate that by using local agents, but I still don't care for it.
6. Public domain. Everything AI makes is essentially public domain. That means as a creator, if I use AI regularly, I can't build unique brand recognition. Anyone that wants it can just take it. And by muddying the waters with art, people might think my writing is AI generated and attempt to take that without permission. It leads to a place where all my time is spent fighting copycats, instead of doing what I enjoy.