>>538717823
>Rules should be as strict as they can no matter the laughs.
For me, it'd be a case-by-case basis in specific outlier scenarios, to say nothing about "house rules". I'm not saying every session needs to have rule-breaking to the point the game is unrecognizable, but a DM should have SOME flexibility to handwave things. Different DMs have different styles, though, so if you wanna go hard on the rulesfagging, don't let me stop you.
>One. Group chats suck because chatbots are a hivemind, they don't seem to be able to have consistent, separate identities.
I actually meant multiple humans with one AI DM. That would be the ideal setup if possible, given the difficulty of finding a capable DM or no one in your friend group wanting to be the DM. Arguably, you could tell the AI to make a character it controls join the party, you wouldn't need other chatbots, I don't think?
>AI will keep track of things like quests, character sheet, what npcs are doing, and so on.
Impressive if true. I'd have to play with the tool myself to get a proper feel for its capabilities.
> I'd get in tons of legal trouble for getting paid to emulate big companies' IP.
Well...you could have the AI help you write your own TTS and offer that, I guess? Since all the dice rolls are digital, you could even pick unorthodox dice that people don't use as often.
>rolling 10d4's for this attack
Something to consider. That or contact a big TTG company and pitch them your product (if those greedy fuckers aren't already cooking something themselves).
>Not only that, but almost everyone who's into tabletops is an AI-hating luddite.
There's a lot of noise from retards on Twitter, Reddit, and even 4chan, but people with an IQ above room temperature can take a more nuanced stance on the matter. Once you break the ice on a fun TTG system that an AI runs (especially if you can have multiple human players at once) you could make some nice money. I'd pay for it if the system actually worked and was fun.