Hi all,
Sharing Dice Roost, a free browser-based virtual tabletop for running tabletop RPG sessions online. No installs, just open a link and play.
A few things that make it a bit different: • AI-voiced NPCs: give an NPC a personality and let it actually talk back to your players during a scene, instead of you improvising every voice • Shared map with tokens, dice roller, character sheets, and session chat, all in one place • Built to be lightweight, easy to get a new group into with no learning curve
Still actively growing it and happy to answer any questions.
Going forward, I'd suggest reading the room better.
All of your marketing documents hype up the AI features to the exclusion of all else. If I were such a "puritan" and turned off all AI features what does dragons roost offer that DndBeyond, roll20 and Foundry do not?
The only thing I can see is that it's "free", but that's freeness that is built on the backs of the lives and livlihoods of thousands of people.
You even directly quoted the complaint that this is built on the backs of thousands of people's work. Without their consent, without the possibility of attribution and recognition for their work.
And then blithely ignored it, failed to address it at all.
You have demonstrated you just don't care about the creative work of countless people over countless hours, that has been shredded and fed into the machine which extruded this thing you want to promote. Why should anyone care about giving you “constructive” feedback? De-construct this thing and think a lot harder about the people you're trying to market to.
I keep not understanding what you're talking about, the site is entirely developed by me, I haven't exploited anyone. And if you're talking about D&D instead, I'm not exploiting anyone's work: all the material on the site is free-copyright, and I specifically only pulled unofficial, unprotected documentation, whether it's the rules (which are free), the spell and monster database, etc. Every reference to the material I've drawn on is specifically credited, which makes my product a sponsor and an opportunity to introduce other people's work to more and more people. What people create in the site afterward is their own property. It's funny to me that you first compare my system to other, more famous ones, sneaking in flimsy criticism of the (entirely optional) use of AI, and then dwell on some supposed "inappropriate" use of other people's content, when the very sites you cite do the same thing, and not only that, they commercialize the product and profit from it, which I don't do. Through all of this, I haven't seen any response to all the other points I raised. ;)
@DiceRoost @bignose
What they’re saying is they find the inclusion of some kind of LLM based AI system to be unethical. The manner in which the data was obtained for training LLMs, the environmental impacts of the AI data center build outs, and the way AI companies have been undermining human labor, and so on. Shallow or not, people have their reasons to avoid it.
It’s like you brought a steak salad to a vegan potluck. Telling people they can pick the steak out isn’t what they want.