Recently, we’ve had a few occasions where art used in marketing and game pieces have been publicly scrutinized, including for the possible inclusion of generative AI. During this time, we’ve made mistakes while at the same time have also seen artists and their work misidentified as problematic in a variety of ways.
To that end, we’re sharing an FAQ that addresses how we assess and respond to generative AI concerns with art commissioned for both Magic: The Gathering and Dungeons & Dragons, both before and after it has been published. Generative AI is a constantly evolving space and this FAQ will be revised on an ongoing basis to reflect what we are learning alongside everyone else.
What are your policies around art?
Both brands have their own artist handbooks. These are not public documents, but every artist who works with us is given a copy and is expected to stick to the guidelines.
The core of our policy is this: Magic and D&D have been built on the innovation, ingenuity, and hard work of talented people who sculpt these beautiful, creative games. As such, we require artists, writers, and creatives contributing to the Magic TCG and the D&D TTRPG to refrain from using AI generative tools to create final Magic or D&D products.
We’ve made a few other statements publicly as well, including two recent statements on our policy on generative AI art in Magic: The Gathering products (which is also covered in our artist handbooks):
Generative Artificial Intelligence Tools and Magic
An Update on Generative AI Tools and Magic
as well as similar statements from Dungeons & Dragons:
Updated Statement on AI
What tools do you have in place to detect generative AI usage?
We are regularly evaluating resources we could use to help us detect generative AI. It is important to us that we continue having a "human in the loop" regardless, especially since these tools are quite new.
How will you handle a situation where a piece of art has used generative AI and it wasn’t caught by your internal processes or tools?
The investigation process is much the same. We gather whatever information we have—from reports both private and public—we re-review the art, we re-run our tools, and we circle back with the artist who created the piece. Often, if public discourse is where a credible violation of our art policy was first discovered, we may make a statement.
Why are you not being transparent about AI use?
We try to be as transparent as possible—but not at the cost of people’s privacy, or livelihoods. Our artists put themselves and their names out there with every piece they produce, and our priority is going to be protecting their privacy whenever possible. That means that not all public discourse on generative AI art use is going to result in a public statement by us.
That said, we have been and will continue to be clear that we do not allow the use of generative AI in our art. While detection can be difficult and lines blurry, we are working hard to make sure our art is made by the talented humans who have delighted our fans for decades.
[Piece of art] sure looks like AI to me. Why are you not doing something about it?
We may not respond to online discourse about AI art for a variety of reasons, including but not limited to:
- Our investigation revealed that there was no generative AI used.
- To protect the privacy of one or more individuals.
- The investigation was inconclusive.
- We made internal changes—such as declining to work with an artist further —but did not publicly comment
Our preference is to handle the issue and the artist relation internally where possible. When that is not possible, our goal is to be clear and concise and, hopefully, prevent further churn on the issue—both for the artist in question and for us.
It seems like you no longer work with [artist] anymore, but you haven’t said anything. Why not?
Working relationships with artists can change for a variety of reasons—everything from a decision by an artist to move in another direction to our evolving styles not matching up. Sometimes artists don’t make art for Magic for years before coming back.
I saw/read that [other Hasbro brand] is using generative AI or will use generative AI. Why is that different from Magic and D&D?
Hasbro has a vast portfolio of 1900+ brands of which Magic: The Gathering and Dungeons & Dragons are two – two very important, cherished brands. Each brand is going to approach its products differently. What is in the best interest of Trivial Pursuit is likely quite different than that of Magic: The Gathering or Dungeons & Dragons.
If there is only one takeaway I should have from this FAQ, what should it be?
Human beings are fallible, whether it is a conglomerate of human beings (like a company) or a single human being (like an artist.) In the tension between perfection and transparency, we have erred on the side of transparency. As stated throughout, we have been consistent in our position with respect to generative AI in Magic: The Gathering and Dungeons & Dragons art, and we want our community to know that we are working to ensure they can see us deliberating on how best to meet that commitment, even if we all occasionally stumble along the way.
