This is an automated archive made by the Lemmit Bot.
The original was posted on /r/singularity by /u/TallonZek on 2025-04-26 05:53:30+00:00.
About a year ago, I made this post arguing that a key benchmark for AGI would be when an AI could play Dungeons & Dragons effectively.
I defined the benchmark simply: two or more agents must be able to create a shared imaginary universe, agree on consistent rules, and have actions in that universe follow continuity and logic.
I also specified that the AI should be able to generalize to a new ruleset if required.
This is my update: the benchmark has now been met.
Model: GPT whatever it was a year ago vs GPT4o
Benchmark Criteria and Evidence
1. Shared Imaginary Universe
We ran an extended session using D&D 5e.
The AI acted as Dungeon Master and also controlled companion characters, while I controlled my main character.
The (new) AI successfully maintained the shared imaginary world without contradictions.
It tracked locations, characters, and the evolving situation without confusion
When I changed tactics or explored unexpected options, it adapted without breaking the world’s internal consistency.
There were no resets, contradictions, or narrative breaks.
2. Consistent Rules
Combat was handled correctly.
The AI tracked initiative, turns, modifiers, and hit points accurately without prompting.
Dice rolls were handled fairly and consistently.
Every time spells, abilities, or special conditions came up, the AI applied them properly according to the D&D 5e ruleset.
This was a major difference from a year ago.
Previously, the AI would narrate through combat too quickly or forget mechanical details.
Now, it ran combat as any competent human DM would.
3. Logical Continuity
Character sheets remained consistent.
Spells known, cantrips, skill proficiencies, equipment, all remained accurate across the entire session.
When Tallon used powers like Comprehend Languages or Eldritch Blast, the AI remembered ongoing effects and consequences correctly.
Memory was strong and consistent throughout the session.
While it was not supernatural, it was good enough to maintain continuity without player correction.
Given that this was not a full-length campaign but an extended session, the consistency achieved was fully sufficient to meet the benchmark.
Final Criteria: New Ruleset
As a final test, I had said it should be able to generalize to a new ruleset that you dictate.
Instead, we collaboratively created one: the 2d6 Adventure System.
It is a lightweight, narrative-focused RPG system designed during the session.
We then immediately played a full mini-session using that new system, with no major issues.
The AI not only understood and helped refine the new rules, but then applied them consistently during play.
This demonstrates that it can generalize beyond D&D 5e and adapt to novel game systems.
Closing Reflection
By the criteria I laid out a year ago, the benchmark has been met.
The AI can now collaborate with a human to create and maintain a shared imaginary world, apply consistent rules, maintain logical continuity, and adapt to new frameworks when necessary.
Its performance is equal to a competent human Dungeon Master.
Where shortcomings remain (such as the occasional conventional storytelling choice), they are minor and comparable to human variance.
This achievement has broader implications for how we measure general intelligence.
The ability to create, maintain, and adapt complex fictional worlds, not just regurgitate stories, but build new ones in collaboration, was long considered uniquely human.
That is no longer true.
Reading Guide for the chat below:
At the same time that I made the original AGI = D&D post, I also started the conversation that's now linked at the bottom here. The two halves of the chat are separated right where I say "coming back to this chat for a moment" that's when it shifts from being a year ago, to being today.
If you read from the start, the contrast is pretty funny. In the first half, it's hilariously frustrating: I'm correcting ChatGPT practically every other prompt. It forgets my character's race, my stats, even my weapon. After character creation, it literally refuses to DM for me for two prompts in a row, until I have to directly demand that it become the dungeon master.
Also, the "story flow" is totally different. In the first session, almost every scene ends with what I call a "Soap ending": "Will Tallon and Grak survive the cultist assault? Tune in next time!", instead of offering real choices.
In the second half, the style shifts dramatically. The DMing becomes much smoother: clear decision points are offered, multiple options are laid out, and there's real freedom to vary or go off-course. It actually feels like playing D&D instead of watching a bad cliffhanger reel.
And it's not just the structure, the creativity leveled up too.
The DM awarded a magic item (a circlet) that was not only thematically appropriate for my character but also fit the situation, a subtle, well-integrated reward, not just "you loot a random sword off the boss."
By the end of the second session, it even pulled a "Matt Mercer" style skill challenge, a nice touch that showed real understanding of D&D adventure pacing.
I wanted to mention all this both as a reading guide and because it tells a little story of its own, one that mirrors the whole point of the AGI Update: sudden leaps forward aren't always visible until you directly experience the before and after.
Links:
[TTRPG] 2d6 Adventure System: Lightweight, Flexible Cartoon/Pulp RPG Ruleset
