| ▲ | josh_p 4 hours ago | |||||||
I know the author specifically did not use a rules engine in their simulation because of uncertainty on how it would affect it. I do still wonder if adapting something like card forge for llm use would result in engaging gameplay with an llm. | ||||||||
| ▲ | veqq 11 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||
MTG: Arena uses a rules engine CLIPS (a s-expr expert system based on the RETE engine), which an acquaintance wrote a course for: https://ryjo.codes/tour-of-clips.html and even a declarative chat server: https://ryjo.codes/articles/a-simple-tcp-server-written-in-g... | ||||||||
| ▲ | CallumFerg 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||
I actually considered using card forge when I started this. I mostly didn't end up using it because of how much more work it would have been. But also with a rules engine, you have to manually go though every step, and pass priority after every action. I think it makes more sense to let an LLM play magic like a person would. On early turns it is acceptable to say "I play a land and pass" without going through every phase. And you can say "I tap all my land and play this card" without having to use a tool call and agent turn for every land tap. Also card forge would not let you goldfish a deck. You must have opponents. | ||||||||
| ||||||||
| ▲ | fc417fc802 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||
> because of uncertainty on how it would affect it. Have the LLM submit a proposed move and either advance the game state or reply "permission denied, try again". Probably also log the number of times it happens since attempted violations seems like a valuable signal as well. | ||||||||