The declaration
Narateer is my creation.
Its core ideas, design philosophy, rules, original prose and creative direction are mine. The project’s origins reach back decades, long before modern generative AI existed. Its foundations came from my own experience, experimentation, research, play, reflection and sustained creative work.
AI did not invent Narateer. It did not supply its purpose, its central ideas or the human experience behind it.
AI now assists the project substantially. I use it to challenge ideas, explore alternatives, test assumptions, organise complex material, support research, model mechanics, refine writing, develop software and generate imagery. That assistance has shaped and strengthened the work, sometimes significantly, but it has not replaced its human origin or creative core.
One of my central concerns throughout this process has been preserving human thought, ingenuity and creative intent while using AI effectively. I do not want the technology to overwhelm the person behind the work. I use it to help my ideas survive contact with scrutiny and become clearer, stronger and more complete.
Narateer remains recognisably, demonstrably and deliberately my work.
Where the rules came from
I created Narateer’s rules and wrote the original rules material and prose.
AI has helped me brainstorm, interrogate, restructure, refine and sometimes reformulate that material. It has identified weaknesses, proposed alternatives and helped me test whether the rules produce the experience I intend.
Those contributions matter, and I do not want to minimise them. But assistance in developing the rules is not authorship of their underlying ideas.
I determine Narateer’s design intent. I decide what the rules are trying to accomplish, what principles govern them and what belongs in the game. I research and review the evidence, evaluate recommendations and decide what enters canon.
AI can challenge my reasoning. It can help me express an idea more clearly. It can reveal that something does not work. It can even propose an answer I ultimately adopt. None of that transfers creative ownership or control of Narateer’s rules away from me.
How AI contributes
Rules and prose
I use AI to help explore, challenge, organise and refine rules and written material that originate in my own design work.
It may suggest wording, structures, examples or alternatives. I assess those suggestions against Narateer’s established intent and decide whether they should be rejected, revised or incorporated.
This does not mean that every published sentence was produced without AI assistance. It means that the ideas, purposes and creative direction behind Narateer’s rules are mine.
Research and critical review
AI assists with locating information, comparing evidence, exposing assumptions and organising complex research.
I remain responsible for determining what questions need to be investigated, assessing the evidence, checking important claims and deciding what conclusions are justified. AI-generated research summaries are not treated as authoritative merely because they are confidently expressed.
Mechanics, modelling and testing
I created Narateer’s mechanical concepts and determine the outcomes those mechanics are meant to produce.
AI helps me calculate probabilities, run simulations, explore edge cases, construct tests and identify potential contradictions. These tools strengthen the analysis, but I decide what the results mean and whether a mechanic serves the game.
Narateer’s current pre-alpha rules draw upon decades of tabletop experience, mechanical modelling, automated verification and ongoing human playtesting. Not every current revision has completed independent human validation, and development remains ongoing.
Website and software
AI has played a much larger production role in Narateer’s website and software tools.
I establish the product intent, requirements, functionality, constraints and acceptance criteria. I direct development, test whether the result does what it should and decide what is accepted and published.
Within that direction, AI has contributed substantially to architecture, implementation, code, tests, troubleshooting and technical documentation. In many cases, once the design intent and required behaviour were established, AI performed much of the detailed construction.
That contribution should be acknowledged plainly. The website and software are human-directed, but their production has been heavily AI-assisted.
Artwork
Narateer’s AI-generated artwork has primarily been created using Google’s Gemini image-generation tools, including Nano Banana Pro.
I provide the creative direction, evaluate the results and decide which images are used. I also select, retouch, composite and correct images in GIMP where required.
The generated image is therefore an AI contribution. Its selection, art direction, correction and use within Narateer remain human decisions.
Human authority and accountability
I retain authority over what Narateer becomes.
I can accept, reject, revise, replace, revert or remove any AI contribution. I decide what becomes canon and what is published. I also remain accountable for errors, unsupported claims and poor decisions appearing under the Narateer name.
That authority should not be confused with claiming that every keystroke was human. AI has made substantial practical contributions, particularly to software production, analysis and refinement.
The accurate distinction is simpler: AI assists in creating and developing the work, but I remain its creator, creative authority and accountable publisher.
Originality and provenance
I do not knowingly direct AI systems to reproduce protected text or imitate the distinctive work of a named creator.
The ideas and design principles at the centre of Narateer developed from my own work and experience. AI assistance does not require pretending that creative work exists without influences, shared conventions or a wider cultural context.
Generative systems can produce unintended similarities. If a credible concern is raised about wording, imagery or mechanics, I will investigate it and correct the material where appropriate.
This is a statement of intent and practice, not an impossible guarantee that an unintended similarity could never occur.
Data and privacy
If a user’s personal, confidential or identifying information is involved, I do not provide it to an AI system unless doing so is necessary and appropriate for the task and that user has explicitly authorised the use with full knowledge that AI is involved, what information will be shared, why it is needed, which provider will receive it and the provider’s relevant data-handling terms.
Necessity and appropriateness are not permission. Without that informed authorisation and transparent disclosure, I do not proceed.
Where material can be analysed without personal identifiers, I remove those identifiers. I handle private playtest information and unpublished third-party material according to their sensitivity.
These are the operating standards I apply to current and future Narateer development.
AI inside Narateer’s public tools
Narateer’s public tools do not currently send a user’s project or content to a production generative-AI provider.
Adventure Loom, for example, is fully usable without AI. References to possible AI assistance describe future or experimental functionality, not a hidden AI service currently operating inside the tool.
Before any external AI service is introduced, I will assess its purpose, provider, data handling, retention, training practices and user controls. Any live integration will be disclosed clearly so users can make an informed decision about whether to use it.
Corrections and continuing disclosure
This declaration will change as Narateer and the tools used to create it change.
If I adopt a materially different form of AI assistance, introduce AI into a public tool or discover that this declaration contains a significant omission or inaccuracy, I will update it.
If you believe I have missed something, overstated something or failed to disclose a material use of AI, you are welcome to contact me. I would rather correct the record than defend a statement that is not true.
Last reviewed: 3 August 2026.
— Stuart Shaw
Founder and Steward of Narateer