I’ve used both of them before for general writing instructions, but both of them seem to be the same thing. Are there any actual differences anyone has ever noticed?
I’ve used both of them before for general writing instructions, but both of them seem to be the same thing. Are there any actual differences anyone has ever noticed?
I was going to post the same question just now, cool forum feature that you get pinged dupe posts… Followup question is, has anyone noted a difference with roleplaying styles? It strikes me as just another sheet of text the AI is supposed to care about but probably won’t?
Sorry for the late reply. You are kind of the money here. At the time of the original reply, Roleplay 2 was better than Roleplay 1. After so many updates, I can say that actually Roleplay 1 outperforms it due to how some of the problems this new model had are fixed (e.g. cavemen speak)
The reason why often times instructions are longer is to “force” the model to obey them. If you know where the bias of the model is, you can omit certain instructions or just put them in one word, while others that the model “refuses” require lengthy paragraphs before the model reacts.
Under this scope, it is very possible to get a “Roleplay 3” that works flawlessly yet does the same as Roleplay 1 and Roleplay 2 with just a single paragraph worth of text. The problem with doing this however, is that after an update, the bias of the model would change and this would have undesirable effects.
My guess for those two templates to exist today is as a safeguard from the dev, being “Roleplay 1” robust enough when the model is stable, and “Roleplay 2” totally robust even if the model is slightly cookie at the moment.
To know where the bias of the model is, a good experiment is to run a campaign of AI RPG with no prompt, or Story Generator with absolutely nothing, and see what does the model comes up with no instruction. Then start working from that seeing what needs guidance and what works from the get-go.