D&D 5E [Merged] Candlekeep Mysteries Author Speaks Out On WotC's Cuts To Adventure

In an event which is being referred to as #PanzerCut, one of the Candlekeep Mysteries authors has gone public with complaints about how their adventure was edited.

Book of Cylinders is one of the adventures in the book. It was written by Graeme Barber (who goes by the usernames PanzerLion and PoCGamer on social media).

Barber was caught by surprise when he found out what the final adventure looked like. The adventure was reduced by about a third, and his playable race -- the Grippli -- was cut. Additionally, WotC inserted some terminology that he considered to be colonialist, which is one of the things they were ostensibly trying to avoid by recruiting a diverse team of authors for the book.

His complaints also reference the lack of communication during the editing process, and how he did public interviews unknowingly talking about elements of an adventure which no longer existed.

"I wrote for [Candlekeep Mysteries], the recent [D&D] release. Things went sideways. The key issues were that the bulk of the lore and a lot of the cultural information that made my adventure "mine" were stripped out. And this was done without any interaction with me, leaving me holding the bag as I misled the public on the contents and aspects of my adventure. Yes, it was work-for-hire freelance writing, but the whole purpose was to bring in fresh voices and new perspectives.

So, when I read my adventure, this happened. This was effectively the shock phase of it all.

Then I moved onto processing what had happened. ~1300 words cut, and without the cut lore, the gravity of the adventure, and its connections to things are gravely watered down. Also "primitive" was inserted.

Then the aftermath of it all. The adventure that came out was a watered down version of what went in, that didn't reflect me anymore as a writer or creator. Which flew in the face of the spirit of the project as had been explained to me.

So then I wrote. Things don't change unless people know what's up and can engage with things in a prepared way. So I broke down the process of writing for Wizards I'd experienced, and developed some rules that can be used to avoid what happened to me."

He recounts his experiences in two blog posts:

• What happened? Writing for Wizards Part 1
• What Happened? Writing for Wizards Part 2

The author later added "Wizards owns all the material sent in, and does not publish unedited adventures on the DM Guild, so there will be no "PanzerCut". I have respectfully requested that my name be removed from future printings. "

 

[Paul Farquhar]

The word primitive being included is insensitive (though I can totally understand why it was included in the description, just not that it was very savvy). Nothing that can’t be fixed on the reprint.

You either need to use a lot more words to explain what you mean, or use similar loaded turns such as "underdeveloped".

I think "change the world" was exactly what the author was trying to do, by establishing friendly agrarian frog people as a significant feature of the Sword Coast, not to mention non-evil snake people.

Wether down to the editing or not, there are a couple of things about the grippli that don't make much sense:

Spoiler

It's been said about halflings, but it applies even more to the grippli: how can such a low tech low magic peaceful agrarian small people hope to survive in a region as dangerous as the Sword coast?

How can small people restrain medium sized people with a sticky tongue without being dragged about all over the place?

Whatever, WotC already have their own playable frog people, as well as a new approach to lineages.

 

[Bacon Bits]

I think your friend missed a zero. They seem to have cut about 2,000 words, not 200. From about 7,500 to about 5,500. Over a quarter of the piece.

No, I'm fairly sure he was talking about the "Panzer cut" and the "final draft" where Panzer cut the player race content. I think he was referring to this Tweet later in the thread:


My read was that my friend thought that maybe Panzer was either asked to cut more and didn't, or they ran out of time coordinating getting all the adventures from freelance authors plus art into the desired page count so the editors just made changes as best they could.

Now, I get that cuts are expected to be made in editing, especially with freelance work. That the piece was cut down - even that it was significantly cut down - doesn’t seem to be the core issue, as I understand it. The issue is that the cut seems to have made the final piece less inclusive, at a time when WotC has been publicly trying to project an image of inclusivity, and that they seem to have made the cut without informing the writer, who also happens to run a blog about inclusivity in gaming.

I don't necessarily agree that it being less inclusive is the big take away. Firstly, Panzer very clearly was trying to push Grippli as a new player race and new culture to expand FR itself when, presumably, the assignment was to create an adventure. Panzer is at least partially upset just because of that, but I don't think that is something that we should be reflexively upset by. I can easily imagine WotC needing to replace that part of it rather than hold up the book and consider the long term lore consequences. If they want an adventure that fits in rather than expands... well, that's their choice. That sucks for Panzer's intended vision and I wish WotC would/could have worked with him on it, but I am not outraged by it.

I agree that it's a significant mistake to characterize the Grippli as primitive at this point in the game -- especially because prior editions didn't always do so, IIRC, though maybe that was Pathfinder. Either way, I don't think that particular element is defensible. However, I don't think the other changes as a whole are quite as blatantly outrageous as people seem to say they are.

"They cut 1,300 of 7,200 words!"

Well, I'm not sure if what he turned in is what WotC asked for or wanted. If Panzer wants Grippli to change FR and WotC doesn't want to do that here, they're going to take a knife to that in that case to get what they want. They can do that because it's their work. That's the crappy part of work-for-hire. You have no creative control.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

The book was designed as a rpg book. It wasn’t a manifesto.

I suspect they weren’t trying to change the world, just adapt. It sounds like some things landed, some didn’t.

The word primitive being included is insensitive (though I can totally understand why it was included in the description, just not that it was very savvy). Nothing that can’t be fixed on the reprint.

Being angry that the PC race, background and magic items are cut, is just being petulant. Outrage over those two elements is uncalled for.

I have the book on Roll20 so can’t see page counts. Now if Panzer found his adventure was cut to be smaller than everyone else’s then I would start to understand. However if his adventure was too long and got brought in line with the others then that is fair enough.

Over all, it’s a shame that he felt burnt. Plus a shame he felt so strongly as to tweet it. It doesn’t bode well for future works.

WotC have repeatedly touted this book as a new diverse forward looking deal. Claiming it's not a manifesto is strawman shenanigans. I said it was PR, not a.manifesto, and denying that aspect is just laughable.

As for "outrage", that's another strawman. No-one including Panzer has expressed "outrage" at those elements.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

No, I'm fairly sure he was talking about the "Panzer cut" and the "final draft" where Panzer cut the player race content. I think he was referring to this Tweet later in the thread:


My read was that my friend thought that maybe Panzer was either asked to cut more and didn't, or they ran out of time coordinating getting all the adventures from freelance authors plus art into the desired page count so the editors just made changes as best they could.



I don't necessarily agree that it being less inclusive is the big take away. Firstly, Panzer very clearly was trying to push Grippli as a new player race and new culture to expand FR itself when, presumably, the assignment was to create an adventure. Panzer is at least partially upset just because of that, but I don't think that is something that we should be reflexively upset by. I can easily imagine WotC needing to replace that part of it rather than hold up the book and consider the long term lore consequences. If they want an adventure that fits in rather than expands... well, that's their choice. That sucks for Panzer's intended vision and I wish WotC would/could have worked with him on it, but I am not outraged by it.

I agree that it's a significant mistake to characterize the Grippli as primitive at this point in the game -- especially because prior editions didn't always do so, IIRC, though maybe that was Pathfinder. Either way, I don't think that particular element is defensible. However, I don't think the other changes as a whole are quite as blatantly outrageous as people seem to say they are.

"They cut 1,300 of 7,200 words!"

Well, I'm not sure if what he turned in is what WotC asked for or wanted. If Panzer wants Grippli to change FR and WotC doesn't want to do that here, they're going to take a knife to that in that case to get what they want. They can do that because it's their work. That's the crappy part of work-for-hire. You have no creative control.

This is misunderstanding or misrepresentation of his comments, frankly, and disappointing.

 

[TheSword]

WotC have repeatedly touted this book as a new diverse forward looking deal. Claiming it's not a manifesto is strawman shenanigans. I said it was PR, not a.manifesto, and denying that aspect is just laughable.

As for "outrage", that's another strawman. No-one including Panzer has expressed "outrage" at those elements.

You clearly didn’t read the Twitter thread. Outrage is what Twitter does best to the point where I’m not sure what else it is good for.

You misunderstand my point. While you may be cynical claiming they were writing for PR, I just think they wanted to produce a great book with great talent that would be popular. It’s PR in so far as any good product is PR... which is not the manner you were framing it in.

 

[Inchoroi]

I'm going to guess the Panzer cut ran into a hard page count imposed by the editor.

Seems like it. There's a whole thread on reddit about it, too.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

You clearly didn’t read the Twitter thread. Outrouage is what Twitter does best to the point where I’m not sure what else it is good for.

You misunderstand my point. While you may be cynical claiming they were writing for PR, I just think they wanted to produce a great book with great talent that would be popular. It’s PR in so far as any good product is PR... which is not the manner you were framing it in.

I absolutely did read the original Twitter thread. That's your problem. You are being misleading as to what the complaints were about, particularly from the actual author. People weren't mad that there were missing magic items, nor "outraged" that the Grippli didn't have player stats - they were disappointed by those things. They were more upset by the lack of communication (which yes, some of that upset did reach "outrage" levels) and the use of the word "primitive".

As for PR you're being misleading again. Trying to claim they weren't intentionally and pretty openly going for more diverse and somewhat younger voices is just hilarious.

 

[TheSword]

Interestingly after rereading the adventure the word primitive is used in this context.

“The central structure of the trading post is a fortified stone and mud brick edifice, decorated with the preserved carapace sand claws of giant crabs where commerce is normally conducted. The ground around it, usually clear of construction, now houses a host of makeshift dwellings, and business has slowed to a standstill. The place feels more like a refugee encampment than a trading post. The primitive shelters are the new homes”

So it makes clear that the original grippili structures are substantial and fortified and only the temporary shelters are primitive. It feels a fair use of the word.

Regarding communication. Is there any indication that Graeme approached WOC about his concerns... or did he just leap onto Twitter to vent his spleen?

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Regarding communication. Is there any indication that Graeme approached WOC about his concerns... or did he just leap onto Twitter to vent his spleen?

He's emailed WotC, if you look at his Twitter, but it doesn't seem like he's had any response. If WotC have any sense they'll sort this out pretty quickly. Simply letting in release the "full" version on DriveThru (or whatever the D&D version is called) would probably be smart, or releasing the extra context text in some form.

As for "primitive" being fair, you may have that view, but it's not factual, merely opinion, so obviously has less value than that of the actual writer, and the point is, it's a word the author would never have used when describing the work of a people of that culture. Certainly if you had a bunch of homeless nobles from say, Waterdeep, would that word have been used? No. A word suggesting the temporary, improvised, or low-quality nature of them would have been used, not "primitive". Especially it's not great because it's likely the grippli temporary shelters are of a higher quality and competence level than many people would create. The word "makeshift" is used earlier in the paragraph and that's more like it.

 

[Umbran]

Mod Note:

Folks, if you are concerned about outrage... maybe not generating it here would be in your own best interests, hm?

Please keep the discussion level headed, and non-accusatory. Avoid off-hand dismissals. And remember that it is possible for two reasonable people to read the same text (especially text on twitter, chopped into tiny segments) and come back with very different impressions. Having a different impression does not make anyone stupid, unreasonable, or willfully misleading.