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. "

 

[PsyzhranV2]

Is it a better adventure post-editing?

From what I've seen, people are saying that it's one of the weaker adventures in the book, that the plot feels really shallow and quite railroady.

 

[Charlaquin]

Work for hire is not a soap box, it's a job. It isn't intended to give you a voice, it is intended to give the publisher a saleable product.

Yes, but in this case the product was being sold on the premise that it was giving its writers a voice.

Once you hand in the work the publisher owes you nothing but a check.

Sure, but neither does the writer owe the publisher anything. And if the publisher hires a writer for the good optics having their name tied to the product will bring, they would be wise to foster a good relationship with that writer.

If I was in the business of hiring freelancers, ones that had a history of running to social media to complain about the process and impugn their former employers would not be on the short list.

Understandably so.

 

[PsyzhranV2]

Work for hire is not a soap box, it's a job. It isn't intended to give you a voice, it is intended to give the publisher a saleable product. Once you hand in the work the publisher owes you nothing but a check.

If I was in the business of hiring freelancers, ones that had a history of running to social media to complain about the process and impugn their former employers would not be on the short list.

That may be how it is.

That is not how it should be. Status quo isn't God.

A big company using a marginalized person's name and face as a shield or a PR stunt but altering or suppressing their voice without their knowledge is a scummy move, no matter the legality of it.

And using names and faces is exactly what WotC did for the hyping up of this book. Whether they ended up putting words in the mouths of their other authors that those people would never say like they did with Barber is something we'll likely never know, unless more of them come forward.

 

[Charlaquin]

That may be how it is.

That is not how it should be. Status quo isn't God.

Yeah, also this. Like, having your work significantly altered without so much as notice let alone input might be standard practice when it comes to work for hire, but that doesn’t make it good practice.

 

[el-remmen]

This is a long and convoluted thread, so maybe someone mentioned this already and I missed it.

Leaving aside WotC's dubious choices and the author's understandable disappointment and surprising naïveté, I am surprised that authors did not get page proofs before it went to press. Admittedly, I have not written for RPGs except for a one or two things about 20 years ago - but in every print publication to which I have submitted something and had it accepted there was a round of page proofs. Usually, this is just looking any minor fixes, but the proofs basically look like the piece will look and be laid out, so you have a chance to object.

Maybe I'm the one who is naïve, but it seems like a bad call on Wizard's part to skip that process.

 

[Haffrung]

Being a professional writer is not a job for the thin-skinned. Your work gets criticized, revised, cut, and removed. Routinely. It’s part of the job. It’s completely different from writing in school, blogs, or other amateur environments.

Sorry, but this person isn’t doing inclusivity any favours by giving publishers the impression that hiring someone with no professional track record is going to be a headache.

That’s one of the reasons writing is a field where people start small and work up to bigger platforms like WotC. Those doing the hiring need to find out if a writer can write to spec, because a lot can’t. They need to find out if a writer can meet hard deadlines, because a lot can’t. They need to find out if a writer can take criticism and be okay with their work being revised, because a lot can’t.

When my company hires writers, part of the interview is a severe critique of a piece of writing they submitted. If they get flustered or take it personally, they don’t get a call back.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

No it's not. It never happens except for really famous contributors. Work. For. Hire.

Eh, it varies. I've never been a really famous contributor, and some editors, and some outlets, routinely do loop back in the writer. Others don't. I don't think there's a sweeping standard, unless the RPG industry is very different than others.

 

[Reynard]

That may be how it is.

That is not how it should be. Status quo isn't God.

A big company using a marginalized person's name and face as a shield or a PR stunt but altering or suppressing their voice without their knowledge is a scummy move, no matter the legality of it.

And using names and faces is exactly what WotC did for the hyping up of this book. Whether they ended up putting words in the mouths of their other authors that those people would never say like they did with Barber is something we'll likely never know, unless more of them come forward.

I think it is important to acknowledge that folks agreed to do the work for the benefit it provided them, as well. Work on a high profile WotC product is the Holy Grail in this business. Let's allow that while many of the writers and designers were chosen for how they would make WotC look, many of them agreed to it for how WotC would make them look to prospective publishers, customers, kickstarter backers, patrons, etc.

I'm not actually defending WotC for whatever editorial decisions it made, by the way. I am saying that freelancers work for hire and this freelancer was extremely unprofessional responding the way they did.

 

[Reynard]

Yeah, also this. Like, having your work significantly altered without so much as notice let alone input might be standard practice when it comes to work for hire, but that doesn’t make it good practice.

That doesn't make any sense from a developmental standpoint.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

From what I've seen, people are saying that it's one of the weaker adventures in the book, that the plot feels really shallow and quite railroady.

“Some editors are failed writers, but so are most writers.”​

― T.S. Eliot​