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. "

 

[Sacrosanct]

Umbran has previously said not to keep engaging with people you believe are arguing in bad faith, and to avoid us both getting red text to the face, I'm going to go ahead and do that. But @Charlaquin has explained it extremely well.

Nice Freudian slip.

And no, I'm extremely familiar with ageism and HR and this is the equivalent of saying you're unsurprised someone hasn't heard of Roblox because they're 45, and HR would laugh in your face. People are "doubling-down" because they're right. Again I point you to:

Ageism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

You keep posting that hyperlink (the same one I linked to earlier). Maybe you should read your own citation, specifically 1.3. Because that's what you're doing. At first I was just calling out how what you were doing was problematic especially since you've been lecturing others to address their blinders, but now that you're insisting on attacking me rather than accept your own behavior, that's...well...it speaks volumes actually.

 

[Schmoe]

We make skyscrapers now. When was the last time you heard a tent called primitive? A log cabin? A castle?

Last time I went camping.

 

[Charlaquin]

Making a stereotype about someone or their character/behavior based on their age is ageism.

Nobody is making a stereotype about anyone’s character.

I literally provided the link to the definition. For one, it assumes that Kim (or anyone of his age) would not normally be able to have the ability to have modern sensibilities or viewpoints.

It makes no such assumption. People of all ages are perfectly capable of understanding and holding modern sensibilities and viewpoints. It is also not surprising when someone who was raised in a different social context isn’t immediately familiar with a relatively new sensibility.

That's bad. No different than making the same assumptions about poor people, or POC, or gender. I gave the definition; not asking you to take my word for it. You can't just ignore it because it doesn't fit your narrative.

I’m not ignoring the definition, I just disagree that the statement in question fits it.

 

[Schmoe]

This definition is where the issue lies. Denoting “an early stage in the development” of human civilization is an inherently Euro-centric, colonialist concept.

Call me crazy, but I think rudimentary is a pretty good word to use to describe rudimentary dwellings. Radical, I know.

It's only Eurocentric if you choose it to be. The definition is actually relative to the speaker and their society.

Rudimentary is a good word, but it's not the only one.

 

[TheSword]

It's an outrageous accusation and has no place in this discussion.

I’ll respond to you DM with the links so as not to derail. Not at all outrageous.

 

[Charlaquin]

It's only Eurocentric if you choose it to be. The definition is actually relative to the speaker and their society.

That’s just not consistent with how the word has historically been used, nor with how it is typically used these days.

Rudimentary is a good word, but it's not the only one.

Of course it’s not the only one.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Don’t forget the vast majority of academics. I know that doesn’t hold much sway with a certain crowd any more, but I still think it’s worth noting.

Zero people who have read your posts are surprised you are plugged into academia.

 

[Urriak Uruk]

Although I'm sympathetic to PanzerLion here (especially for the inclusion of terms like "primitive"), I do find that most of the edits made by WotC were always going to happen, and to expect they weren't seems almost naive.

The biggest two elements cut from the adventure, that also seem intrinsically tied together, are that of "Plot" and "Lore."

The original adventure concept seems to have relied on a lot of lore fluff to make it functional, and invented a lot of new material to add to the cultures of both the grippli and the yuan-ti. Although I think this is great stuff, it is explicitly not good for short adventures, meant to be played in any setting and are meant to be short.

It is also a pretty obvious thing that WotC is not keen on letting third-party writers invent lore for them; they're happy to do that themselves, and it is not part of the original pitch. Being, write an adventure.

Matt Colville says a version of this a lot; "If your adventure starts with me having to read lore, it is not a good adventure. Lore is for the DM to invent for their own world, or is for a setting book for them to pull ideas from."

I personally don't think that's always true (for the big adventure books meant for long campaigns, lore should have some importance). But for these small "insert-when-needed" adventures, I think it is very true.

In short, if the adventure was using lots of lore, especially lore made by the author, it is not surprising to me it was cut to make space. Inventing an entire new race when the pitch was "Write an adventure," is also entirely predictable (and grung already exist).

The only criticism I think has true merit here is the addition of insensitive language to make the Grippli cultures more primitive. This is something WotC is ostensibly saying they want to fix and improve going forward, and this is another point that they're better at talking the talk than walking the walk.

 

[Urriak Uruk]

Also, there's already been a mod warning about the Ageism thing, can everyone just drop it (especially since you're talking circles around each other)?

 

[Warpiglet-7]

Your experiences are yours. The statement was made with very limited context, the statement had no inherent relationship to homophobia, and the term has established origins and uses that are distinct from homophobic elements.

Accordingly, assuming that it was used in a homophobic way when that context is only being assumed to be there, as opposed to being there on the face of the language used, is a disservice.

This stuff is hilarious!

on this very site many years ago I was accused of being “butt hurt.”

not being familiar with the term I looked it up and read about it’s history.

apparently I was assuming some sort of sexual thing when in fact it refers to things that are “a pain in the butt” like a spanking/a mild annoyance.

the problem with word police is that they don’t always know what they are talking about and try to limit others use or language to fit their idiosyncratic understanding and preferences.

but butthurt is a silly example. It’s not silly when you incorrectly label a person that uses the term uncharitably. Being a racist or whatever is a ticket to getting fired and shunned. Whatever. I don’t want to work with creepy people either.

basing that accusation on something errantly is a grievous error.

if we are upset about “primitive” we probably ought to be a little more careful about how WE label others.