RPGCentric » Blog Archive » An open letter to Randy Buehler

An open letter to Randy Buehler

Latest update: The people have spoken and the people have been heard.

Sir,

I recently read your comments in your latest D&D Insider article on a Scales of War AP overview.

Can we get a copy of the Scales of War overview?

The short answer to this question is “no.” The problem is that we’ve mapped out an elaborate plot that covers level 1 all the way through level 30 and there are a number of surprises along the way. Those “grand reveal” moments won’t be nearly as impactful if they’ve leaked out via plot summaries and/or an overview of where the Path is going. I can assure you that the current fears about the lack of a compelling archvillain, or a logically complete structure, or major NPCs, or a real hook are all misguided. Just wait and see!

First off, I would like to say that my group and I are extremely happy with the AP and have been playing it for a couple of weeks. I am really enjoying running and they are really enjoying playing it. In fact, I have set up a wiki to keep the players more involved in the story (http://rpgcentric.com/wiki).

One of things that I have tried to do is to create an environment that my players can feel free to explore and change, if necessary, and it’s working very well so far. Unfortunately, without an overview available to me as a DM, it is very difficult to make long term plans. I understand not wanting to give away too much information away about the AP but, at the very least, a rough outline of where the players will be headed would help me immensely in keeping the players interest and making sure that I can input things such as foreshadowing and long-term goals into the campaign. If I don’t have an overview, I can’t do that, and it will feel very much like the players are just moving from adventure to adventure with nothing happening in the long term.

Please, for all the DMs out there like me, I beg you to release a rough overview with simply a paragraph of information included about each adventure.

Thank you,
Tony Law
www.rpgcentric.com

PS: To give you an example of what I cannot do because I do not know what happens next, I will use a quote directly from Rescue at Rivenroar.

[This enemy] fights until slain unless you want to save him as a future adversary, in which case he runs through any rooms he believes to be inhabited, figuring that slows down pursuers.

Without an overview, I can’t do this. Not because I don’t want to but because I don’t know where I can put him in going forward. I don’t know how he will interact with the rest of the adversaries and, in fact, whether or not this will change how said adversaries react to the players. I would know, of course, if I had an overview and were able to plan using it.

Update: I also sent this letter to Wizards’ Customer Service asking for it to be forwarded to the proper individuals. Here is the response I recieved:

Hi Anthony,

Thank you for contacting us. Thanks for your feedback! We have regular meetings with the administrative staff and will pass all comments on to their attention. While we cannot guarantee a response to your feedback, we can promise that your comment will be heard.

Marc
Customer Service Representative
Wizards of the Coast

So, at the very least, someone there has it and, hopefully, this will prompt a change from Mr. Buehler.

Be Sociable, Share!

Posted in: 4E, RPG

24 Responses to “An open letter to Randy Buehler”

Sandie Law September 3rd, 2008 at 1:56 PM

I’m a player in Tony’s group. I’m also his wife.

1. Much as I’m enjoying the current campaign, I think you ought to scrap this one and write your own. I know we’ve all put in a lot of work on this one, but if you’re not getting what you need from WOTC…do it yourself.

I know you’re talented enough to do it. I know time is a factor, but you spend a lot of time tweaking and becoming familiar with the material on this campaign. That’s time you’d spend writing your own.

Keep a wiki and post every so often about our progress. I’m sure your readers would love to read about it. Hell, we could even film some of our games if the boys are up to it.

I know your readers would love to hear about how you create adventures, determine experience points, set up encounters, create skill challenges, etc. You’re an experienced DM with a lot to offer. Don’t wait for WOTC to give you the opportunity…take it.

2. I am frustrated that they think DM’s can’t handle long term information about a campaign. It’s as if they expect DM’s just to show up and read from a script. I don’t know about anyone else, but I don’t like that kind of DM and I don’t want to play in that kind of game.

Professor Pope September 3rd, 2008 at 2:21 PM

I haven’t read much about Scales of War, but I want to echo some of what Sandie says above — just make it up. You’re a smart guy and a good GM; I’ll bet whatever you come up with will be just as good if not better than whatever the guys at Wizards come up with. You can still raid the AP for monsters, NPC’s, and the stat heavy time intensive stuff, but if you want [the enemy] to survive, then just let him, and figure out how to use him later. Or, better yet, if he survives due to the player’s actions, great. If not, great!

This gets at the “old school versus new school” in adventure design that the guy at Grognardia talks about all the time. I am with the old school, I guess.

reveal September 3rd, 2008 at 3:13 PM

Thanks for the kind words y’all. And I may end up doing just that but, right now, this is something that is rubbing people the wrong way and I think attention needs to be drawn to it.

Mark September 3rd, 2008 at 3:18 PM

All that talent. Incredible writers, wicked artists, creative minds doing awesome things and being stomped on by bad business decisions.

When will these companies learn they are not providing heating fuel or grain or medical care or some other thing we cannot do without? So many editions, so many systems. Why support companies and systems that lack respect for the players and DMs?

reveal September 3rd, 2008 at 3:28 PM

@Mark – I don’t get it either. I actually sent this to Mr. Buehler, so hopefully it will at least make him think that there are some of us who like to be prepared for our games.

Sandie Law September 3rd, 2008 at 3:28 PM

“…this is something that is rubbing people the wrong way and I think attention needs to be drawn to it. ”

I couldn’t agree more. I’m glad you’re bringing it up and letting people in on the whole exchange. I think it’s important to make sure companies know when their customers aren’t happy and that’s what you’re doing here.

greywulf September 3rd, 2008 at 3:34 PM

I’d be happy if they gave us an overview from 10,000 feet up, then outlined the next scenario as they went along. That’s good enough for me, and means if there’s upcoming plot elements I don’t like I can revise it and still keep to the general path.

Oh, and hi Sandie! Keep pushing Tony to write his own stuff – I for one would love to see what he’s capable of.

greywulfs last blog post..The Justice League of Faerun

Bob September 3rd, 2008 at 8:32 PM

Ok….

If that miserable excuse is the real reason you arent willing to share any of this with the DM community, then you’re a [edited].

If there are other reasons behind it, Randy, then your a [edited].

Great work on [edited] Gleemax, btw.

[edited]

That is all…you may go about your business, nothing to see here folks.
Thank you, drive on thru.

Editor’s note: While I appreciate the fact that people are passionate about this, I would appreciate that folks not use profanity and that they do not launch personal attacks. Thank you.

Jeff H September 4th, 2008 at 3:04 PM

Randy seems to have confused the role of the DM with the role of the players. While keeping such plot information out of the hands of players makes sense, keeping it out of the hands of DMs just undermines their ability to do what they’re supposed to be doing. It’s not a rationale, it’s a rationalization.

Jack Colby September 5th, 2008 at 2:03 AM

This is very sad to see. Apparently WotC thinks we are following their adventure materials like a story and won’t keep getting them (and paying for them eventually) unless we can get “hooked” and look forward to “what happens next?” These are game aids for the DM, nothing more. I fear they are using us to satisfy their need for feeling like “real” fantasy authors instead of designers of game materials. WotC: grow up, and realize what you are involved with. D&D is a game, and the adventures are gaming accessories for the DM. You are using a very bad model, that makes the materials ineffective, and will only frustrate players and DM’s alike.

Jack Colby September 5th, 2008 at 2:07 AM

Oh, another thing… for the last 30-plus years what have they told us when attempting to run a published adventure? DMs: Read the entire thing before running it, preferably more than once. Have the rules changed? Randy, Randy, Randy… just one more in a long string of silly goof-ups from WotC regarding 4E (which I play and want to see be successful. More than WotC does, apparently.)

Tomcat1066 September 5th, 2008 at 5:27 AM

Hopefully, this is just a mental goof someone has made. However, WotC hasn’t been making the best decisions lately IMHO, so who knows.

Hopefully, letters like yours will help them understand the error of their ways. I have to give WotC credit though. Their customer service does seem to be pretty good, so I actually believe 100% that your letter has gone up the chain. Hopefully you’ll get a response soon enough.

Of course, I’ve heard that the industry folks keep an eye on the RPG blogs out there, so if they missed the letter you sent, it’s possible they’ll find it here

Tomcat1066s last blog post..Voicing Concerns

Neuronphaser September 5th, 2008 at 8:59 AM

How can the DM decide if the story is good, or needs to be tweaked, or CAN be tweaked if he doesn’t have access to the whole thing??

We definitely need this info available to us. I won’t buy these products until it is (and then, only assuming it’s actually worth running knowing what it’s all about).

Surprises are for the players, and that’s fine. But for the DM? He’s the one who needs the info most.

Cutter September 8th, 2008 at 9:58 AM

It’s hard to understand what the issue is using only the open letter and the links.

Was the original request asking WotC to reveal information about adventures that haven’t been published yet? Even “just a paragraph” isn’t too likely when you’re talking about unpublished material. And what if the publishing schedule changes? What if changes need to be made to plotline later on, based on any number of unplanned events? That would throw the whole outline into disarray and cause twice as many complaints.

I don’t think it’s fair to expect unpublished material (or even info about it) to be released early. The history of RPG companies is filled with stories of information being released, then the actual book doesn;t come out, or things change, etc.

But as I said, it’s tough to understand what the issue is here.

reveal September 8th, 2008 at 10:46 AM

@Cutter – The issue is that DM’s have no way of knowing what is happening next in the path so they have no way of building any dramatic tension across the campaign. Yes, they can build it per adventure, but not across the AP. If they want a recurring character to appear, they have no idea where to put them in or why they would be in a specific locale.

And there is precedent for companies releasing information about unpublished material. Randy has said that “we’ve mapped out an elaborate plot that covers level 1 all the way through level 30″ which means they have those plot points already established. Paizo also had those plot points established for Age of Worms and Savage Tide yet, in both instances, they released an overview with a simple paragraph about each adventure (AoW on their website and ST in Dungeon #138), letting the DM know what was the come. They were not in depth enough to disallow the author to change things if necessary but were not generic enough to not let a DM plant important elements if necessary. That’s all I’m asking for. Nothing more than that.

Cutter September 8th, 2008 at 12:03 PM

Fair enough. Thanks for elaborating.

In my somewhat limited experience as a freelancer in RPGs, I’ve found that things can, and do, change very late in the game. We’d love for them not to, but they do. And I don’t mean minor things, although I wish I did.

Jeff H September 8th, 2008 at 12:26 PM

I came up with an analogy the other day that I think sums this up nicely.

Compare this to making a movie. Keeping the main thrust of the plot secret from *players* is like keeping the script a secret from the general public. Of *course* you do that (except maybe a few carefully chosen elements).

But keeping the main thrust of the plot secret from *DMs* is like keeping the script a secret from the *Director*. There’s no value in doing that, save perhaps in very unusual experimental scenarios; under anything remotely resembling normal circumstances, it’s just a really stupid way to operate.

Cutter September 9th, 2008 at 8:43 AM

@Jeff H–
“But keeping the main thrust of the plot secret from *DMs* is like keeping the script a secret from the *Director*.”

Seems to me, keeping the main thrust of the plot secret from the author of the module fits nicely into your metaphor.

The DM has nothing to do with creating the module. The DM executes it.

Keeping the main plot secret from DMs is more like keeping the script of a film a secret from theater owners. In other words, a non-issue.

In general…

I think this is a big overreaction. As a DM, I can understand how you’d prefer to know everything that will happen. But not knowing every detail actually gives you a little wiggle room as you go along. Do you really want every event of your entire campaign set in stone before you start? And if things aren’t set in stone, why can’t you change them later, or on the fly if need be? Won’t there be time between each installment’s publication and your game night to make such adjustments?

Granted, Randy Buehler could have been much more forthcoming and just said, “The plots are Wizards’ property, and we’d rather not reveal them early for a variety of reasons.” His “we want to suprise you” reply comes across as disingenuous, and I can see being annoyed at that.

reveal September 9th, 2008 at 8:53 AM

@Cutter – Would you rather no one say anything? I’d rather let Mr. Buehler know how I feel and let him decide what to do. It’s not like I’m calling him every day, asking if things are going to change.

No, I don’t want every event set in stone. But I do want a general overview so I can plan long term. I can decide, “Ok. In adventure 1 this guy could get away. It looks like in adventure X, I can put him back in if I want.”

Check out Dungeon #138 for a good example of a very simple overview. One paragraph on each adventure with just enough information to let us know the general plot. Nothing too specific. Nothing that we couldn’t change if necessary.

Cutter September 9th, 2008 at 10:32 AM

By all means, Speak Truth to Power. I’d never suggest that a complaint go unsaid…I have little love for WotC…I’m just throwing my own opinion into the mix.

Take Bob’s post above. What on earth about D&D could possibly justify that? I’m not conflating your opinion with that post (you were good enough to censor it), but Bob’s hyperbole serves as proof that there’s a lot of overreacting going on.

Not necessarily by you, reveal…but it is there.

reveal September 9th, 2008 at 10:39 AM

@Cutter – I agree Bob’s response is an overreaction. But hopefully enough people will not overreact that Mr. Buehler will pay attention.

Jeff H September 9th, 2008 at 7:50 PM

@Cutter: When I run a published adventure, I am normally contributing *at least* as much creatively as a film director does (when that is *not* the same person who wrote the script). If you’re not, then… let’s just say I doubt very much that such a game, run by you, would be to my taste and leave it at that. Certainly the DM has a *vastly* bigger creative contribution to make than a theatre owner!

Also, “it’s not broken because you can fix it yourself” is a silly argument. I’m paying (well, not yet in this case, but I soon will be paying) WotC to do the work for me. Yes, I expect, and even prefer, that some changes will need to be made, but past a certain point that ceases to be par for the course and starts to defeat the purpose of using a published adventure. Committing now to a long-term plot I only know (at best) one ninth of makes the risk of passing that point too great for my tastes, and apparently those of many others.

Over on ENWorld, there’s a thread about this on which no less than Erik Mona and James Jacobs have posted sentiments very similar to mine, and they’re in the business of producing these things. You are entitled to your opinion, but it is decidedly in the minority, and seems like it may be ill-thought-out.

Adventures Sept 2nd News - I wont be doing Scales of War - EN World D&D / RPG News September 10th, 2008 at 9:53 AM

[...] is why I wrote an open letter to Randy Buehler. __________________ Last edited by reveal; 09-04-08 at 01:32 [...]

Noticias do D&D Insider e das revistas eletrônicas - Área Cinza September 10th, 2008 at 11:04 PM

[...] de manter toda a trama maior em segredo foi muito criticada pelos mestres, e gerou até uma carta aberta endereçada ao Randy Buehler. Ele deu uma explicação meio esfarrapada (“Some DMs like the suspense of being able to read [...]