Micah Sweet
Level Up & OSR Enthusiast
Stuff like that is always going to be subjective.
D&D General Making and surviving the break…
ersatzphil
Hero
I mean, both Perkins and Crawford have referred to this as an “evergreen edition”. It wouldn’t surprise me if that was a design goal from on high - the rules of games Hasbro owns don’t typically change.
overgeeked
B/X Known World
They also referred to 4E’s Essentials as an evergreen edition.
dave2008
Legend
Did they? I don't remember that. Also, wasn't Mearls the lead on 4e essentials?
overgeeked
B/X Known World
Yeah, they did. First time I'd heard anyone refer to anything D&D related as "evergreen." It struck me as weird. Learning about what was going on behind the scenes with 4E makes it that much weirder. Considering they knew 4E was dead before even producing Essentials.
dave2008
Legend
I am intimately familiar with the fallibility of memory (got me out of jury duty), so unless you have a reference I will find that hard to believe. Like I said, I don't remember that.
Last edited:
EzekielRaiden
Follower of the Way
Upper management folks, and more importantly their fickle whims, change even more frequently than designers do, in my experience, so that's not particularly convincing to me either.
Fairly sure they did. It's almost guaranteed that whatever they said no longer exists outside of the Internet Archive now, given WotC has nuked their own website like three times in the past 15 years.
And yes, Mearls was in a lead position with Essentials--which departed in several significant ways from the initial design concepts of 4e. You may not be surprised to learn that many folks who liked what 4e was originally weren't keen on Mearls' new direction. Now imagine 5e being taken over by some youngblood after Crawford and Mearls have retired/left the company. The constraints of being the "apology edition," of long-running balance issues, of slowly-built-up cruft and bloat, etc.
Even Pathfinder couldn't justify keeping to the confines of "3e, but with iterative additions" for more than a decade, which put that system at, yes, about 20 years old. Hence my skepticism of the idea that they won't ever make more than small, iterative tweaks--and the idea that small, iterative tweaks could ever add up to being a wholly different game. Iterative tweaks constrained by backwards compatibility won't change CR. They won't change full casters being straight-up superior to non-casters. They won't change magic item issues or the anemic equipment rules (seriously, Larian has absolutely trounced the tabletop game in this regard, equipment is SO much better in BG3 than in tabletop 5e it isn't funny.) Etc.
Iterative tweaks confined by backwards compatibility will mean 5e remains essentially the same game forever. There is no "frog in hot water" thing here (which, incidentally, that metaphor is false anyway, frogs will jump out when the water gets too hot!)--the water will never be allowed to get hot enough.
EzekielRaiden
Follower of the Way
sigh Alright. Since you have demanded a link. Here are several secondary sources, most from 10+ years ago, that refer to descriptions of Essentials as being evergreen.
Is D&D Essentials replacing the PHB/MM/DMG as the core of 4E D&D going forward? | Dungeons & Dragons / Fantasy D20 Spotlight
I'm not a 4E player, but I'm a bit confused by the Essentials line and the talk that the core books are going out of print. Is Essentials going to be the new core? Are new PHB/MM/DMG books coming out to replace the originals?
forum.rpg.net
What's the difference between the new 'Essentials' line and the original 4th ed D&D books?
What's the difference between the new 'Essentials' line and the original 4th ed D&D books? If I was to buy 4th ed books today, which should I buy and why?
ask.metafilter.com
TLC's Future Release Newbie Guide/FAQ - aka. The what happened to X? thread.
Welcome to Future Releases! Odds are your a new or infrequent poster who's itching to ask all sorts of questions about your favorite class, future settings, or various sundries related to 4E Dungeons and Dragons.
The archived Wizards Community post is particularly relevant as it was posted in 2009, specifically intended as a guide/FAQ (and effectively a quarantine thread), so even though it isn't official, you'd think people would absolutely jump on it if it were blatantly false that the core Essentials books had been presented as "evergreen."
If I had primary sources I would absolutely link them, but again, as stated, WotC has thoroughly erased their website something like three times in the past ~13 years.
dave2008
Legend
You could be correct, I just don't remember it that way.
Maybe, but definitely not all. We liked both. We had PHB and essentials characters at our table. As the DM, I think they improved the monsters a bit with essentials books. Dragons definitely improved.
I'm not following you. What does this have to do with essentials being called an "evergreen" edition?
There is no guarantee that iterative tweaks will maintain full backwards compatibility forever. It could still evolve to a point where it is not functionally compatible with 2014 D&D.
Personally I expect 5e to get about 10 more years and then a new edition. 20 years is probably long enough
dave2008
Legend
Ok, so I looked at the references - thank you @EzekielRaiden! However, the "evergreen" WotC and other posters are talking about is very different from what is being discussed with 5e.sigh Alright. Since you have demanded a link. Here are several secondary sources, most from 10+ years ago, that refer to descriptions of Essentials as being evergreen.
Is D&D Essentials replacing the PHB/MM/DMG as the core of 4E D&D going forward? | Dungeons & Dragons / Fantasy D20 Spotlight
I'm not a 4E player, but I'm a bit confused by the Essentials line and the talk that the core books are going out of print. Is Essentials going to be the new core? Are new PHB/MM/DMG books coming out to replace the originals?The D&D Essentials DM Kit: An Editorial Review (check comments; the post itself doesn't use the word "evergreen")What's the difference between the new 'Essentials' line and the original 4th ed D&D books?
What's the difference between the new 'Essentials' line and the original 4th ed D&D books? If I was to buy 4th ed books today, which should I buy and why?
TLC's Future Release Newbie Guide/FAQ - aka. The what happened to X? thread.
Welcome to Future Releases! Odds are your a new or infrequent poster who's itching to ask all sorts of questions about your favorite class, future settings, or various sundries related to 4E Dungeons and Dragons.web.archive.org
The archived Wizards Community post is particularly relevant as it was posted in 2009, specifically intended as a guide/FAQ (and effectively a quarantine thread), so even though it isn't official, you'd think people would absolutely jump on it if it were blatantly false that the core Essentials books had been presented as "evergreen."
If I had primary sources I would absolutely link them, but again, as stated, WotC has thoroughly erased their website something like three times in the past ~13 years.
The point with 4e and Essentials was that both will remain in print for that edition. From the FAQ:
"First off, it's not 4.5! It's not! It's just a new starting point for new players and a reworking of the core classes in the game to make them easier to manage and allows for a more classical structure to class builds. These products will be evergreen, ie. reprinted as needed."
and
"the Essentials line is supposed to be "evergreen" - that is, it will stay in production for the life of the edition. "
Basically they are saying both OG 4e and Essentials will both be printed and good to use.
With 5e, they are suggestion that there will not be a new edition. This is the one edition for hear on out. They were not saying the same thing about 4e or essentials. The said from the beginning of 5e (way before 2024 revision was announced) that it was just "Dungeons and Dragons" and that they are trying/hoping to get away from editions.
Similar Threads
