Dungeons & Dragons SRD 5.2 Is Officially Live

The new System Reference Document (SRD) for Dungeons & Dragons' revised 5th Edition is officially live. The new SRD was officially released and is available for download on D&D Beyond. A FAQ detailing changes from the previous SRD was also released.

The SRD provides a version of D&D's rules that can be used and referenced in third-party material and form a framework for publishing material compatible for D&D's latest edition. The newest version of the SRD contains a mix of species, backgrounds, subclasses, and feats from the 2024 Player's Handbook, along with statblocks from the 2025 Monster Manual.

One other interesting note is that the new SRD purges references to creatures and characters classified as D&D IP. The previous SRD released under a Creative Commons license contained reference to Strahd and Orcus, both of which were removed in the new SRD. Additionally, the SRD renames the Deck of Many Things as "Mysterious Deck" and the Orb of Dragonkind as "Dragon Orb" to allow for both to be used in third-party material while not infringing upon D&D IP.

 

[mamba]

The lack of Bastion rules is sad considering I was interested to see what other companies would do withbthem.

there still is DMsGuild. Personally I do not miss them, to me the best thing to do with them is to start fresh / use someone else’s, like MCDM’s

Overall, it hits me that the selection of material does lean towards what is useful when creating adventures rather than rules expansions. Is this what WoTC sees as the primary role of third-party publishers?

probably

 

[Reynard]

There's a vast gulf between the word "feywild" and all the associated lore attached to that word. The word is in the CC-BY SRD. The lore is not. People confusing the word for the lore are going to create a lot of problems for themselves and others.

If they haven't over the last 10 years,I doubt it will be a problem now.

 

[Reynard]

there still is DMsGuild. Personally I do not miss them, to me the best thing to do with them is to start fresh / use someone else’s, like MCDM’s

This is a flippant response that misses the point.

First of all,you can't sell your DMs Guild contebt elsewhere. That's gross.

Second, WorC holding back the one innovative thing they actually did is quite revealing.

Finally: have you actually used the S&F rules. I have. They are, let's say, undercooked.

 

[mamba]

First of all,you can't sell your DMs Guild contebt elsewhere. That's gross.

it's either that or nothing at all

Second, WorC holding back the one innovative thing they actually did is quite revealing.

in which way?

Finally: have you actually used the S&F rules. I have. They are, let's say, undercooked.

they might be undercooked, but to me the WotC version is raw bordering on rotten (to stick with your analogy), so I would not use it as a starting point either way

 

[Scribe]

Second, WorC holding back the one innovative thing they actually did is quite revealing.

Kind of weird, you would think they would want people to draw attention to it by releasing 3PP content for it, use it as a feature of the new 5.5 rules.

 

[mamba]

Kind of weird, you would think they would want people to draw attention to it by releasing 3PP content for it, use it as a feature of the new 5.5 rules.

Can't they release new material anyway, all it means is they cannot reproduce the WotC Bastion content, but that should not really be needed anyway

I also would not expect a huge expansion on bastions, more a small chapter / product like the one we already have on DMsG

Expanded Bastions - Dungeon Masters Guild | Dungeon Masters Guild

Expanded Bastions - This module expands everything that bastions are: bastion turns and actions, facilities, income, hirelings, even bastion

www.dmsguild.com

 

[Scribe]

Can't they release new material anyway, all it means is they cannot reproduce the WotC Bastion content, but that should not realy be needed anyway

I would think so, just changing up names or whatever.

 

[Twiggly the Gnome]

Got a chance to look it over. Glad to see the omission of Forest Gnomes (and Wood and Drow Elves) was remedied.

 

[Reynard]

in which way?

Whoever is in charge of this at WotC does not seem to be interested in building the game in a broad sense. To actively choose to take out Bastions -- the SRD is obviously a edited version of the rule books, so everything not in it is an intentional choice -- says tat WotC, for whatever reason, does not want 3PP to have access to the subsystem.

 

[mamba]

Whoever is in charge of this at WotC does not seem to be interested in building the game in a broad sense. To actively choose to take out Bastions -- the SRD is obviously a edited version of the rule books, so everything not in it is an intentional choice -- says tat WotC, for whatever reason, does not want 3PP to have access to the subsystem.

yes, obviously they do not want people to have access to it, I was more wondering what it reveals beyond this. Is that the ‘not building the game in a broad sense’ part?

Not sure why they would want / be ok with new subclasses but not with more bastion rules, but here we are