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.

 

[Shardstone]

Hopefully it is a case on bastions that they're going to sit on it a short while (possibly to see what sort of feedback they get, possibly so they have exclusive on the rules for a bit), and then we'll see them appear in an updated SRD a little further down the road.

Personally, I intend to be building my own bastion rules using older edition concepts and sources. The trick is making something fun that isn't too much of a bear to set up or use. WotC's comes across as "a first attempt".

Acquisitions Inc. (the book, not the campaign) has the best rules for bastions IMO.

 

[Alzrius]

The idea of could be used as a "In case of emergency, break glass" was something he and a handful of people thought would not get noticed and be there as an Uno reverse should things go South.

I have to disagree with you here. In his interview in Dragon Annual #6 (December, 2001), Dancey openly says: "You could even use the System Reference Document to publish an entirely new roleplaying game!"

The by half part was that people discovered the Break Glass provision very easily and used it way before an emergency was ever called, creating WotC own competition it was trying to avoid with the OGL.

I think you're referring to Paizo creating Pathfinder here, in which case the emergency was called before they did that, i.e. they went with Pathfinder because WotC pulled their license to Dragon and Dungeon magazines in preparation for 4E's release, when no decision had been made on WotC's part about what kind of compatibility license third-party publishers would have for 4E. In that regard, Paizo's actions were very much a reaction to an emergency.

 

[abazaba]

Creative Commons is not the "make it WotC's property" license. Never fear! Your content is safe.

Thanks for the response. But, do I understand correctly that you literally cannot use any of WotC's IP in your SRD-based content ? So for example, you cannot use the 'Forgotten Realms' setting (or anything in it), and you would have to make it either 'setting-agnostic' or create your own setting ?

 

[Dire Bare]

I've always thought Dancy was too clever by half. The point of the OGL was to get a bunch of companies (big and small) to support WotC /D&D instead of making rival games. The idea of could be used as a "In case of emergency, break glass" was something he and a handful of people thought would not get noticed and be there as an Uno reverse should things go South. The by half part was that people discovered the Break Glass provision very easily and used it way before an emergency was ever called, creating WotC own competition it was trying to avoid with the OGL. Which is why subsequent versions of the SRD have been far less generous.

IMO . . . the original SRD, OGL, and d20 license served their purpose admirably . . . with a few hiccups (d20 Bust). It's not that the OGL allowed for real competition for D&D, it's just that the Hasbro execs have never been comfortable with the idea of giving away their game in order to make money. It's counter-intuitive, and hard for folks whose mindsets revolve around shareholder profits to grok.

Even today, games like Level Up and Tales of the Valiant don't offer real competition for D&D. All those mega-million dollar Kickstarters don't either . . . it's just that the c-suite wants their cut and feels like the OGL was leaving money on the table that should be in their pockets. It's short-sighted thinking vs long-term strategic thinking.

Dancey was good at the long-term strategic thinking, which is rare enough among humans, even rarer among those in charge of corporations.

 

[Dire Bare]

Thanks for the response. But, do I understand correctly that you literally cannot use any of WotC's IP in your SRD-based content ? So for example, you cannot use the 'Forgotten Realms' setting (or anything in it), and you would have to make it either 'setting-agnostic' or create your own setting ?

Yes. You can only use what is in the SRD.

The rest . . . you have to create yourself!

 

[Morrus]

Thanks for the response. But, do I understand correctly that you literally cannot use any of WotC's IP in your SRD-based content ? So for example, you cannot use the 'Forgotten Realms' setting (or anything in it), and you would have to make it either 'setting-agnostic' or create your own setting ?

Well, I’m not a lawyer, and more importantly I’m not your lawyer.

But you can use what’s in the SRD. If it ain’t in there you can’t use it.

Unless you publish on DMs Guild, in which case Creative Commons and SRDs are irrelevant. There you can make your Forgotten Realms book.

 

[Stormonu]

Acquisitions Inc. (the book, not the campaign) has the best rules for bastions IMO.

I've looked over that book and STRONGLY disagree.

 

[abazaba]

Well, I’m not a lawyer, and more importantly I’m not your lawyer.

I get that, but I also get why you state that explicitly.

But you can use what’s in the SRD. If it ain’t in there you can’t use it.

Thanks, that corresponds with how I understand things to be.

Unless you publish on DMs Guild, in which case Creative Commons and SRDs are irrelevant. There you can make your Forgotten Realms book.

Yeah, the whole DM's Guild thing seems to be a whole thing unto it's own. I think I also heard that when you publish on DM's Guild, you cannot publish anywhere else (effectively locking you into the platform). Oh, well.

 

[Remathilis]

IMO . . . the original SRD, OGL, and d20 license served their purpose admirably . . . with a few hiccups (d20 Bust). It's not that the OGL allowed for real competition for D&D, it's just that the Hasbro execs have never been comfortable with the idea of giving away their game in order to make money. It's counter-intuitive, and hard for folks whose mindsets revolve around shareholder profits to grok.

Even today, games like Level Up and Tales of the Valiant don't offer real competition for D&D. All those mega-million dollar Kickstarters don't either . . . it's just that the c-suite wants their cut and feels like the OGL was leaving money on the table that should be in their pockets. It's short-sighted thinking vs long-term strategic thinking.

Dancey was good at the long-term strategic thinking, which is rare enough among humans, even rarer among those in charge of corporations.

Keep in mind there were a number of popular games (Pathfinder, Mutants and Masterminds, DCCRPG, the whole OSR movement) that may not put out major competition, but do carve out a niche and wouldn't exist if the OGL wasn't designed to have that break glass scenario. I'm ok that it did, most of those games are legit good, but I don't think Dancy expected so many OGL products to explicitly bypass the PHB using the OGL. In that regard, too many companies were more than willing to "reprint the SRD" and make money off it.

Dancy was a strategist, but not a prophet.

 

[Yaarel]

Acquisitions Inc. (the book, not the campaign) has the best rules for bastions IMO.

I dont have the book. What did you like about its bastion rules?