Thanks for the clarification, and I appreciate you taking the time to respond!
It’s good to hear that there haven’t actually been delays and that everything is proceeding as intended. That’s exactly the kind of update that helps keep the community informed and avoids unnecessary speculation.
I also understand that sometimes there are limits on what can be shared, but even small updates like “still on track, still happening” would go a long way in the future. WotC has had a trust problem ever since the OGL situation, and when there’s radio silence, it creates doubt—even when things are going fine behind the scenes.
Thanks again for responding, and I’m looking forward to the official release soon!
Thanks for the clarification, and I appreciate you taking the time to respond!
It’s good to hear that there haven’t actually been delays and that everything is proceeding as intended. That’s exactly the kind of update that helps keep the community informed and avoids unnecessary speculation.
I also understand that sometimes there are limits on what can be shared, but even small updates like “still on track, still happening” would go a long way in the future. WotC has had a trust problem ever since the OGL situation, and when there’s radio silence, it creates doubt—even when things are going fine behind the scenes.
Thanks again for responding, and I’m looking forward to the official release soon!
Is it really radio silence if you haven’t got information about something within a very small time period of when it was supposed to happen? Not saying that wizards should’ve done it: updating your community is very important, and I appreciate that weeks can be a very important matter for 3rd party creators, but that does seem a bit excessive
I get where you’re coming from, and if this were just about waiting a little longer for something, it wouldn’t be a big deal. The problem is that WotC set an expectation—SRD 5.2 would arrive “within weeks” of the Monster Manual release. Then, when people started asking about it, we weren’t given any official update until now.
For third-party creators, the SRD isn’t just a nice bonus—it’s something we need for legal certainty when designing content using the updated 2024 rules. So when weeks passed with no word and reports came in that there was no ETA, it raised real concerns that the timeline had slipped or the plan had changed. That’s why even a small update earlier would have helped avoid all this speculation.
Thankfully, we now have confirmation that it’s still coming soon, so that’s great. Hopefully, WotC takes this as a sign that better communication, even when things are on track, is always appreciated.
Sure, but the issue wasn’t just how many weeks count as “weeks”—it was that WotC set an expectation and then went silent until pressed for an update.
If they had simply said, “Expect it in March or April” or “We’re still on track, just not ready yet,” this wouldn’t have been a discussion at all. Instead, we heard “no ETA”, which naturally raised concerns, especially for creators who need SRD 5.2 for their projects.
It’s not about splitting hairs over what ‘weeks’ means—it’s about making sure that when WotC makes a public commitment, they follow up with clear communication so the community isn’t left guessing.
Sure, but the issue wasn’t just how many weeks count as “weeks”—it was that WotC set an expectation and then went silent until pressed for an update.
What "expectation" had they not met?
I'd think it's pretty unreasonable to expect a company to, even monthly, release something stating "no change, things are going according to plan." Some companies do that sort of thing (but only very rarely), and they tend to be the very small ones.
Sure, but the issue wasn’t just how many weeks count as “weeks”—it was that WotC set an expectation and then went silent until pressed for an update.
What "expectation" had they not met?
I'd think it's pretty unreasonable to expect a company to, even monthly, release something stating "no change, things are going according to plan." Some companies do that sort of thing (but only very rarely), and they tend to be the very small ones.
The expectation they set was that SRD 5.2 would be released ‘within weeks’ of the Monster Manual. When weeks passed with no official confirmation of the timeline and reports surfaced that there was no ETA, that naturally caused concern—especially for third-party creators who need it for their projects.
No one is asking for monthly updates on everything WotC does. But when they set a timeline for a major release, it’s reasonable to expect some communication if people start asking whether that timeline has shifted. Now that we’ve finally gotten confirmation that things are still on track, great—but that kind of update could have avoided this whole debate weeks ago.
Sure, but the issue wasn’t just how many weeks count as “weeks”—it was that WotC set an expectation and then went silent until pressed for an update.
If they had simply said, “Expect it in March or April” or “We’re still on track, just not ready yet,” this wouldn’t have been a discussion at all. Instead, we heard “no ETA”, which naturally raised concerns, especially for creators who need SRD 5.2 for their projects.
WotC set a (very vague) expectation. They are well within that expectation, so they have no real obligation or expectation to say anything more.
No ETA just means "sorry, I can't give you more precise information than you already have".It doesn't mean delayed. It doesn't mean not delayed.
Sure, but the issue wasn’t just how many weeks count as “weeks”—it was that WotC set an expectation and then went silent until pressed for an update.
If they had simply said, “Expect it in March or April” or “We’re still on track, just not ready yet,” this wouldn’t have been a discussion at all. Instead, we heard “no ETA”, which naturally raised concerns, especially for creators who need SRD 5.2 for their projects.
WotC set a (very vague) expectation. They are well within that expectation, so they have no real obligation or expectation to say anything more.
No ETA just means "sorry, I can't give you more precise information than you already have".It doesn't mean delayed. It doesn't mean not delayed.
I understand that some people are fine with no updates as long as the release eventually happens, but for those of us who rely on the SRD for third-party content, clarity matters.
The issue was never just “is WotC late?”—it was that when people started asking about the timeline, the only answer was “no ETA”, which raised concerns that the release might not be happening anytime soon. If “no ETA” just meant ‘I can’t give a more precise date yet’, then WotC should have just said that upfront instead of letting confusion build.
We’ve now gotten confirmation that SRD 5.2 is still on track, which is great. But this whole discussion could have been avoided if WotC had simply provided that reassurance earlier. That’s my only point.
If “no ETA” just meant ‘I can’t give a more precise date yet’, then WotC should have just said that upfront instead of letting confusion build.
People failing to understand what "no ETA" means is not the fault of WotC.
If multiple people interpreted “no ETA” as uncertainty about the timeline, then that’s a communication failure on WotC’s part, not just a misunderstanding on the community’s end.
A simple “SRD 5.2 is still on track, but we can’t share a release date yet” would have avoided all of this.
Thankfully, we now have confirmation that it’s coming soon. Hopefully, in the future, WotC will be clearer to avoid unnecessary confusion.
If “no ETA” just meant ‘I can’t give a more precise date yet’, then WotC should have just said that upfront instead of letting confusion build.
People failing to understand what "no ETA" means is not the fault of WotC.
If multiple people interpreted “no ETA” as uncertainty about the timeline, then that’s a communication failure on WotC’s part, not just a misunderstanding on the community’s end.
A simple “SRD 5.2 is still on track, but we can’t share a release date yet” would have avoided all of this.
Thankfully, we now have confirmation that it’s coming soon. Hopefully, in the future, WotC will be clearer to avoid unnecessary confusion.
Or, alternatively, it’s a comprehension failure/bad faith position on the listener’s part.
And we literally got a “still on track” a month after the MM’s release, so by your own metric they handled this properly.
If “no ETA” just meant ‘I can’t give a more precise date yet’, then WotC should have just said that upfront instead of letting confusion build.
People failing to understand what "no ETA" means is not the fault of WotC.
If multiple people interpreted “no ETA” as uncertainty about the timeline, then that’s a communication failure on WotC’s part, not just a misunderstanding on the community’s end.
A simple “SRD 5.2 is still on track, but we can’t share a release date yet” would have avoided all of this.
Thankfully, we now have confirmation that it’s coming soon. Hopefully, in the future, WotC will be clearer to avoid unnecessary confusion.
Or, alternatively, it’s a comprehension failure/bad faith position on the listener’s part.
And we literally got a “still on track” a month after the MM’s release, so by your own metric they handled this properly.
If WotC had said a month ago what they just confirmed now, this entire debate wouldn’t have happened. Instead, when people asked about the timeline, all we heard was “no ETA”, which naturally raised concerns about whether the release had slipped.
The fact that they eventually confirmed things were still on track doesn’t change the fact that they could have communicated that much sooner to avoid confusion. Expecting clear communication from a company isn’t bad faith—it’s just reasonable.
Anyway, at this point, we have the answer. Hopefully, next time, WotC is more proactive in keeping people informed.
If “no ETA” just meant ‘I can’t give a more precise date yet’, then WotC should have just said that upfront instead of letting confusion build.
People failing to understand what "no ETA" means is not the fault of WotC.
If multiple people interpreted “no ETA” as uncertainty about the timeline, then that’s a communication failure on WotC’s part, not just a misunderstanding on the community’s end.
A simple “SRD 5.2 is still on track, but we can’t share a release date yet” would have avoided all of this.
Thankfully, we now have confirmation that it’s coming soon. Hopefully, in the future, WotC will be clearer to avoid unnecessary confusion.
Or, alternatively, it’s a comprehension failure/bad faith position on the listener’s part.
And we literally got a “still on track” a month after the MM’s release, so by your own metric they handled this properly.
If WotC had said a month ago what they just confirmed now, this entire debate wouldn’t have happened. Instead, when people asked about the timeline, all we heard was “no ETA”, which naturally raised concerns about whether the release had slipped.
The fact that they eventually confirmed things were still on track doesn’t change the fact that they could have communicated that much sooner to avoid confusion. Expecting clear communication from a company isn’t bad faith—it’s just reasonable.
Anyway, at this point, we have the answer. Hopefully, next time, WotC is more proactive in keeping people informed.
A month ago their timeline would have been even looser and there was no real impetus to speak up- particularly given there’s a vocal minority who like to try and smear anything they say. Instead they work through part of their allotted time so when they make a statement it can be more informed and come at a point where speaking up is actually needful, rather than just filling the air for its own sake.
If “no ETA” just meant ‘I can’t give a more precise date yet’, then WotC should have just said that upfront instead of letting confusion build.
People failing to understand what "no ETA" means is not the fault of WotC.
If multiple people interpreted “no ETA” as uncertainty about the timeline, then that’s a communication failure on WotC’s part, not just a misunderstanding on the community’s end.
A simple “SRD 5.2 is still on track, but we can’t share a release date yet” would have avoided all of this.
Thankfully, we now have confirmation that it’s coming soon. Hopefully, in the future, WotC will be clearer to avoid unnecessary confusion.
Or, alternatively, it’s a comprehension failure/bad faith position on the listener’s part.
And we literally got a “still on track” a month after the MM’s release, so by your own metric they handled this properly.
If WotC had said a month ago what they just confirmed now, this entire debate wouldn’t have happened. Instead, when people asked about the timeline, all we heard was “no ETA”, which naturally raised concerns about whether the release had slipped.
The fact that they eventually confirmed things were still on track doesn’t change the fact that they could have communicated that much sooner to avoid confusion. Expecting clear communication from a company isn’t bad faith—it’s just reasonable.
Anyway, at this point, we have the answer. Hopefully, next time, WotC is more proactive in keeping people informed.
A month ago their timeline would have been even looser and there was no real impetus to speak up- particularly given there’s a vocal minority who like to try and smear anything they say. Instead they work through part of their allotted time so when they make a statement it can be more informed and come at a point where speaking up is actually needful, rather than just filling the air for its own sake.
I don’t think expecting basic communication is the same as asking them to “fill the air for its own sake.” If a company sets a timeline, it’s reasonable for people to ask for clarity when that timeline starts approaching.
We now have confirmation that SRD 5.2 is still on track, which is all people were asking for in the first place. If they had said that earlier, it would have avoided the confusion. That’s all there is to it.
A simple “SRD 5.2 is still on track, but we can’t share a release date yet” would have avoided all of this.
I'm not sure I believe that. All that happened is someone on kickstarter said they were told "no eta" (which is a mostly meaningless statement).
How often should they publish a statement saying that things are on track? Every month? Every week? Every time someone on the internet asks? Every time someone on the internet claims to have talked to them directly?
A simple “SRD 5.2 is still on track, but we can’t share a release date yet” would have avoided all of this.
I'm not sure I believe that. All that happened is someone on kickstarter said they were told "no eta" (which is a mostly meaningless statement).
How often should they publish a statement saying that things are on track? Every month? Every week? Every time someone on the internet asks? Every time someone on the internet claims to have talked to them directly?
No one is asking for weekly updates—just basic communication when people start asking legitimate questions about a promised release.
If WotC had simply said, “SRD 5.2 is still on track” earlier instead of letting people hear “no ETA” through secondhand sources, this whole discussion wouldn’t have been necessary.
Anyway, we have our answer now. Hopefully, next time, they’re clearer upfront.
No one is asking for weekly updates—just basic communication when people start asking legitimate questions about a promised release.
If WotC had simply said, “SRD 5.2 is still on track” earlier instead of letting people hear “no ETA” through secondhand sources, this whole discussion wouldn’t have been necessary.
They didn't "let" you hear anything. You don't even know what they told "some kickstarter" in full.
Who defines what's a "legitimate question" instead of an illegitimate one? For that matter, the kickstarter people were answered by WotC.
This is all just sounds like trying to make community managers dance.
No one is asking for weekly updates—just basic communication when people start asking legitimate questions about a promised release.
If WotC had simply said, “SRD 5.2 is still on track” earlier instead of letting people hear “no ETA” through secondhand sources, this whole discussion wouldn’t have been necessary.
They didn't "let" you hear anything. You don't even know what they told "some kickstarter" in full.
Who defines what's a "legitimate question" instead of an illegitimate one? For that matter, the kickstarter people were answered by WotC.
This is all just sounds like trying to make community managers dance.
People asked about the SRD release because WotC set a timeline, and when they inquired, they got “no ETA” as an answer. Whether that response came from a Kickstarter update, a direct email, or anywhere else, it was unclear and left room for doubt. That’s why people pushed for more information.
No one is asking for community managers to "dance." Just for basic transparency when WotC makes a commitment that third-party creators rely on. We’ve now gotten an actual response, which is all people wanted in the first place.
I think that wraps this up. Hopefully, next time, WotC is clearer upfront.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Thanks for the clarification, and I appreciate you taking the time to respond!
It’s good to hear that there haven’t actually been delays and that everything is proceeding as intended. That’s exactly the kind of update that helps keep the community informed and avoids unnecessary speculation.
I also understand that sometimes there are limits on what can be shared, but even small updates like “still on track, still happening” would go a long way in the future. WotC has had a trust problem ever since the OGL situation, and when there’s radio silence, it creates doubt—even when things are going fine behind the scenes.
Thanks again for responding, and I’m looking forward to the official release soon!
Who did the "no eta" come from in Post #7ETA: Found it in Post #3.
Is it really radio silence if you haven’t got information about something within a very small time period of when it was supposed to happen? Not saying that wizards should’ve done it: updating your community is very important, and I appreciate that weeks can be a very important matter for 3rd party creators, but that does seem a bit excessive
I get where you’re coming from, and if this were just about waiting a little longer for something, it wouldn’t be a big deal. The problem is that WotC set an expectation—SRD 5.2 would arrive “within weeks” of the Monster Manual release. Then, when people started asking about it, we weren’t given any official update until now.
For third-party creators, the SRD isn’t just a nice bonus—it’s something we need for legal certainty when designing content using the updated 2024 rules. So when weeks passed with no word and reports came in that there was no ETA, it raised real concerns that the timeline had slipped or the plan had changed. That’s why even a small update earlier would have helped avoid all this speculation.
Thankfully, we now have confirmation that it’s still coming soon, so that’s great. Hopefully, WotC takes this as a sign that better communication, even when things are on track, is always appreciated.
Um... "within weeks" does not mean "within a specific small number of weeks". Eight weeks (a month from now) is still comfortably "within weeks".
Sure, but the issue wasn’t just how many weeks count as “weeks”—it was that WotC set an expectation and then went silent until pressed for an update.
If they had simply said, “Expect it in March or April” or “We’re still on track, just not ready yet,” this wouldn’t have been a discussion at all. Instead, we heard “no ETA”, which naturally raised concerns, especially for creators who need SRD 5.2 for their projects.
It’s not about splitting hairs over what ‘weeks’ means—it’s about making sure that when WotC makes a public commitment, they follow up with clear communication so the community isn’t left guessing.
What "expectation" had they not met?
I'd think it's pretty unreasonable to expect a company to, even monthly, release something stating "no change, things are going according to plan." Some companies do that sort of thing (but only very rarely), and they tend to be the very small ones.
The expectation they set was that SRD 5.2 would be released ‘within weeks’ of the Monster Manual. When weeks passed with no official confirmation of the timeline and reports surfaced that there was no ETA, that naturally caused concern—especially for third-party creators who need it for their projects.
No one is asking for monthly updates on everything WotC does. But when they set a timeline for a major release, it’s reasonable to expect some communication if people start asking whether that timeline has shifted. Now that we’ve finally gotten confirmation that things are still on track, great—but that kind of update could have avoided this whole debate weeks ago.
WotC set a (very vague) expectation. They are well within that expectation, so they have no real obligation or expectation to say anything more.
No ETA just means "sorry, I can't give you more precise information than you already have". It doesn't mean delayed. It doesn't mean not delayed.
I understand that some people are fine with no updates as long as the release eventually happens, but for those of us who rely on the SRD for third-party content, clarity matters.
The issue was never just “is WotC late?”—it was that when people started asking about the timeline, the only answer was “no ETA”, which raised concerns that the release might not be happening anytime soon. If “no ETA” just meant ‘I can’t give a more precise date yet’, then WotC should have just said that upfront instead of letting confusion build.
We’ve now gotten confirmation that SRD 5.2 is still on track, which is great. But this whole discussion could have been avoided if WotC had simply provided that reassurance earlier. That’s my only point.
People failing to understand what "no ETA" means is not the fault of WotC.
If multiple people interpreted “no ETA” as uncertainty about the timeline, then that’s a communication failure on WotC’s part, not just a misunderstanding on the community’s end.
A simple “SRD 5.2 is still on track, but we can’t share a release date yet” would have avoided all of this.
Thankfully, we now have confirmation that it’s coming soon. Hopefully, in the future, WotC will be clearer to avoid unnecessary confusion.
Or, alternatively, it’s a comprehension failure/bad faith position on the listener’s part.
And we literally got a “still on track” a month after the MM’s release, so by your own metric they handled this properly.
If WotC had said a month ago what they just confirmed now, this entire debate wouldn’t have happened. Instead, when people asked about the timeline, all we heard was “no ETA”, which naturally raised concerns about whether the release had slipped.
The fact that they eventually confirmed things were still on track doesn’t change the fact that they could have communicated that much sooner to avoid confusion. Expecting clear communication from a company isn’t bad faith—it’s just reasonable.
Anyway, at this point, we have the answer. Hopefully, next time, WotC is more proactive in keeping people informed.
A month ago their timeline would have been even looser and there was no real impetus to speak up- particularly given there’s a vocal minority who like to try and smear anything they say. Instead they work through part of their allotted time so when they make a statement it can be more informed and come at a point where speaking up is actually needful, rather than just filling the air for its own sake.
I don’t think expecting basic communication is the same as asking them to “fill the air for its own sake.” If a company sets a timeline, it’s reasonable for people to ask for clarity when that timeline starts approaching.
We now have confirmation that SRD 5.2 is still on track, which is all people were asking for in the first place. If they had said that earlier, it would have avoided the confusion. That’s all there is to it.
I'm not sure I believe that. All that happened is someone on kickstarter said they were told "no eta" (which is a mostly meaningless statement).
How often should they publish a statement saying that things are on track? Every month? Every week? Every time someone on the internet asks? Every time someone on the internet claims to have talked to them directly?
No one is asking for weekly updates—just basic communication when people start asking legitimate questions about a promised release.
If WotC had simply said, “SRD 5.2 is still on track” earlier instead of letting people hear “no ETA” through secondhand sources, this whole discussion wouldn’t have been necessary.
Anyway, we have our answer now. Hopefully, next time, they’re clearer upfront.
They didn't "let" you hear anything. You don't even know what they told "some kickstarter" in full.
Who defines what's a "legitimate question" instead of an illegitimate one? For that matter, the kickstarter people were answered by WotC.
This is all just sounds like trying to make community managers dance.
People asked about the SRD release because WotC set a timeline, and when they inquired, they got “no ETA” as an answer. Whether that response came from a Kickstarter update, a direct email, or anywhere else, it was unclear and left room for doubt. That’s why people pushed for more information.
No one is asking for community managers to "dance." Just for basic transparency when WotC makes a commitment that third-party creators rely on. We’ve now gotten an actual response, which is all people wanted in the first place.
I think that wraps this up. Hopefully, next time, WotC is clearer upfront.