Hey @JeremyECrawford & @ChrisPerkinsDnD,

Is there any rule against monstrosities speaking to each other (if their Int is high enough)?
Basing this on books and film where beasts of the magical variety can converse using a “nature language” only they understand.

— 🏳️‍🌈Proud of Us (@MichaelCayne) July 22, 2018

If two monsters have the same language in their Languages entry, they can speak with each other. #DnD https://t.co/5eOmZEVCvk

— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) July 22, 2018

Thanks!

I guess it’s time to create a language that only the beasts and monstrosities will know, maybe some Druids too.

Trying to make my world a little more Wyld, and having things connect in ways my PCs haven’t thought of. Consider allowing certain creatures to know Druidic.

— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) July 22, 2018

Because of Twitter's notification limit, some of your D&D questions get gobbled up by the server before I ever see them. Don't hesitate to resend a question.

Also, I might already have an answer for you in the Sage Advice Compendium (https://t.co/nlIvbEC7D7). #DnD

— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) June 26, 2018

@JeremyECrawford 3 Yes/No question about Simulacrum after it does a long rest:
1) can Simulacrum-Sorcerer recover sorcery points and spend them to create spell slots?
2) can Simulacrum-Fighter get back an Action Surge use?
3) can a Simulacrum-Warlock get back Mystic Arcanum uses?

— Draconis (@DerynDraconis) June 25, 2018

Simulacrum—the spell's creation can't gain levels or regain expended spell slots (RAW). The creation is meant to be unable to regain use of any of its features that it expends (RAI). #DnD https://t.co/hGuKoMXGAt

— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) June 25, 2018

Well that RAI is a huge difference. It means making copies of battle masters, bards, monks, etc are way worse. I’m glad this isn’t an errata. There's a good chance it will be. A simulacrum is meant to lose efficacy over time, essentially running out of juice, until only at-will abilities remain.

— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) June 25, 2018

You go to your room and think about what you’ve done, Jeremy. Oh, I have done far sillier things!

— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) June 25, 2018

If the original creature was missing some resources (spell slots, superiority dice…), does the simulacrum start with an equal amount of depleted resources? If the caster copies themselves, is the spell slot used to cast the spell also missing from the simulacrum?

— Armando Doval (@armando_doval) June 25, 2018

A simulacrum is a duplicate of another creature at the time of the spell's casting. You essentially take a snapshot of that creature's game statistics at the completion of the 12-hour casting, and those become the statistics of the simulacrum. #DnD https://t.co/vupGQPmPEX

— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) June 25, 2018

Does Detect Magic detect itself? If so does that mean the first part of the spell always give “yes” in regards to magic being present? If so is spending an additional action to see the aura of magical sources the only way to know if magic is present? Detect magic isn't intended to detect itself.

— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) June 19, 2018

@JeremyECrawford there seems to be a lack of official support for crafting, even though characters choose from alchemy/herbalism/tinkering toolkits during character creation. Is there a reason for this, and are there plans to publish anything related to crafting in the future?

— (@joshjmack) July 19, 2018

Eager for D&D crafting rules?

Check out the "Crafting" section in the "Player's Handbook" (p. 187).

Consider the "Crafting a Magic Item" section in the "Dungeon Master's Guide" (p. 128).

Glory in the "Crafting an Item" section of "Xanathar's Guide to Everything" (p. 128). #DnD https://t.co/N9AfpPfU00

— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) July 19, 2018

I often find that supposed problems in the RAW aren't in the text at all, but in the reader's assumptions about what the text does or doesn't say.

haha. Totally agree with that observation. Its always a fun time reading sage advice themed tweets.
Next time the Crafting dilemna is on my plate Ill be sure to take notes and send them your way sir. 🙂 That said, I'm always on the lookout for problems that we can fix, so please let me know if you find some.

— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) July 19, 2018

Excellent!

— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) July 19, 2018

@JeremyECrawford Some disagreement here with Blinding Smite and Find Steed. Does the spell qualify for Find Steed's spell effect duplication?

(I personally think it doesn't, as I consider the attacked creature a second target, but we're arguing about it over at r/dndnext)

— David Swanson (@DavidDaSwan) July 22, 2018

Blinding Smite has a range of self, and it refers to the creature you attack as a target. Those two facts together mean the spell doesn't target only you. #DnD https://t.co/IUC9zuYtFp

— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) July 22, 2018

Absolutely no offense spells can be cast on the Steed? The ‘target’ mentioned in the spell is a target of your physical attack not a target of the spell itself. It’s a ‘cupid’ effect. Next thing you hit catches some heat. I’d allow it. It’s enchanting you not the creature. The spell, not your weapon attack, is causing the target to make a saving throw and to take radiant damage. But if you're the DM, follow your bliss!

— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) July 22, 2018

Here's an odd one. With the step by step character creation you don't have a background when you first get Expertise as a rogue so seems you can only choose a proficiency given by rogue or race. Surely that's not RAI?@JeremyECrawford 1

— Dave Williams (@DaveWil33) July 3, 2018

The steps of character creation in chapter 1 of the "Player's Handbook" are but one way you can approach making your character. The order of the steps has no rules weight. #DnD https://t.co/wJLMvsMi1K

— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) July 19, 2018

How would extra attack features work?

— Hany Diab (@Debased35) July 3, 2018

Each extra attack = two more TWF attacks, at least that's my first pass. https://t.co/qOcW8il0Vf

— Mike Mearls (@mikemearls) July 3, 2018

I like the idea of freeing up the bonus action by pairing off hand attacks with each attack made as part of the attack action. I am not sure halving the damage is necessary(you and @JeremyECrawford can crunch numbers)…..

— Daniel Lieberman (@DMCLieberman) July 3, 2018

I’m not going to crunch numbers on a house rule. 😉

— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) July 4, 2018

Two weapon fighting as a bonus action has always bugged me. Here’s a house rule I might use: If you take an attack action, you can strike with two weapons you hold in place of each attack, but they deal 1/2 damage. You can do this with 1-handed melee and/or ranged weapons. Twitch, tell me why this doesn't work other than halving damage being a bit of a pain. I am either dumb for missing something or dumb for not just doing this like 5 years ago.

— Mike Mearls (@mikemearls) July 3, 2018

We didn't do it because we experimented with a higher number of attacks, and they significantly slowed down play in our internal stress tests.

— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) July 4, 2018

You’re thinking of the reaction fighter. We never questioned the handling time of core functionality – that path rewrites casters. TWF was a spreadsheet problem.

— Mike Mearls (@mikemearls) July 4, 2018

I’m thinking of the many stress tests the rest of the team and I did on higher numbers of attacks for various weapon-focused classes. I’m not thinking of the reaction fighter.

— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) July 5, 2018