Hey @JeremyECrawford we fans or @dndoptimized wanna know if Custom Lineage Characters who are part elf can get the Elven Accuracy Feat. Basically can customs use racial feats if it falls in line with their backstory?

— Cumrade Corvus (@XCorvus777) March 3, 2021

In Tasha’s Cauldron of Everything, the custom lineage option is chosen in lieu of a race, such as elf or dwarf. If you choose the custom lineage, you don’t qualify for things in the game that require elf, dwarf, and the like. In contrast, if you're an elf and customize your origin (using the option in Tasha's Cauldron of Everything), you're an elf and qualify for elf things. #DnD

— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) March 4, 2021

Customizing your origin and choosing a custom lineage are two rules, addressing different needs. One is about making your elf/dwarf/etc. the way you want them. The other is about making a character who isn't mechanically attached to any particular species in the game. #DnD

— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) March 4, 2021

So I think the issue here is you’re saying mechanics, but people are imagining ancestry. So the custom lineage character isn’t attached to a species, but how did they come about. Are people allowed to say it’s part elf/part orc/part dragon etc? The custom lineage option allows you to create whatever ancestry you'd like for your character. It's a toolbox option. You could be the child of an orc and an elf, for example. Whatever story you tell, the rules consider the character's race to be "custom lineage."

— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) March 4, 2021

Does this feel even more divisive? or is it just me?

No, you’re not an elf, nor a dwarf… It's not for making your own personal version of an elf. It's for making something you want to play that isn't an existing race option.

— Dan Dillon (@Dan_Dillon_1) March 5, 2021

What is the intention between Booming/Green-flame blades requiring a weapon with a value of at least 1sp, when no weapon (in PHB at least) has a value below 1sp?

— Zem (@TheRealZem) November 13, 2020

If a D&D spell’s material component lacks a monetary value and isn’t consumed, you don’t need that component; you could substitute a component pouch, for instance.

Booming/Green-Flame Blade need a weapon with a monetary value because they require an actual weapon. #DnD https://t.co/OTB8kTvQBo

— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) November 13, 2020

So removing the Shadow Blade option is fully intentional? I took the opposite intention out of this. What he seems to be describing is that the spell requires a weapon and that you can't sub out the "material component" for an arcane focus or component pouch. Shadow blade seems like an unintended consequence.

— Brett Richards (@brett_play) November 13, 2020

You're exactly right, @brett_play. The component entries of the two spells were simply incorrect; they didn't follow the rules for how components work. We've corrected them and, as a consequence, some combos that never should have worked no longer work.

— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) November 13, 2020

Okay now I’m the one confused. I know in one of your earlier replies, you talked about allowing booming blade and shadow blade to work together. Was removing this interaction intended? Or is it simply how it works now by RAW to standardize wording but isn’t a balance concern. This change has nothing to do with prohibiting or allowing Shadow Blade to combine with Booming/Green-Flame Blade. It's about fixing those two cantrips. As DM, I'd allow those them to combo, since I make liberal use of the rule on improvised weapons.

— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) November 13, 2020

My pleasure!

— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) November 13, 2020