What was the design reason behind not letting kensais use heavy weapons? I’m asking for house-ruling reasonsPrimarily to keep the monk within its expected damage-output range.

— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) November 15, 2017

For the kensei monk, it says heavy and special properties, does this mean only the Lance, or all weapons with the heavy and/or special property? It says any weapon that lacks the heavy and special properties. That means a weapon that has neither property.

— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) November 15, 2017

@JeremyECrawford The Kensei ability "Unerring Accuracy" is the only ability in that archetype that refers to "monk weapons" instead of "kensei weapons" – is that an error or is it intended to work with all monk weapons? If the latter, what about unarmed?

— Gabriel (@NewModelKoan) November 15, 2017

Here's the problem…

Weapons of the chosen types are monk weapons for
you. (So your Kensei weapons ARE monk weapons.)

— A. Tyger (@ATyger) November 15, 2017

Kensei weapons are all monk weapons, but not all monk weapons are kensei weapons. #DnD https://t.co/pDKmOr15ms

— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) November 15, 2017

My point (if unclear) is that the capstone works with both specific monk weapons, and any kensei weapons chosen. It is not an exclusive or prohibitive capstone. I am not sure if that was what the OP was referring to or not. Yes, that is intentional.

— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) November 15, 2017

@JeremyECrawford can you give your opinion on the order of operations a 14th level half orc barbarian zealot would follow when they hit 0 hp with the abilities; Relentless endurance, relentless rage and rage beyond death?

— Paul Stokey (@Pauljstokey) November 15, 2017

Relentless Endurance and Relentless Rage both give you the option of using them, so you decide if you use them and in which order. They don't happen automatically. #DnD https://t.co/YhM9LKBwVp

— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) November 16, 2017

Why no shield proficiency for College of Swords Bards despite getting the “Dueling” fighting style? Thematic reasons? Mechanical? Given their similarity to Valor Bards it just seems like an odd omission, it’s like if I go dueling idk what to do with my free hand. Thematic. That other hand is ready to hold a musical instrument or to point with style.

— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) December 5, 2017

@JeremyECrawford For Maddening Hex, does the psychic damage trigger off of every target cursed by you within range, (One creature cursed by Hexblade's Curse and another cursed by the spell Hex, or the like) or only a single cursed target per turn?

— Anthony Bunnell (@ApBunnell) November 15, 2017

Maddening Hex works on one cursed target at a time. #DnD https://t.co/i5KRaChSHT

— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) November 15, 2017

@JeremyECrawford Not sure if you're fielding questions about Xanathar's Guide yet, but I'm curious about the design intent by having Identifying a Spell take a reaction/action.

— Sivad Semaj (@therealjimdavis) November 9, 2017

In Xanathar's, Identifying a spell requires an action or a reaction because it involves focused deduction; it's not automatic. Moreover, I didn't want combat to devolve into people identifying every spell. #DnD https://t.co/Vj5kD3tjTp

— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) November 9, 2017

But since Counterspell is also a reaction, that means you can never actually know the spell you’re countering before you counter it? Seems like there should be an exception there.It intentionally doesn't work with counterspell. Counterspell is a sudden effort to break a spell. You're intended to have only enough time to cast it, not to carefully weigh whether the other caster's spell is worth breaking.

— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) November 9, 2017

Would it be reasonable that one person could identify a spell and another counterspell it with that knowledge?Yes.

— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) November 9, 2017

If any of my DMs use these rules yeah I probably will. I quite liked the powerful feeling of control you got from PHB counterspell, it was like playing a Blue deck in MTG. But I can see why you’ve written it this way so again thanks for the clarification.To be clear, the rule in Xanathar's has no effect on how counterspell functions.

— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) November 9, 2017

Sorry I think I’ve misunderstood. Previously my DM (or me if I were DMing) would announce which spell was being cast, then the PC would choose to use their reaction or not. Were we doing it wrong somehow? I’m willing to accept we were but I’ve never seen it played differently :/Your DM is choosing to be generous with information, which is the DM's prerogative.

— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) November 9, 2017

What if you use your reaction to identify it and communicate the spell to some one else who has their reaction left? That works.

— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) November 10, 2017

Along the same lines, I’m betting you have to guess. It creates interesting choices during combat, rather than mechanically optimal ones.You have to guess. Counterspell is extremely potent. Gambling on the outcome is an intended part of the spell's design.

— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) November 9, 2017

I don’t think that’s interesting, that just makes Counterspell pretty worthless at higher levels. There’s better things you can do with a sixth level spell slot than waste it counterspelling a second level spell because you’re playing a shell game with the DM and guessed wrong.If you don't have the stomach for the risk posed by counterspell, I do recommend avoiding it.

— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) November 9, 2017

Because the old way already worked without this headache. It’s a half-hearted attempted at nerfing counterspell, not an attempt to speed up gameplay. Call it what it is, we’re not idiots. The optional rule in Xanathar’s has no effect on how counterspell functions.

— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) November 10, 2017

It does though. I don’t know how you can say that unless you just aren’t thinking about the implications of how much worse it makes the spell.

Why would ever upcast it now? The optional rule in no way dictates how players and DMs describe spellcasting at their table. If your group always says what spell you're casting, ignore this rule. This option exists for the DM who wants a formalized way of identifying spells.

— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) November 10, 2017

Yeah I get that it’s an option. It’s just not one that alleviates slowdown at a table like you seem to suggest.

All you’ve done is add a passing-priority system to D&D in the same vein as Magic the Gathering. That’s what I don’t get. The intent. This rule isn't intended to speed up play. It's intended to give you a formalized way to identify spells. I did say that it's an action/reaction, rather than no action at all, because I didn't want it to lead to endless identification.

— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) November 10, 2017

By the rules, PCs know if they’ve been hit or not before they cast Shield.

They also know if someone has cast Magic Missile or not. So there isn’t even consistency between how Shield and Counterspell work when it comes to that spell. You are correct. Counterspell has never worked liked shield. Xanathar's Guide doesn't change that fact.

— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) November 10, 2017

Maybe you guys meant this to speed up combat but realistically this decision bogs down every combat, forever, regardless of whether anything even can counter a spell or not. Just…what a bizarre design decision. The optional rule has one purpose: giving people a way to identify a spell.

— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) November 10, 2017

@JeremyECrawford say a bard uses mantle of inspiration first in combat. Would this give all players 2 reactions in the first round?

— Chris Hawes (@wazeewa) November 14, 2017

Mantle of Inspiration doesn't increase the number of reactions a person can take. It follows the normal rule: once you take a reaction, you can't take another one until the start of your next turn. #DnD https://t.co/aJT1itn9Ez

— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) November 14, 2017

Right but does this allow for 2 reactions in the first round? One from the bard and the second after your turn? Basically my question is, can someone use a reaction BEFORE their first turn in combat?

— Chris Hawes (@wazeewa) November 14, 2017

No rule prevents you from taking a reaction before your first turn in a combat. #DnD https://t.co/pna5aZQPi4

— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) November 14, 2017

Only if you’re surprised, which explicitly says so as an exception to normal play. 🙂 Yes, a number of exceptions can deprive you of the ability to take reactions.

— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) November 14, 2017