Charlaquin
Goblin Queen (She/Her/Hers)
Yes, Crawford does often give terrible rulings over Twitter. If you’re more interested in following his rulings than in insuring there are compelling reasons to use different weapons, that’s your choice.This is not unique to versatile weapons. As clarified in this Crawford tweet, proper two-handed weapons, such as the greatsword or maul, can also be used in this fashion.
https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford...ww.sageadvice.eu/2017/03/02/2-weapon-casting/
I happen to agree with his rulings on this matter, but that doesn’t mean you can’t use slings and hand crossbows effectively with another weapon in the other hand.There are several Crawford tweets on point detailing that, while weapons like hand crossbows and slings may make attacks one-handed, they still require two hands to feed ammunition into the weapon. As such, I'd dispute the notion that you could use these weapons effectively with a melee weapon in your other hand.
https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford...u/2015/08/22/can-you-load-two-hand-crossbows/
1. Sheathe your melee weapon with your free object interaction for the turn.
2. Load your ranged weapon as part of your attack with it (as per the loading property, this does not take up your one free object interaction for the turn).
3. Use your action to attack with your ranged weapon with one hand.
4. If you want to attack with your melee weapon, you’ll need to do it on another turn anyway, since you can only take one action per turn. In that case, use your free object interaction to unsheathe it as part of the attack.
Basically, you can’t dual-wield with one of the weapons being a one-handed ranged weapon, but you can use a one-handed ranged weapon and a one-handed melee weapon in such a way as to be able to use either one each turn without having to waste any actions to draw one after stowing the other.
Sure, and I don’t disagree that by RAW there’s is little to no reason not to use the most damaging option available to you. I was just answering what the RAW reasons might be.Presumably, the OP was interested in reasoning for why someone would choose one over the other when they have a meaningful choice between the two, not when exigent circumstances meant that one wasn't really a choice.