They're different skillines.

Would you really prefer they renamed it to "Two-Handed Non-Magical Weapons" just because someone wants to split hairs about wording when the whole thing is perfectly understandable in context?

depravity_influence wrote: »

Raisin wrote: »

They're different skillines.

Would you really prefer they renamed it to "Two-Handed Non-Magical Weapons" just because someone wants to split hairs about wording when the whole thing is perfectly understandable in context?

Cross skills yo. Give me extra power for my staves. I completely understand the different skill lines thing I just find it strange that a stave is considered a 2H but yet a 2H passive doesnt work for it.

The passives for the different skill lines are laid out the way they are for a reason. Now I won't comment on ZOS' ability to properly balance anything, but I personally think the concept that different weapons inherently have different strengths and weaknesses is important. I get why you may think switching the pasdives around would be cool, bit I don't think it would be healthy for ESO's combat.

But that is the point I'm making. You can use common sense to understand what Two-Handed weapons means in this context. Blunt & Blade, if you will. We both can understand that Greatswords, Mauls and Battle Axes fit into the same category, while Staves and Bows do not -- you get me? It's just a matter of going into the semantics of their choice of wording in labelling that category. I think you may be overthinking the issue.