If you’ll take notice to the Kraken devotion it says it works with two handed melee or ranged weapons. This can be interpreted as working with one handed ranged weapons as well as allowing you to dual wield. This is not the case.
Take notice to primal strike from Shaman it works exactly the same as kraken but for some odd reason it says it only works with two handed melee weapons and two handed range weapons…
Whoever did the primal strike description should be the guy doing every description. That is all.
I can see your point, but I don’t agree with it, I myself don’t see any confusion.
“two handed melee or ranged weapons.” - The way that I read this is that “Two handed” applies to the next objects, which are melee or ranged weapons.
[Two handed] ( (melee) OR (ranged weapons) )
Could it be improved? Yeah, maybe something like “Works with any 2 handed weapon”. Simpler, smaller. I have only played about 10 hours so far, so I can’t say if there is any kind of 2H weapon that this wouldn’t be applied and thus would be wrong.
To say that it “works with two handed melee weapons and two handed range weapons” is just redundant IMO, and instead of being a better wording as you suggested, I think it is worse.
While that could be the case the current situation makes no sense regardless and is a lack of consistency on the developers part because I was quoting the game. That’s in the description of primal strike. It removes all confusion and when put side to side with other translations cause confusion. If primal strike didn’t differentiate between the two there would be no confusion.
It might be slightly ambiguous simply because it’s worded slightly differently in two different places, but the context clears it up nicely, and it’s grammatically correct both ways (again, due to context). If the Kraken constellation wording was misunderstood, I’d guess it was due to minimal experience or intelligence.
Edit: Would you rather see clearer skills or devotions?
If Crate offered you a free high-five or expansion pack, which would you choose?
Enough silliness, I made my point. I’m with you that they’re worded differently in different places, but it still makes sense with the slightest bit of attention paid.
It may be a slight “lack of consistency”, but you have to remember:
1 - they were probably done at very different times, it’s not like they did all the skills and constellations at once;
2 - there is no confusion, it is clear that you need a 2H weapon on both, you’re making trouble out of nothing;
3 - Primal strike does not differentiate between the two, it is at most redundant by repeating info that is expected/implied (if compared to Kraken).
There’s no need to describe the way Primal Strike does if it’s not different, as in both ranged/melee are “2 Handed”.
So, you have a suggestion here (;)), and maybe it’s easy and they change it for the better sometime, just maybe try looking at it from another angle too, such an insignificant thing to argue about when it’s not really a problem and they’ve got some important stuff to verify from the xpac.
Going to have to disagree because when currently read it implies it works with any ranged weapon when in fact it’s exclusively two-handed. Primal Strike specifically references this because the person who made that description knew there would be confusion. At the same time though because Primal Strike is extremely specific about what weapons can be used for it, it causes confusion and leads to people assuming that anything not exclusively tagged with “two-handed range weapon” is implying it works all range weapons, which it is. Grammatically correct be damned it is confusing and the person who made the description of Primal Strike understood that. Or maybe they didn’t because if they did they would’ve realized changing the way you describe things so late in the game would be confusing. As for context, the only context is it works with ranged weapons.
I would rather see better consistency across the board.
It is not “clear” it is assumed. There is differentiation in the text for primal strike, I suggest you reread it. The only thing Kraken says is it works with two handed melee or ranged weapons, it’s illogical to assume it only works with two handed specifically when put side to side with Primal Strike which differentiates between one handed and two handed.
It’s especially illogical to assume such a thing for the three attack enhancers at the top of Shaman’s tree as Primal Strike is in the same tree.
Zaveana, am I right to guess that english is not your mother language?
Because it is not for me, and if I were to write that description in my language and then translate it to english, I would see the confusion you are having, coming from another language and trying to “understand” it the way you would if it was in your own language.
But as the other user said, in the context of the game, in english, it is clear.
What I mean is that maybe you’re trying to look at it from another language’s perspective, and a language shapes the way we think, which may be the cause of your confusion, there are some amazing YouTube videos talking about it, it’s quite amazing.
I personally with OP. There should be no inconsistancies in GD . Why it is so hard for example clearly type ‘Default attack replacer’ in yellow font in the Fire strike, Savagery (etc.) descriptions? So many topics in this forum I’ve seen about this question. Just a small (really small) QoL improvement but would lower possible ambiguity. Look at Vindictive Flame description - it is all mess. No way for a new player to understand at first glance by reading it what procs 100% and when and what part of that skill is always on while this aura is active. It can be understood in the way that you have flat fire damage added to your skills as well. And there are many such ambiguous things in GD. Time to overhaul the descriptions and make it neat and more clear.
It is not clear. It can be understood as the devotion can be applied to ranged weapons as well - two-handed or one-handed alike. Even if it is clear to you doesn’t mean it is clear for all because it allows the ambiguity.