Also I dont see why Staff gets a special exception while others weapons don't.
As @Feldor alluded to, it’s likely to encourage the idea that staves are a spellcaster weapon (not just wizards, but often found in the hands of druids, priests, etc). I suspect that’s also why staves are limited in how you can attack with them (oh man, I’d make a staff fighter in a heartbeat if I could use a thrusting staff with no grip limits).
Fantasy, bud.
I guess I want to know if this is still around because it has always been that way? Or if there is a specific reason to keep it this way?
This seems like a good time to revisit and question this rule that has been around for 20+ years.
Also I dont see why Staff gets a special exception while others weapons don't.
Maybe you are just guessing.
Hiya folks!
In this case, it's a combination of thematic and safety reasons. As to the safety question: both Bows and Staves clearly state that they must be wielded in a central section, which helps balance out where the rest of the weapon might go when it's hit. Other two handed weapons do not. For example, while one person might hold a Polearm in the middle to block one-handed, others might hold it all the way down next to the pommel - and if someone hits it hard at the far end it is more difficult to control than what we consider the "Alliance safety threshold". This might be different in other games, just like other safety requirements; that's fine for them, but we have safety concerns about allowing it in Alliance.
-Bryan Gregory
ARC