Whats with the Epic Boon naming convention? Why not just go with Epic? Epic combat prowess, Epic luck, Epic peerless aim, etc...
Yep been my houserule for years, and the paladin is still PLENTY powerful, never looked back.We can start the bet that paladin will be able to smite only on attack action, and maybe only once per turn!
I feel like it should be prof bonus instead.Just noticed that the feat form of Protection Fighting Style gives -2 to an attack instead of imposing disadvantage, which seems like a pretty significant nerf. It does have the advantage that it's triggered after the attack roll and can thus be saved until it will change the outcome, but I'm not sure that's enough to compensate.
I suppose the new version makes sense in that +2 is the normal shield bonus to AC, but it seems a lot more fiddly than the 2014 version, especially since it turns the "to hit" calculation into a 3 person affair. And it doesn't solve the original version's issue of scaling poorly with high levels/multiple attacks, except insofar as having fewer opportunities to actually work makes it less likely to be used up.
Whats with the Epic Boon naming convention? Why not just go with Epic? Epic combat prowess, Epic luck, Epic peerless aim, etc...
Just noticed that the feat form of Protection Fighting Style gives -2 to an attack instead of imposing disadvantage, which seems like a pretty significant nerf. It does have the advantage that it's triggered after the attack roll and can thus be saved until it will change the outcome, but I'm not sure that's enough to compensate.
I suppose the new version makes sense in that +2 is the normal shield bonus to AC, but it seems a lot more fiddly than the 2014 version, especially since it turns the "to hit" calculation into a 3 person affair. And it doesn't solve the original version's issue of scaling poorly with high levels/multiple attacks, except insofar as having fewer opportunities to actually work makes it less likely to be used up.