Ignoring the abnormally high (and suspicious) rolled attributes, if the DM allows that, then go for it... although I will say that forgoing some of your armor proficiency for freely chosen feats is a very powerful trade-off (as a DM, I personally wouldn't allow it). If you want to forgo wearing heavy armor due to the time period, I recommend making a Barbarian instead. They fit the theme of a more primitive setting perfectly.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Did anybody actually see you roll those stats? 18/18/17/17/16/15 is ridiculously high. The probability of getting a total modifier (pre-racial) of +16 or better is 0.1%, and you've got a pre-racial total modifier of +19. The probability of rolling a 15 or better for all six stats is 0.016%, and when you further demand all those 17's and 18's, the probability falls further still. By my calculations, the probability of rolling the stats you rolled or strictly better is 0.00047%. In other words, it's borderline impossible.
Also, just take the Lore Warden archetype. It ditches the armor proficiencies for one extra feat (Combat Expertise, which you want) and a few other perks.
And if someone came to my table claiming to have rolled such implausible stats and then started asking me if they could have some extra bonus feats, they would be disinvited to my game.
EDIT: Note that 0.00047% is actually a generous estimate of the probability; I didn't bother running inclusion-exclusion so I double-counted a lot of cases with better rolls than you got. So your odds of rolling those attributes are even worse.
|
Did anybody actually see you roll those stats? 18/18/17/17/16/15 is ridiculously high. The probability of getting a total modifier (pre-racial) of +16 or better is 0.1%, and you've got a pre-racial total modifier of +19. The probability of rolling a 15 or better for all six stats is 0.016%, and when you further demand all those 17's and 18's, the probability falls further still. By my calculations, the probability of rolling the stats you rolled or strictly better is 0.00047%. In other words, it's borderline impossible.
Also, just take the Lore Warden archetype. It ditches the armor proficiencies for one extra feat (Combat Expertise, which you want) and a few other perks.
And if someone came to my table claiming to have rolled such implausible stats and then started asking me if they could have some extra bonus feats, they would be disinvited to my game.
EDIT: Note that 0.00047% is actually a generous estimate of the probability; I didn't bother running inclusion-exclusion so I double-counted a lot of cases with better rolls than you got. So your odds of rolling those attributes are even worse.
Awesome. Just awesome.
So you went down the line for scores, right? Or did you take an 18 Int over an 18 Str that would become a 20 w/racial mod? Heck, go wizard with an arcane-bonded club at this point, you'll be worth twice a kilted Celt Fighter to the party.
"Trading off" the armor proficiency for two freebies is kinda cheesy. Maybe one free feat for the armor feats; flavor aside, your stats themselves leave little to protect.
Did anybody actually see you roll those stats? 18/18/17/17/16/15 is ridiculously high. The probability of getting a total modifier (pre-racial) of +16 or better is 0.1%, and you've got a pre-racial total modifier of +19. The probability of rolling a 15 or better for all six stats is 0.016%, and when you further demand all those 17's and 18's, the probability falls further still. By my calculations, the probability of rolling the stats you rolled or strictly better is 0.00047%. In other words, it's borderline impossible.
Also, just take the Lore Warden archetype. It ditches the armor proficiencies for one extra feat (Combat Expertise, which you want) and a few other perks.
And if someone came to my table claiming to have rolled such implausible stats and then started asking me if they could have some extra bonus feats, they would be disinvited to my game.
EDIT: Note that 0.00047% is actually a generous estimate of the probability; I didn't bother running inclusion-exclusion so I double-counted a lot of cases with better rolls than you got. So your odds of rolling those attributes are even worse.
And the choir thus said AMEN! :D
Guys, why are you jumping on him for his stats? Maybe the DM has a high-powered campaign and they get a bunch of re-rolls. The OP came for advice on the fairness of trading armour proficiency for feats. I'm sure his GM can handle his stats.
On that topic, I think that trading two proficiency feats is worth 1 feat from the "mediocre feat" pile. Something like Combat expertise or Improved Unarmed Strike. Not Power attack or Two Weapon Fighting.
@Roberta Yang
for your probabilities, we can't just calculate the probability of that spread. To determine how plausible his stats are, you need to look at how may characters are rolled with this method, and how many of those people ask for advice on this forum.
I will make a very rough estimate of these things. I don't roll for stats anymore, but when I did, my group would average maybe 3 re-rolls per person. Depending on gaming group and how attached I am to my character, I end up making a character about once a month.
So, a group with six people in it will roll 18 sets of 4d6-drop stats. This already pushes your percentage to 0.00846%. And that's one group in one month. I'm pretty sure that thousands of people play PF, and they play for more than one month.
I'm not sure what reasonable numbers of players are, and I admit that the OP's stats are pretty spectacular, but they are not as impossible as you claim.
</devil's advocate>
Running the numbers again with less double counting puts the probability at more like 0.0003%. That's three in a million. That's tiny. Even allowing for rerolls and other party members, that's tiny.
But hey, Pathfinder's been around for four years, eventually somebody has to roll god stats. And maybe they'll show those stats in a forum post. But when they don't express the slightest surprise at their rolls and immediately start asking for extra feats that are clearly not balanced out by the sacrifice being made? That sets off mental alarm bells.
Even if by some miracle the OP did in fact roll those stats, whether anyone saw them rolled is still quite a pertinent question. Even if you really totally did roll those numbers on your first try in the privacy of your own room, showing up to the table with them and then asking for bonus feats might not be a wise idea - I'm not the only one who will raise eyebrows. The best reaction you can hope for is "You have stats like those and you want more!?"
And I maintain that Lore Warden does as much of what the OP wants as is reasonable.
That is quite a tiny percentage. :)
I second Lore Warden.
The last time I allowed rolling for stats a player rolled a 65 point build right in front of me using 4d6 arrange to taste on just 6 dice rolls.
On topic, I would say that the trade out would be okay since normally it is a feat to get one type of medium armor or one type of heavy armor and you are trading out the abilities entirely. However as suggested I might limit it to some of the non top line feats as having potentially 5 feats at 1st level is a lot. The feats you took look fine though, I would allow it.
I would also be careful trading out proficiencies 1 for 1 since a 1 level dip in cavalier or something gets them back at a very low cost.
|
So just thought I would chime in real quick. Just saw some people throwing around numbers and what not so I thought I would give you a more accurate probability.
Okay, so for 6d4 we have 1296 permutations of dice rolls. Now we have to determine how many permutations there are for a given number.
For 18 we have 21 permutations: {6, 6, 6, 6}, {5, 6, 6, 6}, ..., {6, 6, 6, 1}.
For 17 we have 54 permutations: To lazy to write.
For 16 we have 94 permutations: To lazy to write.
For 15 we have 131 permutations: To lazy to write.
Now the probability of getting an 18 in a 4d6b3 would be 21/1296 or roughly 1.6%. Which is a lot better then a 3d6 where the probability of this occurring is only 1/216 or roughly 0.46%.
The probability of getting a 17 in 4d6b3 is 54/1296 or roughly 4.2%
The probability of getting a 16 in 4d6b3 is 94/1296 or roughly 7.3%
The probability of getting a 15 in 4d6b3 is 131/1296 or roughly 10.1%
Therefore the probability of getting 16 or better for any given stat would be roughly 13.1%, not .1% as suggested above. In addition the probability of getting a 15 or better for all 6 stats would be (300/1296)^6 or roughly 0.015% close to 0.016% as suggested above.
Finally the probability of rolling exactly as the OP did would be [(21/1296)^2]*[(54/1296)^2]*(94/1296)*(131/1296) or roughly (3.34E-07)% not 0.00047 as suggested above. The true approximate number is actually much worse then the suggested number.
Remember it is important to count permutations rather then combinations in this case because {6, 6, 6, 1} is very different then {1, 6, 6, 6}. Because if you count both of those as one you give it the same weight as a result such as {3, 3, 3, 3}, which is not correct. One has 4 ways to occur while the other has only 1.
Note: This was an exercise in probability and I have no doubt in the OP's claim to have arrived at such numbers nor was it an attack on anyone that provided estimates. This was merely a chance to give the correct (aproximate) probabilities because I was bored. Given enough time anything is possible.