Idea: If you want to counter jungle, you should be forced to take Poacher's Knife

Anisoptera··2 votes·586 views

Here's an idea I had about Poacher's Knife. As it stands, it gets overshadowed by the other options in pretty much every way. It doesn't make counterjungling with the item worth buying so strong early junglers can just shit all over the weak junglers, specifically the abusers of Stalkers Blade (Warrior).

Obviously, the item will need some buffs.

But what could be done is have enemy camps prevented from being smited until 20 minutes, maybe even the entire game, unless you possess the counterjungling item. Spells and basic attacks will do 50% less damage against enemy camps without Poacher's Knife.

The bonuses could be that Red and Blue last 40% longer. Gromp can have a slightly higher DPS. Crimson Raptor could have a longer ward sweep time and a range increase. Krugs gives you pre-nerf Krugs stuns, where it takes less hits to proc the stun again. Wolves will send two spirits out that follow enemies in their own jungle and slow nearby enemies by 10% until they expire. The buff will last 50% longer.

Any comments by a Rioter to provide some context on counterjungling and Poacher's Knife would be greatly appreciated. All discussion welcome.

EDIT: So a few mindless down votes without providing arguments. Hate the reddit-stye boards. RIP forums. A solution could be to just buff while smite so it provides more.

6 Comments

Ixoziel6 votes

I don't think you should be forced to have that just to counterjungle. It's already bad enough that you're forced to take smite if you want any jungle items. Restricting choice just dumbs the game down. Making smite not work against enemy camps is silly when many people steal the buffs early. It would make it nearly impossible if the enemy jungle is aware of it (he can just run up and smite and you can't do anything).

Just buff the item. It needs to offer something to fight the enemy champion in the jungle, or it will almost always be worse than the other options. When you're counter-jungling, after all, you usually have to deal with them at some point. Even if you're just trying to steal the camps, blasting is better because it lets you clear faster. What if it stole a small portion of the monster's damage or health?

Anisoptera1 votes

I don't think it restricts choice at all. It provides a more rewarding gameplay style for counter-junglers. It also prevents champions like Lee Sin being as oppressive.

Being "forced" to take smite is not a problem. It creates distinction between junglers and laners. It also enforces the jungler role. The bonuses that smite items provide are for junglers and mean that laners cannot abuse it. The jungle is better than it has been in any other season. Making smite a necessary jungle spell is no issue. Most people would probably agree.

What DOES restrict choice is Riot nerfing Stalkers Blade instead of Lee Sin/Jarvan IV/Vi, so now Assassin junglers like Rengar, Khazix and Nocturne who relied on the blue smite for the extra CC have a harder time. Nocturne got shoved into a bruiser/tank role after season 4. Choice restriction also occurred when Riot added a cost to swapping the smite item, so that you couldn't start pink smite then switch to blue.

Junkο2 votes

RIP Shaco

Akeydel1 votes

I wish i could upvote this more than once.

Ipols1 votes

I like the idea, in my opinion you should not recive better buffs or do more damage, but poacher's knife should be the only one able to smite enemies' camps.

Any comments by a Rioter would be greatly appreciated.

p.s. you should be happy with a discussion with mortals, too

Anisoptera1 votes

Glad you think the same. I thought people would want better buffs, but deep down I would prefer no extra buffs and simply demand that counterjungling requires White smite

More from Gameplay

More by Anisoptera