If this was Dungeons and Dragons, they would never allow a character like Yasuo or Ekko to be create

Mega Annie X·Sep 5, 2016·10 votes·5,031 views

Because they would be WAY OVER roll cap even with the best rolls in the game.

These guys have more "abilities" then some champions combined together.

yasuo has 1.crit double 2. auto shield 3. on hit short cd 3. aoe knock up 4. cdr from attack speed 5. no cooldown dashes 6. faster recharge on shield 7. wall that can easily be an ultimate 8. ultimate follow up 9. 50% bonus armor pen 10. extra damage per charge

37 Comments

Lost RSep 5, 20165 votes

You don't know anything about D&D rules, do you?

RalanrSep 5, 20162 votes

Shh. It's more funny this way.

JackMcSnipeyzSep 5, 20164 votes

But this isnt a D&D game, not even close, so, this thread is just another yasuo whine fest

ParoeSep 5, 20161 votes

{quoted}

But this isnt a D&D game, not even close, so, this thread is just another yasuo whine fest

to be fair, yasuo is far to powerful. In DnD, windwall would make him overpowered and in ekkos case... ekko would be untouchable, being able to move then attack or attack then move in addition to his normal move.

An ekko COMBINED with yasuo would be unstoppable without DM intervention, because yasuo just wind walls every round then dashes around until he can hasagi before moving back behind the windwall.

JackMcSnipeyzSep 5, 20161 votes

{quoted}

to be fair, yasuo is far to powerful. In DnD, windwall would make him overpowered and in ekkos case... ekko would be untouchable, being able to move then attack or attack then move in addition to his normal move.

An ekko COMBINED with yasuo would be unstoppable without DM intervention, because yasuo just wind walls every round then dashes around until he can hasagi before moving back behind the windwall.

But as i said, this isnt D&D. It's like saying yasuo would be OP in counter strike creating a windwall to block enemy fire while you shoot them. These complaints hold very little ground when you come up with these lame new ways to grind the same topic YASUO IS ANNOYING WE KNOW

JustMyBassCannonSep 5, 20164 votes

Do you even fucking play DnD?

Because I don't think you realize just how flexible the rules of DnD can be.

We're talking, "The Barbarian is wielding a boulder four times his size because his Strength mod is in the 30s, his average damage per attack is 50, and he gets three attacks in one round not including interrupts" tier bullshit.

We're talking, "The Magus just attacked three times and fired four Scorching Rays in one round, melting our final boss encounter in the first round at level 7" bullshit.

We're talking, "The Druid just summoned the fury of the storm, turned into a huge Tiger and proceeded to maul what was in his reach while lightning struck what ran away" bullshit.

All of these are doable by level 11 or earlier in DnD.

Do not. Compare. To DnD. LoL doesn't allow the kind of min/maxing that's allowed in tabletop.

RalanrSep 5, 20161 votes

Not to mention out of combat BS like stealing the sea.

Seriously, fantasy story villains have nothing compared to the sort of shit a player can do given the same resources in setting.

JustMyBassCannonSep 5, 20163 votes

"Our Barbarian has managed to 'kill' a greater deity three times, marry two Elder Dragons and now owns every distillery in this country." "...but he still can't read, can he?"

DnD in a nutshell.

ParoeSep 5, 20161 votes

{quoted}

"Our Barbarian has managed to 'kill' a greater deity three times, marry two Elder Dragons and now owns every distillery in this country." "...but he still can't read, can he?"

DnD in a nutshell.

those kinds of situations come about because the DM lets it happen. =/ I know a lot of DMs who keep their people within the realm of plausibility.

JustMyBassCannonSep 5, 20161 votes

While, yes, the DM has the final say, nobody likes a DM that actively blocks you from playing the game.

There's reasonable DM control, such as, "No, you can't have that at this level, I know just how hard that would throw the game balance and you aren't allowed to fuck up my entire campaign this early." The kind of DM that knows the player characters are going to be ridiculous and probably upset parts of his campaign, but stops one development from happening too early? Perfectly reasonable.

And then there's unreasonable control, such as making your players make new characters because their current ones don't perfectly fit his paradigm. Or pulling instakill bullshit because he says so after a player cleverly maneuvers past their obstacles.

Players are allowed to build their characters within whatever restrictions the DM allows. DM says no gun-based classes because low/no tech fantasy? Okay. DM says magic is rare and belongs to noble families? Sure. DM restricts certain feats because of campaign restrictions? That's fine.

DM says that your character retroactively can't build the way they are because he didn't think of how that one solution would solve his campaign? That is not okay, the DM is not supposed to create the characters for the players unless he's teaching them how the system works first.

DM says that the action you took, despite succeeding beyond any possible difficulties, fails? Very, horribly not okay. And before you start pulling some sort of bullshit example, I'm talking about actually, measurably succeeding, not just getting a lucky roll on something that's still impossible to do.

Tabletop at it's best is a story-building game between several players. The DM is not the writer; he is the background, he is the setting, he is all of the characters that the other players are not. He is the law of the world, but he is also bound by that law.

ParoeSep 5, 20161 votes

{quoted}

While, yes, the DM has the final say, nobody likes a DM that actively blocks you from playing the game.

There's reasonable DM control, such as, "No, you can't have that at this level, I know just how hard that would throw the game balance and you aren't allowed to fuck up my entire campaign this early." The kind of DM that knows the player characters are going to be ridiculous and probably upset parts of his campaign, but stops one development from happening too early? Perfectly reasonable.

And then there's unreasonable control, such as making your players make new characters because their current ones don't perfectly fit his paradigm. Or pulling instakill bullshit because he says so after a player cleverly maneuvers past their obstacles.

Players are allowed to build their characters within whatever restrictions the DM allows. DM says no gun-based classes because low/no tech fantasy? Okay. DM says magic is rare and belongs to noble families? Sure. DM restricts certain feats because of campaign restrictions? That's fine.

DM says that your character retroactively can't build the way they are because he didn't think of how that one solution would solve his campaign? That is not okay, the DM is not supposed to create the characters for the players unless he's teaching them how the system works first.

DM says that the action you took, despite succeeding beyond any possible difficulties, fails? Very, horribly not okay. And before you start pulling some sort of bullshit example, I'm talking about actually, measurably succeeding, not just getting a lucky roll on something that's still impossible to do.

Tabletop at it's best is a story-building game between several players. The DM is not the writer; he is the background, he is the setting, he is all of the characters that the other players are not. He is the law of the world, but he is also bound by that law.

but then theres people who build level 1 paladins and can somehow wrath of gods a shadow demon bigger than a castle. In tabletop roleplaying games, your creativity in the face of titanic odds should be what wins you the game. Not intrinsicly overpowered characters who rely on brute force. Working together with your pyromancer and hunter, a ratkin with tunnel should be able to tunnel through the floor and spread glittersand along the tunnel, which the pyromancer then melts to create a glass mirror, which the hunter helps set up so ALL the light from the pyromancers next fireball is channeled into a fire-lux cannon you built using teamwork to destroy the shadow.

In the case of a barbarian... you should never be overpowered enough to cleave a god in twain. With your allies, sure, assuming your allies have weakened or confused him enough that your attack would 'crit' and do something. There is no situation in which a balanced character, even a demi-god end-game legend barbarian, should ever one shot something extremely powerful without the aid of super magical weapons/tools. The DM should stop you and bring you back to reality when you try to do that then punish you in some way... such as whatever youre fighting smacking you down and kicking you out of battle for a few rounds.

RalanrSep 5, 20161 votes

This actually reminds me of what I think is the inherent problem of martial/non magic characters in these games.

Namely the lack of tools to be creative with.

Fighters (main example) are mainly just stat blocks. They get bigger numbers to do the same thing better. Casters however get a bunch of spells that allow them to do one thing or many things. In some editions this allowed them to do the fighter's job better at higher levels (hence why 3.5 wizards were 1st tier).

4e tried to solve this by making everything relatively equal, but it made the game not D&D. Melee characters that didn't use magic were finally on par with magic, but it also made magic a lot less special.

Why study the forces of the universe when swinging your sword will give the same result?

So the inherent weakness of class balance is utility bloat. Casters will always have more utility, while non casters only get so much because they have better stats. Now you'd think this is fair, but in reality it isn't because for some reason the creators are more than welcome to add new spells that do different things, but not new things for non magical players that aren't more stats.

In 5e they gave the fighter maneuvers, but have yet to release anymore. They gave the totem barbarian more spirits, but haven't really given them any other good subclass options (because level 3 bear totem is just too good).

These games are too set in their ways to actually lower the amount of utility. And people get all frustrated when fighters can suddenly do superhuman feats, claiming it ain't King Arthur enough (The Knights of the round table all actually had some funky powers. One of which was turning into a giant).

In the end, utility is king when in bed with creativity. Though you can still be creative outside of magic, it just requires more DM fiat.

BastionKrossSep 5, 20161 votes

This actually reminds me of what I think is the inherent problem of martial/non magic characters in these games.

Namely the lack of tools to be creative with.

They started to give martial classes different stuff to do other than swing their weapons around in combat with feats and items, but there's only so much a guy with a sword can do against someone who controls the power of the elements, affects the passage of time, and can summon dragons. Something tells me being able to sunder a weapon or throw down some caltrops won't make up for all that.

On the other hand, what are you gonna do? Feats are mostly things you can do in the realm of plausibility, but it would take some skill (firing multiple arrows at once, shrugging off the pain of mortal wounds for a couple minutes, knowing how to close the gap on a person with reach without getting nailed, etc.) Unfortunately the greatest athletes, sword fighters, and karate masters the world has ever seen have nothing on a guy that shoots fire from his hands. Bruce Lee isn't going to be much of a problem when you can snap your fingers and fill his lungs with water. Or acid.

Arcanum did the most admirable job of trying to fix this discrepancy between spellcasters and martial classes by having a mechanical vs arcane system. The more mechanically inclined a character was, the greater the chance that spells just didn't affect them. Throw a fireball at a guy who knows some sort of science and it would probably harmlessly fizzle into nothing because the laws of physics are stronger near those who are mechanically inclined.

Now, the martial classes are almost forced into taking non-magic utility skills like chemistry, smithing, working with electricity or gears, and explosives. Sure you may swing a sword around, but you're also an expert in several fields of scientific study, to the point where you've outfitted your metal gauntlets with batteries so they act like a taser. Or maybe you've gone all Tony Stark and have powered armor. Perhaps you make your own nerve gas grenades or build flashlights to illuminate dungeons. In Arcanum, fighters are less Conan and more Batman. They got the gadgets; gives martial classes more agency than simply being a ball of stats that swings a sword all fight.

JustMyBassCannonSep 5, 20161 votes

{quoted}

In the case of a barbarian... you should never be overpowered enough to cleave a god in twain.

Tell that to the guy whose Barbarian, a Suli named Short Bus, could four-round incapacitate The Tarrasque.

He wasn't even level 20. I think he was level 14 at the time.

He built the character, got the right powers and equipment, and then he and the DM basically did a test-drive fake battle between the Barbarian and The Tarrasque.

Short Bus could basically kill The Tarrasque if it was mortal.

ParoeSep 5, 20161 votes

{quoted}

Tell that to the guy whose Barbarian, a Suli named Short Bus, could four-round incapacitate The Tarrasque.

He wasn't even level 20.

If i were that DM, i would have bitch smacked the guy out of the fight for awhile. And this is coming from a guy whose most successful character is a 1 intelligence 20 strength orc named ork who wields a lucerne and dual war hammers and has fought his way out of a skywhales tummy (and almost fell to his death.... but the point is i never just bonked a god till they died!)

JustMyBassCannonSep 5, 20161 votes

You...seem to forget that killing a god is still impossible in the system.

Deity status is literally not possible to kill.

The character, following the rules, could fight a demi-god monster, world-devouring demon, and even incapacitate it within a few rounds, but nobody can actually kill it.

But either you've forgotten how fantasy works, or you're just shit at understanding DMing.

ParoeSep 5, 20161 votes

{quoted}

You...seem to forget that killing a god is still impossible in the system.

Deity status is literally not possible to kill.

The character, following the rules, could fight a demi-god monster, world-devouring demon, and even incapacitate it within a few rounds, but nobody can actually kill it.

But either you've forgotten how fantasy works, or you're just shit at understanding DMing.

For the purposes of story, its the same thing o.O you dont fight and incapacitate something for it to just come back later. You dont 1v1 a raidboss. You can try, but im still going to smack you down and punish you for it.

JustMyBassCannonSep 6, 20162 votes

If a player character broke no rules and managed to pull off a god-defying feat, you don't act like the player doesn't deserve to have pulled it off.

You still have the game's rules. You can still come up with a way to make them pay, if you're so vindictive about it.

And if it just happens to be Old Man Henderson or Pun Pun, you should have the foresight to see that coming and shut it down before it's a problem. There's a reason DMs tell each other about actual, unstoppable, rule-following bullshit.

A player can have one trick up his sleeve. The DM has all of them. That's how it works.

Critmaster GarenSep 5, 20161 votes

{quoted}

"Our Barbarian has managed to 'kill' a greater deity three times, marry two Elder Dragons and now owns every distillery in this country." "...but he still can't read, can he?"

DnD in a nutshell.

well. for none of those it is necessary to read.

JustMyBassCannonSep 5, 20161 votes

"Kor no need read. Kor have smart friend read for him, and help him know what words on tree slice mean."

"Some say Kor need keep dragons from village, but they are wifes. Can't have wifes live away from Kor."

"Some are kings, want Kor to stop angry Kovu from walking on village. Kor pick up Kovu and move it far away."

JIDF OperativeSep 5, 20163 votes

Every champion would not be allowed to be created in D&D, since all of them would get at least 3 attacks per turn to an upwards of over 20 (kog naw). All champions in league are basically on mythic levels due to how strong they are

ZT XperimentorSep 5, 20162 votes

Haven't played d&d huh? At level 20 most characters easily get to attack 5 times a round.

RalanrSep 5, 20162 votes

In 3.5 or Pathfinder. In 5e the fighter is the only one close with 4 to 8 attacks per round.

ProfDrDeathSep 5, 20163 votes

Screw 4 and up. 3.5 forever and always.

RalanrSep 5, 20162 votes

I personally like 5e because martials aren't incredibly far behind mages in the higher levels (thank god for concentration). I never played 4e. I bought the books but never played.

You're free to your opinion though.

ProfDrDeathSep 5, 20163 votes

Well, linear fighters/quadratic wizards was on full effect in 3.5, true.

However, that is not something you cannot work around with creative house roules (after all, the rules-as-written are always only there to give a framework, and the only thing limiting your fun is your phantasy).

For example, I never played a round in which we did not change the rules for skill points in a way for fighters, barbarians and other combatants to bring a lot more in the way of abilities. Our DM "encouraged" (read: forced) us to branch out of pure min/maxing with those extra points, too.

EDIT: Another house rule set concerned spellcasters, especially Sorcerers and Wizards:

For preparing spellcasters, we seperated the "number of spells prepared" from "spell slots". For example, a level 4 wizard would have 3 spell slots for 1st-level spells. He could prepare three different spells, for example Magic Missle, Mage Armor and Endure Elements. However, instead of being able to cast each spell once, he'd be able to cast any combination of the three 1st-level spells, for example Endure Elements once and Mage Armor twice.
To limit this increased flexibility, the number spells prepared was eventually reduced to be less than the number of spell slots. Once we used the next rule, the number of spells prepared was eventually reduced to 1+highest level wizard could cast - spell level.
Spells prepared would be those spells the caster knew how to cast by heart. A caster could also choose to employ a spellbook to cast a spell inscribed in it, but this would increase the casting time by (level of spell/2) times.
Sorcerers would be compensated by getting 5 free Heritage feats, at levels 1, 5, 9, 13 and 17. Essentially embracing the concept of them being descended from powerful non-humanoid beings.

ZT XperimentorSep 5, 20161 votes

Every campaign I played (whether I was a player or DM) we had some house rules as well; though more relating to the vaguely described class abilities or to change out class abilities. Regarding spellcasters we used a similar setup like your third point, but that was all we used as a difference for the wizard having access to more spells (we often used more than the core 3.5 books), though I like the first point you told too. Though I found the psionics easier to work out, most everyone else didn't want to micromanage points . . . which just made me facepalm considering that their frequently rigid format of sticking to spell slots.

RalanrSep 5, 20162 votes

Actually I think Yasuo could be played as an air elemental bloodrager in pathfinder.

JustMyBassCannonSep 5, 20161 votes

Exotic proficiency in katanas (iirc, it was an exotic weapon to wield one-handed), grab spells like Wind Wall, Windy Escape and Dimension Door, make the rest of your spells weapon buffers and mobility...

Yup, added to the list of character concepts. Thanks!

RalanrSep 5, 20163 votes

In D&D you'd be allowed to make much worse.

Do not challenge min/maxers.

ProfDrDeathSep 5, 20162 votes

If this was D&D, this would happen to Yasuo:

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DroppedABridgeOnHim

If not this: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RocksFallEveryoneDies

Brutalitops01Sep 5, 20162 votes

You wanna know what Yasuo has that makes him broken right now? First, the past few bug fixes that he got were HUGE buffs for him. Second, he has a bug in his kit right now where his ultimate will, about 70% of the time, automatically autoattack as it ends, dealing a significant amount of bonus damage that he shouldn't have. He needs to have a few things toned back now that the bugs that kept him weak have been fixed and he needs to have this bug fixed.

But, if you think that Wind Wall could easily be an ultimate, I'll ask you what you are smoking. Wind Wall just blocks ranged attacks. Now, I'm an ADC main, and I'll admit that Wind Wall is super annoying to play against as Twitch because if you move to avoid it, you die and if you let it block you, you deal no damage. But it's also a 20 second cooldown. If you reposition yourself to the side or if you just let it fade, it becomes a useless ability entirely. Most Yasuo W's will only be used reactively to block a single ability that would otherwise kill him. It is his outplay tool, and it sounds to me like you just got outplayed by it a bit too much because you don't know how to play against it. Educate yourself before you make a post complaining about balance. I'll admit he's too strong, a high skill cap champion should never have a 55% average win rate, but he's got counterplay that people need to learn. Yes, he does need nerfs because of the bug fixes that he got, and yes, he has a bug that's also contributing to his win rate being too high. But for now, you can always just ban him out.

Papa SlothySep 6, 20162 votes

dungeons and dragons isn't league of legends

zlumpySep 5, 20161 votes

Only experience I had similar to D&D was the Neverwinter nights games based on the D&D model. I think Yas would work quite well in those games maybe not the classic pen and paper world though. I mean having a monk with 6+ attacks a turn, super speed, and a splash of rogue/shadow dancer prestige class basically made you a dota Riki on steroids :P

Critmaster GarenSep 5, 20161 votes

on the other hand, in dungeons and dragons, dual wielding fighters get up to twice the amount of attacks and way more damage than bow fighters.

and missile weapons get attack penalties in melee.

RalanrSep 5, 20161 votes

Except in 5e. Two weapon fighting loses out on DPS in the double digit levels.