Nerf brand already

1. making something viable is not justification for it being unbalanced

2. Uhhh... what? I'm going to ignore that because not only did I not mention that but, I don't think the two are comparable so... yeah

3. Because assassins have a completely different playstyle, build, and role in the game. They also have completely different powerspikes, ability sets, and skill levels. Usually when you talk about balance in a game, there are examples that you can use as a metaphorical seesaw to represent how underpowered or how overpowered a certain thing is. Here, you are trying to use something that doesn't belong on the seesaw as a means to balance the game, which results in a false representation of the state of the game and its mechanics and whatnot. Why is this? Because assassins are meant to aim a singular target on the enemy team with a high risk/high reward gameplay: if you kill your target as an assassin, then your team will most likely have an overpowering lead in a fight. Brand on the other hand excels at teamfighting due to his AoE damage potential. Ironically, this is actually mentioned in the "countering" part of brands strategy on the wiki: "Assassins like Fizz, LeBlanc, Zed, and Talon are the most reliable way to get rid of Brand. However, they tend to have poor teamfighting presence, while Brand excels at teamfighting, especially if he gets protection from his allies." I gave you a much more applicable and representable example to show how Brands passive damage is too high ("The only other abilities comparable to brands passive are Gnars "Hyper" passive and Kalistas "Sentinal" passive...") as these are both passive abilities that deal % max hp damage. An assassin is an entire set of abilities, whereas brand passive is one ability, and so I compared it to other singular abilities that perform roughly the same function: to deal % max hp damage. That's why an assassin is too apples and oranges here as a point of debate, because the focus is on % max hp damage.

4. Extra damage because you land your abilities is fine; having brands damage when you land abilities is a bit over the top. Not to be rude, but you really aren't comprehending what I'm saying at all. "Why he is poorly designed is because he gets a lot of extra damage simply because he landed abilities, which is a pretty poor justification for the amount of damage that he deals." Clearly stated that the amount of damage he can apply for landing abilities is too high, not that dealing damage because you land your abilities is dumb.

5. "dealing 4% of their maximum health as magic damage over 4 seconds, stacking up to 3 times, for a maximum of 12% of their maximum health over the duration"

"All enemies struck are dealt 12% - 16% (based on level) 「 (+ 1.5% per 100 AP) 」 of their maximum health as magic damage" The bare minimum for a 3 ability combo at level 3 from his passive is 24% max hp in magic damage. Me typing the wrong number there, sorry. Point remains.

6. Again that's me not typing correctly. I'm meant to say: Now of course, other champions have >max< %hp damage, but they usually have it because it doesn't scale, OR it's on a champion who doesn't build lots of damage." Now of course there are exceptions to what I have stated: Fiora, Jayce, Urgot if you build him for damage, zed, vayne, Rhaast, Vi and aatrox. But even then none of the base damages for the % max hp abilities are as high as brands base damage on his passive. Which is what I'm trying to point out here. It is a really high base damage ability, let alone a passive ability.

7. Ok so im going to say this now, and im not going to repeat it. I think Brand should have a revert of his passive back to 2%, but I think he should have some work done to put him back into solo laning, whatever that may be. I understand that "Oh but damage is all he has!" but that's exactly the issue. He has too much of it, and too much of it in his passive instead of his other abilities, and he has too little of anything else. But we can't give him anything else before we give him a nerf, otherwise he's just going to be crazy powerful. So give him a nerf, take away from his passive, and give back to the rest of his kit, thus giving back his laning potential.

[{quoted}](name=Mr Meat,realm=OCE,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=MAgijO9p,comment-id=00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-06-27T12:16:19.010+0000)

1. making something viable is not justification for it being unbalanced

His own viability didn't change, ADCs just got nerfed.

3. Because assassins have a completely different playstyle, build, and role in the game. They also have completely different powerspikes, ability sets, and skill levels. Usually when you talk about balance in a game, there are examples that you can use as a metaphorical seesaw to represent how underpowered or how overpowered a certain thing is. Here, you are trying to use something that doesn't belong on the seesaw as a means to balance the game, which results in a false representation of the state of the game and its mechanics and whatnot. Why is this? Because assassins are meant to aim a singular target on the enemy team with a high risk/high reward gameplay: if you kill your target as an assassin, then your team will most likely have an overpowering lead in a fight. Brand on the other hand excels at teamfighting due to his AoE damage potential. Ironically, this is actually mentioned in the "countering" part of brands strategy on the wiki: "Assassins like Fizz, LeBlanc, Zed, and Talon are the most reliable way to get rid of Brand. However, they tend to have poor teamfighting presence, while Brand excels at teamfighting, especially if he gets protection from his allies." I gave you a much more applicable and representable example to show how Brands passive damage is too high ("The only other abilities comparable to brands passive are Gnars "Hyper" passive and Kalistas "Sentinal" passive...") as these are both passive abilities that deal % max hp damage. An assassin is an entire set of abilities, whereas brand passive is one ability, and so I compared it to other singular abilities that perform roughly the same function: to deal % max hp damage. That's why an assassin is too apples and oranges here as a point of debate, because the focus is on % max hp damage.

You aren't taking everything into consideration though, you are JUST looking at his passive then trying to justify another champion's kit as a whole, that isn't how it works. Yes, on a cut and dry comparison like that, yeah, he gets way too much damage, but there is more to consider then that. He is a great damage dealing teamfighter not just because of his passive, but because of just how much AoE damage he has, but loses SO many tools because of it that other champions do have.

4. Extra damage because you land your abilities is fine; having brands damage when you land abilities is a bit over the top. Not to be rude, but you really aren't comprehending what I'm saying at all. "Why he is poorly designed is because he gets a lot of extra damage simply because he landed abilities, which is a pretty poor justification for the amount of damage that he deals." Clearly stated that the amount of damage he can apply for landing abilities is too high, not that dealing damage because you land your abilities is dumb.

What I don't get is why this is ok for other champion whose passive gives them extra damage, some of which is maximum health damage mind you just like Brand's, but it isn't ok on Brand.

6. Again that's me not typing correctly. I'm meant to say: Now of course, other champions have >max< %hp damage, but they usually have it because it doesn't scale, OR it's on a champion who doesn't build lots of damage." Now of course there are exceptions to what I have stated: Fiora, Jayce, Urgot if you build him for damage, zed, vayne, Rhaast, Vi and aatrox. But even then none of the base damages for the % max hp abilities are as high as brands base damage on his passive. Which is what I'm trying to point out here. It is a really high base damage ability, let alone a passive ability.

Because they have other tools in their kit to make it so that if they also had that amount of damage, it would be broken. Unlike Fiora, Brand gets no sustain and no mobility, unlike Jayce, he gets no mobility and has less range, unlike Urgot, he gets no protection and no mobility, the list goes on. Their damage is LESS because they instead have more elsewhere in their kit.

7. Ok so im going to say this now, and im not going to repeat it. I think Brand should have a revert of his passive back to 2%, but I think he should have some work done to put him back into solo laning, whatever that may be. I understand that "Oh but damage is all he has!" but that's exactly the issue. He has too much of it, and too much of it in his passive instead of his other abilities, and he has too little of anything else. But we can't give him anything else before we give him a nerf, otherwise he's just going to be crazy powerful. So give him a nerf, take away from his passive, and give back to the rest of his kit, thus giving back his laning potential.

Then say that, no one else in this post is saying that, people are just saying "oh his damage is too high." without considering WHY his damage gets to be so high, what he is losing to have such high damage. I'm fine with his passive getting nerfed, but if they do, they HAVE to compensate him.