Thoughts on Death's Dance

StoryDuck··1 votes·573 views

item 3812 Seems to be a pretty hot topic at this moment and fro good reason because it is too strong at this time. People can't even seem to agree if it is providing 30% damage reduction or not. I thought I would just share my thoughts on this item and why I think it is too strong and levy my opinion on whether it is damage reduction or not.

Is it Damage Reduction?

Let's tackle the Damage reduction debate first. Yes it provides 30% damage reduction, for 1 second. Then it provides 20% damage reduction for 1 second, and lastly 10% reduction for 1 second. The term people are looking for is Damage Conversion and it is a mechanic that has been used in many games before LOL. Turning instant damage into bleed damage is still a type of damage reduction it just isn't a permanent form of damage reduction. This type of mechanic has been used many times and often it is placed in the hands of healers and tanks on other games. In a game like LOL the design space of this is to provide durability so that players can last longer and not get bursted down within 1-3 seconds. 1-3 seconds is a LONG time in a team fight for LOL and will often buy you enough time for your allies to help you or for you to help yourself. I think this is a healthy mechanic and it should stay if not get built upon as too many team fights end in under 3 seconds.

What is the Problem?

That doesn't mean Death's Dance is a balanced item. It has a major flaw that allows it to be TOO powerful. It provides self-sustain. The big issue with Death's Dance is that it allows an AD champion to both reduce damage and heal. This item is already blessed with a powerful form of damage reduction and although it doesn't last that draw back is effectively negated by adding in self-healing into the item. Taking 30% damage over 3 seconds isn't something to worry about when you also gain huge amounts of health over 3 seconds. This item has built in a counter to the draw back of the bleed effect and that is just bad design. Why add in such a cool item mechanic only to negate it's drawback effects with the same item? The item has too much synergy with itself when you should have to buy an item to counter it's flaw.

A Solution?

To fix Death's Dance, I feel they should remove the lifesteal but lower the cost so that it isn't such an overpowering first item buy. I think the total physical damage lifesteal should be moved to The Bloodthirster making the items a pair that work well together. I think this would still preserve the item as a durability AD item but stop it from being such an oppressive first item power spike.

21 Comments

oSEXYPLATYPUSo2 votes

it dont reduce damage ... you still take the damage

StoryDuck1 votes

Yes it does. If only temporarily reducing the damage it sill reduces it. You take 30% less damage for a moment. Then that changes to 20% damage reduced then 10% and then it's gone. Taking the damage later is just how it works. It's not permanent damage reduction it's temporary. Who said damage reduction had to be permanent? If I rewrote the ability to read:

Random Item Random item gives you 30% damage reduction. Damage reduced by Random Item is dealt to you 3 seconds later.

Would you still feel the same?

oSEXYPLATYPUSo2 votes

YOU STILL TAKE ALL THE DAMAGE THEREFORE ITS NOT REDUCED

StoryDuck1 votes

Damage is still reduced for 3 seconds so it's reduced, whether it is applied later or not is irrelevant because it reduces the damage for a time. What is so hard to understand about this? Why can you not accept that damage reduction can be temporary? I'm not saying the damage changes, I'm not saying the damage goes away. I am fully aware that you still take 100% damage. You just take reduced damage for 3 seconds that's all.

I challenge you to find somewhere that it say "Reduced damage can never be temporary" or "Reduced damage cannot be reapplied over time."

oSEXYPLATYPUSo1 votes

its not reduce u still take full damage the different is its applied as a bleed effect

it does not say it reduces damage any where in the item

StoryDuck1 votes

So...your logic is "Because its not in the text that's not how it works" That is some pretty limited logic. You're right I can't argue that they never once used the words "Reduce Damage". The way they say it is far more elegant and takes up less text while still conveying an easily understood mechanic. If they wrote it "30% damage taken is reduced and then the champions takes the reduced damage over 3 seconds." would be confusing and more cluttered. It's still the same thing either way.

oSEXYPLATYPUSo1 votes

no cuz u arent taking any less damage

how is that so damn hard to understand

you still take 100% of the damage... just part of it as a bleed effect over 3 seconds ( which is a DOT effect)

at no point do u take less damage

StoryDuck1 votes

at no point do u take less damage

When you first take damage you take 70% damage and then over 3 seconds you take the remaining 30%. At the POINT you take damage you have 30% damage reduction. You do not take 100 damage from an auto attack that just hit you. You take 70 and over 3 seconds you take 30 damage.

Are you saying you take the full 100 damage the moment a 100 ad auto attack hits you? Because you are wrong if you do. You take 70 damage. Then you take 30 over 3 seconds. Simple math tells you you have 30% damage reduction at that time. Here let me show you:

Champ A hit by Champ B AA

Champ B deals 100 damage at 5:37.

Champ A has DD they take 70 damage at 5:37. (they have taken 30% less damage at this time)

1 second passes they have now taken 10 more damage for a total of 80 at 5:38. (they have taken 20% less damage at this time)

1 second passes they have now taken 10 more damage for a total of 90 at 5:39. (they have taken 10% less damage at this time)

1 second passes they have now taken 10 more damage for a total of 100 at 5:40. (they have taken full damage at this time)

oSEXYPLATYPUSo1 votes

YOU STILL TAKE THE DAMAGE

ITS NOT LIKE THE DAMAGE GOES AWAY MAGICALLY

StoryDuck1 votes

The damage didn't go away magically. It was just changed into a bleed effect that lasts 3 seconds so that the player can survive by taking 30% reduced damage up front and have a chance to react by doing things like casting heal or having an ally shield them or in Draven's case use 3 Auto attacks to go back to full health :P (obviously being silly with the last one don't take it seriously ^_^)

Ben SwoIo2 votes

He's not saying it's completely reduced, just reduced over the time the passive is in effect. So instead of taking a flat 100 damage on the spot, you take it in small chunks totaling up to 100 which would allow someone to heal through.

IronwallJackson2 votes

I don't think anyone without built-in sustain or at least a shield would want Death's Dance without its lifesteal, or else champions who've already invested in a lifesteal item before the DD purchase. You'd see it turned into a simple stat-stick with a niche passive, hardly much better than warrior enchant.

StoryDuck2 votes

Well...considering the champions that already buy this that would mean that champions like Riven, Illoai, and Draius can all still first buy DD but now they don't gain insane lifesteal with just this as the first item. They still have their kits with built in sustain and shields. You see, the problem is that it granted too much as a first item. Draven can still buy this too but not as a first item, now it will be a second after The Bloodthirster retaining his identity as a semi-durable life-stealing AA machine. What champion that already buys this couldn't still use it?

IronwallJackson1 votes

In simple terms, it's not who can still use it, it's why would anyone want to? It doesn't matter all that much whether New Death's Dance is gold efficient, it wouldn't be slot efficient. Warrior Enchant+Bleed simply isn't worth an item slot when compared to its peers. It wouldn't do enough to justify its purchase.

If you need AD+antiburst then either item 3053 or your item 3072 outclasses your item 3812 almost every time.

NOTE: Edited for clarity.

StoryDuck1 votes

I think you are seriously underestimating what converting 30% of damage to a bleed effect will do. I hear what you are saying but this effect is incredably powerful. Some people might not think so but I've played enough games with this mechanic to know how powerful it is. Honestly, if you just want it to be expensive and still function as intended they could keep the cost but trade out lifesteal for health, armor or shift it to 40/50% to bleed effect. The only thing it can't have is lifesteal though.

crzymdscntst2 votes

It's unhealthy because it's paired with lifesteal. 30% damage delay means you can compensate over that delay to hopefully shield, heal or lifesteal back otherwise killing damage. Innately, the delay should be powerful in itself, but the compensation of the lifesteal is what really toxifies the overall effect.

Junction this with items like Maw and you get a multi-shield hyper-heal combo. Extra shield, extra lifesteal when low, etc... the effect compounds and moreso scales off potential dps. Which means you have defensive stats for Marksman and Juggernauts (who also can abuse these items) that scale off dps. Defense that scales off dps. This is about as toxic as DPS that scales off defense. It's why Vlad has been a serious issue for balance, his pool and %dps increase have their own edge, but neither quite is an issue in itself so much as the fact that he gets health and gains dps.

It's why spellvamp was ditched. 30% spellvamp on a 1k damage nuke? That turns that nuke into a 300 hp heal.

Lifesteal is not innately broken, neither is spellvamp really, but neither is really compensatory for the idea that they are defensive stats.

StoryDuck1 votes

It's unhealthy because it's paired with lifesteal. 30% damage delay means you can compensate over that delay to hopefully shield, heal or lifesteal back otherwise killing damage. Innately, the delay should be powerful in itself, but the compensation of the lifesteal is what really toxifies the overall effect.

Yep, that's what I said.

Junction this with items like Maw and you get a multi-shield hyper-heal combo. Extra shield, extra lifesteal when low, etc... the effect compounds and moreso scales off potential dps.

I don't have a problem with durability on AD champions but I do have a problem with AD champions becoming tanky with sustain with 1 item and still building tons of crit and AS with lots of AD to boot. If they had to give up AS or crit to gain sustain and tanky that would be okay but they don't because DD is too loaded just as you and I say.

Ben SwoIo2 votes

They should just disable the stupid item. Gets old watching people pick Draven / Riven / Fiora / whoever and rush it for the easy cheese. item 3812 coupled with item 3047 on Draven is a complete joke.

StoryDuck1 votes

If they removed the lifesteal those picks wouldn't be getting such a huge buff when they finish this item. Draven in particular wouldn't be getting insane amounts of lifesteal from it which would leave him vulnerable to dying from damage even if he won the fight. It would be on par with The Bloodletter except he's more likely to die after a fight, he might get the kill first but he will likely bleed out after if the opponent played it correctly.

Ben SwoIo2 votes

I agree. I only say to disable this item since they haven't come to an agreement on how to fix it. It's been a problem lately, why not just disable it for the time being so people could stop cheesing Death's Dance builds? It would also stop people from thinking champs like Draven are op. I still believe he's not op, just seems like it because of stupid item 3812 paired with item 3047 .

StoryDuck1 votes

Ah, I could get behind that. The item is certainly unhealthy in its current form so a temp disable would be great. I also agree that draven isn't the best ADC at least until DD became so OP on him. Now...I've had games where he mitigated more self damage then the top lane tanks in the game and healed insane amounts too boot.

More from Gameplay

More by StoryDuck