Kalista Oathsworn without permission is wrong.

FUBARbarian·Feb 1, 2015·51 votes·11,082 views

This is really getting out of hand. I love this game, the people and community but the way Kalista can make you her oathsworn without your permission is wrong. This is a bigger issue this week because she is free to play. It seems that people who've purchased her ask before making you their oathsworn but that isn't the case when she's free to play. I will not be made to be enslaved by another champion to be used as they see fit. I don't care about the benefits or the damage I can do, I will not give control of my gameplay to someone else. This is wrong on so many levels that this post will be an endless rant if I go any further. I'm at a point where I want to quit playing because it's happening multiple times a day now. RIOT: MAKE THE OATHSWORN ACCEPT THE POSTITION!!!! Without my acceptance, it should not be allowed...PERIOD!!

82 Comments

lxlLilybellelxlFeb 1, 20157 votes

The oath sworn is supposed to be able to accept or deny Kalista's pact by not picking up the spear. HOWEVER I've noticed i often just don't get a choice. I think any champion being able to control another is a mechanic that should not be in the game. It does not feel good to lose control of your champion and that is a mechanic Riot swore they would never add to the game because it doesn't "feel good".

If i play Kalista the ONLY time i ult is to save someone, and if i notice (or they tell me) they don't mind initiating i will use my ult to do so. But it is so disorienting losing control. Especially when you're busy paying attention and focused on what you're doing when Kalista suddenly hits R That's the end of that. It's hard to re-acclimate yourself afterwards.

FUBARbarianFeb 1, 20153 votes

I agree with your points on this but I have NEVER picked up her spear. Twice today I was enslaved to be her Oathsworn!!

GaleWinUnleashedFeb 1, 20155 votes

Currently, there's no denying that little spear. Once she throws it out, you're doomed to be Oathsworn, whether you click on it or not.

nogglebeakFeb 23, 20151 votes

if you only ult to save people you're pissing away her ult.

MikauFeb 1, 20156 votes

it's really annoying when she decides to oathsworn someone across the map (and not the support/jungle) and then randomly ults when you're trying to kill someone simply because the icon lit up. -.-

I was busy, stop it, I didn't ask for this at all.

FUBARbarianFeb 1, 20154 votes

Exactly!! I have had it completely ruin my game when, on multiple occasions, Kalista tries to ult and I am killed because I clicked to use my spell and it responded to her Ult instead. It has completely ruined these matches but I was thankful they weren't ranked ones.

MikauFeb 1, 20156 votes

I'd prefer giving permission because it means I'll at least know I was the one to tell her "Sure, ult me in if you think you should."

When they complain if I click the other way... Blegh. Sorry, but I'm trying to live, not give you an unsuccessful kill.

Luckily I use smartcast so I only have to click QWER and won't be in your situation, lol.

High5Feb 2, 20151 votes

{quoted}

Exactly!! I have had it completely ruin my game when, on multiple occasions, Kalista tries to ult and I am killed because I clicked to use my spell and it responded to her Ult instead. It has completely ruined these matches but I was thankful they weren't ranked ones.

So, the champion should get nerfed because someone's trolling? Let's just blow up the entire game and forget LoL ever existed.

Terrible argument.

AMYS GRAVEFeb 2, 20152 votes

so riot should design champs with trolls in mind so they can troll harder then. she shouldn't get nerfed because of her trolling potential, she should be reworked.

FUBARbarianFeb 3, 20152 votes

Don't change anything, except that the Oathsworn must accept the duties.

Lajinn5Feb 1, 20156 votes

Everything about that champion is stupid as hell.

A KissLike SmileFeb 1, 20156 votes

The easiest way to fix it (conceptually that is, I don't know about the coding) would be for the ult to work a little like a Thresh Lantern. The Oathsworn part wouldn't need to change.

The ult is activated. When activated there is a loud audio cue and an obvious visual one. It can only be activated when the oathsworn is in range. To use the ult the oathsworn has to click on Kalista. They then become untargetable and use the ult as normal. The ult has 5 seconds (or whatever seems right) from being activated by Kalista to be used by the Oathsworn before going on cooldown.

Basically Kalista merely chooses when the ult can be used, then the oathsworn decides to use it or not. Like Thresh Lanterns.

So it still does what it is meant to do, but the Oathsworn keeps their agency. I think this would fix the problem entirely.

ZeeroQuaniFeb 1, 20159 votes

No, that would utterly ruin the power of the ult. The second it would take for that to happen is definitely a huge nerf to the power of the ability. The fact that she can see her partner in trouble and immediately rip them out of combat is huge. How many times have you died while clicking at, around, or near a lantern? It also prevents her from being able to flash away immediately after pressing R for a double escape.

The only option the player should have is whether to be partnered or not. After that, trust your Kalista. She's a champion that they said, right at release, requires a lot of coordination and trust. No need to nerf that aspect just because she doesn't fit well into solo queue when played by or with bad players.

FUBARbarianFeb 1, 20157 votes

The whole point is not how the ult functions but who she forces it on. I should not be enslaved to Kalista without giving her permission. If I accept that I am her bond mate, then I also accept everything that goes with it and the coordination, interruptions and risks. As it is, it is being forced on players and totally screws up their gameplay.

ZeeroQuaniFeb 1, 20153 votes

Tell that to the other guy, he's the one who says the passive is fine and the ult is the issue. I agree with you, passive shouldn't be force-able, but changing the ult like he suggests would heavily nerf it.

FastAsHeckFeb 1, 20154 votes

i think it is simple. instead of letting the oathsworn to choose when the ult can be used etc, i think the oathsworn should just have control over being binded or not. some way to let them choose whether they want to accept it or not. for example, when kalista uses the spear, they can click on kalista to confirm it or they can wait and it wont be confirmed.

GaleWinUnleashedFeb 1, 20152 votes

It did work like that at one point (PBE), but an astonishly high number of people refused to accept it, effectively removing Kalista's ult from the game.

FUBARbarianFeb 1, 20154 votes

So, if a "astonishingly high number of people refused to accept it", RIOT's answer is Forced Enslavement??? Not a very good model for the game.

GaleWinUnleashedFeb 1, 20152 votes

I'd personally prefer the opt-in model, even if it does result in a few games where Kalista has half a kit. If the entire team refuses to cooperate like that, the game probably wasn't going to go all that well anyway.

FUBARbarianFeb 3, 20152 votes

They could compensate other ways, if no one is willing to bond with her. Give her a normal ult and get's boosted with an oathsworn so she isn't playing half a champion otherwise.

BastionKrossFeb 1, 20154 votes

Copied from a similar thread The horror stories I have of being (or witnessing someone else) be that Oathsworn. Malzahar Warwick getting pulled out of their ults, Darius getting ulted right before a dunk so the Kali player can send an auto and get the kill instead, Soraka getting flamed for not sending her squishy, goat body toward the opponents. There was even a whole thread about a support Veigar who absolutely refused to be turned into a projectile.

I hear back when Kali was still on the PBE, you actually could refuse to be her Oathsworn. I believe that was taken away because an alarming amount of players were refusing, and Kali effectively had no ult. After seeing what I've seen, I don't blame the players that refused. Don't get me wrong though, if you have some sort of voice chat with your Oathsworn the ability is one of the strongest in game. But in soloQ? It's trolly as hell. If I had the choice, I'd never be bound to a player I couldn't voice chat with.

WoodakoodashoodaFeb 2, 20154 votes

Remove her from the game and bring her back when she has an acceptable kit. Oathsworn is a problem. I have a problem with the fact that players have no say in being made her bitch and Kali players have a problem if people get to say No because then EVERYONE says no (Imagine that! People won't consent to being tossed around like a yo-yo into death traps or out of battle when they're about to make a kill!)

BemaponFeb 1, 20153 votes

Better to ask forgiveness than permission.

Edit: This was not supposed to be taken seriously. I do not play Kalista unless I am Duo'd with my support. I can see why this would be a problem, but for the people who "Abuse" their Oathsworn, how will you know to not accept? And if nobody accepts you have to play the game with 4.5 people instead of 5. Sometimes people make bad calls, its just a thing that happens. If people just downright refuse to bond with Kalista, you might even be worse than a Kalista that does not ask first.

FUBARbarianFeb 1, 20157 votes

Not in this case. It ruins gameplay and most of those who abuse the Oathsworn could care less about "forgiveness".

AvariceSynFeb 1, 20153 votes

I've recently supported Kalista for the first time since she came out. Mostly my experience with her is playing AS her. I didn't really realize how disorienting it can be when you are ulted by her when you're playing with a random. Before, my oathsworn would comment on it but more in the wow-that-was-weird way when she first came out, and I admit I mostly used her ult defesively or waited for the command from my partner whether or not they wanted me to ult by ping indication.

Now I understand.

The problem is not with not being able whether or not to accept/deny being oathsworn, THAT you should treat as any other variable of the game that you have no control over, it's that there's no safeguard for misfiring the second activation of her ult.

The fact that it can be reactivated by right-clicking is a terrible design choice. I can instantly tell whether or not other players are notorious right-clickers like myself based on the time in-between being ulted, it's second activation, and where they go.

If it could be reactivated by ability use only I can guarantee that it would be less toxic. In fact, it's one of those innocently toxic abilties. You can use it intentionally to be a jerk at bad moments, but with more control over it you can reassess and take advantage of it rather than being this great disorienting thing that JUST HAPPENS TO YOU when you're playing with a Kalista you can't communicate with real-time, or at all.

It's difficult to come up with a good analogy for this because of the variables, but it feels like the difference between seeing a car come at you at 70mph vs 30mph.

Maybe if there was a way for the Oathsworn to queue up to be ulted. That'd be nice. But the state that the game is in now the mechanics don't really allow for it. It'd require one of a few things.

Taking an item slot up for the Oathsworn (which sucks)
Adding a conditional 6th ability slot (seems messy)
Adding a type of utility belt (which would open up loads of options that would be highly beneficial to supports and junglers especially)
Adding a special key assignment for Oathsworn

The current reality of it though, is just that she's a conditional pick. It's not a good idea to pick or play with Kalista when you are not partied with someone you know/can rely on.

It's like picking Katarina against Viktor. Occasionally you'll get people who can play Katarina and not just survive, but thrive in lane against him, but most of the time it is really just a bad decision.

I really can't wait for teambuilder to become the norm because that's where you really have the most control over who/what you're playing with.

FUBARbarianFeb 1, 20153 votes

I can see what you're saying about the functional aspects of both playing Kalista and playing with her Oathsworn. Sadly, we don't always get to choose. On ARAM, when she is Free to Play, people tend to be jerks if they don't like anything you've done. Regardless, I should have to agree to give over that kind of control, especially in the game modes where I can't choose who I'm playing with. All in All, really bad design method and needs to be fixed. It is ruining the games during her free to play times.

AvariceSynFeb 2, 20152 votes

{quoted}

I can see what you're saying about the functional aspects of both playing Kalista and playing with her Oathsworn. Sadly, we don't always get to choose. On ARAM, when she is Free to Play, people tend to be jerks if they don't like anything you've done. Regardless, I should have to agree to give over that kind of control, especially in the game modes where I can't choose who I'm playing with. All in All, really bad design method and needs to be fixed. It is ruining the games during her free to play times.

By that logic, the entire game is of bad design because you can't control the other four champions on your team. You can't decide whether or not Jarvan ults you in with someone who's dangerous, or if Anivia walls you off or even just walls you at all causing a friendly fire mini-stun. Or if Blitzcrank pulls Amumu onto your entire team.

Even less-obvious disruptions like speed boosts can screw you over by changing your ETA and forcing you to re-calculate your actions upon arrival. Like chasing a target down as Vayne, knowing exactly what point you need to be at as well as your enemy to get the perfect condemn off.

There are a lot of factors outside of our control that when used incorrectly are incredibly detrimental. The best players learn how to roll with the punches they can't avoid.

LashrathFeb 1, 20153 votes

I absolutely agree I started a thread on PBE too hoping devs see it sooner there or IDk... this issue needs to be fixed. Make the spear an item thatthe target (and only him) can decide to pick up or not OR make teh spear an offer in the lobby just as champion trades happen - and start the game with teh accepted oath- BUT make it the target1s choice as her lore would suggest (also what would make sense)

PBE account owners plz vote here too: http://boards.pbe.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/champions-gameplay-feedback/ryA1q7wn-suggestion-kallista-needs-to-be-fixed

Paper1Feb 1, 20153 votes

Didn't they even say in the champion spotlight that the player has to accept the oath sworn from Kalista?

FUBARbarianFeb 3, 20151 votes

Apparently too many people were rejecting, leaving her crippled so they too the choice away. They simply need to give her an alternative ult when there is no Oathsworn willing to get jerked around.

Truly PridefulFeb 2, 20153 votes

I hate it unless I'm with my duo partner in Skype. I don't like being randomly yanked around when they feel like it's a 'good' time, half the time they'll pull me out of a combo because they feel like they need me or something.

PrinceArchieFeb 2, 20152 votes

When Kalista took my virginity I was quite happy honestly, because I knew she would always be inside me :) . EMBRACE THE SPECTRAL GENTICLE! Kalista

IceKingChernobogFeb 2, 20152 votes

you lost your virginity to a dead woman....you have issues bro

Cad3Feb 1, 20151 votes

This really is annoying you can stop it in the beggining by going top or jg to stay away but that only works so much the first time i played with a kalista she tried to kill me the entier game and succeeded three times until i learned to react quicker she should not be able to oath swear you with out your permission at least have a pop up allowing you to to decline she has to have limitations to who she can oath swear

FUBARbarianFeb 1, 20155 votes

Yesterday, I had someone land me in the opposing base's turret by standing on the edge. When the control circle comes up and you don't respond, it transports you right next to her, which, in this case was inside the base turret. This was her revenge for me not allowing myself to become enslaved to her. Hopefully, Riot will take these comments seriously and change the way this is done.

Mikal PikalFeb 2, 20151 votes

I am genuinely curious how her ult can "kill you." You do know you don't have to activate it right? You can even go backwards if you want.

AMYS GRAVEFeb 2, 20152 votes

if kalista teleports and ults you at the last second you are pulled across the map with her.

if kalista ults you right before she dies you drop where she died without choice.

you don't always have a choice where you go.

FUBARbarianFeb 3, 20151 votes

When it activates on you, you have the choice to "not click anywhere", effectively ignoring it and getting killed or you click and (when she's standing next to the enemy base turret) teleport into the enemy turret. I was taking down the nexus, clicking and activated it before I could stop. Ended up dying in the enemy base turret as the game ended. A final "F" You for not being her slave...

medium katarinaFeb 1, 20151 votes

Is this real? people are crying about this now? lol (✿◡‿◡)

LashrathFeb 1, 20154 votes

It is annoying. Noone wants her nerfed or buffed just the base mechanism of the spear changed. In SR the obvious pick for the oath is the support but if you played games on other maps with Kalistas - it is just a tool for trolling. Making he oatch an acceptable or deniable mechanism either by making it an item that can be picked up or a choice in the lobby (smilarly how you exchange champions) it would solve this problem without making new ones. Everyone happy. Except trolls but who cares about them.

MrBuffingtonFeb 1, 20151 votes

You should still be able to target a champion with the black spear, to prevent trolling (someone else picking up the spear), but there should be some intuitive way to accept.

GaleWinUnleashedFeb 1, 20151 votes

The problem, though, is when for one reason or another the target refuses to accept it. Then Kalista has no ult, and no W passive.g

MrBuffingtonFeb 1, 20152 votes

Why not just have a gap where if they don't accept, she can pick someone else?

GaleWinUnleashedFeb 1, 20151 votes

I described the worst-case scenario, basically. Odds are that it won't be the whole team that would refuse, just the one person.

MrBuffingtonFeb 1, 20153 votes

Yea, like I don't mind it, the only Kalista player I've played with (me as Janna support) was actually pretty good, but I definitely was a bit hesitant about playing with her initially due to the potential to troll. I probably would accept regardless, but it'd be nice to have a say in it, or be able to do it at a better time (like sometimes Kalista will do this in the jungle while you're getting invaded or something, be nice to cancel and do it later lol)

Mikal PikalFeb 2, 20151 votes

Someone will have to explain this "troll" reasoning to me. When I get a troll on my team they find any number of ways to screw over the game. Sure, Kalista ult is one of them, but it's not even the worst offender. All you have to do is not go in or go backwards if she ults you. This form of "trolling" is much preferred to intentional feeding or following me around in the jungle smiting creeps.

MrBuffingtonFeb 2, 20152 votes

lol, I could argue that Anivia (or J4, Singed, Volibear, Blitz, etc etc) can be better "troll"s in an objective sense in how they can screw with the game, but Kalista feels worse because you lose control of your character temporarily. You have a little more ability to play around other trolls (a little, lol), where Kalista directly affects your character. That's at least my thinking