Can we make Duskblade melee only and Stormrazor ranged only?

he can build both but depending on which form he's using is which passive is used

{quoted}

Can Jayce build and , though?

Now I'm curious.

It should work just the same as how Kayle interacts with hurricane only with her e active.

{quoted}

Can Jayce build and , though?

Now I'm curious.

He can but it's like . When they're melee only works but when they're ranged only works.

{quoted}

Can Jayce build and , though?

Now I'm curious.

Yes. Jayce is both melee and ranged, like Nidalee. They can build both. (I saw a nidalee adc going runaan's once... they lost)

{quoted}

That's actually not a bad idea.

Actually, we need to remove Duskblade from the game.

Being able to go invisible is already a huge advantage. We don't need to be able to one shot just because we can go invisible.

Right now, any champion that can go invisible can automatically one shot. This is dumb.

Riot, get rid of the item, it's a great start toward balancing back the dumb changes made in season 8. You have removed other items from the game that were far less overpowered and unbalancing. As it stands now, Duskblade wins every game. This is a problem for the game.

Stormrazor is dumb too, on certain champions it allows one shot. Nerf it, or better yet remove it, until you can figure out how to balance its impact in the game. Stormrazor is a good example of how NOT to implement new items, before they are properly tested.

only when in melee form

riot already said theyre gonna do this

I think MF, just like Jhin, has been a little too strong over the season (with some small windows of time as exception). Lethality MF has been consistently strong for months now. A nerf wouldn't be bad news. Besides, i can't see a future where Duskblade's proc damage and MF's Q have a healthy interaction.

Your claim is so damn wrong. Marksmen want the stormrazor bc all non on hit ADCs want damage and speed, and this is one of the only items that gives that, and its super cheap, and its a huge power spike once you get it to heavily win trades if you get it first. A lot of assassins are casters who dont need the attack speed, while auto attackers do want the speed

{quoted}

@thread

People really need to get it through their thick skulls that storm razor is an assassin item. Marksmen need to stop claiming items... As a marksman, theres one situation where you should be taking storm razor: When youre already ahead and want to secure that lead with higher burst damage. Otherwise, its an awful item when infinity edge exists and has been tailored explicitly for marksmen.

Meanwhile on assassins, storm razor is the replacement for infinity edge which almost every assassin who didnt build bruiser used to finish their build with. Hell its passive screams "IM FOR CASTERS".

I think the original intention was that Stormrazor would be an earlygame item for crit ADCs to give them some trading potential against lane bullies. It's got no lethality and gives AS, things that assassins dislike. Problem is of course that AD assassins still have high AD so the automatic crit still has a lot of value for them. Then add in Duskblade to stack on top of it and you have a problem.

Making these two unable to stack should fix the problem because without the stackable Stormrazor + Duskblade procs Stormrazor holds pretty much no value for the vast majority of assassins (Rengar and Nocturne aside, but those would have to choose between Stormrazor and Duskblade as well). Lethality marksmen like MF would also need to make a choice between going for a spellslinger (Duskblade) and auto-attack (Stormrazor) based build.

No, but it’s a start. Characters building both isn’t okay.

{quoted}

Or just give them same unique passive such hiw like all sheen upgrades do.

This. Just make them unable to stack with each other. Or even better, make none of the "on next auto attack" items stack (so you can't stack them with triforce or shiv either.).

Edit: well, make an exception for Stormrazor with Shiv/ RFC since those items seem pretty much meant to be purchased together. The rest however... no.

No?

When have they ever said that?