I don't think I agree with the way Kleptomancy was changed.

I did think that Klepto could use a nerf, particularly on it's reaaaally major abusers(aka Ezreal). My main issue with the way Klepto was nerfed is, well... Riot has mentioned that they wanted Klepto to be playable on more champions, while making the extreme cases(onhit effect spells) not as powerful. Basically even it out a bit more. But I think this change will have the opposite effect. The removal of the aa range primarily nerfs the rune on champions that are weak with Kleptomancy: the champions without onhit effect abilities. While having a much less significant effect, possible almost nil, on the champions that already were the prime abusers of Kleptomancy(aka Ezreal).

As such, I think this nerf is headed in the wrong direction. Personally, I would outright make Kleptomancy not an onhit effect, instead something that applies solely on autoattacks... It's a shame to lose the cool interactions, but I think it'll be really hard to buff Kleptomancy for the champs that are weak with it while nerfing the champs that are crazy with it, otherwise.

Perhaps I'd even go as far to increase the aa range bonus on Klepto, rather than remove it. Or perhaps only increase it on melee champs(50 bonus range on melee champs and 25 on ranged?), because I've heard Klepto can be pretty scary on Sona... Sona is the only abuser I can really think of that uses autoattacks and not just an onhit ability, though.

Anyway, regardless of what happens, I do trust Riot to figure it out, in the end. They're cool guys, even if they make mistakes sometimes. Hopefully this bit of feedback will help things along, though?