Riot's always been going on about what makes a good Champion kit, but what I'd like to know is what's at the opposite end of the spectrum. Namely, what would make a Champion's kit too bland, lame, or whatever?
For instance, what part of Braum's kit stops him from being "lame"? Is it his E? His passive?
RiotGhostcrawler10 votesWe look a lot at depth. By depth we mean that the question of how best to use the champion, when to use a particular ability, what the outcome of a particular duel is going to be aren't intuitively obvious. Take tic-tac-toe. You probably played a few games as a kid and realized quickly that there was always a right answer for almost every opponent move.
There are a lot of ways champions can have depth. Here are just three:
The champs we consider boring don't have to plan a lot, either short term or long term. Other players, either your team or the enemy, don't have to make different decisions based on your champion choice. If your answer to the question "Would I have done that thing I just did differently if the other guy had been playing a different champ?" is no, then we'd consider that champ to be boring. For awhile, we sort of naively thought that we could make a champion interesting by having a really good theme or good art or a good story. Those are all awesome to have, but the champ also has to approach a battle in an interesting way as well. (Designers love that word "interesting.")
It's also possible to have a lot of depth, but still have abilities that are too similar to an existing champion. We'd call that boring too.
It's also possible to have a lot of interesting abilities, that don't really play well or complement each other. I don't know that I'd call that champ boring, but it's a missed opportunity for sure.
Does that jive with your impressions?
MrSc0tty1 votesCough cough all of viktors abilities.
Oh man time for my slick burst combo
Huh
All my abilities have different ranges, cast delays, effect delays, and one of them requires me to swipe the mouse when I want to be holding R and spamming right clicks to keep another one doing damage.
Good thing casting them all together doesn't create an enormous gameplay clarity clusterfuck.
Shrikesnest3 votesWell, you can argue that makes him confusing or frustrating, but you can't argue that all of that variety makes him -boring,- I don't think. He might just be the wrong type of interesting.
MrSc0tty3 votesWell not boring but clunky in the extreme. Viktor, Casseopia, Anivia, and Malzahar are the Wizard Kings of Klunk.
Shrikesnest2 votesThis seems like a good answer to me. I'm a fan of Kayle, for example, because angels are my favorite mythological creatures and I like her character and personality, but I'm not sure she's a very interesting champion. It's not that she's necessarily overpowered or underpowered; those are just numbers, and numbers can change. It's more that, once she gets enough CD that her E is up almost all the time, what do you do to meaningfully interact with her that you don't do with every champion? She does physical and magical damage, and shreds resistances besides, so what build decisions could you even make to play against a strong Kayle? She just hits E and right-clicks. Her one nuke isn't even a skill shot.
There are a few interesting decisions to be made on Kayle's end, like whether you use her W to initiate or peel, or when you Ult, but as far as how she impacts a battle, she right-clicks on something near whatever she wants to kill and hopes it blows up before she does.
Contrast Gnar, who I think is the most interesting champion to come out in a long time. When I play Gnar, I feel like the game is constantly winging lemons at me and I need to make lemonade as fast as I can. Even when I'm doing really poorly as Gnar, I'm usually making some kind of interesting decision at all times. I'm going to change forms soon, I need to get in position to boomerang somebody, I need to decide whether now is a good time to burn my hop, I need to pay attention to when I'm triggering Hyper for chasing or escaping. My enemies have clear windows on when it's a good or bad idea to engage on me, and if I'm stomping face they have options to build against that. The difference is marked.
darkdill1 votesOut of curiosity, how would you judge this?
My thoughts on this mobile support Champion Concept.
Depth - Very maneuverable, able to keep pace with any high-speed team, lots of dash tricks, good crowd control, does not have sustain heals (instead has combat heals).
Counterplay - Short-to-melee range (no poke capability), punishable dives, requires other Champions to use as dash nodes (can't hop to minions or wards), can't heal without being aggressive, crowd controls generally counterable by Flash or other jumps.
But there's probably more on the list I haven't thought of. Think you could give it a gander?
Eapenator1 votesDo you think there is a place in League of Legends for Champions with limited kits like Garen, who serves as a good introductory character - (simplistic kit, 1 attack patten). He may be boring to the seniors of the player base, but to the new comers, he is a good champion to introduce people to chaining spells and his is very forgiving
ploki1222 votesHmm... given those 3 depth factors, how would you rate Leona (well, windows is pretty obvious but meh).?
From my point of view, there is little to no tactical depth on Q and W, and the part that could be called so in her innate is waiting for your allies to proc your damage (so part of her depth is 100% reliant on allies). Even then, E and R aren't the biggest skillshots. Sure, pros will flash away from the E, dragging Leona under tower, or move away from the ult during that 0.5s cast time, but to the common mortal guy, Leona having skillshots is nearly a joke.
As I said, when talking about windows of opportunity/power, she does offer some great ones. Using E's uptime as a zoning tool, timing your "facetanking" with W's CDs and chasing based on Q's cd does offer for a bit of depth, but I feel like "windows" is the weakest of the 3 depths since it's implicit. Champions will always have times when they are stronger/weaker, especially when you factor in cooldowns.
Lastly, for Strategic Depth, I feel like most of what Leona brings, Braum, Dr. Mundo, Renekton and Jarvan IV all brings. Except for the ignite on Mundo, I would play against those 4 in a fairly similar fashion, and the results of the fights often wouldn't vary by a lot.
Would that mean that you consider Leona boring? Or do you have another point of view on her that I can't see?
If you prefer other champions to discuss on, I feel like Ashe (lacks mainly windows and tactical), Ryze (tactical and slightly windows), Poppy (Strategic/Tactical), and Annie (Tactical, Strategic) are other fair outliers.
N.B. problems further explained : **Ashe : ** Her one window is "is my ultimate up". Ohtherwise, you can say her passive offers another window, but it's up so rarely and so often is wasted on minions that it barely counts. Also unless you're early in the game, the 100% crit often won't change your play pattern since it will simply add 1 more crit to the fight among many. In term of tactical depth, she has 2 skillshots, one which is sometimes blocked by creeps, sometimes not and otherwise has gigantic range and width so it's pretty much a coin flip in the worst case, and a mana->damage trade in the best one. I really feel that Ashe is one of those champions that feel terrible to play, since your only "WOAH!"moment comes once every few minutes with your ult.
Ryze : His "windows" aspect is pretty terrible. Early game he's "weaker" (still not weak) and as the game goes he bomes a raid boss. His cooldowns are basically always up as long as he stays in the fight and his ult is never really down, it's simply "not quite up yet". In term of tactical dept, he has no skillshots, and his skills are all extremely straightforward. Heck, even his strategic depth is not that great, since he has no real "specific" interactions, he simply deals constant magical dps and heals over time.
Annie : Her 2 windows are her stun and Tibbers. Stun is up fairly constantly but doesn't last long. Otherwise, her power level is pretty much the same all game long; she always has the power of deletion if you're careless. In term of strategic depth, she has 2 instant AoE "skillshots". If the enemy wants to avoid it, he has to dodge it before you even cast it. Her 1 true strategic depth is usage of her stun.
Poppy : Epitome of windows. She is among the best level 1-2, ok level 3-7 and then trash level 8-15 where she finally kicks back up to "final raid boss" level. Even in term of cooldowns, her E is a window of power in and of itself, and her R is the tool that allows her to fight 'evenly' during the weak state. In term of strategic and tactical depth, she's really really awesome... if she was alone in the game, since she removes the depth/choices from her opponents. End game, even a support poppy can simply ult the carry with the lowest damage and kill another target with low mobility, This basically turn teamfights into 3v4 every 2-3 minutes.
Decrit1 votesNice to see I got the right way, sorta! I would hug you, but i know that would make you soft-hearted, so instead I will whip you gently.
ProfDrDeath1 votesIt's also possible to have a lot of depth, but still have abilities that are too similar to an existing champion. We'd call that boring too.
Some people might call that boring. And it is, if both of the champions in question are using everything they have in the exact same way. However, if just some of the tools are similar, but each one uses them in a completely different way, then I'd call that interesting again.
TehNACHO6 votesWhen elements of a kit don't play well together.
I use the word 'play' but I don't mean in game, I mean thematics and execution. Elements of a given kit need to make sense to be together, or else the kit just feels jumbled and stupid. Think of Sion for example, half of his kit literally doesn't work with the other. You can have the bursty AP mage sion or the late game AD destroyer Sion, but you will almost never get a viable means of using Sion's kit as a whole. Or if you want to go to the thematics route, think Yorick. Undead gravedigger who resurrects a ghoul army to stand by you. Yet, the ghoul gameplay is rather limited, simple, and does surprisingly little to play on Yorick's theme as someone who can apparently command the dead. The mere fact that these ghouls can easily function as "fire and forget" abilities makes this champion fail thematically.
Take a look at the latest champions and reworks to hit the line vs the absolute oldest or the champions who have been designated to get a rework. Figure out why Yasuo's kit design is so much more exciting and interesting than Gangplank's, even though they both play the role of a Melee ADC. Look at Ashe and wonder why she's fallen so hard out of favor as an ADC. It's really the little things that end up defining what makes a champion interesting, but if these things can't build together to create a greater whole, you have an Urgot to clean up.
Decrit4 votesWhen elements of a kit don't play well together.
I use the word 'play' but I don't mean in game, I mean thematics and execution. Elements of a given kit need to make sense to be together, or else the kit just feels jumbled and stupid. [...]
Take a look at the latest champions and reworks to hit the line vs the absolute oldest or the champions who have been designated to get a rework. Figure out why Yasuo's kit design is so much more exciting and interesting than Gangplank's, even though they both play the role of a Melee ADC. [...]
I quote that but i also want to add an other thing: depth of gameplay. Think about Sona: why she had a recent kit rework? because she could spam without too much tought her skills, leaving her only decisive play for her Ultimate cast; with the rework they instead took her power has range and spammer and instead moved it with the "resonance" mechanic, if i remember the right word: the more champions she can hit with the right timing the better, even at the cost of her own safety. Now, Sona is designed to be simple so even witht his rework they did not make her difficult like Zed, however there it is more gameplay depth: decision making, paying a better effect with something else ( let it be damage, itemization or risks that must be avoided by the pèlayer' s skill ) and more visible impact. Another example that we can pick is Trundle: while he has some really impactful decision making ( troll the adc with the dots or use it on the tank to get more resistant? where pillar and when ground? ) his Q it' s really a mindless skill, that does not even need too much thinking about mana management; however that is because his Q ( an autoattack modifier that briefly slows and reduces enemy attack damage ) it' s more a tool than a true skill, and if you level that first then you are investing strategically in a tool with a precise use, and that' s skill. If a champion however has the skillset full of tools ( Veigar for example, or Ryze or Annie ) then it becomes more "boring" because his skill have not much depth, but more a "to-do-list". However it also depends by you: for example i like Veigar for the challenging early game, for the team distruption it does in mid/late game and because he becomes the destruction incarnate- and makes you feel destruction incarnate - so you lay waste and terror on enemy lines. It could have been done way better, tho... oh well, gotta wait rework ^_^
ploki1225 votesI believe there are 2 things making champions fun : uniqueness and interactions.
Braum's Innate is unique since it's the only X attacks that can be procced by you and someone else. Similarly, he's the only guy that can take shots for you. at the same time, passive interacts with allies, Shield block interacts with allies and enemies (have to work around it), the small dash interacts with allies (like safeguard does, trying to coordinate escapes).
When you look back at Leona, her dash and Eclipse have unique mechanics, but functionally, she's just another tank. Even when it comes to interactions you're simply depending on others with your innate (Braum can solo-proc) and your skills have very little delay, making the "skillshot" interaction minute.
Poppy's innate is about stopping interactions. Her Q is an AA reset. W is a passive skill. E is a clunky charge (with a bit of mind games, those are greats). R is interaction's nemesis... Actually, I'd consider her Ultimate action, since you interact with your enemies, but they can't interact with you.
The first is fun to play with/against (until he becomes a monster and invalidates your damage), the later 2 are completely boring outside of their power,
Shrikesnest1 votesI found your take on Braum vs. Leona very interesting. They get lumped together a lot, since they're both powerful support tanks that work well in the meta, but I think you're right about the difference in interesting gameplay between the two of them. Braum makes for a lot more interaction with both allies and enemies.
67chrome3 votesBoring?
I guess the best example I can come up with is tying a champion's play style to music.
You kind of want it to feel like you're dancing, that when the beat changes you can do your cool move at the right time, and a kit has a certain rhythm to it. Interesting also means your opponents and allies gets to participate in the song and dance as well. You get your chance to do a wicked guitar solo, but you're not drowning out everything else either with that 24/7 - and you have periods where you fall into a backup or supportive roll while someone else takes the lead - saving that solo for a special time.
Boring is mostly when there's no patterns, no beat. Which isn't just a lack of complexity, but also includes to much complexity. Silence vs. White Noise, both are pretty dull. If a champion's kit is overloaded with complexity, then they can just feel like static. They don't dance or sing with others, but drown out a lot of interaction - and have another issue where it's hard to really see what there roll is or how to optimally use them, so all their potential ends up being drowned out like those teenage bands that try to do a guitar, drum, and singing solo all at exactly the same time. Champions that are really straight forward also kind of kill the beat, as they just keep playing the same note over and over and over again.
Boring is mostly about ignoring the music of the game and being deaf to the beat, refusing to dance and sing with others. Because you're not really playing the game.
Things like Morganna's Dark Binding are pretty solid for the beat - it offers a lot of interaction. You can hide behind minions or just move out of the way. It opens up a lot of play patterns for those used against, and it gives Morganna a mini-quest of doing the right dance to land it. If it does land, Morganna's allies can also change their dance to fit that happening and act accordingly.
Things like Sion's stun, alternatively, are pretty boring. Get within 550 range and you're stunned. Stay more than 550 range away and you don't get stunned. Mostly this changes the beat into silence, where 2 members just keep their distance.
Shrikesnest2 votesThe biggest takeaway for me from the discussion so far is that a boring champ interacts mostly with themselves, while an interesting champ interacts with teammates, enemies or the environment. Annie is one of my favorite champions to play, but by this metric her kit is pretty dull. It's not that there's no skill involved in playing her well; managing her passive and properly controlling Tibbers can be pretty interesting, but mostly to her. There's no interacting with Annie outside of, "She's got her stun ready and her ult up," or "Do I have enough health to fist-fight the bear?"
Skill shots are the simplest "interesting" thing to me, because they create interactivity. You can dodge them or body-block them. Both the champion with the skill shot and the possible targets need to keep an eye on their positioning. Think of all the laning complexity of, say, Anivia versus Annie, just comparing their basic nukes. With Anivia you have genuine multidimensional positioning concerns. With Annie you just need to stay out of range.
Linna Excel1 votes90% of the time having a good kit means getting the QWE skills right.
Sigh, I need to rewrite that post on QWE.