Why don't we just, dunno, get rid of Runes and Masteries alltogether?

SaltyToplaneGoat··49 votes·29,599 views

The more complex a game, the harder it is to balance. -> Therefore: every element and system that ADDS complexity is primarely problematic, as it makes balance harder. -> However, the element is tolerated due to the benefits it offers. -> As a result we can conclude: Every single element that brings more problems than use to the game should be removed immedeatly to assure overall quality and an easier job for the balance team.

This is pretty much the basis on which my call to abolish the whole Runes/Mastery/Whatever-System stands on. Not revert to how it was before, not make minor changes, but get rid of it ENTIRELY. And there's good reasons for that!

1.) Runes need to be significant in power, or they are unnoticed and therefore useless. This however results in a conflict with the actual experience the game itself is trying to deliver as a power-fantasy specific to the champion you are playing.

2.) Offensive Runes are always the prefered go-to option as damage is the way of effectively winning the game - the other runes are just utility so either you can do more damage, the enemy deals less, or someone else on your team can do more damage thanks to you. But why jump through extra hoops when you might as well just take the damage-option, as this is what the game requires as a win condition? Combined with the fact that Runes need to be noticeable to function, this leads to inevitable power creep, noticable now given just how easy people can now delete each other starting at level 3.

3.) And worst of all: the existence of a Runes-System is a balancing nightmare, as a) no champion must be broken with ANY sort of rune combination and b) to not be a joke in of itself, there must be no "optimal runes" for every champion, or the whole idea of playstyle customization, the absolute primary reason we have this system in place to begin with, falls apart completly. Because what is the point in customization if all deviations from the norm are strictly worse in every single aspect?

So that was the problematic parts of the system, but what about it's benefits? In point three I mentioned "playstyle customization", and maybe in the early days of League that might have been an issue, you know, with only 40 champions and all, but in this day and age? When we have 141+ champions? If you do not like the playstyle of one, go play another, it's not like you have at least literally two dozend choices per position. Not to mention the diversity the item system was supposed to offer to begin with. So in this day an age, calling the Runes system "necessary" for this goal is downright wrong. I might have made sense in the past, but the game, with it's roster having more that tripled in size, has simply outgrown it - and at this point I have the feeling we are jzst sticking to the idea because of "we have always done it like this, so why should it be any different?", and that's not what the guideline for design should be.

I doubt many people would miss Runes in the long run, and so many issues could be fixed: damage creep, balancing troubles, champions could be balanced more directly, and the power can be put back into items and, much more important: CHAMPION KITS. This is a game about champions. Not runes, not items, but about THOSE CHARACTERS THAT DO COOL THINGS. And it sucks with the current system because as of right now it all just boils down to "who can abuse the strongest rune currently". You are not playing with "cool champions" anymore, but with generic "rune-proxies", mere vehicles for another system with no value or identity in of itself. And given that League IS undoubtetly a game about champions, that is A BAD THING.

So how about we just trim the hedge a little and cut back on the systems that do more harm than good? I mean, the balance team sure won't have any issues with this, as it effectively makes their job at least easier by a third. Instead of having to juggle Champion Kits, Runes, and Item-systems and their relation to another, they could now just easily drop one ball and make sure the other, much more important ones, fly well.

Also Riot, if you really wanna claim the casual crowd, as some on the boards here accuse you of doing, getting rid of that system will be more efficient than every single ingame design-decision. Because all the knownledge needed to work through optimize such a system for your champ, especially from a newbie perspective? Gone. League would become a simpler game focussing on the things it is supposed to do good, and it would smoothen out the learning curve a little. And all that without stepping on the toes of the self-proclaimed "non-casuals" as they probably wouldn't miss seeing the systems go as long as their champions can still function without it.

So no matter what perspective you see this from, the abolishment of the Rune-system has only benefits:

  • For the Dev-Side, balancing becomes way easier
  • For the New-Player side, the game becomes smoother to get into
  • For the "regulars" increased game quality

Benefits for keeping this outdated concept alive? None, unless you like having systems in your game that just annoy literally everyone, players, newlings, and devs alike.

70 Comments

Carnicore33 votes

I think something closer to the Augments system would be much better. Instead of having 15+ keystone runes for every champion in the game to choose from, you could have 3 keystones that only your champion could choose from. So you wouldn't have to worry about Ezreal ruining your Kleptomancy Yorick build, Fiddlesticks would have Keystone runes to choose from that make sense for him, and assassins wouldn't just be running Electrocute in 90% of games. As we can see in Odyssey, runes designed for just one champion have an incredible variety of possibilities.

ModKnightsKemplar14 votes

I've been dabbling in Heroes of the Storm for the last month, and this is basically what it does.

In that case, the "talents" replace items, though, in a way. League would still have items, but also have champion specific options.

Worst thing about that idea: holy crap that's a lot of work for the devs. Best thing about that idea: wow the balance levers.

crippler381 votes

DOTA 2 has had this for a bit and I must say, if I were better at the game I'd play it more. Their talent choices are very impactful and generally unique across all the heroes.

ModKnightsKemplar3 votes

That's true, I had forgotten about those! I only played DotA for a few hours before I decided it wasn't for me.

What I actually don't love about HotS or DotA is how those change mid-match. It's a nice way to handle the "scaling" problem with runes, but I don't like that it's extra things, on top of items, that you have to track with your opponents. League could have a better version, imo, just by leaving it as a pre-game system.

It would be so much work, but I am pretty interested in seeing this some year. Would be a nice improvement over runes.

La Bello1 votes

at first glance this might sound like a good idea but then again you are asking players to remember 3 different effects for over 140 champions. thats 420 different effects AND COUNTING (because LoL is hellbent on releasing 3+ champs a year as a method of subsidizing itself).

What ever happened to burden of knowledge? You cant seriously be expected to remember all that stuff ON TOP of knowing the capabilities and strategies for playing against each augment style.

Kazoo Soloist3 votes

[{quoted}](name=La Bello,realm=NA,application-id=ELUpwER8,discussion-id=p9TAg1JA,comment-id=00020004,timestamp=2018-09-20T17:32:48.379+0000)

at first glance this might sound like a good idea but then again you are asking players to remember 3 different effects for over 140 champions. thats 420 different effects AND COUNTING (because LoL is hellbent on releasing 3+ champs a year as a method of subsidizing itself).

What ever happened to burden of knowledge? You cant seriously be expected to remember all that stuff ON TOP of knowing the capabilities and strategies for playing against each augment style.

But we already remember more than that. We already have to remember 4 different abilities across over 140 champions or 560 abilities (assuming you want to be able to properly play against every champion). This doesn't even take into account the fact that a lot of abilities are more complicated than others, have multiple parts, or passives. If you bother counting passives, that's a total of 700 abilities we already memorize. 420 is a lot, I agree, but we already memorize far more (700 doesn't include other things about the game, just champion abilities including passives) so 420 doesn't really seem like a big deal.

dapositiveviking1 votes

no, but it’s increasing the burden of knowledge by over 50% of what we already know. keystones don’t change abilities, but augments would.

QancerClown7 votes

I would just bring back old runes and masteries that were actually working.

ModUlanopo5 votes

Two questions for you:

  • How do you address the idea that without some form of customization beyond items (which are just as susceptible to solved optimization as runes/masteries) the game itself becomes solved on a larger level?

  • What would be problematic about a simplified runes/masteries system as opposed to junking it entirely?

SaltyToplaneGoat9 votes

Point 1: I do not see how a "solved" game would be a big issue in of itself. I mean, chess is a solved game and it's still played for centuries, so that's a thing. The job of the balance team is to provide an equal playing field where multiple strategies are valid, and then what decides the game is player skill.

Generally Runes and Items are fighting over the same niche and like that they also steal each other's design space. A lot of things runes currently do could surely be integrated into a more diverse item system instead. However, items just FIT BETTER INTO THE GAME, as they are an integral part of the MOBA-Genre as they gate in-match-progression. Runes are just some random extra that don't provide anything special out of themselves that couldn't be achieved otherwise.

Point 2: Because it is an extra system that just pushed unnecessary complexity when you might as well adjust every champion's individual stats beforehand. Also if stuff being "solved" is your issue, then why not just reduce the amount of "potentially solvable systems"? Again, balance is the focus here, because then we still have the issue that we need to warp the entire game around every champions potentially using every possible rune combination.

Reduce complexity, increase quality! League should be a simple game with complex player interaction, not a complex game with braindead "woops ya dead" interaction!

ModUlanopo4 votes

Point 1: I do not see how a "solved" game would be a big issue in of itself. I mean, chess is a solved game and it's still played for centuries, so that's a thing.

Having some experience with high-ranked chess, I would disagree with that statement. At most skill levels, chess is definitely not considered solved. Part of the illusion of chess being solved is that it is entirely non-random (at least outside picking who goes first, which is surprisingly meaningful).

While the most commonly used example of a solved game is tic-tac-toe, Risk, Monopoly and Ticket to Ride come up pretty often.

The job of the balance team is to provide an equal playing field where multiple strategies are valid, and then what decides the game is player skill.

I agree with you on the first half, but it isn't always skill that decides things. My friend and I are both similarly skilled at Warmachine/Hordes. This last weekend, I played a Borka 2 brick list vs. his Haley 1 trenchers list. Both of our lists were equally valid, at least in the larger sense. In that application, however, his list was very strong against mine.

None of this, however, addresses my question of how making the game simpler does not create an increased risk of clear optimization.

SaltyToplaneGoat2 votes

That's the job of the balance team, to actually create multiple optimization paths. That'd be ACTUAL balancing, not constantly running after cable fires as the devs currently do. They put one out and ignite another in the process, mere treatment of symptoms that keeps them so busy, they can barely work on levels that affect the game as a whole - and the Rune-System is to blame for that as well, as it makes their job harder than it has to be.

Generally there are always item builds better than others. item 1001 item 3070 x5 will lose to a regular build. That's just how it is. The trick is to offer multiple ways to get to that "optimized state". Like, let's say for AP champions, you say now the optimal state is 500 AP. If you have only one item build that can reach that number, that is a problem. However, if you suddenly had the option to build two completly different builds, with different unique passives, side stats, and active abilities (very important design space that opens up with Runes gone!), then suddenly you can't say what is "better", as the primary condition this is judged with, aka "does my AP champ get the AP they need to be effective on the battlefield" is guaranteed in both, and the rest is dependant on matchup, teamwork, and strategy, as well as the active use of utility functions provided by items.

However, items would need a massive overhaul as well - especially the existence of hybrid/on-hit champions is an issue, but that's for another thread I guess.

ModUlanopo3 votes

A lot of things runes currently do could surely be integrated into a more diverse item system instead.

I would argue that "surely" is a pretty big reach here. While I agree that runes and items occupy overlapping design space, runes are different in that they have only an opportunity cost. They are present (in one degree or another) at all times during the match. The same is not true of items.

However, items just FIT BETTER INTO THE GAME, as they are an integral part of the MOBA-Genre as they gate in-match-progression.

"Just fit better" is a stylistic thing, not a balance thing. Heroes of the Storm does just fine without items, while preserving many of the same mechanics as League.

SaltyToplaneGoat1 votes

Runes generally fall in two categories: early game lane-prowess or lategame advantages. The first can be integrated into the system by looking specifically at starting items and first building components (aka what you get after a first back with reasonable CC), the other's effect could simply be stapled on lategame items.


It's not about style. MOBAs, from the most ancient days, ALWAYS HAD ITEMS. However, everything that came from the outside is unecessary bonus. And the items have a function, as they regulate the increase of power for the duration of a match. Their function is necessary to reward good play (as in: here spend your gold on) and to give the game a clear structure, on top of the initial customization factor.

They are far FAR deeper engrained into the "moba-DNA" than any outside-system like runes could EVER be - and that's why the presence of runes in general is disrutpive and a problem for the design as a whole.

ModUlanopo3 votes

It's not about style. MOBAs, from the most ancient days, ALWAYS HAD ITEMS.

"That's how we've always done it!" is almost always a weak and inferior argument.

They are far FAR deeper engrained into the "moba-DNA" than any outside-system like runes could EVER be

Heroes of the Storm continues to say hi.

Further, you're making the exact same argument Mearls makes with regard to 5e Dungeons and Dragons: some concepts are just "traditional". It's interesting to note exactly now many 4e mechanics made it into 5e, though. You just have to disguise them so the grognards don't lose their minds.

painkills2 votes

But Heroes of the Storm has an In-game decision that is gated by level. Runes here, are an out of game decision that are always on. Items are a closer parallel to HotS talents than runes are.

painkills1 votes

But Heroes of the Storm has an In-game decision that is gated by level. Runes here, are an out of game decision that are always on. Items are a closer parallel to HotS talents than runes are.

painkills2 votes

But Heroes of the Storm has an In-game decision that is gated by level. Runes here, are an out of game decision that are always on. Items are a closer parallel to HotS talents than runes are.

ModUlanopo5 votes

Reduce complexity, increase quality! League should be a simple game with complex player interaction, not a complex game with braindead "woops ya dead" interaction!

That's hyperbole. A simpler game is not, by definition, better than a complex one. I received received a game called Vanagard through Kickstarter. It was marketed as a simple roleplaying game based around Norse animal-kin. Unfortunately, the mechanics are so rudimentary, it amounts to a "make your own fun" kit.

As far as "braindead 'woops ya dead' interactions" go, that's a balance issue, not a design issue. Frankly, I would argue that many more items are problematic (Stormrazor, anyone?) than runes.

SaltyToplaneGoat2 votes

However, a simpler game is easier to maintain, and - most of all - easier to balance. It is one thing to have many levers to adjust the game state from as a dev, but the current rune system is a "cursed lever". You flip it over and it causes chain reactions and side effects that are often bigger than the problem you were trying to fix in the first place.

The current problems that impact game quality are power creep and balancing - if one wants to increase quality, those fields need to be adressed, and the one thing that stands in the way of that is the Rune System that makes the job impossibly hard. A simpler game is not a better game by definition - however, a simpler game is easier to balance, and therefore better for a game of this genre!

ModUlanopo2 votes

A simpler game is not a better game by definition - however, a simpler game is easier to balance, and therefore better for a game of this genre!

That would seem to imply that fewer items and runes would be better, not just trashing the runes system. After all, runes are nothing more than items you don't have to purchase with gold.

dark100dark1002 votes

Overwatch? Most champions has 2-3 core skills and it works awesome. In the game you need to outplay your opponents rather than finding op combinations left by game designers.

SangreDeNoche1 votes

{quoted}

Two questions for you:

  • How do you address the idea that without some form of customization beyond items (which are just as susceptible to solved optimization as runes/masteries) the game itself becomes solved on a larger level?

  • What would be problematic about a simplified runes/masteries system as opposed to junking it entirely?

Here's a question for you:

*If Riot wanted actual customization why is the runes reforge lacking in all the stats from defensive runes?

Health, health regen, armor, mr, etc. were all in old runes and you could swap out offensive runes to suit your needs and vice versa however riot made the system MORE limiting while just before that claiming champions needed their kits to be overloaded so that there were more places to tweak to keep them balanced. We've not seen a single case of that being true in all this time.

DeathBurst5 votes

OK, you make the case for the removal pretty well, but please refrain from blatant hyperbole like that last paragraph.

Benefits for keeping this outdated concept alive? None, unless you like having systems in your game that just annoy literally everyone, players, newlings, and devs alike.

This is simply factually wrong. I'm not gonna detail everything, but just off the top of my head, here are a few benefit from the Rune system:

  • Customize a given kit to your personal playstyle. Going Predator VS Electrocute VS Press the Attack on the same champ will totally change your game plan, for instance. It allows more people to play the same champion if they like it, with different playstyle.
  • Adapt yourself to the circumstances, especially for One-Tricks. If you can only play one champion well, the flexibility in the Rune system lets you fit into more team comps, and versus more match-up. A Diver like Vi for instance can go heavy damage to carry, or invest into Resolve to serve as a front-line for her team if she has no other Tank with her. Or Juggernauts can use Predator to have kill pressure against Ranged match-ups, or even Phase Rush against other less dominant Melee.
  • Similar to the previous point but also important, it lets you adapt the same kit to different role/position. You wanna go in lane and bully your opponent? Take Aery+Domination. You need to Jungle? Go Aftershock+Precision for faster clear speed and durability for safe ganks.

Your whole argument relies on the above points not happening in practice, because people always go for the "optimized cookie-cutter build with tons of damage", but again, that's simply not true. People at the highest levels, even in Master, use various Rune builds in various situations. Just from the streamers I personally follow, Ristiu, Singed420 and SirchEz always mix-up their Runes. And Dong Huap often do videos on "off-meta" builds that reach Master/Challenger, and why they work.

The problem is, even if you make a very good argument for one side, if you just dismiss the other side entirely, that's still not an interesting discussion, that's just you posing your (well-informed) opinion as facts, and that's not cool...

So, if you really wanna convince me to ditch out Runes: you don't need to convince me that a simpler game is better, I already agree with that. You need to convince me that all the above points I made are not worth the cost of the Rune system.

Karunamon4 votes

{quoted}

  • Customize a given kit to your personal playstyle. Going Predator VS Electrocute VS Press the Attack on the same champ will totally change your game plan, for instance. It allows more people to play the same champion if they like it, with different playstyle.

Does this actually happen in the real world at substantial numbers? AFAICT, most champions have a single viable rune build with maybe a single variation based on matchup. And that variation is usually in the same tree.

Which is strangely very similar to how the old system was played in real life.

In most games with changeable stat systems, going all the way back to D&D, you play to your strengths rather than buff your weaknesses. MissFortune, for example, is an AD glass cannon - you will almost never see her running the resolve or inspiration trees. This was even recognized when the old system was redone, as champions got a bunch of stat buffs along the same lines as their usual rune pages to compensate for their removal. Nobody gave Nami bonus AD.

You can point to popular streamers as outliers, but they are just that. Outliers. Oneoff streamers or pros number a few thousand people in a game with millions of players.


Another reason I'd point at is that we traded a devil we knew for half a decade plus, for a new and untested system, at the very real cost of further balance headaches.

Was it worth it? I don't think so. Poor balance makes the game unfun in a way that stagnation does not. And it's not like stagnation was ever a real concern, with the constant march of champ/item/mechanic rebalancing. This constituted another stack of variables being added, for what I see as very little actual benefit.

Were Riot a crack team of elite gameplay design people with a storied history of changes that keep League a fun, yet balanced game (as I put on my Thanos gauntlets), I'd have a completely different pattern of it. Instead, we have a game that goes from OP FOTM to OP FOTM with very little in the way of actual balance.

Getting your face stomped in because a change went through that people who play the game could tell you was a bad idea (anyone remember the multiple ardent censer buffs last season?) is anti-fun.

painkills2 votes

The thing is, if you want to change tanky Vi into damage Vi, even without the rune system, Items still allow you to do this. The argument you make is predicated on Runes being the only way to change the playstyle of your champion.

DeathBurst1 votes

Items are much more effective to adapt to a situation than to completely alter your role in the team-comp. If you go Electrocute, you'll never be as tanky as if you go for Aftershock. Some champs also have core items that they really can't function properly without, so even if the item system gives some flexibility, it's delayed to a later point in the game.

So, yeah, if Rune aren't the only way to change your playstyle, they are the main one and the most efficient at that. The purpose of the item system is NOT to completely alter your playstyle, and more to leverage early wins for late game advantage. Making good plays gives you more gold to invest into items to be more efficient.

Umbral Regent3 votes

I want to focus on your third point a little here, 'cause I feel like you're pointing out a problem that has surprisingly minimal impact on the system itself; the problem being that Runes (as any system) gets generally "solved".

First thing's first, like Ulanopo mentioned, Items are just as susceptible to being solved as Runes - although I'd go a step further and say they're more solvable, even though that hypothetically isn't true. Both are open-ended systems that rely on the player's intuition of their playstyle and how their Champion operates, but, as with any game, players will get the core systems down to a science just to win better.

Runes, though, I feel are less-so solvable (and for that matter, solved) than item builds. Sure, runes are way more limited than items, and greater breadth means more options to puzzle out, but let's look at it this way:

The runes are primarily designed to be small but impactful bonuses that you can take with you into matches. Whether that be reduced damage on the first three attacks that hit you, bonus ambient vision and a damage boost from having it in enemy territory, or the ability to spend more gold than you actually have.

Between those and the keystones, which are built to be the centerpiece of your Rune builds - which, are fairly diverse, no less - there is at least some room for personalization in your rune builds.

To try and better get my point across, I wanna bring up a few Champions who can actually run a decent variety in Rune setups. Master Yi, for example, can work reliably with Press the Attack, Lethal Tempo, Conqueror, Dark Harvest, and Hail of Blades, and can probably even get some niche use out of Electrocute, Grasp of the Undying. Sure, his other runes in those trees are pretty set-in-stone (Triumph, Legend: Alacrity, Coup de Grace, for example), but that is a fair amount of options to work with in a given match.

Similarly, Shen can run Aftershock, Hail of Blades, Press the Attack, Grasp of the Undying, Guardian, or Conqueror, as well as some niche use of Predator, Kleptomancy, etc.

And, just for one last example, let's use a more recent Champion; Pyke. Albeit this is kind of cheating since Pyke is a Catcher-Assassin hybrid. He can use Guardian, Aftershock, Dark Harvest, Electrocute, Predator, with some potential niche use of Kleptomancy or Glacial Augment.

And, of course, nearly everyone can adopt a rune page using Unsealed Spellbook if they like, though that speaks more to the versatility of that keystone than anything else.

That is a fair bit more depth and choice than I'd get anywhere else.

Also, you mention the fact that the Rune system is a whole hell of a lot more stuff piled onto the list of things that newer players have to learn...And, you're right, that is. But new players are going to be spending more time learning the game as a whole, and they do have preset Rune pages to help give them less mental work to do.

They have a Press the Attack build for Marksmen and Skirmishers, an Electrocute build for Assassins, an Arcane Comet build for Mages, a Grasp of the Undying build for Juggernauts and Tanks, and an Unsealed Spellbook + survivability rune page for general use. With those five rune pages, they can set aside figuring out the Rune system until they figure out a few Champions for themselves - and, when they feel they better understand the systems they're working with, can devise a rune page to fit the Champion they play.

Granted, the wordless, "we'll let you find this on your own" nature of runes tends to make it more front-loaded info you have to consume, but the preset pages are a decent way to mitigate that immediate confusion.

That was a whole lot of rambling for all of two counterarguments, but, I hope they at least prove to be solid enough points to consider.

Gramps693 votes

@OP Bless your heart, this post really sums up a lot of feelings I've had since the season started. It doesn't really feel like I'm playing champions anymore, I'm only playing a vessel to best exploit X rune, or Y item. Champions that can't abuse these runes or items are inherently weaker (i.e. Amumu, one of my favorites from past seasons), and some runes grant True Damage, that thing that had been restricted to a summoner spell and about 6 or 7 champions throughout every season til now.

Really big fan of the idea of removing the current runes system. I wouldn't mind seeing some kind of flat-stats/scaling stats options to choose pre-game, so that an Orianna that was counter picked by Zed can grab some extra armor to survive lane phase, or an off-meta jungler can get some more armor for their early clears.

SaltyToplaneGoat2 votes

If in a game that is literally about "legends", the champions, you are not feeling like you are playing one, that is a BIG problem.

The scenario you mentioned with Ori vs. Zed could be solved without any stuff from outside the match: just diversify starting items and do the rest with base state accordingly. Balancing stuff like that, like one champ having a slightly overbearing early game or power spike can easily be handled with less interlocking systems present. Because if you now change Zed or Ori a little, that suddenly will not affect balance in unforseen ways - the problems Runes always cause. Nerf one rune, buff another, suddenly a load of champions that was never supposed to use the rune get OP with it. Like this we just run from one problem to another. The better solution would be to cut this mess altogether!

Power Cosmic3 votes

It is great that you took the time to think this through. I agree to a point but the most important thing for me personally as a gamer is depth; and I'm sure there are a lot of people like me. Now that I am thinking too, I do not like the concept of Keystones, yet I'm heavily in favor of stat manipulation. There would be favorable ways to go (a meta) with stats, but the vast majority would ideally not be game breaking, and would open the door for plenty of experimentation and personalization. In summation, basically bring together the old runes and the present system to have deeper but less potent customization options.

Hilsun3 votes

I mostly agree with the OP here. I think damage-creep is a real problem, and it has been for years, even before the remastered runes. I do like that they provide slightly different ways to play a champion, but I think the way they did it was TOO influential. I know one of their big reasons for redoing it all was because they wanted to make a runes/mastery system that felt meaningful, but I think they flew past "meaningful" and went straight to "game-defining." I think too many of their keystone runes offer too much damage without changing anything about gameplay (adding Electrocute as a keystone, for instance, changes nothing about how a Zed or Talon perform their combos over if they were to take Conqueror or Dark Harvest even).

InTheory2 votes

Jumping in to give my two cents here:

  1. I'm not sure how many players use them but the fact that there are pre-set rune pages might case a noticeable part of the casual players to not really use the rune system as a customization tool in the first place but as a mandatory self-solving part of the game which contradicts the existance of the runes reforged in the first place.

  2. The fact that Riot sold rune pages for real cash currency (RP) in the past was a curse they are now stuck with. They can't get rid of runes reforged as they'd have to get rid of rune pages for that. Truth is, they already got rid of old runes for the most part and just renamed their mastery system as runes to pass on the problem with rune pages. Thinking about removing rune pages must always come with solving the problem how to handle rune pages.

Pika Fox2 votes

Balance =/= fun. Why not just have 1 champ everyone plays?

Awf Meta2 votes

You are assuming Riot is striving for a sort of "equilibrium"?

I think Riot wants to shape a constantly evolving meta. Kind of like Magic the Gathering.

SaltyToplaneGoat1 votes

They should, because that's what the genre demands.

MtG does not really "try" to make an evolving meta. They have their standard format that simply kicks out every set older than 2 years - and then there's Modern, and that's every card since Mirrodin Block, which is a FUCKTON of cards. Like, no matter WHAT is going to be broken in modern, someone somewhere will be able to assemble a counter out of the literally thousands of different cards at their disposal. All they occasionally do is to print specific "hate-cards" in new sets that don't really do much there, but can really break apart modern strategies like Tron or Storm.

They don't really shape a meta, the meta is completly player driven, and occsionally they widen the players toolbelt with specific hate-cards if one strategy appears to be overwhelming suddenly.

Riot on the other hand should not try themselves to direct a meta - all they should do is create an equal playing field for all champions so players can figure out the rest. The moment they start deciding what is now allowed to be viable and what not we run into a mountain of problems. I do not mind it if like, 5 REALLY old champions are intentionally kept down until their rework hits, as their design just is harmful for the game. Five out of 140 does not bother me. What bothers me when there's suddenly only a quarter of the roster made to be "viable" for the one or the other stupid reason. Why do you even bother having a game with 140+ champions when I can't even play half of them?!

A directed meta lacks the evolutionary drive and leads to stagnation, and ultimatively bordeom - the absolute WORST thing an entertaiment product can bring up. They should just focus on making a good game instead of trying to direct how it is played.

Karunamon1 votes

{quoted}

Riot on the other hand should not try themselves to direct a meta - all they should do is create an equal playing field for all champions so players can figure out the rest.

They've never, ever behaved this way. Two examples: proxy singed was specifically targeted by way of changing how the death mechanics work. Lane swaps, an early (S1/S2) pro strategy, were specifically targeted by way of removing the botlane tower buff that the other two towers share.

Both of these also share an issue: they affected a lot more than the one specific problem they set out to solve. In the desire to godhand a single strategy out of existence (rather than letting the player base evolve alongside it), the entire meta was warped to compensate. We're still feeling the effects of that godforsaken bot tower change (bot lane decides game), almost a decade later.

Irelia Bot2 votes

Honestly would be fine if Riot removed runes/masteries and put some of the more interesting ones on items. Then again some have something comparable on an item already be it Rightous Glory has predator or nullifying orb being comparable to hexdrinker/maw.

Kazoo Soloist2 votes

I doubt many people would miss Runes in the long run...

I for one would.

I still feel gypped by Riot switching over from the old rune system without properly compensating players, but that's a separate issue.

Point is, I think that the crowd that feels similarly to how I do is larger than you imply with this statement.

Most of the people I talk to like having a rune / mastery system, but wish that there were either more (or more meaningful) mastery choices. I don't think I've met a single other person who's said. "We should abolish runes and masteries."

Shinjusuke2 votes

Design is almost always about a balance of the cost of complexity in order to add depth.

For almost any game, you're seeking to add as much depth as possible at the cost of as little complexity as possible.

On that premise, I'm not convinced that the Runes system needs abolished completely, but I believe that all the non-keystone runes should be removed and that each player should be able to select a single, powerful, playstyle-warping keystone before the game, much like they do for Summoner Spells.

Runes have the potential to add a high degree of depth with little complexity, but that possibility isn't (and realistically, probably cannot) being realized by systems where you have one major effect and 6 minor effects. It's just a bunch of complexity and those 6 minor effects don't add a significantly noticeable amount of depth.

Summoner Spells are basically a "solved" mechanism in League. Unless one of them is extremely overpowered at the time, generally speaking you take Smite and Flash if you're Jungling and your name isn't Shaco, and otherwise you take Flash and a different spell dependent on your lane (typically Exhaust/Ignite for Supports, Barrier/Heal for ADCs, TP for Top Laners, and Mid is mostly champion-based).

Keystones could add a lot of depth, if Riot abolished all the other minor effects and put all that power and design space into several really compelling keystones targeted at specific groups of characters outright. ESPECIALLY if they successfully made it a choice that mattered every game based on matchup.

The current system is, in my opinion, far superior to old runes and masteries from a general game design standpoint, but I strongly feel that really, the best version would just be selecting one playstyle-warping keystone and that's it, and focusing on balancing those specific things such that every champion has at least 2, hopefully 3, viable options.

And it provably works. Not to get into a HotS vs League topic, but the HotS talent system allows for significant variance in playstyle for quite a number of characters because they allow talents to fundamentally change how a character plays the game. And it makes those characters more interesting, and to my knowledge most HotS players praise the talent system. If I'm playing Abathur (don't hate me, HotS players), the way I play a game is very different based on which Ultimate I take.

I'd very much like to see Keystones go down that same road, where players actually care about their keystones and their opponents keystones, and choose based on playstyle preference, much like how a lot of players care what Summoner Spells their lane opponent brings.

At the moment I really don't give a rats ass whether Yi has Hail of Blades, Press the Attack, or Lethal Tempo, because it doesn't actually change anything. If all the minor runes were removed so that the Keystones could vastly change how a champion approaches situations, I'd care whether the Master Yi has X keystone or Y keystone.

TLDR: The whole system isn't a bad idea and doesn't need removed entirely, but I strongly feel the best version would be to make single, very powerful Keystones that fundamentally change how you approach playing a character.

The Bad Touch2 votes

I would much prefer a revert to the old runes/masteries system. Or an even more complex one. I'll refer to WoW in this example. The moment that removed masteries the game started to die population wise. I play about 1/3 as much as I did before and go a week or 2 at a time without playing a single game. Where as when I owned all Runes I was ALWAYS capable of finding something fun to try in norms.

The primary reason I still play League is to try out weird builds. The new runes system has killed 80% of the reason I play.

Even Youtube content creators have mostly moved on because there is such limited ways to customize and at it's base the game gets rather dull to watch after a few hundred of the exact same champs with the exact same builds.

(Mind you I'm still salty as hell over the HUNDREDS of dollars I spent on buying champs with RP and IP boosts to unlock every rune... that I got basically nothing back for.)

Jetboost2 votes

A couple of points i want to make in defense of runes and masteries.

  1. Some people like complexity they like to puzzle with what they got.
  2. This connects with point 1. Some people like to play X champion in Y way. Runes and masteries allows them to play that way.
  3. Runes and masteries allows for more diversity in the game and thus makes it less monotone and therefore more enjoyable. 4.You say it is about the champion and its kit the problem with this however is that you would be forced to play champion X in role Y or otherwise being called out for trolling. As example i like Tresh and i wanted to get into jungling so i pick Tresh with the passive on his E it should be possible i thought but no you couldn't you are trolling they say. But having runes makes this more or less possible. (point 4 kinda connects with point 2).

So yeah balancing may take a lot of work (i am working on a game myself the spreadsheet i use on google for ballancing has allready crashed multiple times due to all the calculation i was even getting ad's for a MYSQL database i digress what i want to say is) i know balancing is a lot of work and takes a lot of time but it also gives a game more content and that is in my opinion worth the effort.

Judah Bot2 votes

The way that Riot has been moving the Runes around in their rows... what was once presented as logical, has shown itself to be arbitrary in the end anyway. The runes aren't particularly arranged in any sequence of power or conflict. They should just say here: Pick a Keystone and any three, and done with it. I don't see any two runes currently in the same row that are broken if taken together. Actually, the runes that would stack, tend to be in different rows anyway.

Unflinching wasn't nerfed when they moved it down, and Bone Plating isn't getting nerfed by going down in position either.

Tanks with Shields now get to take Bone Plating AND get Stronger Shields.

DearPear1 votes

The more complex a game, the harder it is to balance.

That's quite wrong!

SaltyToplaneGoat2 votes

Actually history proves otherwise. Do you remember the old Starcraft? The one game that had such a success it became the bedrock of modern korean culture? RTS at the time before SC were HORRIBLY complex. They catered to a specific niche audience that would see any reduction of game complexity as an insult to their self precieved intelligence. Then Blizzard came along and did what they always do: make it simple, polish up the graphics (for the time), and add a story they know the mainstream would like (It's pretty much space-elves vs the masses-of-evil with humans in between them. Typical generic fantasy). Heck they did the same with HotS, it's called "baby's first moba" for a reason by some people...

Starcraft became a massive hit. Sure, compared to must RTS back in the day it was "dumb", low in inherent complexity, but compared to the others it was balanced. The complexity arised from the player interaction that led to specific optimized strategies for specific matchups, opening moves, optimized cheese, and so on. But the game itself was simple as hell. Unit Micro was a thing that could be put to good use, but the macro game was always way more important.

And the deviation from that is what ruined it for SC2 with their latest expansion: suddenly you had a lot of units with special, combat focussed activated abilities or gimmics even early in the game, and suddenly unit micro was a LOT more important. The complexity of the game was increased, and the balance was now dependant on a player's skill with specific micro-mechanics, no longer bound to the overall balance of species macro. As a result: Starcraft 2 could by far not reach the popularity or presence of the previous title.

To put it into comparison: In SC2:WoL the "gimmicest" early-game threat, a Terran-T1 unit, was the Reaper. His ability was that he was kinda fast and could jump cliffs, which allowed for unconventional attack routes on the hostile workers. The obvious counterplay was obviously to either block the routes or deploy defense accordingly. Fast forwards some years, in the latest version you have a fast ranged Protoss unit that can send out a clone of itself and if the player wants they can make the unit switch places with the mirror-image. Also two of these are enough to murder a whole base and half of their hitpoints is regenerating shield. See the difference?

They tried to appease the diehard esport gosus, when they made up maybe 1% of the playerbase. Cranking up game complexity just because the highest 1% of players can deal with it, but fucking over game balance for the "regulars" in the process which actually was a major selling point of the series, was a horrible idea, and Riot appears to be slowly going down that same route. This is a problem, and should be fought wherever possible.

oortoomeebreesuu1 votes

Something always bugged me about runes and masteries, they put a lot of effort into champions base stats and the damage and scaling of their abilities, only to go so far out of their way to ruin their own designs. All of these ABSURDLY niche picks like Aftershock and Kleptomancy that offer some champions absurd bonuses, then other champs like Urgot are like "Well i guess my best choice is free summoner spells" which is such a wildly random benefit, either a ghost or exhaust gets you the kill or you sit on an exhaust when you should have TP available for a roam and it throws the game, YAY!

Runes Reforged was the literal - and I've seen a lot - literal worst patch I have ever seen, in any game. They spent so long with total radio silence, not about that the problems were being fixed, but that they even knew what the problems were.

Rekkon1 votes

The only problem is that you literally start the game from 0, only counting on your base stats and starter items. This is a problem for AP champions, so there must be a workaround for that.

Also, as someone else said in a comment, having something like Augments specialized for each specific champion will indeed make a better solution.

Glaricion1 votes

My only issue with augments is that it is another way for Riot to enforce their vision of how champions are to be played. Elise, Nidalee, Graves, Taliyah, Skarner, etc... have all been forced into the jungle, supports forced to be solely supports, etc... Would hate to see how many more champion-role combinations would be eliminated if augments were implemented.

edit: augment thing is from a comment I saw scrolling, not the original post

Power Cosmic1 votes

Another important thing is that most Runes used are offensive in nature (even the gold ones). So if you get behind they give you close to no value, and while ahead they are tremendously strong. If you hit someone with a comet or electrocute when behind it means nothing, while someone hits you with it from ahead it makes their lead that much more insurmountable. The runes need to be changed drastically. Someone is behind every game and to all them the runes do mostly nothing but bury them; hence the not-so-fun pace of the game.

Velasan1 votes

Hmmm I mean sure you could do other systems... but it ultimately boils down to a similar result. Either you are balancing champions around what they can take or having to alter the system by who can take what; same problem. Taking out the entire system completely is boring and doesn't reward strategic planning.

There are also other games that manage to have talent/mastery systems and not completely destroy their balance.

It's a fun idea to throw around, but probably wouldn't actually help the game as a whole.

More from [ARCHIVED] Gameplay+

More by SaltyToplaneGoat