Boards›[ARCHIVED] Miscellaneous

@IronStylus Data on Champions and Skins by Gender

RiotSkarnye West··25 votes·8,563 views

Hey everybody,

My name's Gentleman Gustaf, I'm a writer for LoLEsportsand Cloth5, as well as my own website, and also an ex-writer for A Different View. Recently, I shifted over to making infographics, and cutting and pasting so many splash arts really struck home the way that champions are characterized by gender, so I thought I'd bring my experience with blogging and data to bear on this issue. My original post can be found here, but it is pretty long (~4500 words), so I figured I'd try to summarize it here as best as I can. My hope is to get a response from and a dialogue with reds (maybe IronStylus), because I believe that these are issues that he understands, is aware of, and has talked about in the past (specifically regarding his decision to put Leona in heels).

Because I know this is long like WOAH, I'm putting this near the top. I was asked by a forum-poster "How many champions and skins would Riot have to release in a row following your guidelines in order to balance the scales of representation?"

This is my answer.

"No well-intentioned effort is ever wasted. There's no quota which needs be enforced, a good-faith attempt to do would do wonders to destigmatize gaming as a boys-only club (something which is false; 45% of gamers are women, and the average age is 30).

TBH, If Riot made one good female monstrous champion, I'd think "exactly, they understand the concept" and trust them to handle champion releases from then on. I'd want more, but I understand the practicalities they're dealing with.

Riot has already released the vast majority of champions it is ever going to release. Honestly, the best solution I can think is small visual upgrades to Diana and Leona (like they did with Sejuani) to emphasize the aspects of their character that make them different by referencing them in their art. Make both of them a bit stronger and fuller, remove the heels from the Leona skin. Even the 'fan service' Leona skin is very good. Riot is on the right track, more than almost any mainstream game I can think of. They just need nudges to keep them going."

"Furthermore, I don't mean to imply a lack of progress by Riot. There have been consistently better female champions.

Jinx has a vastly different bodytype from most other LoL champions, inasmuch as her breasts are not the size of her head.

Lissandra's proportions are quite inhuman, and she is certainly progress towards a truly monstrous female skin.

Quinn is fully clothed in both of her skins!

Vi is a badass, and her Officer skin, while very sexualizing, is not at all bothersome due to its juxtaposition with a reasonably skinned champion.

Now back to the post!

I’m about to dive into some mountain data, and I implore you to read it all. But if you want to read my suggestions for first, before you do so, here they are.

  • Diversify monsters: make some truly monstrous champions that are female. I’m sure your community (not to mention your already employed concept designers) have plenty of ideas for that.
  • Change what “revealing” means. Make more revealing skins for male champions, and allow some female champions to go without revealing skins.
  • Change what “sexy” means. The variety in male champions shows you understand this distinction. Some champions are sexy because they’re trying to be sexy, and are sexualizef. Some champions are just inherently sexy, but it isn’t their main attribute. Allow more female champions to fall into that camp: let them be sexy without forcing sexualization.
  • Let your creations speak for themselves. Don’t overstate something when subtlety will do, because it adds depth to the overall presentation.

Why do I think this? Let's dive into some data!

Monstrous Champions

First, I divided all champions into three groups: humanoid, cute, and monstrous. The definitions can be quibbled over, but basically, I'm going by facial structure. Cute champions have HUGE heads compared to their bodies, whereas monstrous have non-human faces.

  • Total: 118 – 78 Male (66%); 40 Female (34%)
  • Cute: 14 (12%) – 10 Male (9%); 4 Female (3%)
  • Monstrous: 36 (31%) – 34 Male (29%); 2 Female (2%)
  • Humanoid: 67 (57%) – 33 Male (28%); 34 Female (29%)
  • Nunu: 1 – Humanoid? Cute? I couldn’t really make a decision, but he's non-humanoid, and that's what matters to the following analysis.

What struck me as most interesting when I was going through the list of champions was how many I didn’t know the genders of with 100% certainty: Blitzcrank, Fiddlesticks, Galio, Kog’Maw, Malphite, Maokai. I checked their bios to make sure, and indeed, they were male. As well, Cho (Gentleman skin aside), Galio, Karthus, Nautilus, Nocturne, Rammus, Skarner, and Xerath could all easily be female. I don’t mean that their characters could have been designed female. I mean that, had I gone to their bios and seen “she”, I wouldn’t have thought “typo” (as I might about, say, Darius or Garen), I would have thought “didn’t see that coming”.

This is — I think — what creates the perception that the genders are ‘even’ in League of Legends. When it comes to humanoids, that is certainly true. It is just that all of the non-gendered champions are, by default, male. On the other hand, when you have a female champion who could be monstrous, like Elise, she is very clearly female. If Elise’s bio said “he”, I’d think “typo”.

http://ddragon.leagueoflegends.com/cdn/img/champion/splash/Elise_0.jpg

So basically, you have a 50/50 split between male and female champions, unless they’re non-human, in which case they’re mostly (88%) male by default. An equal number of humanoid men and women is actually staggeringly notable in the field of fantasy, so kudos to Riot there.

Ever heard of the Smurfette Principle? Basically, it says that most casts will have a lots of different characters: the funny guy, the smart guy, the annoying guy, the single guy, the sneaky guy, the woman. Notice the difference? The guys have adjectives that make them different; the woman is different by virtue of being a woman.

By and large, Riot avoids the Smurfette Principle. But arguably where it matters most, the Monstrous champions (those champions who are the most different from normal), male characters are given all of the divergence from ‘normal’.

This isn’t a new concern to voice; people have been asking for female monstrous champions for ages. The real issue is that Riot thinks they have produced female monstrous champions.

Now, you may argue that I’m being unfair in excluding Soraka or Cassiopeia, but you’ll notice that I’ve been pretty consistent in excluding Aatrox as well. When it comes to male champions, Riot has put out some seriously monstrous (and I mean that in a complimentary way) champions, like Urgot or Trundle. But when it comes to female champions, the ‘monstrous’ champions more resemble ‘sexy’ Halloween costumes than monsters.

Suggestion #1 – Female Monsters

There’s an easy solution for Riot. Next time you release a genderless champion — a water elemental, for example — make it a lady water elemental, give it lady voicing, and for the love of god don’t give it breasts because it is a water elemental and why does it need to suckle young like a mammal?

Even cooler (Riot, you can hire me for this champion), why not make a cool Void champion that has two heads, is genderless, and speaks with two voices (one male, one female). Sometimes, you can have them talk separately, but you can also have them talk together for a cool blended effect! Call it Kor’Nath, the Progenitor of the Void. Ok, but that’s all you get for free! (No really, I even have a kit written up for them. You know how to reach me!)

Revealing Skin(s)

The second area in which female skins vary wildly from male skins is in the amount of skin per skin. For now, we’ll only be looking at humanoid champions. Refer to the above definitions: a humanoid champion has a head which is significantly smaller than their torso or body, and whose bodily (but especially facial) proportions are within the realm of plausibility for a human.

To give a strict definition, I’ll be calling a skin revealing if the torso below the armpits or the legs above the mid-thigh are revealed. I acknowledge that this is a general rubric and not a hard rule, of course. After all, Blood Moon Akali is technically revealing according to my definition, but I think we can mostly agree that it’s a pretty classy skin:

Firsts, looking at the base skins, 12 of the male champions (36%) have a revealing base skin, while 23 of the female champions (68%) have a revealing base skin.

And while there are 15 male champions (45%) who have no revealing skins, only 2 of the 34 female champions (a mere 6%), Kayle and Quinn, have no revealing skins.

On the other hand, there are 15 female champions (44%) who have no skins that aren’t revealing. Male champions who fit that bill? Not a single one.

Now, I'm not saying that partial nudity in a game is problematic. And I don't just mean that in the aforementioned Blood Moon Akali sense. Some champions simply should be sexualized! Take Ahri for example:

Ahri, as a character, is supposed to be foxy and sexy. One of her ability is literally called Charm. The description? Ahri blows a kiss…the first enemy it hits…is charmed, forcing them to walk harmlessly towards Ahri. She is literally a fox lady! Everything about her character says sexy, sultry seductress who will turn around and kill you. I think there is definitely a place in the game for characters like Ahri.

That time and place just isn’t almost every female champion in the game.

Unfortunately, the data above shows that it is almost every female champion in the game.

As well, the ‘revealing’ skins for men almost all reveal some part of the chest. This is about the only sexy skin that reveals a male champion’s legs above the knee.

I made a joke above about Halloween costumes, but it is in the themed skins where we see the biggest difference between the male and female champions.

When a male champion gets a theme costume, they’re relatively serious and impersonate the role they take. When a female champion gets a theme costume? Look for yourself. Let’s take, for example, Doctor Shen and Nurse Akali.

In this case (and many more like it), the message is clear: men are there to do things; women are there to be looked at.

Suggestion #2 – Skin Variety

111 of the 152 female skins (73%) are revealing, while 35 of the 134 male skins (26%) are revealing. That’s basically an inverse value. Only 2 female champions aren’t ready to strip down. Make some badass fully clothed (maybe even armored) female champions. And then, 6 months down the line, when you feel the urge to make a skin of them half-naked, just don’t. Instead, give us a sexy shirtless Jayce. Malzahar, too. Oh, and Vladimir. Riot pls ; )

http://www.deviantart.com/art/Malzahar-381900182

Champions like Varus, Aatrox, Leona, Diana, and Vi are all great starts. But instead of making exceptions, Riot could easily start setting their own trends.

Of course, it’s not just clothing that sends the message that women are eye candy, but also the positions champions are put into. It's important to make an important note here. Sexy is a quality champions possess. Sexualization is a quality of presentation of a champion.

One can advocate for female champions to be less sexualized (on average, not across the board) while not making any comments about how sexy they are. There are a large number of sexy male champions, but a small number (Varus/Aatrox/Pool Party) that are sexualized. On the other hand, pretty much every female champion is sexy, and every female champion but for a couple is sexualized in at least one skin.

Sexy and sexualized champions are not the problem: this imbalance is.

Broken Back Mountain

If you'll look at the champions in League of Legends, you'll see that a number of female champions appear to have shattered their spines.

I’m so used to seeing women posed in ads or billboards in ridiculous positions with half of their chest photoshopped out that my judgement was horribly wrong. So I called in two friends of mine with a lot of experience drawing the human body to second-guess me.

And what did they do? I categorized each skin as “That pose is totally manageable”, “That pose is uncomfortable looking, but I bet it’s possible”, or “Dear gods, what am I looking at?”

Rarely did they disagree with me when I said “Dear gods, what am I looking at?” For example, we all agreed that Soraka has clearly just suffered an spine-shattering fall:

But almost every time I said “that looks uncomfortable, but I’ll bet it’s possible”, they turned, looked me dead in the eyes, and said “show me”. In the now four days since then I’ve had constant pain in my everything. My back feels like an elephant stepped on me repeatedly. But if you don’t believe me, ask this contortionist martial artist who has written on the same topic.

Again, this is not a female-only thing, but it is certainly a predominantly female thing. Aatrox, after all, is definitely giving us a little bit of the stock chest + butt pose:

Take note: I’m not criticizing the Riot artists for being unable to draw. Sometimes, you want a character in a certain pose, but you also want that character’s face visible. So you cheat a bit with perspective, you shave a bit here and there, and you bend your character just a bit to make the picture work. And in moderation, there’s nothing wrong with that! But it can be overdone, both in degree and in quantity.

To give an example, here is a side-by-side of how Lux looks, vs a re-worked version of Lux for less broken spine, courtesy of Escher Girls:

When you see the following data, you should know that anything that I did not always disagree with my friends. If I couldn’t manage a position, but it was close, I let it slide anyway. Only things I upgraded to “that champion literally does not fit together/is dead” got counted as “awkward pose”.

32 champions in total were posed in a ridiculous fashion, and of those 32, 27 were female, and 5 were male.

To give some data to this point, let’s narrow our search to champions who are both posed and revealingly dressed in the same skin. This leaves us with 23 of our 34 female champions vs 2 of our 33 male champions. Mostly, the men are posed to be cool, while the women are posed to be sexualized.

In Riot’s defense, they actually have a decent lineup of male champions designed to be sexy:

But with exception of Aatrox and Varus, the male champions are not trying to be sexy, they just are. Ok. They’re trying a little bit. I can totally see Graves sucking it in and walking with his shoulders back. But if that’s trying, what is this?

Now, I feel that I need to reiterate my thesis to make sure that the point is not lost at this point: I do not object to sexualized skins or champions. What I object to is the huge dichotomy of variety. Male champions exist in all varieties: macho, boyish, lithe, muscled, sexy, and monstrous. Female champions basically have thin and sexy.

Suggestion #3 – Stop Trying so Hard

You have a great team of artists. If I didn’t want to work at Riot Games already, I would want to just to meet Iron Stylus after seeing him being an excited geek about Leona's sword. Let’s not mention the wonderful champion designers you have. So trust their characters. We were compelled by Diana in her base skin.

She’s a sexy, dark, powerful, scary badass with an underexplored storyline. And then we get to her followup skin. It has potential; it highlights her massive changes from her past in ways that a story could not. But it does that whether or not she’s arching her back impossibly.

Everybody trusts Riot’s ability to make new champions, develop characters and storylines, and tell stories with skins. Y’all are badasses. So rest on that, on the variety of stories you can tell, not on chest + butt poses.

Riot really had a chance to break new ground in the representation of women in games with Diana and Leona. You already have the sexy/lithe male archetype with Varus/Aatrox.

You could have embraced the physically strong woman archetype with Diana and Leona. Unfortunately, they ended up with the same sort of stick figure bodies every other female champion has.

And that’s ok. Who am I to tell you how Diana or Leona should look? Those are your ideas, not mine. But the idea for a stronger looking, fuller, more buff female character? That can be your idea too. You only have to embrace it.

Game of Thrones did it with Brienne, and they’re about as successful as fantasy gets.

Who Cares?

Why does this matter? Because media shapes the way we see the world. Because maybe this is the reason there are so many fewer female League of Legends players. Because it’s real life, flesh and blood sports that are constrained by the old notions of male competitors and female cheerleaders. Fantasy is about imagining new and better things, and breaking the way we see the world.

Or as WhyU put it: *92% of LoL users are male, and yet, 45% of gamers are female.*

Could the sexual objectification of female champions be apart of the reason why so few girls play League of Legends (comparatively)? Could another part be the misogynistic views held by so many LoL gamers? Is there a causal link between the two?

Overall

You can have your overly sexualized female champions (male versions: Aatrox/Jayce/Varus/Pool Party Lee Sin), but next to them, you can have attractive champions who aren’t trying to be sexy (male versions: every other Lee Sin Skin). You can even have gasp conventionally unsexy female champions (male versions: Gragas and most monstrous champions).

And don’t give me that “it’s a game, it’s about fantasy” line. First, we have to consider whose fantasy it is: the male champions are designed as somebody you might want to be, while the female champions are designed as somebody you might want to look at.

There are lots of fantasies, and I grant that some of them are about attractiveness. Sometimes I just want to be a hideous troll bashing people with a club. Sometimes I want to play Draven, and nobody thinks that facial hair is attractive. I’m not even really saying “make some unattractive champions”, although I don’t think it would kill you. I’m just saying that every female champion doesn’t need to be look more concerned with the observer than what it is she’s fighting.

Check out this difference. Lee Sin looks cool; he definitely looks sexy. But his sexiness comes from the fact that he’s physically fit and in a fighting stance. You know how I know that? Because it’s the same whether he’s wearing a shirt or not.

Lee Sin is an attractive badass who will **** you up if you mess with him. And you know what? Sometimes he likes to go down to the pool, flex his muscles, and …tickle the chin of that female champion next to him… if that’s what he’s into.

But in League of Legends, female champions don’t really get a choice. Fiora, the Master Duelist, is the best fencer in all the land. Surely she gets a cool fighting pose? Oh.

Diana and Leona and Jinx and Quinn and Riven and and Sejuani Shyvana and Vayne and Vi are all super well-designed champions (I don’t see it as a coincidence that IronStylus worked on Diana, Leona, Quinn, and Sejuani’s rework). They’re badass, they’re sexy, they’re cool, and they have distinct personalities. But making them preen doesn’t improve their characters; in fact, it can diminish them by masking the elements of their character that define them.

And you know what, Ahri is a super cool champion too. She’s all sexy and seductive and that is her character. And it almost doesn’t register, because your brain is all “so what, every female character is sexy and seductive”.

All the variety that goes into your male champions’ art? Just send some of that over to the female champions! Because variety in champions actually serves to make your unusual characters stand out even more because they don’t play by the rules of the other characters.

It’s really a simple thing to improve on, and what I’ve written is anything but simple, so here’s a restatement of my points:

  • Diversify monsters: make some truly monstrous champions that are female. I’m sure your community (not to mention your already employed concept designers) have plenty of ideas for that.
  • Change what “revealing” means. Make more revealing skins for male champions, and allow some female champions to go without revealing skins.
  • Change what “sexy” means. The variety in male champions shows you understand this distinction. Some champions are sexy because they’re trying to be sexy. Some champions are just inherently sexy, but it isn’t their main attribute. Allow more female champions to fall into that camp: let them be sexy without forcing sexy.
  • Let your creations speak for themselves. Don’t overstate something when subtlety will do, because it adds depth to the overall presentation.

Thoughts? Have you been thinking this for a long time? Do you think "unsexy" female champions would be received well? What about monstrous female champions?

Champions/skins I think are really cool design:

  • Aatrox - rawr
  • Ahri - Like I said, there's a place for sexy champions.
  • Diana - Badass
  • Jayce - Captain Hammer
  • Jinx - Get Jinxed was a spectacle
  • Lee Sin - The Blind Monk
  • Lissandra - her second skin is just silly, but she looks cool/inhuman.
  • Lucian - A black champion who isn't a brute? Say WHAAAAT?
  • Miss Fortune - just kidding, she seems more like a repository for sexy themed halloween costumes than a champion.
  • Riven - but not Battle Bunny -_-
  • Shyvana - SHE'S A DRAGON
  • Varus - a really well designed sexualized male champion
  • Vayne - Batman
  • Vi - Another badass
  • Vladimir - cool in an androgynous sort of way
  • Yasuo - attractive in a sort of lithe, coiled way. Like a snake.

Sorry this is a double-post; somebody suggested this may be better suited to the community beta misc forums than GD. The original thread is here.

72 Comments

PlatonicMistress7 votes

Because maybe this is the reason there are so many fewer female League of Legends players.

I can tell you definitely that this is a factor. (The level of misogyny that is tolerated by the community in-game is another.) Like, I found out about LoL by listening to feminists on my dash discuss Jinx when she was released, giving her props for not having huge breasts and being rather unsexulized despite her very realizing clothes, while criticizing Riot's handling of female champs as a whole. And, as someone who did a similar analysis on my own for "fun" (did you know that for every female tank, there are about six male tanks? and that the only class with more female than male champions is support (by 1)? Talk about adhering to gender roles...) I'm really glad to see it posted for all to see.

And some of you guys really need to Google "power fantasy." Being a huge muscle-bound dude who blows stuff up isn't a sexual fantasy aimed solely at women to drool over, that's for sure. :/

(I guess I'd try and provide more links, but I've read/been in/seen this discussion happen over and over again for so many years concerning almost every aspect of media, from comic books to movies to video games as a whole, that I don't have the energy to keep hashing out the same points ad nauseum.)

Thats My Brand2 votes

did you know that for every female tank, there are about six male tanks? and that the only class with more female than male champions is support (by 1)? Talk about adhering to gender roles...

Hate me for this as much as you want, but this tendency is well founded within the fantasy convention for a reason. Fantasy is based on medieval warfare and fairy tales, and there's an overwhelming element of masculinity there for a good reason - in a world where physical strength determines the better warrior, men outmatch women in most of the cases.

In classic fantasy, every female warrior (Eowyn in LotR, Brienne of Tarth in ASoIaF) has to struggle with the stigma of being the only female warrior in the male world. It's difficult to justify equal presence of women in a battle if they're simply physically weaker. Now a complete gamechanger was the element of magic. When willpower and human spirit became a factor that could transpond directly into battle, magic became a playing field where women could challenge men or even outmatch them. Some time after, when the element of "superpowers" soaked into all archetypes, she-knights ceased to remain an exception and became more of a commodity.

Riot has responded to the requests for female fighters and tanks and shipped Leona, Shyvana, Sejuani and Riven all in one year. Prior to those releases, the number of female tanks was zero. Followed by Diana, they really increased the variety in champion pool.

OP is correct, though. Lack of female tanks is directly linked to lack of female monsters. Out of 15 primary tanks, only 2 are women, but only 3 are men. The remaining 10 are non-human - robot, minotaur, gargoyle and others. Monsters such as Malphite and Cho'Gath fit the tank theme visually with their size, and that's where the female tank discrepency comes from.

Now on the support role - it's a byproduct of the monster problem, really. Supports archetype is a medic/priest type. That poorly fits monsters and is generally aplace for human characters. And yeah, adhering gender roles. Just like in a physical field men are more likely to succeed (we don't have mixed Olympics for a reason), the medical aid is the domain of women. I'm not qualified to speak about the subject throughly, but even in Scandinavia women tend to make 90% of nurses. And you can't say that in Scandinavia, the most developed region in terms of gender equality, they're imposed to do that. They choose that path.

It's wrong if there is no representation in the place where it should be. But there is hardly a reason to force a "strong female" trend when the problem is "all females in our game have to be sexualized".

And even that trend is improving. Latest four female champions - Jinx, Lissandra, Quinn and Vi - are a great examples of excellent champion design and none of them is as stupidly oversexualized as Elise was.

hunnyflash5 votes

I actually always defend Elise because I feel hypersexuality for her character fits in with the concept of a "Black Widow" and entrapment.

But I've been told that many people saw Elise as the chance for Riot to finally release one of these "female monsters", but instead of getting that, they just got another tall, thin, female with large breasts.

In any case, I feel like the game is coming along well. It's all well and good to point out all of the discrepancies in past characters, but it does seem like Riot is rectifying the situation and we're seeing many more diverse female characters, as you've pointed out.

I think the game is in an exciting time right now, where lots of things are changing for the better, and we'll have more interesting characters, of both genders.

RiotSkarnye West4 votes

Agree. There is nothing wrong with the Elise archetype. Like Ahri, her character is based around being sexy, so of course she's presented as such.

The base level of sexualization in the game means that the true examples of sexualization fall flat (because they just look like standard sexualization).

Less ubiquitous sexualization would lend an air of seriousness to most of the female champions, while increasing the impact of the characters to whom sexualization is important.

Lady Luck4 votes

More than just "black widow" entrapment - using sexuality as a cult leader fits perfectly. A lot of cults use sex as a control mechanism - and a lot of cults are founded by "attractive" and charismatic men. The use of sex and sexuality as a cult leader is ripped right out of reality.

I feel like this leadership status is expressed perfectly in her splashart. She is sexy as can be while sitting confident and strong upon her throne.

(I love Elise. I think her sexiness fist amazingly with both the spider and cult aspect. Of all the sexy champions she is the only one I feel uses her sexuality in a powerful, predatory way - not just the beguiling methods of Ahri. Elise is a strong woman who uses one of the many tools at her disposal. Thematically, Elise is by far my favorite champion.)

RiotSkarnye West5 votes

Do you not realize the irony in saying 'tanks are male because the history of knights', and then saying 'our tanks are all monstrous because they're super tanks'?

What does the biology of human men and women have to do with the biology of a giant inhuman creature from the Void, like Cho'Gath?

Limakoko8081 votes

I think human biology not having anything to do with monsters is the point of why not having a female monster doesnt matter.

Elise is a sexualized female because it makes sense;she uses her looks to lure men in and kill them.

Take any of the other monsters and dont change anything about them except their gender. What would be the difference? You could say "well the voice actors would be more feminine." But since when does having a feminine voice make you female? Since when does having a deep, raspy voice automatically make you male?

In fact who is to say the void monsters are actually male or female? Because the word "he" or "him" is used in the bio?

In the world of league of legends these bios are written by the summoners, who is to say the summoners are correct in assuming certain creatures are male or female simply from their own perceptions of what being a male or female means?

I cant recall many void monsters reffereing to themselves as male or female, so who is to say what gender they really are? What if they are genderless?

Regardless of any of this my main point is that gender has no real effect on a monsters theme unless the monsters theme revolves around it. Chogath is a monster based upon consumption, would being female or male really has such a big difference? Would being female change how you perceive chogath? How his overall feel is?

Who is to say Chogath isnt a female or genderless?

It really doesnt matter

RiotSkarnye West7 votes

If gender really didn't matter, consciously or subconsciously, then we'd expect a 50/50 split, and more genderless characters, because the designers wouldn't be thinking about gender at all. They obviously are, just in a very "male is default" way.

The characters are male because they are called male by the game-makers, in canon materials.

If you actually believe that Cho'Gath wouldn't be perceived differently if he were a she or an it, you wouldn't care about this topic at all. It wouldn't matter to you if all champions like him were male/female/genderless. You'd see my post and think "I am literally ambivalent about this".

But you obviously do care, enough to respond.

Your language betrays your biases, because you say "gender has no real effect on a monster's theme unless the monster's theme revolves around it". Again, if this were the case, why is there no 50% split? Because your mind categorizes male as the default, onnotable gender.

PlatonicMistress5 votes

I cant recall many void monsters reffereing to themselves as male or female, so who is to say what gender they really are? What if they are genderless?

Riot. Riot refers to them exclusively with masculine pronouns. (And then of course there's the Gentleman Cho'gath skin - women and nonbinary people typically aren't called gentleMEN.) If you refer to any of these monstrous champions with feminine pronouns (or singular-they, or spivak) prepare to have like a dozen people tell you you're r*tarded and should uninstall (or accuse you of being a feminazi who is "being too PC") at the worst, or correct you to masculine pronouns every single time at the best. :/

Limakoko8082 votes

So what we are really asking for is for Riot to use a different pronoun when writing a monster champions bio? Because for a truly monsterous champion whos theme has no correlation their gender, the only real change is replacing "he" with "she."

Thats My Brand3 votes

Do you not realize the irony in saying 'tanks are male because the history of knights', and then saying 'our tanks are all monstrous because they're super tanks'?

You don't get my point - I totally support you. I just explained that human tanks are generally male. Riot stepped up and it's 2 women (Leona, Sejuani) and 3 men (Jarvan IV, Shen, Singed) in that category.

What does the biology of human men and women have to do with the biology of a giant inhuman creature from the Void, like Cho'Gath?

Nothing. Actualy in many species females are the bigger and stronger ones.

The problem is that all females in LoL seem to have to be attractive and never monstrous.

RiotSkarnye West4 votes

I agree. Adding monstrous females champions would be the largest step Riot could make, in my opinion.

I would extend the data to include bruisers/tanky fighters as well, but I think the same correlation will exist, a slight male majority with humans, a huge majority with monstrous champions.

Linna Excel1 votes

Honest question - isn't a female tank inherently misogynistic?

Tanks are people who are supposed to get beaten up by the enemy, on purpose. As in you tell them to go there and take a beating. So let me rephrase it like this "You go there and take a beating by a group of people like a good girl".

Tanks also tend to lack offensive power.

So a female tank (a women) is supposed to get beaten up by others and is unable to hit back. Take Leona. You'd probably never build an IE on leona. You'd never build a BT on her. You'd never build a Last Whisper on her. You'd never build the AP equivalents.

So Leona's role is to get beaten on by a bunch of guys and how her passive works, if the proc kills someone, she only gets the assist.

Do I really need to go into the symbolism any farther than that?

Or should I talk about how she's only particularly viable as a support? Unlike other tanks she can't go top and right now, her jungle clear is too slow. Mid and ADC are right out. So despite all these illusions, she's not strong and independent. The key word in that sentence is and. Her starting gold item? It's the one that gives minion kills to the ADC. Sounds like someone likes being a dependent.

Leona - the traditional stay at home Waifu! Maybe we can give her a skin with an apron, a rolling pin instead of a sword, and a pan instead of her shield just to cement the fact that she's really the 50's housewife of LOL's roster. Maybe call her Cooking Leona (Chef Leona?) as a nod to the Cooking Mama series.

Depending on how you want to spin it, you could either praise them for making a tough chick or tear everyone at riot a new ***hole over what Leona is. Yes I know everyone is going to downvote before they read this part, but I'm being honest here. From a different point of view it is pretty easy to spin it as being both sadistic and misogynistic to expect a female to get beaten up.

Thats My Brand3 votes

Honest question - isn't a female tank inherently misogynistic?

Honest answer: NO.

Yes I know everyone is going to downvote before they read this part, but I'm being honest here.

Downvotes are meant to mark and bring down in hierarchy comments that bring little value to the discussion. Yours is a load of bull crap, but at least it's honest and relevant.

Back to topic: I hope you are joking. A view that "women shouldn't be tanks" for the sake of them not being the ones getting beaten up is so unbelieveably stupid that I'm at a loss of words. I can't comprehend, why are men being tanks okay, and women not?

Your comment is so close to supremacy feminism that I can't really believe you're serious here.

RiotSkarnye West2 votes

He's not. His goal was simply to mock.

Linna Excel2 votes

No I'm not trying to mock the idea of female tanks/monsters*. I'm actually trying to do the opposite. I'm personally fine with female tanks and monsters. However I feel that this needs to be looked at from another angle.

Symbolism and hidden meaning are important.

You know how a book or a movie comes out and then the fans are saying that this piece is about X when the author or director said I never really meant that. Well, which is it? The symbolism that people see or the symbolism that the creators intend?

The symbolic value of female tanks and female monsters is only one way to look at things. There could be another side of the coin. You need to look at it and at least be able to talk about it and say it is wrong because X.

So this seems to be a valid, if unpleasant, issue that needs to be brought up. What if there is another way of seeing it? I decided there could have been another perspective and tried to explore that possibility. The diametric opposite seemed like a natural place to start.

Watch this video for more info on the scientific process. So Gustaf posted a good article about why there should be more female tanks and monsters. While perhaps I went too far, it's also good to try and disprove that female tanks and monsters are necessarily good or socially conscious. If there's a better way of doing so, please feel free to try.

Don't get me wrong.

I know a lot of women want to be able to play a female in full armor or be a monster. I know they don't want the only female characters to be male fantasies. I'm fine with that. That however is only one possible way of looking at things. That could be the director who isn't looking at or sees the symbolism that group X does. Maybe those points are valid too but we don't want to look at those things. Just because Mario and Zelda are fun games that women will play too doesn't mean that Damsel in Distress isn't an issue either.

...

...

...

*Except for the Cooking Leona skin part. But that was more me trying go to absurd lengths to illustrate the point that female tanks are bad and attempt to mock the idea that female tanks are all good. In retrospect I over did it. Then when I thought about a splash art her smacking Teemo with a frying pan I thought "a lot of people would probably buy that".

RiotSkarnye West3 votes
  • Tanks do lots of important things other than just "get beaten up". Their job is to CC, initiate, and protect.
  • Your tone is ridiculous, and it makes your statements impossible to take seriously, whether it'
  • Your whole point seems rooted in the notions that supports and tanks don't do anything.
Lady Luck3 votes

I just want to add my perspective to the term 'tank' when used in other games (especially MMOs with an explicit tank in the group) since we're talking about the class as a whole.

I like tanking in games because as a tank you are in control of the group and fight. You decide when to initiate. If somebody else tries to go ahead - they likely die unless you can pull aggro. You lead the way as the tank. The ability to lead is a sign of power. You may take a beating while doing so, but the pace of the fight is determined by your strength. You are the lifeblood that holds a group together. Everybody else is there to support you - through damage or heals. I have always pictured the tank as the leader in a group. A true and noble warrior.

Linna Excel1 votes

Honest answer: NO.

That's a perfectly acceptable answer. Please justify it. Why is asking for a woman whose literal purpose is to get beaten up not misogynistic?

Thats My Brand4 votes

Tank archetype is not a masochistic being that loves getting beaten up. That niche is Mundo. A tank is a defender who keeps his team safe by disabling or locking down the threats. Good examples involve Blitzcrank, Malphite, Nautilus or Leona.

Nobody asked for female tanks because they wanted to fullfill their sadistic fantasies. It was merely a request for gender variety among the tank characters.

Linna Excel1 votes

It was merely a request for gender variety among the tank characters.

Yes, I agree this is the intention.

Lady Luck6 votes

I have to agree with pretty much all of what you said, but I feel like adding a couple thoughts.

Monster Champs: Given the previous discussions by Rioters I honestly thought the next monster champion was going to be female. Because it is something that's easy as changing a pronoun in the lore pretty much and they said it was a known issue that they're working on. I was disappointed when Vel'koz was male. Even if you want to go by stereotypes as to what would be male vs female, Vel'koz fits a more female role. Vel'koz is a mage, relies on knowledge over strength and has a bit of pink. I'm hoping that all these more feminine attributes are actually why Vel'koz is male - they didn't want to make the first void lady be comparatively girly. He works fine male. I just was hoping for a female void creature.

The other thing I wanted to say is purely reactionary... Holy crap I did not notice just HOW broken Lux was. I knew she was broken, but I kind of liked it because it made her look a tad crazed. The adjustments in the image you linked surely make a good splash art and would probably have been received better by the community. Partially because she actually looks less crazed by looking less broken. It makes her look more actiony than psycho.

PS - As for people who say it doesn't matter... I introduced my coworker to LOL with a picture of Iron Solari Leona. She thought that a fully armored female in a game was awesome. The fact that there's scantily clad females is fine and dandy (she loves Morgana now that she plays). But having females in full armor is such a rarity that it's almost a selling point. (When I first found out Kayle was a female, I thought it was the most amazing thing.)

While this is great for LoL, it's kind of sad that a draw for a game is such a simple thing. Some of us ladies wanna have a fully armored power fantasy like the boys have always gotten in every game.

Linna Excel3 votes

I had a thought about this late last night but didn't get to post it in the other thread.

A lot of champ ideas come from popular culture. So I asked myself how many female monsters I could think of.

  1. Mermaids (Nami)
  2. Lamia/gorgons (Cass)
  3. Spider chicks/driders (elise)
  4. Sirens/harpy (both are bird like but one is beautiful the other is ugly)
  5. Mothra (franchise specific)
  6. Sphinx (can be male)

I'm really struggling to think of some monstrous type of female that is commonly known and doesn't have boobs on the top half of her body. So far of the non-human females only the siren and harpy type isn't covered unless you force kayle and morganna into those slots, but they are angels and demons and a bit of a different direction than a bestial monster which I'm assuming people want. Sphinxes also aren't a champion type yet, but if there is one, it's got a 50/50 chance of having boobs if it's a female at all.

I mean the only female monster I can think of without boobs is Mothra. Frankly I'd rather see a Godzilla inspired champ than a mothta one. This is probably why Anivia is female, it's because you can get away with a female bird or phoenix.

So I'm forced to ask myself what is a feminine monster? What traits should it convey? What would a female voice bring to a monster champ?

So here's my only conclusion for the moment: a female monster may have to represent something other than strength. I went into this in the other thread but the male display of sexual potency is power whereas for females it is allure. That's why all our savage beasts are male, because that's something masculine in nature. I don't think traditional allure should be a true female monster's trait or it's more boobs. Don't get me wrong, I love boobs but I don't think it honors what people want.

Now I think you can represent beauty in a monster, but you are talking about something like a Milotic (pokemon that evolves from frebas). Other things you could emphasize are knowledge (but vekkers has that covered) or speed as opposed to raw strength.

That's not to say you can't have a traditional monster with a female voice, but I think there's more room for exploration than who does the voice over.

Tortferngatr2 votes
  • Shelob
  • Insect hive queen
  • Bee queen
  • Scarab queen
  • Locust queen
  • Mother Brain
  • GlaDoS
  • Anglerfish
  • Amaterasu (Okami version)
  • Plant Queen
  • Izanami (Japanese mythology)
  • Scylla
  • Banshee
  • Tiamat
  • Fairy queen
  • Whitney's Miltank

A large number of those lack (humanoid) boobs.

Linna Excel1 votes

Shelob - elise has that covered.

Insect hive queen - never read enders game, had to google her

Female villians from other games - don't want to go there

Plant queen - I googled it, saw a yugioh card that was basically zyra

izanami - shinto dieties are too obscure, plus there are more chinese and koreans than japanese playing LOL

Scylla - SMITE already has her, otherwise it would be an interesting idea.

Banshee - would work if a place could be found for another undead champ.

Tiamat - would be a problem as it is an item name also she'd share a large visual design space with a hydra, which some people want. You probably can't have both. It's doable thematically, but it has to be different than any FF tiamats and not step on shyvana's toes. Realistically, this kind of a champ would be a problem because of poly count and a texture map. I think it's pretty safe to say anything with 5-9 heads, 4 legs, possibly 2 wings, and a tail is too much to ask for. If she only has one head, she'd be too close to shyvana's ult.

RiotSkarnye West2 votes

The point of his post was not to say "Riot should copy those", it was to say that these sorts of things are doable.

RiotSkarnye West4 votes

Is not fantasy about alternative realities? Why should we limit ourselves in this way?

It's like how good sci-fi explores societies that are truly different from human society, so too do good fantasy monsters break our typical rules.

Limakoko8081 votes

In an alternate reality why should any of our rules have any say?

Runeterra isnt our creation, we are just people who get to enjoy it.

The people who design this world should have free reign in how their art is designed.

Its their world and their game and the seem to know what they are doing because of how successful they are.

And lets remember that the champions are not the only inhabitants or runeterra. Maybe the sexualization of champions is just because the summoners are all perverts who like boobs just as much as any other guy? lol

But in all seriousness I dont believe that the creators and desgners need to change their artistic vision to placate us.

I dont believe that champion designers purposefully change their art to be more sexy to increase the amount of money they make off it, they change it according to the way they envision it. So why should they be forced to placate us?

Im all for variety but not at the cost of artistic freedom

RiotSkarnye West5 votes

Yes, designers have the right to make whatever game they like. But that also means that consumers have the right to make whatever critiques they like.

Artistic freedom, like freedom of speech, is only in the expression of the speech, not in immunity to the critique thereof.

It's easy to see where your argument falls apart. Let's say a game wanted to make all of their protagonists white and their villains black. We'd be perfectly allowed to voice opinions that the game's artistic and creative direction be changed. Of course, they don't have to do anything, but voicing opinions is the first step among many.

The final step is -- of course -- taking money elsewhere, but the issue with that is the dominance LoL has atm as a game. No game has as much of a public face as LoL (maybe WoW?), and so if there is a game to advocate for your beliefs, it is as good a place as any, because the impact will be larger.

Limakoko8081 votes

Except your example is offensive while what you claim is wrong with League of Legends is minor.

Sure a lot of champions are sexualized and objectified, but its nowhere near as bad as what is already being done in other media. In fact there are many females that arent sexualized that are strong in both theme and gameplay.

And the difference is that this is a fantasy game, created for enjoyment. I think Lol accomplishes what it is attempting to do.

In fact it has done more because in addition to becoming a pioneer of esports and professional gaming, it has also created a bridge between different countries and cultures.

An american company(solomid.net) just donated more than $15k for a korean player's medical expenses.

But here we are arguing about the way these people choose to display their artwork and whether or not we can get a female monster when gender has no real effect on a monsters theme.

All it seems what you really want for a female monster is for Riot to choose a different pronoun.

RiotSkarnye West4 votes

Your argument about 'minor' implies that I don't also have an involvement in 'major' issues. One doesn't preempt the other.

No, I don't think that a pronoun is all they could do. I'm just intrigued that even that seems to bother you.

Linna Excel1 votes

I always thought some of the best sci fi makes you think about your own society more. Like the original star trek series.

Pyrrasu6 votes

Why should the default gender be male, though? What about the void monsters, which aren't based on specific mythical creatures? Kha'zix is a male mantis-monster, but in mantises, females are larger and more aggressive. The gender is arbitrary, but in every single case they chose to make the monster male.

In fact, Pokemon is a great example. Most of the monsters in that game can be either male or female, regardless of how the design is. Salamence, Tyranitar, Garchomp... they can all be female. They're fearsome but there isn't something inherently male about being fearsome.

Spacesquatch2 votes

I'm willing to guess most Riot Designers are male, therefore the "default" gender to them is male. If they were mostly female, we'd got more female monsters

Lady Luck4 votes

In most games the default is white, hetero male. It's the assumption that's made without thinking about it, no matter who it is.

For example - when playing a game like Starcraft where people control multiple units I call everybody a "he". I know females play games - afterall, I do - but society has told us that the norm is for the other players to be male. (I think every single PS4 commercial has a young, white male as the lead player.)

As a result, anything that is not a white, hetero male suddenly stands out in design. When Lucien was announced there was a ton of posts about him being black. He deviated what the assumed norm is and it was a big deal to some people. Does the fact that no previous men were black mean there are no black men at Riot? I doubt it. It's just the default is white.

We've already stated that the humanoid champions do a pretty good job of at least having females. Unlike the smurfette principle mentioned initially, Riot's created multiple ladies with more than just boobs as an attribute. However, outside of humanoids the default remains... they're all male.

I think it has more to do with the industry as a whole over the years, not just Riot's designers. It's the atmosphere that people have become accustomed to - whether or not employees are male or female.

Linna Excel1 votes

Pokemon needs both genders for breeding and a lot of the ideas would be a little to boring or cartoonish for LOL. I'd love a gardevoir champ, but that isn't going to happen because of Zyra.

I think monsters default as male simply because they represent strength usually and that is very masculine.

Pyrrasu3 votes

Strength isn't inherently masculine. We view it that way because male humans have more muscle mass and cultural expectations push strength as a masculine trait. Males are larger than females in most mammal species, but in non-mammals the opposite is usually true. If the whole point of designing a monster champion is to give an animalistic feel... why copy human social norms? If I want to play as a creature, I want to play something entirely separate from humans.

AlphaBloodThirst3 votes

Nidalee +Khazix =KogMaw

Doominator102 votes

Ezreal +Taric =Leona

I'm sorry I just had to laugh at the last one XD

Limakoko8081 votes

Just so that this isnt upvoted simply because its long, and the GD thread takes way too long to go through im going to post the best counter arguments from the GD threads here(both from the same poster). Dont get me wrong I feel like the OP has good intentions, but this thread really doesnt need to exist and if anyone wants to check out the GD thread i recommend pages 13 through 25 for the best overall discussion of the topic(try to sift throught the trolls)

My opinion on the matter is that I dont believe that champion designers should have our views be forced upon them about how they should envision their creations for minuscule "social issues" that shouldnt even be applied to a fantasy realm, especially since things like these dont have any effect on the overall quality of the game and its characters

Limakoko8081 votes

Comment # 2 Quote: Originally Posted by Gentleman Gustaf View Post "You don't seem to grasp the difference between a fantasy of somebody you want to be vs something you want to look at."

What is the difference? If I want to be a muscular man it's hardly because "I feel like being muscular." It would be because women find muscular men sexy. And don't even try to tell me they don't. I have a female friend and I've heard her talk about how much she wants to touch some dudes 6-pack. Also let's not forget about the popular-with-girls movie "Twilight" where the highlight of the movie was the wolf guy taking off his shirt and never putting it back on.

Quote: Originally Posted by Gentleman Gustaf "Nobody's saying there aren't attractive male champions. The thing is, there are no non-attractive female champions. There is no female Gragas or Draven. There are no non-sexualized female champions. There are plenty of Darius and Shen and Swain champions, but no female counterparts."

Draven, Darius, Shen, and Swain aren't sexy? You serious? I'd even argue that Gragas can be considered sexy. He is insanely muscular, but just has a big belly from drinking so much. You don't carry a giant Keg full of liquid with one arm without being muscular. No un-attractive female champions? I personally don't find Lissandra attractive. Leona also isn't my type. It's all a matter of taste. I guarantee you there are people who find every champion in this game attractive.

Quote: Originally Posted by Gentleman Gustaf "And yet you seem worked up at the idea of calling them female"

No, I get worked up with people trying to force developers to change their creative visions and give in to non-existent social justice bullcrap. If they came out with a female monster tomorrow, I would have zero problem with it as long as it was their original vision to have it be female..

Quote: Originally Posted by Gentleman Gustaf "The issue is that you see male monsters as 'just regular' monsters, but female monsters as in some way marked. That distinction is artificial."

When did I ever say that? I said they have deep voices, so they are called male. We distinguish deep voices as male. Hell, when I saw Vel'Koz for the first time I thought it might have a female voice and I would've had no problem with it. When I heard his actual voice I didn't go into a blind rage because he wasn't "female." Why? Because his gender has nothing to do with his character.

Quote: Originally Posted by Gentleman Gustaf
"Is Nami a human being? Stop trying to pretend fish and people are the same."

Nami is based on the mythological creature called a "mermaid." Mermaids are half-(female)human, half-fish.

Quote: Originally Posted by Gentleman Gustaf "Does it look weird on Aatrox or Varus?"

No, and I don't understand what makes you think there is anything feminine about either of their poses. You say Aatrox is showing off his a** when his pelvis is going towards the viewer. Varus is just shirtless and firing an arrow, how is this feminine?

RiotSkarnye West10 votes

You still don't get the difference between sexy and sexualized.

hunnyflash2 votes

For some of us, the difference doesn't mean much. If I were to draw a female character for myself, she'd be quite scantily clad, because that's what is aesthetic to me.

After countless threads on this, the one suggestion that everyone always comes down to, simply has to do with numbers. Just release more "monstrous" female characters.

I'm all for trying to get people to understand how females are portrayed in the media, only when you understand can you make decisions closer to objectivity and being true to your own individuality.

That being said, everyone has to decide for themselves what they like, and then promote it. If, in our community, everyone decides to promote nude women, I guess that's what our community will be known for.

That's how the world works, you know? That's what being a part of different groups and communities is about.

RiotSkarnye West8 votes

scantily clad =/= posed to be sexy. There's an important reason I separated those two.

There are plenty of champions who are scantily clad but not presented with sexuality as their major trait. They are just mostly male.

RuleroftheWorld3 votes

I think you have a point about the designers not changing their creative views. But what makes you think that there aren't some designers that feel the same way. I'm sure there are designers that would love to create something different, but there just isn't the right concept. It's much more difficult to create something abstract, give it a story and make it successful. Especially a female monster, in this male dominated community.

I wish there were more sexier guy champions and weird female champions or whatever. It doesn't bother me too much because I think Riot does create A LOT of diveresity. They do listen to the community XD

Also, I think as a company, they really do need to give a little to the consumer. It's business. They can't just always do what they want or else they wouldn't be too successful. I'm sure creating a couple different champions isn't out of the question and I think I read on Surrender@20 about a RED saying they plan on releasing a lot more abstract champions this season.

Angry Monster1 votes

I sorta doubt that this guy is who he says he is. There hasnt been a person who actually works for riot that goes to the forums to seriously get another rioter attention. This person is trying to get votes by saying he works for riot.

Down voting thread for this reason alone. I am not even bothering with the rest. A LoL esports would have a more direct way of contacting the bird.

Sry not buying it

RiotSkarnye West3 votes

I work for Riot, not at Riot. I'm what they call a freelance contributor.

But you don't have to take my word for it. Here's my personal blog.

http://gentlemangustaf.com

The 6 featured posts (in the slidey thing) are:

Gender Representation in League of Legends (also reposted here) Interconnected Balance: Lich Bane Nerfs and Champion Buffs (also featured at Cloth 5) LCS Super Week Analysis (not hosted anywhere else) Cloud 9 – Quest to be the Best (hosted at LoLEsports)

and 2 other posts.

My last two posts at Reign of Gaming both reference my work at Riot.

Finally, you can see a Twitter account referenced at the bottom of any of my LoLEsports posts, @GentlemanGustaf. That Twitter account

I believe that is what we call a preponderance of evidence.

Either I've undergone a lot of work to impersonate myself, including hacking various accounts, or I am who I say I am.

Angry Monster1 votes

So you go on there website. (for whom you are a contract worker) and make certain opinions about there game. um?

Ever heard don't shit where you eat?

Well what ever. I am not sure i would go this route but to each there own. Though i would clarify in your post. Dont expect others to go figure out if your legit. MAKE it clear what your retaliation is.

Lady Luck2 votes

I'm going to hazard a guess that his previous opinions about Riot are why he's now writing for Riot. Riot knows he expresses his views and would be silly to think otherwise. Gentleman Gustaf actually presents his opinions in a well reasoned, polite manner - which Riot encourages. (IIRC... I believe he had even done a gender related post for RoG a long while ago. I may be mistaking him for somebody else though. Back when the Sirens had their moment of fame.)

He also gave links in his initial post for evidence regarding who he was.

RiotSkarnye West5 votes

If Riot is the type of company to fire me for not thinking their product is 100% perfect, they're not a company I want to work for. They obviously don't think it's 100% perfect either, or why would they be patching it?

They hired me for my ability to distinguish "there" from "their" and "you're" from "your", my knowledge of competitive play, and my ability to write.

It's pretty clear it's me, since each of those sites has my name on it :p More importantly, my opinions should stand on their justification regardless of who I am. I just also am comfortable having my name attached to my opinions.

More from [ARCHIVED] Miscellaneous

Open Letter to Parents of League of Legends Players
[ARCHIVED] Miscellaneous860 comments
2,611
votes
Rewards for positive play
[ARCHIVED] Miscellaneous19,712 comments
1,337
votes
I don't like Boards
[ARCHIVED] Miscellaneous324 comments
809
votes
STOP ALLOWING LEVEL 1 ACCOUNTS TO SEND FRIEND REQUESTS!!!
[ARCHIVED] Miscellaneous291 comments
679
votes
Wanting to do something special for an awesome friend. Riot, please help? <3
[ARCHIVED] Miscellaneous220 comments
614
votes
People that are telling others to kill themselves has to stop! Please help me get this noticed!
[ARCHIVED] Miscellaneous605 comments
600
votes

More by Skarnye West

Patch Chat 6.9 - Playtesting the Mage Update
Dev Corner416 comments
1
votes
Patch Chat with Playtest - Comet Dragon
Dev Corner609 comments
1
votes
Patch Chat with Playtest Team - 6.14 (Ryze, Leona, Sona, and more)
Dev Corner318 comments
1
votes
Patch Chat 6.7 - Playtesting 101
Dev Corner556 comments
1
votes
Patch 6.15 - The One Where The Towers Change
Dev Corner52 comments
1
votes
Patch Chat 6.8 - Playtesting The Outrageous
Dev Corner231 comments
1
votes