The problem with most champion concepts that people come up with...

Dat cool kid·May 5, 2015·13 votes·1,921 views

...is that people come up with a unique idea for WHO the champ should be, but don't come up with unique WHAT ideas (what they do such as abilities/gameplay). Sure, a cyborg unicorn would be cool, but if its only abilities were a damaging skillshot, a stun, a stat boost, and a damaging ult, that provides extremely unoriginal gameplay which would mean that there's no reason to play the champ, and if no one plays the champ then its just a waste of time. So please, if you come up with a unique idea for a person, make sure its abilities are just as unique.

39 Comments

The Red WardenMay 6, 20155 votes

One thing I would like to add: the abilities should match the champion's theme and be based on it.

If it is wind based make the abilities have characteristics of the wind, otherwise a person could just change the theme to gravity or something without anyone noticing.

Ex: An aoe wind spell would be a hurricane that spins enemies around you, a generic ability would just be another aoe damaging knockback.

If you can exchange the theme for another without anything seeming off, then the abilities need to be thought through. If you can take every instance of you saying "fire" and exchange it with "poison" then you need to re-think your design.

Black k 9May 6, 20152 votes

Like this?

The Red WardenMay 6, 20151 votes

Pretty much, your champion is very similar to Anti-mage from Dota though. Did you use him as inspiration?

Mana drain would be strange no matter what in league since many do not use mana, and with only one champion having access to the mechanic (denyplank situation) it can become irritating and confusing for the enemy. Yours could work but the mana drain mechanic would be alien to many of this game's players.

Black k 9May 6, 20151 votes

Yes I used Anti-mage as inspiration, but I refused to make him a carbon-copy. I made his First ability a toggle requiring mana, and his third ability an active melee-range aoe damage rather than scaling bonus Magic Resistance.

I like the mechanic of Manaburn a lot. Riot tried to make item 3508 Essence Reaver use the same mechanic but instead they just made it a less powerful copy of item 3072 Bloodthirster for Mana.

Many aspects of league have people doing things that are strange and frustrate players, Support Yasuo for example.

I wanted a new champion that disrupts teamfights and prevents mages from being the bursty powerhouses that everyone builds them as.

The Red WardenMay 6, 20151 votes

The main problem in League for mana-drain in league is that not all champions use and mana, and some don't even have a resource at all. That makes it very confusing for enemies as it would make the abilities look like they have random effects on your champ. How does the ult work on Yasuo, or riven?

Couldn't the other team just screw with him by countering with a whole team that doesn't use mana?

If you want a teamfight distuptor that counters mages then you start arguing with Galio .

AdaloreMay 6, 20152 votes

A correction on mana burn in league...Wit's end used to have it WAAYY BACK and it was removed because it had two results...

The target champion either DOESN'T USE MANA or builds SO MUCH MANA that they don't give a care.
The target Champion is low on mana or just has a small pool, all the mana is burnt off and results in the longest silence effect in the game, being OOM by the actions of another.

Mana burn thus has two EXTREME differences in effect, Nothing or the target is doomed a slow death being unable to act beyond autos and running.

The Red WardenMay 6, 20151 votes

It is an un-fun mechanic similar to Gangplank's old minion denial, in that both are unfair to the enemy by putting them in unwinable situations.

They got removed because they didn't work and made the game one-sided.

AdaloreMay 6, 20151 votes

in the case of the mana burn it isn't even quite "One-sided" in how you'd expect, it's either super effective and makes the target feel like crap because they simply cannot act...Or does nothing and feels like crap for the player using it.

So at all times someone is feeling like the unfun train is at the station.

Black k 9May 6, 20151 votes

Interesting, so Manaburn doesn't work in league because people don't like being silenced.

Even though a lot of characters already give the biggest silence in the game. Instant death.

All the assassins do this.

Also, just because it says "Manaburn" doesn't mean it REQUIRES mana to activate. I specifically listed it as any resource that is burned off. This includes Metal (Mordekaiser), Rage, Skill and Blood (Aatrox).

DreddethMay 6, 20152 votes

Death and silence are not comparable. You can still auto, run, etc, and you don't give your enemy gold. Also, there isn't a silence in the game that lasts more than a couple of seconds (Except Equinox, but you can move out of it.), while waiting for one's mana/fury/whatever to recharge generally takes an obnoxious amount of time.

Also, if you're going to argue that an assassin's ability to 100-0 a single soft target (You know, that thing that all assassins are designed to do.) is worse than forcing anyone at any time into a state of controlled helplessness until they can b, when most other cc lasts for two seconds at best, then I won't dignify such nonsense with verbal response.

Black k 9May 6, 20151 votes

So Resource Drain = Bad

Lifesteal = good

Even though Lifesteal will kill you faster.

DreddethMay 6, 20152 votes

You can move/build resistances/outdamage/zone/cc/etc. to avoid or negate lifesteal

Just so long as the cc's not a glorified perma-silence disguised as "Resource Drain."

Black k 9May 6, 20151 votes

Hey, guess what. His so-called "perma silence" can only be done at melee range.

So...

You can move/build resistances/outdamage/zone/cc/etc.

DreddethMay 6, 20152 votes

Melee range doesn't make it fair. summoner 4 summoner 6 summoner 32 item 1001 Your position is untenable.

NarasimhaMay 6, 20151 votes

item 3022 item 3142 item 3044

Tin TarantinoMay 9, 20151 votes

Skarner had a perma slow in melee range before his rework that was removed because it was problematic, he could just build tank and sit on top of people for as long ashe liked

VbunnieMay 10, 20151 votes

[{quoted}](name=Black k 9,realm=NA,application-id=A8FQeEA8,discussion-id=e4PO5oum,comment-id=00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2015-05-06T04:55:07.337+0000)

So Resource Drain = Bad

Lifesteal = good

Even though Lifesteal will kill you faster.

some champions use life as a resource so in some cases lifesteal=resource drain Aatrox DrMundo Vladimir Zac Olaf Soraka item 3070 's for all

Black k 9May 6, 20151 votes

I like how when you get ambushed by an Assassin it doesn't feel "one sided"

Especially if that Assassin can 100-0 you in a few seconds

*cough* Zed cough

And yet denying the opponent a resource is considered "one sided."

Oh wait, I know why it feels "one sided."

And yet denying the opponent a resource is considered "one sided."

denying the opponent a resource

denying the opponent

denying

LoLers hate Denials in their "fair" and "balanced game"

The best way to balance it is to deny your opponent gold, because the items give so much advantage in game.

You can't even prevent your opponent from taking a turret at 12 hp, (which is, by the way a guaranteed 200 gold for everyone, so a guaranteed 1000 total gold for the enemy team you can't do anything about).

the Anarchit3chtMay 6, 20151 votes

turrets stopped giving (as much?) global gold a while back.

Black k 9May 6, 20151 votes

The ult still deals magic damage, but less so.

It's the same as asking how Veigar 's ult works on champions who don't build ability power.

The Red WardenMay 6, 20151 votes

Then make it like Veigar's ult with it having a set base damage and ratio but dealing bonus damage to those who have that certain stat or resource.

Ex: It always does 150/200/250 damage (.4 AP damage) but if the target has mana he does 60/90/120% of the targets missing mana as bonus magic damage.

Black k 9May 6, 20151 votes

Actually, I already fixed it, you should take a look at the post :)

The EcdysiastMay 6, 20151 votes

Hold the phone. Is there actually a DoTa character simply named "Anti-mage"???

Black k 9May 6, 20151 votes

Yeah, and he's an annoying little bugger as well.

NarasimhaMay 6, 20152 votes

He has an actual name, most DotA characters are referred to by their role/title though. 'Anti Mage', 'Phantom Lancer', 'Brood Mother', 'Warlock' etc etc

EfaunaMay 7, 20151 votes

{quoted}

Hold the phone. Is there actually a DoTa character simply named "Anti-mage"???

No.. That's like his description. Like for example, Soraka, The Starchild. In Dota people would refer to her as The Starchild.

Black k 9May 7, 20151 votes

Most DotA players (Defense of the Ancients, people keep spelling the acronym wrong), would still refer to Soraka as "Soraka." The only reason Anti-Mage's name is Anti-mage, is because that is his Title in the Original DotA allstars for Warcraft III.

Every hero in DotA has a name, but since most players of DotA 2, played the original DotA on WC3, they refer to their names as their titles. Valve decided to keep these titles as their names for ease of recognization.

For example, if valve had decided to keep Omniknight's lore name, he would be called "Purist" or "Purist Thunderwraith" instead of Omniknight.

And Bloodseeker would have been named his Lore name "Strygwyr" (yeah try to say that).

Anti-mage's name is "Magina," but everyone just calls him Anti-mage.

The second reason behind this, is that in Warcraft 3 (as DotA is custom game mode/mod for Warcraft 3) the system of Warcraft 3 displays a hero's name if he/she dies to yourself and your allies. As Heroes are a large part of the RTS, Warcraft 3.

Example:

Magina the Antimage (level 6) has fallen!

LifeCyclesTWAMay 7, 20151 votes

This unique? http://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/skin-champion-concepts/f9OHV9ci-champion-concept-anshin-the-eternal-conqueror

Never seen anything like it. Cool features include: Auras. Similar to Kha'zix in that he gets to "evolve" his abilities each time he raises his ultimate rank, however you can only do this to your Q/W/E and by doing so you activate that aura tied to it to benefit all allies within range of you.

Absorbs a % of damage in place of an ally.

Has a Thornmail-AoE-Aura that applies to his team as his ultimate. Only it reflects not only basic attacks, but 20% of all damage

A fear trail that works similar to Nocturne's trail but fear all who touch it.

Alpha LegendMay 7, 20153 votes

Graves Graves + Gillette Fusion item 1039 = Jayce

ElphrihaimMay 6, 20152 votes

I wholeheartedly agree with the sentiment and despise the phrasing-- but also, there exists a critical judgmental error.

The OP divides the champion into only two pieces--«Who» and «Kit»--And... it doesn't even refer to the Who properly.

The OP writes "a unique idea for WHO the champ should be"... but their example is "cyborg unicorn".

That, however, is a «What».

For example; let me break down Ahri--

«What»: Ahri is a Gumiho. Ahri's powers derive from souls and trickery. «Kit»: Therefore, Q [true damage, the soul is the purest form of a being and a gumiho interacts with this directly], W [gumiho and kitsune lore states that fire is part of the powerset, though it is usually illusory], E [seductress, temptress, whatever you want to call it], R [further trickery, escapes which are essential to the gumiho as they must leave at some point], innate [the gumiho eats souls to sustain itself / to become more human depending on interpretation].

The «What» quite clearly feeds into the powerset.

But you cannot deduce the «Who» of Ahri from this.

Ahri was a remorseless killer, but now she is softer-hearted; she is a temptress and seeks to further herself from her past and become more human-- though she realizes the moral fault in killing so many to do so. That is her «Who», which is far from a fair number of myths regarding the gumiho (her «What»)-- not all of them, but most of them do not cover her this way.

So I agree with the idea-- people do not usually create something that takes these three parts of a champion and tie them together properly.

A kit does not always have to have a unique feature inside of it-- but the sum of the kit-- the playstyle of that champion-- must be unique to it.

[The parts I disagree with are the phrasing, which seems hostile to me, but that may just be me being tired because I kind of am; and the notion that the champion is only two parts, when it is at least three and probably four-- the aesthetics of the champion, certainly, are quintessential to making them be them.]

TrylobyteMay 6, 20151 votes

{quoted}

Snip.

I think better words the OP could have used are those old tabletop standby words, fluff and crunch. Too many champion designers spend time on the fluff of the champion - Their design, their concept, their visuals, their story, their 'feel' - and not enough time on the crunch, which is how that translates into gameplay and mechanics. OP wants designers to focus less on the fluff, which is mostly supplementary anyway, and focus more on making good crunch to make the character play like their concept.

In other words, don't tell us this super awesome concept then betray it with a generic-feeling kit. Come up with a great kit, then fluff it out.

ElphrihaimMay 6, 20152 votes

{quoted}

I think better words the OP could have used are those old tabletop standby words, fluff and crunch.

Hmm.

I... I disagree on a philosophical level that that is a good way to make a champion.

The thing with this is that different people fight differently; have different circumstances and strengths.

The abilities of the Champion need to match up with their lore, in my opinion.

Too many champion designers spend time on the fluff of the champion - Their design, their concept, their visuals, their story, their 'feel' - and not enough time on the crunch, which is how that translates into gameplay and mechanics.

*shrug*

The difference is in which part the designer feels is the most important to the character, the reason why they think that idea would fit well with the legends already on the field...

To some, that is the character, their motivations. To others, that is the thing that they are. To others, that is what they bring as an experience as a player.

I'd say that what one must do is actually do each part extraordinarily well. You can't have a bad kit no matter how smashing your lore is, and vice-versa. If the central concept for your abilities doesn't match up with the appearance at all; then it seems weak.

I mean, Brand exists, and what is Brand? Embodiment of all things fire.

His lore: FIRE His appearance: FLAMING MAN His kit's visuals: FIRE

His innate passive: FIRE His E is the button on his kit that actually feels like fire the most, imo, but it's not his iconic ability. His Q is a plain line skillshot, his W a plain AoE, his R isn't particularly attached to the idea of fire at all, but something that advances and moves (like its current lava, or one could go with water if one wanted).

OP wants designers to focus less on the fluff, which is mostly supplementary anyway, and focus more on making good crunch to make the character play like their concept.

I want to punch you for this. The driving character is incredibly important, in any work.

But I agree that you can't have a good concept unless you tie the parts together into a great sum. Just doesn't work otherwise.

In other words, don't tell us this super awesome concept then betray it with a generic-feeling kit. Come up with a great kit, then fluff it out.

I think that the appropriate way to tackle anything that centers around a character is to write up the character first.

Since a champion is a character, getting that character down first seems more pivotal to me--at least, if what you want to do is tell a story.

I mean, I wrote up Wirym for a reason; because she is a character of mine that I enjoy a lot with an involved story.

I could not do her the injustice of shortening her character; and I actually believe I must lengthen her lore to better connect it to her kit. I decided to cut it off at a point, when in reality I could have kept going in exploration of her sort-of salvation (her innate).

That's her character, and her passive, w, and r came from that. Her Q and E were logical conclusions given her basis in chinese, japanese, korean, european, far-west asia's, and even some greek myths as a succubus, temptress, etc.; though I've likely done her rejection of herself poorly. Actually, one could say that her w came from her myths, and her lore from her w, and the rest of her kit from her myths and lore combining together; and that too would be correct.

...I need to learn to not talk about things I love, but I love them too much.

Back on the original subject, if all that you want to do is make good gameplay, why have lore in the first place? Just go for accepted thematical combinations and devote your time entirely to gameplay.

ohwaitriot'sdoingthatqq

TrylobyteMay 7, 20151 votes

{quoted}

Long, interesting post.

I think the difference in views we have comes from our writing backgrounds, but I still (Cognitive bias go!) think mine works better for creating a video game character. The thing with video games is they're inherently interactive - People are going to be concerned about what they can do while playing the character. A character can have tons of well-written lore but still have generic and uninteresting gameplay just like a character can be bland and shapeless but still have a very fun, engaging game built around them. I'm not saying lore is bad, either - I play tabletop D&D and I'm somewhat infamous in my group for the level of characterization, backstory, and 'lore' my characters develop. But it's precisely because of that fact that I'm aware of the pitfalls of doing it when designing a character for a more action-oriented setting.

A video game like League of Legends is a lot like a D&D session that's all about combat. In these situations, the detailed lore isn't as important as the mechanics. Detailed lore can always be reshaped, reformed, stretched or skewed, or otherwise manipulated as needed to fit the core concept of the character. In these types of settings, your character can have a bestselling novel's worth of backstory, but since that never comes into effect when the game itself is being played it's functionally irrelevant to the majority of your players. What is important is how the character's mechanics reflect the core concept of the character.

Let's dissect a League character. I'll pick one at random and get... Rengar

What is Rengar's core concept?
Rengar is a primitive ambush hunter.

How do Rengar's mechanics reflect this core concept? Passive: Leaps at people who can't see him, perfect for ambushes. Ferocity emphasizes his primitive nature and love of the hunt. Q: Generic damage boost, but pairs well with his passive to make sure that first strike from ambush is the nastiest. W: Roar emphasizes his primitive, bestial nature while psyching himself up. This actually allows him to push himself harder (heal) if he's sufficiently psyched. E: Bolas are a common tool of primitive hunters. Makes sense he'd have one! When he's not 'in the zone' it merely slows but when he's on his game (Ferocity) he can tie a target up with it. R: Quite simply, the perfect tool of the ambush hunter. He knows where everyone nearby is, he moves faster, and you can't see him. Allows him to jump on peoples' faces even more.

Beyond those aspects, his fluff, while charming, isn't why most people play him. People play him because they like to play as the ambush predator jumping out of brush and shanking people then collecting their heads as trophies. The fluff merely builds on this concept. It could have gone any number of ways, really, but they chose to make him more of an anti-Nidalee because Nidalee already existed in the general role.

That's how I feel new champions should be (and usually are) designed.

What is the core concept?
How do the mechanics reflect the core concept?
How does the lore explain and humanize the core concept?

Now, there are exceptions to this! Sometimes you just have to write out the lore before you can even identify the core concept. And that's fine. Just don't let the lore run away from you. Remember you're designing for a video game, not a fantasy novel.

ElphrihaimMay 7, 20151 votes

{quoted} I think the difference in views we have comes from our writing backgrounds, but I still (Cognitive bias go!) think mine works better for creating a video game character.

I think that a video game needs binding story and gameplay-- and the two need to work together.

So I don't think that there is any one way that is 'better', in general, for making a character for a game, because the genre of the game can inform, greatly, how you want to tackle a character.

The thing with video games is they're inherently interactive - People are going to be concerned about what they can do while playing the character.

I think that the story, the why behind a decision, is also important-- and I like to, as a player, figure out the developer's thought process some.

Now, there are exceptions to this! Sometimes you just have to write out the lore before you can even identify the core concept. And that's fine. Just don't let the lore run away from you. Remember you're designing for a video game, not a fantasy novel.

I write both ways--

a) build kit, then lore b) build lore, match a kit

because I do whichever one I feel like, then flesh out the other.

Wirym is an example of me going back and forth between kit and lore and I love what happened with her, so I'm trying to do similarly, but I can't bring myself to do it since the IoW has fled. ;;

The EcdysiastMay 6, 20151 votes

"If no one plays the champ, it's just a waste of time." Mordekaiser Yorick Skarner Galio Urgot item 3070

Laughing FishMay 6, 20151 votes

Sometimes though a truly beautiful and unique champions concept pops up. For example: http://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/skin-champion-concepts/gAdeAAN1-abraham-lincoln-the-commander-and-chief?

Citrus JesusMay 6, 20151 votes

I don't wana spam but if anyone wants to check out my Idea? http://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/skin-champion-concepts/eAfHpNdg-jaq-the-dark-magician I think its original and has a cool overall lay out

TransgressorMay 7, 20151 votes

That and the fact some of the best fanmade champs are in complete lack of blatant pop culture refferences that would make the champ instantly familiar and/or recognizable with something. Also most don't have the resources skill not technical expertise to fully fledge their vision into even a concept much of a champion. Besides, with the fear they they're just gonna get their post ripped off and the 98% certain chance absolutely NO developers will see their concept.

Their complete distaste for player involvement(at least give a chance to the talented ones, but no)is also really off-putting for many including myself. Also do you by any chance remember the last time a champion's concept was properly exectuted?

VbunnieMay 10, 20151 votes

now understand some champions like, earl the pool shark, are unique however they still get downvoted. What he does in most cases are not big changes but mechanics that are different then what are currently in league, while he might have a knockback damaging ability it does have a small aoe and the knockback decreases the farther the skillshot travels as well as the skillshot itself slowing down, or he has a stun aoe that stays in place and can stun multiple targets but only for a short period of time and it is limited in how many times it can be cast, also he has an aoe slow that after a short delay explodes and pulls enemies to the center of it all unique skills yet he is still downvoted explain why? please. http://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/skin-champion-concepts/AVxJU1nU-champion-concept-earl-the-pool-shark-final-version-dreaming-of-a-red-reply