You guys come off as really cocky/abrasive. Like all those self-referential appeals to authority in defense of your designs ("remember guys, i'm in college for this stuff...", "if there's one thing I know (besides game design), it's character design", etc.). Makes me wanna gag. Let your work stand on its own feet please. On that note, the redesigns do a good job with theme generally, but the actual experience of playing a lot of these kits... well a lot of them break down in their own ways.
Redesign Ashe, for example, could easily be an amazing support (the passive alone...). And there'd be little reason to ever choose her as a carry (every skill disables autos for an extended period of time, which, yea, goes with her passive... she's designed more like a ranged ad caster than a ranged ad carry, even if she might be built and played as a ranged ad carry just because of the higher dps, and I believe you intended her to still be a carry?). So in this one I feel like you're lacking a good sense of how things actually balance out, and that's a problem quite a few have.
Others just don't seem viscerally satisfying to play - clumsy, awkward kits that fit theme only on a cerebral level. I realize this is more subjective, and not everyone will enjoy every character, so I only mention it because it seemed so common. So many awkward mechanics and too-subtle effects that fit theme but don't actually add anything to the player's visceral experience of being the character, the mental flow when timings and muscle memory and understanding of the character has been nailed down. What it actually feels like to kite as Ezreal, to dash and charm past a team and assassinate your target as Ahri, etc.
As chu8 puts it, when you're so familiar and good with a character, you don't have to 'think' at all anymore, everything's subconscious and 'felt'. On this level, your new Lee Sin is the most boring thing in the world compared to the absolute blast playing Lee is in current Lol (hell that redesign is just bad in general... worse on a cerebral, thinking level and a visceral, musclememory-playing level). And I wouldn't brush off this particular criticism if I were you. I think the core lesson of The Art of Game Design is it's all about the player's experience. If someone says your kit is boring to play, saying something like it fits the theme better is meaningless.
And finally, readability. You harp on this one a lot, saying 'if you fit theme then you don't have to do any homework to play!'. But it's just not true, and never will be in a game like this. Specific numbers, ranges, etc. are vital to understanding matchups and playing competently. Not to mention that just because mechanics fit a theme doesn't mean it's the same mechanics someone who heard the theme would've imagined. Sure, new Nunu plays like a Yeti, but it's a very specific imagining of a Yeti. It wasn't what I would've guessed from a Yeti, and there's lots of specific things I'd have to know to play right against it. And instead of coming back and saying something like "reducing burden of knowledge is about new players being able to play at all, not competitive players playing at the highest level", realize that I think it's still strongly present on both levels in most of your redesigns.
And that's not to say it's a bad design. I don't think readability being so good that burden of knowledge is almost eliminated can really happen unless the game's extremely simple (like, say, Divekick). At the least, you guys certainly haven't solved that one so it'd be nice if you quit acting like you did .
I s'pose that's my point overall. You guys do a lot of good in these designs. Where there's flaws, they'd often be understandable, forgivable flaws (from a perspective of how annoying/damning it is to see the flaw be made, not from a perspective of making the best champion possible)... if you didn't have to go and act like they were so flawless.
Guhnosis had some good points. I think you guys understand theme really well but after reading several of your redesigns I don't think I'd want to play the game. Yes having a theme that ties things together is good but to focus on that to the exclusion of all else is not what game design is about. Take for instance your Nami. Nobody would have fun playing against her. You couldn't move and you'd be dragged around and not get a choice about where you go. Already that's is one of the most annoying things in the game (why do you think blitz is such a common ban)
Along with that you haven't given any though to synergy and how the game would play as whole. Its the same thing that the guy who has created the mathematical formula for which champions are most powerful. It'd work for spherical chickens in a vacuum. (Look it up on Wikipedia if you don't get it) but actually playing would be chaos.
Yea, Nami hits a few things you guys don't seem to like. I think the design would be MUCH stronger, from thematic cohesion translating to newbie-friendly readability, if the core mechanic of tides was played to even stronger, if everything was about controlling a certain type of tide that acted predictably after one encounter with it but could be used in all sorts of ways by the Tidecaller. Instead you have this water that slows you, this water that pushes you but you can fight against it or ride with it (I think? undercurrent is not very clearly worded), and this water that pushes me uncontrollably a long ways and then stuns me sometimes (but the other water that pushes me never does...), and they could easily be overlapping or occurring all at once. It's all very muddy for the player to learn the first time, and takes homework to remember 'this current that looks like this does this, this current that looks like this does this, etc.'
© 2013 Riot Games, Inc. All rights reserved. Riot Games, League of Legends and PvP.net are trademarks, services marks, or registered trademarks of Riot Games, Inc.