: So... How's that Visual Update goin?
Last I heard, Riot was currently working on directions they wanted to take Evelyn in, which would help shape her eventual Full Update. They said they had some good ideas for her, but I'd guess there isn't anything concrete being worked on at the moment.
Sukishoo (NA)
: So about the Definitely Not series
I don't see Udyr. All I see is two perfectly normal looking gentlemen and their four animal friends.
Vistha Kai (EUNE)
: >_"Aurelion Sol once graced the vast emptiness of the cosmos with celestial wonders of his own devising. Now he is forced to wield his awesome powers at the behest of a space-faring empire that tricked him in to servitude. Desiring a return to his star forging ways, Aurelion Sol will drag the very stars from the sky, if he must, in order to regain his freedom."_ A-ha-ha! Oh, boy. That's a good one. Haven't they retconned IoW and Summoners to _free_ themselves from champion backgrounds **exactly** like this one? Ironic. http://media2.giphy.com/media/brDwVn5kGIz3W/giphy.gif
The problem isn't with a powerful champion being in servitude, it's that their servitude could never be broken under the IoW and Summoners. They had to stay locked up in order to explain how they were playable characters, otherwise there's no way they would have fought for the Summoners. At least now, Aurelion Sol can best this empire and become his own master once again without it having any affect on his gameplay.
: ***
The problem is that League's narrative and the game were not created in tandem. Aside from a few mechanical differences League is largely a copy of DOTA and the lore was roughly built around that framework. The problem is that the lore was, arguably, rushed out the door. While the original LoL universe on release was interesting and had some novel concepts, it was already inherently flawed from the start as far as mechanics matching aesthetics. League is a world filled with conflict, both micro and macro, and that conflict is what drives the individual champions and their factions to do action. This was to reflect the conflict built into the game, as it explains why two sides would be working against each other in the first place. However, this begins to crumble when you realize that these beings have no say in their political squabbles, as the decisions are 100% decided by the will of the god-like summoners. It doesn't matter if Swain is a master tactician and leader of Noxus, because my mid laner keeps running into the enemy turret. Characters aren't "characters" in the game, they're the summoner's (i.e. player's) pawns. Additionally, League had (arguably) one way to deal with conflict created in the lore: a 5v5 match on the Summoner's Rift. How do you deal with a threat like the Void? Ask five Void representatives to calmly and cooperatively agree to a equally represented match with the residents of the world in order to gain control and consume it? Given the build up of the Void even in the early lore that would have been a disservice and a let down. Every conflict would have resulted in the exact same conclusion: a 5v5 match where someone would win and someone would lose. And while that has it's own merits as a storytelling vehicle (Noxus vs. Ionia was definitely a crowd pleaser at the time) I question how many times that style of conflict would play out before the novelty wore off. It was limited, extremely so, as to what actual compelling story could happen that could ever be reflected in the game. Powerlevels were, equally, a somewhat nebulous concept. No matter what the champion was, they would always be kept in check by Summoners. This kind of questions why you'd ever include violent or destructive champions that didn't care for the League's ideology (Cho, Fiddles, Nocturne, Brand, etc.), because their story would always result in the same conclusion: and then the League chained them up and used them as tools in their deathbattles. The numerous and all powerful Summoners, who were the least interesting characters by far in League, would always have to take precedence over everyone else because the game, the actual game, was their plaything. Champions had to be bound to their will in order for us, the players, to play them. While this might work for a select group of characters, I don't think it was really applicable to every character, and I don't think it should have been. While restrictions can spark innovation, I don't really know if these were the right restrictions to have. The connection between lore and gameplay was already vague and tenuous from the start, and I don't think it's fair to call Riot or the narrative team "lazy" when making this decision. Narrative has frequently gotten the short end of the stick with League and I think that's more to do with the prevalence of weak narrative structure than it is a lack of effort or talent. Likewise, I don't think mechanics and aesthetics are divorced at all in League. Mechanics are often reinforced by aesthetics, with characters having unique and flavorful mechanics, rather than failing to serve as a 1-to-1 canonical representation of a character. Regardless we can go back and forth on whether the division of lore and gameplay was the right one. I think, if Riot had really built a strong framework for their narrative from the get-go they could have had something to work with, but _c'est la vie_. On the subject of Aurelion Sol and powerlevels, I don't think it's really the question of why a star destroying/creating space dragon should be playable alongside mere mortals, but rather how his kit and in-game mechanics present an extremely powerful celestial being in a balanced way.
: So, about Rafen...
He kinda fills the same role as Mr. Gibbs from the Pirates of the Caribbean films, to me at least. Just some salty cutthroat sailor who's MF's right hand and friend. He's a cool character to have and I hope he sticks around for a good while longer (even though he's got "fan-favorite emotional death" written all over him). I'm fine with him not being a champion, as I think his role as a average side-kick to MF works well for the character, but I also wouldn't be opposed if he was released as a champion.
Wolfeur (EUW)
: Is he the ruined king?
It's doubtful, actually. Considering the "Ruined" King hails from the land of undeath, it's unlikely he's truly "dead" at all (probably in a state much worse than death). Also, Kindred states that they're not allowed in the Shadow Isles when purchasing BoRK, most likely because it is a land of undeath rather than one that lets death happen naturally. Kinda highlights the unique aspects of the Shadow Isles, really. Most people would assume, due to the spooky nature and all of the skeletons and ghosts and such, that it's a place that reveres death. In reality it values neither life nor death, but that unholy place that lies between.
Sharjo (EUW)
: How Magic and the Universe Works. Maybe.
I don't really have much to add to the discussion here, but I just wanted to commend you on a fantastic post. Really well written and I enjoyed the read immensely. :D
Ultîma (NA)
: ...Ok? The Frostguard still won by a landslide. The point is that there were no narrative repercussions to this whatsoever. You'd think that 2 years down the line someone at Riot would've taken the time to write a couple paragraphs to commemorate the event.
That's not how it worked. The event never stated that the icon popularity results would have story-relevant ramifications, and if it did that would be a horribly stupid idea. It was just a fun little thing to tie into the Freljord event and Howling Abyss/Lissandra's release. Nothing more.
: I. Have. Felt. **Nothing.**
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d66FK9UjIvg
: Which style will you use on DJ Sona?
Kinetic > Concussive > Ethereal I imagine I'll switch through them often enough, as it can get repetitive, but those are my preferences.
SS Enforcer (EUNE)
: A petition to bring Journal of Justice back.
Rather than a unified publication that spanned the entirety of Runeterra, which doesn't make much sense in the world as we've seen it anyway, I'd rather see pieces from individual publications based on particular city factions. Rather than a detached and impersonal viewpoint we would often see in the JoJ, we would instead see a much more direct view of the factions themselves. By viewing stories through this particular lens it allows us to get a closer look into the politics of these individual city-states, and how they function: propaganda, local flavor, as well as focusing on individual champions within their own realm. However, I don't think this needs to be limited to a journalistic perspective. Take, for instance, Rek'sai's reveal: relayed as a series of letters from a Noxian stationed in Shurima. This concept seemed very well received by a lot of people and I think it's worth perusing doing something similar on a more frequent level. Potential benefits for such an endeavor include: * Inspiration - By fleshing out the world and the characters you create new inspiration for the champion design and art teams. "Look at this cool aspect of the Freljord/Demacia/Piltover/Ect.! This totally puts this image into my head that I want to see [in the next champion]/[in this rad piece of art]." That, in turn, inspires the players to play those champions and create their own content surrounding them. It's a win/win. * Fleshing out the IP - The world as it exists to the players is very spotty right now. There are patches of lore that exist within pockets, but they don't really form a collective world as a whole. By putting out content like this you give us, the players, a better idea of what kind of world we're pulling characters from and that in turn adds to those characters. Sivir is cool, but Sivir is cooler when I know about the difficulties in Shurima and what it means to live the kind of life she does. * Teasing new content - Riot, you like doing this. You looooooove hinting at things to come, but you don't want to spoil the surprise. That's okay, we get that, but that doesn't mean we can't have fun. I'm not talking about Ao Shin levels of "Look at this thing we're doing right now", but I think that a character or asset making a small cameo in a story (or stories) long before it's actually revealed would make that eventual reveal all the more cooler and meaningful. * Repairing broken bridges - The easiest way to get Lore fans back on the Riot boat is consistent content. **If you take one thing away from this wall of text please let it be this**. I don't think it's insane to expect written content either monthly or bi-monthly, but at this rate it's "Whenever a champion comes out, maybe." and that's pretty unacceptable. Yes, this means a lot of work from a lot of people, but if you want the lore and your IP to be taken seriously than you need to take it seriously and give it all of the credit it deserves. If I was reading a comic or watching a TV show and it released content "whenever", regardless of how great that content was, I would stop reading/watching it. End of story. No one wants to get invested in something like that because there's no reliability or consistency. It's the same with League's lore: you can write all the wonderful reveals you want, but very few are going to want to get invested unless they can expect at least some level of consistency. Anyway, that was a bit of a ramble. I don't expect Riot to look at this post at all and I'm pretty sure they've internally discussed similar ideas to this already. But, just to reiterate, if you take one thing away from this post: **please make consistent content**. Good quality, yes, but more importantly consistent.
: For what it's worth, I rather like Carnival Knights and Jaredan. Now, we disagree on some things, but I respect their work and I think we'd enjoy discussing LoL lore together. I'm not entirely comfortable with my "rebellious" position. That said, I know what I want, and I feel some obligation to others to keep voicing that opinion. A lot of my posts are intended with the following tone: "Hey, that's cool; by the way, you should engage with your community." I guess it's a friendlier *ceterum censeo.* I really do not understand their apprehension. I'm not going to argue with them about the Great Retcon, unless they ask me to do so. That's settled. And while I object to drastic rewrites of established lore, I'm open to change, and indeed think that many of their changes have been both for the better and fully backwards-compatible with prior lore. I just think that it's a mistake for them to think that they need to retreat into their insulated corner and rewrite LoL's lore from scratch, without any collaboration with the community that's kept LoL's lore alive for years. I've always thought of Riot as a company that understands the value of tapping into the community's ideas and experiences. It seems very strange that Narrative hasn't done more of that, especially given that the Narrative team seems brand new and the lore community includes people with truly profound understanding of LoL's lore. (No, I'm not including myself. I don't actually know very much about League's lore. I just do what I can to represent those who do.)
> [{quoted}](name=CupcakeTrap,realm=NA,application-id=6kFXY1kR,discussion-id=uFxIzFTl,comment-id=00020000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2015-02-06T06:40:31.435+0000) > > I've always thought of Riot as a company that understands the value of tapping into the community's ideas and experiences. It seems very strange that Narrative hasn't done more of that, especially given that the Narrative team seems brand new and the lore community includes people with truly profound understanding of LoL's lore. (No, I'm not including myself. I don't actually know very much about League's lore. I just do what I can to represent those who do.) I think it's important to note that the most active Rioters back when Narrative regularly engaged with the community are no longer a part of the team (for whatever reason) and much of the team, at least the active part of the team, have only joined within the past few years when communication has been, noticably, lacking. For many, if not most, of the members of Narrative the backlash from the retcon announcement would have been the first they've seen of this newer and more active community. I can't imagine that left a good impression, exaggerated and overzealous as it was. Perhaps it's just me, but it seems like Narrative takes the criticism and bad mouthing a lot more personally than most other departments.
: What does Narrative mean when it says it can't discuss "specific story ideas"?
I think it's important to note Ant in Oz says >the same reason **I** don’t read fan-fic Emphasis on the "I". Perhaps it is merely a personal choice on their part, because they are a writer and don't want to accidentally absorb a fan's idea or be working on a project and then realize a fan has already done something very similar. This way, they can at least claim that they never read or saw anyone's ideas during the writing period, if there is someone claiming theft. Perhaps it's not that strict as far as legality is concerned, but it might help them feel more comfortable? This is all speculation, though.
: > [{quoted}](name=roosterbega,realm=NA,application-id=6kFXY1kR,discussion-id=uFxIzFTl,comment-id=00020000000000000000,timestamp=2015-02-05T18:37:56.165+0000) > > Well they do discuss it best they can. IronStylus was all over the boards a few times asking what people saw was important about Taric. They aren't being the fastest about this new lore sure, but they're putting lots of quality into what they get done. IronStylus' thread on Taric was a great example of the sort of thing Narrative should be doing more of. (I should use that in the OP.)
I'd say IronStylus has been doing that type of community engagement for quite some time now, while it seems like a lot of Narrative is either fresh off the boat or (for the folks who have been around longer) simply afraid of engaging with us. It seems that despite our constant cries for communication there are plenty that feel this part of the LoL community is a hornet's nest. There are certain figures in this community (you, Terra Rising, LordHippoman, Grand Viper (whenever he pops in), etc.) that are very much the face of this community. It's really up to those people to act as buffers when it comes to dealing with Narrative because I think it's safe to say: I'd rather have Narrative come in here and be candid/honest/open and accepted than not come in at all. IronStylus can come in here and do that because he's got confidence and a lot of the community likes him already. Narrative is lacking that, it seems.
: We usually intentionally don't do many lore skins. That would reeeeeaally limit us in what idea space we could work in. I think one of the best parts of the game is that the skins aren't cannon. I don't think you could find a fitting place for Heartseeker Varus in the story.. ..even if you can, well.. yikes.
Right, but the HotS skins aren't cannon either. I think you misunderstood when the OP said **lore** skins, as they meant the skin itself had lore. The whole point of the blurb is to explain the flavor, or rather what situations/world *could* exist in which these skins were cannon. There was a little bit of this with the Void Fizz skin release: > A chill grips the man’s spine as a warped giggle echoes through the streets. He’s coming. Fizz used to be welcomed with open arms but recently, something’s changed. Vaulting over walls with his corrupted trident, he’s been terrorizing everyone for weeks with his demented games. The man starts running, passing by an alley when something strikes his back and drags him to the ground. Reality tears beneath him and a sickly sweet odor envelops the street. He looks back and sees Fizz, reeking of corruption, staring and chuckling. Moments later the ground erupts as a putrid leviathan bursts forth from below, devouring the man in an instant. Void Fizz and his pet love to play hide-and-seek. The idea isn't that Fizz has in-cannon become void-ified, but rather this skin represents a reality where he might have (and the whole "multiverse"/"skin-cannon" thing is already an idea that's been heavily suggested with the Battlecast universe). Obviously it wouldn't need to be this long, as the HotS example is only a few sentences. The difficult part comes in actually creating these snip-its for the hundreds of skins you have, as well as where you'd actually be able t put the blurbs. On the champion page itself? We already have enough issues with the client holding text that I don't think that's really feasible; and does anyone really go to the site's champion pages? Is it worth that effort? So, yeah, it's a cool idea. I would love for it to happen, and I'm sure Riot would like it too. Adding flavor to the Lol "multiverse" (HA!) is something I think every player can get behind. The question is: is that time and effort spent doing something that only adds flavor to an admittedly non-cannon aspect of the world for every instance? I'd say no, but perhaps there's a compromise in there by only focusing on particular universes and fleshing them out. This in turn provides a lot of inspiration for the art/skins team. I know the Battlecast universe is one of those that a lot of people have suggested interest in seeing more of, and even some of the other more neglected skin themes could see some life and love pumped into them. Just some thoughts.
: Cake decoration
You'll be fine. Just don't start selling League of Legend's themed cakes for money and it won't be an issue.
: Lore Broken
Everyone knows this. We know it. Riot knows it.
: I've suspected this as well. Also, the lyrics to the song and Amumu's current residence point to his race as being yordle. It seems that yordles were a part of the general population of Shurima, similarly as to how they populate Piltover and Ionia present-day.
I'm not sure I agree with that. Aside from Amumu being a boy, most specifics on his identity are left ambiguous. This was intentional on Riot's part, as if you watch the documentary on the music video they discuss how Amumu's story/plight is identifiable to all factions in Runeterra and how they like that element.
: I really need a TL;DR. Also Amumu {{champion:32}} is Azir's {{champion:268}} son. Azir had enemies in high places and they placed a curse on his only first born that he would be alone for all of eternity. Azir has magic and it has been handed down through his blood line. In the music video you can see him come out of a sarcophagus. He must have been baried alive.
Except we know that everyone even remotely close during Azir's botched ascension was basically vaporized. There wouldn't be much to bury of Azir's children, let alone mummify, nor would there really be anyone to bury him. It's most likely that Amumu predated Azir's reign.
: > [{quoted}](name=XxSnakeBytesxX,realm=NA,application-id=6kFXY1kR,discussion-id=sTZbeEMT,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2015-01-26T23:44:11.901+0000) > > If you check the wiki i think it states him as a Undead yordle. Riot has stated that they're removing his Yordle identity though. Unfortunately the forums are a complete cluster to search for the particular Rioter who had said this and the direct quote, so I can't really back it up without referring to 2ndary sources.
It was IronStylus and while I don't have the direct quote it was something along the lines of being a "Yordle" needlessly adding too much bloat to his identity, or something similar to that.
Motajo (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Gentleman Gaston,realm=NA,application-id=6kFXY1kR,discussion-id=2yALXl9n,comment-id=0000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2015-01-12T01:01:15.964+0000)But, for me, it was a willful denial that the gameplay and story didn't match up Is it truly that much better when they don't match up at all, instead of some ratio between 0 and 1? I can make Mario walk to the nearest fortress and take a dip in the lava, but that doesn't mean his nonchalant suicide is part of the story. Whether I do that as a player, or as a summoner, I'd say the same applies.
But the idea that Mario is being controlled by some "Outsider" isn't rolled into the story at all. Your actions are Mario's actions and it is never implied otherwise (except in the case of cute 4-th wall breaking bits that have appeared throughout the series, but are not meant to be taken seriously). If Mario takes a dip in the lava that's due to his own/your actions, but those are never considered the "true events". Remember, if you die in Mario it merely restarts the level over and continues to do so until you run out of "Lives" or complete the level. The story does not progress having acknowledged Mario's, also the Player's, failure. There is no alternate and canonical ending where Mario just dies forever, or even that he dies at all. In the canonical retelling of events Mario is always successful and that's because the story exists to loosely tie the elements of gameplay together, but it is not there to explain gameplay. In essence, the story never alters based on the results of you playing the game, but rather is a static thing that the player/Mario progresses through. However, in the IoW version of LoL the story does very much so try to explain gameplay and those failures due to player negligence and contradictory character actions stand out much more because of that. The problem isn't entirely that the gameplay and story didn't work well together, but rather that the entire function of the IoW and Summoners was to explain gameplay and that explanation was outright faulty.
Impetual (NA)
: RIot Didn't Retcon the Lore, They Just Deleted It.
Everytime I see this complaint and the correlation to the retcon as the "DEATH OF LORE" (all caps intended) I just kind of giggle to myself. The "direction" changed years ago when Riot Babaganoosh left and his ideas/plans for the story with him. Seriously, go look at how things line up and you'll see. If you dug the silly, pop-culture referencing, somewhat illogical aspects of the game from things like the JoJ and early parts of the lore that helped define the world than that boat sailed long ago. By 2012 things immediately started switching to less IoW/Summoner focused and more Faction/character focused stories. What we're seeing today is not some sudden upheaval; it is a continuing trend in direction that started years ago. The only reason people are more upset about it now is that Riot made a big deal about it with the blog post and so all the people that hadn't really been paying attention to the game's story suddenly started paying attention. Also, really? The roleplaying aspect has been destroyed? Come on. Whatever aspects Riot "removed"...just unremove them. RP whatever you want. The constraints to your imagination are not what is cannon to the game's universe. That's silly.
: > [{quoted}](name=Gentleman Gaston,realm=NA,application-id=6kFXY1kR,discussion-id=IsEmE7c2,comment-id=00010000,timestamp=2015-01-12T00:08:45.724+0000) > > We've already seen a bit of this in Jayce's bio, but there's evidence for Viktor's tendency towards violence as a means to forward his own pursuits, although there was no serious harm done to persons in his attack on Jayce's lab. So, you could argue that those actions were of a "You just don't understand and I will not let foolishness stand in the way of my vision" nature and less of a mustache twirling villain variety. > > To me, Viktor is one of the best gray-area villains League has. On the surface his ideologies seem extreme, but underneath all that I think there is simply a desire for others to understand him. His main quote: "Join the glorious evolution!". What does it mean? Is he demanding that others forcibly join him, as in a edict or order? Or...is it a request? "Join this glorious evolution. There is no pain here. No anguish, or fear, or hate. There is nothing holding our species back from achievement, from claiming the destiny we deserve." > > It is, perhaps, a bit too romanticized, but I tend to look for the complexities in characters like this. Jayce is a complete and utter jock douchebag if you read his lore. He goes in to Viktor laboratory without any real proof, smashes EVERYTHING, maybe a part of Viktor evolution was a tissue regeneration aparatus since a cyborg/bionic aparatus IS more efficent then a pure electrical one. Perhaps Viktor was working on something groundbreaking in medical science .... we may never know
> Viktor, the machine-augmented scientist from Zaun, brought Jayce an offer – together, they could use the crystal to advance his "glorious evolution," a vision of humanity fused with technology. Jayce refused, but the Zaunite had no intention of leaving empty handed. He effortlessly blasted Jayce aside and seized the crystal, incinerating the lab's meager security force as he left for Zaun. And then >Inside, Jayce saw the horrifying brilliance of Viktor's creations, all powered by the energy of the arcane crystal. He realized that his only option was to destroy the power source, but Viktor stood in his way. Jayce had plenty of reason to believe that Viktor would use the crystal for some dark purpose; he pretty much told him so up front. There was no "glorious medical evolution" here, and either way we know Viktor is not some sort of heart of gold "I just want to help people" kind of guy. Don't get my previous post wrong: Viktor is **not** a good guy. He's a villain through and through. What makes him interesting is his motivations are sympathetic and understandable, but that doesn't mean you should want him to succeed. Likewise, Jayce may be hot headed and rash and cocky, but he's a good guy. He legitimately wants to protect others from harm. What makes *Jayce* interesting is that he's a hero who's been thrown into that role without really being emotionally equipped for it; sure the accolades, glory, and self-righteousness is good and all, but is Jayce ready to take on such a responsibility? I'd say no, and it'll be interesting to see what happens when he realizes that.
Impetual (NA)
: @Riot Narrative Department, What Is Your Ideal Narrative Direction For LoL?
Could you clarify what you mean by > What role do you want the lore of LoL to have within the games narrative?
Sneak Dog (EUW)
: It wasn't perfect. It was just immersive to an extent. You were a summoner summoning a champion. The champion talked to you. You had summoner spells, runes and masteries, you gained influence points and whenever the champion died on the fields of justice, you had to regain the melding. It was all explained, it was as immersive as it could be without sacrificing gameplay. Now it's just super smash bros. You pick a character, that character starts monologueing, you have some bonus static abilities, bonus power, gain currency and die and respawn. The gameplay never made way for the lore and I don't blame it. Given this, the game was pretty much as immersive as it could be.
I can see that, and I acknowledge that for many players that's all they wanted. But, for me, it was a willful denial that the gameplay and story didn't match up, which seems incredibly ludicrous when you take into account that the basis for the game's central lore was to support that faulty union. The IoW, Summoners, and the like were designed to support a gameplay=story universe, which as even you admit wasn't perfect. Now, as a fan of storytelling and lore and worldbuilding I feel like that's unfair. It's stating that because gameplay comes first (which, for LoL, it should) that story *must* come second. You see evidence of this all over the old story when story attempted to co-exist with gameplay. Without attempting to delve into other aspects of the IoW retcon, this is the entire point of severing gameplay and story. It is the willful acknowledgement that, yes, LoL's gameplay and story don't really co-exist in the same space. That doesn't mean that the two never intersect. Gameplay often references story and there are many analogous elements (Kalista and Thresh's passives, the Rengar and Kha'zix fight, various item names, Twisted Treeline and Howling Abyss, and most champions as a whole) but that means that the prior mentioned "willing suspension of disbelief" which was dubious at best need not exist at all. I can simply focus entirely on the game or the story, whichever is more relevant to me at the moment, without them muddying each other. I'm not saying that the charm of attempting to explain such an imperfect union is lost on me, nor that it's loss must be greeted with open arms. I do think that for the overall health of the game and it's universe that this particular severance was a good idea. I don't believe I'm going to convince anyone of that, as most people have already convinced themselves of what was "good" vs "bad", but those are my personal thoughts.
: Viktor is a pretty neat character. I voted neutral because I think his decisions were made for the wrong reasons. Viktor had a shitty life and was pretty much used as a footstool by everyone. He lost faith in humanity because of some bad things happening to him, and I think he went too far without looking at the big picture. Not all humans are awful people, but the ones Viktor encountered were, so he really had no frame of reference. I think if Viktor had any real friends or allies, things would have gone better for him, but they didn't, so he sort of flung himself into this ideal that "Robots don't lie, robots won't hurt me, robots won't betray me.", which is really sad if you think about it. I think whether or not Viktor comes out as a flawed hero or a tragic villain depends on his actions. If he uses his cyborg creating abilities to save the diseased or dying, that's a noble pursuit and he'll look like a pretty great guy. If he decides to use violence and destruction to FORCE his ideology and "evolution" on people, he's no better than the people who made him change himself.
We've already seen a bit of this in Jayce's bio, but there's evidence for Viktor's tendency towards violence as a means to forward his own pursuits, although there was no serious harm done to persons in his attack on Jayce's lab. So, you could argue that those actions were of a "You just don't understand and I will not let foolishness stand in the way of my vision" nature and less of a mustache twirling villain variety. To me, Viktor is one of the best gray-area villains League has. On the surface his ideologies seem extreme, but underneath all that I think there is simply a desire for others to understand him. His main quote: "Join the glorious evolution!". What does it mean? Is he demanding that others forcibly join him, as in a edict or order? Or...is it a request? "Join this glorious evolution. There is no pain here. No anguish, or fear, or hate. There is nothing holding our species back from achievement, from claiming the destiny we deserve." It is, perhaps, a bit too romanticized, but I tend to look for the complexities in characters like this.
Sneak Dog (EUW)
: The game play was immersive. The gameplay was not a 1:1 representation of the lore. There were not millions of summoners and only a hundred champions.
That is literally the opposite of immersive game play though. If the whole premise is the player is a summoner you can't arbitrarily decide that "Oh, sometimes they just aren't" without breaking immersion. My willful suspension of disbelief for the game is shattered when I can make the champion do something they never would, say to die needlessly.
Sneak Dog (EUW)
: They've gone from allowing the lore to focus around a central point where everything interacts to creating lots of small unrelated stories. It allows them to write whatever they want in their part of the world without affecting the rest. They refocused. This is not inherently more or less limiting, not good or bad. The new focus is just as limiting as the old one, it doesn't give them more freedom, it gives them more freedom in areas where they wanted this freedom but less in others. What they did do is kill off all immersion, put up all the old lore and even characters up for change and go their own way. This without bothering to argue with us, giving us only a couple of arguments, at least one of which plain false (summoners were never puppetmasters), in a dev blog. No Q&A's, no good well-argumented standpoint, just a dev blog and the lore is now all gone.
Summoners **are** puppetmasters. Any argument I've read about how it's "mind sharing" or "guidance" falls apart when you acknowledge that you, a **Summoner**, can forcibly control your champion to walk into an enemy tower and die. Over and over again. There's no guidance in LoL's gameplay. There is simply "Do".
Shíny (NA)
: Request for a more open look at the Narrative and creative teams at Riot.
These are all people I know are either a part of Narrative or Writers of various sorts (being a "Writer" doesn't necessitate that they're a part of Narrative): - Riot Jaredan is Senior Editor for Narrative - Riot Harrow is a Creative Designer - Riot Runaan is a Writer - George Krstic (unsure of Riot tag?) is a Senior Writer - Riot Whiski is a Senior Writer - Riot Ransom is a Writer - Riot Paradox is a Writer - fizzNchips is a Writer - Ant in Oz is a Writer - Ryan Verniere (unsure of Riot tag?) is a Senior Writer There are probably others I've missed, but those are the ones I could find immediately or already knew about. Notable figures that used to work in Narrative: - Riot Entropy no longer works at Riot as of last November. - Riot Opeli no longer works in Narrative, although she is still a part of Riot in their Publishing team (this was also around late November/early December). - Tom Abernathy (aka Tommy Gnox) left Riot back in September. - Kitae no longer works in Narrative, although she is still a part of Riot. - Riot Babaganoosh was in charge of laying most of the foundations surrounding the IoW, Summoners, and the lore up until his departure back in 2011.
Shíny (NA)
: I do :D http://www.reddit.com/r/leagueoflegends/comments/2j7e14/list_of_riot_games_artists_with_links/ That's how it is with artists (storytellers and illustrators) people like to know who they are, they like to share and discuss different styles and which ones are their favorites. Its strange with the style they've gone with (Short stories) that they choose to remain a giant blob of anonymity. Although the way the post is titled is somewhat hostile, i'd love to know the names of some of the writers and what stories they've penned.
I absolutely agree. Comparing styles and genre of various authors is really fun, and it'd be even more fun to actually get to interact with those authors on a more personal level to better understand their influences and interests when it comes to storytelling. I really hope that this community and Narrative eventually come to a place where that kind of interaction can happen peacefully. :)
: While you're right in that nobody expects him to know who works in which department, he actually *is* supposed to be capable of easily finding that out. The International Game Developers Association considers it a developer's basic right to be credited for their work. While they cannot punish a company for doing otherwise, they *will* actively brand companies as being unethical and untrustworthy if that happens. The most famous example of that is Team Bondi, the company who developed L.A. Noire and almost immediately folded because nobody was willing to work with them. It's why most AAA-list games have those enormous credit rolls that include every single person who was involved in the game, including babies born during development and that one dude who was found drunk in a bathroom once. No one wants to piss off the closest thing the industry has to a trade union, or repeat that one time when EA got smacked with three class actin lawsuits in one month.
Looking into this I found numerous examples that support your case. http://navgtr.org/archives/2164/ While these do only claim to be guidelines, they do recommend that credits are found within the game itself. Now, unless I'm blind this doesn't seem to be the case with the LoL client. So, let's assume that Riot isn't acting within the IGDA guidelines. According to you they would be branded as such, but that doesn't seem to be the case. I can find no such branding available online, and in looking into the Team Bondi debacle it seems that allegations were not to do with crediting employees but ludicrous overtime. (http://www.gamepolitics.com/2011/06/28/igda-promises-investigation-team-bondi039s-alleged-employee-abuses#.VKx21Hu8HEY) In fact, that same year (2011) Riot was invited to speak at a IGDA conference. (http://www.mcvuk.com/press-releases/read/sony-riot-games-shell-games-executives-to-share-insights-at-october-igda-leadership-forum-in-la/083501) Now while that was a few years ago nothing has really changed as far as more or less available crediting, which makes me question why the IGDA would invite a company lead to speak if that company was breaking their rules. From this I can draw the conclusion that Riot's method of crediting it's employees is not enough to ruffle the IGDA's feathers. If it were Riot is a big enough company that it would be a big news topic. All this being said, I am curious as to why Riot has chosen this method of obscuring credits, or at least leaving it up to the discretion of the employee on whether they would like to openly claim credit. Does anyone have any other MOBA games with available credits? Are they only the initial ones or accumulative? I wonder if this is merely an internet thing, where those with little presence on the internet simply don't have the desire to make themselves known on the internet.
: Can we at least know who's CONFIRMED to STILL BE in the Narrative Department?
Do you know all of the members in every other department? Can you name every artist? Or designer? Or programmer? I wouldn't expect you to. So, why is it so vitally important to know? I'm not intending to be accusatory, I am legitimately curious.
: To be fair, I read this post as a parody of all the braindead "Zed and Nocturne are the same person!" threads. If we're allowed to make fun of dumber aspects of actual lore such as everyone being retconned into Freljord and wandering Valoran, we should be allowed to make fun of the dumbest fan theory of all time.
I've seen dumber fan theories.
: I do not find the Xenomorphs very monstrous because, well, they no longer fit the "true monster" description as discussed in my conversation with Dreamspitter and Narasimha. The original Alien from the very first movie matched that description, as does the Alien from Alien: Isolation. It's a barely comprehensible destructive force that is hard to predict or understand, a creature that doesn't obey human logic in any feasible way. But in all other works, Xenomorphs were essentially reduced to a pack of wild animals that operate on rules very similar to ones I described for Rek'sai above. They're simply quadrupedal predators that run around killing others so they can breed and feed themselves. Also worth noting that recent Alien fiction actually *humanized* Xenomorphs, as both Resurrection and Prometheus revealed that their genetic structure is very similar to humans in part because the original Xenomorph was a human/alien hybrid. Predators are considerably less comprehensible because while they are portrayed as having a strong sense of honor, their social structure and even ways of thinking were never explained due to their purpose within the stories. Predators are supposed to be an incomprehensible force who hunt and kill for reasons humans cannot really understand. They are an apex predator who will intentionally engage other predators for what can *kind of* be described by humans as "fun," but that might not even be correct. They are monstrous because a vague approximate of "wild game hunter with a sense of honor" is the closest to how one can describe a Predator, except their methods are so ridiculously savage that you cannot even expect their idea of honor to resemble ours. As for Vel'koz, him being almost purely rational actually does add to him being monstrous. Believe it or not, most humans are *not* rational; we have far too many emotions caused by random chemical reactions to ever actually achieve that state. Sociopaths are characterized by reliance on reason over emotion and most people find them terrifying; after all, Hannibal Lector *is* a sociopath. There is also the fact that Vel'koz's logic operates on rules different than our own (as it's structured around Voidborn values), and generally logic that doesn't rely on human ideas of what is logical can be very scary. Rek'sai does have logic as described by me above. It is "DIG DIG HUNGRY KILL KILL HUNGRY". She is monstrous only by the value that she looks unusual by our world's scientific standards, but that monstrosity is easily stripped away by the fact that her species came to being and evolved on a different planet, and therefore their evolutionary pattern might be different. She is essentially a wild predatory animal from a different ecosystem. A giant chitinous bear. If that's monstrous to you, sure thing! Have fun. But it's not what I classify as a true monster because, in the end, I can very easily explain her. And it still doesn't change the fact that Rek'sai is severely underwhelming in-game when you compare to how lore describes her size and presence.
Being able to "explain" something doesn't define it's monstrosity. Most monsters aren't very complex (a Werewolf, the *Odyssey*'s Polyphemus, etc.), and their motivations are pretty straightforward, so I don’t think that ruling anything with decipherable motivations cannot be a monster makes much sense. I'll repeat again what I said before; a monster is something that differs so far from the norm that it causes horror. There are multiple ways to make a monster, and therefore different kinds of monsters, but that's the basic definition. So, in the later Alien films (let’s take Aliens for example) when they start throwing dozens and dozens of Xenomorphs at the characters it certainly isn’t the same as the single Xenomorph hunting the crew in the original film. But, they’re still monsters for two reasons: the way they look and what they do. Xenomorphs are absolutely alien in form and look like very little else most people have seen, and the lethality of their look (claws, tail, double mouth, acid blood, etc.) is what provides horror. The second reason is what the Xenomorphs do; they kill. A lot. But it’s not merely the act of killing that makes something a monster: it’s the repeated killing and effectiveness of killing. Humans (of the Western world, at least) like to believe that they are on top of the food chain and that we control our environment. Xenomorphs, and other monsters of this variety, tell us that that mentality is wrong. This installs fear and uncertainty because it breaks the norm. Take, for example, most childhood monster fears: while most have either long arms/legs, giant eyes, many eyes, and whatever physical abnormalities from what we expect to exist they also instill the knowledge that you are not safe because this thing desires to kill/kidnap you. To use a previous example; Jaws is a monster not just because of its size but because of its repeated killings as though it were actively hunting people. So, to put it all in context: A squirrel is not a monster. A bear is not a monster. A bear that is twice the size of a normal bear, has a face that pulls back revealing a gaping chasm of teeth, and actively hunts humans *is* a monster.
: > I would say Braum is definitely a legend, as his story was told by a Grandmother to her grandaughter, and the grandmother admits that she TOO was told this story by her own grandmother which makes Braum extremely long lived. Fair enough! I no longer trust Riot's narrative team to keep track of their own timelines. > I'm gonna hazard a guess that some of your disappointment stems from the fact Rek'Sai is a true monster. Not merely monstrous character with an obvious human like sapience, and its own thoughts and feelings. So we get told the story of someone else's encounter like Tremors or Alien. That's not it at all. I specialize in playing monsters. I mained Predator way back when AvP was still a popular thing and multiple friends keep asking me to buy Evolve because they think I'd be amazing in it. My disappointment is that Rek'sai is a piece of underwhelming garbage disguised as a monster. She has a severely overhyped lore that spends 10 pages tooting the horn of how horrifying she is, but her gameplay pattern is that of a very generic DPS thingie. Her in-game size is actually smaller than most other Voidborn and her combat consists of her spinning around in one place like a dog chasing its own tail. Vel'koz is a true monster because while he can communicate on a human level, his behavior patterns and perception of the surrounding world are completely alien and indecipherable to us. Rek'sai is just an insectoid bear, plus being the only Voidborn who cannot talk actually makes her *less* scary because it portrays her as less intelligent than everyone else in her own species.
I find it interesting that you find Predator the monster of note in AvP. From Wikipedia, "The word "monster" derives from Latin monstrum, an aberrant occurrence, usually biological, that was taken as a sign that something was wrong within the natural order." In essence, a monster is something that differs so far from the norm that it is almost unrecognizable, but in a distinctly horrifying way. So, a character like Hannibal Lector (a genius but deranged serial killer/cannibal) would be accurately described as a monster due to the horrifying acts he commits that make him inhuman. Likewise, Godzilla (a giant atomic fire breathing lizard) is also a monster not just because of his size but because of the cataclysmic devastation he leaves in his wake; he is a force of unfathomable destruction (insert nuclear bomb analogy). Additionally, I believe it is the distance these monsters have from the comprehensible and relatable that truly makes them monstrous. Now, forgive me because I’m going to use the word “relatable” a lot, but it’s the basis for the argument I’m going to make. Now, I bring this up because while you say you main Predator, proof that you "specialize in playing monsters" and therefore understand monsters, I question why not the Alien? I find it somewhat ironic that you use the Predator, the much more human and, much more notably relatable, as proof of your monster credibility. Now, the Alien (aka Xenomorph), on the other hand, is entirely...well, **alien**. Unlike the Predator it has almost no relatable features whatsoever. Not only is the body of the creature barely humanoid, sporting a tail and a bulbous head, but it is a creature of pure instinct. While it's true that the Predator species is, indeed, monstrous, they are distinctly more human than the franchise's counterpart. The Predators have motive, high intelligence, a language, and a fairly advanced civilization. What makes them monstrous, aside from their appearance, is their ruthlessness and ability/desire to kill at will. No one’s denying that both of these creatures are monsters. However, a key feature that makes the Predators less monstrous is **restraint**. In the film AvP there is a scene in which one of the Predators team up with the surviving human in an attempt to destroy the last of the Xenomorphs. While foreign and tribal, the Predator’s have a serious code of honor that allows the human to be recognized as an equal to the Predators in their eyes. Predators are able to value and express emotion. Savage and brutal, definitely, but they have noticeably human characteristics inherent to their species. In essence, the Predators are a species that is understandable. The Xenomorphs have no such code or restraint. Their entire purpose is to kill and multiply, and they are engineered to be perfect at doing both. They are extremely fast, extremely tough, and extremely lethal in almost all aspects. Their shape has an echo of the familiar, but it is twisted in such a way that it almost mocks the humans from which they’re birthed. What makes Xenomorphs monsters is not only their ability to kill, but that nothing can stop them from doing so. You can’t prove yourself to a Xenomorph or in some way exempt yourself from being slaughtered, and unless you’re Sigourney Weaver or someone equally badass you’re not going to be able to stop them by force. My point is, where you can get into the head of a Predator and comprehend how they work in a way that seems similar to humanity (hunter/tribal mentality and society) you can’t with a Xenomorph. They’re surprisingly similar to Jason Voorhees or Godzilla: less of monstrous human-like things and more like deadly forces of nature. This brings me to my final point: Vel’koz. Now, you bring up Vel’koz as a true monster, and while I don’t disagree that Vel’koz is certainly monstrous he’s, well, an odd choice for who you’d call out. I say this because Vel’koz is *rational*. Of all the Voidborn to chose from you chose the only one that has shown **restraint**, much like the Predators. In Vel’koz’s short story he chooses not to disintegrate Zilean’s tower and what’s inside it or let it be eaten because he knows it will serve a purpose. > There are some things the Void should not consume indiscriminately. While Vel’koz doesn’t abide by any rules of honor he does find value in some things. He craves knowledge, like the Predators crave a worthy kill, but is willing to put aside a potential gain of knowledge for an even greater one down the road. It’s an odd characteristic for a Voidborn that seems to be unique to Vel’koz, at least of those we’ve seen, and what makes it odd is that it’s understandable. I can empathize with Vel’koz and he becomes slightly less foreign to me. It’s very slight, but it’s there. Rek’sai on the other hand is more like a Xenomorph. She’s bestial, instinctual, and seems exceptionally good at killing things. She’s like Jaws, but, ya know, in the sand. There is no logic to Rek’sai, it is simply that she will kill you if she senses you. End of story. And that’s scary. Now, I haven't played AvP myself and it's totally valid that you make have just found the Predator's gameplay more satisfying. Nor am I trying to question whether you do or do not enjoy playing monsters. I’m also not trying to say that Vel’koz or Predators aren’t monsters, that they aren’t good monsters, or that Rek’sai’s gameplay should be satisfying for you. What I am trying to say, and I’ll go ahead and tl;dr this ** tl’dr – Just because she’s not the kind of monster you like to play and she doesn’t play like the kind of monsters you like doesn’t mean Rek’sai is not a monster.**
Pryotra (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Gentleman Gaston,realm=NA,application-id=6kFXY1kR,discussion-id=in7PBMPP,comment-id=000000000000000000010000,timestamp=2014-12-17T22:32:10.674+0000) > As for what you said about divorcing lore and gameplay: yes. Although, it seems like Riot has committed to the divorce. Is there a recent example where they haven't? Ironically enough, Shurima, the very same event they were praising in that thread. Poorly written story (opinion) with large plot holes due only partially to deletion of old lore they never really rewrote, and very buggy additions to the game (Azir should be the only thing I need to mention here, but the game mode had it's share of bugs as well). If they had truly had a divorce, why oh why do they have to retcon so many champions without adding more stories? I would believe the line of tech problems, except they never even posted the lore for most of the champions whose lore they deleted. Seeing as they have been quite able to post the other lores, where are these other pieces? Remember, we can't count things that may or may not exist in their servers unless they show and tell. Also, they even have admitting pushing Azir live before he was ready so that he could be a part of the lore event. I don't know what else I really need to say here. While I realize that event is almost as old as that post, consider that the only other instance of them adding lore is Sion, and yeah, that is as recent as it gets. --- > I think what we've seen of Rek'sai has almost exclusively added to the world. She very much so has a place and defines that place just as much as she is defined by it. As far as Rek'sai, what exactly does she add? She is a void creature, but that is what she is, not what she adds. Her hunting grounds lie in shurima, but that is where she is, not what she adds. I don't really see anything that she adds to the story in any meaningful way. Contrast that with Sion, that not only added greatly to his own lore, but also expanded on the Black Rose, added something to the past of both Demacia & Noxus, as well as showed more of what Vlad can actually do. While I am not expecting this much from every champion, it is undeniable that Sion adds more to the world than just himself. Without Kalista adding anything, whose lore is that she effectively enables suicide, we have Rek'sai. The first female void monster, so I guess you could claim she adds the fact that there are multiple genders in the void, but then again we had that with Kog'maw and his "daddy". You could claim that she helped tear down Shurima, but then again it was pretty much obliterated after the sabotaged ascension (another plot hole there mind you.). So what exactly did she add to the world? Well, I'm left with herself. And that isn't lore, that is adding a champion.
Let's look at what Rek'sai has brought to the table so far: * Expanded the knowledge of Shurima both in terms of it's geography and culture * Introduced the idea of cross-nation intermingling, which has not yet existed in a post-retcon world * Helped define what life looks like to Shuriman people * Helped define Noxian customs * Introduced the idea of Voidborn naming tendencies and the idea of Void "species" And as far as Kalista is concerned, she doesn't expand the world so much as she deepens it. Kalista is the equivalent to the Bloody Mary legend and her story adds to the culture of the world and makes it seem like a more "lived in" place. Additionally her dialogue adds some pieces to the "Shadow Isles/Ruined King" puzzle, but that's somewhat weak to be the only world tie-in for an entire character.
Pryotra (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Gentleman Gaston,realm=NA,application-id=6kFXY1kR,discussion-id=in7PBMPP,comment-id=0000000000000000,timestamp=2014-12-17T20:47:28.798+0000) > > [Actually they did answer this.](http://forums.na.leagueoflegends.com/board/showthread.php?p=49817319#49817319) This link I hadn't seen yet, and while very indepth, its rather... old. Still, thanks for pointing it out to me. It still raises the issue that A) they haven't really improved in their communication, and B) how much time does it take? The only lore since shurima was, well, honestly Sion. I don't count new champions until they add to the overall world, otherwise they are like Rammus. Just kinda there. I almost feel it would have been better to just leave up the old lore until they were ready, as now alot of things feel either rushed because lore finally did something(Azir), or the lore feels rushed because other teams are ready and waiting(Trundle). I hate that their systemic communication issues have even made this a thing (both Riot to Community and Riot to Riot needs help badly), but frankly Sion was the best lore out in quite sometime, and it's because they didn't really try to tell story with their game. They just told a story while the game happened to be doing something with a character in said story. Until they can deliver on both sides completely, they really just should stick to the divorce of story and game, and not half ass it like they have been doing. Either commit to the divorce, or retcon the retcon, but don't half ass it and make both sides worse for it.
It's old (a couple months?), but I feel like it's still the sentiment that Narrative has on the subject. I think what we've seen of Rek'sai has almost exclusively added to the world. She very much so has a place and defines that place just as much as she is defined by it. As for what you said about divorcing lore and gameplay: yes. Although, it seems like Riot has committed to the divorce. Is there a recent example where they haven't?
: Did I say it's perfect? Was I suggesting there's nothing left to improve on after the damage the last 2 expansions did? And if the second part of that were true, Cataclysm wouldn't have made it past the drawing board let alone to the shelves.
"The damage". There's been good and bad about every expansion? If you're talking specifically about sub loss as a metric I'd chalk that up to Cata not having enough end-game content as well as a lot of players growing up (read: no longer being in school & having jobs, so less time to commit to the game). Mists, IMO, was a fine expansion despite the rep/daily gating on release.
: > [{quoted}](name=Impetual,realm=NA,application-id=6kFXY1kR,discussion-id=Tcud4GnJ,comment-id=,timestamp=2014-12-17T09:23:03.974+0000) > You're doing the exact opposite of what WoW is doing with "Warlords of Draenor" right now. Some departments are still in the *Cataclysm* phase: "It's our game, deal with it. We don't care, buy our stuff lol!" Right now I think Narrative is coming into the *Pandaland* phase where they realized how bad they screwed up and don't really know what to do, so they do nothing and hope people stay. After a while they'll enter the *Draenor* phase and look at what the community concerns are and see what they can do to actually make something enjoyable for the consumers. Look at what happened with the Lee situation - they apparently **had no idea** he was so overbearing and there are talks of him being changed based the interaction between Scruffy and the community. I hate to say it, but waiting is probably the best thing you can do.
You're hilarious if you think WoD solved all community concerns or if you think every expansion wasn't a response to the concerns of the previous expansion(s).
Pryotra (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Dr Clueless PhD,realm=NA,application-id=6kFXY1kR,discussion-id=in7PBMPP,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2014-12-17T14:50:17.533+0000) > > No, they definitely answered in regards to what decisions led to the retcon. A number of people simply aren't happy with the answer. Um, they kinda did, except they didn't fully answer it. They have dodged a majority of the question, and that is just as bad as dodging the whole question. > They intentionally divorced the narrative from the gameplay. They believe that trying to keep the gameplay of LoL in-universe was restricting what they could do with story and character development. Strictly speaking, this is true. This is a restriction they had to deal with for a long time. Well, yeah, nobody disputes that is what they did. However, it doesn't explain "why retcon instead of just killing it off?" considering there was enough intrigue to disband the IoW in the old lore. They haven't answered that question, which is an important factor for "why retcon?" > Riot believes that this restriction was too large to contend with anymore, and that the content they could make with it released would be far better than what they would make continuing to fight with it. This is the part people get hung up on. Lots of people REALLY want gameplay to still be canon, so they try and think of new ways to preserve it in the story. Ultimately, however, Riot simply doesn't want gameplay to be canon anymore. They believe they can put out better content without that restriction, and LoL's narrative will ultimately be better because of it. Whether or not that is true is beyond the point. They never explained why the straight retcon over other options like nerfing the summoners through lore or just killing off the IoW and saving themselves from having to rewrite every character that even for a moment used the IoW for anything. They could even have divorced gameplay and kept the IoW, so that isn't even an answer. > Is that true? Can they put out better content without that restriction? I'm led to believe the answer is actually yes (though it certainly will take more time and more content to confirm it). They've put out quite a bit of high-quality material as of late, and there's no mention of the League or Institute anywhere. I think to do so would be forced, at best. Rather than trying to build a story to support a game, they're simply building a story. How many Champions in League were basically prisoners of the Institute, or otherwise forced into competing? Do we really need another (Rek'Sai) tacked onto that list with a line at the end of her story? How many characters did Riot make that were great in and of themselves, but their competing in the League simply didn't make sense or felt awkward? Kalista doesn't need to add to that list. There are many, many, many ways the IoW could have ended and left the universe intact. They chose the path that litterally forces an effective reboot of just about everything. That is a decision that everyone wants to understand, why that path over every other? And that is the question they keep avoiding. It's bad enough that content in this area still feels the need to follow champion releases, but to not even explain why they are just removing everything? I think the worst part about all this is that most if not all of their stories so far fit into their old universe with very little if any modification. This shoots their own argument in the foot, as it disproves the idea that the IoW was infact holding back lore.
[Actually they did answer this.](http://forums.na.leagueoflegends.com/board/showthread.php?p=49817319#49817319) > Hey guys, >Long time no see. First and foremost, I apologize for my own silence on the forums – we definitely owe you guys more interaction than we've given you, and we know we've messed up on that front. We'll try to do better. >Now, let's dig into this a bit. >Let's start with some of the old canon – something I contributed heavily to. I wrote, more or less, the latter half of the Journal of Justice (Kaldera Carnadine, here), and the presence of the Institute of War was something we wrangled with in telling that story over its entire course. In fact, the whole “conspiracy” angle arose entirely because we were digging for a way for our characters to encounter legitimate political conflict and war – without the IoW being able to step in and immediately diffuse it. What that led to, as you know, was “corruption” within the Institute itself, and champions working covertly together to counter the IoW's influence. It was a cool story (if told through a particularly clumsy medium) – but it wasn't exactly something we could pull again. With the Institute of War in place, we often found ourselves asking: just how can we work around this so the story we want to tell can take place? >Right there – exactly there – is where I see this idea come up. Why didn't we just continue the story line as it was unfolding, and why not let the Institute of War crumble? Why not “end” the League of Legends? >There are a lot of answers to this – answers we considered. One of them is actually an argument I see cropping up right now in favor of keeping the Institute: that it would destroy the framework of the video game League of Legends. Without the League, what is the game? The answer is really, really messy, but it's more or less the same place you get when you remove the LoL story from the game entirely. They become separate entities. We're actually okay with this, but we didn't want to leave a strange lingering tie that muddied the clarity there. The game is the game. LoL's story is its story. >Another part of the answer is that ending the League wouldn't fully remove our ties to it in terms of storytelling – characters will have still interacted with it in the past, the “fall” of the League would still be significant enough to deeply influence all of our champions' lives, and “summoners” would still be a dangling, confusing story piece we'd have to deal with somehow. >Now, I understand that a lot of this is ENTIRELY subjective. A lot of you will say, “that sounds like a cool story!” and you know what, it probably could be. But when we really thought about it and weighed the things we valued about our storytelling, we really came down to the characters being the most important piece. Focusing on them and asking ourselves the question, “what's the best story this champion could have?” often resulted in us acknowledging that the IoW actually played a very awkward and restricting role in our character's lives. >We believe in a philosophy in which story should spring from the characters naturally, not from a very arbitrary plot built around them. Character drives plot. >Secondly, while it hasn't been brought up in this thread directly, I want to talk about the “League of Legends” as a device in our narrative design. As we used to frame it, the player is literally a “summoner” controlling a champion on the Fields of Justice. I've read a lot of concerns that taking away this framework harms the game; it takes away the reason these characters have to fight. >This is going to get into pretty subjective territory again, but I have to say that I deeply do not believe that the League, summoners, and the Fields of Justice were ever a strong framing device if we're speaking strictly in terms of narrative game design. When I play League of Legends, I am not concerned with myself as a summoner – I connect more to the champion him or herself. I am not concerned with the “stakes” of every battle (such as whether or not taxes will be raised in a certain place, or political favor of a certain noble house in Noxus) – none of these things are built into the actual experience, they're more or less described OUTSIDE OF THE GAME entirely. This makes it a weak frame. Sure, we could have worked to strengthen it, but we didn't feel excited by the possibilities there. >“But Ionia vs. Noxus” - yeah, that event was awesome. I wasn't even working at Riot at the time, but it certainly perked my interest. The thing is, though, this wasn't something that was going to work over and over again. The idea that players could influence the story was pretty misleading – at any “story match,” only ten players would legitimately get to fulfill the role of a summoner. In addition, story by vote or story by chance can often end with unsatisfying results (simply because of the random chance). Strong storytelling is deeply crafted. >“But a certain character's entire story focused on his or her connection to the Institute of War!” Yeah, I know these things are sticky; we wrestle with them internally, too. Our philosophy with these characters is that whatever we do to re-shape them should hold very tightly to the “soul” of what a character was in the old canon. Nobody should feel like an entirely new character – their spirit, the “feeling” you get from them, those things should feel true, even if details shift in how they came to be that person. >Orianna and her father, for example – they can still be who you know them to be. She can still be a girl with hopes and dreams that met a tragic end. Her father can still be a man driven to questionable means to bring her back and let her live those dreams. THOSE are story beats that are important to Orianna. The Institute of War is merely a detail, it doesn't define her. >AGAIN: a lot of these are philosophies myself and the narrative department hold, not necessarily things that apply to every player. Many DID believe that the frame story was satisfying, regardless of its objective strength. To those people, I'm sorry, our actions were absolutely not meant to “step on you” in any way – we are truly looking for the best way to tell you guys awesome stories, and we stand behind our decisions. >FINALLY, I know that “proof” of this new story direction has been slow coming. Before I worked in the industry, I would be upset, too – but these things take time. I know it's frustrating to ask for patience over and over again, but please stick with us! Thank you all for being so invested and taking the time to interact with us about this stuff. -RiotRunaan!
LeeDark (NA)
: Don't twist my words around. I did not say I wanted them to immediately use feedback for the new lore. I said they won't have my trust again until I see results, not more promises. They've promised to listen to our feedback before and we got ZERO results. You, on the other hand, are saying that, even though they've broken promise after promise, I should go ahead and give them the benefit of the doubt this time. Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me. If you're going to let them fool you a dozen times, then I'd just have to call you a moron. It doesn't matter what YOU think a Q&A is all about. How many times does it have to be repeated before it gets through that unfathomably thick skull of yours? IF THERE IS A Q&A, A LOT OF PEOPLE WILL ASK ABOUT THE RETCON. They don't care if you think the Q&A should be about something else. They don't care if you ask questions about something else. They don't care if those questions get answered. They don't care if you don't want them to ask about the retcon. THEY WILL STILL ASK A LOT OF QUESTIONS ABOUT THE RETCON. They will also ask questions about why we should trust them when they have shown NO evidence of actually listening to our feedback so far. (http://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/story-art/1Bi3Xi6w-link-this-thread-next-time-narrative-makes-a-massive-change-with-no-prior-community-input) It's not just a lack of new lore containing something players gave feedback on. It's about threads that try to preemptively give feedback about a particular lore issue getting NO Narrative attention, and threads where they get to make another empty promise getting attention. Do you get it yet? You cannot dictate what other people are going to ask in a Q&A, and you cannot dictate what dominates the conversation. You can only read the pulse of the Lore community and realize that the retcon is still a sore issue, and the lack of community-developer dialogue is still disheartening. If you think that, despite that, those issues will magically not come up in a Q&A, then there is simply no help for you.
I didn't twist your words around, but that doesn't seem to have stopped you from twisting mine. I didn't tell you to trust Riot. In fact, I did quite the opposite. >That's really not how the system works, but hey, they've also said that they should speak with results rather than promises so I guess you're in the right camp in waiting for results. If you don't want to trust Riot's ability to deliver and that's fine; that's your prerogative. If Riot hasn't met your standards than *don't* trust them to deliver. Please. If Riot starts meeting your standards in the future than by all means, start trusting them again. No one is holding a gun to your head and forcing you to care about something that obviously upsets you. Personally, IRL, I'm a pretty forgiving and empathetic person and it *has* led to me getting burned a lot. But that's *my* baggage and not yours. I don't need to convince you that Riot is going to explode out of a cake, fists full of lore backgrounds and side-stories that would make even the biggest anti-retcon lore curmudgeon swell with happy tears. For me, one of the oldest things that I asked for (and this is almost a year ago) is more fleshed out characters and a more fleshed out world. And, for me, Riot is delivering on that. So I **do** trust them; that's my prerogative. I'd ask you to respect that rather than insult me, but that seems to be the level that people deal with differing opinions on here these days. I never suggested to dictate *what* the Q&A would be about. I even specifically said "to me" as to indicate that "this is what **I** think a Q&A would consist of". The implication, given the context of what we're talking about and the previous things I said, was that in the absence of comments about the retcon there are still plenty of questions and subjects worth talking about. Even earlier in this thread I discussed a way Narrative could point out to where they had answered questions of a similar nature before. The goal not being to not answer questions, but to inform those who did have those questions what Narrative would answer with. The simple fact that I bothered to give that as a suggestion indicates that, well duh, of course tons of people are going to be asking those questions. The idea is to avoid answering the same questions with the same answers, not "silence the masses" or whatever else you seem to think I'm suggesting.
Impetual (NA)
: @Riot, This is Hard to Say, but Because of Your Recent Decisions, I Don't Care About Lore Anymore.
If you don't care about Lore anymore does that mean you'll stop making several threads every day saying the same thing?
: To be fair there are tons upon tons of english lit, philosophy or other niche (better term than useless) degree holders who im sure would love to write some good stuff. I can't write worth a damn but I can sure as hell come up with better lore than what LoL has now. I was going through the lore of characters while bored and I remember a few just being a few lines.
It takes a lot more than merely having a degree to make it into Riot. Unless you were in on the ground floor you need severe talent or several years of experience to really be considered as a candidate.
Sharjo (EUW)
: To touch on that ancient magic bit mentioned here and elaborate a bit for you Mr. Krizalid Brando, the Iceborn's magic allowed them mastery over ice and also allowed them to utilise a material known as True Ice: magical ice that doesn't melt, even when put to fire. Quite a few in game items are made of True Ice, such as these: {{item:3184}} {{item:3092}} {{item:3098}} {{item:3022}} {{item:3025}} {{item:3112}} The magical properties of True Ice are something that doesn't seem to be easily accessible to most humans, but for Freljordians its possible, at least for some of them, because "the ice in their blood is strong"; the Iceborn were essentially magically altered humans, and as such could likely still procreate with other humans, producing babies that still had some of that magic in their veins. True Ice is utilised by {{champion:22}} and {{champion:113}} due to the fact they are direct descendants of some powerful Iceborn, and as such still have a good deal of that magic flowing in their veins. It's also utilised by {{champion:201}} and {{champion:48}}, presumably because of their own strong connections; Braum likely has a strong connection to his Iceborn ancestors (or is maybe an Iceborn himself), while Trundle, being a Troll, likely has a natural connection to Freljord through evolution and such; Freljord Trolls are native to the landwhile Humans likely migrated there from further south thousands of years prior.
Impetual (NA)
: It would...except that Riot has stated that Summoners still exist. I'd like to hear what what "RIot Games" considers as summoner.
They've said they might reuse the concept of a summoner (i.e. "people that summon things") at some point in the future. That's pretty much the extent of it.
: Rek'sai's lore - Change to Void Champions' lore?
There are multiple humans and Yorldes and that doesn't seem to be a problem. Other members of each character's species probably don't look or behave exactly the same, although there will certainly be similarities in some general aspects.
LeeDark (NA)
: Hashed out over and over again? They made a couple of flippant comments about the retcon, and moved on to how they'd like to communicate with us better. That's a promise that falls on deaf ears, since we've been told that before to no effect. Yes, I know about that thread. I participated in that thread. I've also not seen anything from that thread used yet, so it makes for poor evidence that they are actually listening this time. Maybe they are, but the history between Narrative and the players doesn't lean that way, and nothing new has shown that to have changed yet. All that aside, your post does nothing to address the simple fact that whether you like it or not, Terra is right. If Narrative does a Q&A, the retcon WILL come up as a topic of discussion, and it will come up a lot. If they did the Q&A without addressing any questions about the retcon, that lack of answers on that topic would become the major theme of the Q&A unless they had something HUGE to reveal within the new lore. Unfortunately, a reveal big enough to take attention off the retcon would have to be a big surprise, and so it would confirm that they aren't really listening to us and don't care what we have to say. Therefore, a Q&A is mostly a lose-lose situation for them, ipso facto, not something they are going to do anytime soon.
They stated pretty clearly when the retcon happened, in multiple threads from multiple different people in Narrative, why they decided to make the change. So, you want them to hear your feedback and then immediately turn around and release something using that feedback. That's really not how the system works, but hey, they've also said that they should speak with results rather than promises so I guess you're in the right camp in waiting for results. Whether the retcon comes up or not is moot, the voice that brings it up is always the same: "I don't like it. Change it or I will complain." It's not even a question, really. Most of the actual questions involving the retcon's logistics have already been answered. A Q&A, to me, would consist of questions about the work environment, the depth that goes into world building and how that's done, particular favorite characters of people in narrative, stuff like that. It doesn't have to be related to any particular event and it doesn't need to have every person from narrative there answering questions. If actual questions about the retcon came up they could give answers to some, but I don't see how it needs to DOMINATE the discussion. Despite the people who keep bringing up the same points over and over again, I've seen plenty of really good discussions crop up that don't deal with the retcon. Those people deserve attention too.
LeeDark (NA)
: What's your point? A Q&A would most CERTAINLY bring up the retcon, and it's a subject of which they are terribly afraid. Plus, Terra is right, even if you leave the retcon questions out of it. They are unwilling to interact with us, by and large. There are tech problems slowing down the new stuff, and even with that new stuff, accepting the retcon, they STILL do not care at all about what we have to say on any given upcoming champion lore rewrite.
It's a subject that has been hashed out over and over and over again for months by both parties, and frankly it comes down to one thing: some people don't like the retcon and want Riot to change and Riot's standing their ground on this. It's not that Riot's afraid of the subject, there's just nothing more to say. It's a black hole of a discussion that will never go anywhere, especially because people tend to get extremely heated and overzealous about it. When insults start flying out then there's no more room for an actual discussion. And as for "do not care at all about what we have to say on any given upcoming champion lore rewrite", http://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/story-art/6EofhoHW-lets-talk-biographies
: > [{quoted}](name=Gentleman Gaston,realm=NA,application-id=6kFXY1kR,discussion-id=XRwK8x2G,comment-id=0005000100000000,timestamp=2014-12-14T21:21:58.258+0000) > Where do you get the impression that his disability is false? Is it his dance? Please tell me you have harder evidence to back up a character defining claim like that than "He throws down his cane and does a silly dance in-game". His Tyrant Swain skin — which depicts his successful attainment of the highest military rank in Noxus — has no limp. Obfuscating Disability. He's faking being crippled to make his political enemies underestimate him.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnH-8B4SUoY He does still seem to hobble slightly while walking and steadies himself with his staff every few steps, although it is not as evident as it is in his base skin. Not enough to convince me personally, but I do see what you're talking about.
: > So, narrative is both going "let's get rid of this old junk and start from scratch" and "hey, let's not screw up any more established lore than we have to" at the same time? No, they're the former, quite clearly. (I think there might be some individual members of the Narrative team who don't view the community as worthless, but the prevailing theme seems to be "trash everything, start over.") I wish I could say that I think you're right, but I don't. Absent a major change in Narrative's attitude, I doubt we'll be lucky a third time, or a fourth time. Sooner or later, they're going to release a huge wave of rewrites that completely annihilate established lore. I wouldn't be surprised if they timed it with the "Summoner rewrite", just to add insult to injury. They're not on our side. Maybe they'll rethink their approach. I really, *really* doubt they will. That might come across as more dramatic than I intend it. I hope that the lore community can find a way to survive this. Maybe we will, maybe we won't. Either way, I'm not planning to spend much more time asking Narrative to hold back. They just don't care. Our energy is better spent finding new ways to roll with the punches.
> No, they're the former, quite clearly. I don't think I'm seeing things quite as clearly as you insinuate they are, and I don't consider myself a dense person so I'm not really sure what to say. Sion, and Noxus, received little, if any, narrative input from players...and yet they turned out just fine. Great, in fact. You *could* count this up to luck, but I'd argue Rek'sai's teaser (which you yourself claimed you liked) shows that Narrative is very competent when it comes to writing lore and expanding the world, and a desire to go above and beyond what they've done before. The Shurima portrayed in the teaser, and the hardiness of the Shuriman people, is very much in line with how Shurima has always been portrayed. They didn't need to do this. People ask for proof as to why they should trust Narrative to deliver, and they're giving it to us. I'd say I understand your skepticism, as there is quite a bit up in the air at the moment, but you seem to be adamant to be excessively cynical regardless of what Narrative does. :\
Show more

Gentleman Gaston

Level 69 (NA)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion