My Account
× My Account Media Forum Supporter Packs

I am against the introduction of set items


Lets take Path of Exile as an example of what legendary/unique items should be like. IMO the game has the best uniques compared to every other ARPG, they have proven that you can have different build-enabling items without designating a whole set around them. It is excessive, a relic from the past. Lets be honest here, sets were not that big of a deal even in Diablo 2. So why its heirs are so desperate to include them?

Diablo 3 has to be the example of sets done the worst where they are so incredibly strong they are the end-all of everything, while at the same time heavily restricting your build and every other item which is not a set one.

Grim Dawn is not that much better honestly. At least they have rare(green) items which could be on par so they are not the end-all but the system is still flawed because it requires you to hunt for hundreds of set pieces in a game which was not built to support trading. Also the sets there are quite bland but this is a different topic.

This poses a logical question: why do we need sets when PoE proved you could enable different builds and ways to play the game without them? Why is restricting your choice by forcing you to wear matching set pieces a better solution?


I pretty much agree on this. Diablo3 was a much better game when it came out and you could make builds, before it became set dependent. I am a PoE player and you DO NOT need set items in a game


Good exhibit would be the necrotic damage set. Why does it need to exist when there is a bunch of fire damage items which do the same thing without them being a “set” ?


Sets… why not? Sure they need to be implemented in a good way with overall stats and no skill specifics. With the crafting system of LE the implementation of sets will be pretty hard because crafts will outperform sets anyway untill those have some braindead +100% dmg nodes ^^.


Set are fine. Not sure if you have played Diablo 3 recently, but most people rarely run a full set. Then again, Diablo 3 is built around sets. Whereas this game is not. Yes sets are there, but they will never outpace rares. The creators have already stated rares with crafting is were you will find the best gear. Uniquies/legendaries/sets will only be to compliment your rares like PoE.

Also to note, you can craft set-like gear which is an even better bonus. It was mentioned recently in a patch thread.


I don’t understand this part. Crafted sets? Its not something new, both D3 and Grim Dawn has it.

As for the having sets, this is it, why not? Well why not do it with legendary items instead and free up equipment space? Why are sets so important when even in Diablo 2, the grandaddy of ARPG, wearing something like the full IK set was silly.


Personally I think your argument is a bit ridiculous. It seems your actual issue with sets is because in d3 they were way too powerful. There’s absolutely no indication based on what we’ve seen that this will be the case at all. Although I use many set items I never use them as a set.

-Pretend they don’t have set bonuses…your problem is solved.-

Basically they’re just uniques with minor bonuses if you happen to use them all together. Which so far, you wont. Relax man.

If you want to make a post saying you hope set items wont become too powerful so that they are required for late game or to enable builds I’d totally understand that. However the devs have specifically said that wont be the case and crafted rares will be the strongest items in the game…as others have said in this thread. As far as build enabling, not a single set in the game so far is build enabling at all. The set bonuses really aren’t a big deal.

To me it sounds like you should be posting in the d3 forums.


He never said it was something new…
And hes referring to the “set” affixes when crafting. Set dodge/health/elemental protection. That gain the stated crafted value for each piece of gear you are wearing with that affix.
No one ever said sets were important. They aren’t. In fact I throw out a lot of them except for the exceptionally good pieces that I use by themselves…


And what is that thing?

You could also make that argument about a lot of the non set uniques in most Arpgs. They don’t NEED to exist…but why not. There’s plenty of useless uniques in PoE.

The real issue is properly balancing uniques/sets so they add something without being too strong. There’s no need to have a tantrum over their mere existence.

Beyond that I would argue the necro set, isadora’s DOES add a unique niche to the early game by providing 30% mana efficiency. Definitely not over powered at all, in fact I didnt use the full set even when I leveled a hungering souls build, but it does provide somewhat interesting options for a brief period of levels. At level 39(the level requirement of the head gear, which is pretty bad…so you have to give up something) there are definitely better rare options but for those that don’t want to spend crafting materials at that time its an interesting choice.


The Diablo 3 thing was an example. My foremost point is a positive one - sets do not need to exist to make impactful legendary/unique items which give you different ways to build and play. Sets are a relic of the past that does nothing but restrict equipment space.


Set are fine and it’s a content i grow up with because of diablo 2 and now when i see a Arpg without it , i just find it sad and feel missing something…
You just have bad memory from D3.


Nostalgia is fine of course but thinking more about the matter - is there really something unique and exciting sets provide which normal legendaries cant? Both of the current sets could have been easily split up into legendary items which do roughly the same thing without any harm. Putting Diablo 3 aside, the only thing sets do in Grim Dawn is maybe sometimes they give a unique proc/ability. Procs/abilities which already exist on legendary items which are not part of a set.


Lets not take an example of PoE. 99% of legendary items of PoE 1c garbage.I cant even be happy when a legendary drops. Im like ; Oh! another garbage. I hope this game will have its own soul. Lots of players need a new breath, not a clone of PoE or any other Arpg.

For the sets part, i enjoy them, they are good addition.


I was expecting this one. Funny thing is you don’t even need to buff a legendary item to make it viable. Starforge, while not complete trash, was never particularly popular, however a single patch made it very desirable showing how fluid these things are. Besides, having unique items be bad has nothing to do with the unique/set distinction. Why? Because plenty of them used to be OP before getting nerfed. Balancing decisions mean nothing when we talk about core item concepts and PoE’s no-set concept has been proven to be successful.

Also since you have no intention of proving to me why sets are necessary(other than “I like them”) lets give another example why they are not necessary. Suppose we have a set and unique parity. This would mean that set items by themselves would be weaker than unique items. Would not make sense otherwise, if set items were of the same power they’d clearly have the edge when their corresponding set bonuses are taken into account. So answer this: why having underpowered set items which only get on par with uniques/rares after you collect the entire set is better than simply having unique items which are strong and rewarding by themselves?


Well its like you said ; a single patch would change underpowered set to viable one, either way you cant prove sets are totally useless but i can prove almost all uniques in that game you in love not end-game viable.

Either way i hope devs wont take an account these ridiculous suggestions of yours. Last Epoch have an uniqueness and i hope it stays that way. Furthermore you are free to play 1shot simulation of yours with non existant sets ^^.


Why so salty? Me liking something offends you? I am not sure why you are even responding when you add literally nothing to the discussion. Something being underpowered/overpowered does nothing to change the core concept of itemization. You attacking my examples instead of the core of my argument means you got no argument yourself.

closed #17