Let's brainstorm sets!

PC General Discussion
1

Hello, Blizzard!

In an effort to bring ideas to the table on the topic of set items, I’d like to pose some questions to spark your minds and provide my view on them at the same time.

Should sets come?

Yes! They are a staple of Diablo games.

Should sets have just higher numbers?

No! Bigger isn’t more interesting, just forces a decision.

Should sets be thought from existing aspects?

No! Get creative, don’t take previous possible combinations away from people, don’t be lazy. Be expansive, not reforming.

Should sets have “damage on Tuesdays”?

Hell no!

Should sets have conditional damage?

Only if you’re not punishing the player too much. You should be rewarded for having collected the set, regardless of it’s form, not conditioned to be a lab rat wanting to hit within 4 seconds time span.
It’s ok to enable a series of steps in small variations, but not force the exact same steps. (see: D2R mosaic/kicksin, charges can be combined in any way you please for more dmg and you’re not forced to have the exact same series of steps or even number of steps to unleash the charges).

Should sets have a clear visual identity?

Yes! You should be able to recognize from a distance, if the user doesn’t use cosmetics, what set he/she is wearing. Can’t wait to also glow like a canon saint again! Or maybe radiate darkness like a demon, in this edition. The glow shouldn’t be poignant, so as to accommodate other cosmetics.

Should you be able to extract aspects from a set as a set aspect?

Well, yes but no. A set is to me a grouping of uniques with a theme. You have a clearly defined theme, purpose and spot. I would maybe accept extracting and imprinting a set aspect only on the same gear slot.
At the same time, a set should be set in stone. I shouldn’t be allowed to extract Tal Rasha’s “essence” right? Feels like collecting mummified body parts from a demon.
Uhh, I can’t decide!

Should a set be conventional (tied to a piece of gear and always having all same affixes) or not?

I like to have base affixes random and a bonus when multiple criteria/a parts count are/is reached.

Should a set be a set of what?

  1. A conventional item set?
  2. A set of accessories that, once applied to the gear (and forfeiting aspects), give a bonus only together?
  3. A set of glyphs to form a sign (like Tal Rasha’s Tombs signs) and the polygon that they form get bonuses based on a theme?
    e.g.
  • 3-piece glyph set forms a triangle. The activated nodes in the paragon board get some bonus based on set theme and maybe class that uses it.
  • 4-piece glyph set forms a square. A square is a block. A block is something defensive. This would be a defensive type of set, to resemble a rudimentary shield. (I might be going places here)
  • 5-piece glyph set forms a pentagram. A pentagram is the sign of the devil. All nodes activated inside the pentagram are now inactive and all inactive ones are active. Now that’s an amazing set!
  1. A set of ghosts? Attached to the item slot, but not the item equipped? The spirits of the slain mobs inhabit/affect any items equipped in the designated slots?
    To better understand this concept, think of poisons applied to a blade, but in an abstract way, decoupling the consumable part of the D4 aspects.
    e.g. A sharpshooter’s ghost would have any rings equipped have accelerated/magnified mods (an 10 attack speed affix would get a % bonus etc.)
    A dead mage’s ghost would affect your resource affixes (big brains, big potential).
    A dead swordsman’s ghost would affect either the affixes on the gloves or the weapon (damage against the demon family that killed him, to avenge him).
  2. A set of jewels, that all inhabit the sockets of an item? (cough cough runewords)

How many parts should a set have?

Option 1: According to legacies:
A set themed around D2 should have 2 pieces.
A set themed around D3 should have 3 pieces.
A set themed around D4 should have 4 pieces.

Option 2: According to legacies, but progressive:
A set can have up to 4 pieces (because D4).
The 2-piece bonus should be a tribute to D2 (mods that you would have seen only in D2).
The 3-piece bonus should be a tribute to D3 (a system from D3, like elemental rune variations, for example could be transported as giving a new type of element to a skill/skill category).
The 4-piece bonus should be something new and amazing (don’t we all wish), that transforms the gameplay much more. Any of the skills affected would work in a different manner than what the skill tree currently offers.

What kind of bonuses should sets give?

  • the most basic bonus could be one to honor D2, which means global stats or skill category (similar to skill tree) bonus; this also provides some beef for your character, while letting you play the mix & match with aspects
  • the next tier bonus could honor D3, where we had a gazillion options in terms of elements for any skill, so the bonus would be for an element type
  • the next tier bonus would be something that completely changes the gameplay of the skill (this doesn’t necessarily mean absurd aoe or dmg or single target capability, but how you play (what buttons you press) and the result would be similar to uniques)
  • this topic deserves days of discussions alone

How rare should set parts be?

More common than uniques, more rare than aspects.

What is the acquisition method for set parts?

  • if you’ve read my 3rd response on the question “Should a set be a set of what?”, you could split types of sets and their parts acquisition method by event/content types
  • You’ve talked about monster families. You could enact demon families (unique mobs sharing the same last name) and each demon member would drop a set part? Their monster species would be embedded somehow in the theme and/or looks of the set! (this would also give a sense to collecting ears…now you collect ears, hearts, brains etc. and wear them as accessories)
    e.g. One monster family would drop various organs which would be worn as jewelry. The fang of an Alpha wolf as an amulet, the hair of a demoness as a makeshift ring or belt. The heart of another demon as an offhand for the sorc etc.
    One barbarian monster family could drop various weapons named after them (similar to Istvan and BK swords). Families from different barbarian tribes would drop different types of weapons. A lone barbarian, the last one of his clan, would drop an unique.

Go wild! The world of Sanctuary is your oister!

4 Likes
2

I proposed an idea that sets could be aspects for uniques as uniques are weak.

Maybe they could become aspects just for uniques that dont add a gigantic amount of power but add gameplay changes that are big such as these:

Cain’s Legacy - Economy Set Aspect
2] - Summon Cain for 600-1200s after you gain a level. Cain copies all skills you cast at the same target for free and cant be hurt. When Cain kills an enemy that enemy can drop extra gold.
3] - Gain 20% more gold and XP in dungeons you did not die in.
4] - Chests have a chance to drop a high amount of gold and cursed chests have more enemies. Enemies hate Cain!

The Comet Icestar - Meteor Set Aspect
2] +1-2 Meteor skill
3] When you are inside a meteor strike restore 3-6% resource and health.
4] Your meteors now deal cold damage instead of fire damage, have a chance to freeze instead of immobilize, and make puddles on the ground for 3s. Wet enemies have a higher chance to be frozen.

Other options:

Maybe they are not even items but set slots are added in paragon boards.

Maybe they are items but in new slots like shoulder, belt, earring, ect.

3

No!

Sets reduce build diversity and railroad everyone in a class into one set of gear. The current setup of uniques + legendaries is more compelling and provides more customization.

11 Likes
4

NO…done brainstorming.

Would rather see something like Runewords make a return where they actually have a journey attached and take up a single slot.

Sets, restrict player choice, reduce player agency and damage build diversity - not to mention will just result in displacement other item tiers. If Diablo was some type of E-sport, or needed a higher level of balance then the disadvantages of sets might be worth considering. However, that isn’t the case so best the developers focus their time on other areas of the game IMO.

5 Likes
5

My example does not do this. It just changes meteor into a cold skill with a small bonus. Its not ultra powerful so it forces nothing.

All the ppl complaining about sets in D4 are just worried they will be the same as D3 and that is 100% correct. Sets in D4 cannot follow the same design because sets in D3 were much too good.

They dont have to be items. They could be aspects. This keeps the same theme we already have while giving a bonus to weak uniques.

6

What’s the point of even making this a set? This can easily be done with one legendary aspect. The whole idea behind sets was they give multiple bonuses. Sets are just extraneous.

7

Exactly, why redesign itemization again…when all of this is already possible - makes zero sense to me either!

If you want an Ice Meteor Sorc three options already exist;

  1. Add a new option into the skill tree
  2. Add aspects
  3. Add a unique item
    4) A combination of the above
1 Like
8

Shoehorning doesn’t come from a set.
It comes from power.
It comes from irresponsibly increasing power until that’s the best option.

There is a lot of diversity in the current system.
Having a set with a theme wouldn’t hurt the system, as long as the total power/power dynamics don’t change too much.
For me, sets are about establishing identities/themes and paying tribute to gameplay dearly experienced in the past.

/e
You’re judging a company by the results of a team that most likely doesn’t work at all on this game or even any more in the company.
D4 has a new team, Rod said it before.

I did play both D2 and D3, I have like 95%+ achievements in D3 and more than 20 years in D2.

If you don’t want to bring ideas to the table, nobody forces you, however for now you’re not constructive at all.

9

Have you played D3? Blizzard proved over more than a decade that they are completely incapable of accomplishing this.

It’s a total catch-22. If Blizzard doesn’t make them powerful, everyone will say they’re dumb and no one will use them. If they do make them powerful, everyone gets shoehorned into one set per class. Both outcomes are bad - the game is better off with no sets.

1 Like
10

Even in D2 sets are effectively pointless from a design perspective. Sets work in games like WoW where you need to keep strict controls over builds and balance for balancing PvP and Raids etc.

Adding sets into Diablo 4 will be like adding oil to water at this point.

11

Would rather have runewords (not automatic BiS of course like enigma) over sets. At least runes have a little bit of depth by being able to be used in more than one runeword. Sets just force very limited build diversity and I’ll be damned if we ever go back to sets like in D3.

Unfortunately, there’s probably no avoiding them. D3 fanboys love their 60,000% damage sets and want to see D4 turn into D3 even more. Sets sound like a headache to implement into D4. They’d either be too weak and all the D3 kids would cry they need buffs or they’d be too strong, like in D3, and then make everything else obsolete. I say keep them away from D4.

2 Likes
12

There should be open end sets, where you arent railroaded into a build, or if they are build specific, there needs to be LOADS of them to prevent everyone just being the same.

1 Like
13

Fortunately if you watch the developer streamer interviews they are very wary of how dangerous sets could be. I doubt we will see them any time soon, if at all to be honest. Which to me at least is an absolute blessing. They are not going to want to totally overhaul their new itemization system which throws some serious cold water on set bonus items.

On the otherhand, Runewords are almost a certainty if you read between the lines.

1 Like
14

I sure hope so and I know they’ve been aware of power creep and stuff before but it feels like with S4 they’re relaxing on that a lot more, compared to their vision for the game at launch. There’s also the odd comment by one of the producers at blizzcon (brent?) about “liking the colour green” or something, when we was wearing a green jacket. Seemed very out of place but maybe I’m reading way too much into it.

15

The expansion is Green and maybe Runewords will be the Green items…anything but set bonuses please Blizz!

16

Awesome post!

This whole section is pointing in the right direction. If sets dont fit into the game the old way, the devs could rethink how to integrate them. Instead of locking a whole gear slot there are other creative solutions. Suggestions are good. I like 4 and 5 the most.

The idea of using body parts as equipment is always interesting. While reading this I was reminded of the jewels from Diablo 2. Wouldnt that be also a cool way to introduce new socketable items besides gems? Putting a demons heart (with new stats) into armor sounds great fantasy-wise.

17

D4 isnt D3 guys. Sets are going to come eventually and they might not be items. I showed how with 2 examples on uniques. UNIQUES aspects! Opens up much design space. We dont have unique aspects so they are just gravy at any power level. Stop saying how this cant or shouldnt happen and start seeing how it can. + > -.

Here are two more.

Firebird’s Glory - Firewall Set Aspect
2] Firewalls that overlap spawn a hydra with 4 heads.
3] Spawn a firewall when you cast fire shield.
4] Your firewalls are twice as big (square shape) but deal 30%-50% less damage.

There you go. Some cool abilities and cant be all on one unique item. You get bigger walls but they do less damage.

The Gathering Storm - Lightning Storm Set Aspect
2] Lightning storm strikes that defeat elites reduce the cooldown on cataclysm and hurricane by 3 seconds.
3] Lightning storm has 20% bigger AOE while in human form and 10% faster attack speed in wolf form.
4] Lightning storm costs 5-10% more resource but has a 5% lucky hit chance to cast tornado for free.

Im just showing ideas guys. Numbers and % chances can be tweaked. No need to deep dive the balance here.

:heart: u all!

18

Nope, no sets. Let them rot in D3 and D2. Time to move forward.

1 Like
19

Yea along with sockets and item rarities and skill-tr…oh wait.

20

None of which is degenerate - sets are though. Besides we have aspects and uniques. Sets fill no niche anymore.