LogFAQs > #962176001

63. SET

https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/1198/set

Category: Player vs player
Key mechanics: Pattern-recognition, real-time, repeated hands
Rules complexity (0 to 7): 1
Game length: 5-20 minutes
First played: 2015
Experience: 5+ plays with 3+ players (over multiple sessions)
Previous ranks: 88/100 (2016)

SET didn't make it onto my 2018 or 2019 rankings, for a fairly sensible reason - it's kind of iffy in its status as a "hobby game." The principle of it is that twelve abstract cards are laid on the table, and you search for a set among the three based on different attributes of those cards. It's a pure pattern-recognition game that can really twist the mind to pieces, which gives it more of an "activity" feel than a "game" feel. Combine that with the fact that the card design isn't graphically interesting (unlike SET's younger but more enjoyable cousin, Ghost Blitz) - and the fact that it looks rather mass-marketed - and there are lots of reasons I didn't include it in those lists.

Well, SET does make it onto this list, and it's... fine. It's not an amazing game, but if you like doing pattern recognition, logical puzzles, and the like, then you may like it. As a kid I played twenty-four with my dad, where you'd flip four numeric cards and then try to use them arithmetically to make 24 - but as a race. That's what SET is, and while that is intrinsically fun, there are two main issues with it: first, that each round exists purely independently of other rounds - i.e. there's no story arc at all - and second, that the more skilled player has a high chance of outsourcing the rest very dramatically. As in, shut-outs are entirely possible if everyone is playing to the best of their ability and there's a skill gap. Even in extremely cutthroat eurogames, that wouldn't necessarily happen. It can be punishing and negative and unengaging as a result.