Well , they had a legit reason in the sense that their intentions were good , but it doesn ' t mean that it was actually a smart or well thoughtout move . There ' s two major angles to this failure to predict how players would act , and the underlying complications of any system that cuts off any significant chance of a legendary after a certain point . For the first one , I can kinda let it slide . Predicting player behavior isn ' t easy , and it ' s not too shocking that some things like early 23 spam by people who massively overgear and overperform it for AP weren ' t expected . Still , they should ' ve had a better idea of what was going to happen . The second one , however , is what really bugs me . The issue with cutting legendary chances beyond certain threshold is that legendaries are not on equal footing , at all . It is totally possible to have 4 legendaries and still not have any good legendaries , especially for classes that have 12 that are radically better than the rest . Not many classes have a selection of legendaries where you can give them a random selection of 4 and guarantee that they ' re basically fine , especially when Sephuz and Xavaric are spread across all classes and specs . It gets messier when you start thinking about legendaries spread across multiple specs . To me , it makes absolutely no sense that a person with 0 legendaries had a much , much higher chance of getting a superawesome BiS legendary than a person who has 4 different legendaries . Even if the intent was to trim down on some edge cases , I don ' t think that they did it the right way from the start .