Petition to completely remove the sanctum as a mechanism of ascension.

We, members of the Path of Exile 2 community, submit this petition to formally request the complete removal of the Sanctum as a mandatory mechanism for Ascendancy progression. While experimentation with new systems is expected in a sequel, the current implementation of Sanctum-based Ascendancy represents a fundamental misalignment with the core identity of Path of Exile. Instead of enhancing character progression, it introduces frustration, exclusion, and mechanical dissonance that undermines player agency and long-term engagement.

Ascendancy is not a side activity. It is a foundational pillar of character identity, build expression, and power progression. Locking it behind a system that is mechanically narrow, heavily restrictive, and hostile to many playstyles is damaging to the overall design philosophy that has defined the franchise.

Ascendancy represents a character’s core specialization. In previous iterations of Path of Exile, it was earned through challenges that tested general combat competence and build readiness. By contrast, Sanctum is a highly specific, self-contained mechanic with rules that do not translate to the rest of the game.

Requiring players to engage with a niche system to unlock universal character power creates a disconnect between Ascendancy and the broader gameplay loop. Ascendancy should reflect mastery of the game as a whole, not proficiency in a single, highly constrained mode.

The Sanctum system disproportionately favors specific archetypes while actively punishing others. Builds that rely on damage over time, proximity, minions, self-damage, ramping mechanics, or slower defensive play are placed at a clear disadvantage. This is not a matter of balance tuning; it is structural incompatibility.

Path of Exile has always prided itself on build diversity. Sanctum-based Ascendancy directly contradicts this principle by implicitly dictating which builds are “acceptable” for progression. Players should not be forced to respec, reroll, or abandon their preferred playstyle just to access a core system.

Sanctum replaces player-driven decision-making with rigid constraints and punitive failure conditions. The emphasis on avoiding damage at all costs, regardless of build intent, strips away meaningful defensive and mechanical choices.

Ascendancy progression should reward investment in survivability, mitigation, recovery, and clever build planning. Sanctum ignores these layers almost entirely, reducing success to a narrow execution check that does not respect the depth of Path of Exile’s systems.

Failure in Sanctum is not instructive or motivating. A single mistake can invalidate an entire run, wasting time and effort without meaningful feedback or progression. This level of punishment is inappropriate for a mandatory system tied to character power.

Ascendancy should feel earned, not withheld. Repeated failure at such a fundamental progression step creates frustration, discouragement, and eventual disengagement, especially for newer or more casual players.

The time required to successfully complete Sanctum-based Ascendancy attempts is excessive relative to what is being unlocked. Ascendancy is not optional content or a luxury reward; it is baseline progression.

When players are forced into repeated, lengthy attempts just to access expected character power, the system becomes a gate rather than a challenge. This design encourages burnout rather than mastery.

Path of Exile is built around layered defenses, resource management, risk-reward combat, and the acceptance that characters will take damage. Sanctum fundamentally rejects this philosophy by treating any hit as a critical failure rather than a solvable problem.

This creates a jarring inconsistency where the skills and strategies that work everywhere else in the game are suddenly invalidated during one of the most important progression moments.

Sanctum difficulty does not scale in a way that feels fair or instructive. Instead of testing a player’s understanding of their build, enemy interactions, or game systems, it enforces arbitrary constraints that feel detached from character strength.

Difficulty should emerge naturally from combat complexity and decision-making, not from rules that override the game’s own mechanics.

Widespread community feedback indicates that Sanctum-based Ascendancy is one of the most criticized aspects of the current Path of Exile 2 experience. Many players report delaying progression, abandoning characters, or losing motivation entirely due to this system.

A core progression mechanic that actively drives players away is a clear signal that the design is not meeting its goals.

While Sanctum may function as optional content in other contexts, tying Ascendancy to it makes it effectively mandatory. This removes player choice and forces engagement with a mechanic regardless of preference or compatibility.

Optional content should enhance the game, not serve as a gatekeeper to fundamental systems.

Given the structural issues outlined above, incremental adjustments are unlikely to resolve the core problems. The conflict between Sanctum’s design and Ascendancy’s purpose is fundamental, not numerical.

1) A complete separation of Sanctum from Ascendancy progression would allow:

2) Sanctum to exist as optional, specialized content for those who enjoy it.

3) Ascendancy to return to being a universal, build-agnostic progression milestone.

4) Greater design clarity and consistency across the game.

We respectfully request that Grinding Gear Games remove the Sanctum as a mechanism for Ascendancy progression in Path of Exile 2. Ascendancy is too central to character identity, balance, and enjoyment to be locked behind a system that excludes builds, undermines player agency, and conflicts with the core philosophy of the game.

Path of Exile has always thrived on freedom, depth, and choice. Restoring Ascendancy to a progression system that reflects these values would strengthen the game and reaffirm the trust of its community.

It's much more better than Izaro lab, but worse than sanctum poe1 in some moments. GGG just need rework whole poe2 to be faster for biggest qol.
Fucking ai slops..

Sanctum is not build specific, it's a basic competency check.

Get better and next time you create a whine thread, don't act as if you're speaking for anybody but yourself.

Sanctum is lesser evil compared to Bahlak mixed with 10 random debuffs. And knowing GGG I bet upcoming 3rd ascension system will be even worse than both sanctum and ultimatum.

At least in sanctum you can succeed with precise manual control, even if your build is far off-meta, your level is low, and your gear is bad. Ultimatum is a dumb dps/eHP check, as well as RNG dependent.

Petitions are useless.
But I agree, Sanctum sucks.

"

Offfit#6199 wrote:

It's much more better than Izaro lab, but worse than sanctum poe1 in some moments. GGG just need rework whole poe2 to be faster for biggest qol.
Fucking ai slops..

bullshit, izaro lab was perfect. Any character had the same possibility to run it and complete it. Nobody got worse chances, except if you went RF which just ignores most shit ever. But having speed made the content literally irrelevant.

But sekhema is for only a specific kind of classes, high dps, high dodge/evasion. Which melee aren't and you cannot do anything about it except of having god like skill. Cause it is bound to the campaign and the second ascendancy is only in act 3.

So Sanctum or Sekhema is far worse than izaro lab. Sanctum was not mandatory and also in POE 1 it is literally the same and I wouldn't want to have it a ascencion there either....

I love sekhema in terms of having a good character and farming it, cause it is also the only content so far that was somewhat enjoyable in PoE 2, but to make it mandatory for ascension is just crap.

Absolutely! And the worst part is they're using the labyrinth key system as if it were a brief reference, when the sanctum as it is is 100% worse.

I was playing as my character, I took an AOE and went from 500 to 27 in 3 seconds, even though my character's health didn't budge. Then I couldn't fight the boss in a way that was even remotely fun. The labyrinth had its difficulties, sure, but at no point, even playing with ranged/melee builds with high or low health regeneration did I feel like I wouldn't finish.


But the moment I entered the sanctum, I took a hit from a mob and saw your "health" go from 500 to 375 is terrible. I literally finished that mess running away from everything, didn't open a single chest, and when I got to the end, the boss hit me, making my character lose 90% of their HP and "survive," but unfortunately, the damn thing... The extremely poorly done mechanics caused me to lose the run.

If you don't like the Sekhema trial, don't run it. Just because you don't enjoy it, or think it's for niche builds (hi, I use DoT builds and crush this content even though you say otherwise), doesn't mean others don't like it. You've got the Trial of Chaos if you want your ascendancies, and later on GGG will be bringing back Trial of the Ancestors as well.

"

Pizzarugi#6258 wrote:

If you don't like the Sekhema trial, don't run it. Just because you don't enjoy it, or think it's for niche builds (hi, I use DoT builds and crush this content even though you say otherwise), doesn't mean others don't like it. You've got the Trial of Chaos if you want your ascendancies, and later on GGG will be bringing back Trial of the Ancestors as well.

That's what I said in the beginning already. TOTA will be third way to ascend, so you can choose then between cancer, HIV and Malaria to ascend. Great choices

just did the 1st ascension after not playing the game for many months.

I now remember why I haven't played the game for many months (not just the ascendancies tbh, its the whole levelling process).

I would sign this petition, but its all fairly meaningless as the design is intentional and GGG are building the game for people who like this sort of thing, so there will be more of this flavour of content in the long run, not less.