Unearthed Arcana Why UA Psionics are never going to work in 5e.

[ZeshinX]

I certainly fall into the camp that wants psionics to be "it's own thing", but I'm fine with WotC offering something that doesn't fit that desire if the vast majority of their responding audience approves of them. I just won't use them if I dislike them enough, just like I never touch the Ranger class in 5e (even the variations WotC has presented taste sour to me).

I do like the idea of psionic-infused subclasses in addition to a dedicated class for psionics, but I find (after having played 1e, 2e, 3.Xe and their takes on psionics) to get it "right", meaning balanced from the start as "it's own thing", it would need to be included as an option from the start, meaning it's present in the Player's Handbook at the beginning of the edition, so it had all the playtesting and balancing needed to allow it to fit naturally with the other classes from Day 1 (1e pretty much did this, but they were exceedingly rare and ultimately ended up being little more than a 1/day spell-like ability).

Doesn't mean it CAN'T be done now (or later), but I doubt it will be anything that anybody particularly thinks of as psionics. It'll likely just be a rose by another name (i.e. Magic). I mean traditionally psionic monsters have been there since Day 1 and they work just fine with a fluffy name for their psionic abilities that are really just magic. The psychic damage type exists for magic, so might as well just continue as is at this point.

Just my 2 cents anyway.

 

[Umbran]

In order for psionics to make it past UA you would need to somehow appease enough of everyone all at once, which I don't see as happening ...

Or, (I know some will see this as a stretch) WotC might be able to see the same thing you do, assume that there's some significant knee-jerk down-voting of a vocal and dedicated minority and lower the threshold.

Don't assume the "rules" on WotC's end are written in stone.

 

[Parmandur]

Or, (I know some will see this as a stretch) WotC might be able to see the same thing you do, assume that there's some significant knee-jerk down-voting of a vocal and dedicated minority and lower the threshold.

Don't assume the "rules" on WotC's end are written in stone.

True, they have lowered the threshold, already: they had a higher approval standard when they were working on the Core rules than they do now.

 

[Minigiant]

I see psionic like monks.

1. Both Psionics and Monks are outside the norm. The norm in combat is the use of weapons, armor, and magic.
   1. Monks go outside the normal path for combat. The class is developed due to a social, spiritual, or political requirement. So monks would come from places outside of the traditional area of D&D.
   2. Psionics is outside the norm. Psionic classes go outside the norm and do not manipulate reality via the normal channels set up and managed by the gods.
2. Both Psionics and Monks feel learnable but require mental ability rather than being "born with it".
   1. A monk needs wisdom to truly unlock their monk features. But all you need is a master to teach you. Finding one might be hard though.
   2. I see psionics as someone anyone with high enough mental stats can use. They just need to be taught. Bloodline, ancestors, or fateful birth/encounter is not neccesary but helpful. The innate part is your natural intelligence, wisdom, or charisma.

So I can see it working but it would have to take up significant pages in a book. And a setting book as a full book of psionics would require it to go too unconventional to justify itself.

So Darksun.

 

[Fenris-77]

People are going to hate this, but I think the vocal minorities need to be ignored if psionics is going to be a thing in 5e. Whatever it looks like some portion of that group will be unhappy, but that can't be helped. So long as it's cool and different I'm fine with it, and I think something like that view is probably held by a large number of players who don't have a skin in the psionic edition wars game. Thinking outside the box is where I'd go here rather that trying to redo something a previous version did. That's the main reason I really like the psionics die in the new UA - a new mechanic for a new thing.

 

[Reynard]

Whatever mechanical form psionics takes in 5e, I think it is a fair bet that it comes in context of a campaign setting. And while I personally do not understand the appeal of Dark Sun, it seems the most likely setting to include psionic powers (except Eberron, but that setting shipped without psionic rules).

 

[Weiley31]

With the way the new UA seems to go, we get the Psionic Die and (Wild) Talents.

Each of the three UA Psionics sub classes utilize their Psionics via different ways: through the use of Talents and (in the Sorcerer's case) spells. And likewise, each of the three sub classes have their OWN Talents while the Wild Talent feat gives PCs generic talents. So Psionics can be based more on Feats and said Talents more than Psionic powers/classes.

There are also Talents/Spells that require the burning of the Psionic Die to use or to cast without components. Which is different (most of the time aside from exceptions such as the Psionics Sorcerer) in theory than the Spell Slots used by Arcane/Divine/Spontaneous.

So already the 5E framework basis for Psionics is there: The Psionics Die kinda represents Power Points, it's "different" in mechanic feel slightly, and it seems like the main difference is that, theoretically, each Psionics Subclass gets its own talents which act as their specializations. The Wild Talent feat is the basic form of unformalized Psionics.

The only stick in the mud of the situation is whether to have Psionics "normalized" as magic/reflavored magic spells ala the UA Psionics Sorcerer or something completely else. Which may or may not go against 5E basic design structure as it would add complexity by requiring DMs to keep track of counters to Psionics (ala Anti-Magic Field and Anti-Psionics Field/Zone.) I would be, as a DM, crazy enough to enforce that distinction as I'm too used to it from 3.5 AND adds flavor. And 5E favors reflavor too much.

And while I like the Psionics Die idea and how you can "burn" it to fuel Talents and Spell Effects, I will agree with people that the complete inverse of the D20 concept is a tad bit weird.

But then again, the main focus seems to be various subclass Talents and how they can be used/changed via the Psionics Die. A bit(kinda) like Meta Magic but different enough to not step on the Sorcerer's toes. I like it. It can probably be refined a bit more, but as somebody that liked the Power Point system in 3.5, I like it.

 

[Enevhar Aldarion]

I’ve never understood why psionics needs it’s own class. They’re just sorcerers right? They have an innate power they need to learn to control. Just give them a subclass with more mind control type spells.

The standard sci-fi type of psionics is not magical in any way, so things like Detect Magic, Dispel Magic, Anti-Magic Field, etc, would not work on it. And while shoving that type of system into a fantasy, magic-based setting/game is what some people seem to want, it just does not mesh well with the other rules, especially in a system that is trying to keep things fairly simple, like 5th Ed. Back while I was still interested in Pathfinder and reading the Paizo forums, I remember when they announced they were going to add psionics to the game and call it Mind Magic. Pathfinder is much more complex, but they still had to make it magical in some way. That caused some head shaking and facepalming. It was shortly after that, that I stopped following Pathfinder, so I do not even know if they went through with that name.

If they want to get some of this into 5th Ed, and try to make it magical, so all the rules apply to it, they really need to play up the psychic, paranormal, supernatural side of these kinds of powers, which would link at least some of it to the Sorcerer, but also to the Warlock. I think a psychic subclass for the Warlock could be very interesting.

 

[Big Bucky]

The Sorcerer doesn't have innate powers, but can innately cast spells

This is the kind of thing I don't get. They seem the same to me. The power just comes from their mind.

it would be Int based, rather than Cha based)

I didn’t think of this. You’re right it would have to be Int based.

 

[MichaelSomething]

So it's basically the Warlord situation???