Unearthed Arcana Unearthed Arcana Revisits Psionics

The latest Unearthed Arcana from WotC revisits some psionic rules! “Shine with the power of the mind in this installment of Unearthed Arcana! Today we revisit several psi-themed options that we released in the past few months. Studying your feedback on those options, we’ve crafted this new collection of subclasses, spells, and feats, found in the PDF below.“

News Archive | Dungeons and Dragons

Read the full archives of Dungeons & Dragons news, Sage Advice, Unearthed Arcana, and D&D Studio Blogs.

dnd.wizards.com

 

[Guest 6801328]

For the most part at the tables I play at we do ignore (dare I say "hand wave"?) VSM rules, because most of the time they don't matter. So it's not like every time a Wizard casts a spell he/she gets asked about hand gestures.

Except for when it does matter. "I thought you put your staff down to carry the chest. Wasn't that your spellcasting focus?" "Your hands are tied...does that spell have somatic components?" Etc.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Well, yes, that's what the rules for Charm say: once it wears off, they know exactly what happened.

But other than "well, it's magic" why don't they act like it before hand?

After all, all the charm effect does is give you advantage on Charisma Checks. The spell says they regard you as a friend.

How would you react to your friend roofying you? Sure, you are more suggestible, but you also know exactly what they did, because you saw and heard them do it, in a clearly obvious manner.

Wouldn't you react aggressively?

I wouldn't be quick to assume that a particular house rule was dominant in actual fact.

Just because you ignore a certain part of the rules doesn't mean that an ability that changes the rules isn't a bonus.

But that is what I'm saying. That rule in specific seems to be ignored the majority of the time. Are spell components the same? In my experience they tend to be.

So it is fair to ask, "is this the ability to ignore a rule most people are already ignoring" because if that is taking up design space, it isn't useful to the majority of people.

 

[Guest 6801328]

But other than "well, it's magic" why don't they act like it before hand?

I don't have a problem with the target somehow overlooking the obvious spellcasting until after the spell wears off (because...well, it's magic. duh.) but other observers might very well note the obvious spellcasting.

 

[Fenris-77]

Charm Person has a range of 30'. If you can't manage that stealthily in many many cases you probably shouldn't be in charge of planning the stealth portion of your festivities. That said, I do love the silent spell meta magic for sneaky public casting. Knowing you were charmed isn't exactly the same thing as knowing who did it either.

As far as design space goes, I think there's a lot of assumptions floating around about common usage. Every table is free to hand wave whatever parts of the rules they like. Saying no one uses that anyway so it should be binned is a different statement, and one that might need some evidence.

 

[TwoSix]

So you homebrew it to be different. Homebrew doesn't mean much in this discussion.

Homebrew matters in every discussion, because the only table you actually need to worry about is your own. The “state of the game” is a purely theoretical construct.

Don’t play RAW, play better.

 

[Eltab]

As a DM, I did not worry about material spell components. As a player, I only worry about the expensive ones. This is what an arcane focus is for.
I presume that competent guards know to put the Wizard's hands in a boxing glove, and gag him, so he cannot do his thing. (Arcane Trickster Mage Hand ruins their day!)
Other than using Message while sneaking I haven't had to deal with how loud your spellcasting is / isn't making you. And for that I defaulted to narrative dramatic value.
NOTABLE EXCEPTION: An assassination attempt against the PCs begins by stealing the mage's component pouch if he carries one.

 

[Guest 6801328]

Homebrew matters in every discussion, because the only table you actually need to worry about is your own. The “state of the game” is a purely theoretical construct.

Don’t play RAW, play better.

"Ohhhhh, in other words you (sniff) play homebrew" is Max's favorite retort.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

We used to do it obsessively in 2E, I recall. With 5E we do check if you have a hand free or have a focus, but there's some obscure stuff that I think people generally ignore about exactly what a focus can replace and so on.

Yeah. That obscure stuff was straight up bad design. I just go with allowing an appropriate spellcasting focus to to be manipulated as a Somatic component and to replace (non-costly) Material components , which I'm sure someone is reading right now and asking themselves, "Isn't that how it works RAW?" Nope, nope it isn't.

 

[Parmandur]

But other than "well, it's magic" why don't they act like it before hand?

...

Magic.

But that is what I'm saying. That rule in specific seems to be ignored the majority of the time. Are spell components the same? In my experience they tend to be.

So it is fair to ask, "is this the ability to ignore a rule most people are already ignoring" because if that is taking up design space, it isn't useful to the majority of people.

"Most"? Sez who...?

 

[Urriak Uruk]

I'm not saying that you have to care, shine on you crazy diamond. I'm just more bemused that there was an unspoken assumption (until it was spoken) that everyone was ignoring the rules, when I haven't really seen that myself (and obviously, the rules are what they are, so I wouldn't have gotten that from there: even Critical Role tends to pay attention to narratively significant components, and they are not rules sticklers...)

Sorry, I think I lost my temper a little bit... I simply detest when someone points to the RAW to justify an argument as to how the game "should be played."

It's a lot like Monopoly; did you know that the rules of Monopoly actually state that if you land on a property and don't buy it, it goes up for auction where every player has an option to purchase (and because the auction can start at $1, someone will get it eventually).

Most people don't play with that rule; in fact, most people don't even know that rule exists. Does that mean people play Monopoly wrong? Or does it even matter?

It's also why I find most of these argument against these psionics rules wears thin after awhile. Fine, if these rules don't match your exact vision of how the game should be played. Whatever. Change them so they do. Make your own class if you need one. The world will not end. Most people here seem happy with them (a lot of posters are simply writing "I like it!" and smartly leaving the thread after), what's wrong with that?

This is not aimed at you specifically @Parmandur , don't take offense.