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

 

[ccooke]

I was thinking more in line with how they are using the new die mechanic. Getting Ritual Caster on them might be worth it, but it sort of leaves me with the same thought about damage, they just aren't built to be damage dealing focused, so I'm not sure why the ability at level 6.

The Sorcerer base class is already good for damage dealing; the bonus damage at 6th synergises nicely with it. What you get from psionics opens up a lot of options that would otherwise be hard to achieve with the class. Most of the Sorcerer subclasses will boost damage as well, though. It fits.

I think also that WotC have three clearly different sets of interactions with the talent die in this UA, too. Look at the subclasses - Psi Knight is a heavy talent-die option, where basically all the extra abilities are fueled by it. Psionic Soul is a mid to high talent die option. You won't roll it as often as a Psi Knight, but it will come up often, and more often as you level up. The Soul Knife is a low talent die option - the core differentiator in the class doesn't use it, so you're mostly using the die tactically. Much less often than either of the others.

I also doubt they will end up taking concentration just for that. Storm Sorcerer can do it too just off the top of my head. And at about the same level.

Also, flight is about the only consistently useful ability from that list, so I don't think the nerf would really be appropriate.

I don't know about that. After about level 5 or so, the parties I run for would kill for "Bonus action. I can now see anything invisible within 60'" The rest of the abilities are situationally good, but being able to use them on a bonus action makes for a very versatile character.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

The ability to cast sells undetectably is definitely worthy of design space. It may not be the dominant power of a class, but it is certainly worth consideration.
Subtle spell for a sorceror has definitely been worth taking in my experience, so a class that casts all sells as if under the effects of a metamagic ability.

I think that official D&D products will need to be designed with the assumption that people are following the rules of the game, since trying to account for everyone's homebrew is a losing proposition. If specific tables tend to ignore the VSM rules, and thus find that the official psionic casters are too weak, then they can always adjust things themselves.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

The Soul Knife is a low talent die option - the core differentiator in the class doesn't use it, so you're mostly using the die tactically. Much less often than either of the others.

The psionic feats can greatly increase the frequency with which you use your PTD though. The Wild Talent feat in particular synergises with the Soul Knife.

One might almost think they where designed that way...

 

[MorkaisChosen]

The psionic feats can greatly increase the frequency with which you use your PTD though. The Wild Talent feat in particular synergises with the Soul Knife.

One might almost think they where designed that way...

I started writing this post to ask where you saw the synergy, but looking into the details to make sure I phrased my interpretation right, I came around - I think you're right.

I didn't think the Wild Talent features don't combine particularly well - Psi-Boosted Ability overlaps quite heavily with Psionic Knack, only helping you on rolls with the ability you chose where you don't have Proficiency, except I realised that's on the assumption that you can't use both, which I'm not sure is a restriction the text actually places; and Rogues do very well with Psi-Guided Strike, as rolling a big pile of Sneak Attack dice means you're much more likely to have a low die worth replacing in the damage roll.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Wild Talent's Psi Guided Strike may answer question "why does the bonus action attack do 1d4". It's so you can replace it with your PTD.

Psi Boosted Ability is, on the whole, better than Knack - it can apply to tool use, initiative rolls, all sorts of things that there isn't even a skill for. And you use it before you know the outcome - so you don't have to fail to use it. But, since Knack is used after you know the outcome, they aren't simultaneous, so RAW you can use both on the same roll.

 

[Eric V]

The ability to cast sells undetectably is definitely worthy of design space. It may not be the dominant power of a class, but it is certainly worth consideration.
Subtle spell for a sorceror has definitely been worth taking in my experience, so a class that casts all sells as if under the effects of a metamagic ability.

I think that official D&D products will need to be designed with the assumption that people are following the rules of the game, since trying to account for everyone's homebrew is a losing proposition. If specific tables tend to ignore the VSM rules, and thus find that the official psionic casters are too weak, then they can always adjust things themselves.

To be fair, Subtle Spell has a strong mechanical incentive as well: it can't be counterspelled. If psionics was also specifically called out to be immune to counterspell, that might be something.

 

[Guest 6801328]

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?

My next character concept is a bounty hunter under contract with Parker Bros. to hunt those people down.

 

[Quartz]

... That's the happiest I've been reading a psionics ruleset in a long, long time.

Separate psionics are not my cup of tea. It's just magic under a different guise, so just reflavour what's already there.

 

[TwoSix]

When discussing rules, such as what the rules are for components and what the rules would be for a class that doesn't get components, that you homebrew components away has no bearing. Okay. That's what YOU do. Now how about talking about the rules, because the rules are what the designers go by when designing new things, not your house game.

Sure, but again, it's a theoretical construct. Your impact on what the designers will actually end up doing is obviously immaterial.

 

[Parmandur]

Honestly, I do think that RAW (de jure) and non-RAW (de facto) play experience have bearing in the discussion. Because it's important when designing and playing a game to understand both how a game is meant to be played per rules and how a game is often played per praxis. Often these things align, but we learn a lot about the game from the places where they don't.

So it is correct that the debate of how psionics interact with SVM per RAW is important, but it's also important to understand in the discussion how psionics may not meaningfully interact with SVM per praxis if tables commonly handwave (to various degrees) the tracking of SVM.

In my experience, the RAW for components match the RAP. I see no particular reason to suspect that this is unusual, and WotC official supplements over the past five years have consistently treated normative usage of the component rules as normal. I see no reason that would stop for published Psionics.