• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

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


log in or register to remove this ad

Astral Constructs are the "steel defender" you mentioned. Summoning creatures or constructs should not be a part of psionics.
If I recall correctly they were made out of ectoplasm??? which was the generic psionic goo? They also might have shared a mind with the psion and not been self willed, but that's way too far back to remember.

It's been a long time and I never used that family of powers on a character.
 

If I recall correctly they were made out of ectoplasm??? which was the generic psionic goo? They also might have shared a mind with the psion and not been self willed, but that's way too far back to remember.

It's been a long time and I never used that family of powers on a character.

Are you sure that wasn't the Ghostbusters RPG?

RPG_Ghostbusters_cover.jpg
 




I personally wouldn't want either. If it was a copy of yourself, that'd be too close to an echo knight. I'd prefer summoning elemental beings that follow your commands exactly, but you'd control them mentally. They really wouldn't be individual creatures, more an extension of yourself.
You could represent these by some spells I think. - Ones giving access to force objects like Cloud of Daggers, Bigby's hand, wall of force etc?
Conjure spells but specifying that the creatures are constructs, not fey perhaps? Did these astral constructs tend to have special abilities, or just stick with melee beatdowns?
 

If it is not published by WotC it will be by a 3PP, maybe Dreamscarred Press. And other 3PPs could create a 5th Ed of the occult classes from Pathfinder.

* WotC wants to publish a d20 Modern with superheroes, and the psionic powers are one of the steps in the path.

* I like the concept of "aegis" ( = shield), creating an armour or exosuit by ectoplasm, I imagine it with a game mechanic with psi-points, the eidolon by the summoner class from Pathfinder and the totemist shaman from "Magic of Incarnum", about spendint "points" to get monster traits or special powers, or spell-like maneuvers (powers in the middle between at will and once-encounter).

* Athanatism, psionic art of manipulating souls and spirits, should be added as a new discipline.
 

So we should get rid of a dedicated psionics class then, to make psionics the way it was supposed to be.
So your reason for sabotaging discussion with your persistent "this is why psionics in 5e will never work" spiel is because you want psionics to be exceptional in 5e that gets slapped onto the character rather than a dedicated class, as has been the case for the past 3 out of 4 editions?

My point is that 1e established what psionics was, and it wasn't creation of astral constructs and such. Getting rid of those makes it more like it was supposed to be.
What it "was supposed to be"? What is that even supposed to mean? It's psionics. Even if it was "supposed to be" like 1e, both 3e and 4e showed us that it could be better than what it was "supposed to be" in 1e. Why go back to the days when psionics was its worst? Why not look to 3.5e and 4e when it was at its most balanced and flavorful?
 


Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top