Unearthed Arcana New Unearthed Arcana: Psionics!

There’s a new Unearthed Arcana article out, and it’s all about psionics! "Their minds bristling with power, three new subclasses arrive in today’s Unearthed Arcana: the Psychic Warrior for the fighter, the Soulknife for the rogue, and the tradition of Psionics for the wizard."

​

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

In this 9-page PDF, there are also some new psionics-themed spells (including versions of classic psionic powers like id insinuation and ego whip) and two new feats.

 

[gyor]

It sounds like I'm in the minority here, but I actually prefer having psionics as subclasses rather than a new class. I'll do a deeper dive into this UA over the weekend, but at first glance it looks really good.

I like a mix, I like a core Psion class, but stuff like Aberrant Soul, Psychic Warrior and Soulknife being subclasses is great.

 

[dave2008]

I'll just homebrew some stuff up myself then. I want a PsionWorld setting to run and this won't get me where I need to go.

That is always the best way!

 

[Sacrosanct]

Isn't the point of 5e that you have a base simple core around which you can make a lot of changes around? I would like to see some more creativity in the design (like the artificer class and the class feature variants UA and the skill feats UA), but I don't think the core mechanics need changed. There is still a lot of space to cover outside the core.

That sure seems to be the design goal of 5e. Build a strong core, focus on what most players want, and give the tools and options to the players to create the more peripheral ideas that may have appeared in the past.

Gotta say, it’s a sound business decision so far.

 

[pukunui]

Hmmmm.

I guess I do kind of see the Jedi in psychic warrior now.

Wish they changed the name though. Psychic Warrior is the blandest most straightforward name they could come up with.

They didn’t come up with it. “Psychic warrior” was a psionic class in 3e. Might even date back to 2e. Can’t remember. I don’t think it was used in 4e, though.

 

[Sacrosanct]

They didn’t come up with it. “Psychic warrior” was a psionic class in 3e. Might even date back to 2e. Can’t remember. I don’t think it was used in 4e, though.

The 2e class was a psionist. A class I actually enjoyed, if a bit over powered. I liked the versatility. Can’t speak for 3 or 4e though

 

[CleverNickName]

Wasn't there a previous UA about psionics that included a new psionic character class? Mystic, I think?

EDIT: Found it. It was back in 2016.

 

[Parmandur]

Okay I really want WotC to show us the results of that survey. How did Blood Hunter and Warlord and Psion do?

I'm just speculating, but I would wager Crawford wouldn't be so open about that if he didn't have cause to think it's not something a huge percentage of people want.

 

[Parmandur]

Wasn't there a previous UA about psionics that included a new psionic character class? Mystic, I think?

EDIT: Found it. It was back in 2016.

There was, but it died in playtest surveys.

 

[Mercule]

I don't know. I've read it now, and it seems pretty sweet.

It looks fine, power-wise. Theme-wise, it should have been a sorcerer, not wizard.

Yes, there's a whole conversation about whether psionics should be its own system or not, but that's somewhat beside the point when trying to decide which existing class to use for psionics -- as this article is clearly attempting to do.

FWIW, I tend to be mostly in favor of using sorcerer for psion, but that's because I've used psions to represent "powers of indeterminate origin", including being touched by planar blood, artifacts, etc. since they showed up in the 1E Player's Handbook (which is where I encountered them). In fact, that's exclusively what I used them for, all the way through the end of 3E (sorcerers in 3E fit nicely into a niche of wizards who favored depth over breadth). So, for me, putting the sorcerer class into that niche seems the intrusion, rather than the other way around. IMO, if you want "classic" psionics, just make a mentalist sorcerer and use the spell points option from the DMG.

 

[CleverNickName]

There was, but it died in playtest surveys.

That's a shame. I don't follow the surveys; usually I just download the articles and then pick them apart for house rules and my homebrew campaign. I guess that response isn't surprising, though...psionics has always been a very contentious topic in D&D. It might explain why they are trying the subclass-only approach this time around, too.

Still: If someone wants to build their own psionics character class (instead of a subclass), that old 2016 article could make a pretty good starting point.