Unearthed Arcana Psionics Hits Unearthed Arcana

If you've been waiting anxiously for psionics to arrive in the D&D Unearthed Arcana column, your wait is over! The Awakened Mystic is a psionic class by Mike Mearls which - currently - has access to three psionic disciplines, with more to come later. Following on from Mike Mearls' question, Should Psionic Flavour Be Altered? (a discussion which promoted 750+ comments here on EN World, and is still ongoing), it sounds like he has answered the question with a resounding "yes". Rather than pseudo-scientific sounding terms like telepathy, clairovoyance, and the like, we have the disciplines Conquering Mind, Intellect Fortress (a callback to earlier editions), and Third Eye.

UPDATE - IMPORTANT NOTE FROM MIKE MEARLS: "For folks looking at the psionics material in today's UA, looks like there was a minor error. Not all the material is there." Keep an eye on it; I expect it'll be fixed soon.

UPDATE 2 - fixed! Updated document includes another three disciplines (Celerity, Iron Durability, and Psionic Weapon) and the basic rules to the class.

Find it here!

 

[TheCosmicKid]

All this is true. My point is that the model of Id, Ego, and Superego is really a simple one, and that the terms used would make sense to medieval scholars if the model were described to them. So I have no problem with those terms being used in psionic powers in a fantasy game.

I never thought about it that way before, but you have a point. And the Europeans at least would be all over the Latin terminology.

 

[Dire Bare]

I still don't get the insistence by so many that psionics was always sci-fi.

Arthur Collins of TSR wrote much of the original Psionics rules. Arthur was informed by the Deryni novels by Katherine Kurtz, which are 100% fantasy and which have no sci-fi elements at all. He said so, and wrote the Psionicist class right along side two Deryni articles in the same Dragon Magazine.

Perhaps. It's been a long time since I've read the Deryni novels (need to go back and do a reread!), but I remember thinking as a kid they were a blend of fantasy and sci fi.

Either way, we've had decades of evolution of psionics in D&D, just like every other aspect of D&D. A science fantasy, or pseudoscience feel, attached to psionics has long been a part of the game. I'd like to keep it. Others don't. And we argue on and on for pages.

After going through the 5E draft psionics rules again, I'm more okay with things as they are. If I want to include a science fantasy psionics aspect to my next campaign, I'll just have to do a little work to match terms from my favorite version (3.5E) to the new rules, which shouldn't be too hard. I'd rather them be in there from the start, but I think I'm in the minority, and that's okay.

 

[TheCosmicKid]

After going through the 5E draft psionics rules again, I'm more okay with things as they are. If I want to include a science fantasy psionics aspect to my next campaign, I'll just have to do a little work to match terms from my favorite version (3.5E) to the new rules, which shouldn't be too hard. I'd rather them be in there from the start, but I think I'm in the minority, and that's okay.

I applaud your open-mindedness.

If 3.5E psionics were my favorite version, I suspect I would be more concerned by the implication (spelled out more explicitly in this week's podcast) that psionics are going to be differentiated from magic by being "subtler": there probably won't be psionic fireballs. Now, my real opinion is that this is a very good change, that psions should not be blasters. But is that something you would miss from 3.5E, or are you fine with the subtlety?

 

[Vael]

I applaud your open-mindedness.

If 3.5E psionics were my favorite version, I suspect I would be more concerned by the implication (spelled out more explicitly in this week's podcast) that psionics are going to be differentiated from magic by being "subtler": there probably won't be psionic fireballs. Now, my real opinion is that this is a very good change, that psions should not be blasters. But is that something you would miss from 3.5E, or are you fine with the subtlety?

Well, I wouldn't necessarily tie those two together. I'm fine with Mystics being subtler and not throwing around Psionic Fireballs ... but I still want Mystics to potentially fill the "blaster" role. IE, Telekinesis, pulling off some Dark Phoenix or something like the ending of The Chronicle. So I'm hoping the Invisible Hand is going to be able to still wreck shop. Also, Firestarting is a thing for Psionics. So, I hope Psionics doesn't get too pigeon-holed. It's still supernatural power and Mystics should still be allowed to cut loose on the battlefield. But I can accept the end of all the Energy blasts.

 

[dwayne]

I hope they do something like an over load option so just in case you have to do a Hail Mary and save the day. Or some kind of signature power based off there area of skill they can be used but may cost a lot to do and require a long rest. So you can not go around blasting but if need did a rise you could make some one think twice. A wild talent would be more raw and not have a full handle on there powers (fire starter) and a trained one would be more balanced (Psi corps ). Just my thoughts hope they change the class name mystic just does not do it for me how about ( Wildling ) for untrained and wild talents and maybe some thing alone the lines of ascetic, swami, anchorite or yogi. As the culture of India would be a good real world draw to pull this from.

 

[Herobizkit]

For me, psionics seem more sci-fi because they manifest akin to superpowers, which are generally reserved for modern-and-beyond settings.

 

[Benji]

One thing's for sure, expect the next storyline after the Drizzt fan-wank one to be Cthulhu-esque, Far Realm focused. WotC doesn't release anything unless it has a direct correlation to its storyline concepts. Their attempt to mimic Marvel's shared universe concept with D&D and all.

Given that they've said it's 'giant focused' and 'based on shakespeare' if they can fit psionics in their as well, I'm buying the hades out of that - Against The Psionic Shakespearean Giants!

Though I say all UA articles as ofyet haven't shown up anywhere else.

 

[DMCF]

We allowed one in game since the player was having problems with lock/druid (new to d&d). So now he is druid psionist and it is frickin powerful...might be OP. We are flexible and shaping the class to the character and an extensive background so flavor aside I see this as a fun class.

 

[Pieter-Jan Maesen]

Could someone provide me with a link directly to the document? It does not appear in the article for me...

 

[Yaarel]

Could someone provide me with a link directly to the document? It does not appear in the article for me...

Huh. It appears, WotC removed the document from the Wizards .com website.

The webpage description and downloadable pdf document for the ‘Awakened Mystic’ (and the ‘Immortal Mystic’), with playable info from levels 1 to 5, should have been here:

dnd.wizards .com/articles/features/awakened-mystic

I guess, they want to rework some of it based on feedback.



Fortunately, you can still download the pdf from the Wizards site here:

media.wizards .com/2015/downloads/dnd/UA6_AwakenedMysticv2.pdf