Unearthed Arcana Unearthed Arcana: Psionics and Mystics Take Two

February's Unearthed Arcana article from WotC's Mike Mearls has been posted. This time around, the topic is psionics again "This month, Unearthed Arcana returns to the mystic character class and the rules for psionics. Based on the playtest feedback you sent us, there are a number of changes you can expect." The article expands the Mystic class to 10th level, and adds a variety of new options.

Find the article right here.

 

[lkj]

It would kind of be cooler if the benefit you got for using your psychic disciplines was discipline specific rather than a generic regeneration. Just a thought. Otherwise I like a great deal of what I see.

AD

 

[SailorNash]

Anyone else notice that the fix for the floating save - tying it to Wisdom - now breaks it for multiclassing? If you're MCing into Mystic, unless Wisdom is your base class save that ability is useless.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

I only have minor criticisms, and would probably be okay using it as is--which is a huge coming from me. So I definitely think it is moving in the right direction. A couple more iterations and it should be good to go.

I disagree with the whole "dispel magic doesn't dispel psionics." I mean, logically, it does make sense. I get that. But it also means that the Mystic has advantage to "magic" that cannot be countered, unlike every other spellcaster.

It depends on whether psionics does anything worth countering by magic. You can't counterspell an arrow or dispel magic a mundane disguise either. That doesn't mean that wizards have no ways to deal with arrows or disguises (or alternately, that such things have no way to deal with wizards). Dissimilar mechanics interact in pretty much every D&D session and combat round.

In the current setup, it doesn't look like psionics is really creating much that you could dispel if it were a spell, or at least, not much that seems out of line with what other non-spellcasting classes can do. Now, I only read through it once, so I could be missing some glaring issues.

As long as they make sure that psionics isn't doing the same things as magic (a design goal), and that the sorts of effects it creates can be interacted with by dissimilar mechanics just like most things in the game, I don't think we'll have a big problem with psionics and magic not directly interacting.

That having been said, I'm personally entirely neutral on the issue. Either way works for me.

Interesting to see the special rule that essentially tells the Mind Flayer "no you don't get to be special". For some reason they decided Mind Flayers aren't allowed to become even more awesome than they already are...

Right now...

I believe Mike Mearls said in a tweet that they'll probably revisit the psionic monsters once the psionic rules are out. I expect we'll see exactly the same sort of treatment as the 3.5e Expanded Psionics Handbook had. You provide a different (optional) version of the monster that replaces the spell-like abilities from the original version with standard psionics rules.

The current (well, playtesting) rule is just a placeholder for that, as well as an alternative for those who choose not to switch to "Psionic Mind Flayer" statblock when it becomes available.

 

[GobiWon]

Consumptive Power feels like it belongs with another class. Say, blood mage subclass for the sorcerer?

Consumptive power seems weak, and it comes at a steep price that seems obscene, but I kind of understand it. Maybe lower your hit points to 1 to gain psi points equal to your psi limit. If the mystic is still at 1 hit point at the beginning of his next turn, he drops to 0. Thematically this seems right. The mystic is pushed to the brink of death trying to project power beyond his abilities. Most times mystical recovery or the party cleric will keep the mystic alive. When used, the mystic's hit point maximum would be halved until the next short rest. It becomes a dramatic sacrifice play to use your psionics beyond their normal limits.

 

[The Myopic Sniper]

Anyone else notice that the fix for the floating save - tying it to Wisdom - now breaks it for multiclassing? If you're MCing into Mystic, unless Wisdom is your base class save that ability is useless.

That could be intentional which is why they dropped on an Ability Score Increase (if you really want it you can take Resilient(Wisdom) and if not, it is still not a dead level.) I would just throw that mechanic off into a Discipline, maybe just as a way to get a third proficient saving throw that can be adjusted once a day.

I don't think the mechanic as is will be utilized that much anyway. You still need a build that can take advantage of the different saving throw and if you do, you will probably just permanently move it to that.

 

[Twiggly the Gnome]

Well, Mike Mearls tweeted that not mentioning Dal Quor in relation to psionics in Eberron was a "total oversight", so I'm feeling a little better now.

 

[GobiWon]

0ccluded Mind seems to seems over-powered. "Your ally is actually your arch-enemy" ... more powerful than charm. Only one save instead of the target getting one every round. Lasts five minutes. Two enemies negated. All for two psi points.

 

[Hussar]

It's pretty easy to ignore fluff in general, but bad defaulting can kill my interest. Like, I don't play a wizard because I love daily power resource management, I play a wizard because a learned scholar of magic is an appealing character type. I don't play a monk because I really like ki points, I play a monk because playing an ascetic, disciplined character who fights with elaborate martial arts is an appealing character type. I won't play a psionic character because I like the mechanics. Usually, it'll appeal because I want a character who is a psychic, who employs mental tricks to read minds, tell the future, maybe do some pseudo-science comic-booky kinetics stuff. But in 5e, unless I want to play a character involved with the Far Realm, I won't be interested in what the Mystic has to offer.

It should be said that with that narrative, there's not a whole lot that the mechanics do to support it. I don't feel like I'm an echo of the farm realm when I spend points on things or because I resist psychic damage or because I have an extra proficiency. There's nothing Beyond The Natural World about getting a bonus to Charisma checks. Blah blah blah.


I want mechanics that reinforce the story, and this isn't doing a great job of that. It's fine if you plan on ignoring the story anyway, but that separation between mechanics and story isn't a great play experience for me.

I get what you're saying, but, like you say, changing things out isn't too much of a stretch. I mean the Immortal could be reskinned easily into a sort of Matrix style dude chopping things down. Less Far Realms and more "one with the universe" sort of thing. I'm thinking this is a pretty easy shift since I didn't see any direct ties to anything Far Realms in the actual powers and whatnot. But, I only skimmed the article, so I might have missed stuff.

 

[ClockworkNinja]

My initial reaction on reading the "Exacting query" ability (forces a target to answer one question truthfully) was a desire to ask an enemy soldier "Whats the worst thing you've done to a fellow soldier, that your comrades don't know about?"

 

[Xeviat]

At first I was looking at lethal strike as if it was no worse than Smite; then I realized that the spell equivalencies are 2, 3, and 5, so 5d10 damage for effectively a 3rd level spell slot is a whole lot more than a paladin's smite. Multiclassing to get two attacks could be problematic. I was temporarily thinking of spell level to point being 1 for 1. Woops. It probably should have been 1 for 1, considering most of the spell increases are +1 die of damage per spell level increased.