Unearthed Arcana Unearthed Arcana Revisits Psionics

Aldarc · Apr 19, 2020

Paul Farquhar said:
It could easily have been trimmed back if it had met with a less overwhelmingly negative response, and doing everything better than every other class is exactly what the 2nd edition psion that people are so fond of did.

And anyway, your own suggestion includes no significant differences to the Mystic.

It wasn't a fundamentally bad idea, but some fans of psionics thought that the whole "mystic" name was trying to pussfoot with psionics by intentionally avoiding the "psion" name. Mearls posed a question on Twitter asking whether or not the name "mystic" or "psion" was preferred. "Psion" won like 66 to 33 percent. But as others have said, such as @DEFCON 1, the mystic was attempting to do too much. But a big problem - much like with 4e - was presentation of their ideas.

Nope, The truth is it was rejected because the community is deeply divided over what it wants from psionics, and no side is prepared to give an inch.

How many inches have I already given? I have proposed so many ways psionics could work in 5e. So let's stop pretending that we are dealing with two monolithic and unwavering sides.

Paul Farquhar · Apr 19, 2020

Aldarc said:
It wasn't a fundamentally bad idea, but some fans of psionics thought that the whole "mystic" name was trying to pussfoot with psionics by intentionally avoiding the "psion" name.

Psion was a subclass. But names are the easiest thing to change. Personally, I prefer Mystic, Psion is as bland as you can get.

How many inches have I already given? I have proposed so many ways psionics could work in 5e.

One that has already been resoundly rejected. And you haven't suggested any way to change it, other than a vague "present it better".

So let's stop pretending that we are dealing with two monolithic and unwavering sides.

There aren't two sides. If there where only two sides it would at least be easy to reach a simple majority. There are four or five sides, so it's difficult to get more than 20% or 30% in favour of anything.

Aldarc · Apr 19, 2020

Paul Farquhar said:
Psion was a subclass. But names are the easiest thing to change. Personally, I prefer Mystic, Psion is as bland as you can get.

It was still clear that WotC was pussyfooting around the label of psionics. Much as I said before, in Mearls's straw poll on Twitter, the psion name resoundingly thumped the mystic one.

One that has already been resoundly rejected. And you haven't suggested any way to change it, other than a vague "present it better".

Perhaps it would help if you were an active listener. In the various psionic threads, I have suggested ki/psi points. I suggested warlock pact-like mechanics. I suggested using regular spell slots. So I have suggested a number of things for the psion.

Paul Farquhar · Apr 19, 2020

Aldarc said:
It was still clear that WotC was pussyfooting around the label of psionics.

"Pussyfooting" is a value judgment.

All of the D&D class names are words that exist outside of the game. Apart from psion, which is a meaningless collection of letters. I suspect WotC wanted a name that had a meaning.

But anyone who rejected it on the basis of "I don't like the name" is an idiot.

Perhaps it would help if you were an active listener. In the various psionic threads, I have suggested ki/psi points. I suggested warlock pact-like mechanics. I suggested using regular spell slots. So I have suggested a number of things for the psion.

I tend to loose track over who said what. But the fact is, it doesn't matter what you suggest, THERE IS NO OPTION THAT CAN COMMAND A MAJORITY.

Cap'n Kobold · Apr 19, 2020

Paul Farquhar said:
It's that what WotC are going for with their psionic soul? It just needs a bit of clarification, especially how it interacts with "subtle spell".

The statement was about the psion that people in this thread seemed to want rather than the one in the current UA.
That said, the sorceror is a pretty good base, since they have subtle spell as a fallback if you don't want to risk rolling the psi die.

I guess I don't see the fuss over "minor" material components - in our games almost everyone uses an spellcasting focus anyway, and an spellcasting focus is the same as a psionic focus, is it not?

Unsure of what a psionic focus is. The material component issue is mostly the same as the somatic component issue: it needs a hand free and acts as a visual indicator that someone is casting a spell/psi ability.

Aldarc · Apr 19, 2020

Paul Farquhar said:
"Pussyfooting" is a value judgment.

We are largely discussing value judgments.

All of the D&D class names are words that exist outside of the game. Apart from psion, which is a meaningless collection of letters. I suspect WotC wanted a name that had a meaning.

The name "Psion" has had meaning in the context of D&D, which is what matters.

I tend to loose track over who said what. But the fact is, it doesn't matter what you suggest, THERE IS NO OPTION THAT CAN COMMAND A MAJORITY.

I am skeptical of your opinion. Going back to something @Remathilis said, one of the problems is that it feels like WotC keeps trying to reinvent the wheel when it comes to psionics. They could have presented something far more straight-forward in their initial showing of the Mystic instead of the convoluted mess that it was.

Paul Farquhar · Apr 19, 2020

Cap'n Kobold said:
The statement was about the psion that people in this thread seemed to want rather than the one in the current UA.
That said, the sorceror is a pretty good base, since they have subtle spell as a fallback if you don't want to risk rolling the psi die.

There is no one thing that "people seem to want". I'm happy with the psionic soul, with a little bit of polishing up. I would have been okay with a polished up Mystic too.

Unsure of what a psionic focus is.

Its a spellcasting focus used by psionicists.

In a wider context, it's usually a crystal.

Paul Farquhar · Apr 19, 2020

Aldarc said:
The name "Psion" has had meaning in the context of D&D, which is what matters.

But the point is, WotC felt that the name should have a meaning to someone who has never played the game. Because, you know, WotC like to get new players, sometimes.

I am skeptical of your opinion. Going back to something @Remathilis said, one of the problems is that it feels like WotC keeps trying to reinvent the wheel when it comes to psionics. They could have presented something far more straight-forward in their initial showing of the Mystic instead of the convoluted mess that it was.

You are trashing the very thing you just suggested!!!

The Mystic use psi points, just as the 2nd and 3rd edition psion had. It had a wide range of different abilities, just like the 2nd and 3rd edition psion. It was more complex than other classes, just like the the 2nd and 3rd edition psion. It had it's own set of abilities rather than recycled spells, just like the 2nd and 3rd edition psion. It could do the same job as other classes, just like the 2nd edition psion.

Maybe it was overambitious, and shouldn't have tried to include things like the Wu Jen, and some of the abilities where poorly balanced, but UA stuff isn't balanced anyway (and nothing was as horribly broken as the 2e psion). If it hadn't been so soundly rejected for having the wrong name it could have become exactly what psion fans are asking for.

Remathilis · Apr 19, 2020

[QUOTE="Aldarc, post: 7967560]I am skeptical of your opinion. Going back to something @Remathilis said, one of the problems is that it feels like WotC keeps trying to reinvent the wheel when it comes to psionics. They could have presented something far more straight-forward in their initial showing of the Mystic instead of the convoluted mess that it was.[/QUOTE]

I rough sketched up a psion class by combining the wizard, bard, and spell point variant in the DMG, as well as a custom spell list and a few abilities from the various UAs and while not complete (it lacks subclasses at the moment) feels usable if not a little derivative. I'm sure WotC could have done the same and frankly after seeing how the artificer really contains few new mechanics and a lot of refluff, I'm surprised they didn't do the same with psions.

Then again, I feel WotC has been trying to be too cute by half as of late and been going for options that are either quirky or very one-shot (I'm looking at you returned rogue) and ignoring some classic staples (like dervish, witch and shaman). In think the psionic sorcerer is a good idea, but the psi-die mechanic is too quirky and doesn't feel like psionics. Maybe just give sorcs some additional spell choices, some abilities to use sorcery points for psychic stuff, and a few ribbons like telepathy? Nah, we need a new die mechanic!

Try KISS for a change WotC!

Paul Farquhar · Apr 19, 2020

Remathilis said:
Try KISS for a change WotC!

They usually do! Mystic and first round Artificer where the only exceptions. These new UA subclasses are KISS.

But psionics being more complex than core rules is kid of traditional, going all the way back to 1st edition.