Mystic as Mage: Genesis of the Psychic Warrior

[Steampunkette]

During the D&D Next playtesting, early on, the Mage represented the Sorcerer, the Wizard, and the Bard classes all in one piece. At the time you could create a fairly wide variety of different characters from the pieces provided. I put it to you, dear reader, that the Mystic could provide the same basic function due to it's six different orders. That what we're looking at isn't a single cohesive class, but several.

Now, I fully acknowledge that I may be way off base on this. That the Mystic is, in fact, a singular class which will be provided at a later date in a sourcebook for Psionics or Eberron or Dark Sun. Perhaps a PHB2 equivalent. However, such a fact would be simple and dull, and provide no interesting discussion or debate, so for the time being I ask that those who participate in this thread discard that possibility and instead proceed under the conceit that it is, in fact, representative of multiple classes.

With that in mind, these are the classes I think would be the most likely to come out of this playtest:

Psionicist. Utilizing the Awakened Disciplines as the core function, but capable of reaching into the other disciplines at higher level in a "Magical Secrets" sort of way. This is one of the two classes where Psionic Mastery would be a paramount consideration.

Psychic Warrior. With the Immortal and Nomad disciplines, one could create an interesting and powerful Melee or Ranged Psionicist. Similarly, the Soulknife would be a subclass of the Psychic Warrior, gaining extra attack at level 5. Yes, I realizes this allows the Nomad to break the attack economy by making 3 ranged attacks through Nomadic Arrow. I foresee that being expected.

Mystic. With the Avatar and Wu Jen disciplines, I could easily see the Mystic taking on the role of the Bard or of a Shaman, marshalling their allies or the elemental forces around themselves to create marvelous synergies. This is the second class where Psionic Mastery would be a paramount consideration.

Please, feel free to speculate on other combinations or directions. Suggest new class abilities or changes that might come about. Tell me I'm wrong about the different assumptions made, herein, and lay out your own ideas of how things might work. And know, when the Mystic Class Survey comes out, I will carry your ideas forward and do my best to advocate for this sort of split.

I hope you will, too.

[Ferrin33]

I rather enjoy the "flavor packages" that disciplines provide, and that those choices are what shape your character. However, you're still stuck to the main chassis for the mystic.

With different classes like you suggested you would have the option of greater focus in any single area, but at the cost of limiting choices overall. I hope that we can agree that the goal is to allow as much freedom of character creation as possible without breaking immersion or balance. Either way, I'm going to continue based on that assumption.

I think that each class should have Disciplines to choose from, rather than a pool of Disciplines per subclass. That way you don't have a hit or miss whether it would fit the flavor of one class or the other if you put them in one pool or not. Much like spell lists, wizards and sorcerers have a lot of overlap, but they don't get access to all of the same spells. For example; while you would want the Psionicist to have Adaptive Body, you wouldn't want him to have Psionic Weapon. But you also want the Psychic Warrior to have access to Adaptive Body, but in what pool do you put it if you don't want either to access other disciplines in that pool? Make it a discipline without a pool? How many exceptions do you need to make then before getting rid of those pooled together disciplines altogether? I think you get my point.

Rather than Splitting it in three, I think two is enough. A martial/tough base class, and a caster chassis with more focus on abilities like "Psionic Mastery". I would just call the latter the Mystic rather than Psionicist though.

Psychic Warriors: warriors that combines the martial and mystical(generic, a basic chassis to allow more combinations), an agile fighter with blades shaped of his own mind or soul(Soul Knife), or someone who focuses his mental might to enhance his own body(Immortal).

A martial-centered base chassis works for all of them, as it primarily means being tougher and getting Extra Attack, of which the latter is optional. The Immortal could get more discipline choices/boost to damage for discipline powers rather than Extra Attack, for example.

For the Mystic, one sub-class could be a wu-jen that combines rudimentary spellcraft with their mental powers, another a more basic Psionicist that focuses on things like "Psionic Mastery" to concentrate on multiple things, and a third to be more of someone who's focused on influencing the minds of others? More like the avatar, in a way?

I'm not sure about any of these, of course. But the main gist is this; the base chassis of a class is to allow you to mechanically recreate a concept. The more classes there are, the more nuances you can have, but I'd be wary of limiting the available disciplines too much as that limits the choices you eventually have.

[Newtonsolo313]

During the D&D Next playtesting, early on, the Mage represented the Sorcerer, the Wizard, and the Bard classes all in one piece. At the time you could create a fairly wide variety of different characters from the pieces provided. I put it to you, dear reader, that the Mystic could provide the same basic function due to it's six different orders. That what we're looking at isn't a single cohesive class, but several.

Now, I fully acknowledge that I may be way off base on this. That the Mystic is, in fact, a singular class which will be provided at a later date in a sourcebook for Psionics or Eberron or Dark Sun. Perhaps a PHB2 equivalent. However, such a fact would be simple and dull, and provide no interesting discussion or debate, so for the time being I ask that those who participate in this thread discard that possibility and instead proceed under the conceit that it is, in fact, representative of multiple classes.

With that in mind, these are the classes I think would be the most likely to come out of this playtest:

Psionicist. Utilizing the Awakened Disciplines as the core function, but capable of reaching into the other disciplines at higher level in a "Magical Secrets" sort of way. This is one of the two classes where Psionic Mastery would be a paramount consideration.

Psychic Warrior. With the Immortal and Nomad disciplines, one could create an interesting and powerful Melee or Ranged Psionicist. Similarly, the Soulknife would be a subclass of the Psychic Warrior, gaining extra attack at level 5. Yes, I realizes this allows the Nomad to break the attack economy by making 3 ranged attacks through Nomadic Arrow. I foresee that being expected.

Mystic. With the Avatar and Wu Jen disciplines, I could easily see the Mystic taking on the role of the Bard or of a Shaman, marshalling their allies or the elemental forces around themselves to create marvelous synergies. This is the second class where Psionic Mastery would be a paramount consideration.

Please, feel free to speculate on other combinations or directions. Suggest new class abilities or changes that might come about. Tell me I'm wrong about the different assumptions made, herein, and lay out your own ideas of how things might work. And know, when the Mystic Class Survey comes out, I will carry your ideas forward and do my best to advocate for this sort of split.

I hope you will, too.

im gonna have to say that nomad being a "warrior class" in the same sense as the soulblade or immortal isn't really true. the abilities are
1) being stealthy
2)finding things telepathically
3)sniping people(nomad focus allows the ability to ignore disadvantage outside of normal range is a disadvantage) from range
4) getting places without triggering traps or attacks of oppurtunity
5) the ability to get whatever sort of "sense" you want
6) skill monkeying
so generally they seem to be good at playing the 'rogue' and then teleporting out and letting everyone else do the killing while you shoot from behind

[Typhon]

Psionicist. Utilizing the Awakened Disciplines as the core function, but capable of reaching into the other disciplines at higher level in a "Magical Secrets" sort of way. This is one of the two classes where Psionic Mastery would be a paramount consideration.

Psychic Warrior. With the Immortal and Nomad disciplines, one could create an interesting and powerful Melee or Ranged Psionicist. Similarly, the Soulknife would be a subclass of the Psychic Warrior, gaining extra attack at level 5. Yes, I realizes this allows the Nomad to break the attack economy by making 3 ranged attacks through Nomadic Arrow. I foresee that being expected.

Mystic. With the Avatar and Wu Jen disciplines, I could easily see the Mystic taking on the role of the Bard or of a Shaman, marshalling their allies or the elemental forces around themselves to create marvelous synergies. This is the second class where Psionic Mastery would be a paramount consideration.

First off, after seeing the various archtypes presented and the disciplines formed for those archtypes, I am really hoping this is them testing out the archtypes for the other classes. Let me explain.

The Avatar, with all its bolstering powers, comes across very much like the Ardent from earlier editions. That in mind, the Ardent was pretty much a psychic paladin and most of the set up about the Avatar plays to that angle. It is all about supporting your allies and negating your enemies.

The Immortal, this go around, reads very easily as the psychic warrior. Which would be exceptional as a fighter archtype where it would allow for easy bolstering and healing, as well as providing a benefit in combat. Additionally, the immortal as the mystic as is comes across very limited for attack, but put the fighter bones into it and that is a very dangerous animal.

Wu-jen screams sorcerer from the word go. The disciplines are worded too distinctly as spell type effects not to be noticed. It should also be noted that the disciplines are explicitly elemental/energy type damage associations. The added benefit of being able to create more spell slots also backs this idea as this is wholly the shtick of the sorcerer.

The Nomad is a great fit for a bard archtype as it all about traveling and knowing things. The ability to shift proficiencies as well s being able to adapt more readily is the hallmark of the bard. The biggest takeaway is that such a character would be pretty mixed and powerful overall.

The Awakened makes me think of an enlightened monk, seeking to fully unite their physical and mental abilities wholly. The very epitome of what many people do think of monks. It would also allow them more adaptability to break standard cookie cutter and be more flexible power wise.

A Soul Knife was a very obvious psychic thief focused on assassination, and this edition looks little changed. This archtype would be everything that I imagine for a psychic rogue. Concealable weapons that can be drawn in an instant and are soundless? Check. Improved and improvable combat abilities? Check. If you stack rogue sneak attack damage on top of a honed and psionically enhanced weapon/s, that is pretty much an instant kill.

A psionicist, while defined by their preference of power types, is not what I am feeling here. These comes across much more readily as if they are tests for multiple class archtypes under the guise of a main character class. My main reasoning is this, while the bones of the mystic class are pretty good overall, it does lack a finishing polish and balance. Looking at the layout of current classes, many of them have arcane or divine spell casting archtypes available. These also tend to be ones that people seem to enjoy, and I can think of very few complaints people have about their composition.

Now historically, because it was only one class or multiple classes using same separate mechanic, psionics has been slow to be adapted if at all.

Now, If you wanted a mechanic to work really well and be widely adopted, well the easiest method would be to cast a wide net and adapt your mechanics to old classes. Minimal work for maximum return. Is it still a considerable effort that may not be adopted? Yes. But what if that mechanic made it easier to adopt new IPs to your existing overall mechanics model? Say a property like Star Wars, that has been in their hands before. Many people have already been talking up making Jedi. Perhaps you would prefer a superhero game? What was the name of those superheroes that could grow and shrink? Wasn't there a few superheroes that had powers that would be considered bestial? Oh, and what is the name of the company that owns a few IPs that might easily make use of such a system of mechanics? Disney.

This could be a good play for the long game and put WotC in a position that they have not seen in a long time. Market Superiority. Just my theory and my take, but it feels like the right direction they are taking.

[Newtonsolo313]

The Nomad is a great fit for a bard archtype as it all about traveling and knowing things. The ability to shift proficiencies as well s being able to adapt more readily is the hallmark of the bard. The biggest takeaway is that such a character would be pretty mixed and powerful overall.


no not really i feel that if you actually gave them access to the nomadic disciplines you would have a very weird character. now if you gave them to a rogue you would have a much cooler character. especially considering the skillset of the nomad looks like its very good at stealing knowledge than seeking it as they get a lot of abilities that let them avoid detection as well as not falling for magical tricks as well as having combat abilities that would do well to counter a mage.

like if a nomad fights a mage a nomad can teleport beyond the range of there spells and shoot them from that range while empowering there shots since mages generally have crap ac so you hit often making a to hit bonus less useful than a damage bonus and since they don't get a range disadvantage they are fine at 120+ feet away plus the high burst damage of speed dart means you drop the mage quickly

[Typhon]

no not really i feel that if you actually gave them access to the nomadic disciplines you would have a very weird character. now if you gave them to a rogue you would have a much cooler character. especially considering the skillset of the nomad looks like its very good at stealing knowledge than seeking it as they get a lot of abilities that let them avoid detection as well as not falling for magical tricks as well as having combat abilities that would do well to counter a mage.

like if a nomad fights a mage a nomad can teleport beyond the range of there spells and shoot them from that range while empowering there shots since mages generally have crap ac so you hit often making a to hit bonus less useful than a damage bonus and since they don't get a range disadvantage they are fine at 120+ feet away plus the high burst damage of speed dart means you drop the mage quickly

True it isn't like there is a trope of wandering minstrels or anything. Neither is there anything about wandering persons with wondrous knowledge that can speak any language they want fluently. Only those that squish or gish. I am not saying they don't have abilities really useful for the rogue, but for the fluff it is bard.

[Newtonsolo313]

True it isn't like there is a trope of wandering minstrels or anything. Neither is there anything about wandering persons with wondrous knowledge that can speak any language they want fluently. Only those that squish or gish. I am not saying they don't have abilities really useful for the rogue, but for the fluff it is bard.
there is also a trope of gypsys you know being pickpockets:smallwink:

anyway there is also explicit fluff about an order of the nomad sneaking past guards and scribing down books which is a lot less bard and a lot more rogue(its pretty obvious its a nomad) and honestly the core mechanic of the nomad isn't its large library of skills its the teleportation in 3.5 the nomad discipline was for the school for teleportation spells and nowendays it doesn't have the sort of long range transport spells that its namesake had instead opting for more mobility
TLDR; bard is a poor fit for a nomad

[Typhon]

there is also a trope of gypsys you know being pickpockets:smallwink:

anyway there is also explicit fluff about an order of the nomad sneaking past guards and scribing down books which is a lot less bard and a lot more rogue(its pretty obvious its a nomad) and honestly the core mechanic of the nomad isn't its large library of skills its the teleportation in 3.5 the nomad discipline was for the school for teleportation spells and nowendays it doesn't have the sort of long range transport spells that its namesake had instead opting for more mobility
TLDR; bard is a poor fit for a nomad

If we are going by 3.5 then lets go back to 2 where it wasn't called nomad, it was called psychoportative. 3.x was just fluffing a wizards as psionics. 2 had better powers and a much better feel. So many issues when they switched to the 3.x psionics. Plus I have an issue with the metacreative as it was just such a skeezy way of making a non-arcane/non-divine summoner. Lastly, like I keep being informed for some odd reason, this isn't 3.5.

In 2, it was pretty much an odd mixed class that allowed you to play a fighter/thief/mage without having to multi or dual class. If we really want to get going, bard used to carry many of the exact same skills, even in 3.x. You could take the same skills in this edition, nothing is stopping you. I am not saying you can't MC, like so many other people do. I am just saying that the fluff doesn't match the rogue as laid out, it matches the bard.

Laid out as is, judging by disciplines, it is meant to be more of a ranged character. You know like a bard tends to be as a buffer/magic user and not a stabby, like a rogue. Do people make stabby bards? Yes. Would it work that way? Yes. Do rogues need what would look like another archtype? No. Does it look and fit the bard best fluff for fluff compared to the other archtypes given? Yes.

[Newtonsolo313]

If we are going by 3.5 then lets go back to 2 where it wasn't called nomad, it was called psychoportative. 3.x was just fluffing a wizards as psionics. 2 had better powers and a much better feel. So many issues when they switched to the 3.x psionics. Plus I have an issue with the metacreative as it was just such a skeezy way of making a non-arcane/non-divine summoner. Lastly, like I keep being informed for some odd reason, this isn't 3.5.

In 2, it was pretty much an odd mixed class that allowed you to play a fighter/thief/mage without having to multi or dual class. If we really want to get going, bard used to carry many of the exact same skills, even in 3.x. You could take the same skills in this edition, nothing is stopping you. I am not saying you can't MC, like so many other people do. I am just saying that the fluff doesn't match the rogue as laid out, it matches the bard.

Laid out as is, judging by disciplines, it is meant to be more of a ranged character. You know like a bard tends to be as a buffer/magic user and not a stabby, like a rogue. Do people make stabby bards? Yes. Would it work that way? Yes. Do rogues need what would look like another archtype? No. Does it look and fit the bard best fluff for fluff compared to the other archtypes given? Yes. I'm gonna be honest i meant more as a shooty rogue(do those exist or did they do something to make them impossible) like Robin Hood or Haley.
Unless 5e has some rogue feature that makes it impossible
Also nomads don't have any buffing disciplines

But anyways I'd rather not even have it be an archetype I mean there is only one class that can really be called an archer class and that's not even really an archer. I feel that having the sort of mobility that nomad gets and it's ability to just ignore range increments brings an interesting character concept online that can't be fully replicated by any of the classes we have so far.

[Mortis_Elrod]

I like the idea of testing the mechanics for a Mystic class, which will be more psionic mastery stuff focused, alot more castery and the rest being archetypes they introduce to different classes. a few ideas, going for flavor and avoiding full casters.

Avatar- very support in nature could go with base class of mystic and have another support focused character to the game. If the Mystic has archetypes other than this to choose tho.. I'd give this to the barbarian. I know i know, at first it seems odd, but when you look at it this way..: avatar is all about emotion, the most emotional class in the game has got to be Barbarian. I mean THE RAGE. thats there thing. However it could go to the monk too. Using your discipline and training you can control not only your emotions but the emotions of others. seems cool to me. Monk/Barbarian.


Awakened: If there's a base mystic in this i think its this one. I doubt this would go to another class, and since no appreciated the theurge wizard, i doubt they'd appreciate any more spellcasting mixing. (though i think of the wu'jen when i type this. I think its different. less than 1/3rd casting there. ). Basic Mystic

Immortal: Well this one is weird. Its almost like the monk but the monk said the body is already a weapon and the immortal said "Thats a not a knife. " *makes arm a shortsword* "THIS IS A KNIFE". I kinda think that they are yin and yang so monk is crossed off. Who else wants to be immortal? Barbarian for certain and while his could be really cool i think zealot and frenzy barbarian kinda of cover this. Fighter? sure simple easy. But i think this would be better as its own class or sub of a half-psionic class. No psionic mastery, maybe half the disciplines (but same choices), extra attack and...someone else can make that. Psychic Warrior.

Nomad: This is really cool flavor wise and it seems to fit alot of different concepts. But again the monk is the first think i think of. Now not ever wandering nomad is a monk, but alot of times they are. I'd stop here if i wanted to encourage the most mobile class ever imagined, teleporting and sprinting like the wind with abandon, but i think it also fits the rogue. Rogue in alot of ways is a greedy class. Greed in a lose term, but greed nonetheless. Its there in existing archetypes too, swashbucklers are built to use two weapons easier than others by maintaining their bonus action instead of disengage, thats like cheating on your action taxes. Oh and its also the archetype for the standard pirate. Arcane tricksters are masters of mage hand thievery and stealing arcane knowledge. And i could go on but i think you get the point. Nomads are OBSESSED with the noosphere and unraveling secrets. Knowledge is power. Treasure. nothing better to steal than that in my eyes. nothing better to hoard either. But this could also be a cool Ranger Conclave. On the hunt, in pursuit of greater knowledge. Ranger's are THE traveler. They roam. There home isn't just one spot (though they may have a favorite). Rangers are seekers, and nomadic in nature. I kinda see how a bard can fit but meh not enough. Rogue/Ranger/Monk

Soul knife: Honestly I'm a little biased here, (more than usual) i loved the the class in 3.5 though i wish it wasn't ...well Bad. So i kinda want this in its own class or in the same one as the immortal. Currently its a very simple flavor of mystic. They want a super cool mindblade instead of UNTOLD KNOWLEDGE. Super cool for a rogue fit, easy win for a monk, can work with fighter too. Also might work weirdly with barbarian (fly into rage, suddenly you have a giant glowing axe made of pure ANGER). I think its best with the Psychic Warrior though. Psychic Warrior/Rogue/Monk/Fighter

Wu'jen: It's weird that the avatar isn't the avatar, if you're looking to play Aang or Korra take the last door on your left. I can't really think of another place for this class than the mystic base. Flavor wise I'd guess at AGAIN monk, but more Druid. I could see a Druid rebuilding a forest or creating a weird area where all the ecosystems exist extremely close to another. Then spending his life maintaining it. Wizard already has a god complex AND an isolation policy so yeah there's that but that's like a Wizard Wizard. which would be weird. Basic Mystic/Druid

[Newtonsolo313]

I like the idea of testing the mechanics for a Mystic class, which will be more psionic mastery stuff focused, alot more castery and the rest being archetypes they introduce to different classes. a few ideas, going for flavor and avoiding full casters.

Avatar- very support in nature could go with base class of mystic and have another support focused character to the game. If the Mystic has archetypes other than this to choose tho.. I'd give this to the barbarian. I know i know, at first it seems odd, but when you look at it this way..: avatar is all about emotion, the most emotional class in the game has got to be Barbarian. I mean THE RAGE. thats there thing. However it could go to the monk too. Using your discipline and training you can control not only your emotions but the emotions of others. seems cool to me. Monk/Barbarian.


Awakened: If there's a base mystic in this i think its this one. I doubt this would go to another class, and since no appreciated the theurge wizard, i doubt they'd appreciate any more spellcasting mixing. (though i think of the wu'jen when i type this. I think its different. less than 1/3rd casting there. ). Basic Mystic

Immortal: Well this one is weird. Its almost like the monk but the monk said the body is already a weapon and the immortal said "Thats a not a knife. " *makes arm a shortsword* "THIS IS A KNIFE". I kinda think that they are yin and yang so monk is crossed off. Who else wants to be immortal? Barbarian for certain and while his could be really cool i think zealot and frenzy barbarian kinda of cover this. Fighter? sure simple easy. But i think this would be better as its own class or sub of a half-psionic class. No psionic mastery, maybe half the disciplines (but same choices), extra attack and...someone else can make that. Psychic Warrior.

Nomad: This is really cool flavor wise and it seems to fit alot of different concepts. But again the monk is the first think i think of. Now not ever wandering nomad is a monk, but alot of times they are. I'd stop here if i wanted to encourage the most mobile class ever imagined, teleporting and sprinting like the wind with abandon, but i think it also fits the rogue. Rogue in alot of ways is a greedy class. Greed in a lose term, but greed nonetheless. Its there in existing archetypes too, swashbucklers are built to use two weapons easier than others by maintaining their bonus action instead of disengage, thats like cheating on your action taxes. Oh and its also the archetype for the standard pirate. Arcane tricksters are masters of mage hand thievery and stealing arcane knowledge. And i could go on but i think you get the point. Nomads are OBSESSED with the noosphere and unraveling secrets. Knowledge is power. Treasure. nothing better to steal than that in my eyes. nothing better to hoard either. But this could also be a cool Ranger Conclave. On the hunt, in pursuit of greater knowledge. Ranger's are THE traveler. They roam. There home isn't just one spot (though they may have a favorite). Rangers are seekers, and nomadic in nature. I kinda see how a bard can fit but meh not enough. Rogue/Ranger/Monk

Soul knife: Honestly I'm a little biased here, (more than usual) i loved the the class in 3.5 though i wish it wasn't ...well Bad. So i kinda want this in its own class or in the same one as the immortal. Currently its a very simple flavor of mystic. They want a super cool mindblade instead of UNTOLD KNOWLEDGE. Super cool for a rogue fit, easy win for a monk, can work with fighter too. Also might work weirdly with barbarian (fly into rage, suddenly you have a giant glowing axe made of pure ANGER). I think its best with the Psychic Warrior though. Psychic Warrior/Rogue/Monk/Fighter

Wu'jen: It's weird that the avatar isn't the avatar, if you're looking to play Aang or Korra take the last door on your left. I can't really think of another place for this class than the mystic base. Flavor wise I'd guess at AGAIN monk, but more Druid. I could see a Druid rebuilding a forest or creating a weird area where all the ecosystems exist extremely close to another. Then spending his life maintaining it. Wizard already has a god complex AND an isolation policy so yeah there's that but that's like a Wizard Wizard. which would be weird. Basic Mystic/Druid
There is some bard in a nomad as it has some similar spellcasting abilities like identify
Also a nomad probably likes bards and hates wizards cause they are all abou sharing knowledge you can learn there secrets with a flagon of ale while wizards hoard it behind magic traps

[Mortis_Elrod]

There is some bard in a nomad as it has some similar spellcasting abilities like identify
Also a nomad probably likes bards and hates wizards cause they are all about sharing knowledge you can learn there secrets with a flagon of ale while wizards hoard it behind magic traps

Well, nothing in the description of nomads really alludes to sharing knowledge....
Yes identify, how could i forget, the most iconic bard spell. Nothing compares in showcassing a bard's spell casting ability like the spell Identify!

seriously though thats hardly bardly. Nomadic Mind is in its entirety more compared to a Divination Wizard or even Knowledge cleric.

[jaappleton]

I, too, think the Mystic will be divided up into two or three different classes. Have one class encompassing ALL of this is simply too much. Its also how I think the more melee oriented archetypes will get their Extra Attack feature.

[Garret Dorigan]

Strangely enough, I made a post about this back in the dark speculative times of 2014, about what I would expect or want to see from classes and whatnot. It doesn't fit exactly, but for prosperity before I continue:

2014-10-15, 01:12 AM what concepts do you think would need a new class to be made? (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?376383-what-concepts-do-you-think-would-need-a-new-class-to-be-made)

My thought is that when it comes to the introduction of new classes WotC will either take a route quite similar to Pathfinder and release an "Advanced Class and Concepts Guide/Player's Handbook 2", or will slowly introduce new class concepts in campaign setting material and such.

To answer the main question of the thread title, concepts that are iconically different (Psionics), mechanically too dissimilar (Incarnum, Artifice, Aura based classes), or are a mashup of existing concepts that cannot fit correctly on an existing chassis.

I see Psionics fitting into both the iconic and mashup categories. They have been different, so they will be different... but I see it happening much like a mixture of the mechanics of the Monk's Ki system mixed with the Sorcerer Point system. Incarnum I see as a long shot for representation, unless someone in WotC D&D design really has a hard on for it, but it's a simple idea to be represented within 5e mechanics; a short list of things that you can only have a certain number of, and you move points from a standard pool between them. Kinda a mixture of Invocations and the Bender-esque Monk stuff. I see Artifice as it was being a sticky concept in 5e mechanics, but the idea of "magic that is actually mundane meets technology" is an iconic one... it would just have to have an entirely new representation of it, methinks.

Then you get into class themes, so to represent Psionics I see there being two classes; the Psion, and the Wilder. The themes come out in the available sub-classes for both, the Psion's in how her mental prowess effects the world around her (Kineticist: Change, Telepath: Influence, Shaper: Create) with each adding a list of available Psion powers and associated abilities, and the Wilder's in how her mental prowess affects herself (Battlemind: Physical, Ardent: Emotional, Elocater: Physiological). I'd like to see, using the above examples, the Wilder get a Psycrystal as one of the base class abilities to represent a portion of her mildly broken psychology.

If Incarnum gets represented again, I can only see one class for it with a couple sub-classes; steal the better name of "Soulborn" with the sub-classes being a mishmash of Jungian and Athenian concepts with previous edition concepts (Incarnate: Psyche and self betterment, Wraith [read- mangled Shadowcaster]: Jung's "Shadow" theory and the mysteries of the unconscious, and Binder: people who mess with others' soul alignment) because having esoteric ideas from the real world represented weirdly in in-game themes is something D&D is known for.

Then there's the rest... An Artifice class will look at the inclusion of some sort of clockwork, alchemy, and infusions. Aura based classes in the Shaman (Dragon, Spirit, Beast) and some sort of Marshal. Generalized ideas here, obviously.

But that's just me thought boxing, and I'm sure that I'll be wrong. I am more than certain Psionics will be represented, James Wyatt is still around so there's a small chance Incarnum may in some way, an Artifice based class is almost assured due to Eberron still being a thing, and Aura based classes would be cool but they would have to be playtested extensively since the idea is so anathema to the current structure of 5e mechanics.

Bolded parts for emphasis in that spoiler.

Back to the topic at hand, most of it still fits for what I'm thinking will be the case, if this thought of Mystic=Mage comes to be true, minus some of the names, obviously (Elocater=Nomad, Ardent=Avatar, Battlemind=Psychic Warrior). I was dead wrong about the Ki Point/Sorcerer Point system, though, and considering the complexity that is the current Mystic, I can see it definitely become three classes as was laid out by Steampunkette, not just the two that I mention.

In that regard, I'd say/like to see the Psion, Wilder, and Psychic Warrior as those three classes, with the Psion having archetypes similar to what I wrote those years ago, the Wilder consisting of the Nomad, Avatar, and Wu Jen, and the Psychic Warrior consisting of the Immortal and Soul Knife. That'd be pretty cool by my own approximation, but obviously I'm biased. :smalltongue:

[Newtonsolo313]

I, too, think the Mystic will be divided up into two or three different classes. Have one class encompassing ALL of this is simply too much. Its also how I think the more melee oriented archetypes will get their Extra Attack feature.

Oh yeah that's definitely the best way to keep the same flavor

[Typhon]

Truthfully, I do see them bringing out multiple psionic classes but I can honestly say that I don't see psychic warrior being one of them. The most I see them doing is giving a wizard and sorcerer type, so psionicist/mystic and wilder. I believe they are honestly looking at it from the point of using archtypes to fill out the rest of peoples character desires.