Mystic will NOT be made official this year

[jaappleton]

https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/885973767435853824

It will still be added to DMs Guild, hopefully sometime this year (along with Artificer), but it won't become official, legal material this year.

[DracoKnight]

https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/885973767435853824

It will still be added to DMs Guild, hopefully sometime this year (along with Artificer), but it won't become official, legal material this year.

It's already on the DMs Guild! :smallbiggrin:

But this doesn't surprise me.

[Ninja-Radish]

This is probably for the best. The class is a horrendous mess right now and needs a ton of work before it's ready. I'm a huge fan of psionics and have played a psionic character in every edition since 2E, which is why I want them to take their time and do this right.

[Tetrasodium]

Good. gunsmith artificer is an abomination trying to to make up for FR's self inflicted spellplague wounds to places like lantan where they had guns & such & has no business existing in eberron where the current default x charges/day wands originated from in the form of eternal wands.

[Fishybugs]

This is the best news I've had all week. I've hated psionics since they were introduced. Granted, they're probably just fine, but I'm still prejudiced from days of old.

[JumboWheat01]

This is the best news I've had all week. I've hated psionics since they were introduced. Granted, they're probably just fine, but I'm still prejudiced from days of old.

"Back in my day, we had to find a scroll with a spell on it, study it, and MAYBE learn it good enough to put in our books, then sleep on the spell before we could even cast it!" Something like that, eh? :smalltongue:


I'm glad it's going to get more work. I'll admit I found it a bit complicated, especially for 5e, but I do hope to see a nicely polished version some day to try out.

[Tanarii]

Good. Every version of psionics released for a D&D edition has been a mess. This one didn't look to be any different so far. The longer there's nothing official out there, the better.

Psionics destroyed Dark Sun for me, which was otherwise an awesome setting.

[lunaticfringe]

Meh. Psionics has just been magic without components when we use it in 5e. You have a Tell though, which is some sort of strange effect when you used your powers. Glowy Eyes, strange noises, etc, etc. With refluffs and minor spell list tweaks it works great.

[Hypersmith]

Psyonics are an interesting concept I want to try to explore, but mystic just covers too many bases. I think it's good that they can hopefully focus on Artificer fix first.

[furby076]

So much hate and most of that is of psionics past. No really, some of you guys just said that. Listen, if you dont lije it, dont use it...but stop yucking my yum :)

It needs a bit more work, but its almost there.

I think some powers should be more visible, but stuff like mind control....doesnt make sense to be visible.

[Tanarii]

So much hate and most of that is of psionics past. No really, some of you guys just said that. Listen, if you dont lije it, dont use it...but stop yucking my yum :)The problem is historically, your yum has yucked up all sorts of things for everyone else. That's because when something gets an official stamp of approval, it shows up all over the place.

Thats one reason I'm glad 5e has been so splat free. "don't use it" isn't a reasonable position to take when something is everywhere. Look at the GWM/SS Feats, an 'optional' rule. Or look at SCAG's Booming Blade and GFB. They're public play legal, yucking up everything for everyone.

[Temperjoke]

I'm not surprised that Mystic won't be out this year. I mean, it's a completely different system of doing things. I hope they take as long with Artificer too, I'm not happy with how it's designed either.

[ATHATH]

Good. Every version of psionics released for a D&D edition has been a mess. This one didn't look to be any different so far. The longer there's nothing official out there, the better.
Hey, 3.5 (NOT 3.0) did it pretty well- as well as a spellcasting class in a spellcasting-biased system can be done, at least.

Personally, I actually liked the Mystic, and am slightly saddened to see that we won't get an official revised/improved version this year. Ah well, there's always next year (or is there? DUN DUN DUUUUUUUUUNNNN).

[agnos]

Hey, 3.5 (NOT 3.0) did it pretty well- as well as a spellcasting class in a spellcasting-biased system can be done, at least.
That's something I agree with to some extent. But there were problems with 3.5 psionics too. Expanded Talent (or whichever feat let you steal a power from another list) was pretty absurd for its ability to give you that one niche power you needed. There were a number of absurd powers too: Crystal Shard, Ego Whip, Empathic Feedback, and Astral Construct were all busted. Wilder made things even worse for their ability to surge to absolutely insane levels. Soulknife was a terrible class no one should ever take. The mechanic (which is basically spell points) was perfectly fine; probably even more balanced imo than spells. The whole package wasn't.

[Specter]

And Thank God.

[Kite474]

Ah well heres to hoping they can polish it up a bit.

Also to all the folks bitching about Psionics you people are just sad.

[Telwar]

Not surprising in the least, for various reasons.

I can certainly see them splitting it into a, say, battlemind and a mystic. But on the whole I think it's generally pretty good.

[Millstone85]

I'm glad it's going to get more work. I'll admit I found it a bit complicated, especially for 5e, but I do hope to see a nicely polished version some day to try out.I would sum up the third mystic UA like this:
* Your cantrips are called talents.
* The rest of your spells are called disciplines. They are all the same level but can be upcast to great effects.
* Instead of spell slots, you have spell points much like in the DMG, only they are called psi points.
* True novelty for 5e, the stance mechanic called Psychic Focus. Whenever you learn a new discipline, you also learn a new stance that comes with it but isn't otherwise bound to it. You can only be in one stance at a time, switching between them as a bonus action.
* None of that counts as a spell, but all counts as magic. Thus, counterspell doesn't work against psionics, but antimagic field does.

Then there is the subclasses:
* Order of the Soul Knife is the martial subclass, as expected.
* Order of the Wu Jen is the elemental subclass, with a bit of regular arcane spellcasting too.
* Order of the Nomad completes the fighter-mage-thief triad, by being skilled and mobile.
* Order of the Avatar is the buff-debuff subclass, with the fluff of a master of emotions.
* Order of the Immortal just means you are really hard to kill.
* Order of the Awakened does more of the typical psionic stuff.

I find this overall picture pretty satisfying, and I wouldn't mind if WotC devoted half a book to psionic subclasses for already existing classes. That too would take time, of course.

[mephnick]

I'd be fine with psionics if they required a "tell". Subtle spell for every ability just because MIND POWERZ is so unbalanced it's stupid. Not to mention psionics has always just been "magic, but better for no reason" with crappy fluff to back it up. I mean, it won't effect me cause I won't be using it but it's still bad design.

[Ninja-Radish]

The problem is historically, your yum has yucked up all sorts of things for everyone else. That's because when something gets an official stamp of approval, it shows up all over the place.

Thats one reason I'm glad 5e has been so splat free. "don't use it" isn't a reasonable position to take when something is everywhere. Look at the GWM/SS Feats, an 'optional' rule. Or look at SCAG's Booming Blade and GFB. They're public play legal, yucking up everything for everyone.

Sorry, but outside of 2E, that's just not the case. Also "historically" the most broken characters are always Wizards. I have yet to play in a campaign that wasn't ruined by the arcane caster. Yet old timers like you conveniently forget that and spew hate at psionics.

[Millstone85]

I'd be fine with psionics if they required a "tell". Subtle spell for every ability just because MIND POWERZ is so unbalanced it's stupid.How about a big neon sign around the head?

https://i.warosu.org/data/tg/thumb/0151/23/1306928441027s.jpg

No, seriously, a visible halo is a pretty flavorful way to balance this.

https://vignette3.wikia.nocookie.net/dnd4/images/4/46/Battlemind.jpg

4e battlemind, more obviously magical than a paladin with a holy shield.

[Typhon]

Well that is good to hear. As long when when it comes out it is complete and feels like a singular class. Right now the sub-classes each feel like they belong to other classes.

When it is released, I honestly hope they include another class or two and character options for the existing ones. It is only right.

While I do understand the hate psionics has garnered due to past editions, I do believe much of it is unwarranted. If played as intended it was balanced. It did alter the power curve where wizards were undisputed power mongers at later levels and had possible ability to fight as equally as a fighter early on. But the power cost was pretty sizable over time. 3.0 was a mess due to design and.ability score oddity. 3.5 was better, but just a re-skinned wizard. 4 was just odd, but it worked for that system. For 5, I really want it to fit and not be held completely at odds with the rest of the game.

[MeeposFire]

Sorry, but outside of 2E, that's just not the case. Also "historically" the most broken characters are always Wizards. I have yet to play in a campaign that wasn't ruined by the arcane caster. Yet old timers like you conveniently forget that and spew hate at psionics.

IT did not help that 1e and 2e psionics had numerous problems. 2e was less overall broken in terms of power generally but the mechanics were not the best leading them to make several variations of mechanics to try to address the issue.

3e's original version of psionics were cool but also a mess being the most MAD caster of all time in the psion.

Thankfully 3.5 did make an excellent version of psionics though the bad news for those who liked that system is that they essentially ported it to 5e as spellcasting with some minor changes.

4e psionics were very functional. There was a tendency to keep the lower level powers in many classes because those just happened to be the best but they worked fine.

Psionics has always had some niche support and could be a lot of fun even in the old days (the 2e psionics books is a fun one to read with lots of jokes) but I am surprised when I hear people from those older times that have issues with psionics due to their experiences because psionics in pre 3.5 were often times varying levels of a mess.

[Tanarii]

I agree about 4e being better than most other Psionics systems. It wasn't horribly broken in terms of being almost unusable, nor does it seriously mess up the rest of the system. So I stand corrected / proven wrong. Psionics isn't inherently/automatically a bad thing. 4e did an okay job. Which proves it's possible to do an okay job. But the design constraints of the 4e system made outliers in terms of unnecessary complexity, and for that matter power variance, compared to other classes of the system, hard to achieve unintentionally.

And yes Ninja Radish, 3e wizards and clerics were also fairly broken in terms of power. The Tier system for classes came into place in that edition for a reason. But the primary point isn't power levels, although in some cases that's an issue. It's that Psionics it historically a messy-ass system that screws with other systems in place. It's historically been a bolt-on that requires drilling too many bolt holes right through other things, messing them up.

Edit:

How about a big neon sign around the head?It's a cool idea, especially if it's while using the powers. Visual and auditory manisfestiations. Possible with some specific powers, types of powers, or subclass features removing them.

------------
Man, you guys are making me want to go pull out all my old Psionics PDFs and review them for the stuff I found cool. Because don't get me wrong, despite disliking he messiness of the various systems and knee jerking because I felt like the mystic was going back down that route, I think Psionics are a cool concept that can work. Especially with the Far Realm / abominations association.

[Nettlekid]

I would sum up the third mystic UA like this:
* Your cantrips are called talents.
* The rest of your spells are called disciplines. They are all the same level but can be upcast to great effects.
* Instead of spell slots, you have spell points much like in the DMG, only they are called psi points.
* True novelty for 5e, the stance mechanic called Psychic Focus. Whenever you learn a new discipline, you also learn a new stance that comes with it but isn't otherwise bound to it. You can only be in one stance at a time, switching between them as a bonus action.
* None of that counts as a spell, but all counts as magic. Thus, counterspell doesn't work against psionics, but antimagic field does.

Then there is the subclasses:
* Order of the Soul Knife is the martial subclass, as expected.
* Order of the Wu Jen is the elemental subclass, with a bit of regular arcane spellcasting too.
* Order of the Nomad completes the fighter-mage-thief triad, by being skilled and mobile.
* Order of the Avatar is the buff-debuff subclass, with the fluff of a master of emotions.
* Order of the Immortal just means you are really hard to kill.
* Order of the Awakened does more of the typical psionic stuff.

I find this overall picture pretty satisfying, and I wouldn't mind if WotC devoted half a book to psionic subclasses for already existing classes. That too would take time, of course.

I just wish that all Disciplines weren't available to all Orders. I recognize that the intention is to allow mix-and-matching, but really it just makes the class ripe for cherry-picking. Since the Disciplines have a lot of meat to them they're really a big part of the class, and making them accessible to all Orders means that the Order ends up mattering less than your Discipline choices. Plus since the Disciplines and Orders are so thematically linked, they really should be mechanically linked too. The way it is now, it would be like having a Cleric pick whatever Domain they want but then choose a different expanded spell list. A Life Domain Cleric with the Trickery Domain's spells, that's the same feeling as an Order of the Nomad taking the Wu Jen and Soul Knife Disciplines. I think a better way to balance it would be to give every Mystic access to one Disciplines from their Order every odd level up to 10, and then maybe at levels 5, 10, and 15 also allow them to access one that isn't from their Order, reflecting a widened mind but only to some extent. That way you frontload the abilities so that you have a good variety to choose from early in the game which is always fun and gives each Mystic a structured customization in that you'll find the same Disciplines across an Order but which of those any Mystic has may be up in the air, and later on gives each individual Mystic a chance to individualize while retaining the core of their order.

[Steampunkette]

I'm glad the Mystic won't be made official.

I eagerly await, however, the Psion and the Psychic Warrior.

'Cause I still stand by the idea that the whole "Mystic" class is a grab-bag of abilities in the same way "Mage" was a grab-bag of Wizard, Sorc, Warlock, and Bard.

There's some -great- potential in the class, with some interesting new mechanics. It's just a matter of getting them divvied up correctly.

As to the "Psionics is just magic without the finger wiggling!" well... yeah? So is Alchemy. So is Technology. So are superpowers like the ability to launch 9 attacks in a 6 second period. Your point? It's all about plot elements and different sociological trappings, but when you break it down it's all the same thing done in different ways. The mechanical differences between Arcane and Divine spellcasting are essentially nonexistent with the only REAL difference between the two being the setting conceit of magic coming from gods or concepts rather than being an underlying function of reality.

Psionics have a long history in Fantasy and Sci-Fi. And while generally not as popular in Fantasy as Magic (if only because of their sociological identification with Science Fiction) they work just fine as an alternate power source within basically any narrative.

As to previous editions handlings of Psionics as compared to magic: Due to the conceit of magic being standard and psionics being nonstandard, any attempt to create a psionic system has been either a minimal addition to the core rulebook, or a significantly later addition to the edition. It was always going to be the Harry Potter living with the Durselys. But this edition's psionic mechanics are, in my not so humble opinion, the first sign that we might see Psionics hit Hogwarts.

If you'll excuse the strained metaphor, of course.

[Millstone85]

It's a cool idea, especially if it's while using the powers. Visual and auditory manisfestiations. Possible with some specific powers, types of powers, or subclass features removing them.I don't remember if 4e ever commented on that aspect of its illustrations, but I would indeed assume the halo is only this manifest when the psionic character is using their powers. You would look ridiculous, or mighty suspicious, with that around your head when you are just sitting at the inn.


Man, you guys are making me want to go pull out all my old Psionics PDFs and review them for the stuff I found cool. Because don't get me wrong, despite disliking he messiness of the various systems and knee jerking because I felt like the mystic was going back down that route, I think Psionics are a cool concept that can work. Especially with the Far Realm / abominations association.I am not averse to the Far Realm association, but it doesn't surprise me that it disappeared between the second and third UA. A lot of people seemed to misunderstand the connection, or just find it jarring with pre-4e lore.


The way it is now, it would be like having a Cleric pick whatever Domain they want but then choose a different expanded spell list.I think it is meant to be like an evoker picking illusion spells, but yeah I see how a couple bonus disciplines from your order might not be enough to feel like there is a connection.


I'm glad the Mystic won't be made official.

I eagerly await, however, the Psion and the Psychic Warrior.This year. It won't be made official this year. But you can still hope for that division.

[Nicrosil]

I agree with Steampunkette; I like the psionics system, but I feel like the Mystic itself is too broad. It's a jack of all trades, master of all, even more so than the Bard. To use a term from 3.5 days, the Mystic is a Tier 2 class; with sufficient time and resources the class could do and excel at anything.

I feel like if the Mystic becomes two classes, with maybe the Soul Knife switched to a fighter or monk archetype, and some Disciplines get reworked, I would be in love with psionics.

[JumboWheat01]

That may be the best thing for it. Dividing it between a "Full Caster" style and a "Half-Caster" style would make the class a little less broad and complicated.

[Millstone85]

I have to admit that my idea of an arcane half-caster might actually work better as a half-psionicist. Techniques, learned in ways that could pass for regular martial training, that suffuse both flesh and steel with magical might.

Also, I really hope Psionics and Ki will eventually be like Spellcasting and Pact Magic, i.e. sharing the same resource though regaining it differently.

[jaappleton]

I do believe the Mystic will be split up between the Mystic and the Psion.

One will be the Caster, one will be similar to a Half Caster.

[Ugganaut]

I agree with others, that this has a good chance to be great if they flesh it out more. Having Mystic without a clear role in its core features other than "build your own class" is fine to get the content out for play-testing, but not as a final system.

I've tried to replicate the feel of a Psychic Warrior with Immortal in one of our games, and the main issues the DM has in function, is it gives Subtle Spell(or aspects of War Caster feat) to every power, and not having somatic and material components. Some of the more impactful spells (eg Revivify/Raise Dead) have a gp cost, which psionics doesn't have. That's a major advantage. I liked the divine barbarian removing the need for material components to bring him back to life, but that applies only to him, not to the caster using those spells on anyone. Would also be happy if they left raising the dead to the divine(mostly).

I don't like the idea of a halo covering all visuals, although it would suit Mantles. There used to be visual or audio cues varying by each power, would like to see that again, with a cheap way to remove them for a cost(like Subtle spell).

Love the idea of putting things like Soulknife into an archetype, and Psions having specializations like they used to(same as a Wizard). Makes it easier to lock off certain abilities by making them features - which is where some things belong both mechanically and for flavor.

I hate the name Mystic. Sounds like what a tribe would call a Psion, or a clairvoyant Psion/divination Wizard. Previous editions already have names most of us recognize, why they insist on messing with that is a mystery. And its not limited to psionics.

[SaurOps]

I hate the name Mystic. Sounds like what a tribe would call a Psion, or a clairvoyant Psion/divination Wizard. Previous editions already have names most of us recognize, why they insist on messing with that is a mystery. And its not limited to psionics.

Well, psionics are magic in 5e, and the monk was psionic in the last edition, so WotC might be trying to make them an easier sell to people who might have issues with a Weird Fiction setting that slams sci-fi together with fantasy. Hence, a non-scifi name*. It's not actually a new approach; the AD&D 2e Complete Psionics Handbook mentioned psi being like Zen, and that they were probably cribbing off of South and East Asian folk tales for at least part of the book. They nearly flat out said that they were doing it on page 113.

* And let's be serious, here; why would any of the book-reading folk who work magic see it and immediately jump to the conclusion of "developed brain powers"? Especially if they're also familiar with ki-using characters?

[Steampunkette]

Ki is the use of one's inner spirit or life force.

Magic is using an external force through words and gestures and objects or prayer.

Psionics is using the power of the mind, directly.

These three things are functionally similar, but conceptually distinct. And in D&D the last one is as known as the first two, at least among sages and adventurers, because Mind Flayers and Intellect Devourers exist. Creatures who can't be Counterspelled to stop their insidious abilities from sliding against your thoughts...

I'd honestly prefer the term Psionics in D&D to "Mystics" and "Mysticism" because those two terms are so broad you could fit nearly any concept you like into them. Too diffuse, it lacks any core identity, y'know?

Also I'm still really salty they made Monks "Psionic" last edition. It really gummed up the works on making things distinct and unique.

[toapat]

I agree with Steampunkette; I like the psionics system, but I feel like the Mystic itself is too broad. It's a jack of all trades, master of all, even more so than the Bard. To use a term from 3.5 days, the Mystic is a Tier 2 class; with sufficient time and resources the class could do and excel at anything.

I feel like if the Mystic becomes two classes, with maybe the Soul Knife switched to a fighter or monk archetype, and some Disciplines get reworked, I would be in love with psionics.


That may be the best thing for it. Dividing it between a "Full Caster" style and a "Half-Caster" style would make the class a little less broad and complicated.

i feel like the specific solution is to make mystic into a Psionic fullcaster, and then Soul Knife a Rogue or Monk subclass, Immortal a Fighter subclass, and avatar could possibly become a Barbarian subclass or fighter subclass (but barb seems more awesome for this idea, Lead from the front Yo)

[JumboWheat01]

A barbarian psychic sounds like such a contradiction and I absolutely love it.

[SaurOps]

Ki is the use of one's inner spirit or life force.

Magic is using an external force through words and gestures and objects or prayer.

No, magic seems to just be magic, or anything that allows you to surpass normal physical limits. Spell magic is different from other forms of magic, much like in Earthdawn, which divides spells from general talents. Probably not for the same reasons, though they might sound really similar if you started articulating them.



Psionics is using the power of the mind, directly.

It seemed to go back and forth on that in prior editions, and always mentioned that psionics were an internal or inner energy. Which always sounded suspiciously similar to Ki, because the two are based on similar vitalistic principles, which is why the monk ended up as a psionic class in 4e.



These three things are functionally similar, but conceptually distinct. And in D&D the last one is as known as the first two, at least among sages and adventurers, because Mind Flayers and Intellect Devourers exist. Creatures who can't be Counterspelled to stop their insidious abilities from sliding against your thoughts...

I'd honestly prefer the term Psionics in D&D to "Mystics" and "Mysticism" because those two terms are so broad you could fit nearly any concept you like into them. Too diffuse, it lacks any core identity, y'know?

I'll grant most of that, but the other magical classes seem to be much more accepted and well-known in most D&D campaign worlds. The monk is admittedly a bit of an outlier in this.



Also I'm still really salty they made Monks "Psionic" last edition. It really gummed up the works on making things distinct and unique.

And now we have the Asian Power Source that is Ki. The only way out of that bad corner is to make ki-using subclasses for everyone, and that still raises the question of whether or not it has sufficient conceptual distance from psionics, which has a Wu Jen Order, which really needs a name from Chinese that makes sense. It's not as bad the botched Wade-Giles term for mages in the WoD, still just doesn't go together.

[Millstone85]

Ki is the use of one's inner spirit or life force.

Magic is using an external force through words and gestures and objects or prayer.

Psionics is using the power of the mind, directly.The current 5e lore, UA included, would call the second one spellcasting, and treat all three as different forms or approaches of magic.


Mind Flayers and Intellect Devourers exist. Creatures who can't be Counterspelled to stop their insidious abilities from sliding against your thoughts...An odd aspect of 5e is that psionics is already found in its books, as a type of innate spellcasting for monsters. I don't know if past editions went through a similar phase.

Even the "mind flayer psion" variant from VGtM simply describes illithids that "excel at using their innate psionic energy to duplicate the casting of spells". I hope such monsters will get an update when the psionic class or classes are officially released.

All three mystic UAs have included the concept of "a psionic effect that reproduces a spell", but the third one doesn't seem to actually offer any such discipline.


I'd honestly prefer the term Psionics in D&D to "Mystics" and "Mysticism" because those two terms are so broad you could fit nearly any concept you like into them. Too diffuse, it lacks any core identity, y'know?The UAs do not talk about mystics (other than as the plural of the class) or mysticism. It is still psionics.

Which only makes more jarring the class isn't called the psion. Well, maybe not. If we do end up with several classes that use psionics, wouldn't all of these characters be psionicists, or psions for short? Mystic would then be a name unique to the psionic equivalent of the wizard.

I do wonder if there was a better name, though.

[toapat]

A barbarian psychic sounds like such a contradiction and I absolutely love it.

especially when the use the Fury of Mind and Body combined

[Steampunkette]

No, magic seems to just be magic, or anything that allows you to surpass normal physical limits. Spell magic is different from other forms of magic, much like in Earthdawn, which divides spells from general talents. Probably not for the same reasons, though they might sound really similar if you started articulating them.

I should have specified "Spellcasting".


It seemed to go back and forth on that in prior editions, and always mentioned that psionics were an internal or inner energy. Which always sounded suspiciously similar to Ki, because the two are based on similar vitalistic principles, which is why the monk ended up as a psionic class in 4e.

For 1e through 3.5e Psionics were separate from Magic. They were Supernatural, sure, but they weren't magic. It only waffled in 4e and now to some degree in 5e. 3.5 had a touch of overlap, in that variant rules allowed Antimagic Field and similar effects to affect psionics, but that's as close as it got.

The "Inner Energy" part was the 4e explanation for Psionic Strength Points which were later reduced to PP which were probably to some degree the 3rd edition inspiration for Monks to get Ki. After all, back in 1e AD&D it was argued Monks should get more HP, a level cap increase to 21, and some Psionic Powers to increase their power level. In 2e, Monks were Priests with Divine Spellcasting. Later they had the option to give up Priestcasting for Psi Powers when the Complete Psi hit the shelves, which brings us to the Ki in place of PSP place.

Monks waffled between Divine and Psi because people couldn't figure out how to handle the Eastern Mysticism aspect of them. When 3e found Ki as an internal resevoir of power/life/whatever it worked great. We should keep it the unique thing it is.


I'll grant most of that, but the other magical classes seem to be much more accepted and well-known in most D&D campaign worlds.

Most. But not all. Planescape and Dark Sun are two that come to mind.


And now we have the Asian Power Source that is Ki. The only way out of that bad corner is to make ki-using subclasses for everyone, and that still raises the question of whether or not it has sufficient conceptual distance from psionics, which has a Wu Jen Order, which really needs a name from Chinese that makes sense. It's not as bad the botched Wade-Giles term for mages in the WoD, still just doesn't go together.

Or just leave Ki as a Monk-Exclusive thing? *shrugs* We don't need members of every class using every other class's abilities or sources. 4e really wanted to cover all it's bases like that, and that's why Monks got stuffed into Psionics. Wu Jen has been a class in at least one previous edition of D&D as a divine elemental spellcaster in the Oriental Adventures. I have no idea why they decided to make it a Psionic Discipline, to be honest.

[MeeposFire]

I should have specified "Spellcasting".



For 1e through 3.5e Psionics were separate from Magic. They were Supernatural, sure, but they weren't magic. It only waffled in 4e and now to some degree in 5e. 3.5 had a touch of overlap, in that variant rules allowed Antimagic Field and similar effects to affect psionics, but that's as close as it got.

The "Inner Energy" part was the 4e explanation for Psionic Strength Points which were later reduced to PP which were probably to some degree the 3rd edition inspiration for Monks to get Ki. After all, back in 1e AD&D it was argued Monks should get more HP, a level cap increase to 21, and some Psionic Powers to increase their power level. In 2e, Monks were Priests with Divine Spellcasting. Later they had the option to give up Priestcasting for Psi Powers when the Complete Psi hit the shelves, which brings us to the Ki in place of PSP place.

Monks waffled between Divine and Psi because people couldn't figure out how to handle the Eastern Mysticism aspect of them. When 3e found Ki as an internal resevoir of power/life/whatever it worked great. We should keep it the unique thing it is.



Most. But not all. Planescape and Dark Sun are two that come to mind.



Or just leave Ki as a Monk-Exclusive thing? *shrugs* We don't need members of every class using every other class's abilities or sources. 4e really wanted to cover all it's bases like that, and that's why Monks got stuffed into Psionics. Wu Jen has been a class in at least one previous edition of D&D as a divine elemental spellcaster in the Oriental Adventures. I have no idea why they decided to make it a Psionic Discipline, to be honest.

Honestly 3.5 psionics are really magic by another name. Unless you use the alternative rules (which most people do not and frankly it makes them weaker and more annoying in general anyway) it is magic with a couple changed rules (and even then it is really casting with just more rules exceptions). AD&D psionics were different enough to really feel different from casting even if it duplicated a magic effect (like disintegrate) due to their very different mechanics but 3.5 really has a feel like alternative casting. Heck they took most of it for 5e spell casting THAT is how similar it is and it feels similar enough that most people do not even complain.

I would also argue that if one were to consider 3.5e psionics not close to casting then you really cannot say that 4e psionics feel like casting considering that both have the same general premise (they both have a psinoic system that uses a similar stat block as what magic uses but has several important differences that define it as being different). I would say you can either say that 3e and 4e psionics are different from magic casting or that they are similar to casting after playing both they are both similar relative to their own systems.

[Steampunkette]

Honestly 3.5 psionics are really magic by another name. Unless you use the alternative rules (which most people do not and frankly it makes them weaker and more annoying in general anyway) it is magic with a couple changed rules (and even then it is really casting with just more rules exceptions). AD&D psionics were different enough to really feel different from casting even if it duplicated a magic effect (like disintegrate) due to their very different mechanics but 3.5 really has a feel like alternative casting. Heck they took most of it for 5e spell casting THAT is how similar it is and it feels similar enough that most people do not even complain.

I would also argue that if one were to consider 3.5e psionics not close to casting then you really cannot say that 4e psionics feel like casting considering that both have the same general premise (they both have a psinoic system that uses a similar stat block as what magic uses but has several important differences that define it as being different). I would say you can either say that 3e and 4e psionics are different from magic casting or that they are similar to casting after playing both they are both similar relative to their own systems.

In 4e everything felt like Casting. EVERYTHING. Couldn't swing a sword without feeling like a spellcaster.

And yeah, 3.5 really just added a spell point system to spellcasting and ran away, which had some of it's own adherents.

But 5e? I feel like it's significantly different enough from your spells known and spells prepared casting classes to be it's own special thing... and I hope it gets to be that for a loooong time.

[SaurOps]

For 1e through 3.5e Psionics were separate from Magic. They were Supernatural, sure, but they weren't magic. It only waffled in 4e and now to some degree in 5e. 3.5 had a touch of overlap, in that variant rules allowed Antimagic Field and similar effects to affect psionics, but that's as close as it got.

The waffling was in the explanations of how things were supposed to work. Eventually, it seems, the people at the top didn't see a reason to keep them separate, given the startlingly close similarities of spirit.



The "Inner Energy" part was the 4e explanation for Psionic Strength Points which were later reduced to PP which were probably to some degree the 3rd edition inspiration for Monks to get Ki. After all, back in 1e AD&D it was argued Monks should get more HP, a level cap increase to 21, and some Psionic Powers to increase their power level. In 2e, Monks were Priests with Divine Spellcasting. Later they had the option to give up Priestcasting for Psi Powers when the Complete Psi hit the shelves, which brings us to the Ki in place of PSP place.

Wikipedia's article on the monk doesn't make mention of monks in 2e getting access to psionics. They did get access to several spell spheres that provided similar capabilities, though. It was a kind of a mercy; the rules for psionics were extremely unstable, since the CPH came out, and then later on, there was the Dark Sun Revised/Player's Option version. The mechanics were a bit of a mess, and you wouldn't have been able to cram them into a customizable Player's Option framework as psionics users, since, while the revised psionicist was in Skills and Powers, it was only a basic writeup without the fiddly exchangeable bits that the other classes had.



Monks waffled between Divine and Psi because people couldn't figure out how to handle the Eastern Mysticism aspect of them. When 3e found Ki as an internal resevoir of power/life/whatever it worked great. We should keep it the unique thing it is.

Well, great, unless you count the sorry state of monks in 3.x. And, again, the descriptions of ki and psionics were extremely close.



Most. But not all. Planescape and Dark Sun are two that come to mind.


I know, particularly well in the case of the latter.



Or just leave Ki as a Monk-Exclusive thing? *shrugs* We don't need members of every class using every other class's abilities or sources. 4e really wanted to cover all it's bases like that, and that's why Monks got stuffed into Psionics. Wu Jen has been a class in at least one previous edition of D&D as a divine elemental spellcaster in the Oriental Adventures. I have no idea why they decided to make it a Psionic Discipline, to be honest.

Ki as a monk-exclusive thing doesn't make sense on at least two levels. Firstly, other treatments of the subject don't pin being able to use vital energies to always being in a monastery; for example, there's a diverse array of characters in, among other examples, Weapons of the Gods/Legends of the Wulin that use qi to one effect or another, and they aren't assumed to be monastic devotees. On another level, that doesn't really jive with how subclasses seem to work, given the existence of the third-caster subclasses like the Arcane Trickster or Eldritch Knight, Arcane domains for clerics, and Theurgists for wizards. Most every class is up in every other class's business, and it's a wonderful thing that prior editions didn't have.

So, yes, make ki-stuff for everyone. The door's been opened; there's no real holding it closed, now, any more than there is making integrated gish subclasses or, presumably after the mystic gets out the door, psionic subclasses. And then people can conceptualize subclasses for both and begin to see that they weren't so different when it comes to power sources; the monk just has a smaller pool that refreshes more often.

(Also, the Wu Jen was a wizard, originally, which explains why it also allows for limited arcane spellcasting as a cross-powered Order akin to a theurgist or arcane domain cleric. You're confusing them with Shugenja/Shukenja. The reason for the combination is, again, associations of psionics and its internal nature being close in conception to Ki and thus the Asian Power Source as D&D seems to flip between reckoning them.)

[furby076]

I'm not surprised that Mystic won't be out this year. I mean, it's a completely different system of doing things. I hope they take as long with Artificer too, I'm not happy with how it's designed either.

It not being out has more to do with logistics than anything else. Even if the class was 10p% ready to get the nod (and it isnt). The material has to be enhanced....from tweaking the current stuff, to adding archtypes for the other classes, to adding feats, skills, psionic items, etc. That stuff takes dev time. Then, they gotta write it up, proof read, get pictures, lay it out...review and approve things at least 100 times. Then publish a print sample, then a full run, then ship it.... all of this takes lots of time. Im thinking xmas 2018




Hey, 3.5 (NOT 3.0) did it pretty well- as well as a spellcasting class in a spellcasting-biased system can be done, at least.

Personally, I actually liked the Mystic, and am slightly saddened to see that we won't get an official revised/improved version this year. Ah well, there's always next year (or is there? DUN DUN DUUUUUUUUUNNNN).

I liked 3.5 psion. I played 2e psionic, but removed the psychic combat...that was annoying. I told the dm i think it should be removed, and he agreed. We replaced the psionic combat powers with abilities that are similar to 5e. Stuff like intellect fortress were passive abilities like psychic focus. Choose 1 and enjoy...psychic combat......ewwwwww, talk about boring the rest of the table....and also being incredibly rare



That's something I agree with to some extent. But there were problems with 3.5 psionics too. Expanded Talent (or whichever feat let you steal a power from another list) was pretty absurd for its ability to give you that one niche power you needed. There were a number of absurd powers too: Crystal Shard, Ego Whip, Empathic Feedback, and Astral Construct were all busted. Wilder made things even worse for their ability to surge to absolutely insane levels. Soulknife was a terrible class no one should ever take. The mechanic (which is basically spell points) was perfectly fine; probably even more balanced imo than spells. The whole package wasn't.

Stealing powers from other classes...dont bards do this? Like any other class....some of their abilities were OP and some were UP :)


And yes Ninja Radish, 3e wizards and clerics were also fairly broken in terms of power. The Tier system for classes came into place in that edition for a reason. But the primary point isn't power levels, although in some cases that's an issue. It's that Psionics it historically a messy-ass system that screws with other systems in place. It's historically been a bolt-on that requires drilling too many bolt holes right through other things, messing them up.

Edit:
It's a cool idea, especially if it's while using the powers. Visual and auditory manisfestiations. Possible with some specific powers, types of powers, or subclass features removing them.

------------
Man, you guys are making me want to go pull out all my old Psionics PDFs and review them for the stuff I found cool. Because don't get me wrong, despite disliking he messiness of the various systems and knee jerking because I felt like the mystic was going back down that route, I think Psionics are a cool concept that can work. Especially with the Far Realm / abominations association.

Historical issues shouldnt be a reason to not work it in now. Mystics are just wizards with different fluff, and different ways of handling things. In the end, powers are just spells


I'd honestly prefer the term Psionics in D&D to "Mystics" and "Mysticism" because those two terms are so broad you could fit nearly any concept you like into them. Too diffuse, it lacks any core identity, y'know?

I agree....why did they remove the name psionic and change it to mystic? Annoying and pointless

[Arkhios]

Didn't read the whole thread so my apologies if this has been addressed already.

Crawford's tweet does NOT say that both Artificer and Mystic will not be made official this year; only Mystic. The person in that tweet chain saying that this announcement includes artificer is giving misguided and outdated information with that quote from june 1st. No further information about Artificer's fate was mentioned by Crawford, so it's still possible that it might see the daylight as an official class sooner than mystic.

[Tanarii]

An odd aspect of 5e is that psionics is already found in its books, as a type of innate spellcasting for monsters. I don't know if past editions went through a similar phase.Classic: Mind Flayers appeared in strategic review #1, and were not Psionic because psionics didn't exist yet. Even so the Mind Blast ability was described as 'Psi Force'. They did not have any other mind-related abilities or spells. Psionics were introduced in Eldritch Wizardry Supplement, along with the 'classic' Psionic creatures. Including the full stated Mind-flayer, Brain Mole, Cerebral Parasite, Thought Eater. Whether or not you want to consider the Strategic review a 'release' or not is debatable, and honestly the way things worked at the time that's kind of a meaningless argument. Effectively they existed before the psionics bolt-on.
1e: Psionics were re-released with AD&D 1e, and the psionic creatures were built right into the Monster Manual with Psionics.
BECMI: I don't think psionic creatures were included at all. I can't recall Mind Flayers being a thing here.
2e: Mind Flayers and others are magical, but their abilities were called psionic*. Label only.
3.5: Mind Flayers and others are magical, but their abilities were called psionic*. Label only.
4e: Given this edition worked, there's no real distinction between magic and psionics. Mind Flayers (specifically) were released in the original MM, long before the psionic power source in PHB 3.
5e: Mind Flayers and others are magical, but their abilities were called psionic. Label only.

So the only edition where the seminal psionic monster, the Mind Flayer, were psionic using the psionic system from the get go was AD&D 1e. Other than that, the psionic bolt-on has been dropped initially, they've been released with psionics converted to using spells or spell-like abilities*. Which is hardly surprising. They were so memorable (and feared) in 1e exactly because there wasn't any real defense against psionics, since they weren't magic. So they had to be in the game, even if psionics wasn't.


Historical issues shouldnt be a reason to not work it in now. Mystics are just wizards with different fluff, and different ways of handling things. In the end, powers are just spellsI completely agree, it shouldn't be. But the reason for my knee jerk (and admittedly, way over the top) reaction is they appeared to me to be going right back down that the rabbit hole of a bolt-on subsystem that's overly complex and messes up existing sub-systems.

*As noted by Steampunkette below, the 2e & 3e versions using spells or spell-like abilities were updated to psionic versions when psionics were released.

[coolAlias]

2e psionics were very interesting but also a real mess in play, especially the whole choosing a mental defense vs. attack stuff.

3e (or I guess 3.5) I found really fun - all the crystals, tattoos, etc. were flavorful and the Psychic Warrior was just awesome.

That said, I only ever included psionics in specific settings or, sometimes, specific parts of specific settings. The advantage of homebrewed settings vs. AL, I suppose. Since I don't play AL, I would love to see psionics make a comeback in 5e, but I'm happy to wait until they really nail it.

[Steampunkette]

So the only edition where the seminal psionic monster, the Mind Flayer, were psionic using the psionic system from the get go was AD&D 1e. Other than that, the psionic bolt-on has been dropped initially, they've been released with psionics converted to using spells or spell-like abilities. Which is hardly surprising. They were so memorable (and feared) in 1e exactly because there wasn't any real defense against psionics, since they weren't magic. So they had to be in the game, even if psionics wasn't.

I completely agree, it shouldn't be. But the reason for my knee jerk (and admittedly, way over the top) reaction is they appeared to me to be going right back down that the rabbit hole of a bolt-on subsystem that's overly complex and messes up existing sub-systems.

Slight Addendum: Once AD&D 2e (and subsequently 3.5) both added Psionic Mind Flayers (Alongside Intellect Devourers and other beasties) after Psionics were added as a bolted-on system.

And yeah... Unless an edition of D&D -launches- with Psionics as part of the core rulebook it's always going to feel tacked-on and secondary. A fact I find -ridiculously- frustrating.

[coolAlias]

Slight Addendum: Once AD&D 2e (and subsequently 3.5) both added Psionic Mind Flayers (Alongside Intellect Devourers and other beasties) after Psionics were added as a bolted-on system.

And yeah... Unless an edition of D&D -launches- with Psionics as part of the core rulebook it's always going to feel tacked-on and secondary. A fact I find -ridiculously- frustrating.
I'm afraid it won't be much better this edition, but I still hope.

At least we don't have numerical Spell/Magic Resistance to worry about and the kludge of giving them all the exact same resistance vs. psionics. In 5e, it would be as simple as "and this list of monsters that have a racial trait granting advantage on all (or a selection of... ew, that'd get messy) saving throws against psionics."

[Lolzyking]

My biggest issue is that they want people to test it, and that they said it would Be AL legal for the next test, but the problem is with only people testing it in home games they won't get the test data they want.

They should really drop both mystic and artificer into AL before xanathurs, let them test the crap out of it with the condition that the characters class may change in the future and to deal with it as changes occur. The pros of the large test base it would bring outweighs the cons of it being possibly overpowered.

You won't know if its op unless the AL reddit is bitching about it 24/7 that it's op even with pointbuy and being locked to only being used with the phb.

[Tanarii]

Slight Addendum: Once AD&D 2e (and subsequently 3.5) both added Psionic Mind Flayers (Alongside Intellect Devourers and other beasties) after Psionics were added as a bolted-on system.Not sure what you mean by this? (As in, I can't understand what you're trying to say in this sentence.)


And yeah... Unless an edition of D&D -launches- with Psionics as part of the core rulebook it's always going to feel tacked-on and secondary. A fact I find -ridiculously- frustrating.Even that's not a guarantee. AD&D 1e technically launched with the system included, but since it was basically the Eldritch Wizardry bolt-on, it still felt tacked-on and secondary IMO. OTOH back then a huge majority of the game was bolt-on subsystems that didn't play well together. As well as a huge chunk of subsystems were close to unplayable in terms of complexity and lack of explanation as to how they were supposed to work. It's only nowadays that the trend/desire is to have integrated subsystems that play well together, and are well designed in and of themselves.

In other words, its the integration level with the existing system, as well as (of course) if the system itself is playable or workable or well designed, that matters. That's probably more likely to happen during release though. But as 4e showed, you can have a expansion later on with a psionics subsystem that integrates VERY well with the primary system. But that also showed that to do so, you may be very limited in how it can be mechanical differentiated.

[coolAlias]

Slight Addendum: Once AD&D 2e (and subsequently 3.5) both added Psionic Mind Flayers (Alongside Intellect Devourers and other beasties) after Psionics were added as a bolted-on system.
Not sure what you mean by this? (As in, I can't understand what you're trying to say in this sentence.)
She is saying that once Psionics was added, they released updated versions of the Mind Flayer that had Psionics built in, rather than using spell-like abilities.

[Steampunkette]

She.

And yes, I am saying that.

[Fishybugs]

I find this overall picture pretty satisfying, and I wouldn't mind if WotC devoted half a book to psionic subclasses for already existing classes. That too would take time, of course.

I would probably enjoy psionics much more if they did it this way. Adding a few psionic abilities to enhance your main class would be nice. Psionic AC boost, or accuracy boost. Advantage on stealth sort of thing.

[Ralanr]

Wow there is a lot of biased for spellcaster psionics of old.

Thankfully mystic so far has been created to function more uniquely (stances instead of full casting/half-casting) and I don't mind waiting longer for them to fine tune it.

[OverdrivePrime]

This is interesting - aside from a lack of internal cohesion, what are people finding is so off about the UA Mystic class in play? I have a player who really wants to try the class as a Wu Jen. I've no fear of him powergaming - he's the kind of player who's in it for pure RP and only occasionally glances at his class abilities.

[toapat]

This is interesting - aside from a lack of internal cohesion, what are people finding is so off about the UA Mystic class in play? I have a player who really wants to try the class as a Wu Jen. I've no fear of him powergaming - he's the kind of player who's in it for pure RP and only occasionally glances at his class abilities.

for the first 10 levels, Mystic is the most powerful class in the game, it remains the most versatile class afterwards although its power quickly drops after lvl 10

Mystic is Ludicrously modular, and essentially supports both fullcaster and halfcaster subclasses through its subs. it should probably be converted into Just the fullcaster psionic class while fighter, monk, rogue, and barbarian get the half caster disciplines and subclasses

[OverdrivePrime]

for the first 10 levels, Mystic is the most powerful class in the game, it remains the most versatile class afterwards although its power quickly drops after lvl 10

Mystic is Ludicrously modular, and essentially supports both fullcaster and halfcaster subclasses through its subs. it should probably be converted into Just the fullcaster psionic class while fighter, monk, rogue, and barbarian get the half caster disciplines and subclasses

Okay, that makes sense. It does seem like 6 very different character classes crammed into one. Probably better off in a setting retooled just for psionics and no clerics, mages, druids and bards.

We're going to be playing at 12th-13th level, so I'll see how this goes. The player is reasonable, so if it's a mess after a couple sessions, I can ask him to retool as pretty much anything but a bard and it'll go fine.

Thanks for the advice!

[toapat]

Okay, that makes sense. It does seem like 6 very different character classes crammed into one. Probably better off in a setting retooled just for psionics and no clerics, mages, druids and bards.

We're going to be playing at 12th-13th level, so I'll see how this goes. The player is reasonable, so if it's a mess after a couple sessions, I can ask him to retool as pretty much anything but a bard and it'll go fine.

Thanks for the advice!

at 12-13 the mystic is fine, the WuJen is going to be quite Blast happy and difficult to individually build because of its internal mechanics, but the Mystic stops being OP at lvl 11 just because everyone else is finally at about the same level of endurance and versatility

[Tanarii]

She is saying that once Psionics was added, they released updated versions of the Mind Flayer that had Psionics built in, rather than using spell-like abilities.


She.

And yes, I am saying that.
Fair enough. I thought it was implicit this was the case in the context of the post I was responding to, but I'll go back and add something explicit.

[Millstone85]

The mystic might be starting where other classes are headed.

We have a magic fighter in the PHB and a martial wizard in SCAG.

We have an arcane cleric in SCAG and a divine wizard in UA.

Maybe that's what 5e prefers over multiclassing: subclasses that feel like other classes.

[Arkhios]

The mystic might be starting where other classes are headed.

We have a magic fighter in the PHB and a martial wizard in SCAG.

We have an arcane cleric in SCAG and a divine wizard in UA.

Maybe that's what 5e prefers over multiclassing: subclasses that feel like other classes.

I have to agree with this deduction. My "first" TTRPG experience about archetypes/sub-classes within a class came from Pathfinder and since then I've always felt that that's what's their purpose: Expand a class niche to something entirely different. When D&D 5e was finally released, I immediately approved their take on how archetypes/sub-classes were handled. Instead of having a base class from which you would diverge to alternatives, there were essentially 2 or more "base classes" per class niche.

[rollingForInit]

I'm glad they are taking their time. I want the psionic class(es) to be great, but they aren't there yet. I think they'll make something really nice though, and hope they take all the time they need for it.

[druid91]

I'd be fine with psionics if they required a "tell". Subtle spell for every ability just because MIND POWERZ is so unbalanced it's stupid. Not to mention psionics has always just been "magic, but better for no reason" with crappy fluff to back it up. I mean, it won't effect me cause I won't be using it but it's still bad design.

You mean the tells like people catching on fire? I mean. It's not like the fire is invisible.

If you're talking about telepathic attacks. Well no duh. It's telepathic.

Psionics has always been "Magic but with the safeties taken off so I can do cool stuff, but also burn myself.out really easily."

[mephnick]

Psionics has always been "Magic but with the safeties taken off so I can do cool stuff, but also burn myself.out really easily without any of the drawbacks of being another caster because MIND POWERZ

there, fixed that for you.

[druid91]

there, fixed that for you.

No drawbacks huh? Except you know. The far more limited repertoire of abilities. The lack of anything world altering. Because while a wizard is changing the weather and building a flying castle.... What is a mystic doing?

And at least in this edition over reliance on saves for their abilities.

Your perception of psionics is frankly objectively wrong.

[Waazraath]

No drawbacks huh? Except you know. The far more limited repertoire of abilities. The lack of anything world altering. Because while a wizard is changing the weather and building a flying castle.... What is a mystic doing?

And at least in this edition over reliance on saves for their abilities.

Your perception of psionics is frankly objectively wrong.

As far as this goes about past editions (which the phrase "has always been" implies), I have to say I'm with mephnick here. In 3.x at least, where I played / played together with psions, they were broken as hell. Limited repetoir of abilities didn't fly, cause they only needed 1 power to have level 1-9 summons, only one power to have all energy types, scaling 1-9th level, and they ability to bypass resistances or target specific saving throws. They pushed over the action economy way worse than wizards, and that in an edition with spells like celerity and (the much more powerful than in 5e) time stop. Even at the lowest levels, when casters were relatively squishy, the psion was hardest to kill of all, with vigor, or worse, vigor/share pain/psy crystal, or getting access to full plate and a shield and not being hindred in any way by them. Etc. etc. etc.

The only real argument in all those "psionics aren't broken" discussions in 3.x boiled down to "not more broken than wizards", who could be, totally, broken. And at a low to medium optimization level, wizards were actually less broken.

I liked the flavor, liked playing (with) them, but I surely hope they can make it a balanced system this time. Especially since 5e did a great job so far, concerning balance.

[MeeposFire]

Meh 3.5e psions were roughly as nasty as a sorcerer so quite potent but not potentially as nasty as a wizard. Psionics had a number of limitations that really limited it compared to magic (and sadly were often missed or forgotten by those who did not know the system very well). For instance there was a tendency for no auto scaling so you had to spend more power to use a power at the level that a caster got for free. Let us pretend that psions had magic missile a wizard could cast it at 9th level with a single 1st level slot and it would launch 5 missiles while the psion manifesting this same abiity would launch only one if it used it with the PP of a 1st level power and would have to spend the number of 9 PPs to get that effect.

NOte that 5e spellcasting is a slight variation of the psion manifesting. You get a spell and it does not scale but you can make it scale by casting it with higher level slots which is how psionics worked in 3e.

Also psionics in 3e could not make use of meta effects in the same way that casters could because they had to use their focus to use just one so they could not combine effects and would have to spend actions to get that back so they can use meta effects round after round which a caster did not have to worry about.

[Waazraath]

Meh 3.5e psions were roughly as nasty as a sorcerer so quite potent but not potentially as nasty as a wizard. Psionics had a number of limitations that really limited it compared to magic (and sadly were often missed or forgotten by those who did not know the system very well). For instance there was a tendency for no auto scaling so you had to spend more power to use a power at the level that a caster got for free. Let us pretend that psions had magic missile a wizard could cast it at 9th level with a single 1st level slot and it would launch 5 missiles while the psion manifesting this same abiity would launch only one if it used it with the PP of a 1st level power and would have to spend the number of 9 PPs to get that effect.

NOte that 5e spellcasting is a slight variation of the psion manifesting. You get a spell and it does not scale but you can make it scale by casting it with higher level slots which is how psionics worked in 3e.

Also psionics in 3e could not make use of meta effects in the same way that casters could because they had to use their focus to use just one so they could not combine effects and would have to spend actions to get that back so they can use meta effects round after round which a caster did not have to worry about.

Part in bold emphasis mine. I don't know if you refer to me, but as i said in my earlier post, I both played and played together with psions. I've played 3.x from release up to last year and wrote several handbooks for the system. So I think I know it pretty well.

You are correct if you say that 3.x psion's powers don't auto-scale, but it is of no consequence. If you max out intelligence and pick a psionic race, your power points are more than sufficient to pay for those power ups if you need them. If you stick to the suggested 4 encounters/day that 3.x had, it really wasn't an issue. Last time I played, it was an official module, playing up to level 6 psion / kineticists, often more than 4 encounters/day, and I ran out of power points once in the entire adventure. As for the 9th level character using magic missile: true, but spending that much point on a direct damage spell, the psion would use 9 power points not to do 5d4, but to 9d6 of the most advantage energy type against 5 different targets (that also could be objects). That's a big difference.

As for stacking meta-effects: technically you're correct, but in my experience it never was an issue in actual play. You only need 1 feat to have to psionic foci (on for your crystal, one for yourself), and need another feat to regain focus as a move action. So the first round you can stack 2 metamagic/psionic effects, on all other rounds use 1. Given how short combats often are, that is enough. Also given the fact that psionic powers are already augmentable by nature. You didn't need metamagic to switch the energy type, every direct damage energy power had that choice from the start.

Personal experience, last time I played a psion: Playing with people who known how to optimize, and a bunch of characters tier 1-3 (if you're into that stuff), cleric, druid and martial adept (think it was a swordsage), the psion dealt the most damage (energy missile/wall of energy), was hardest to kill (share pain/vigor/psi crystal, damp power), had great battlefield control (grease, wall), and plenty of powers left for utility. Note: this was without obvious broken stuff like synchonicity / linked power and the like, mostly just out of the box, non combo-powers (with the vigor exception mentioned above).

Psionics was in places even more broken than wizards were, and also at lower levels. Minor creation for poisons at level 1; synchronicy / linked power for 4 spells/powers with 1 action; etc. Wizards could be broken further, but psions were, from the lowest levels, really easy to outperform other classes without putting any effort in it. And that's bad.