Psionics, UA, and what to do now?

[jaappleton]

So they've done a few UA passes now that most of us have seen regarding Psionic subclasses. Psi Warrior and later Psi Knight for Fighter, the Soul Knife for Rogues, etc.

The latest iteration used Psi Die, which grew and shrunk as you played.

And in an interview maybe two weeks after the release of that, Crawford said that the feedback indicated people didn't really want that mechanic, and essentially said its not going to make the cut.

Meanwhile... For people that wanted to play those subclasseses, they already know they're going to be quite different now. That interview, that statement, is quite a large indicator that the subclasses won't function the same.

And so, I ask all of you: Would you still be interested in playing those subclasses (Not necessarily a Psionic one, could be any one) where you already knew it was going to be quite a bit different the next time you saw it? Of course, with UA, we all know that its subject to change, and they never make it to print without some tweaks. But this was a UA with a new mechanic entirely, the subclasses presented relied on such a mechanic, and you already know its being tossed.

[QuickLyRaiNbow]

As a DM I'd be more cautious about allowing a player to play one if I knew that the signature mechanic was going to get tossed, that's for sure. And as a player, I don't think I'd be interested in starting a game with a class that had DOA mechanics. If I'd already started, I'd want an assurance that I could continue to use the old stuff if I wanted, and without that I'd want to change classes.

[jaappleton]

As a DM I'd be more cautious about allowing a player to play one if I knew that the signature mechanic was going to get tossed, that's for sure. And as a player, I don't think I'd be interested in starting a game with a class that had DOA mechanics. If I'd already started, I'd want an assurance that I could continue to use the old stuff if I wanted, and without that I'd want to change classes.

I feel pretty much the same.

Especially as a player, I already feel like the rug got pulled out from under me. I have no reason to even really check it out now, from a playtest perspective, because its DOA already.

[Man_Over_Game]

Eh, just because it's UA doesn't mean it's not good content. The Spore Druid was pretty good as a UA choice, and then it got nerfed into obscurity on the official release. Yet the Ancestral Guardian release is practically identical to the UA released on it. The Stone Sorcerer has never gotten an official release, despite players really really wanting one.

So just because it's official doesn't mean it's good, and just because it's UA doesn't mean it's bad.

I think those subclasses were bad because the die didn't mix with anyone's conceptualization with a "Psion" or "Mystic". Random chance of being extra/under powered every time you use your powers? It just sounds odd.

But I can totally see those same subclasses work totally fine as a subclass that leverages some kind of psionic parasite, powerful curse, or magical virus that grants you powers. It gets weaker when you use a lot of it at once, but sometimes it defies you to rest to gain more power for later. That way, the randomness doesn't come off as the result of your incompetence, but from a power you don't control (which isn't what most people think of when it comes to Psychics).

[carnomancy]

Can't say I'm too terribly interested in this round of psionic subclasses. I think what killed it for me is the weak flavor. Rather than focus on what Psionic powers did, it felt like they were more interested in name dropping old psionic classes from 3rd edition.

The problem with that approach is that the 3rd edition psionic classes were very much empty vessels. Psychic Warrior didn't really have anything flavorful in its class features to establish any identity with. Everything interesting a Psionic character did was defined by their powers. The Soulknife was the worst possible example they could've chosen, since I mostly remember them as the psionic class that didn't get psionic powers.

The should have focused on psionic disciplines instead of the 3rd edition classes. Each discipline has a defined flavor and is mechanically distinct. Telekinesis is a sneaky social manipulator that can disrupt the battlefield by messing with enemies heads. Psychometabolism makes you super tough to kill with a wide array of defensive powers, but its offensive talents are confined to melee or at the very least close quarters. Psychokinesis can fling things around and control energy, giving them high destructive potential. Psychoportation can jump through time and space and open rifts to different planes to create hazards. Clairsentience lets you do a bunch of things associated with crystal ball psychics, like look into distant places or speak with the dead.

As for the psi die, it had potential, but it needed work. The random jumping up and down in size made it feel like die rolling for die rollings sake rather than a functional resource. I'd rather they focus on interesting identities for psionic powers rather than getting super fixated on dice rolling.

[Telwar]

I suspect they don't have the inclination or work ethic to get something out the door at this point. Certainly, not anytime soon.

I suspect they were maybe hoping to do Dark Sun, since that absolutely requires psionics. Since they either couldn't make the Mystic work, or completely ignored positive/constructive feedback, they were trying to get by with just doing a few new subclasses and calling it a day... only to find that the players didn't like those, either.

[jaappleton]

I suspect they don't have the inclination or work ethic to get something out the door at this point. Certainly, not anytime soon.

I suspect they were maybe hoping to do Dark Sun, since that absolutely requires psionics. Since they either couldn't make the Mystic work, or completely ignored positive/constructive feedback, they were trying to get by with just doing a few new subclasses and calling it a day... only to find that the players didn't like those, either.

In fairness to the design team, its a darn near impossible task put before them.

The demand for Psionics to exist is there. Every edition has had Psionics.
However, the issue is that they've never been implemented in the same way. In every instance, there's been a new way they've worked, mechanically.

So how is it possible to appease everyone that wants this? A percentage wants how they worked in 3.X, but another percentage wants how it was in AD&D, and others want how it worked specifically from Dark Sun (And fracture that same percentage into based on what edition was their favorite), etc.

Its certainly a tall order, for sure. And no matter how they implement it, there's going to be a vocal aspect which simply shouts "NO YOU'RE WRONG TERRIBLE BROKEN" and another percentage of people that simply dislike Psionics and don't want it in the game in any form also yelling at them, telling them how they're ruining the game.

[Telwar]

True. Tbh, I think they're listening to the negative feedback far more than positive.

[jaappleton]

True. Tbh, I think they're listening to the negative feedback far more than positive.

Well, its funny you say that.

Take this as an example:

You buy something from Best Buy. Lets call it a Widget. You bought the Widget. The Widget works fine. Does what its supposed to. Fair price. All is well. No problem, there's nothing to do here. Because there's no problem. You just go on with your life, and your Widget.

You then buy a Sprocket. The Sprocket, after two weeks, breaks. Defective. Poorly made, piece of garbage, you've wasted your money.\. But you paid cash, you lost the receipt, never typed in your phone number... There's no recourse for you. You spent a lot on that Sprocket, you were invested in it, and now you've got nothing.

......Which of these is more likely to occur at this point:

A) You write a solid review of the Widget that simply did its job, as it should have
B) You, irate, angrily write a 1 star review and, possibly, hope to get a customer service rep to help fix the issue

Its B. Its B, every single time this happens. People seldom go out of their way to provide feedback when everything functions as it should. When things work. Its when people get upset, and have a bad experience, that they're much more willing to put in the effort to get their point across. I mean, when you get a pizza, and its fine and as it should be, you don't call them back and say "Hey. Everything was good. Just wanted to let you know."

[Man_Over_Game]

Well, its funny you say that.

Take this as an example:

You buy something from Best Buy. Lets call it a Widget. You bought the Widget. The Widget works fine. Does what its supposed to. Fair price. All is well. No problem, there's nothing to do here. Because there's no problem. You just go on with your life, and your Widget.

You then buy a Sprocket. The Sprocket, after two weeks, breaks. Defective. Poorly made, piece of garbage, you've wasted your money.\. But you paid cash, you lost the receipt, never typed in your phone number... There's no recourse for you. You spent a lot on that Sprocket, you were invested in it, and now you've got nothing.

......Which of these is more likely to occur at this point:

A) You write a solid review of the Widget that simply did its job, as it should have
B) You, irate, angrily write a 1 star review and, possibly, hope to get a customer service rep to help fix the issue

Its B. Its B, every single time this happens. People seldom go out of their way to provide feedback when everything functions as it should. When things work. Its when people get upset, and have a bad experience, that they're much more willing to put in the effort to get their point across. I mean, when you get a pizza, and its fine and as it should be, you don't call them back and say "Hey. Everything was good. Just wanted to let you know."

For whatever reason, humans value loss more than gains.

That is, losing $500 is a bigger deal than gaining $500. Perhaps it's because expectations take investment, while hopes do not? Dunno, just thought it was relevant and interesting.

[ArkthePieKing]

I think another non-insignificant part of the problem is they already teased us with the Mystic which was more or less a combination of all the best ideas of 3.5 and 4e Psionics. It was rough as heck and needed to be polished but the ideas where there and to see them scrapped it so...disheartening. Nothing else they can come up with is going to live up to the lofty ideas already set by the Mystic. Everything is going to be smaller in scope, less ambitious, and ultimately disappointing. They really should have just finished the Mystic.

[jaappleton]

I think another non-insignificant part of the problem is they already teased us with the Mystic which was more or less a combination of all the best ideas of 3.5 and 4e Psionics. It was rough as heck and needed to be polished but the ideas where there and to see them scrapped it so...disheartening. Nothing else they can come up with is going to live up to the lofty ideas already set by the Mystic. Everything is going to be smaller in scope, less ambitious, and ultimately disappointing. They really should have just finished the Mystic.

I don't entirely disagree with this.

At its core, the Mystic was a reverse engineered Warlock that operated of the spell point system from the DMG. Psychic Focuses were almost like always on Invocations you could easily swap out at-will, which was a problem because it had such versatility.

The problems with the Mystic was that it offered so much versatility and virtually no restrictions, while encompassing so much that it almost completely lacked an identity.

Mystic should've been split into 2 classes. Psion and Mystic. One for the more "my mind alter reality", your d8 caster style similar to Cleric, Bard and Warlock, and one for the more "my mind alters my body" style, for a more martial oriented experience (Monk, Fighter, Rogue, etc)

I really do agree that, had they refined it much more with a second pass, we'd be playing a fully released version by now. Unfortunately, as we all know, it never happened. Which is a shame, because I think at the very least, you can take some of those elemental disciplines and try to adapt them to either an Elementalist class, or perhaps a new Elements based Monk, or even convert them fully into spells.

Shame to let it all just waste like that.

[ProsecutorGodot]

I made the mistake of choosing to use the Psionic Wizard Class for my Descent into Avernus character. I ended up having to transition to a different subclass with the Wild Talent/Telekinetic/Telepathic feats when the previous version of Telekinetic and Telepathic feats changed.

I'm attached to the idea of the character now, his Charisma is rock bottom and he communicates almost exclusively via telepathy, but if all of the current psionic feats end up scrapped (which is fairly likely at this point) then the only way to retool this character would be as a GooLock, which is distinctly off brand.

Of course I could always continue to use the current versions as they are, but I'm personally a bit hesitant about doing that. I'm actually getting a bit turned away from UA's recently because I'm starting to get the feeling that I'm playtesting content that I enjoy that won't ever be official.

Recent examples: Expanded spell lists (No way in heck are Spirit Guardian/Life Transference is staying on Paladin spell list) Spirit Shroud, Bait and Switch Maneuver, Psi Knight, Tandem Tactician.

The Mystic being scrapped was probably the final nail in the coffin for any hope of my brother getting into 5E as well, he really enjoyed the UA despite being aware of how ridiculous it was at something like 27 pages of content.

[Zevox]

And so, I ask all of you: Would you still be interested in playing those subclasses (Not necessarily a Psionic one, could be any one) where you already knew it was going to be quite a bit different the next time you saw it? Of course, with UA, we all know that its subject to change, and they never make it to print without some tweaks. But this was a UA with a new mechanic entirely, the subclasses presented relied on such a mechanic, and you already know its being tossed.
If I were interested in the class/subclass in question, sure. I don't care whether it's going to be official someday, I care whether it looks like something I'd have fun playing.

In this particular case, the recent Psionic subclasses don't, because I feel the Psi dice fails pretty hard at representing the fantasy of psionics in general. But on the flip side, there's another Psionic UA that's also been dropped that I'd absolutely play, the Mystic. I've got my criticisms of it, and I'm sure I'd have to work with my DM to address potential issues with it, but it's a much better take on 5E Psionics IMO (at least except insofar as I do think making Psychic Warrior and Soulknife Fighter and Rogue subclasses makes more sense than cramming into the same class as the Psion). Hell, depending on what we ultimately get for 5E Psionics, it's entirely possible I will one day ask my DM to use that instead of the official Psionic caster class, if Wizards absolutely insists on making it a subclass of a regular spellcaster class like they've tried the past two UAs.

Honestly, the only reason I can see why I'd ever care about a UA being dropped (beyond general disappointment that we won't get a more polished, finalized version) is if I were playing in something officially sponsored by Wizards (such as I think that Adventure League thing, if I have the name right?) which had to stick to the officially published, final material. Which I never have. Barring that, all that matters is what I and my DM think will be fun, and if that's a UA rather the final published material, that's fine.

[Telwar]

Well, its funny you say that.

Take this as an example:

You buy something from Best Buy. Lets call it a Widget. You bought the Widget. The Widget works fine. Does what its supposed to. Fair price. All is well. No problem, there's nothing to do here. Because there's no problem. You just go on with your life, and your Widget.

You then buy a Sprocket. The Sprocket, after two weeks, breaks. Defective. Poorly made, piece of garbage, you've wasted your money.\. But you paid cash, you lost the receipt, never typed in your phone number... There's no recourse for you. You spent a lot on that Sprocket, you were invested in it, and now you've got nothing.

......Which of these is more likely to occur at this point:

A) You write a solid review of the Widget that simply did its job, as it should have
B) You, irate, angrily write a 1 star review and, possibly, hope to get a customer service rep to help fix the issue

Its B. Its B, every single time this happens. People seldom go out of their way to provide feedback when everything functions as it should. When things work. Its when people get upset, and have a bad experience, that they're much more willing to put in the effort to get their point across. I mean, when you get a pizza, and its fine and as it should be, you don't call them back and say "Hey. Everything was good. Just wanted to let you know."

Clearly not all of the feedback they get is negative; otherwise, nothing would have made it out of UA, ever.

...did they even ask for feedback on the Mystic? Did they even ask for it with enough time for playtesting?

[Kane0]

And so, I ask all of you: Would you still be interested in playing those subclasses (Not necessarily a Psionic one, could be any one) where you already knew it was going to be quite a bit different the next time you saw it? Of course, with UA, we all know that its subject to change, and they never make it to print without some tweaks. But this was a UA with a new mechanic entirely, the subclasses presented relied on such a mechanic, and you already know its being tossed.

I don't see why I wouldn't be interested. I would prefer Psi Die iterated rather than thrown out but hey, wouldn't be the first time that's been done, even for 5e Psionics specifically.

[MrStabby]

Well, its funny you say that.

Take this as an example:

You buy something from Best Buy. Lets call it a Widget. You bought the Widget. The Widget works fine. Does what its supposed to. Fair price. All is well. No problem, there's nothing to do here. Because there's no problem. You just go on with your life, and your Widget.

You then buy a Sprocket. The Sprocket, after two weeks, breaks. Defective. Poorly made, piece of garbage, you've wasted your money.\. But you paid cash, you lost the receipt, never typed in your phone number... There's no recourse for you. You spent a lot on that Sprocket, you were invested in it, and now you've got nothing.

......Which of these is more likely to occur at this point:

A) You write a solid review of the Widget that simply did its job, as it should have
B) You, irate, angrily write a 1 star review and, possibly, hope to get a customer service rep to help fix the issue

Its B. Its B, every single time this happens. People seldom go out of their way to provide feedback when everything functions as it should. When things work. Its when people get upset, and have a bad experience, that they're much more willing to put in the effort to get their point across. I mean, when you get a pizza, and its fine and as it should be, you don't call them back and say "Hey. Everything was good. Just wanted to let you know."

Huh? Most of my feedback is positive... I think... OK, mabe about balanced. But I always try and find some positive thing to say - an indication of direction of travel that would make me happy.

I actually liked this UA. I thought it was... compact. About the right power level. Just different enough. OK, the feats were a bit on the strong side but I thought it a pretty good stab. It was safe though - I feel that UA, especially psionics should be pushing the opportunity to test new stuff. It was a bit timid.


I do think that psionics, mystic or whatever has some scope to be more than this - but for the time being I can see this as a cool new fighter/rogue/sorcerer class and would be happy to let any of my players play them.

[Kane0]

......Which of these is more likely to occur at this point:

A) You write a solid review of the Widget that simply did its job, as it should have
B) You, irate, angrily write a 1 star review and, possibly, hope to get a customer service rep to help fix the issue

Its B. Its B, every single time this happens.

As someone working in tech support I know this all too well. No news is good news, and when I do UA surveys I mentally check myself for this bias and try to be positive and constructive with my criticism.

[jaappleton]

As someone working in tech support I know this all too well. No news is good news, and when I do UA surveys I mentally check myself for this bias and try to be positive and constructive with my criticism.

Precisely!

Everyone that’s worked in any sort of support or customer service, let’s be honest for a moment here:

When the phone rings? Chances are it’s not someone telling you how great everything is :smalltongue:

So that’s precisely why with UA it’s so overwhelmingly important for them to get all feedback. And don’t get me wrong, some of the content isn’t up to snuff. That’s fine, it happens, not every shot they take will be a bullseye.

But if you don’t tell them what’s pretty close to the mark, and all they hear is how it’s wrong and it all sucks, it’s pretty darn tough to figure out just what the mark is. What people actually want.

[Segev]

Personally, if I thought the classes were balanced and would work at the table, and I had an idea for playing with them, I'd run it by the DM anyway. It's no worse than homebrew.