Any official product that WotC puts out which includes Psionics but does not include a Psionic class is a product I will NOT buy. Since the UA article has flat out killed the Mystic, I will start looking for a good, 3rd party Psionic source book. Someone will either put one out on DM's Guild or as a Kickstarter project since WotC will not be putting one out.

As to the UA article and this Psi Die, I won't be using any psi class or archtypes that use it. It is just one more thing that I'd have to track since many players can't be trusted to do so. There are many who can, but those who can't make it a royal pain.

I was all for the UA Mystic. It was over powered and a tad too complex, but that could be fixed. In my opinion, they should have focused on making it powers of the mind and Mind over Body. Make everything they did have to come from within, something like the Sorcerer. Also, do NOT make psionics Magic. It is not and never has been; except in 4e maybe. Not sure since 4e does not exist to me and I won't touch it with a 20-foot cattle prod or maybe to burn the silly stuff. It would make good kindling.

Psionics is magic for balancing purposes, but definitely not spellcasting. 

Quote from Mezzurah >>

 I mean, WotC is clearly working on a new system.  It's right there in the new UA.

Are we reading the same article? Here's a quote from it, emphasis mine:

In 2019 and now in 2020, we’re enjoying that exploration, looking into providing options (subclasses, spells, and feats) that allow different types of characters to manifest psionic power. The philosophy of this approach is most akin to the one taken in the 1st edition of D&D, where psionic powers weren’t the domain of any particular class but were available for characters of different types to experience.

I'm not trying to be a buzzkill and I have nothing personal against a full psionic class, but the article pretty clearly states that they are not currently going in that direction. You can (and have) shout me down all you want, but it's not going to change their approach. If they were going for a class, they would have revamped Mystic. This UA is literally them taking psionics in the opposite direction from a class.

Note, I'm not arguing should they make a psion, I'm arguing will they. I love new classes and mechanics.

You guys have some great ideas and a lot of enthusiasm and I encourage you to work on a homebrew class. Then it can be exactly as you're envisioning it, and if you balance it well there's no reason why a reasonable DM wouldn't accept it at the table. I would.

I am well aware of what the article says, I have read it multiple times, and perhaps I should clarify.  This Psi Dice they've presented?  Significantly different from Psionics=Spells, which is the biggest gripe I've had with the previous approach by WotC.  Personally, I feel it has the potential to become the basis for a new class much in the same way spellcasting has become the basis of multiple classes, and would like to try and encourage it to continue to go in that direction.  I don't know that they will or won't, but I feel this is a very promising step in a new direction, and want to see it developed as far as it can be.

I would also like to point out that in the previous round of psionic subclasses, Jeremy Crawford stated in a Sage Advice piece that having subclasses like these isn't taking away from the possibility of a class like the mystic or psion, and that this approach is the same taken with arcane subclasses like the Eldritch Knight/Arcane Trickster and divine subclasses like the Divine Soul/Zealot.

Also, not to be pendantic, but this thread isn't about whether there will be a full psionic class, but that there should be.  I obviously believe that there should, not that this means there will be, but with that said there is a new system being tested here which I think is very promising, and which very much has the potential to lead to a new class.  That is what I'm saying.

I think it should be a sub-class of monk and use Ki pool.

I don't think that they'll do a psionic monk as long as the Astral Self monk exists.

I don't think that a psion class will happen, because Wizards dislikes our opinion that they should make a psion, but I am hopeful. 

I just think Psions and Monks are conceptually very similar and it makes sense they should be linked.  I don't see why we need another spellcaster class in all but name. 

Ki points derive from Psi points in 2nd edition Psionic Handbook. The reason to have different classes is to offer a diversity of play mechanics. The monk has a unique play mechanic in Ki points but it's woefully undeveloped, almost an afterthought of the system. Allowing Ki to manifest in new ways, ie psychic powers, can greatly expand the monk's interest. 

Personally I would prefer if psionic abilities are distinct from spells in every way and not just a bunch of re-skinned spells. 

Quote from Xerostomia >>

 Personally I would prefer if psionic abilities are distinct from spells in every way and not just a bunch of re-skinned spells. 

 I agree with this 100%.

Quote from Xerostomia >>

I just think Psions and Monks are conceptually very similar and it makes sense they should be linked.  I don't see why we need another spellcaster class in all but name. 

Ki points derive from Psi points in 2nd edition Psionic Handbook. The reason to have different classes is to offer a diversity of play mechanics. The monk has a unique play mechanic in Ki points but it's woefully undeveloped, almost an afterthought of the system. Allowing Ki to manifest in new ways, ie psychic powers, can greatly expand the monk's interest. 

 I don’t agree with this. I don’t think it makes any sense for every Psion to have access to Martial Arts and Unarmored AC and Movement like a Monk.

Yeah, I agree with Sposta here. I don't like that they're making Psionics be spells, but I also don't want them to just make psionics monks. That's like saying, "Well, I don't like that they make it this one system, so lets take a completely different already existing system that fits less, and make it be like that."

I'm completely in favor of the Psion being its own class. But I don't like how much versatility the mystic was given (it could fill the role of a druid, fighter, monk, paladin, rogue, or sorcerer, or at least any 2-3 of these depending on choices).

If psionic powers are to be a separate system from spellcasting, it needs to be much simpler than spellcasting. And if they aren't going to be susceptible to countermeasures against magic, they should not be as powerful as magic.

That was one of my main problems with the Mystic as well. It could be a paladin, wizard, cleric all in one. It was too versatile, it is the definition of "stepping into another class's territory."

This is why I think that psionics should be more limited than spellcasting. 

Quote from Xerostomia >>

I just think Psions and Monks are conceptually very similar and it makes sense they should be linked.  I don't see why we need another spellcaster class in all but name. 

Ki points derive from Psi points in 2nd edition Psionic Handbook. The reason to have different classes is to offer a diversity of play mechanics. The monk has a unique play mechanic in Ki points but it's woefully undeveloped, almost an afterthought of the system. Allowing Ki to manifest in new ways, ie psychic powers, can greatly expand the monk's interest. 

Personally I would prefer if psionic abilities are distinct from spells in every way and not just a bunch of re-skinned spells. 

 Um...  not sure where you get that comparison.  I don't know the history of DnD classes, so it's entirely possible that the early version of psi points gave WotC the framework for the Ki Point system.  But to equate psionic abilities with the Monk....  I don't even know where to start with that, it's just so inherently wrong.  Can you imagine Jean Grey running around, punching things or beating them with a staff, while also disintegrating another 6 guys at the same time?

Quote from Xerostomia >>

I just think Psions and Monks are conceptually very similar and it makes sense they should be linked.  I don't see why we need another spellcaster class in all but name. 

Ki points derive from Psi points in 2nd edition Psionic Handbook. The reason to have different classes is to offer a diversity of play mechanics. The monk has a unique play mechanic in Ki points but it's woefully undeveloped, almost an afterthought of the system. Allowing Ki to manifest in new ways, ie psychic powers, can greatly expand the monk's interest.

 
The psion and monk were both psionic classes in 4e. Still distinct, though.

Monk was a class since 1e, psionicist was a class since 2e.

Quote from Xerostomia >>

I just think Psions and Monks are conceptually very similar and it makes sense they should be linked.  I don't see why we need another spellcaster class in all but name. 

Ki points derive from Psi points in 2nd edition Psionic Handbook. The reason to have different classes is to offer a diversity of play mechanics. The monk has a unique play mechanic in Ki points but it's woefully undeveloped, almost an afterthought of the system. Allowing Ki to manifest in new ways, ie psychic powers, can greatly expand the monk's interest. 

Personally I would prefer if psionic abilities are distinct from spells in every way and not just a bunch of re-skinned spells. 

 I think everyone here disagrees with you. The Psion should definitely not just be a Monk subclass. 

I don’t mind a psionic monk at all, in fact I want one. But I also want a Psionicist.

Quote from IamSposta >>

I don’t mind a psionic monk at all, in fact I want one. But I also want a Psionicist.

 I also would very much like and expect psionic subclasses of other classes, the same way there are spellcasting subclasses of non-spellcasters.

Sure, why not. I just hope we get a psionicist Too.

Yeah, Psionic Monk should exist, even though Astral Self Monk fills that role, but I do want a full non-spellcaster Psionic class.

This is one homebrew Psion. I did not make it, but it looks pretty good.https://www.gmbinder.com/share/-LZSNMgmChWNGW979hrj