This is semi-related, but if I had my way in an ideal world, divine spellcasting would be called "miracles" and use a different system from arcane casting, which uses the traditional tropes of witchcraft and the occult.
That would be cool. I would actually prefer that too. Unfortunately for us there is no chance to shape Divine Magic in 5e because it’s already been printed. Hopefully we’ll have an opportunity to change things for 6e.
This is semi-related, but if I had my way in an ideal world, divine spellcasting would be called "miracles" and use a different system from arcane casting, which uses the traditional tropes of witchcraft and the occult.
That would be cool. I would actually prefer that too. Unfortunately for us there is no chance to shape Divine Magic in 5e because it’s already been printed. Hopefully we’ll have an opportunity to change things for 6e.
I wouldn't know how to go about it, mind you, especially since I've gotten used to how divine casting is handled. But I feel like more could be done to distinguish between a mage using their energy and knowledge of metaphysics to bend reality, and a priest who utters a prayer to a divine power to receive a miracle. Warlocks are somewhere in the middle because of their patron, but the class tries to make it somewhat distinct with the Pact Magic feature.
This is semi-related, but if I had my way in an ideal world, divine spellcasting would be called "miracles" and use a different system from arcane casting, which uses the traditional tropes of witchcraft and the occult.
That would be cool. I would actually prefer that too. Unfortunately for us there is no chance to shape Divine Magic in 5e because it’s already been printed. Hopefully we’ll have an opportunity to change things for 6e.
I wouldn't know how to go about it, mind you, especially since I've gotten used to how divine casting is handled. But I feel like more could be done to distinguish between a mage using their energy and knowledge of metaphysics to bend reality, and a priest who utters a prayer to a divine power to receive a miracle. Warlocks are somewhere in the middle because of their patron, but the class tries to make it somewhat distinct with the Pact Magic feature.
Agreed. That’s all I want for Psionics too. I‘m too late to ask them to change Divine Magic, but I’m not too late to try for Psionics.
And to paraphrase your very own argument: “You feel that way, I don’t.” I think have one single alternative to Vancian Spellcasting is necessary.
Why is all spellcasting assumed to be Vancian? Four Element monks use spells, but not spell slots. Put aside that the Four Element monks are pretty bad, the system they use is a good skeleton of spells that don't use spell slots.
But those spells are still drawn from the same list, and so are still part of the same system. Also, not all Psions should be Monks.
*sigh* It was just an example of a system of spellcasting that is distinctly non-Vancian. I didn't say psions have to be monks, I'm just pointing out that there are plenty of ways to use the already very robust spells system in ways that are different. You just seem very stuck on the idea that psionics has to use a completely different sub system and I feel like it's just some sort of unreasonable distaste for using the same sub system.
Ok, so I haven't fully finished it yet, but my personal take on a Mystic subclass I'm calling the Shaper is this: They get access to a list of spells known at level 3 when they take the subclass as well as a Mystic Energy Pool equal to something like the highest number on their Psi die + their Int modifier. They can cast any spell on their known list, they don't have to prepare them nor do they have slots, but it costs one point of Mystic Energy per spell level to cast. As an action, they can concentrate for a turn to refill their pool. At the beginning of their next turn, if they have not lost concentration, they roll their psi-die and refill the pool with the result. They ignore the verbal components of all their spells and they can use gemstones as foci. As a special rule, if the spell has a material component with a gold cost, they can use a gemstone with the same cost instead. their list of spells known grows as they level, like the UA Ranger Variant, but with a bigger spell list.
Is that sufficiently different enough for you? I somehow feel it is not.
You would be correct, it is not different enough for me. Any system that includes any of the following is insufficiently different as far as I am concerned:
Spells Known
Spell Slots
Spell Points
Spell Lists
Spells
Spellcasting
spell “casting”
Spell Components
Psionics=/=Spellcasting The closest I would willingly accept is the possibility of “reproducing the effects of (but does not cast)” and not for anything above Cantrips.
Lemme put it this way, as far as I am concerned I am already the centrist by willing to go as far as accepting Psionics as “Magic.” The rest of the diehards won’t even meet you at that halfway point.
Yeah, then I'm going to continue thinking that you're being pretty unreasonable. You object to the name "spell" simply because of the name.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Canto alla vita alla sua bellezza ad ogni sua ferita ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
So, maybe Extra Attack isn't a great example, but Arcane Archers are. They're magic. They have a new simple magic system. The Psi Dice proves that they're not against making new systems only for psionics.
Why can't they do that with a class, and not have it be a caster?
creating just eight effects that are thematically apropriate to an arrow mage is a lot easier than creating an psionics system advanced enough to last an entire class. How much overlap could an psion have with spellcasters? would you be fine with a handful of disiplinces fules by spell slots and are similar to spells, but who dont require any components and are not considered magical?
If they make a Dark Sun book without including a non-caster psion class, I won't allow it in my games. If they do psionics wrong, I'm not allowing it. Until they publish an Unearthed Arcana with the 3 requirements I have for the psionic system in 5e, I'm not voting for it.
And if they would simply stop trying to make Psionics as something similar but different from Spellcasting and just make something entirely different from spellcasting it would have led to different results. That was the issue with the Mystic.
The issue with the Mystic is that the devs didn't have a clear picture of what a Mystic should do. The actual mechanics was the least of their problems. Is it a damage dealing class? A support class? What distinguishes them from other classes in that niche? "Psionics class" is not an identity.
well the thing is the mystic class had to represent every kind of psion with the mystic class, you cannot have one psionic class for utillity, and blasting and one for tanking and support for instance, an mystic will only ever have a fraction of the total available disiplinces, just like an wizard, bard or cleric it can be built to fit a certain niche, they are worse at out right damage and blasting compared to sorcerers and wizards, and their disiplinces generally falls into the categories of buffs, utillity, debuffs and anything to do with weapon usage / melee mystics. think of them like clerics, they have a little bulk and a little armor and a few weapons, and depending on subclass they can deal quite a bit of damage, yet where they are at their best is with helping their allies, un-helping their foes and providing some useful spells.
To distinguish them further from clerics and wizards, they are a lot more "here and now" than what their spellcasting peers are, they dont get better spells with longer casting times, they dont get the luxury of ritual casting and their disiplinces almost always have short durations described in minutes, with maybe a handful of effects lasting an hour, with only a single example of an effect lasting for a total of 8 hours. Furthermore a much greater portion of their disiplince effects require concentration to maintain compared to other classes, and once they reach 9th level they will no longer gain any more powerful effects than what they weilded previously, just more control of the powers they do weild, suddenly capable of concetrating on the equivolent of an 5th and 1st level spell at once instead of an single 6th level spell slot, or the equivalent of an 4th and a 2nd level slot at once, or the equivialent of three 2nd level spells, but cannot do anything greater than a 5th level spell. No raw increase in power, just more utillity.
You might see them as more extreme sorcerers, they do not know much, but they are flexible with the disiplinces that they know with their spell point like system of casting and their psionic mastery feature
They seem to have had at least some idea of what the class should and should not do, it has its own little identity still
Sure lets add another system that will bog the game down, where if it is a magic system no game slowdown. Making a system just to be special mind dudes is not the right way and I hope it never happens the Psi Die works good and keeps stuff moving, I think what this Psionic UA is just righr.
It won't bog down the game. The DM can choose if it's allowed or not.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
also hey if psionics will be defined by this mechanic and we get an proprer psionic class, would it not be neat to have the option (ie it is not manditory) to use an roll on your psi dice instead of your proficency bonus to set your DC? might be a little too powerful, perhaps you would need to put an limit like only doing this once per short or long rest and your psi dice being reduced an extra step every time you do tho
They tried something similar in 3.0 where the psion rolled a d20 to determine a powers save DC. They later changed it in 3.5 to mirror the save DC rules for magic. Maybe with the smaller die used for psionic talent this could be a viable class feature again.
And to paraphrase your very own argument: “You feel that way, I don’t.” I think have one single alternative to Vancian Spellcasting is necessary.
Why is all spellcasting assumed to be Vancian? Four Element monks use spells, but not spell slots. Put aside that the Four Element monks are pretty bad, the system they use is a good skeleton of spells that don't use spell slots.
But those spells are still drawn from the same list, and so are still part of the same system. Also, not all Psions should be Monks.
*sigh* It was just an example of a system of spellcasting that is distinctly non-Vancian. I didn't say psions have to be monks, I'm just pointing out that there are plenty of ways to use the already very robust spells system in ways that are different. You just seem very stuck on the idea that psionics has to use a completely different sub system and I feel like it's just some sort of unreasonable distaste for using the same sub system.
Ok, so I haven't fully finished it yet, but my personal take on a Mystic subclass I'm calling the Shaper is this: They get access to a list of spells known at level 3 when they take the subclass as well as a Mystic Energy Pool equal to something like the highest number on their Psi die + their Int modifier. They can cast any spell on their known list, they don't have to prepare them nor do they have slots, but it costs one point of Mystic Energy per spell level to cast. As an action, they can concentrate for a turn to refill their pool. At the beginning of their next turn, if they have not lost concentration, they roll their psi-die and refill the pool with the result. They ignore the verbal components of all their spells and they can use gemstones as foci. As a special rule, if the spell has a material component with a gold cost, they can use a gemstone with the same cost instead. their list of spells known grows as they level, like the UA Ranger Variant, but with a bigger spell list.
Is that sufficiently different enough for you? I somehow feel it is not.
You would be correct, it is not different enough for me. Any system that includes any of the following is insufficiently different as far as I am concerned:
Spells Known
Spell Slots
Spell Points
Spell Lists
Spells
Spellcasting
spell “casting”
Spell Components
Psionics=/=Spellcasting The closest I would willingly accept is the possibility of “reproducing the effects of (but does not cast)” and not for anything above Cantrips.
Lemme put it this way, as far as I am concerned I am already the centrist by willing to go as far as accepting Psionics as “Magic.” The rest of the diehards won’t even meet you at that halfway point.
Yeah, then I'm going to continue thinking that you're being pretty unreasonable. You object to the name "spell" simply because of the name.
What I would really like is for D&D to completely abandon Vancian Spellcasting in it’s entirety. I also realize how utterly ridiculous that would be. So instead I am asking for a compromise of just one measly little class that “does magic” without “casting spells.” Just the one class, that’s it. If I can accept 30 years of Vancian Magic (with no end in sight) and 9 entire classes, each with a slew of subclasses (plus two more subclasses for Fighter and Rogue) that all use it, why is it too much to ask that the comunity accept one class that doesn’t? Just the one.
so then ýou don't specifically want psionics to be a diffrent system, merely for an diffrent system to exist? would you be happy with any kind of diffrent magic person, like a class who only uses at-will AoE spells who constantly chooses what damage type and area to use for their spell and whose AoE damage scales in the same manner as an rouge? perhaps an spllthief like archetype, one who steals the unique psionic and magical power posessed by certain monsters like the charm of an succubus or the life drain of an vampire and uses them for themselves? an class all about music, whose "spells" have dance and song components instead of verbal and somatic and who needs his enemies to often see the dance and hear the music to gain its benefits?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
i am soup, with too many ideas (all of them very spicy) who has made sufficient homebrew material and character to last an thousand human lifetimes
No, because they would still use spells. And why invent another other class when Psionics has already been the alternative to Spellcasting for 30 years?
No, because they would still use spells. And why invent another other class when Psionics has already been the alternative to Spellcasting for 30 years?
Maybe we can phrase the question a different way. The effects and mechanics in the game are meant to reflect and represent different aspects of these character archetypes. A Warlock for example, is granted its power through its patron, so its spellcasting is different. The reason it seems to work is because you are expending just a couple spells per short rest but they are cast at their highest level, almost as if your are channeling your patrons power through your connection.
The question here is being posed about the Psionic. What kind of mechanic accurately represents what they Psionic should be able to do? How do you represent it mechanically? It seems like most Psionic designs are building a specific feature first and designing the class around that, which is backwards. It makes it feel like we are designing a new feature just to say we did.
I love the way that the Psi Die mechanic works. I would simply expand on that and have all of the psionic powers work the same way the Psionic Talent Options work, I would just let them choose their options the way a known caster chooses spells.
I don’t think we need to invent a new mechanic, they already did it. We just need a bigger list.
So, maybe Extra Attack isn't a great example, but Arcane Archers are. They're magic. They have a new simple magic system. The Psi Dice proves that they're not against making new systems only for psionics.
Why can't they do that with a class, and not have it be a caster?
creating just eight effects that are thematically apropriate to an arrow mage is a lot easier than creating an psionics system advanced enough to last an entire class. How much overlap could an psion have with spellcasters? would you be fine with a handful of disiplinces fules by spell slots and are similar to spells, but who dont require any components and are not considered magical?
Yes, but they were saying that there only needs to be one magic system. This is clearly not true, as they made a new, very simple magic system for Arcane Archers. The fact of the matter is that multiple types of magic systems can exist, and they could make on for a Psion class instead of just using spellcasting. Psions would not overlap with spellcasters much, to avoid the problem of saying, "why reinvent the wheel?" The problem is, if there is a cart representing magic that spellcasting is the wheel of, psionics would be a completely separate part of the cart. They're not the same, and shouldn't work the same.
If they make a Dark Sun book without including a non-caster psion class, I won't allow it in my games. If they do psionics wrong, I'm not allowing it. Until they publish an Unearthed Arcana with the 3 requirements I have for the psionic system in 5e, I'm not voting for it.
what are those three requirements exactly?
My 3 requirements are:
There must be a psionic based class.
That class must not be a spellcaster.
It must be simple to understand.
This is what I personally require to be true before I approve of any psionic system WotC publishes in an Unearthed Arcana.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
But what does this full class do if not spells (or renamed spells that use some other similar but different resource)? I still fail to understand conceptually what the goal is here. Is it designed like a martial class? Like a monk that has Psy Points instead of Ki Points and some features like Invocations that perform Psy like abilities?
This is what I personally require to be true before I approve of any psionic system WotC publishes in an Unearthed Arcana.
1) +1 I agree completely.
2) +1 I agree completely.
3) I completely disagree on this one. The wizard, the artificer, the sorcerer (as examples) are not simple to understand. Any psionic based class should have a Psi Point based system (probably based on the optional Power Point system in the DMG).
They were on the right track with the Mystic. They just needed to focus more on archetypes in line with the Wizard school style of archetypes. Give them all a central set of abilities then add another set of abilities based on their archetype (telepath, telekinetic, etc.).
Retain the psionic focus concept and have these abilities powered (fuels) by psi points.
This concept of psi die is just another thing for the DM to keep track of when dealing with players who can't be trusted with keeping track of their own abilities. I have been playing/DM'ing D&D since 1981 and have lost track of the number of times I have had issues with this type of player.
I won't be using (or allowing in my games) any of the psi die based archetypes. I have enough on my plate to track as is.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Watch your back, conserve your ammo, and NEVER cut a deal with a dragon!
I love the Psi Die, but if it has to be points then points it is. I don’t care nearly so much about that as I do the rest of it. I will say that Mystic table was all over the place. If they’re going to use points, it has to be a more linear and streamlined progression than the Mystic used, which was based on the Spell Points from the DMG. If anything it should be more like the Sorcery/Ki point progression.
But what does this full class do if not spells (or renamed spells that use some other similar but different resource)? I still fail to understand conceptually what the goal is here. Is it designed like a martial class? Like a monk that has Psy Points instead of Ki Points and some features like Invocations that perform Psy like abilities?
Sure, why not. Instead of Martial Arts Die it’s a Psi Arts Die and goes d6-d12 (instead of the Monk’s d4-d10). And think of it like this, if you took every fire based spell but wrapped them all up into one power that started baby sized and grew with Class Level, call that “Pyrokinesis.” You don’t need a laundry list of psionic powers as long as the spell list if they each just do more as the class level goes up. If the powers encompass the same kind of scope as multiple spells then the character only needs, what, 6-10 max to be a match for any full caster, with no casting whatsoever.
I'm pretty sure I've mentioned it in this thread already, but I'll just bring it up again. As IamSposta said, the Psi Dice introduced in the latest Psionics UA would make a great basis for a new, proper psionic class; the foundation is there, all it needs is a little expansion.
Now, what I am about to say is jut my personal supposition on how this this could work, but if I were to go about making this class, I would use the Psi Dice mechanic as it presently exists, with this addition for this class: I would create a limited pool of points to go alongside it that could be used for one of two purposes, either to increase the die size by one rank if it is below it's maximum, or to fuel an effect that would otherwise automatically lower the size of the dice. From my understanding different psionic powers fit under different disciplines in previous editions (telepathy, telekinesis, etc); there could be a limited number of powers available for selection from each discipline, and the way I would go about it would be to have it so that certain powers would be labeled as being affected by antimagic, depending on how potent they were. For subclasses, I would take a page from the Wizard's playbook and have certain options be affiliated with certain disciplines, where they have class abilities that synergize with that particular discipline.
Again, that second paragraph is entirely my supposition and brainstorming, but all that is just to say that having a psionics class that isn't just a dressed-up spellcaster is very much workable.
I'm pretty sure I've mentioned it in this thread already, but I'll just bring it up again. As IamSposta said, the Psi Dice introduced in the latest Psionics UA would make a great basis for a new, proper psionic class; the foundation is there, all it needs is a little expansion.
Now, what I am about to say is jut my personal supposition on how this this could work, but if I were to go about making this class, I would use the Psi Dice mechanic as it presently exists, with this addition for this class: I would create a limited pool of points to go alongside it that could be used for one of two purposes, either to increase the die size by one rank if it is below it's maximum, or to fuel an effect that would otherwise automatically lower the size of the dice. From my understanding different psionic powers fit under different disciplines in previous editions (telepathy, telekinesis, etc); there could be a limited number of powers available for selection from each discipline, and the way I would go about it would be to have it so that certain powers would be labeled as being affected by antimagic, depending on how potent they were. For subclasses, I would take a page from the Wizard's playbook and have certain options be affiliated with certain disciplines, where they have class abilities that synergize with that particular discipline.
Again, that second paragraph is entirely my supposition and brainstorming, but all that is just to say that having a psionics class that isn't just a dressed-up spellcaster is very much workable.
I like that idea. I would probably make the other DMs in my group nuts because I would play that class so much.
Sorry as a non-veteran player, I still struggle to understand the mechanical and narrative need for a whole new chassis. Once the Artificer came out, I immediately switched my next character concept from Wizard to it, because it fulfilled the "inventor" category that a Wizard just wasn't able to do. I struggle to think of a "Psionic" that wouldn't be fulfilled in a well designed subclass in each class. If I want to play Psylocke, a Psionic Monk or Rogue would work. If I want to play Eleven, a Psionic Sorcerer seems to be fine. If I want to play a Jedi, a Psionic Fighter would do it. I could be wrong, I don't know every single concept out there, but I think the reason we haven't seen the Psion pursued very aggressively is because it isn't as obvious of a need to players. It seems to be something you only really want if you knew about it beforehand. I didn't know about it until Mystic UA and now these.
Well, the way I see it, I think it'd be simpler to create a single base class that can fulfill the majority of these fantasies than it is to create a multitude of subclasses that are spread out everywhere; not that you can't have both though, having the Wizard doesn't invalidate having the Arcane Trickster or the Eldritch Knight. And, to be fair, there have been plenty of players who have said that this is something the game has needed for a quite a while now.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
That would be cool. I would actually prefer that too. Unfortunately for us there is no chance to shape Divine Magic in 5e because it’s already been printed. Hopefully we’ll have an opportunity to change things for 6e.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I wouldn't know how to go about it, mind you, especially since I've gotten used to how divine casting is handled. But I feel like more could be done to distinguish between a mage using their energy and knowledge of metaphysics to bend reality, and a priest who utters a prayer to a divine power to receive a miracle. Warlocks are somewhere in the middle because of their patron, but the class tries to make it somewhat distinct with the Pact Magic feature.
Agreed. That’s all I want for Psionics too. I‘m too late to ask them to change Divine Magic, but I’m not too late to try for Psionics.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Yeah, then I'm going to continue thinking that you're being pretty unreasonable. You object to the name "spell" simply because of the name.
Canto alla vita
alla sua bellezza
ad ogni sua ferita
ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty
To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me
The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
It won't bog down the game. The DM can choose if it's allowed or not.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
They tried something similar in 3.0 where the psion rolled a d20 to determine a powers save DC. They later changed it in 3.5 to mirror the save DC rules for magic. Maybe with the smaller die used for psionic talent this could be a viable class feature again.
Some of my 5e homebrews on GM Binder for Dark Sun, Dark Sun Sub-classes. Feel free to message me with any questions, suggestions, or critiques.
Okay then, you go right ahead and think that.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
so then ýou don't specifically want psionics to be a diffrent system, merely for an diffrent system to exist? would you be happy with any kind of diffrent magic person, like a class who only uses at-will AoE spells who constantly chooses what damage type and area to use for their spell and whose AoE damage scales in the same manner as an rouge? perhaps an spllthief like archetype, one who steals the unique psionic and magical power posessed by certain monsters like the charm of an succubus or the life drain of an vampire and uses them for themselves? an class all about music, whose "spells" have dance and song components instead of verbal and somatic and who needs his enemies to often see the dance and hear the music to gain its benefits?
i am soup, with too many ideas (all of them very spicy) who has made sufficient homebrew material and character to last an thousand human lifetimes
No, because they would still use spells. And why invent another other class when Psionics has already been the alternative to Spellcasting for 30 years?
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Maybe we can phrase the question a different way. The effects and mechanics in the game are meant to reflect and represent different aspects of these character archetypes. A Warlock for example, is granted its power through its patron, so its spellcasting is different. The reason it seems to work is because you are expending just a couple spells per short rest but they are cast at their highest level, almost as if your are channeling your patrons power through your connection.
The question here is being posed about the Psionic. What kind of mechanic accurately represents what they Psionic should be able to do? How do you represent it mechanically? It seems like most Psionic designs are building a specific feature first and designing the class around that, which is backwards. It makes it feel like we are designing a new feature just to say we did.
I love the way that the Psi Die mechanic works. I would simply expand on that and have all of the psionic powers work the same way the Psionic Talent Options work, I would just let them choose their options the way a known caster chooses spells.
I don’t think we need to invent a new mechanic, they already did it. We just need a bigger list.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Yes, but they were saying that there only needs to be one magic system. This is clearly not true, as they made a new, very simple magic system for Arcane Archers. The fact of the matter is that multiple types of magic systems can exist, and they could make on for a Psion class instead of just using spellcasting. Psions would not overlap with spellcasters much, to avoid the problem of saying, "why reinvent the wheel?" The problem is, if there is a cart representing magic that spellcasting is the wheel of, psionics would be a completely separate part of the cart. They're not the same, and shouldn't work the same.
My 3 requirements are:
This is what I personally require to be true before I approve of any psionic system WotC publishes in an Unearthed Arcana.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
But what does this full class do if not spells (or renamed spells that use some other similar but different resource)? I still fail to understand conceptually what the goal is here. Is it designed like a martial class? Like a monk that has Psy Points instead of Ki Points and some features like Invocations that perform Psy like abilities?
1) +1 I agree completely.
2) +1 I agree completely.
3) I completely disagree on this one. The wizard, the artificer, the sorcerer (as examples) are not simple to understand. Any psionic based class should have a Psi Point based system (probably based on the optional Power Point system in the DMG).
They were on the right track with the Mystic. They just needed to focus more on archetypes in line with the Wizard school style of archetypes. Give them all a central set of abilities then add another set of abilities based on their archetype (telepath, telekinetic, etc.).
Retain the psionic focus concept and have these abilities powered (fuels) by psi points.
This concept of psi die is just another thing for the DM to keep track of when dealing with players who can't be trusted with keeping track of their own abilities. I have been playing/DM'ing D&D since 1981 and have lost track of the number of times I have had issues with this type of player.
I won't be using (or allowing in my games) any of the psi die based archetypes. I have enough on my plate to track as is.
Watch your back, conserve your ammo,
and NEVER cut a deal with a dragon!
I love the Psi Die, but if it has to be points then points it is. I don’t care nearly so much about that as I do the rest of it. I will say that Mystic table was all over the place. If they’re going to use points, it has to be a more linear and streamlined progression than the Mystic used, which was based on the Spell Points from the DMG. If anything it should be more like the Sorcery/Ki point progression.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Sure, why not. Instead of Martial Arts Die it’s a Psi Arts Die and goes d6-d12 (instead of the Monk’s d4-d10). And think of it like this, if you took every fire based spell but wrapped them all up into one power that started baby sized and grew with Class Level, call that “Pyrokinesis.” You don’t need a laundry list of psionic powers as long as the spell list if they each just do more as the class level goes up. If the powers encompass the same kind of scope as multiple spells then the character only needs, what, 6-10 max to be a match for any full caster, with no casting whatsoever.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I'm pretty sure I've mentioned it in this thread already, but I'll just bring it up again. As IamSposta said, the Psi Dice introduced in the latest Psionics UA would make a great basis for a new, proper psionic class; the foundation is there, all it needs is a little expansion.
Now, what I am about to say is jut my personal supposition on how this this could work, but if I were to go about making this class, I would use the Psi Dice mechanic as it presently exists, with this addition for this class: I would create a limited pool of points to go alongside it that could be used for one of two purposes, either to increase the die size by one rank if it is below it's maximum, or to fuel an effect that would otherwise automatically lower the size of the dice. From my understanding different psionic powers fit under different disciplines in previous editions (telepathy, telekinesis, etc); there could be a limited number of powers available for selection from each discipline, and the way I would go about it would be to have it so that certain powers would be labeled as being affected by antimagic, depending on how potent they were. For subclasses, I would take a page from the Wizard's playbook and have certain options be affiliated with certain disciplines, where they have class abilities that synergize with that particular discipline.
Again, that second paragraph is entirely my supposition and brainstorming, but all that is just to say that having a psionics class that isn't just a dressed-up spellcaster is very much workable.
I like that idea. I would probably make the other DMs in my group nuts because I would play that class so much.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Sorry as a non-veteran player, I still struggle to understand the mechanical and narrative need for a whole new chassis. Once the Artificer came out, I immediately switched my next character concept from Wizard to it, because it fulfilled the "inventor" category that a Wizard just wasn't able to do. I struggle to think of a "Psionic" that wouldn't be fulfilled in a well designed subclass in each class. If I want to play Psylocke, a Psionic Monk or Rogue would work. If I want to play Eleven, a Psionic Sorcerer seems to be fine. If I want to play a Jedi, a Psionic Fighter would do it. I could be wrong, I don't know every single concept out there, but I think the reason we haven't seen the Psion pursued very aggressively is because it isn't as obvious of a need to players. It seems to be something you only really want if you knew about it beforehand. I didn't know about it until Mystic UA and now these.
Well, the way I see it, I think it'd be simpler to create a single base class that can fulfill the majority of these fantasies than it is to create a multitude of subclasses that are spread out everywhere; not that you can't have both though, having the Wizard doesn't invalidate having the Arcane Trickster or the Eldritch Knight. And, to be fair, there have been plenty of players who have said that this is something the game has needed for a quite a while now.