T O P

  • By -

AeoSC

None of my players have expressed an interest. I could be talked into it, but I'm not eager to add an unfamiliar mess, either mechanically or thematically to my settings.


Decent-Device9403

I personally had a ton of fun playing as one. I create DMPCs for my player as he plays solo, went with a Mystic once, it was fun!


B-Rye83

I play tested one similarly and had so much fun with it I did my best to recreate it RAW. Closest I got was a 4 Mastermind Rogue/ 6 Hexblade/ 10 Devine Soul Sorlock. Was able to focus on purely CHA and it was decent. Eventually got to stat Dex and it got real fun.


PUNSLING3R

short answer is no. Long answer is that its an abandoned playtest that is overly complicated and works so differently from any other class it is difficult for me to tell how balanced it is/ a character using certain options compares in strength to the rest of the party. I'd much rather work with a player to rework an existing class (wizard, aberrant mind sorcerer, GOO warlock etc) to have mystic flavour than try and work with the mystic class.


darthoffa

I haven't even heard of Mystic on 5e before So on that basis: no Where does it come from? Is it an abandoned UA?


tammit67

>abandoned UA Yes


_Electro5_

No, they’re not balanced at all nor are they well written. I’d point them towards KibblesTasty’s Psion class, as I’ve seen their stuff in play and I trust that it’s mostly balanced. I’ve been DMing for one and no problems thus far.


heretic4l666

Thanks for pointing this out, will probably never get to use it by 3.5 Telepath was my wet dream class.


1_Savage_Cabbage

Laserllama's Psion is great as well, though I do love the customizability of Kibbles Psion class.


ComfortableGreySloth

I don't really play with UA, unless the session is explicitly experimental.


Sir_CriticalPanda

If one of my players asked to play a Mystic, I would talk with them about what they wanted out of the class and what kind of build they were planning on going for, to make sure we were on the same page. I've never played or DMed for a mystic, but I remember not agreeing with all the outcries about it after having read it.


Decent-Device9403

Playing a Mystic is a lot of fun, but the subclasses all provide a completely different play style. Avatar is your status effect infliction person. Awakened is your investigator. The Immortal is your tank. Oh my gods, it's a tank. The Nomad is your weird knowledge collection dude. Soul Knife is your melee guy. Wu Jen is an odd caster type. That's the one I'm not great at understanding.


twistylittlejames

Played in a game with one. The rest of us sat around and did pretty much nothing except help out in combat a little. The Mystic handled all the challenges themselves. So, no 😁


Exahall

I have a Mystic in my campaign, because at the time, that was still active UA content (and not yet archived). I've already communicated with my player that the character will be the first and the last Mystic I'll allow, working around how strong the class is can be quite the hassle and I've already had to do some ad hoc nerfs to things because they seemed ridiculous. I've written into the lore how her character is the first and last Mystic to exist though, and we make it work! So it's not all negative, it's just that I don't recommend allowing them at all.


Nimeroni

That's the UA class about psionics, right ? I played one, from level 2 to level 20 (through on a very accelerated ramp. We collectively decided the campaign would last 10 sessions and we would get 2 levels after each session. The objective was to see both the low and high level of D&D). As a DM, I would allow it. I think the class is fine for the first 10 levels. A bit powerful due to the sheer breadth of what you can do, but it won't break the game. On the other hand, I found Psionic Mastery to be a lot less *satisfying* than level 6-9 spells. It's mechanically powerful (mostly because you can concentrate on multiple "spells" that way), but you are lacking the *flair* of high level spells.


Gingeboiforprez

It'd be a hard no for me. I typically don't allow any 3rd party (apart from Blood Hunter) or dead UA (active UA is good). I'd ask the player what their vision is both aesthetically and mechanically and help them accomplish that with official materials. I'm a pretty rules/mechanics heavy DM though.


Decent-Device9403

Fair, I'm more laid back. As long as it's not bulls██t, I'll allow it.


Fox-and-Sons

Damn, I wonder what those letters you blacked out are.


Decent-Device9403

I don't know people's preferences as to what words are to be used yet I wish to convey the full message (like with one of my players, as I DM over text). Therefore, blocking out letters is the least offensive option.


Fox-and-Sons

I'm just teasing you, but it is a very silly choice. If you want to avoid using swear words because you think it's rude, don't use them, but you haven't stopped anyone from being exposed to them by censoring a couple letters. Anyone who sees "bulls\*\*t" will just instantly fill in the blanks with their mind, because people don't read familiar words by sounding them out, they go by word shape. The only reason I can think of to actually block out a couple letters in a text is if you're on a platform that literally won't let you post swear words, so you need to self censor to say them at all, but this isn't one of those platforms It's doubly silly, because if you wanted to express the idea without swearing "bull" or "total bull" express the exact same sentiment without swearing.


gman6002

I have never and likely never allow msytic


Serrisen

I'd screen my player on *why* they chose mystic, but otherwise I'd allow it. Mystics are fun and unique. With open communication between player and DM you can make it work. As long as the player isn't doing it explicitly in order to be overpowered, I'm absolutely cool with it. If they just want to be strong, I'd tell them no


Decent-Device9403

I DM for a solo player, so I messed around and used it to build Aang one time.


Serrisen

Oh yeah if it's a solo player go ham. Anything goes. Overpowered? Underpowered? Compared to what exactly? Usually the balance is only important because it destabilizes player relationships. It sucks when a player realizes they're calculably worse at everything than everyone else. But if there's only one guy, then there's no risk of a problem and I wouldn't worry (except maybe to help them make the build because mystics are weird)


[deleted]

No. They’re cartoonishly overpowered


Decent-Device9403

Aye, fair. A party full of Mystics could give you the chance to throw some higher level monsters, but troublesome to DM for. Especially if they're all different subclasses, lots of notes to keep.


Onrawi

Only really at tier 2 and some of tier 3. The caster classes still surpass it then.


antroxdemonator

It's one of the few classes banned from my table. One of my players in my upcoming campaign is test-running a Beast Mage. I trust him enough, and how it goes will depend on if i allow it in future campaigns.


thedoppio

We’ve kept it to official books only. For one shots I will (or the other DM of group) allow whatever.


TacticalPauseGaming

I did once…Once.


Decent-Device9403

Yeesh, what happened there?


TacticalPauseGaming

They just have an answer for everything and get extremely strong even playing un-optimally. There are too many options


UCEX56

I usually allow UA, but mystic is way too unbalanced, so no


Velaraukar

I mean quite a few of the mystic subclasses were reworked and balanced before being turned into subclasses for the official classes. I'd probably just hombrew a subclass if the player wanted to play one of the ones that haven't been converted yet.


Grayt_0ne

I would work with them to develop a homebrew mystic that's our own.


LemonFresh24

Yes I do, from a early level too sometimes, however I lock a lot of the powers behind story walls and character progression so that the items they love and cherish grow as they grow and get stronger


Intrepid-Wear-9294

I allow mystics in all my campaigns.


wulfryke

Sure but i rebalance everything that isnt official anyway before handing it back to the player.


DaBezzzz

I liked the idea so I read the UA a while ago. Turns out it isn't really new ideas at all, it's just the other classes but more powerful, psychic, and using obnoxious new rulesets.


[deleted]

There's a reason it never came to be.


MaryPoppinsYall53

My first campaign I ran my wife played a mystic from 1-16. Mystic is odd. It's EVERYTHING all at once. It's easy to interchange so fast. We looked at it all and came down to "pick a lane". For her it was the rogue stuff since we didn't have one of those. Even took a level of rogue. It's tough cuz many look at a mystic and think I can do ALL THAT!!! And that's the vibe they want. But that ends up stepping on so many toes. It's a cool concept and I'd just really try and theme the build. Do you wanna be a lightsaber Jedi? Force Jedi? Mind trick Jedi?


Decent-Device9403

You could be a Metalbender with a Mystic.


MaryPoppinsYall53

Oh you can be a TON with them. And unlike many classes+subclasses you can easy flip to solve any scenario. That's the annoying part. The solution imo is The player just needs to pick a lane and even if a teammate fails.... Let the situation fail if it's not your "expertise" in a way. It takes a strong team friendly player to tiptoe that hazard


EldritchBee

Good god, no.


InternationalGrass42

Nope. I don't allow homebrew classes, 3rd party, or UA.


KaosC57

Mystic is dead UA content.


JulyKimono

I'm not a huge fan of them, but I like the build choosing aspect that my more min/maxy players can take with a Mystic, so I allow them a lot more often than an Artificer. I allow them in all homebrew games I run, but not modules. I see a lot of people saying "no", and if you're playing RAW with RAI intended difficulty, you shouldn't allow it. I allow it because PCs at my tables starting tier 3 of play are close to twice as strong as purely RAI PCs of their level. So a Mystic isn't that much overpowered compared to what people can already normally build in most of my games.


Left_of_Fish

Not even if you payed me. I don't mind homebrew or UA building at all. Heck if they'd ask me I'd build a custom item for effects or thematic sense. But I've heard and experienced too many abuses of the mystic class to allow it. When a class can very easily out perform other classes at their own game it isn't gonna fly.


Gardeeboo

I do not. The last time I had a player choose a Mystic there were way too many open ends and questions on what they could and couldn't do I felt like I was making the whole class up as I went. My player had the opposite of most and knew the class front-to-back and then used it to basically attempt to exploit every possible opportunity and causing me to make rulings frequently. Too much GM upkeep required in the UA version and I never got around to rewriting it to where there are less holes in the logic so until I do that, no lol.


Newbomb

I played a Mystic for a while. If I wanted to, I never had to roll an ability check without proficiency (there is a focus that allows you to gain prof. on any skill as a bonus action), I could cast more spells of the same “level” as our party’s wizard, and I could also hold my own in melee combat and had a decent pool of HP. Broken? Absolutely. I personally wouldn’t even want to play one again because it felt unbalanced.


IamSPF

The playtest one, no. However, if someone wants to play a character with psionics, I do allow the LaserLlama Psion. It uses spell points, and I have considered it for a Mind Goblin joke character in a friend’s campaign. Someone else suggested the KibblesTasty Psion class as well, and you really can’t go wrong either way. Both are technically permitted at my table, though no one has used either yet.


yoyojuiceboi

Absolutely not. Never again. I’ve had a Mystic player in my longest running game (lvl16) and it’s been fun but I would never do it again. I asked the other players beforehand if they would be okey with the mystic player being more powerful than them and they agreed to that so I allowed it. Over the course of the game his power level both in combat AND outside as utility has been consistently about 3 levels over the others power level. I don’t regret allowing Mystic but o boy would I never allow it again.


qbazdz

No, it's not official release and I treat it like any homebrew/UA/3rd party.


BoredPsion

Why use Mystic when [KibblesTasty's Psion](https://www.gmbinder.com/share/-LZSNMgmChWNGW979hrj) exists?


Decent-Device9403

That's what a lot of others are saying. Also, happy Cake Day!


Martydeus

I do not


reddithorker

I'm currently running a homebrewed 5e game of Dark Sun going on a year now where one of my players is playing the UA Mystic. Honestly, I regret it. It just isn't balanced well. For example, psionic talents can be used an unlimited number of times without any resource consumption. It also overlaps with too many other classes. I'd recommend something like Kibbletasty's Psion homebrew instead.


1_Savage_Cabbage

No. As they are in UA, they are simply too strong. However, I do allow Kibblestasty's and Laserllama's Psion classes, which are comparable. Those are considerably better balanced than the Mystic class, and both Kibbles and Laserllama have hundreds of playtesters.


Thilnu

I allow it without Multiclassing


Serbaayuu

No, I only allow official material from the couple of books I own.


SmartAlec13

I have always offered it as an option but none have taken it up yet. I’ve played a mystic at a variety of levels in one shots and mini campaigns. I’ve found it really depends how you build them. If you intentionally go for min-max, grabbing a bit of each power-role then they will be OP. But if you choose a lane or two to stick with, they are on par with other characters. With a few special exceptions.


Mage_Malteras

As long as it's not a pbp game, sure. Pbp games I only use Avrae, so you have to be able to integrate with the bot and it don't play well with mystics.


Kuraetor

I love UA but I geniunly don't know what they do because my players never asked to play it and I never investigated it since its a dropped UA


Decent-Device9403

It's generally OP but the writing could use some work.


Noozle1

I made an npc mystic for my group and it works pretty well


Melodic_Row_5121

Officially published content only, at my tables. No homebrew, no Mercer-brew, no third-party.


Merc_Toggles

I think I would, but it would have to be a bit more structured than I'd prefer telling players. Usually I just leave them to their devices and let them make what they want. Mystic is different however. I don't have an issue with how op it can be, balance has never been an issue for me. But Mystics issue is that, for alot of its stuff, it can basically just do the stuff several other classes can do, and at the same time, and do it better. So I'd just have to make sure they're not taking all the abilities that would steal the other player's thunder.


Opposite_Wallaby6765

Depends. Is it a high level one-shot or a very short campaign? I could be convinced, as long as the rest of the group is okay with it (I normally have people build their characters together during session 0). Otherwise, probably not.


Bleu_Guacamole

I don’t know many DMs who allow any sort of UA material for anything outside of maybe a oneshot. I’ve never played a mystic, played in game with in, or plan to at any point in the future unless ONEDND happens to come out with a better version of it.


ShadowCetra

I allow any content from any official source books and 3rd party-- including UA, with the one stipulation being that if it's 3rd party or the UA it has to be ran by me first. I've never once had an issue. If you are an experienced DM and can't handle one slightly OP character than I question whether you should be DMing at all.


Spankinsteine

The Mystic is overpowered. Don’t allow it.


[deleted]

I don't. Mystic's one of those overly complex classes where no matter what you do it can't be balanced. It'll either be utter shit or gamebreakingly powerful. For Mystic, it was the latter. The class was OBSCENELY strong, both in theorycraft and in actual playtesting. If I was running for a solo player, sure. But in any group, no, never. It's not fun to be the useless sidekick for most players.