This paper investigates the plausibility of novelty-variety as a potential basic psychological need in a series of three studies. Using criteria proposed by Baumeister and Leary (1995) and Ryan and Deci (2017) to establish a motive as a basic human need, we focus on those criteria where evidence is lacking. Specifically, we examine whether novelty-variety is distinct from other needs in Basic Psychological Need Theory (BPNT) proposed by Self-Determination Theory (SDT), whether its absence results in adverse effects and its satisfaction uniquely predicts well-being outcomes, and whether the effects are different across age and personality. In Study 1, participants (N=202) rated novelty-variety and needs from BPNT (competence, autonomy, relatedness) in three domains to assess its independence from these needs and the extent to which novelty-variety uniquely relates to domain-specific well-being. In Study 2 (N=414), the fulfillment of novelty-variety and two BPNT needs (autonomy and relatedness) was experimentally manipulated in work-related vignettes, further showing that unsatisfied novelty-variety is related to lower well-being. Finally, the third study (N=599) accounts for some of the limitations in Study 2 and examines the criteria of universality. Based on the examined criteria, all three studies provide support for further considering novelty-variety as a potential basic psychological need.