http://www.enworld.org/forum/news/323442-en-world-interview-mike-mearls-lead-designer-d-d-next.html

Excerpts:

Q:I saw some elements of 4E represented in some of the defensive spells - such as mirror image being set as interrupts (works well by the way). One of the complaints that I and lots of fans have with 4E is that the proliferation of interrupts for offense slowed the pace of each turn to a crawl. I know in December we spoke about the pace of the game being very important to you. With that in mind will we be seeing the interrupt mechanic more in an offensive way or just defensively?

A:I'd like interrupts to serve either two purposes. First, I think quick, simple interrupts that boost a defense are OK. For instance, an interrupt that boosts your AC or reduces damage you take. You resolve it quickly and it doesn't slow the pace too much.

For more complex interrupts, like those that require die rolls or decisions, I'd prefer the interrupt to take away part of your next turn. That way, the total time it takes to go around the table remains relatively constant. In essence, you're taking your action ahead of time rather than getting two actions during a round.


Q:The fighter in D&D Next feels like a fighter of old, but with more tricks up his sleeve than before. In my opinion the fighter feels like the one class that seamlessly melds the feeling of all editions into one class (surge power from 4E, hit point dominance from 1E, specialization from 2E and 3E). Is thought put into the classes so that each class has aspects which represent it in each edition, or was it just a perfect storm in the case of the fighter?

A:I think that you've captured the basics of our approach though, interestingly enough, the fighter changed a bit from that initial draft. I'll explain some of the mechanics for folks:

The surge mechanic was a fighter-only ability that let fighters heal. Based on closed playtest feedback, we added a mechanic that lets all characters heal by resting.

Like the basic D&D and AD&D fighter, the current fighter design has the best hit points, weapons, and armor class.

Weapon specialization has moved into themes. Again, based on feedback, we moved the fighter away from picking one type of weapon to be good at.

In any case, I think that every class has drawn from each edition. The interesting part to me is how much 2nd edition has influenced things, primarily from the idea that characters can be customized primarily according to how they fit into the world. Rogues pick a scheme, inspired in part by the 2e mechanic that let thieves allocate points to their skills so that they could focus on one ability or another. Our new take on domains moves a little closer to spheres in intent, while our focus on themes as bundles of feats that are tied to organizations, training, or some other element expressed in the setting is another nod to keeping characters grounded in the campaign world, rather than only in the mechanics.



Yeah, is WotC really gonna make the same mistakes again? Interrupts, for fuck sake?! Healing surges?

Healing surges in the 4e sense =/= healing by resting necessarily. The later has been in every edition of D&D I know. My guess is that they just gave it a name.

The Surge Power was a Fighter Class ability, by the looks of it and again not necessairly a healing surge in a 4e sense.

As for interrupts, I am guessing they are there as tactical combat will be in core 5e (though supposedly it may be ignored to some extent).

Huh! All this time I thought it was "healing STIRGES"! Boy, is my face red!

-clash

The healing surges don't look like they work at all like the 4e version.  It looks like a midpoint between 1e's slow natural healing and 4e's anime style natural healing that works on a wholly different mechanic.  Interrupts look like a choice that takes a portion of your action instead of giving whole new seperate actions on top of your standard action.  Not the same to me but it's taken from 4e for sure.

Hit Points are a wonderful game mechanic until you start thinking about them.

Quote from: Marleycat;541030Interrupts look like a choice that takes a portion of your action instead of giving whole new seperate actions on top of your standard action.  Not the same to me but it's taken from 4e for sure.

hurr hurr Or it's from Magic: the Gathering hurr hurr

Seriously, though, it's from M:tG.  

It makes me wince almost as bad as 'defender' or 'striker'.

I think its just an instant spell right. The fighter swings before he hits you can improve your AC, reduce his damage or whatever.

Rather than consider it an intercept, a compute term R Garfield indeed applied to MtG, consider it as a Magical Action of Opportunity.

So you might have a spell that negates another spell, a counterspell if you will, you can cast that spell in reaction to another spell.

I think that looks fine.

I liked the healing HD stuff but want to keep it out of combat, so once the combat is over you can rest and heal 2HD or whatever. In combat is more of an issue for me.

Quote from: 1989;541018Interrupts, for fuck sake?!

You mean the thing that's been in the game since at least 1978*? Yeah. I'm shocked to discover those are still in there.

(*Probably earlier, but I'm too lazy to check when feather fall was added.)

QuoteHealing surges?

Now, see, this actually is the end of the world. I can see the storm clouds of blood forming on the horizon now.

I don't see how mirror image works as a series of interrupts. You cast the frikkin spell and then there are X number of images of the caster. Successful attacks destroy the images.

Why the hell does this need to be an interrupt?

Quote from: Exploderwizard;541064I don't see how mirror image works as a series of interrupts. You cast the frikkin spell and then there are X number of images of the caster. Successful attacks destroy the images.

Why the hell does this need to be an interrupt?

I assume you can do it in response to an attack. Does seem to be a little odd on that one though.

Generally I like the concept as it can lead to wizardly type battles with spell and counter spell etc but Mirror image is an odd one to highlight. Stoneskin, or somethign might have been a better choice.

Quote from: jibbajibba;541068I assume you can do it in response to an attack. Does seem to be a little odd on that one though.

Generally I like the concept as it can lead to wizardly type battles with spell and counter spell etc but Mirror image is an odd one to highlight. Stoneskin, or somethign might have been a better choice.

If thats how it works then it seems like quite a nerf. It would protect against only one attack per casting instead of the 2-5 the spell traditionally provides.

Yet another instance of using an iconic name for something completely different.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;541070If thats how it works then it seems like quite a nerf. It would protect against only one attack per casting instead of the 2-5 the spell traditionally provides.

Yet another instance of using an iconic name for something completely different.

I am speculating. Maybe it a pay off. Cast it in advance for a greater benefit cast it as an interrupt to save you now. I quite like that flexibility

Quote from: Exploderwizard;541070If thats how it works then it seems like quite a nerf. It would protect against only one attack per casting instead of the 2-5 the spell traditionally provides.

Yet another instance of using an iconic name for something completely different.

That doesn't make sense. Mearls mentioned more than once spells will be be powerful, they better be with less slots. I see mirror image lasting just like before, hit every image one at a time and done. Being defensive in nature it operates as a 4e style immediate interrupt not taking away from the wizard's action.

The counter to a mirror imaged mage in AD&D?  

The dart throwing fighter

Quote from: Sacrosanct;541077The counter to a mirror imaged mage in AD&D?  

The dart throwing fighter

or the hobbit with a bag of gravel