Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 6019715" data-attributes="member: 6696971">I do believe that Mearls or Thompson (or someone) wrote an article on this very subject and explicitly stated that they are aiming for a monster design method whereby both top-down (outcome/target-based) and bottom-up (process/organic-based) work hand-in-hand.  Want to build a monster through the organic process of 3e (bottom up)?  You're good.  Those same monsters will have their derivation formula readily available so you can quickly ad-hoc build (top-down) diverse, of-level (and above and below) NPCs/monsters to challenge your PCs (4e).Given the absolute, disparate tastes of DMs out there, they must make good on this promise.  But they said they aware of the polarization of the user base on this subject so they were adamant that they will.  So there you go.</blockquote>