I'll re-read the multiclassing rules when I get the opportunity and see what I'm missing, then -- everything I saw suggested that multiclassing was "Here, you get one power from the other class, now don't bother us you weirdo."
The multi-classing rules in 4E is the single best improvement over 3.x that exists in the edition change. The powers you get from the other class with a multi-class feat are just as powerful as a character with that class would receive.
In 3.x, if you play a 10th-level wizard who takes a level of fighter (and assuming you have the same STR score as an optimized fighter), you have the attack bonus of a 6th-level fighter.
In 4E, if you play a 10th level wizard who takes the fighter multiclass feat, you not only get the fighter (rather potent) marking ability, you get the same attack bonus as a fighter of your level.
In the Wednesday night game I DM, one of my players has an eladrin wizard who is stocking up on fighter multiclass feats and is having a ball of it. I'm rather jealous, having failed so miserably at making an effective Ftr-Mu with 3E core.
In the game I play in, I decided my paladin was not going to be a defender. The class roles my look like straitjackets, but they aren't. Creative use of race/class combos and feat selection can turn any class into a stand-in for any other class. In my case, I turned my paladin into a striker/leader. No one even noticed that our warlord was gone.
The trick is to think outside the box: if multiclassing = having levels in multiple classes, then yeah, it's a disappointment. If multiclassing is being able to thematically and tactically represent more than one class
effectively, then 4E beats 3.x in my game.
