Let's keep the snarkety to a minimum, shall we?
Anyhow, as for the article itself, I haven't had the time to read it over in full (I'm doing this between classes you see) but I have to say it looks good to me. The sharn does look weird, but I can't see how it looks any weirder than it did in 3e. I also like that, unlike in the FRCG, the article reclaims sharn rightfully as chaotic neutral / unaligned rather than chaotic evil (never seemed particularly evil to me, just crazy). Best of all, I like the fact that the article, unlike every other 4e ecology article before it has actual details for FR specifically. This, of course, wouldn't be necessary for more broadly-used creatures (like dragonborn) but it would have been nice for the creatures with specific ties to FR (can anyone say "genasi?").
All in all, I look forward to reading it in more detail.

*reads the preview bits*
Wait. Did they adopt FR's sharn to core 4e, or did they just insert core 4e backstory into an FR creature?
Or does the article present a core-adopted sharn and an FR sharn as well? Becuase if the FR sharn suddenly has references to Tharizdun dropping all over the place, I'm going to go have a drink.




(Dungeons & Dragons)
Rulebook featuring "high magic" options, including a host of new spells.