Bialaska said:
As for roles, I really don't like them. I am one of the players who tend to make characters that cover two or more roles. Might not be as good a striker as a dedicated striker, or as great a fighter as a dedicated defender. But the fact that I can cover where necessary has always been one thing I liked.
I can completely understand this, because when I'm a player, I'm the same way. I always want to play a multi-role character, one who doesn't dominate any area but is half-decent in several (like a 2E Bard). It seems like we're not really going to see any 4E classes along those lines, though the Leader classes will probably be closest. My players differ, however, so 4E is working well for us.
Mercule - They're got christmas baubles for eyes, every picture of them has them wearing bright colours and fancy outfits (with a very vague but I think detectable Edwardian vibe), mostly with fancy hair flowing lightly on mysterious breezes, they live in a world beyond ours, teleport every five minutes, and generally, as has been mentioned, like "double elves, now with extra elf". They certainly don't seem much like the +int elves I'm used to, who seemed to be portrayed as more dour and less flighty than the high or wood elves.
The Ghost said:
Alignments - It seems odd to see lawful used to modify good but not evil and chaotic modify evil but not good. We would have rather they kept the old system or done away with it entirely.
I personally think they should have renamed the alignments, either all of them, or LG and CE, because it seems like a wierd situation right now. I don't see myself getting a lot of benefit out of LG and CE, to be honest. They seem like they're both just subsets of G and E, and kind of defy the rule that "Alignment is not personality", because they both have much clearer personality elements than the other alignments.