Had a thought this morning about how these multiclass rules lose flexibility. Not only does it interfere with also taking an archetype but it makes it impossible to multiclass into an archetype for your 2nd class. Let's say samurai is a fighter only archetype. If you're a wizard who wants to multi class to fighter you're fine. But if you're playing a wu Jen who wants to multiclass to samurai you're out of luck. Multiclass rules as written only allow the base class, no archetypes allowed. That's a flaw with the rules for me
I dont think archetypes will be class specific, though they might have prerequisites that favor certain classes.
I like the way spells scale now, but its frustrating to me that spontaneous casters only add one level at a time to their spell list. I'd rather they just had fewer spells known. But, its just the playtest, I'm sure they'll find a better way, and if not, I trust the developers have a better understanding of balance than I do.
I prefer to have only beings with a supernatural connection to their alignment like clerics, outsiders and undead to be really affected by it. But, that doesn't really work when paladins want to smite evildoers.
I absolutely love the Paladin class, and the idea of a holy and righteous warrior shining as a beacon of light in a darkened world. That said, I do feel that the Paladin occupies a certain conceptual space, in such a way that it pushes out a broader idea of a divine champion or holy warrior, one that would include the paladin as a roleplaying option, but open it up to other forms of divine champion that aren't limited to the paladin or it's dark (or rebellious) reflections. I see that's not the direction that the developers are going, and that's fine, but I do think a broader class with the paladin as a specific roleplaying option (possibly with an archetype or class feats) would benefit the system more.