So I've been trying to zero in on the real problem people have with AEDU. Now I can't speak for everyone but I'm starting to think that it is not AEDU at all. It is the way AEDU is used in 4e that is throwing a lot of people from earlier editions.
In past editions, a martial action was a martial action. Any class could perform a martial action. They just weren't as good at it if that was not their focus.
Magic was also not absolutely distinctive to class. There was a lot of cross pollination between classes. Even clerics and wizards shared some magic. It was more a matter of focus.
In 4e, each classes powers were strictly that classes powers. In some ways this made life simple since you only had to look at what your class could do. On the other hand, it also reduced the overall choices and choices are fun. Now I will agree that mathematically, many of the powers were very similar but flavor wise I feel there was still a disconnect.
I am hoping in 5e that the number of class specific powers is greatly reduced. Maybe not to zero as a few powers per class can add distinctiveness. (e.g. laying on of hands for Paladins). Instead I'd rather the powers be grouped by power source (yea I hate that martial is a "power" source but I don't have a better name for the whole group that includes martial). Then let the classes focus to differing degrees on the power sources.
Maybe Fighters are super duper focused on martial whereas Paladins are focused on martial but also to a lesser degree on divine. Clerics can be a balanced focus between martial and divine.
Anyway, I see the lack of crossover as one of the things about AEDU that people dislike. Does anyone else feel this way?
Here is a great blog by themormegil that explains why we had an edition war. narrativism vs simulationism
HoBby Award Winner metagame dissonance (plot coupon)