Hmm.....Some interesting chat.....
I think there's definitely something here about the choices WotC made in regards to applying mechanics to the classes that seems to have fundamentally changed the view of the archetype for a lot of people. [MENTION=4937]Celebrim[/MENTION] mentioned how the Wanderer/Explorer archetype fools too broad for the Bard. To me, the bard seems to fit here perfectly as a class "concept" (A jack of all trades wandering adventurer), however the mechanical choices WotC made it feel narrower - the Bard is specifically now a inspirational figure relying mostly on spells, even valor bards. However, I would say this turns them into an aspect of the original archetype, rather than removes them from that archetype altogether. Similarly I would say the same restrictions were applied to Druids who feel like the defenders of a place the embody....WotC decided this would specifically be a natural bent, but I reckon you could just as easily make a case for the Archetype of a druid as a straight up non-caster, similar to the 4e Warden. Sorceror's feel like the classic Superhero archetype - I have transitioned from non-powerful to powerful without intention, and now I must control it. Again however the Mechanical choice shoved it into squishy Spell-slinger, whereby a melee version could probably be hung off a similar concept.
So I guess then another question would be: Where it feels like the mechanical application of the Class has closed off aspects of the archetype (The choice between martial and spellcasting being a common theme), would the aspect of the archetype that was ignored warrant a class in its own right? So the melee aspect of a sorcerer, for instance. Or would these things be better address in a sub-class, such as the arcane trickster?
I think there's definitely something here about the choices WotC made in regards to applying mechanics to the classes that seems to have fundamentally changed the view of the archetype for a lot of people. [MENTION=4937]Celebrim[/MENTION] mentioned how the Wanderer/Explorer archetype fools too broad for the Bard. To me, the bard seems to fit here perfectly as a class "concept" (A jack of all trades wandering adventurer), however the mechanical choices WotC made it feel narrower - the Bard is specifically now a inspirational figure relying mostly on spells, even valor bards. However, I would say this turns them into an aspect of the original archetype, rather than removes them from that archetype altogether. Similarly I would say the same restrictions were applied to Druids who feel like the defenders of a place the embody....WotC decided this would specifically be a natural bent, but I reckon you could just as easily make a case for the Archetype of a druid as a straight up non-caster, similar to the 4e Warden. Sorceror's feel like the classic Superhero archetype - I have transitioned from non-powerful to powerful without intention, and now I must control it. Again however the Mechanical choice shoved it into squishy Spell-slinger, whereby a melee version could probably be hung off a similar concept.
So I guess then another question would be: Where it feels like the mechanical application of the Class has closed off aspects of the archetype (The choice between martial and spellcasting being a common theme), would the aspect of the archetype that was ignored warrant a class in its own right? So the melee aspect of a sorcerer, for instance. Or would these things be better address in a sub-class, such as the arcane trickster?