Has it been a secret unrecognised opinion that people want to play those latter archtypes though? I’ve always felt it’s been quite prominent an opinion at least while I’ve been around, it’s just like you say though, the mechanics didn’t support them well.
^This
See, the thing is, the low levels are generally not a problem. They still are to a degree, casters still cause issues, but the scope of the challenges is smaller so it is easier to skirt the edges.
But, I will once again point out something I find highly notable about the situation.
DMs ban goodberry. DMs ban revivify. DMs ban or circumvent Speak with Dead. DMs ban Leomund's Tiny Hut. DMs ban or circumvent Wall of Force or Forcecage or Wish or Clone or Simulacrum or or or or...
But what base class feature of the Fighter ever gets banned? The rogue has some discussion of the intersection of expertise and Reliable Talent, making skill checks not worth rolling, but very rarely does this get into "ban for the sake of my game" territory.
Now, I'm not saying I want Fighters or Rogues or Barbarians or Rangers or Paladins to have these sorts of game-breaking effects... But I think there is clear room for growth and improvement. It shouldn't be that the only things these classes are good at are hitting single target enemies and dealing damage. It shouldn't be that the Detective archetype is completely blown away by someone who can speak with the soul of the victim, or ask the housecat what happened. The Secret Spy shouldn't be better built as a mage who uses teleportation/disguise self/invisibility/etherealness/ect
But as long as one set of people can do the impossible, and the other can only do what is possible... the imbalance is obvious. And while it is nice to say that a Grizzled Detective might be able to do seven really neat possible things and that means he is better than the person who can only do one impossible thing... magic isn't one thing. Every full spellcaster eventually has access to a dozen impossible abilities. You can't even the scale by increasing the breadth of the martial. Especially when DnD and archetypes themselves are about specialists. IF your detective is a worse detective, but a better pugilist, piano player, and doctor... well he isn't fulfilling the archetype of a detective.
But, there is a second problem, and that is... where do we put these new powers? Rangers and Paladins get spells, so they are fine. Barbarians are getting some fun new toys, as are rogues. I think Rogues are likely in a pretty decent spot overall. But... I don't think we can add the power directly to the classes. Feats won't work without adding more feats to the classes. New subclasses will just have the same problem that the Clockwork Sorcerer, Abberrant Mind, Hexblade, and all the other "subclass fixes" have had in the past.
Which is why I looked to the skill system. It is under-developed, fits the idea that the martial is SKILLED and that is the source of them doing the impossible, and requires much less bloat to implement.
