Some time back I separated the skills I’d come up with by suit (Swords, Wands, Cups, and Coins) to give myself some ways of differentiating between the suits during the design process. Around the same time, I started coming up with the “classes” (like character classes) I wanted to represent each of the skills.

I noticed several months ago that as Wizards of the Coast was adding their new “Essentials” classes, they began redefining the classes they’d already released in Fourth Edition. The Player’s Handbook Fighter was still a type of Fighter, but he became known as the “Weaponmaster.” The Rogue remains a type of Rogue, but is now known as the “Scoundrel,” instead.

Similarly, the Cleric became a “Templar” and the Wizard became an “Arcanist.” I foresee similar updates to the other classes as time goes by, look at the Essentials “Knight” and “Slayer” (both Fighters), the “Sentinel” (Druid), “Hunter” (Ranger), “Warpriest” (Cleric), “Blackguard” (Paladin), and “Mage” (Wizard). It may be that certain classes become archetypal, while others become specializations.

It makes sense that a few of the Player’s Handbook classes lost their archetype status (especially the wizard) because they didn’t perform enough like an archetype. I think by the time the Player’s Handbook 2 and PHB 3 rolled around, Wizards of the Coast had a much firmer grasp on what they were doing, which is why the Sentinel is a type of Druid, and not the other way ’round.