230608-1434 EDT
I do not understand what most of you have been saying.
The important point is that this circuit needs the return path for any conductor to have in close proximity a conductor that carries the same current in return to provide a counteracting magnetic field to the forward current's field.
A traditional 'switch loop' consists of an ungrounded conductor, the 'switched' ungrounded conductor, and nothing else. Any current flowing on the ungrounded conductor to the switch will return in close proximity on the controlled ungrounded conductor. We ignore the rest of the circuit and are just discussing the 'switch loop'.
Code changed, and an EGC was required along with all circuit conductors. So that a 'switch loop' would have two circuit conductors (ungrounded and 'switched' ungrounded) along with the EGC.
A 'three way' switch loop is similar, having an ungrounded conductor and two switched ungrounded conductors.
A switch isn't a load, but is placed in series with the load. It isn't necessary to run a grounded conductor to the switch, because balanced current flows in the ungrounded and switched ungrounded conductors.
Technology advanced, and _switches_ which themselves consumed power entered the picture. This includes various time switches and dimmers. Some of these devices are powered by being placed in series with the load. But some require a small amount of control power continuously, and this _control power_ is electrically in parallel with the load.
Providing this continuous control power without a grounded conductor at the switch location is the problem.
Often this control power is provided by intentionally using the EGC as the grounded circuit conductor. The code change 'requiring the neutral at switch locations' is to provide for future modification to use switches which require control power.
-Jon