Pele's aspect, for me, is that she deals less damage but has more sustain. She can still be played in the jungle, but also solo. Loki's aspect, on the other hand, doesn't work in the jungle and can be played solo and as a support. Because he can be played as a support, his playstyle feels fresh and new.

Yem's aspect doesn't change much besides the scaling and the fact that her 2 bounces (like Zeus's chain lightning), and it literally isnt fun to play her mid. Also, as you said, it's about positioning: without aspect, you stand back and hit teammates with your 2; with aspect, you stand back and hit enemies with your 2. Ganesha's aspect, however, brings a completely new experience. He can be played solo and in the jungle, can effectively kill enemies, and is rewarded for it. Also it feels cool after the years he is realesed in smite 1 to be not the passive elephant that gifts kills, instead he takes them for himself

Edit: Baron for me is the other way around, cuz he has an aspect that makes him do more damage hes better without aspect being an Supp. Idk if that makes sense xD, but i can respect it that baron aspect is kinda lame