If the development team does implement a "2HR-like" ability for each class they have to be extremely careful. There are MANY dangers and pitfalls.
- Abilities from some classes are more powerful/effective/useful than from other classes. This would lead to classes becoming "lol<class-name>" and shunned from parties.
- Demand for a particular ability creates artificial demand in parties for the class with that ability. Party members would not be chosen for their skill with a class or role (e.g. Summoner), but instead simply because they have that ability (e.g. Astral Flow). If a player has already used that ability, they are no longer useful, and thus removed from the party and unable to get into another party until that ability is available again.
- Abilities are "too balanced" and become virtually identical. As such, they would not contribute to class-uniqueness, and thus be counter-productive.
The
tactical benefits of any additional ability (whether 2HR-like or not) are clear. Having more options in combat is always positive. But the permanent
social implications and drawbacks (as demonstrated by the venomous debate of the preceding pages) might do more harm than any temporary tactical advantage that these abilities provide is worth.
I am on the fence, to be honest. If the choice was between "2HR-class abilities" or "constant class traits" like Marauder's Steadfast Stance. I would go with traits, as they would be easier to balance, and have fewer social pitfalls.
An example would be if Lancers had a "Piercing Charge" trait that allowed them to always hit multiple enemies as long as they were in a straight line in front of them. Something like that would add class distinctiveness and tactics (specifically the tactic of maneuvering).
Adding 2HR-class abilities is not as simple as it may seem. Class traits may be the better way to go.