That small part was still a hell of a lot more than literally zero interaction, as was suggested by removing GL from Monk.
They're one and the same. AST Sects being designed as a simply out-of-combat SCH/WHM mode toggle, rather than actually building around hastened/periodic and empowered/preemptory mechanics to be used with synergy between them, is what made AST feel like a WHM/SCH-lite.
Why are you condemning me over it, even ignoring the fact that imitating a DRG-lite or NIN-lite is not what we'd want? It was your suggestion. I simply pointed out that having the stances do so little would amount to only bloat, either in terms of relatively useless features or CS-like empty apm.
Yes, as BotD duration could be. Did we always want to burst our way out of that, too? It's distinctly less ambiguous than TK was given that the StB gave no in-game information on its bonus damage or attack speed and had the wrong damn potency written for TK. (Yes, TK's true potency was a result of a bug. That doesn't make the errant information any less incorrect.)
It drops a level only when you consume the entirety of your duration, just like BotD did. And you absolutely can sit at GL3. The only difference is, again, that you are not effectively punished for dropping GL during low-damage GCDs and can therefore use it to sync to CDs and positioning requirements despite varying downtimes and base GCDs. It's the same exact thing you've always had, except in that it allows for many of the same things we had before and lost (being able deal with positioning and sync to CDs or downtime through changes in rotation as aided by changes in speed). The idea is literally just two parts: (1) GL falls off stack by stack and (2) you can consume excess GL duration.
Given that TK spammers were only as common as Ice Mages and outside of meta comps one could still perform highly without using TK rotations, even despite TK dealing 30% more damage than intended, I would be perfectly fine with that.