Who says you have to play perfectly? You don't need to play perfectly now, there's room even in Savage and Ultimate, content with tight DPS checks, to drop GCDs (to allow for players to use healing GCDs for safety). As long as potencies are balanced intelligently, a more complex kit can have room to be more complex, while keeping the barrier to entry low. For example, I put Dia as 12s, 430p total, and Banish at 15s CD and '40p more than Glare'. So, a casual player would lose an average of 6.6p per GCD that they don't use Banish for (if they replace it with Glare). A casual player would lose less damage to using Glare instead of Dia because Dia has a lower total. A casual player would also lose less damage to using Dia to move compared to currently, as the 'on cast' potency would be more frontloaded. The only way for a player to 'lose damage compared to currently' is to use the exact same rotation as currently, exactly two Dias per minute and no more and no less
The shield is also 'Succor but without the heal', or 'E.Prognosis without the heal', or 'Gobskin from BLU', or 'Consolation without the heal' or 'Neutral Sect Aspected Helios, without the heal or regen'. It's almost like 'action applies a barrier and is AOE' is such a wide reaching design idea, that there's going to naturally be some overlap between it and other similar actions. In which case, we'd better write off all of SGE as being 'not innovative' as it's 80% a reskin of SCH's actions, WHM and AST have a ton of actions that are identical in function (and in some cases, even the potency is identical) between them. Cure/Benefic, Cure2/Benefic2, Regen/Asp.Benefic, Medica/Helios, Medica3/Helios Conjunction, Divine Benison/Celestial Intersection, Aquaveil/Exaltation
Putting your healing access behind a stance, that requires a different GCD to cycle, is a speedrun to the 'player misplayed and caused a wipe' that SE is so deathly allergic to. Say you need to heal something (eg a 'get to 100% HP' mechanic), but you didn't know it was coming up and so you just pressed the Glare button to cycle out of that stance. At minimum you'd need 5 seconds to do the 2 GCDs to cycle to DPS stance, and then to Mit stance, and then back to Healing mode, all before you can even start to address the mechanic. And in some mechanics, 5s is the whole duration you're given to solve it (EG White Hole in O4S)
I assumed there'd be no talent tree involved, because I assumed that no external system were involved. If I had said 'oh the reason I didn't include Raise in the list was actually because I was thinking of reworking items so that anyone can Raise via Phoenix Down' I expect I'd have been DQ'd, frame one. But surely 'there's an external system that works in tandem with the idea to make the idea function' is just admitting that the idea doesn't actually function, without being propped up by the external system? Which is something that annoys me to no end with WOW balancing, the idea of 'oh this class underperforms but it's okay because the tier set effect makes it catch up and be balanced with the rest'
SE have previously said 'we didn't really know what to do with Scholar' (pre-EW, as an explanation for why we got Expedient). We give SE 'shit' (which is actually 'constructive criticism' and 'potential fresh ideas/inspiration') because we care about the game, not because we hate it. I don't think it's particularly fair to say that I don't 'respect the depth' of the Job designs, because if I didn't, I wouldn't have used the current Job designs as the foundation to build off of. Surely, if I really didn't respect the depth I'd have thrown everything out and started from scratch?