Absolutely agree with the direction you’re mentioning, but it can be done in an even better way, that’s almost perfectly balanced, yet simple. I’ll probably make a more detailed post by myself, but for the moment, take a look at this post from US forums.
That’s the perfect approach for everyone 
TLDR:
- “pet playstyle” vs. “pet-less playstyle” is a completely cosmetic decision (i.e. Lone Wolf gives no throughput advantage)
- this decision/toggle (“Lone Wolf”) is available as a baseline
- if you decide for “pet-less playstyle”, your auto-attacks (i.e. single-target only) are buffed to match the missing pet damage
- when you decide for “pet-less playstyle”, you select which passive pet-type buffs you get and you get access to pet utility (even without a pet)
As a side note, I love playing with a pet even as MM, so that’s my personal choice, but this approach is the only one that shows understanding and flexibility needed for both playstyles.
Though I think there should still be some slight benefit to playing with a pet, for the increased complexity of managing it, maybe something like slight buff to the passives/pet utility, or shorter CDs, but nothing major.
