Your point about choosing a single path is one which until my recent studies I might have disagreed with. The idea of philosophical eclecticism is sort of trendy. Not syncretism, mind you, of which Stoicism is arguable a good example, but there mere plucking and keeping of what seems pleasant or favorable.
It seems then we should choose path partly based on where it leads. Stoic philosophy has never (and hopefully never will) claim to be ‘the one true path.’ It is in part this humility and uncertainty that I find attractive.
The question then of the Sage arises, whether it be achievable, or a mere measure. I suppose whether the Sage can ever exist is a moot point; since we know for sure we can endeavor to be one.