TOTALLY REVAMPED CYBER KNIGHT !!!

[LostOne]

I don't have time to keep up with this thread, so I'm just going to say this:

You can't please everybody all the time. Clearly some people are happy with the changes and others are not. If we haven't been able to change each others minds after ~170 posts, I don't think anyone is really going to budge on this.

So have fun with your arguing, I'm unsubbing.

[Killer Cyborg]

Preventing someone from doing something is a form of control over the person in question.

If you disrupt somebody's tech weapons, then you are exerting control over the person, not the weapons.

Expand...because all I get here is support for my statement.

What was your statement?

[Killer Cyborg]

Yes, it is.
What it is NOT is one of the Cyberknight's powers.
Which is why I said "Because their powers have nothing to do with integrating electronic and mechanical components into biological systems."

The name doesn't just refer to powers. It refers to the entirety of the class.

And, out of the entirety of the class, the only thing Cyber about them is their Cyber-Armor, which isn't very cyber anymore.

It could be argued either way.
All I have said on that matter is that having the armor become a living part of them makes it less cyber than it was before.

I guess on this point, we'll just have to live with disagreeing. I don't see it as something that decreasing with complete integration.

I don't think that last sentence made any sense.

You think that "Psi-Soldiers" would be a good name for that class?
I doubt it; I think you're just fishing.

No...because Psi-soldiers would be something else and wouldn't encompass a holistic view of the Cyber Knight.

You've forgotten what this part of the conversation was about.
Go back and reread.

1. Tech /= Cyber.
2. If having one cybernetic implant means that the class should have "cyber" in the title, then I guess they should rename a few other classes.
"Cyber-Rats" instead of "City Rats," for example.
Cyber-Crazies.
Cyber-Juicers.
Cyber-Hunters.
Etc.

But they're not and that's not what we're arguing...and in all reality, it has nothing to do with the Cyber Knights being named properly or not.

Sure it does.
The argument on your side seems to be that since they have one cybernetic enhancement, that justifies calling them Cyber-Knights.
If that's true for CKs, then it should be true for other classes as well.

Cybernetic and bionic implants are cyber.
But Cyber-Knights don't get any other than just their Cyber-Armor, which isn't very cyber to begin with, and which was made less cyber by making it come to life.
CKs can get other implants, but the fact that individuals of a certain class might possibly get cybernetics does NOT justify including "Cyber" in the title. GB pilots can get cybernetics, but they're not called "Cyber-Glitter Boy Pilots," and CS Grunts can get cybernetics, but they're not called "CS Cyber-Grunts."
Because it just wouldn't make any sense.

Okay...we need to operate under the idea that the name already exists and you need to prove that it should not exist.

I'm not saying that the name should not exist.
I'm saying that the new powers should not exist, because they do not fit the name of the class, and they do not fit the concept of the class overall.

I've said this several times, and it's about time you paid attention.

It's a term that doesn't refer to or describe any attributes of the class other than, to an extent, their cyber-armor.
This was okay back in the day, when Cyber-Armor was one of the two main features of the class, but now it's just a minor feature and their main powers have jack to do with cybernetics.

But the new main powers have everything to do with technology (which includes but is not limited to Cybernetics). Sure...they'd probably be better named as "Psi-Tech Knights", but they're not. They were working within the boundaries that were first created, and they make enough changes to invalidate the original name.

Look at what you just said.
Technology > Cybernetics.
That right there shows that they are NOT working with the boundaries that were first created.
They started off (barely) with Cybernetics, then got expanded to where they can affect any technology.
That's busting through the original boundaries and into a much larger category.

IF you give an OCC new powers that make it so that the name of the class no longer fits, you've screwed up.
That's what they've done here.
You point that out yourself in the bolded part above.

[Killer Cyborg]

So what IS the essence of a Cyber-Knight?
Their Cyber Armor?
IF so, then not having their armor would strip them of their powers... but that's not the case either.

If you strip them of their armor, what is left? A psychic who specializes in fighting technological based threats, who also most likely has 1 or more cybernetic/bionic implants.

Except that that last part simply isn't true.
Cyberknights "are not necessarily opposed to cybernetics," but most of them are psychic and having extra implants will screw with their powers, so they're more likely to be avoided than not.

So what you're left with if you take away their Cyber-Armor is:
A psychic knight with anti-technology zen powers, who might have some limited cybernetics but who probably won't.

[NMI]

Cant play nice then I lock threads.

[Killer Cyborg]

So it's not just about me trolling, but about you actually putting forth an argument this is iron clad. You haven't done that. My questions are an attempt to get you to do so. If you did, then we wouldn't still be arguing.

********. You're just claiming victory here.

The arguments against naming them cyber-knights is iron clad.

Either you don't see it or you don't want to....

If it were ironclad then there would be no argument.

This is why it seems to me like you are trolling; the argument is ironclad, yet you persist.

[Subjugator]

To me the only thing equalizes any person, creature, monster, deity, OCC, RCC, race, class, etc. in any RPG is death.

It make take only a normal blade, to magical weapon, to a bullet, to a laser blast, to a black hole, to another one + deity, etc. to kill the character. (or the GM ). The fact remains, all can be killed some are just a bit harder than others.

Good. Show me how to kill that freaking Mulka that's been bothering me all this time.

/Sub

[Subjugator]

Disruption is a form of control.

Nope.

We can play that game, or you can actually put forth an argument that explains how preventing someone from doing something isn't a form of control?

It's a portion of overall control, but is not a complete version thereof.

/Sub

[bigbobsr6000]

To me the only thing equalizes any person, creature, monster, deity, OCC, RCC, race, class, etc. in any RPG is death.

It make take only a normal blade, to magical weapon, to a bullet, to a laser blast, to a black hole, to another one + deity, etc. to kill the character. (or the GM ). The fact remains, all can be killed some are just a bit harder than others.

Good. Show me how to kill that freaking Mulka that's been bothering me all this time.

/Sub

Sorry, I don't do personal request.

"This is why I don't do two shows a night. Not gonna do it."

[Subjugator]

Again...show me how controlling someone from doing what they want to do isn't actually controlling them.

Because you're limited to simply preventing them from doing what they want to do. You're not making them do as you want them to do, which is different.

If you could make them do as you want them to do, you could make them shoot their friends, dig a big hole, or dance the Charleston. THAT is full control. What you're describing is at best partial control. By your definition, Christopher Reeve had control over his body because he could induce some level of movement.

/Sub

[Subjugator]

Can anyone explain how they're not cybernetic implants?

Cybernetic, as per Dictionary.com:

the study of human control functions and of mechanical and electronic systems designed to replace them, involving the application of statistical mechanics to communication engineering.

Cyber Armor is not cybernetic. It's clearly a name that was given without regard for the technical definition, but because the term 'cyber' sounds cool.

Similarly, the Cyber Knight was given its name because it sounds cool. They specifically avoid cybernetics, so it cannot be because of some affinity with cybernetic devices.

Also - if one is following the loose definition of cybernetic to refer to things technological, then the Cyber Knight is by behavior more of an anti-Cyber than a Cyber, as he has special abilities to help him fight technology. To further illustrate this, an EMP burst nuke is not an electronics bomb, but an anti-electronics bomb.

/Sub

[bigbobsr6000]

Encyclopedia Britannica - the Online Encyclopedia

cybernetics

Science of regulation and control in animals (including humans), organizations, and machines when they are viewed as self-governing whole entities consisting of parts and their organization.
It was conceived by Norbert Wiener, who coined the term in 1948. Cybernetics views communication and control in all self-contained complex systems as analogous. It differs from the empirical sciences (physics, biology, etc.) in not being interested in material form but in organization, pattern, and communication in entities. Because of the increasing sophistication of computers and the efforts to make them behave in humanlike ways, cybernetics today is closely allied with artificial intelligence and robotics, and it draws heavily on ideas developed in information theory.

[bigbobsr6000]

Encyclopædia Britannica - the Online Encyclopedia

Information theory

Field of mathematics that studies the problems of signal transmission, reception, and processing.

It stems from Claude E. Shannon's mathematical methods for measuring the degree of order (nonrandomness) in a signal, which drew largely on probability theory and stochastic processes and led to techniques for determining a source's rate of information production, a channel's capacity to handle information, and the average amount of information in a given type of message. Crucial to the design of communications systems, these techniques have important applications in linguistics, psychology, and even literary theory.

[Shadyslug]

It's a portion of overall control, but is not a complete version thereof.

/Sub

Because you're limited to simply preventing them from doing what they want to do. You're not making them do as you want them to do, which is different.

If you could make them do as you want them to do, you could make them shoot their friends, dig a big hole, or dance the Charleston. THAT is full control. What you're describing is at best partial control. By your definition, Christopher Reeve had control over his body because he could induce some level of movement.

/Sub

You're limiting the idea here. If you want to say that full manipulation is a requirement of control, then we can go along with your definition.

But I don't have to have full manipulation of your magic to be in control of your magic...

[Shadyslug]

Are you using the new powers of the CK to justify their name that existed before those anti-tech powers?

What exactly made the Cyber-Knights specialists in fighting technological based threats when the book was initially released?

No...I'm saying that the CK wasn't changed enough to remove the name...

[Shadyslug]

So it's not just about me trolling, but about you actually putting forth an argument this is iron clad. You haven't done that. My questions are an attempt to get you to do so. If you did, then we wouldn't still be arguing.

********. You're just claiming victory here.

The arguments against naming them cyber-knights is iron clad.

Either you don't see it or you don't want to....

If it were ironclad then there would be no argument.

This is why it seems to me like you are trolling; the argument is ironclad, yet you persist.

Again...if the arguments were ironclad, I wouldn't be arguing the point that they name still fits...

[Killer Cyborg]

So it's not just about me trolling, but about you actually putting forth an argument this is iron clad. You haven't done that. My questions are an attempt to get you to do so. If you did, then we wouldn't still be arguing.

********. You're just claiming victory here.

The arguments against naming them cyber-knights is iron clad.

Either you don't see it or you don't want to....

If it were ironclad then there would be no argument.

This is why it seems to me like you are trolling; the argument is ironclad, yet you persist.

Again...if the arguments were ironclad, I wouldn't be arguing the point that they name still fits...

We can go back and forth on this all day, but let's not.

[Killer Cyborg]

To me the only thing equalizes any person, creature, monster, deity, OCC, RCC, race, class, etc. in any RPG is death.

It make take only a normal blade, to magical weapon, to a bullet, to a laser blast, to a black hole, to another one + deity, etc. to kill the character. (or the GM ). The fact remains, all can be killed some are just a bit harder than others.

Good. Show me how to kill that freaking Mulka that's been bothering me all this time.

/Sub

Blackmail the Game Master.

[Killer Cyborg]

Can anyone explain how they're not cybernetic implants?

Cybernetic, as per Dictionary.com:

the study of human control functions and of mechanical and electronic systems designed to replace them, involving the application of statistical mechanics to communication engineering.

Cyber Armor is not cybernetic. It's clearly a name that was given without regard for the technical definition, but because the term 'cyber' sounds cool.

Actually, I think that's a good sign of how the authors interpret the word "cyber," and that it refers to cybernetics and other artificial physical additions to the body.

Which the new powers clearly are NOT.

Similarly, the Cyber Knight was given its name because it sounds cool. They specifically avoid cybernetics, so it cannot be because of some affinity with cybernetic devices.

Actually, the books (main book and RUE) say that CKs are "not necessarily opposed to augmentation" in the Cybernetics section.
But yeah... that's not nearly enough to warrant the name.

Also - if one is following the loose definition of cybernetic to refer to things technological, then the Cyber Knight is by behavior more of an anti-Cyber than a Cyber, as he has special abilities to help him fight technology. To further illustrate this, an EMP burst nuke is not an electronics bomb, but an anti-electronics bomb.
/Sub

Exactly.

[Killer Cyborg]

Are you using the new powers of the CK to justify their name that existed before those anti-tech powers?

What exactly made the Cyber-Knights specialists in fighting technological based threats when the book was initially released?

No...I'm saying that the CK wasn't changed enough to remove the name...

Well, we've all explained why we think that it IS changed enough that the name no longer fits.

Why don't you explain why you disagree?


(although I don't believe anybody here has actually argued that the name should be changed)

[Danger]

Well, it could possibly be changed to Psiber-Knight. That might be more fitting.

[Natasha]

Again...if the arguments were ironclad, I wouldn't be arguing the point that they name still fits...

The problem is you're not making arguments. For example, that the O.C.C. is named Cyber-Knight is not an argument that it should be named Cyber-Knight.

As was said before, you're just claiming victory.

And that is why having a conversation with you is pointless. And that is why I am not responding to your so-called arguments. Just because you name them arguments doesn't make them arguments.

[Shadyslug]

I'm not claiming victory. I'm claiming that the name and the powers are just fine. In fact, if I were to claim victory, it would mean that the name of the class is Cyber Knight and the powers they have are the powers that you are disputing...

So...is the name Cyber Knight and have the powers remained the same as they were expanded upon in the SoT4?

Then I guess I'm the winner...

[sasha]

I'm not claiming victory. I'm claiming that the name and the powers are just fine. In fact, if I were to claim victory, it would mean that the name of the class is Cyber Knight and the powers they have are the powers that you are disputing...

So...is the name Cyber Knight and have the powers remained the same as they were expanded upon in the SoT4?

Then I guess I'm the winner...

You don't understand the criticism of your claims either.

[Shadyslug]

Of course I do...

But here's where we stand.

They are called Cyber Knights. They have been called Cyber Knights ever since Rifts MB came out.

They got some shiny new powers because someone decided that they needed to have something to compete with the power creep (especially since they are supposed to be legendary heroes).

These new powers seem more "anti" tech than "pro" tech.

People are getting their underpants bunched up because they think that the new powers don't fit with the name.

Well...the new powers are there...and the name that the Cyber Knights have is, in fact, Cyber Knight.

Whether or not the name is appropo is moot because that's the name. Whether or not the new powers are appropo is moot because that's their new powers...which were so secret that most people didn't know that they had the powers until the new book came out...which is why they were called Cyber Knights before...

My main claim is that it's a moot argument (and it's especially not iron clad, because if it were, then there would be NO counter argument, and as we've all seen there are plenty of counter arguments, which means that the claim of "ironclad" is a bit overestimated) and that there are several reasons that the new powers are valid from the sense of Cyber Knights.

I mean...we call people who put out fires Firemen. Why can't we call people who have special powers to fight tech Cyber Knights?

[sasha]

My main claim is that it's a moot argument (and it's especially not iron clad, because if it were, then there would be NO counter argument, and as we've all seen there are plenty of counter arguments, which means that the claim of "ironclad" is a bit overestimated) and that there are several reasons that the new powers are valid from the sense of Cyber Knights.

There have been no effective counterarguments. Just "well it says so in the book" and "that's how it's named". Those aren't arguments.

I mean...we call people who put out fires Firemen. Why can't we call people who have special powers to fight tech Cyber Knights?

Firemen also throw baseballs and stoke fires. It's a bad analogy. But let's run with it anyway.

The answer is: Because it doesn't make sense. Taking your logic means cyber-knights would fight exclusively cybernetic tech, which they don't do at all in any way, shape, or form whatsoever.

If we are not allowed to discuss the names of things then what happens when we find out that my duck is actually a dog? We have to call it a duck anyway since that's what it was named back in the day?

[Shadyslug]

I have a friend who has a rooster named Molly. Turns out the cute little chicky they got wasn't a girl...but did they change the name?

If we go with the Fireman analogy...should we expect them to no get cats out of trees? Should we expect them to not give someone CPR?

Head Hunters...should we take the name literally? Why not merely call them Bounty Hunters? Or maybe Fighting Dudes with Metal in their bodies?

How about Mind Melters. Do they actually melt your mind? Psi-Stalkers? What the heck would you think a Psi-Stalker was if you didn't know what one was? I mean...does it just pop out that they feed on PPE?

Names are just names...it's our need to classify something.

Cyber Knights are the name of that group of warriors. Does it have to mean that their powers MUST revolve around Cybernetics? Can't Cyber just be a generic name? I mean...why do we have Cyber Space?

You should ask KC what term he coined regarding useless arguments that go round and round...because that's what this is. At least largely.

Overall, however, I don't think that it's wrong to grouse about power creep or that a class got a bump...just don't say that there's an iron clad argument when it's got the look of swiss cheese...

[Killer Cyborg]

I'm not claiming victory. I'm claiming that the name and the powers are just fine. In fact, if I were to claim victory, it would mean that the name of the class is Cyber Knight and the powers they have are the powers that you are disputing...

So...is the name Cyber Knight and have the powers remained the same as they were expanded upon in the SoT4?

Then I guess I'm the winner...

Except that nobody's said that they don't have the name, or that they don't have the powers.
Just that the powers don't fit the class.

[Shadyslug]

Except that nobody's said that they don't have the name, or that they don't have the powers.
Just that the powers don't fit the class.

Again...why does that matter? Seriously? Why does it matter? It's not like there aren't a hundred other examples of powers not fitting a classification...

[Killer Cyborg]

Whether or not the name is appropo is moot because that's the name.
Whether or not the new powers are appropo is moot because that's their new powers...

That's pathetic.
All we're doing is complaining that the way things were done is stupid.
You can't logically counter that by saying that it's a moot point, because it's not; it's our view of the situation.
You can't randomly call other people's opinions Moot just because you don't like them.
Well, you can, but it's incredibly lame.

[Killer Cyborg]

I have a friend who has a rooster named Molly. Turns out the cute little chicky they got wasn't a girl...but did they change the name?

If we go with the Fireman analogy...should we expect them to no get cats out of trees? Should we expect them to not give someone CPR?

Nope.
But we should expect that their primary function is to deal with fires.

The primary function of Cyber Knights is NOT to deal with cybernetics.
Your analogy doesn't work.

You should ask KC what term he coined regarding useless arguments that go round and round...because that's what this is. At least largely.

IIRC, it was "talking to Shadyslug."

[Shadyslug]

Whether or not the name is appropo is moot because that's the name.
Whether or not the new powers are appropo is moot because that's their new powers...

That's pathetic.
All we're doing is complaining that the way things were done is stupid.
You can't logically counter that by saying that it's a moot point, because it's not; it's our view of the situation.
You can't randomly call other people's opinions Moot just because you don't like them.
Well, you can, but it's incredibly lame.

Well...isn't that what you and others are doing? You're saying that KS's and PB's opinions are lame because you don't like them...

[Shadyslug]

Nope.
But we should expect that their primary function is to deal with fires.

The primary function of Cyber Knights is NOT to deal with cybernetics.
Your analogy doesn't work.

The CK's primary function is to save those who need help...and more often than not, the assailant has a technological device...like a gun.

IIRC, it was "talking to Shadyslug."

Good attempt...but maybe you should try again...

[Killer Cyborg]

Nope.
But we should expect that their primary function is to deal with fires.

The primary function of Cyber Knights is NOT to deal with cybernetics.
Your analogy doesn't work.

The CK's primary function is to save those who need help...and more often than not, the assailant has a technological device...like a gun.

Then he's mis-named.

IIRC, it was "talking to Shadyslug."

Good attempt...but maybe you should try again...

No, I really shouldn't try talking to Shady again.
I do anyway, though.

[sasha]

I have a friend who has a rooster named Molly. Turns out the cute little chicky they got wasn't a girl...but did they change the name?

If we go with the Fireman analogy...should we expect them to no get cats out of trees? Should we expect them to not give someone CPR?

Head Hunters...should we take the name literally? Why not merely call them Bounty Hunters? Or maybe Fighting Dudes with Metal in their bodies?

How about Mind Melters. Do they actually melt your mind? Psi-Stalkers? What the heck would you think a Psi-Stalker was if you didn't know what one was? I mean...does it just pop out that they feed on PPE?

Names are just names...it's our need to classify something.

I was talking about 2 or 3 other definitions of the word "fireman".

To unequivocally speak about those who fight fires and rescue kittens and come to automobile accidents you should say "fire fighter".

I mean...why do we have Cyber Space?

Because it's actually cyber space.

just don't say that there's an iron clad argument when it's got the look of swiss cheese...

Check your glasses.

[sasha]

Whether or not the name is appropo is moot because that's the name.
Whether or not the new powers are appropo is moot because that's their new powers...

That's pathetic.
All we're doing is complaining that the way things were done is stupid.
You can't logically counter that by saying that it's a moot point, because it's not; it's our view of the situation.
You can't randomly call other people's opinions Moot just because you don't like them.
Well, you can, but it's incredibly lame.

Well...isn't that what you and others are doing? You're saying that KS's and PB's opinions are lame because you don't like them...

Except that I don't think his opinion is moot, or lame.

[sasha]

Nope.
But we should expect that their primary function is to deal with fires.

The primary function of Cyber Knights is NOT to deal with cybernetics.
Your analogy doesn't work.

The CK's primary function is to save those who need help...and more often than not, the assailant has a technological device...like a gun.

Which makes cyber-knight a bad name for the guy.

[Killer Cyborg]

Whether or not the name is appropo is moot because that's the name.
Whether or not the new powers are appropo is moot because that's their new powers...

That's pathetic.
All we're doing is complaining that the way things were done is stupid.
You can't logically counter that by saying that it's a moot point, because it's not; it's our view of the situation.
You can't randomly call other people's opinions Moot just because you don't like them.
Well, you can, but it's incredibly lame.

Well...isn't that what you and others are doing?

Nope.
You're the only one who has said that.

You're saying that KS's and PB's opinions are lame because you don't like them...

1. You're making assumptions that you know exactly what KS's and PB's opinions are.
2. I'm not saying that their opinions are lame, I'm saying that the new powers for the CK are lame.

[Shadyslug]

If the Cyber Knights are mis-named as a reflection of their purpose then they were mis-named at the start and the new powers didn't do anything to change that.

Whether or not the name is appropo is moot because that's the name.
Whether or not the new powers are appropo is moot because that's their new powers...

That's pathetic.
All we're doing is complaining that the way things were done is stupid.
You can't logically counter that by saying that it's a moot point, because it's not; it's our view of the situation.
You can't randomly call other people's opinions Moot just because you don't like them.

Well, you can, but it's incredibly lame.

Well...isn't that what you and others are doing?

Nope.
You're the only one who has said that.

No...I'm not. You and others are saying it based on what you've said I'm doing...

[sasha]

If the Cyber Knights are mis-named as a reflection of their purpose then they were mis-named at the start and the new powers didn't do anything to change that.

The new powers nailed it shut.

Whether or not the name is appropo is moot because that's the name.
Whether or not the new powers are appropo is moot because that's their new powers...

That's pathetic.
All we're doing is complaining that the way things were done is stupid.
You can't logically counter that by saying that it's a moot point, because it's not; it's our view of the situation.
You can't randomly call other people's opinions Moot just because you don't like them.

Well, you can, but it's incredibly lame.

Well...isn't that what you and others are doing?

Nope.
You're the only one who has said that.

No...I'm not. You and others are saying it based on what you've said I'm doing...

I never said anyone's opinion is moot or lame. You have though.

[Shadyslug]

I never said your opinion was lame...I said your argument wasn't ironclad...

[sasha]

And moot

[Shadyslug]

Yes...I did say that...but are you saying that it isn't moot? I mean...do you think that PB is going to change the name or powers any time soon?

[sasha]

Yes...I did say that...but are you saying that it isn't moot? I mean...do you think that PB is going to change the name or powers any time soon?

But you just said you didn't say that.

Anyway. My answer to your question is "no".

But I don't see how this question is relevant to the point I made.

[Shadyslug]

No...I said that I didn't say that it was lame...not that I didn't say it was moot.

Moot and lame are two different words with different meanings...

[Killer Cyborg]

If the Cyber Knights are mis-named as a reflection of their purpose then they were mis-named at the start and the new powers didn't do anything to change that.

The name of something doesn't need to reflect its purpose (though that is common).

Whether or not the name is appropo is moot because that's the name.
Whether or not the new powers are appropo is moot because that's their new powers...

That's pathetic.
All we're doing is complaining that the way things were done is stupid.
You can't logically counter that by saying that it's a moot point, because it's not; it's our view of the situation.
You can't randomly call other people's opinions Moot just because you don't like them.

Well, you can, but it's incredibly lame.

Well...isn't that what you and others are doing?

Nope.
You're the only one who has said that.

No...I'm not. You and others are saying it based on what you've said I'm doing...

Since you seem to suddenly be in a different conversation from me, I'll clarify my last statement.
"You're the only one who has said that other people's opinions are moot."

[Shadyslug]

I'm the only person who verbalized it as such, but the fact that we're arguing it shows that you think the originators and developers opinion on the matter is moot...

[sasha]

I'm the only person who verbalized it as such, but the fact that we're arguing it shows that you think the originators and developers opinion on the matter is moot...

They haven't told me what their opinion is.
So I don't know if it's moot or not.

[Killer Cyborg]

I'm the only person who verbalized it as such, but the fact that we're arguing it shows that you think the originators and developers opinion on the matter is moot...

We're not arguing the originators' and developers' opinions, so no.

[Shadyslug]

I would say we are...unless you have a book that doesn't have the CK being called a Cyber Knight...or a SoT4 that doesn't give them the new powers...