Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Dan'L" data-source="post: 5258593" data-attributes="member: 68954">Just because someone makes product &quot;A&quot; and product &quot;a&quot; and gives them the same essential name doesn't mean that I as a consumer have to disbelieve the evidence of my own senses.&nbsp; Coca Cola bottling company may tell me that Coke and Diet Coke essentially taste the same, but I know that they don't.&nbsp; I know that WOTC's trying to approximate the same flavor using a different recipe; I know that they want them to be as functionally identical as they can; I know that they name the products with very similar names to entice the consumer into buying the product based on past associations and familiarity.How many changes can one make to a thing before it's no longer really the same thing?&nbsp; IMO, what we've seen of the Knight build takes it past that point for the 4e Fighter class.&nbsp; Obviously there are other opinions out there, including that of the WOTC marketing department, but that doesn't mean I am wrong for knowing what is a meaningful difference for me.And please realize, I'm not complaining that the Knight build is bad/poorly built/over-powered.&nbsp; I actually think it's a neat little build, for what we've seen of it.&nbsp; It's just that IMO it is, again from what we've seen of it so far, mechanically distinct enough from the existing 4e Fighter class to be best handled as a different class when using the CB.-Dan'L</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Dan'L, post: 5258593, member: 68954"] Just because someone makes product "A" and product "a" and gives them the same essential name doesn't mean that I as a consumer have to disbelieve the evidence of my own senses. Coca Cola bottling company may tell me that Coke and Diet Coke essentially taste the same, but I know that they don't. I know that WOTC's trying to approximate the same flavor using a different recipe; I know that they want them to be as functionally identical as they can; I know that they name the products with very similar names to entice the consumer into buying the product based on past associations and familiarity. How many changes can one make to a thing before it's no longer really the same thing? IMO, what we've seen of the Knight build takes it past that point for the 4e Fighter class. Obviously there are other opinions out there, including that of the WOTC marketing department, but that doesn't mean I am wrong for knowing what is a meaningful difference for me. And please realize, I'm not complaining that the Knight build is bad/poorly built/over-powered. I actually think it's a neat little build, for what we've seen of it. It's just that IMO it is, again from what we've seen of it so far, mechanically distinct enough from the existing 4e Fighter class to be best handled as a different class when using the CB. -Dan'L [/QUOTE]

Verification