I wholeheartedly agree with the sentiment and despise the phrasing-- but also, there exists a critical judgmental error.
The OP divides the champion into only two pieces--«Who» and «Kit»--And... it doesn't even refer to the Who properly.
The OP writes "a unique idea for WHO the champ should be"... but their example is "cyborg unicorn".
That, however, is a «What».
For example; let me break down Ahri--
«What»: Ahri is a Gumiho.
Ahri's powers derive from souls and trickery.
«Kit»: Therefore, Q [true damage, the soul is the purest form of a being and a gumiho interacts with this directly], W [gumiho and kitsune lore states that fire is part of the powerset, though it is usually illusory], E [seductress, temptress, whatever you want to call it], R [further trickery, escapes which are essential to the gumiho as they must leave at some point], innate [the gumiho eats souls to sustain itself / to become more human depending on interpretation].
The «What» quite clearly feeds into the powerset.
But you cannot deduce the «Who» of Ahri from this.
Ahri was a remorseless killer, but now she is softer-hearted; she is a temptress and seeks to further herself from her past and become more human-- though she realizes the moral fault in killing so many to do so.
That is her «Who», which is far from a fair number of myths regarding the gumiho (her «What»)-- not all of them, but most of them do not cover her this way.
So I agree with the idea-- people do not usually create something that takes these three parts of a champion and tie them together properly.
A kit does not always have to have a unique feature inside of it-- but the sum of the kit-- the playstyle of that champion-- must be unique to it.
[The parts I disagree with are the phrasing, which seems hostile to me, but that may just be me being tired because I kind of am; and the notion that the champion is only two parts, when it is at least three and probably four-- the aesthetics of the champion, certainly, are quintessential to making them be them.]
+ Gillette Fusion 
= 
