AGPO

It'll be disappointing if he is a named character since that'll be three for the Hammers of Sigmar and none for any of the other chambers. Show the Knights and the Vindicators some love!

Honestly back when I started playing the two new death releases this year plus the new generals handbook rules would have been it for at least three years. My old wood elves had two whole editions without an update. I'm not saying that death/aelves and others couldn't do with some love, but these projects take time to do properly, especially if you're doing something original and not just updating a few old sculpts. We all have plenty of other stuff to paint and play with in the meantime. Whilst we're on the subject of Stormcast, let's clear one thing up - GW pursue the golden child model when it comes to flagship armies because it works. More than two thirds of all 40k players have a marine army, so you can sell a new squad or character to any of them. The percentage collecting Eldar is in single figures, so any new release requires the same amount of effort for much lower returns. To build sales for smaller ranges you need to generate enough excitement to get players to start whole new armies, which generally means a full range update. That's a massive resource sink. Could GW be more imaginative with this? Sure. Create a non-Stormcast character who can ally with any order faction and you'd get the same effect, but as a small one off release another Stormcast is still an extra option for every order player.

El'Johnson is rumoured to be the next Primarch. Could make sense with the Cypher storyline.

The third guy is actually may favourite! I love all your conversions, only slight issue is that the black background makes it tricky to see some of the blood warriors

First thought I had was that scourge wings would look better. Outside of that I love your concept.

As someone who is a modeller first, gamer second, I instinctively dislike any rule which disincentivises dramatic posing and scenic bases. For me this is why this type of rules question will always come down to player discretion. As a narrative gamer I like to fill in the blanks, so I'm not moving my character 5" up to that terrain piece, he's running forward before taking cover behind that bolder and there's no way he holds the same pose as the model throughout the entire battle. For this reason my group plays 50% obscured = cover, 75% obscured = not visible, with players being sensible and a roll of if we can't agree. Likewise since 2-4 trees doesn't constitute a garden, much less a wood, we prefer to imagine minis moving through thick, sentient undergrowth which my attack at any moment. For this reason, woods block like of site to those behind them and give cover to those inside. Another point about area terrain is that it spoofs players taking ages to exactly place their model to get the benefits of cover.

Love that idea @Jamopower! May have to steal it.

LOTR minis are made in true scale (ie normal human proportions) as opposed to the 'heroic scale' of 40k and AoS. You can find a good range of true scale heroic plastics for various historical eras. I'm using Perry Miniatures medieval ranges for my Freeguild, because a) I also play historical so they're multi purpose and b) like you I really like the more realistic proportions, especially how it accentuates the weirdness of Chaos and other factions. LOTR is a good source of things like wizards and monsters for a true scale army, but I do sympathise with those who feel that it wrecks the feel of the fame when Aragorn rocks up in the mortal realms. I'd recommend doing a bit of conversion and using some alternate paint schemes to make your guys stand out. To my mind it's no different to using any other range of models.

What's the issue with updating the starter set armies' books to bring them up to scratch? These armies are most new players gateway to the hobby, so it makes sense that they need to be up to the standard of the most recent battle tomes