Colonic

...Now I absolutely want this to happen!

Yes there were beaked and dog faced beastmen, mutations given (with more frequency when marked), but far from ubiquitously. No they were not subraces. No you did not get them presenting uniform appearance like AOS Tzaangor. Yes they should all have mutations. Those should be random and chaotic. It was a d1000 table (or d100 if they got a reward) - this is impossible in a TOW game. Almost everything you say is correct*, but "AoS tzaangor fit Total War/the Old World" is not correct and what you say does not support it. You are in fact a classic example of what I mean about people misunderstanding the original presentations of Tzaangor, because you think the existence of beaked beastmen = AoS style Tzaangor. They share little but a name and a patron god. There's as much support for tentacled beastmen, or beastmen with their eyes on stalks. So to that regard, yes I will tell you that lore does not support AoS Tzaangors in the Old World, and never has. I never said Beastman lore was unchanging, in fact its implicit in my post that it did. But just because lore changes that doesn't mean anything is supported. What I did say was the concept of a Tzaangor is in the Old World was and is exactly what CA quoted. a marked beastman given mutations that may have a slant towards a god but not a stable race of beaked beastmen , and what came from GW itself I imagine. Yes, GW could have retconned AoS Tzaangor into the setting (despite their thematic differences). But it would be a retcon IMO. What there would be room for is having some beastmen in a unit manifest Tzeentch like mutations including beaks, feathers, tzeentch's symbol and so on, but without any uniformity. It is far away from whole units of beaked beastmen adorned in finery like you have in AOS. *

Like I say, GW saying "lose the beaks" is actually them just sticking to the lore of the last 30 years. Whether it also separates the franchises and that is a relevant thing or not is up for debate, but I would expect (and am glad) that GW stuck to beastman lore as it was. I like the Tzaangor in AOS but they are not old world beastmen. There weren't whole armies of beaky beastmen in the old world setting barring specific geographic regions but there are tzaangor all over. I guess this sort of thing is the problem with beastmen being pretty fringe and playing second fiddle to warriors of chaos, some of their older lore gets lost.

I was just thinking how much had changed and other people are complaining it changed nothing. The miracles of perspective!

I don't think what they said about Tzaangor was misleading at all. Tzaangors have been a well established part of the lore since the Lost and the Damned book. They've always been regular beastmen who have been marked by the gods, and they shared the same outlook on existence and background as other beastmen. All beastmen had mutations, yes, and tzaangor were no exception but they were very random with some god influences. There were some common traits like having the rune of Tzeentch somewhere on the fur/formed in the horns etc. The mentions of different kinds of beastmen in 6th edition and onwards were geographic. You got entire populations of non-goat beastmen in a given region, not that all beastmen could appear in different stableish forms all over the world. The problem with that always was that the miniatures were all goats or goats with mutations. Meanwhile the Tzaangor of AOS are a subrace crafted by tzeentchian magic, many of them humans who are malformed. They wear finery and crafted goods in a way regular beastmen would not, both their aesthetic and what it reflects about their outlook is unlike the beastmen, or the tzaangor of the old world. I really would have disliked avian beastmen from AOS being put into Total War without a significant overhaul. To me what is there now is much closer to lore.

A white lion prince - a man of culture I see.

"Had a planning meeting" has less zing as a comment though....

If its like the armies of renown we have had already, you'll give up striek and fade, and seasons, and the like as well. Although in Trugg's Troggherd you get regranted the Bad Moon.

I'm guessing he will be quite fighty, and that he will provide a buff to Kurnoth Hunters. I also guess he might be more tanky than usual for Sylvaneth given his army of renown seems to lean away from strike and fade.

I was hoping I was wrong! I have one Steam Tank, and was considering another to build as a commander to have some ST flavour without it dominating. I kind of feel that its either 1 or 3 now, and 3 is a lot.

Something I am wondering. The Steam Tank has the Keywords STEAM TANK COMMANDER but not STEAM TANK. His Division Commander special rule allows him to issue orders two times to friendly STEAM TANK units. Does his STEAM TANK COMMANDER keyword let him benefit from that? A lot of people seem to be posting as if it does, making two steam tanks the sweet spot, but it seems to me like he has to order other tanks, not himself. The fluff for the rule even refers to other tanks. What am I missing?

The Celestial Warbringers have a stormkeep in Misthaven. Its mentioned in the COS tome.

I am basking... Can I ask why gryph hounds as screens? Is it the increased speed over something like steelhelms?

If you check the Grundstock Escort Wing on the lore page describing fleets its got a Frigate and Skywardens in it, kind of implying, lorewise at least, those all work together.

Hammerers, Scourgerunners, Drakespawn Chariots + Knights and the Tenebral Blades spell are what I tend to think of when people say that the rules of non humans in Cities are undercooked. I actually think the book is just designed to give non human forces supporting roles that require less (not zero) synergies. The best tanky infantry are the duardin and even irondrakes shine when supporting holding a point with their better unleash hell. The best offensive punch is found among the aelves. That is not a book that is cycling those units out of use.

Well put Sire!

So, a duardin contingent?

He's beautiful....

I have one in the UK if you'd be willing to pay the postage!

They say in the article there were not enough Bonesplitter players to make analysis worthwhile.

I was chatting with some 40k players about balance and this dataslate. The stats here are as good as some of the best 9e balance, it seems.

I think the BT solution is good in this case though, as those battletomes do have terrible tactics.

Its odd the Drakespawn Chariots don't get a champion in 3's but the Scourgerunner Chariots do!

This looks really good. Would it help for someone to pass their eye over it to help spot typos, areas of potential confusion etc? I wanted to ask, are the Raid and Siege quests intended to not need any earning of Quest Points to get to the battleplan. Do you just get to do the battleplans right away?

I love this idea. Can you give us an indication of the sort of power level you are going for? Like a couple of examples of what you've already done.