AoS Alternative Army Building: Composition Limitations

[ChapterAquila92]

Hello! ChapterAquila92 here!

Spurred on by a discussion on historical tabletop games (starting here), I started thinking of alternative means of army building for Age of Sigmar. Of particular note was the army composition limitations that are used in WHAB (Warhammer Ancient Battles), which is what I'm drawing a lot of inspiration from for this.

in WHAB, each army you can play has its own set of limitations as to what it can take at any given battle size, typically split between Characters (generals and heroes), Infantry (sometimes split between Light and Heavy), Cavalry/Chariots, Skirmishers/Support Infantry, War Machines, Elephants (WHAB's only Monster unit), and Allies/Mercenaries. Usually, it will look something like this:

Bactrian Greek (2000 points)
Characters: up to 25% (<500 points)
Cavalry: Up to 50% (<1000 points)
Infantry: At least 25% (>500 points)
Elephants: 1 per 1000 points (up to 2)
Allies: Up to 33% (<330 points)

Additionally, sometimes individual units within that army have further limitations (i.e. In Ancient British armies like the one I collect, while Fanatics and Warriors both count as INFANTRY units, and their only SKIRMISHER unit option may be equipped with either javelins or slings, Fanatics are limited to 1 unit in the army and cannot be larger than the smallest Warrior unit, and sling units likewise cannot outnumber javelin units in either number or unit size).

Insofar as to how this could be implemented in Age of Sigmar is up in the air, since many AoS unit warscrolls (Skink Skirmishers come to mind) can comfortably fit in one of two roles depending on loadout, the complexities of 3rd Edition's battlefield roles, keywords, and battalion designations don't really jive with this traditional vocabulary, and some factions (especially among Dwarf factions like Fyreslayers) lack a lot of variety in what they can take. Such a system does partially exist in AoS however, nominally the limitation on how much you can invest in Allies and Mercenaries within a given army size, and Coalition-type factions like Cities of Sigmar permit taking a unit from a specified other faction for every 4-5 units of the main faction.

in any case...

If we were to take Seraphon and its sub-factions as an example here, outside of a certain percent (likely 25-33%) of the total point value being available to purchase heroes and other characters (the most straightforward translation), we'd likely need to determine what counts as infantry and what counts as skirmishers first, since the ironically-named Skink Skirmisher warscroll can fulfill either role depending on load-out - clubs and shields fits an infantry cohort better than a skirmisher formation for instance. Same story with cavalry (I'll include flying cavalry like Terradons and Ripperdactyls in this category) and monsters (not including hero mounts).

As such, this is what I've determined to be the unit breakdown for the purposes of this listbuilding method for Seraphon:

Characters: all SERAPHON HERO units
Infantry: Saurus Warriors, Skink Cohort (Skinks w/ Clubs and Shields)
Cavalry: Saurus Knights, Terradon Riders, Ripperdactyl Riders
Skirmishers: Skink Skirmishers (Skinks w/ Javelins or Boltspitters), Chameleon Skinks
Support: all SERAPHON HUNTING PACK units, Kroxigors, Saurus Guard
Monsters: all SERAPHON MONSTER units
Allies: all STORMCAST ETERNAL and CITIES OF SIGMAR units.

Like with the Ancient British, I can see there being further unit limitations imposed:

• You may not have more Saurus Guard units than you have SERAPHON HERO units with the SLANN or ETERNITY WARDEN keywords
• You may not have more Terradon Rider units with Fireleech Bolas than you have Terradon Rider units with Javelins;
• Terradon Rider units with Fireleech Bolas may not have more figures than the smallest Terradon Rider unit with Javelins.
  
• You may not have more Chameleon Skink units than you have Skink Skirmisher units;
• Chameleon Skink units may not have more figures than the smallest Skink Skirmisher unit;
• The total number of wounds invested in Support units may not exceed the total number of wounds invested in Skirmisher units.

Options:

• If the army's warlord has the SLANN or ETERNITY WARDEN keywords, Saurus Guard count as Infantry instead of as Support.

Note that much of this is due to the number of units that Seraphon have available. Factions that are already restricted in unit variety (i.e. Fyreslayers) will see fewer unit limitations in this regard.

As such, you might see something like this for each of our subfactions:

Dracothion's Tail
Characters: Up to 33%
Infantry: Up to 33%
Cavalry: At least 25%
Skirmishers and Support Infantry: Up to 20%
Monsters: 1 per 1000pts
Allies and Mercenaries: Up to 20%

Fangs of Sotek
Characters: Up to 25%
Infantry: At least 25%
Cavalry: Up to 25%
Skirmishers and Support Infantry: Up to 33%
Monsters: 1 per 1000pts
Allies and Mercenaries: Up to 20%

Koatl's Claw
Characters: Up to 25%
Infantry: At least 50%
Cavalry: Up to 50%
Skirmishers and Support Infantry: Up to 20%
Monsters: 1 per 1000pts
Allies and Mercenaries: Up to 20%

Thunder Lizard
Characters: Up to 33%
Infantry: At least 25%
Cavalry: Up to 25%
Skirmishers and Support Infantry: Up to 20%
Monsters: 1 per 500pts
Allies and Mercenaries: Up to 20%

Note that I didn't go over Endless Spells or Invocations here. Personally, I think that the limitation of needing at least one spellcasting or priest character, in addition to the relevant army composition limitations, is enough of a limitation in itself. Likewise with faction terrain, even though most of the time it's free.

Thoughts? Queries? Concerns?

 

[Kilvakar]

I think it's a very interesting concept. I've always liked the idea of running a truly mixed army list like a real army would normally do, but AoS *strongly* encourages spamming your best/most efficient unit in as large a quantity as your points allow.

However, limiting the points by percentages could be really complicated with how points work in AoS. If the point cost of the unit you want to take makes it 35% instead of 33%, for example, I could see that being quite frustrating.

 

[ChapterAquila92]

I think it's a very interesting concept. I've always liked the idea of running a truly mixed army list like a real army would normally do, but AoS *strongly* encourages spamming your best/most efficient unit in as large a quantity as your points allow.

However, limiting the points by percentages could be really complicated with how points work in AoS. If the point cost of the unit you want to take makes it 35% instead of 33%, for example, I could see that being quite frustrating.

I would say that's part of the challenge involved with this kind of listbuilding, especially when it comes to trade-offs. With that said, just because you're permitted to allocate up to X% of your point budget on a certain unit category doesn't necessarily mean you can or have to use all of it in that category, especially at smaller battle sizes like 500-point skirmishes. Chances are that as long as you've met the minimum requirements of a warlord and however many points needed for compulsory unit type, you're likely only going to lean hard into one or two unit types beyond that.

Still, you raise a valid point about the mismatch between having to pay for unit increments and having to pay for individual figures.

 

[Kilvakar]

Now that I think of it, would the percentage composition be determined by point cost or by the number of units? Like for the TL example, would 50% of your army being monsters mean that up 50% of the point costs of your army be monsters or 50% of your actual number of units?

 

[ChapterAquila92]

Now that I think of it, would the percentage composition be determined by point cost or by the number of units? Like for the TL example, would 50% of your army being monsters mean that up 50% of the point costs of your army be monsters or 50% of your actual number of units?

As shown in the examples above, ideally it would be based on point cost due to reinforced units still being a thing. It's highly unlikely AoS will ever return fully to a point-cost-per-model system outside of 1-model units, despite that being the system used by 40k, WFB, and WHAB.

Trying to base it off of the number of units would not only be rather unfair for a 30-model Saurus Warrior unit to be worth the same as a 10-model version of the same unit for instance, but you'd also have to do a lot of unnecessary calculations just to arrive at a satisfactory army composition (no more than 25% of the army can be characters? You better have at least 3 units per hero to keep that number down).

 

[ChapterAquila92]

As a good example of how this might play out, here's what I came up with for a 500pt Fangs of Sotek list built using this method, before traits, spells/prayers, and artifacts are applied:

Characters
Skink Priest - Warlord (80)

Infantry
Skink Cohort - Reinforced (1x), Clubs and Shields (150)

Skirmishers and Support Infantry
Skink Skirmishers - Javelins and Shields (75)
Skink Skirmishers - Javelins and Shields (75)

Cavalry
Terradon Riders - Javelins (105)

Total: 485/500

While I intentionally built this to be similar in composition to the old Shadowstrike Star/Templehost warscroll battalion and then some, there's a fair amount of wiggle room in how it can be altered. At 500pts the list would have access to as many characters as can fit into 25% of that value (125 points - i.e. the current cost of a Sunblood or Eternity Warden), but would require at least that many points invested in Infantry as well (hence the unit of 20 skinks with clubs and shields). As per the composition, this army would also be able to afford up to 33% (165pts) in Skirmishers and Support Infantry (i.e. Skink Skirmishers, Chameleon Skinks, Kroxigors, Salamanders, and Razordons), and again up to 25% (125pts) in Cavalry.

Comparably speaking, a Koatl's Claw version might look something more like this:

Characters
Saurus Scar-Vet on Cold One - Warlord (110)

Infantry
Saurus Warriors - Clubs (105)
Saurus Warriors - Clubs (105)
Saurus Warriors - Clubs (105)

Skirmishers and Support Infantry
Skink Skirmishers - Javelins and Shields (75)

Total: 500/500

Very similar to yet another one of our old warscroll battalions (Sunclaw specifically, if the leader could be a Scar-Vet on Cold One instead of an Oldblood or Sunblood), this was an interesting challenge to put together at 500pts. While there is always the option of simply ditching the Saurus in place of Skinks (indeed, replacing all three Saurus Warrior units with two reinforced Skink Cohorts would save you 15 points to spend elsewhere), it doesn't really play into the strengths of Koatl's Claw to begin with, which is that of a Saurus-focused subfaction. Alas, as much as I would have liked to take even an MSU of Saurus Knights, it would have required dropping two Warrior units for two Cohorts to maintain having at least 250 points in Infantry, and then removing the Skirmishers altogether, resulting in a total army point value of 475 points, with enough points left over to replace the Scar-Vet with a slightly more expensive Saurus foot hero.

 

[Putzfrau]

This is basically how fantasy did list construction without the unique limitations for each subfaction.

 

[ChapterAquila92]

This is basically how fantasy did list construction without the unique limitations for each subfaction.

I'd have to ask which edition, since I don't have any recollection of an army composition system like this in the brief time I was exposed to WFB. At best I remember the whole Lords, Heroes, Core, Special, Rare unit distinction and the limitations for each.

 

[Putzfrau]

I'd have to ask which edition, since I don't have any recollection of an army composition system like this in the brief time I was exposed to WFB. At best I remember the whole Lords, Heroes, Core, Special, Rare unit distinction and the limitations for each.

I mean that's basically the same idea, no? Each of those things has a percentage limit or minimum of your overall points you had to meet.

 

[ChapterAquila92]

I mean that's basically the same idea, no? Each of those things has a percentage limit or minimum of your overall points you had to meet.

From the best that I recall (mostly from 5th Edition WFB), armies actually had hard caps on how many units they could take from each category at certain army point sizes, and some models (especially lords and heroes on monstrous mounts) took up multiple slots.

Again, I have no recollection of a percentage-based system being used in WFB.

 

[Putzfrau]

From the best that I recall (mostly from 5th Edition WFB), armies actually had hard caps on how many units they could take from each category at certain army point sizes, and some models (especially lords and heroes on monstrous mounts) took up multiple slots.

Again, I have no recollection of a percentage-based system being used in WFB.

Up to 25% lords, 25% heroes, up to 50% special, up to 25% rare min 25% core or something like that. I don't remember 5th Ed but wfb was like that for 8th and 7th at least.

 

[ChapterAquila92]

I don't remember 5th Ed

Back in 5th Edition, it was limited by the number of each unit type you could field like the battlefield roles are currently, with caps on how many Characters (both Lords and Heroes) and Special & Rare units you could take and how many Core units you needed for a given battle size.

Less than 2000pts: 3 Characters max (0 Lords, up to 3 Heroes), 2+ Core units, 0-3 Special Units, 0-1 Rare unit.
2000-2999pts: 4 Characters max (up to 1 Lord, up to 4 Heroes), 3+ Core units, 0-4 Special Units, 0-2 Rare units.
3000-3999pts: 6 Characters max (up to 2 Lords, up to 6 Heroes), 4+ Core units, 0-5 Special Units, 0-3 Rare units.
4000-4999pts: 8 Characters max (up to 3 Lords, up to 8 Heroes), 5+ Core units, 0-6 Special Units, 0-4 Rare units.
Each +1000pts: +2 Characters (+1 Lords, +2 Heroes), +1 min Core units, +0-1 Special Units, +0-1 Rare units.

 

[NecridHydra]

I'm seeing your idea with good eyes, specially for narrative players. My local store will have a PtG campaign soon, so I may borrow this.

 

[Putzfrau]

Back in 5th Edition, it was limited by the number of each unit type you could field like the battlefield roles are currently, with caps on how many Characters (both Lords and Heroes) and Special & Rare units you could take and how many Core units you needed for a given battle size.

Less than 2000pts: 3 Characters max (0 Lords, up to 3 Heroes), 2+ Core units, 0-3 Special Units, 0-1 Rare unit.
2000-2999pts: 4 Characters max (up to 1 Lord, up to 4 Heroes), 3+ Core units, 0-4 Special Units, 0-2 Rare units.
3000-3999pts: 6 Characters max (up to 2 Lords, up to 6 Heroes), 4+ Core units, 0-5 Special Units, 0-3 Rare units.
4000-4999pts: 8 Characters max (up to 3 Lords, up to 8 Heroes), 5+ Core units, 0-6 Special Units, 0-4 Rare units.
Each +1000pts: +2 Characters (+1 Lords, +2 Heroes), +1 min Core units, +0-1 Special Units, +0-1 Rare units.

Gotcha, didn't remember that!

 

[ChapterAquila92]

Expanding on this into other factions/subfactions, I'll largely be starting with the factions I'm more familiar with and moving from there.

As such, Skaven are next.

Characters: all SKAVENTIDE HERO units
Infantry: Clanrats, Stormvermin, Plague Monks
Skirmishers: Skryre Acolytes, Rat Swarms, Giant Rats, Night Runners, Gutter Runners
Support: Plague Censor Bearers, Stormfiends, all SKAVEN WEAPON TEAM units, Rat Ogors
Monsters: all SKAVEN MONSTER units
War Machines: all SKAVEN WAR MACHINE units
Allies: all NURGLE units

Unit limitations:

• You may not have more Stormvermin units than you have Clanrat units;
• Stormvermin units may not have more figures than the smallest Clanrat unit;
• You may not have more than one Plague Monks unit in your army;
  
• You may not have more Plague Censor Bearer units than you have Plague Monk units;
• Plague Censor Bearer units may not have more figures than the smallest Plague Monk unit;
• You may not have more Gutter Runner units than you have Night Runner units;
• Gutter Runner units may not have more figures than the smallest Night Runner unit;
• The total number of wounds invested in Support units may not exceed the total number of wounds invested in Skirmisher units

For a horde faction that doesn't really have any subfactions, there's a fair amount of nuance that could be gleaned from building an army that leans towards any of the clans.

Masterclan
Characters: Up to 33%
Infantry: At least 33%
Skirmishers and Support Infantry: Up to 33%
Monsters: 1 per 750pts
War Machines: 1 per 750pts
Mercenaries: Up to 20%
Additional: The warlord of a Masterclan army must be MASTERCLAN.

In my opinion, Masterclan ought to be the well-rounded approach, representing a Grey Seer's influence in wrangling together elements of the other clans into something resembling an army, with council representatives in tow. Little more needs to be said.

Verminus
Characters: Up to 25%
Infantry: At least 50%
Skirmishers and Support Infantry: Up to 25%
Monsters: 1 per 1000pts
War Machines: 1 per 1000pts
Mercenaries: Up to 20%
Additional: The warlord of a Verminus army must be either MASTERCLAN or VERMINUS. At least 50% of all Infantry units in a Verminus army must be VERMINUS.

Ah, Verminus: the clan you play when you want to swamp your opponent with clanrats and stormvermin. For composition purposes here, I'm going with the idea that Clanrats and Stormvermin are universal Infantry options for Skaven, with the additional limitation that you may not have more Stormvermin than Clanrats in your army, in both unit count and unit size.

Eshin
Characters: Up to 25%
Infantry: At least 25%
Skirmishers and Support Infantry: Up to 75%
Monsters: 1 per 1000pts
War Machines: 1 per 1000pts
Mercenaries: Up to 20%
Additional: The warlord of an Eshin army must be either MASTERCLAN or ESHIN. At least 50% of all Skirmisher units an Eshin army must be ESHIN

It took a while to determine how I'd consider an army to be built around Eshin. At first I thought about the army treating non-hero Eshin units as Infantry, but the more I thought about it the more it didn't make much sense since Eshin units lean very heavily into a Skirmisher role in general (in fact, this is the default state for most clan-specific units, with maybe the sole exception being those associated with Clan Pestilens, the War Machines of Clan Skryre, or the Monsters of Clan Moulder). Thus, we get the additional limitation of how many of these non-Eshin units we can take in that role.

Moulder
Characters: Up to 25%
Infantry: At least 25%
Skirmishers and Support Infantry: Up to 75%
Monsters: 1 per 500pts
War Machines: 1 per 1000pts
Mercenaries: Up to 20%
Additional: The warlord of a Moulder army must be MASTERCLAN or MOULDER. At least 50% each of all Skirmisher, Support, and Monster units in a Moulder Army must be MOULDER

As follows from Eshin, Moulder gets a similar limitation on how many non-Moulder units it can take as Skirmishers and Support Infantry, with perhaps a bit more flexibility in what units it has access to due to Stormfiends being a dual-clan unit on top of their usual line-up. As the Monster-focused clan, it's only fitting that they would be able to invest more points into their beasts than other clans.

Pestilens
Characters: Up to 25%
Infantry: At least 50%
Skirmishers and Support Infantry: Up to 25%
Monsters: 1 per 1000pts
War Machines: 1 per 750pts
Allies and Mercenaries: Up to 20%
Additional: The warlord of a Pestilens army must be either MASTERCLAN or PESTILENS. At least 50% each of all Infantry and War Machine units in a Pestilens army must be PESTILENS. Unit restrictions on Plague Monks are lifted in a Pestilens army. Censor Bearer units count as Infantry in a Pestilens army instead of as Support.

Pretty straightforward. Pestilens shakes things up a bit by removing unit restrictions on Plague Monks, including Censor Bearers as Infantry, and by being the only clan that can take Allies (in this case, Nurgle). I briefly contemplated also having Plague Monks to count as Clanrats for the purposes of determining how many Stormvermin and Censor Bearers you can take, but I feel that that would have probably been more trouble than it's worth to implement.

Skryre
Characters: Up to 25%
Infantry: At least 25%
Skirmishers and Support Infantry: Up to 75%
Monsters: 1 per 1000pts
War Machines: 1 per 500pts
Mercenaries: Up to 20%
Additional: The warlord of a Skryre army must be either MASTERCLAN or SKRYRE. At least 50% each of all Skirmisher, Support, and War Machine units in a Skryre army must be SKRYRE.

Like with Moulder and Eshin, most Skryre units fall into a skirmishing or support infantry role, with notable exceptions being their infernal war machines. The only other limitation I can think of possibly implementing here is one where no WEAPON TEAM unit may have more wounds than the smallest unit of Skryre Acolytes in the army (I'm not even counting Stormfiends, since they're pretty much their own thing). I'm not sure where I'd want to go with that though since, out of all of the 2W/model teams, only Warplock Jezzails come in multi-model units. Solution? Properly separating Skirmishers and Support Infantry and basing the limitation on total wounds for each.

 

[ChapterAquila92]

Disciples of Tzeentch... Where to begin?

It's rather fitting that trying to make sense of what each unit counts as is a little maddening, since now there's also the distinction between Mortal and Daemon that needs to be accounted for when it comes to subfaction composition, as well as the complexities of how units of Horrors work.

As before, we'll start with what counts as what.

Functionally, you could very easily split the faction into two main camps, of which I'm taking cues from the warscroll super-battalions you can take: the daemon-focused Fate Legion and the mortal-focused Arcanite Cult. Unlike Coalesced and Starborne for Seraphon however, the roles of certain Tzeentch units aren't necessarily constant.

Fate Legion
Characters: all TZEENTCH HERO units, BEASTS OF CHAOS Characters, SLAVES TO DARKNESS Characters with the MARK OF CHAOS keyword
Infantry: all HORRORS OF TZEENTCH units, Kairic Acolytes, Tzaangors, BEASTS OF CHAOS Infantry, SLAVES TO DARKNESS Infantry with the MARK OF CHAOS keyword
Skirmishers: Screamers of Tzeentch, BEASTS OF CHAOS Skirmishers
Support Infantry: Flamers of Tzeentch, Exalted Flamers of Tzeentch, Tzaangor Enlightened Tzeentch Chaos Spawn, BEASTS OF CHAOS Support Infantry, SLAVES TO DARKNESS Support Infantry with the MARK OF CHAOS keyword
Cavalry: Tzaangor Enlightened on Discs of Tzeentch, Tzaangor Skyfires, BEASTS OF CHAOS Support Infantry, SLAVES TO DARKNESS Support Infantry with the MARK OF CHAOS keyword
Chariots: Burning Chariots of Tzeentch, BEASTS OF CHAOS Chariots, SLAVES TO DARKNESS Chariots with the MARK OF CHAOS keyword
Monsters: all TZEENTCH MONSTER units, BEASTS OF CHAOS Monsters, SLAVES TO DARKNESS Monsters with the MARK OF CHAOS keyword
Allies: all HEDONITES OF SLAANESH units, all SLAVES TO DARKNESS units without the MARK OF CHAOS keyword

Limitations:

• At least 50% of all units in a Fate Legion army must be DAEMON units;
• No more than 50% of all units in a Fate Legion army may be SLAVES TO DARKNESS units with the MARK OF CHAOS keyword;
• All units with the MARK OF CHAOS keyword must be TZEENTCH;
  
• No more than 25% of all units in a Fate Legion army may be BEASTS OF CHAOS units;
• A Fate Legion army may not include any KHORNE or NURGLE units;
  
• You may not have more TZAANGOR ENLIGHTENED or Skyfire units in your army than you have Tzaangor units;
• TZAANGOR ENLIGHTENED and Skyfire units may not have more figures than the smallest Tzaangor unit;
• You may not take more Pink Horror units than you have Blue Horror units;
• Pink Horror units may not have more figures than the smallest Blue Horror unit;
• You may not take more Exalted Flamer units than you have Flamers of Tzeentch units;
• Exalted Flamer units may not have more figures than the smallest Flamers of Tzeentch unit.
• The total number of wounds invested in Chariot units may not exceed the total number of wounds invested in Cavalry units
  
• The total number of wounds invested in Support units may not exceed the total number of wounds invested in Skirmisher units

Options:

• If the warlord of a Fate Legion is a FATESKIMMER, you may include up to one Burning Chariots of Tzeentch unit in addition to any Chariots you may normally take.

Arcanite Cult
Characters: all TZEENTCH HERO units, BEASTS OF CHAOS Characters, SLAVES TO DARKNESS Characters with the MARK OF CHAOS keyword
Infantry: Kairic Acolytes, Tzaangors, BEASTS OF CHAOS Infantry, SLAVES TO DARKNESS Infantry with the MARK OF CHAOS keyword
Skirmishers: all HORRORS OF TZEENTCH units, Screamers of Tzeentch, BEASTS OF CHAOS Skirmishers
Support Infantry: Flamers of Tzeentch, Exalted Flamers of Tzeentch, Tzaangor Enlightened, Tzeentch Chaos Spawn, BEASTS OF CHAOS Support Infantry, SLAVES TO DARKNESS Support Infantry with the MARK OF CHAOS keyword
Cavalry: Tzaangor Enlightened on Discs of Tzeentch, Tzaangor Skyfires, BEASTS OF CHAOS Support Infantry, SLAVES TO DARKNESS Support Infantry with the MARK OF CHAOS keyword
Chariots: Burning Chariots of Tzeentch, BEASTS OF CHAOS Chariots, SLAVES TO DARKNESS Chariots with the MARK OF CHAOS keyword
Monsters: all TZEENTCH MONSTER units, BEASTS OF CHAOS Monsters, SLAVES TO DARKNESS Monsters with the MARK OF CHAOS keyword
Allies: all HEDONITES OF SLAANESH units, all SLAVES TO DARKNESS units without the MARK OF CHAOS keyword

Limitations:

• No more than 50% of all units in an Arcanite Cult army may be DAEMON units;
• No more than 50% of all units in an Arcanite Cult army may be SLAVES TO DARKNESS units with the MARK OF CHAOS keyword;
• All units with the MARK OF CHAOS keyword must be TZEENTCH;
  
• No more than 25% of all units in an Arcanite Cult army may be BEASTS OF CHAOS units;
• An Arcanite Cult army may not include any KHORNE or NURGLE units;
  
• You may not have more TZAANGOR ENLIGHTENED or Skyfire units in your army than you have Tzaangor units;
• TZAANGOR ENLIGHTENED and Skyfire units may not have more figures than the smallest Tzaangor unit;
• You may not take more Pink Horror units than you have Blue Horror units;
• Pink Horror units may not have more figures than the smallest Blue Horror unit;
• You may not take more Exalted Flamer units than you have Flamers of Tzeentch units;
• Exalted Flamer units may not have more figures than the smallest Flamers of Tzeentch unit.
• The total number of wounds invested in Chariot units may not exceed the total number of wounds invested in Cavalry units
  
• The total number of wounds invested in Support units may not exceed the total number of wounds invested in Skirmisher units

Options:

• If the warlord of an Arcanite Cult is a FATESKIMMER, you may include up to one Burning Chariots of Tzeentch unit in addition to any Chariots you may normally take.

Much like how Seraphon subfactions are evenly and definitively split between Coalesced and Starborne, Tzeentch's subfactions are roughly split between the two categories.

Fate Legion Subfactions

The Eternal Conflagration
Characters: Up to 33%
Infantry: At least 25%
Skirmishers and Support Infantry: Up to 50%
Cavalry & Chariots: Up to 33%
Monsters: 1 per 750pts
Allies & Mercenaries: Up to 20%
Additional: Flamers of Tzeentch count as Skirmishers instead of Support.

The Hosts Duplicitous
Characters: Up to 33%
Infantry: At least 33%
Skirmishers and Support Infantry: Up to 25%
Cavalry & Chariots: Up to 25%
Monsters: 1 per 750pts
Allies & Mercenaries: Up to 20%
Additional: N/A

The Hosts Arcanum
Characters: Up to 33%
Infantry: Up to 33%
Skirmishers and Support Infantry: Up to 50%
Cavalry & Chariots: At least 25%
Monsters: 1 per 750pts
Allies & Mercenaries: Up to 20%
Additional: N/A

Arcanite Cult Subfactions

The Cult of the Transient Form
Characters: Up to 33%
Infantry: At least 50%
Skirmishers and Support Infantry: Up to 25%
Cavalry & Chariots: Up to 25%
Monsters: 1 per 1000pts
Allies & Mercenaries: Up to 20%
Additional: N/A

The Pyrofane Cult
Characters: Up to 33%
Infantry: At least 50%
Skirmishers and Support Infantry: Up to 25%
Cavalry & Chariots: Up to 25%
Monsters: 1 per 1000pts
Allies & Mercenaries: Up to 20%
Additional: N/A

The Guild of Summoners
Characters: Up to 33%
Infantry: At least 33%
Skirmishers and Support Infantry: Up to 25%
Cavalry & Chariots: Up to 25%
Monsters: 1 per 1000pts
Allies & Mercenaries: Up to 20%
Additional: N/A

To say that this was a bit of a pain to put together is an understatement. I'll be leaving Tzeentch as is until it gets some playtesting.

 

[ChapterAquila92]

At this point, just about any faction is easier to work with than Tzeentch.

The Ogor Mawtribes are no exception here.

Unit-wise, beyond the division between Gutbuster Warglutts and Beastclaw Alfrostuns, a Mawtribe generally has access to both in varying quantities:

Characters: all OGOR MAWTRIBES HERO units
Infantry: Ogor Gluttons, Ironguts
Skirmishers: Gnoblars, Frost Sabres
Support: Gorgers, Leadbelchers, Icefall Yhetees, Maneaters
Cavalry: Mournfang Pack
Monsters: all RHINOX units, all OGOR MAWTRIBES MONSTER units
Allies: all ALEGUZZLER GARGANTS and TROGGOTHS units

Limitations:

• You may not have more Ironguts units in the army than Ogor Gluttons units;
• Ironguts units may not have more figures than the smallest Ogor Gluttons unit;
• The total number of wounds invested in Support units may not exceed the total number of wounds invested in Skirmisher units

Meatfist
Characters: Up to 33%
Infantry: At least 33%
Skirmishers and Support Infantry: Up to 25%
Cavalry: Up to 25%
Monsters: 1 per 1000pts
Allies & Mercenaries: Up to 20%
Additional: N/A

The most straightforward Mawtribe, really, with its primary benefit focusing on Gluttons. Likely the easiest to form a well-rounded list with, pun intended.

It goes without saying that Ogors tend to lean on the expensive side of per-model costs, and their characters are no exception. This is primarily why point allotment for characters is generally higher than usual - at 500pts, an Ogor player wouldn't be able to field anything more expensive than an Icebrow Hunter or Firebelly at 25% (125pts), while a 33% cap (165pts) would at least allow them to purchase a Ogor Tyrant at the current point cost.

Bloodgullet
Characters: Up to 33%
Infantry: At least 33%
Skirmishers and Support Infantry: Up to 25%
Cavalry: Up to 25%
Monsters: 1 per 1000pts
Allies & Mercenaries: Up to 20%
Additional: The army must include at least one BUTCHER unit.

Another straightforward Mawtribe, only this time relying more on a synergy between BUTCHER units and Gluttons. My decision to add the requirement of having at least one BUTCHER in the army was not an easy one - especially given that the faction rules as they currently stand do enough of the talking to suggest this anyway - but a little future-proofing may be called for as time goes on.

Underguts
Characters: Up to 33%
Infantry: At least 33%
Skirmishers and Support Infantry: Up to 25%
Cavalry: Up to 25%
Monsters: 1 per 500pts
Allies & Mercenaries: Up to 20%
Additional: Leadbelcher units count as Infantry instead of Support.

Shoot first, ask questions later. Given the lore behind Underguts largely revolving around their love of guns as both weapons and improvised cooking utensils at the same time, having Leadbelcher units be treated as Infantry was rather natural. Also of note is the potential 25% point allotment for Monsters - this was largely intended to represent their propensity to go big with cannon use as well, of which Ironblasters certainly count, being mounted on Rhinoxes and all.

Boulderhead
Characters: Up to 33%
Infantry: Up to 25%
Skirmishers and Support Infantry: Up to 25%
Cavalry: At least 25%
Monsters: 1 per 500pts
Allies & Mercenaries: Up to 20%
Additional: N/A

The first of the Beastclaw Raider-dominated Mawtribes, and thus likely to focus on cavalry-centric forces, Boulderhead's signature theme most definitively revolves around its stonehorns and thundertusks, which stand as being among the most point-intensive monster models in the game that aren't heroes. As a result, they would require far more of a permitted allowance than Underguts just to be able to field a third in a 2000pt game (not including any heroes that ride them).

Thunderbellies
Characters: Up to 33%
Infantry: Up to 25%
Skirmishers and Support Infantry: Up to 25%
Cavalry: At least 33%
Monsters: 1 per 750pts
Allies & Mercenaries: Up to 20%
Additional: N/A

The definitive Ogor Cavalry force with a focus on Mournfang Packs, I would argue that Thunderbellies are the Beastclaw equivalent to Meatfist in this regard, and don't require much more explanation than that.

Winterbite
Characters: Up to 33%
Infantry: At least 25%
Skirmishers and Support Infantry: Up to 50%
Cavalry: Up to 25%
Monsters: 1 per 750pts
Allies & Mercenaries: Up to 20%
Additional: The army must include at least one unit with either the ICEBROW HUNTER or OGOR PRIEST keywords.

The decision to treat Winterbite as the Skirmish-focused Ogor subfaction comes down to the two units it primarily benefits the most: Frost Sabres and Icefall Yhetees, both of which are treated as Skirmishers and Support respectively in the general unit breakdown. Much like with Bloodgullet, there was a strong temptation to include a requirement of at least one Icebrow Hunter in the army. Similarly, across all three Beastclaw-heavy subfactions, the situational bonuses towards an OGOR PRIEST (really, there's only one such model, and its the Huskard on Thundertusk) were tempting enough to consider making that a requirement as well for each of them. Again, some futureproofing was called for, and making the requirement a shared minimum of one rather than one of each was suitable for what this subfaction has to offer.

 

[RuneBrush]

I've always liked this kind thematic structure in games. The biggest issue with AoS is that as soon as you add any form of list building mechanic in, it gets messy really quickly! There is also a huge leaning towards legitimising what my local group classes as "daft" lists - like an army composed entirely of bloodthirsters... I've no issue with lists like that when playing as a friendly, but it drives me nuts to see it at tournaments and events.

Back on track though! I'm liking the thinking above, my main gripe would be there's too many options. Streamlining to 5th ed concept (Lord, Hero, Core, Special, Rare - perhaps combining Lord & Hero and adding Behemoth) should be enough to control lists. Some units could change from Special to Core (aka battleline if) and some could have additional limitations (no more than X per Y points). You could even have some units that could be either Special OR Rare for example

 

[ChapterAquila92]

I've always liked this kind thematic structure in games. The biggest issue with AoS is that as soon as you add any form of list building mechanic in, it gets messy really quickly! There is also a huge leaning towards legitimizing what my local group classes as "daft" lists - like an army composed entirely of bloodthirsters... I've no issue with lists like that when playing as a friendly, but it drives me nuts to see it at tournaments and events.

Yeah, there's not much I can say on that. I'm not a fan of single-unit spam lists myself, as meme-worthy as they may be, which is most of the reason why I'm putting this together.

Back on track though! I'm liking the thinking above, my main gripe would be there's too many options. Streamlining to 5th ed concept (Lord, Hero, Core, Special, Rare - perhaps combining Lord & Hero and adding Behemoth) should be enough to control lists. Some units could change from Special to Core (aka battleline if) and some could have additional limitations (no more than X per Y points). You could even have some units that could be either Special OR Rare for example

This is a fair assessment. As with all means of list-building however, there are still going to be pitfalls with this as well.

This may just be me drawing inspiration from the historical tabletop games, but I don't find that Core, Special, and Rare exactly speak to particular battlefield roles any more than Battleline can without some arbitrary definition that's more likely than not to be nonsensical (Lords, Heroes and Leaders are characters through and through, making them the exception to this). Comparatively speaking, Infantry, Cavalry, Skirmisher, Support, Monster, and War Machine all speak volumes as to what niche they fill in an army, which can then be tweaked to emphasize some unit types at the expense of others for much the same effect (as demonstrated with my attempts at tackling both Seraphon and Skaven).

No word of a lie though that some of the "soup" factions I'll likely end up doing (i.e. Cities of Sigmar) are going to be something of a nightmare to tackle.

 

[RuneBrush]

This may just be me drawing inspiration from the historical tabletop games, but I don't find that Core, Special, and Rare exactly speak to particular battlefield roles any more than Battleline can without some arbitrary definition that's more likely than not to be nonsensical (Lords, Heroes and Leaders are characters through and through, making them the exception to this). Comparatively speaking, Infantry, Cavalry, Skirmisher, Support, Monster, and War Machine all speak volumes as to what niche they fill in an army, which can then be tweaked to emphasize some unit types at the expense of others for much the same effect (as demonstrated with my attempts at tackling both Seraphon and Skaven).

No word of a lie though that some of the "soup" factions I'll likely end up doing (i.e. Cities of Sigmar) are going to be something of a nightmare to tackle.

Makes sense! Would agree too that Core, Special & Rare are pretty generic and vague terms too I do know that one of the things GW deliberately did was to not use anything that appears as a keyword in their pitched battle limitations, which is why we have Behemoth rather than Monster and Leader rather than Hero.