There is a small battlegrounds issue with Agamaggan. Today as I played BG i noticed that in game there were no beasts. But at the same time Agamaggan (beast from tier 5) was in game.
So…
Is it a beast or is it quilboar?
According to blizzard website it is a beast.
But if so and there were no beasts how it appeared in my game.
True mystery…
For battlegrounds, tribes consist of the cards that are part of that tribe and those that have specific synergies.
So for instance, when Gentle Megasaur was still in the game, it was not part of the beast tribe, but of the murloc tribe, since that is where it had synergies. This was explicitly mentioned as being by design when the “banned tribes” feature first appeared in BG.
So I assume that Agamaggan is considered part of the Quilboar tribe for that same reason.
Excellent response from BigHugger. For the purposes of BG’s, tribes are more like big pots of minions of which you can find any from any particular pot, rather than beasts only containing beasts and nothing else, for example.
It’s not exactly the same, but is similar to certain tribes containing neutral cards. If tribes only contained minions that had that specific tribes tag, useful cards could be pretty redundant if you didn’t get that particular tribe in your game For example, pack leader would be pretty useless without beasts, same with Kangor’s apprentice if no mechs were in the game, so these cards…while they don’t contain their tribes tag specifically, are grouped in with them.
So, in summary, it’s useful to think of tribes more as groups of cards that synergise with each other, rather than specific to a tribe tag.