A lot can happen over the course of 5ish years, so yeah I guess Biomancy now doesn't look like the original Biomancy concept. I bet Corruption doesn't either.
The problem with a rework that a developer has to ask them self is whether the the delta-change in mechanics (that is how much better the end goal is than what you currently have) is worth the investment of development time.
Like if you're making a shooter which uses homing bullets for aim-assist, and you want to change into hitbox-embiggening 'cuz it's better somehow. Will the change be worth the time-investment?
I think it's the same for Biomancy, and while it may entirely be me, I can't really think of a system that'd be better-enough to warrant serious time-investiture.
Personally I'd prefer a lot less dialogue boxes and 'stops' where RAGS waits for the user to press continue. But I hope they're there for good reason already.
(Fewer dialogue boxes would also reduce the memory leakiness of RAGS 2.4.16)
...- Is there then a way to make sure biomancy actually adds the traits/checks of the new race? I pretty frequently still get referred to as the old race/don't get the traits of the new.
-...
It is possible, but it's not easy in the RAGS architecture. It builds the sentences from arrays of identifiers, amongst others the targets race, gender, etc. You'd have to find them all and change them all. Which, given how difficult it is to get Biomancy to even fire 100% of the time, is probably a tall order.