Chaos SPace marine units & Daemon Subtype from New Rulebook

[Spear of Achilles]

Accourding to the Grey Knights FAQ, the following are considered non-Chaos Daemon codex are considered daemons:

 

Possessed Chaos Space Marines

Obliterators

Any vehicle with the Daemonic possession upgrade.

 

Per the new rulebook: "Models with the Daemon special rule have a 5+ invulnerable save, and also have the Fear special rule.". Note taht it does not say sub-type or anything else. Just Daemon special rule. So do models without the ATSKNF need leadershipc hecks to assault any of these, and does a possessed land raider now get a 5+ Invuln?

[Seahawk]

Sounds like vehicles get the benefits too, open n' shut.

[Feste]

In the FAQ Summoned Greater and Lesser Daemons are both listed as having the Daemon special rule. There's no such listing for the units you mention. As such, I'd assume that they don't. For now anyway.

[Spear of Achilles]

They do indeed get listed in the FAQ. The GK FAQ. Of course, you have to buy Daemonic possession for chaos vehicles, so unless you purchase it, the land raider would not get the Invuln. It's probably a bit too expensive for massed rhino use either way, just to effectivly add another Hull point....

[Feste]

But the GK FAQ just refers to them counting as daemons for some other purpose. It makes no reference to giving them Fear or the Demon special rules.

[Brother Ambroz]

So GK should get their bonuses against these units because they're daemonic but CSM shouldn't get their bonuses because they're not daemonic enough...?

[Spear of Achilles]

The Chaos Daemon Codex does not list them as having Fear either. In this case I'd say the Codex obviously does not outrule the BRB.

[Feste]

@Spear of Achilles: The Chaos Daemon FAQ says that everything in the codex does get Fear.

 

@Tanith Ghost: Well, maybe Possessed marines being only mortals hosting a daemon aren't daemon enough? I don't know. But this isn't the only difference between the two FAQs. Daemon Princes have a different unit type between them both.

[Legatus]

Daemons are creatures of the warp, without a physical form, that only manifest in the material world for a short duration. Obliterators and Possessed are mortal creatures that got daemons in them. That is enough of a distinction to me to have them be subject to some Grey Knight anti-dameon rule without getting all the benefits of being actual complete daemons.

 

Edit: Ninja'd.

[Spear of Achilles]

Well if you're using fluffy descriptions for why rules work, then especially the daemonic vehicles would get the benefit. Weird slimy tenticles or a assault ramp with teeth is enough for me to consider them daemons. The GK codex stated Preferred Enemy: Daemons. Not Preferred Enemy: Possessed or Quasi Daemons. The exact wording for teh FAQ is 'What is considered a daemon?' If they are considered daemons, that's what they are. We could add Defilers to the list, while we are at it; it says Possessed. The exact wording for Preferred Enemy is 'This rule is often presented as Preferred Enemy (X) where X identifies a specific type of foe.' I think SPECIFIC narrows it exatly, in this case, to what is listed in the GK FAQ. Those listed ARE considered daemons from a rules perspective. (All rules, not select-few rules)

[pingo]

It would be weird to have to refer to another Codex's FAQ in order to properly use the units in your own Codex in accordance with the games developer's intended use of them in the new rules.

[Feste]

We're not using fluffy descriptions to justify rules. We're describing the rules as written, which nowhere mention adding new special rules to the Possessed. You're attempting to use a clarification in one army's FAQ regarding a rule in that codex, to add a special rule to a unit in another army when that army's FAQ does not add this rule to that unit.

 

As you say, the exact wording is 'What is considered a daemon?'. It does not say 'What has the Daemon special rule'.

 

Can you explain why the CSM FAQ would give the Daemon special rule to Greater and Lesser Daemons, specifically mentioning them, but would omit mentioning the Possessed if this is not both RAW and RAI?

 

The Rulebook states that unless stated otherwise a model does not have a special rule. The wording in the GK FAQ does not state that Possessed have a special rule, just that they're considered daemons. These are two different things.

[Spear of Achilles]

I don't see 'quasi-daemon' listed in the CSM codex either, but apparently GK FAQ is adding it....

 

Unless of course we're considering Preferred Enemy the GK's personal hatred/interp of what is worth their wrath. Good point. However I might also reinterate that PE does say specific kinds of creatures.

[Feste]

No, the GK codex is simply stating that there is a type of foe that are called daemons and that against these they have the effects of the Preferred Enemy special rule.

 

This category is in no way related to determining which units have the Daemon special rule. Being the target of Preferred Enemy does not grant a separate rule.

[DarkGuard]

It would be weird to have to refer to another Codex's FAQ in order to properly use the units in your own Codex in accordance with the games developer's intended use of them in the new rules.

 

Exactly. You play C:CSM, you bring the C:CSM FAQ and use that for rules, not the C:GK FAQ. Therefore, if it doesn't mention that those units are Daemons in the C:CSM FAQ, then they aren't Daemons for the purpose of the rulebook USR.