Demonic Steed clarification

C) Heralds of Daemons cannot take a Daemonic Steed because they do not have the Mark of the chosen god.

Facebook responses:
I say the upgrade to the chosen daemon is a Mark.
p.93 Daemon Prince.
p.68 Psychic Powers.
I believe the Daemon of a God and the Mark of a God is interchangeable.

I beleive that to be true. /They just need to come out and say it

It will be in the FAQ, just because some people can't let go of common sense.
It is clear as to intent, similar to infinite and henchman rule... We all knew the reality, but some people wouldn't let go because of perception.

The book clearly has the steeds as a option in the book. They do not spell it out but they don't with the psychic powers either it just says respectfully because we can put two and two together knowing only with the correct mark you take powers from that tree

I envy you guys for being able to apply common sense to rules. However the reason for the debates is the poor technical writing/editing on GW behalf. I must constantly contend with these type of questions to rules and you'll see alot of them on DAkka Dakka that are obviously smoking something but are retarded. So as a T.O. here is why we are having this discussion is this: You begin the tourney and this does not come up for a round or 2. But 3rd round they have proof they are not being douchey (beyond not comprehending the rules) but RAW states X is true Y is False. So I have found it best to establish your self as a T.O. that makes either RAW or RAI calls. Its not Fair to be both. I understand that there are rules that will always exist like these where there has been an oversight. But mention it Like I did before CAG Started Here are RAW rules Changes. others are adjusted by FAQ or they are RAW. Regardless of how stupid it may be until it can be ruled on before the tourney Starts. So yes I applaud Chad and his technical Rules Lawyering ways and bringing the idiotic rules to my attention so I can make these rulings for my events. GW still hasnt Addressed the Invuln save for vehicles yet so dont count on FAQ to always fix stuff in a timely manner. ala 5th Edition Ork Deff Rollas Can only Ram not tank shock because it only said Ram, even though Tank shock was a type of RAM. Look it up in Dakka Dakka or even CAG... Stupid stupid stupid

Yes you can apply RAI and RAW even handedly, and even become known for that... Where there are clear lines, you apply without question.
Where there are contradictions within the rules set, you have to extrapolate .
I did so at my store in Florida for 11 years... And had people from out of state coming to my larger events with fair regularity. ( note that is neither a statement toward you... I think of it as a hard line that should not be so in the community).
When a person searches like specifically for things that deny players the ability 2 execute common sense play, you're looking for loopholes.

Thanks guys.

The original discussion came up at EGC.
Can a Daemon of a God take a Herald?
They say no because they don't have the Mark of the God.
I say yes because 'Mark of' and 'Daemon of' are interchangeable.

I've been reading some stuff about this and it seems to be a point of contention on which interpretations are correct. Here is some of the stuff I have read.


Does Daemonic Alignment prevent ICs from joining squads in other armies with the Daemon special rule? For instance, when deployed as allies for a CSM force, can a character possessing the Daemon of Khorne special rule join a unit of Possessed Space Marines with the mark of Khorne?


kull LeaderMarch 4, 2013 at 5:34 PM
@Eternal Nurgling- you are correct, but that's not the question being asked. They want to know if a Codex Demon IC such as a herald can join a squad from Chaos Space Marines that ARE Daemon (USR) such as Possessed, Warptalons, Obliterators and have the matching alignment (mark).

Since instability states a IC without instability mayn't join a unit with but not the other way around and the alignment wording doesn't specify "daemon of X" vs "daemon with mark of X" and they are daemons it appears all requirements may be satisfied and they can.

The question is if that was intended.

Specifically, the rule says:
"A unit with this special rule cannot be joined by a model without this special rule."

So, does an IC count as a "unit" on it's own? I'd always thought so, but it does open up the possibility of, for example, a Herald of Nurgle joining a unit of Nurgle Obliterators, and conferring FnP upon them...

More: While this is not specifically about the original question it does pertain to the "Daemon of" and "Daemons with Mark of" debate.


Do Obliterators with Mark of Nurgle benefit from Epidemius's aura and/or add to the tally? The rule for Epidemius state Daemon of Nurgle (which includes shrouded and etc.), but the entry for daemon princes in the daemons codex refers to being a daemon of X and being a daemon with Mark of X as being equivalent.

Captain Jay MorganMarch 4, 2013 at 1:00 PM
The answer to this, unless FAQd, is no.

EpicWarGamerMarch 4, 2013 at 2:42 PM
Agreed. No. Daemon of Nurgle is different from Daemon and Mark of Nurgle.

ChristopherMarch 4, 2013 at 3:59 PM
@EpicWarGamer.... That is incorrect.

A Daemon with the Mark of Nurgle is a Daemon of Nurgle.

Otherwise you are saying that all Daemons from CHaos Daemons who in their listings Have Mark of Nurgle... Don't count.

MAAkselMarch 4, 2013 at 6:54 PM
@Christopher... That is incorrect.

A Daemon with the 'Mark of Nurgle' is *NOT* a 'Daemon of Nurgle'. These are two entirely different entries, from two entirely different books.

RAW is all we have to go by, hence this list is being created to address these issues.

No demons in the book have "Mark of Nurgle", they all have "Deamon of Nurgle".

jdwelch62March 4, 2013 at 7:08 PM
Agree with MAAksel, unfortunately. Seems that the wording of "Mark of X" & "Daemon of X" is intentional, and meant to restrict the one from what benefits the other. Otherwise, IMHO, it would state that they DO affect/confer to each other.


HOTpandaMarch 4, 2013 at 12:07 PM
As the wording stands only Daemon of Nurgle not mark of nurgle units. Daemon Princes of Nurgle in the CSM codex would as they are a Daemon of Nurgle.

Christopher ValentineMarch 4, 2013 at 12:59 PM
Obliterators have the USR deamon tho.

Captain Jay MorganMarch 4, 2013 at 1:06 PM
Yes, but it doesn't say "Daemons with the Mark of Nurgle". It says, "Models with the Daemon of Nurgle rule". That means no Obliterators.

Eternal NurglingMarch 4, 2013 at 6:27 PM
His tally applies to anything with the mark of nurgle. I believe the only part of that changed is the range.

jdwelch62March 4, 2013 at 7:13 PM
Disagree, Eternal Nurgling, as much as I'd like to agree, it specifically says "Daemons of Nurgle". That would seem to work for a CSM Daemon Prince, but not Obliterators, which have both the "Daemon" rule and can be given "Mark of Nurgle"... Sorry, I've been playing Epidemius as my Death Guard's ally since the CSM codex came out, and would love for it to work the way you want , but unfortunately without an FAQ to the contrary, it doesn't appear to work that way... :-(

EAP wrote:

Yes you can apply RAI and RAW even handedly, and even become known for that... Where there are clear lines, you apply without question.
Where there are contradictions within the rules set, you have to extrapolate .
I did so at my store in Florida for 11 years... And had people from out of state coming to my larger events with fair regularity. ( note that is neither a statement toward you... I think of it as a hard line that should not be so in the community).
When a person searches like specifically for things that deny players the ability 2 execute common sense play, you're looking for loopholes..

That may have been the case 11 years ago and maybe in a different area, but the local stores come up with the most ridiculous rulings on shit. Infamously Hobby Town, AoW, SciFi City, and Yotta, have had some wanky calls on these so called common sense rules. So for the tiny community of players at the store they play with RAW. So when they come to a bigger or different tourney then thats where issues happen. Yes the majority is just a rules interpretaion that can be solved quickly. My issue is not that its common sense but that there are too many people with so little of it and I see it regularly in cincy! So I would just prefer that GW get a freaking technical Writer and eliminate some of these damn easy fixes or at least address them in FAQ amendments...