Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

blaktoof wrote:
GW changes rules in the FAQs, and uses the FAQs as errata multiple times through the both the GW FAQs and the FW FAQ.

Please cite even a single instance of this ever being done. You seem to not understand the difference between Frequently Asked Questions and an Errata.

blaktoof wrote:
In some cases they give errata answers in the Warhammer community fluff section that links to the actual FAQ/errata which doesn't contain said FAQ/errata (see thousand sons access to dark hereticus for example)

Literally called an Errata at the top of the page. See for yourself.
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/08/13/daemons-and-thousand-sons-in-codex-chaos-space-marines-aug-13gw-homepage-post-2/

blaktoof wrote:
The codex clearly states that death guard cannot make use of the rules in that section of the codex, which includes Strategems. GW may have put it in the section for fAqs because it was a rules issue brought to them(their idea of a FAq) versus an interaction they thought of changing(their idea of errata).

The very definition of "nothing was changed". They clarified how the rules interact with each other for those who didn't already know, nothing more. Simply because you thought they interacted a different way because of your own reading interpretation does not mean that's how it worked at all, though you are free to email and argue with GW telling them this. We're not interested in discussing something that has been given an official verdict here.

blaktoof wrote:
Regardless in the case of this topic it still leaves the RAW statement that deathguard cannot use any of the rules in that section- as there was no actual change to any rules text, so although the FAQ allows the strategem the RAW still means the model cannot cast the power it swapped for as it cannot make use of the dark hereticus rules.

It was also officially stated that Dark Hereticus is NOT being updated or replaced in the codex which means the Index version still exists separately and is usable by Death Guard, such as with the index Palanquin of Nurgle Sorcerer who by RAW still has access to Dark Hereticus and can still be Death Guard.

 Arkaine wrote:

blaktoof wrote:
GW changes rules in the FAQs, and uses the FAQs as errata multiple times through the both the GW FAQs and the FW FAQ.

Please cite even a single instance of this ever being done. You seem to not understand the difference between Frequently Asked Questions and an Errata.

Pask orders. Blood Chalice and Red Grail Strength Boosts. Those two off the top of my head without even checking.

blaktoof wrote:

 Arkaine wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:
From the Death Guard FAQ:

Q: Is it possible to use a Stratagem from Codex: Chaos Space Marines to target a unit from Codex: Death Guard? For example, can I use the Tide of Traitors Stratagem on a unit of Cultists from a Death Guard Detachment if I have an Alpha Legion Detachment and a Death Guard Detachment in a single Battle-forged army?

A: Yes – if you have access to a Stratagem because you have an appropriate Detachment, it can be used on any permitted target: they do not need to be from that Detachment. In your example, the Alpha Legion Detachment gives access to the Chaos Space Marine Stratagems, and Tide of Traitors can be used on any Chaos Cultists – this would include any Chaos Cultists from the Death Guard Detachment.

This saves countless headaches for finally being confirmed. It was already how the rules were written but at least now there is no arguing the point. Wonder what shenanigans people will come up with using a CSM detachment + a Death Guard detachment.

Although it is an official answer It was not now the rules were written at all in any way anywhere in the codex.

And it still leaves the rules as written situation that explicitly death guard cannot make use of any dark hereticus powers they would gain.

Actually, it's exactly how the rules about Stratagems were written. I cited all of the rules related to Stratagems in previous posts. The language is very clear about how they work.

With regards to DH powers: what is it about the fact Stratagems change the rules that is so hard to understand? Every other Stratagem in the Codex allows units to break the rules that normally apply: shooting twice, walking off the board and reappearing, extra fight phase, modified stats, etc.

In that sense, each Stratagem is like a super rule, it allows players to take control of basic game mechanics in a specific way. Given this, I'm having a very hard time understanding why rules would be limiting use of a Stratagem. Stratagems > rules.

Arkaine,
In the past, Game Workshop has changed how a Rule functions via misapplied Frequently Asked Question and answers....
It is one of those 'goddess, can't Game Workshop do anything right?' sort of things for me.

In any case, Game Workshop has provided to us a way to figure out how they intended for this situation to be played out and we should be thankful they have given us that much.