I agree with your perception of the written rule. It was VERY poorly written, and doesn’t actually represent rage in any way, shape, or form. Since rage only takes effect during movement phase, there is nothing from keeping someone from fleeting and assaulting a different unit after that.

haha looks like me and Darrell love dropping the monolith near vulnerable rage infested units. one time i remember dropping some wounds on a squad of hive guard and tyrant (or was it tyrant guard? i can never remember) so he actually decided to put all the wounds on his tyrant which made the gaurd have rage. well they just bum rushed the monolith and parked there the whole game. i love running into those cheasy blood angel armys with only non-scoring rage infested death company for troops. just brilliant

yeah….no…depends which real life gamer is more big and scary looking.
To assult the unit you have to leave the vehichle, so you’re then break free from the rule that made you move in the first place.
The way I see it is that Rage is blind so you are running at the enemy without a care in the world. Rage is not something you’re meant to be controlling with a calm and collected strategy so I don’t see why you would ignore the main target to pick off the cheap grunts.
Treat it like the animosity tests of fantasy’s greenskins and demons?

Darrell is right on this, but he shouldn’t be. The rule should have been FAQ’d long ago to have Rage units move toward and assault the nearest unit that its possible to do so. The way its written now they have to move toward the closest unit they can see, even if they can’t assault them E.G. foot death company run at someone behind impassable terrain or 2 floors up in a building, often this would take them away from and even out of reach of another unit nearby that they could actually assault.

The real question is when Darrel plays does he bring the wine and crakers or does the club provide them?

I would have to agree the way the rule is written suggests one does not have to assault, but I would guess it’s implied.

hahaha i like my whirlwind =3 never fail’s to make its points back, to a point that people hate it so much, nobody expects it. which is a strength in its self XD

Apparantly, rage means you must move, run, and consolidate towards the nearest enemy unit.

Darrel is right. Darn it.

The German RB states that Raging units have to charge the closest enemy unit as well! This has caused large debates on German WH40K forums on the net, but most agree that this is the correct interpretation of the rule, so technically the English RB is wrong!

I would give my left arm to see Darrel and John roll like an ultramarine in a video 😀

Darrell is right on the money with the wording of the rule. I will disagree that it should require you to assault the nearest enemy unit. It would be far too big a nerf against every unit that has Rage if you couldn’t punish the slightly less canny player who leaves a vulnerable squad within 6″ of whatever they’ve chosen to distract you with. If it made the units that do have Rage significantly cheaper, such that it wouldn’t ruin your gameplan if they went off on one, then it wouldn’t really be much of a drawback, but if it… Read more »

Defiantly agree with the wording of the rule, I have to admit that this is a massive loophole to extort. However if you were to talk “house rules” I would personally prefer it that the unit would have to assault the unit they rage at, but again this is all to the personal advantage of the player. Once again Darrell you are a genius when it comes to finding loopholes and wonders within the rules.

If the rules state: you must move, run(if you want), and consolidate towards the nearest enemy unit. then Darrell’s scenario is wrong because the closest enemy still the Rhino… the Death Company would have to destroy the vehicle before moving on to the next target Besides the rule also states: “In the Assault phase they must always consolidate towards the closest enemy”… Consolidate is the key word… the only way to consolidate is to win an assault (close combat attack) even if is a vehicle, the Rhino, in this case, is the closest enemy. To get to the Marines the… Read more »

Wow! I find myself in full agreement with Darrell. I never thought that would ever happen.

you can’t rage from one thing to another though, because you’d be moving away

@coolhand “Thing I’ve never been able to understand is how comes Khorne Berzerkers don’t have rage? doesn’t seem very berzerk to me. Maybe they don’t want blood that badly!!!”

They used to in 3rd ed. Back then they even raged out of their transport if I remember right.

“correct me if you can”? is that a new film where leonardo dicaprio plays darrel and tom hanks runs around asking him cheesy 40k rule questions?

I remember back in yee olden days of 3rd edition (gods what does that make 2nd ed and RT) the number of times my Khorne army ended up getting stuck in combat with things that only the champion could hope to touch…and even then only if he had the right gear for it.

Slowly getting butchered by wraithlords, getting stuck on Monoliths while the rest of the Necron army blasted my nutters to pieces.

Thank heavens for Rhino rush back in those days so it didn’t happen TOO often.

It is a major flaw in the rule and you are right but we have a house rule for that because obviously fluff wise they are running blindly to destroy the nearest thing caught up in blood lust not even controllable by themselves let alone their Commander

As stated before, Darrell is 100% right here. RAW players will be able to point out that the rule says nothing in the way of having to assault the unit closest to you. It just says you have to move toward the closest enemey. It’s just another badly written rule and thankfully I play with people who are very relaxed about their games. I can see it causing problems in tournements though. How it wasn’t spotted by GW by now though is beyond me. Sisters of Battle have units with it, Nids and Blood Angles have it (both very new… Read more »