Subscribe Us

header ads

A First Look: Carnage, A 4-Player Mission


Just released from Games Workshop Digital is Carnage, a 4 player mission pitting up several players against each other, with makeshift alliances and deals, while you attempt to forge victory through a 4 player free-for-all.

Carnage is a mission and costs $1.99 to purchase. You can find it by following the link to Games Workshop Digital or on itunes. http://www.blacklibrary.com/games-workshop-digital-editions

The book itself has a 4 page short story to start it off, which I have not had a chance yet to read. The mission is about 4 ambitious commanders attempting to seize a precious artefact in the center of the board. A rather King of Hill type scenario, where even the final objective gives a random number of victory points. 

The mission itself is rather straight forward, with most of the standard rules applying. The game is a Dawn Assault (uses night fighting in round 1), which will cut down on some of what could be overpowering firepower coming down hard on whoever gets stuck going last. 

The game gives players rules for how to handle a 4 player game, and the suggestion of keeping the points below 1500. They appear rather clear, even in the handling of close combat. 

Overall I think Carnage feels rather short, and possibly even cut short when reading through what it has to offer. I was left with the feeling that a second mission, or more special rules would of made the mission much more interesting. 

I really like some of the planetary effects and tables that are found in the apocalypse book, and I think something along these lines would of thrown a lot more fun into Carnage.

Post a Comment

28 Comments

  1. The problem with multiplayer games is that what most people will do is look for whoever is weakest to their army (or in the middle depending on deployment) and jump them. The second somebody doesn't keep the circle going and fights two different armies at the same time, that person will get crushed and then whoever is hurt least will mop up the other player as well.

    Just use the Triumph and Treachery rules, they are incredibly fun and make for a lot of balanced games. The rules translate over relatively well, and make for an interesting dynamic.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This was first published in WD and I've played it several times. evey game has been tense and immense fun. the game should be played on a square table with deployment zones in the corners. Largely tactics revolved round the largest threat gets a kick in from the others, though often politicking and diplomacy can be used to obfuscate and distract.

      Delete
    2. Or, that person destroys/grinds down both sides until he is so far ahead, the other players cannot catch up. At least in triumph and treachery, where vp is how you win rather than taking objectives.

      Seems like taking a central objective would be difficult for gun line armies, guess it depends on secondary objectives

      Delete
    3. Does somebody have a T&T rules overview so I don't need to buy all the stuff you don't need for 40k? 96 Pages for 65 euros is quite hefty...

      Delete
    4. I'm sure you can torrent the rules set by now. T&T is a great rules set. Pity that there's only 10 ish pages of game rules.

      Delete
    5. @Daniel Grundy - What was the WD number that this was originally in? I'd like to see if I have it before spending the $ on this digital release.

      Delete
    6. See, I think that system works better. Too often in multiplayer games (we have an odd number of players in our consistent group, so this is what i end up playing almost exclusively), someone will hang back and wait for other people to fight it out and then roll in on the last two turns and torch everyone who's left. In T&T, there are objective missions that score you 100 VPs off of. We did it so you can get those points after every turn, so people going last on that round had some form of advantage.

      Delete
    7. Oni, they also had this mission in the Call To Arms series GW did just after 6th ed dropped. It should be in the last book of the series in iBooks.

      Delete
    8. @oni. Can't remember but I have nearly all of them from 200-300. based on timing of it being in one of my first year or two of uni around 2003-2004 would be when we were playing it. I think I stoped getting WD around 2006 so maybe around WD250?

      Delete
  2. Adam you are wrong :D everyone will seek a win so it is possible of 3 players unite against the strongest also :D

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Or three of you pick on the most competitive to watch them cry when they are eliminated first... it's what true friends do to each other.

      Delete
    2. I like your style, s2thek. :)

      Delete
    3. @Kuba

      The problem with that idea is that you don't know what cards someone has in their hand. If everyone picks one guy because they want to gang up on him, he could very easily play cards to make you pick a different Enemey that round, totally disrupting your plans for that round, or let you do it, then pay coins to not let you shoot/re-roll To-Hit, which is arguably worse because he robs you of a turn to score points. Keep in mind that you picking the same person over and over means that the person you aren't picking gets rolls to get more cards, making him even better until he tries to swoop in on you. You never know what someone can do, so you can't underestimate somebody.

      Delete
  3. I have played a couple multi player missions like this, a given they are geared more toward being a good time; to keep it fair we roll off every turn to see who goes first, second third... It makes for a really dynamic and interesting games when you think your about to trounce someone and then next thing you know your going last.

    ReplyDelete
  4. We've been using the Triumph and Treachery rules for 40k in addition to WHFB. Works.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I've played this a couple of times, both were great fun, though the second game did result in a big scrum of models all clustered round the objective at the end. We added in a house rule however that it were perfectly allowable to shoot into close combat, providing you didn't have models engaged in that melee, not sure if the latest incarnation of the mission includes something like that or not.

    Contrary to what some posters are suggesting, neither game saw anyone ganged up on particularly, there are too many threats on the table to concentrate solely on one opponent, if you do that and wipe them out suddenly you become the threat to the remaining two players, so casualties were pretty evenly distributed. Needless to say the first game was settled by a model standing on the hatch that prevented a terminator squad from getting out of the line of fire that saw them cut down in the following turn...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I tried allowing shooting into enemy cc in a 4 way scenario I ran for my son and his friends. It worked fine right up until the hell drake did it - 18 dead marines all at once in a 600 point per side game.

      What did work well was the possible vp every turn for king of the hill.

      Delete
  6. Its pretty easy to make your own special scenarios and usually far more fun. I came up with a mission called "The Drunken Girls of Bourbon Street" which 3 others and myself played last week. It was a team battle with hammer and anvil deployment. Terrain was set up with a road stretching the length of the board in the middle. Buildings were lined up on both sides of the road creating a city strip. We used modified relic mission rules where there are 3 female model objectives placed in the middle of the table. At the beginning of every player turn, the ladies would scatter 2d6 inches in whatever direction the arrow points, only stopping when moving into any players unit where it would stop 1" away. A scoring unit moving into b2b with it would stop her from running, and follow the normal rules for the relic mission. Everyone had a blast.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thats the way one should enjoy WH40k IMO. Not paying money for some digital products,but being creative

      Delete
    2. I've played quite a few homebrew scenarios and they are always more fun for everyone than the standard missions. The above mission was particularly fun because when either side was getting close to grabbing one of the objectives, the objective would run away! Lol

      Delete
    3. That sounds great! And it gives me something to do with my female Malifaux models. LOL!

      Delete
    4. How many points was it per side &/or per player, Teivel?

      Delete
    5. We did 2000 per player. The last turn my teammate managed to kill the model holding one of the ladies thus losing them a 3 point objective. The same turn my noise marines exited my bastion through a well placed escape hatch that happened to be within 6" of where one of the ladies had run to, giving us a win by 3 points.

      Delete
    6. Cool. I mentioned this to the manager of my FLGS tonight, and a bunch of guys just hanging out, and they all liked the idea, especially the mgr. we might see something like this in a future "fun" tournament.

      One of the guys mentioned that the wandering objectives could be Imperial important types from a crashed transport or something, to make it fluffy. My response was, I thought "Three Drunk Girls on Bourbon Street" was already pretty fluffy. LOL! :-D

      Delete
  7. "Carnage is a mission and costs $1.99 to purchase." And everyone be like "thanks GW" I dont know what to say :D

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's the price of a large chocolate bar. Get over it.

      Delete
  8. I find with multi player side is that you conduct shooting at the same time then resolve wounds after. Randomlly roll initiative per person

    ReplyDelete