Brand new player here- just bought the core box this week and looking forward to playing it!

I have a questions about the Barkham Horror expansion:

- Can you use it with the main game?

- Does it cause any balance issues when used with the main game?

- Can you use it in organised play events?

I've been unable to find any rulings apart from "it's not intended for use but that won't stop you." I'd love to eventually take part in OP events, but haven't been able to find any rules regarding what you can and can't use in such events.

Thanks for your help!

It's a silly thing. Meant as a standalone. More like an april fools joke that got away. It's probably not as balanced as other products are.

I really don't get it... I see it as a cash grab.

30 minutes ago, Lecitadin said:

I really don't get it... I see it as a cash grab.

It was an April Fools thing that people clamored about making a real thing. And they listened.

Also, proceeds from purchases were going to an animal charity last I knew, so, no, not a cash grab.

32 minutes ago, Soakman said:

It was an April Fools thing that people clamored about making a real thing. And they listened.

Also, proceeds from purchases were going to an animal charity last I knew, so, no, not a cash grab.

Confirmed. https://www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/news/2019/12/2/barkham-horror/

2 hours ago, Urvogel said:

...

- Can you use it with the main game?

- Does it cause any balance issues when used with the main game?

- Can you use it in organised play events?

...

1. It's your game, you do you! I intend to playthrough at least 1 campaign with Barkham characters.
2. We don't know yet (it's, as yet, unreleased) but I doubt it will be too OP.
3. It's not intended to be used in OP events. (Stupid OP having more than one meaning.) I believe, as long as the people you're playing with (i.e. the other people at your table) don't mind then there's nothing stopping you.

I expect, whenever there is another Arkham Nights (big Arkham event at their HQ in Roseville, MN just before Halloween) there will be a few groups of them playing as Barkham investigators. I might even be one of them. ☺️

Original April Fool's Day post:

https://www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/news/2019/4/1/the-dogwich-legacy/

Where is it confirmed? All it says is they are a proud supporter. You can support an organization without donating.

I yield.

I thought I read something about donations somewhere though in addition to that. I may be wrong. But my primary point was that people asked for it, so I wouldn’t call it a cash grab. Just don’t buy it if you don’t want it?

I would love it they made the phrase "cash grab" illegal on the internet as it's often used in ridiculous contexts. Every product FFG makes is meant to generate profit so they can pay their employees and fund new products. The phrase you are looking for is "Fan Service". Yes it's definitely fan service.

People loved the joke that was Barkham. The buzz was overwhelmingly that if they released that sort of product people would buy it. The devs thought it was a fun idea and there was an audience so they made it. That's the free market at work. There is nothing predatory about it.

I'll go on record that I'd love for them to continue to put out parody products for this game. I'll support every one of them. Also yes in the article for the product a portion of the profits go to charity anyway.

Update: I went and looked it up and the charity is Pets for Vets.

20 minutes ago, phillos said:

Also yes in the article for the product a portion of the profits go to charity anyway.

Update: I went and looked it up and the charity is Pets for Vets.

Do you have a quote?

Now we need next full doggy campaign and of course doggy core set :)

and some bones...

All those “good boys” are still waiting to run amok though and chase those evil kitties to their hearts content. I’m sure they would love a release date!

I had the same impression that part of the proceeds would go to Pets for Vets. The article states twice that they are a proud supporter, but didn’t specifically say anything about proceeds. A good question to ask when we Twitch again with Matt! And see if he can be pinned to a release date.

9 hours ago, Villefere said:

Do you have a quote?

It says it explicitly at the bottom of the announcement article

1 hour ago, phillos said:

It says it explicitly at the bottom of the announcement article

It says "Fantasy Flight Games is a proud supporter of Pets for Vets®, helping veterans and pets create new beginnings together. "

That is not as specific as saying that portions of the profits go to charity.

11 hours ago, Vlad3theImpaler said:

It says "Fantasy Flight Games is a proud supporter of Pets for Vets®, helping veterans and pets create new beginnings together. "

That is not as specific as saying that portions of the profits go to charity.

I mean okay I guess. You win Vlad. It doesn't explicitly say it. You have to join that info with info from the article that does say they are donating a portion of the profits, but to suggest that it's not connected is to suggest that FFG is being deliberately misleading.

1 hour ago, phillos said:

I mean okay I guess. You win Vlad. It doesn't explicitly say it. You have to join that info with info from the article that does say they are donating a portion of the profits, but to suggest that it's not connected is to suggest that FFG is being deliberately misleading.

At this point, if we're going to question whether they're implying proceeds are going to the charity then what good is quote anyway? Couldn't they just say they will donate and not do it? I feel integrity is deeper than this and that it's independent of what is written.

2 hours ago, Duciris said:

At this point, if we're going to question whether they're implying proceeds are going to the charity then what good is quote anyway? Couldn't they just say they will donate and not do it? I feel integrity is deeper than this and that it's independent of what is written.

Agreed my friend. A good reminder that sometimes we can get caught up in the ‘thick of thin things’, at least speaking for myself.

4 hours ago, phillos said:

I mean okay I guess. You win Vlad. It doesn't explicitly say it. You have to join that info with info from the article that does say they are donating a portion of the profits, but to suggest that it's not connected is to suggest that FFG is being deliberately misleading.

Welcome to corporate America. Never take what corporations tell you at face value, they are not your friends. Always read critically, especially when reading "news" they actively try to sway you to their way of thinking. I am not accusing FFG of deception though, they probably are donating but they never actually claimed they were. Not that I have seen anyway.

Quote

At this point, if we're going to question whether they're implying proceeds are going to the charity then what good is quote anyway? Couldn't they just say they will donate and not do it? I feel integrity is deeper than this and that it's independent of what is written.

That would open them up to lawsuits. The trick is to get as close to lying without actually doing it. Again, I am not accusing FFG of deception but it would be a good question for them.

7 hours ago, phillos said:

I mean okay I guess. You win Vlad. It doesn't explicitly say it. You have to join that info with info from the article that does say they are donating a portion of the profits, but to suggest that it's not connected is to suggest that FFG is being deliberately misleading.

I wasn't trying to "win." I was trying to clarify the difference between what you said and what Villefere was looking for. Not sure why I got that response.

On 7/29/2020 at 2:08 PM, phillos said:

I would love it they made the phrase "cash grab" illegal on the internet as it's often used in ridiculous contexts.

I used ''cash grab'' here because Barkham is not compatible with the regular game. So nothing should be illegal here, because it was used in a justifiable context.

57 minutes ago, Lecitadin said:

I used ''cash grab'' here because Barkham is not compatible with the regular game. So nothing should be illegal here, because it was used in a justifiable context.

That still doesn't really justify use of the term "cash grab". It comes across as derogatory for no real reason. I mean, yeah it's not illegal, but it doesn't serve a reasonable purpose either. And also, FYI all the player cards are actually compatible with the regular game. The only ones that aren't are the actual investigators and their signature cards.


On the donation note - they may or may not be donating a part of the proceeds, but making the product may have inspired them to make a large donation to the charity, or even set up a recurring regular donation. So they may be supporting it in conjunction with the product even if it's not a specific percentage of the proceeds.

The term “cash grab” usually indicates a cynical attempt to make quick money by releasing a shoddy product aligned with current consumer trends. If Barkham were to turn out to be a poor quality product then this would be justified but, while it is too soon to say, personally I believe that the team are trying to make something good (and FFG certainly haven’t done the quick part!).

Exactly how FFG are supporting Pets for Vets is a fair question to ask. I have faith that FFG will be meaningfully supporting the charity, but I think if the charity is being used to promote the product then knowing whether or not a portion of your purchase is going directly to the charity is reasonable. There will hopefully be the opportunity to ask if/when they do a live stream about this product if they haven’t said anything by then.

5 hours ago, mwmcintyre said:

And also, FYI all the player cards are actually compatible with the regular game. The only ones that aren't are the actual investigators and their signature cards.

I don’t think this is correct. In the news article announcing Barkham we were shown this card fan:

The two player cards bear the text “Barkham deck only” and don’t appear to be signature assets (they don’t have the “[investigator name] deck only” text). From the wording in the article I wouldn’t be surprised if all the player cards had the same Barkham only limitation.

19 hours ago, Vlad3theImpaler said:

I wasn't trying to "win." I was trying to clarify the difference between what you said and what Villefere was looking for. Not sure why I got that response.

I apologize. I was emotional when I wrote it. I'm not sure why I cared about this so much yesterday. Villefere can believe whatever they want.

I guess its just all this 'cash grab" and anti corporate rhetoric get's me going a bit. Are there very real negative effects of corporate culture? Yeah of course. It's an ethos built to reward the pursuit of self interest and does little to promote thinking about the concerns of the greater community. It relies on voluntary selfless action. That is something that seems to not come naturally to people. Especially when responsibility can be deflected. Is Barkham (a product made to answer the desires of the AH audience and raise some money for a charity) a great example of these evils? It makes the real concerns seem less valid when these sorts of threads become the battlegrounds. You just sort of become a meme shaking your fist at capitalism rather than spurring productive discussion or healthy debate.

On 7/31/2020 at 9:30 AM, Assussanni said:

The two player cards bear the text “Barkham deck only” and don’t appear to be signature assets (they don’t have the “[investigator name] deck only” text). From the wording in the article I wouldn’t be surprised if all the player cards had the same Barkham only limitation.

I think that 'Barkham deck only' could be interpreted as it can only be used by a Barkham Investigator. Matt has said that the Barkham Investigators are only designed to be used in Barkham Horror scenarios...but that he knows that we will try to use them in other campaigns...I know I will. As is frequently observed, the game is cooperative and is ours to make our own choices with what we do with it. It will be interesting to see exactly how this plays when it gets released. I'm very glad they decided to release this after the enthusiasm for their elaborate April Fool's posting.

On 7/30/2020 at 11:06 PM, mwmcintyre said:

That still doesn't really justify use of the term "cash grab". It comes across as derogatory for no real reason. I mean, yeah it's not illegal, but it doesn't serve a reasonable purpose either. And also, FYI all the player cards are actually compatible with the regular game. The only ones that aren't are the actual investigators and their signature cards.

That's good to know about the cards compatibility. As for the ''It comes across as derogatory for no real reason', that's an opinion, and I respect it but I don't share it.