Much of the art in Arkham Horror is shared with this game, and fond as I am of game flavor, I am curious of how I am expected to view this shared artwork. Steve Clarney/Monterey Jack shenanigans aside, I see no problem with viewing the investigators in Arkham Horror as "examples" of the character archetype described by the card titles of their artwork counterparts. My question is if this is somehow a wrong way to look at it. I realize gaming companies frequently recycle artwork, but to me this seems a special case since both games reside in what is ostensibly the same universe.

For example, Gloria Goldberg shares her artwork with our game's Arcane Initiate. Now at first glance, the Arcane Initiate's Villainous keyword seems to rule out the possibility of her being one of the "good guys" in Arkham Horror, but then her flavor text reads: The next morning she felt weak and hollowed-out, as if she had attended a debauch. Nothing she did that day could she afterward remember. When the call came in that evening, she rushed out, never pausing even to don her coat. Perhaps her loss of memory accounts for questionable acts she may have committed previously. For a character as troubled as Gloria Goldberg, it seems plausible to me.

Has anyone else taken this basic stance? Anyone think this is totally absurd nonsense? Thoughts welcome.

It would take a fellow player of both games to better reply. So, I'll ask speechmachine, a devotee of both. For myself, with limited knowledge, and a disgusting fully swayed bias toward this game, I don't worry so much about it. I do not like to see recycled artwork as a usual rule. I feel in my gut, 'look Arkham Horror stole one of our images. Look, they used it toward their own end." We obviously have the market cornered on FFG cthulhu artwork - 1,800 illustrations to, what, 180. Other than its wider recognition and following, Arkham Horror, I believe offers our game a broader tableaux for mythos experience. Conversely, may I never look to that game for artwork for Call of Cthulhu Card Game. We are the kings. Though I guess we can share. A look at AP1 reminds that artwork without focus is harder to duplicate and represent on a card than obvious better compositions.

I play and enjoy both games, but, that said, generally agree with Shoes.

I do not expect FFG to maintain a consistent storyline connected to any piece of art across different games.

If both uses do happen to fit together thematically, I just consider that a bonus.

My advice would be "don't worry about it". Both games are fun, and that is all I ask from FFG.

Chick

Absurd nonsense.

chicklewis said:

As I mentioned above, I don't either, except given this case in which both games bear the "Call of Cthulhu" brand. But you all seem to think I'm nuts, so whatever.

Sorry for the double-post, I couldn't see the edit button at first.

I will say that I agree with johnny shoes that this is the better Cthulhu experience. I just like being able to think that both games could conceivably be happening in the same world, that's all. ^^

A good case could certainly be made for that conclusion; Gates opening-Nasty things come out-

Fight the 'nasty things'-Close gates-Get bounced to other dimensions. There are advantages that

the card game has; The struggles, particularly Terror captures something the board game does not.

Locally for fun we play with the story cards face-down and when won the effect is auto-resolved,

this I feel is very evokative. 'Same world' might be a little redundant but I do like the idea of a

'Parallel World'. This would allow for some sameness but with a twist. A character in one

fares poorly dying or being twisted to the dark side where in the other fares well

becoming the triumphant hero. Two sides of the coin.

MarthWMaster said:

Yeah, I suppose I can live with that.