So here's an interesting thought:

Who here came to the game because of GRRM's books? Who came to the books because of the game? And who has never read any of them and doesn't plan to?

The question came up in relation to this: How much does the source material influence the way you build and play your decks? And what sort of elements from the books would you like to see more of in the game (short of a 7th major, playable House affiliation...)?

I played the game then read the books then bought the game.

I'd like to see more the game focus more on central characters in the books. I suppose you would do this by creating incentives to play unique characters or rewarding in-house lords and ladies, rather than making new, powerful versions of the big characters. That would be a poor choice.

I staretd to play because of friends. Then I started to read the books (I am almost done now). I loved the books so I continued to play. I think a bit about the books when I build the deck but mostly try tu build the best deck I can think of regardless of the books. But I am not a fan of out-of-house cards. Maybe like one or two if it fits in the deck construction. But I never liked Treaties and playing cards out-of-house, like my friend that had Queen of Thornes (AhoTh) in every deck. During the game if there is a nice situation like SPOILER ALERT -----------------------------Areo killing Arys -------------- I always has some comments to the story.

I came to the game because of the books, and stayed because I love both. I started out as a Ned player, building my decks around the houses or themes of the books, and never using out-of-house cards or the like. My first real deck was my Winter-era Night's Watch deck, which I loved, so I'm looking forward to the NW love in the next set of Chapter Packs.

Now, I play more to win, not just around themes. But, at the same moment, that is truly Nedly. The players in the novels will use whatever tools are available to them to get what they want. If you think about it, anyone playing a "Jaime" deck is really inspired by Littlefinger.

Lately in LCG I tend more towards themes within the houses, simply because there are so many good builds. But I am not above adding a useful card form another house to my deck to take advantage of it like the Old Nan/Carrion Bird combo and the Lion Gate in my pre-Princes of the Sun Martell deck.

I read the books, then bought the boardgame and at last the Card Game... never played a Card Game before... and now I'm in love!

I play all houses except lannister... cause I hate them in the book :-) I like only Tyrion/clansman decks and so I'll wait the future for that :-)

My friend told me about the game and the books. So I tried (first read) and don't regret

My favorite houses are Stark, Martell and Greyjoy because of the books. I don't have out of house cards in decks, but because of gold penalty (and Bear Island), not because of the story. I hate Lannisters!

I like the current state of the game. The only wish is to see more characters from the books. (And no more reprints (like Arianne) with the worst image possible - I beg you FFG).

I came to the game through the books - this is the only CG I will ever play again, and only because I love(d) the books so much.

I too, will never play Lannister. One great thing about the game is hwo hateful the cards and mechanics are in the game - much the way they were in the books.

Interestingly enough, at this point, I think I enjoy the game more than I do the books. Martin's endless tinkering voer Dance has gone beyond grating on my nevres. Storm came out in 2000. Its now 2010. So ten years - one so-so filler novel? Disappointing.

I read the first book (which I first heard about on a M:tG podcast). Then I stumbled on the game, possibly by actively wondering if there was a game based on the books (I can't remember). I bought a two deck starter pack and played with it a little but lost interest without anyone else to play against. Then a year later I read the second book and decided to look into the game again. It was just entering the LCG era at this point and the concept gave me extra incentive to join the game. I found another local player and then bought the Core Set and finished reading the books. So really the books drew to the game, but I was already a card gamer before that.

I think about the books in game, especially in melee where the atmosphere is more relaxed. As a fan of the books, it's fun to see the plot be reimagined by things like certain characters defeating others in military challenges. I don't base any of play decisions off the books though. I don't think about the books at all during deck construction - I have had too many years of playing games to get sentimental like that.

One thing that's somewhat missing in game is the amount of treachery and deceit present in the books. I think the shadows does a decent job at capturing a little bit of the sense of there being more plots in the works than the ones that have been revealed. Obviously, treachery comes into play more melee, but I mean that the loyalty of characters in the game does not match the sense in the books that anyone could turn on anyone else at any moment. I'm not sure there's a good way to implement that in a game, but I'll think about it (Walder Frey is a good execution, but no one wants to play with a deck full of Walder Freys).

I also enjoy the breadth of the world that Martin builds. I wouldn't want to see full fledged new houses permanently added to the game, but I think agendas that allow you to run a "different" house would be cool. I mean an agenda that makes all House Tyrell (for example) traited cards count as in house (without you having to be run a Lannister or Baratheon house card). I liked the Braavos sections of Feast - it would be cool to see some sort of Braavos deck possible.

I'll have to think about other possibilities. In general what I want to see in the LCG is the continued creation of expansions based on insular mechanics (like seasons or shadows). I like how these expansions build on themselves as the chapter packs are released but don't have a ton of cross-expansion synergy. Without too much synergy between expansions, decks drawing from three expansions do not become excessively powerful relative to decks drawing on only a couple. I think that this is important for new players to feel welcome if the LCG is going to continue without a rotation (since otherwise as the card pool grows new players will overwhelmed by all the expansions they need to be competitive). Oh, I should also add that I would like to see *less* cards that are powerful hosers for people not using a certain mechanic. For example, the immunity of the ravens really punishes someone without access to cards from the Ravens cycle, and cards like Tower of the Hand Robert Baratheon seem a bit unfair for players without access to Kings Landing Edition (though they have put a few Shadows cards in Kings of the Sea and Princes of the Sun so it seems like shadows might continue to see enough support for things like Robert to be fair - but if enough cards with the shadows crest get printed buying all of the Kings Landing Edition cycle might become a necessity).

I also want to see the power level of cards maintained at its current somewhat low level - I like how each game feels like a real struggle (as opposed to Magic where competitive decks often match up in ways where in game decisions are obvious or irrelevant to the match outcome).

I probably never would have tried this game without having read the books first. Most of my friends and I read them years ago and have since read them again. We probably would have played sooner, but the cost seemed prohibitive at the time, and it was very difficult to jump in because of (what I believe were) limited print runs for the first few sets. When I found out the game had rotation and I didn't need to worry about the earlier blocks, I gave it a try and became hooked immediately (we started around House of Thorns, for sake of reference).

How much do the books influence my deck-building? Practically not at all. I can justify almost any alliance in my own mind, if it means I can win more easily.

However, I do love it when in-game situations match up to the books.

i thought i was done with CCGs after SW:CCG and LOTR:TCG, and didn't really play much for a few years a little more SW here, a touch of spoils there but i continued to go to gencon every year, as it's consistently been the best four days of my year for the last 13 years independent of whether i was heavily into a CCG at the time. i knew the game existed, just being into CCGs in general; some of my gaming crew members from milwaukee played AGOT at the same time as the LOTR tournament scene was growing in its early days.

i had read the ASOIAF books over winter break/spring semester of my senior year of college (2007), and finally demoed the game at the FFG booth at gencon that year (from LUke, no less). it was sufficiently cool that i played in the drafts for two consecutive years; and because i was living in madison, WI for college, i had always endeavored to get out to misty mountain to play with the madtown meta. but it never happened because i thought i was done with CCGs. the game always intrigued me after i had read the books, though, in part because the game was well-designed, but definitely also because the books are just so awesome.

then i moved to DC, and at the gencon drafts in 2008 some of you guys (i can't really remember who anymore) told me about dan/twn2dn and the then-dead NoVA meta; dan loaned me cards to help me get going, and threw out a concept for a stark deck for black friday 2008, which we refined and playtested for a while beforehand; and the rest is history.

I started playing with a friend, then read the books, then started buying my own cards.

Interestingly enough, my friend told me all about the books while we were playing, explaining why some of the character had the abilities they did. I felt as though I knew the characters before I even started reading.

The friend that got me into the game read the books first, and then started playing the game because he loved the books so much.

I read the books which got me interested in the card game. I love the card game almost as much as the books now, though I must say I probably never would have played the card game if not for the books.

I don't have any "major" change ideas for the game. I'd just like to see more variety in the plots. To me, plots are what give the biggest spice to this game outside of the characters themselves, and I'd like to see more, different plots. To start with, I'd like to see some search plots that don't force me to help my opponent at the same time as myself.

I started the game because of the books. I had been a long time player of several CCG's and eventually decided that the source material or play experience was not rich or varied enough to justify the amount of money I was spending. I dumped my cards for pretty much everything and moved to Boston for about 3 years. I moved back to CA and the same friend who introduced me to the books introduced me to the card game. I was in love after my first game. It had everything I felt all the other games had lacked.

I'm not a "straight" Ned. I like to look as my decks and my games as reimaginings of Martin's world. I made a Stark/Greyjoy Treaty deck based around what might have happened if Balon had accepted Robb's offer. I have numerous decks devoted to traited themes, and like to play mostly single House decks spashing cards for thematic reasons for the most part.

I have and will continue to be though, a Shagga at heart when it comes to gaming in general. I look for neat combos and interesting synergies which luckily most often can be found within a House.

The Ned in me wants more unique characters. I don't understand why characters we have several chapters of as companions or adversaries are still not represented in any form in the history of the game. Iconic characters we only know by reputation I can see the developers wanting to wait until there is more information about who they are and what they are about before assigning them stats and abilities (Howland Reed for example), but others, Lommy, Hot Pie, Galbart Glover, make a lot less sense to not have introduced them at some point... especially when you consider how many versions of some uniques we have.

I'd like to see the game move towards fewer generic non-unique characters with cool abilities and more unique characters of the second and third string characters Martin introduced with those abilities... even knowing this may mean my ability to use an effect less frequently.

Good question & thread starter ktom!

I started reading the books and then found out, randomly online searching for more about the series, there was an LCG based on them. I'd been looking for a new card game with depth and not named Magic since Decipher's Star Wars CCG (Red 94 in Houston btw). From watching the support video the very first time and then making sense of the LCG format really sealed the deal for me. I then took it upon myself to communicate my joy to old SWCCG buddies and close friends to get things rolling locally and haven't looked back. I only wish I'd found the game sooner!

I don't believe the books really influence my deck building. However, I do wish more central characters were more important to the game then they seem to be thus far. Our meta is a bit strange since we haven't introuduced all the cards available yet, but plan to eventually. We are enjoying adding in additional cards slowly for affordability & opening up new strategies as they come instead of all at once.

I read the first book and a half and owned them. Then I started to read them again (working thru Storm of Swords right now)and got into the LCG back a couple months ago. I have played CCG's of all kinds for 18 years now. I love card games and currently only support this one and Warhammer invasion. I am a Nedly player, I won't play Lannister cuz I hate them, I love Stark and miss Eddard in the books(course he wasn't too smart near the end). I do however really like Tyrion and would play a deck with him and his clans men if it was possible, not sure if it is. Love the game and love the books, but the books effect how I build decks alot, based around characters and the such in the books. I will play Baratheon but never Stannis or Melisandre, creepy fire worshipping psycho chick. And not sure about Martell yet as I have not read about them yet in the books as they have not really been in them much yet, if I like them in the books then I will play them in the game.

I read most of the books years ago, and loved them. Also had some history with CCGs: played the one that starts with M quite a bit when I was younger (and still sometimes play some odd variants with friends) and also was into V:TES some years ago.

Anyways, I was looking around for something else published by FFG after running into Arkham (and utterly loving it, tentacles and all) and heard about the AGOT board game, and was going to buy that. Then as I was reading a small FFG brochure, I found out about the LCG. Thought the idea sounded good, as it was attempting to fix all the stuff that was wring with CCGs, while still maintaining the open-ended feeling and dynamic nature of the card games. So I decided to try this instead, and haven't regretted it! (Although I will be quite happy when the distribution model changes...)

I also tend to be quite Nedly in mainly keeping with in-House chars, playing lots of uniques (just because you should!) and trying quirky deck ideas based on some aspects of certain themes found in the book (such as a Melee Summer-Lannister deck that focuses on getting a whole lot of gold, and using that to control the game). But truly at heart I'm a definite Shagga (that Lanni deck is mainly based around abusing Sweet Cersei...).

I played L5r for a few years and skipped from less then one year ago. I decided not to paly any other CCG again, as it takes really a lot of time and money.

I knew about AGOT even in that time but I always avoided it. I heard a few good word about the books from my friend but I never really interested in it.

Then a few month ago, somewhen in September or October I just run into AGOT again here in the FFG site and started to browse the forums.

Then read about the LCG modell and I liked it.

Then watched the demo on the support page. And thought its not too complicated but still have its depth. (I especially liked even the plot deck idea in that time already)

Then read the Rulebook on the support page and kept reading the forums.

In the end I decided to give this a try.

I get the books for Christmass and in January I bought my first core deck and chapter pack from a friend who left the game some time ago soon after it became LCG. (Ironically he joined to L5R btw.. )

Right now I'm reading Storm of Swords and started to paly with my girlfriend who was quite skeptic but even after the first one and two games both of us started to love it!

We just played with the Core sets mainly and just started to add the first Chapter Packs to the game. (We will see how my girlfriend will like this aspect of the game. She never palyed any CCG or LCG before )

So for me, I started the books and the game about the same time and didn't regret it

I cannot say more about my deck building strategy as really just started this game, but as I have some past in other CCG neither I think I will became a totally Nedly player, but in the meantime I didn't even "play-out-of-house" characters in L5R so probably neither will do here so much But a noname character what fits more to the deck has almost over has priority over weaker but famous characters for me.

(BTW: Doesn't any of you have an extra Arya Stark from the core deck? A few card is still missing from my collection as my friend traded them already long before I got his collection.)

I was a big fan of GRRs books (I will call him GRR till he finishes book 5), and am a gamer of any and all genres. I played the CCG through a friend but even with my love of games and my fandom I refused to play any collectible game on principle (random collectability disgusts me as a gamer). Then, while perusing BGG, seeing if there were any boardgames I might be interested in playing (my 360 got its second red ring of death), lo and behold I discover the game went LCG. Still not perfect, but much more palatable. The change to having every copy in a pack is overdue imho.

Playing the game reminded me how rich the ASoIaF world was, and it got me back into fantasy, but also into FtF games in general.

I played MtG, SW:ccg, LOTR ccg and Wars tcg before AGOT. My interest for AGot started when decipher announced that wars:tcg would be put on hiatus, so i saw the AGOt product in a game shop and decided to pick up two ice and fire starters. I remembered that a friend (AegonTargaryen) also mentioned the card game a while ago. So i asked him about the game and was introduced in the world of the AGOT card game and the books simultaneously. I still rember that he told me "i would like to get you intrerested in the card game, but i could only encourage you to read that fabolous books". I think he is right. The books are definetely worth reading for everyone who´s interested in the fantasy genre, even if it takes a lifetime to get a full series (or so it seems :-) ).

I read the books first, and if it wasn't my love of the source material, I probably would have dropped the game sometime last year right after the switch to LCG.

I thought I was never going to come back to a card game. I had just played Magic 12 years ago or so, for 4 months... And Battletech, wich I couldn't find other players before long.

I read the first two books something like 3 or 4 years ago and loved them. But I got the report that Martin was very ill and would never be able to end the series. I was so worried and upset that I stopped thinking about it.

Recently, a friend of mine told me she never heard about Martin's illness (if it ever happened), and that he was writing the fifth book by now. She lend me the third and I bought the fourth, which I'll this week or the next. And then shw told me about the LCG.

I had doubts at first, but we agreed to order the Core Set and KotS. We would share it, but in the end we thought it was better for me to keep it. I am far from being disappointed (as you can suggest by seeing how much a newbie I am and how much I post here recently).

I think I'll ever be a Nedly player. I just love the books too much to go making changes that don't fit the feeling of the story. I'm also an RPG player, so I have this flaw... :] It is kinda confortable as I'm the only one to own cards here in my group of friends, and I also think the game have possibilities enough for interesting deck building without leaving the feel of the books.

I only imagined myself deckbuilding regardless of story implications if I'm going to play with any of you through OCTGN. And that just to stand a chance.

It has been about two years since I started playing. I had well before that read the books (and loved them) and had been a hobby boardgamers for a few years. I had picked up snippits about the game that were positive about its gameplay and player community from posts on boardgamegeek.com, but it had the vile black mark of being a CCG working against it (there's not a whole lotta love for blind collectible games models on BGG). I even had an near brush with trying it when my brother-in-law starting playing it for a little while when Iron Throne edition was the current block, but I resisted because it was a CCG, even though I was very tempted to play it by then.

Then I saw a post on BGG about the announcement of the planned move to the LCG model, which got me excited enough that I could rationalize trying the game then even though the LCG switch was about a year away. By that time my brother-in-law was not playing, but he steered me to a friend of his that was still dabbling in the game and I played a few games with him one evening using a Stark deck I cobbled together from the ITE and 5KE starters and some commons and uncommons that I had bought online (at that time, there was a seller who sold whole sets of commons and uncommons Mainn's website still links to the seller even though he's been gone for a while getting those was a big help in letting me jump into the game running). And, even though the play was a bit clunky while I tried to learn what was going on, I was impressed with the game. At both my bro-in-law's friend's and Nick Angronoff's suggestion (Nick was the FFG rep supporting the game at that time), I contacted StagLord (Chris) who was pretty much propping up the organized AGoT play in NYC at the now-closed Neutral Ground game shop. I met up with him and played some amazing games (he, Mainn, and others pretty much schooled me those first couple of game nights) that showed how rich and interesting the gameplay and deck construction could really be. I was firmly hooked.

Two years later and I'm playing it just as much as when I first got excited about it and it easily dominates the time I can make for hobby gaming.

kpmccoy21 said:

Interesting. And how about now? Is the LCG pool now robust enough that it alone keeps you engaged with the game or is part of what keeps you playing still your love for the source material?

For me, I loved the books, but I think my appreciation for them and desire for future installments would at this point be muted if not for the game keeping Westeros fresh in my mind.

And I'm still schooling you - like I did at our last meetup on 1/6 at Cranberry Cafe.

Around nine o' clock that Wednesday evening.

Twice.

Vassal.

Pedro Lunaris said:

One of the interesting things we're finding from this discussion is that even people who build their decks with little heed for story implications tend to focus primarily on in-House effects. Whether it's the OOH penalty and management of the resource curve or the thematic "purity" of it, we all seem to stay in-House most of the time - even when things would work really well together.