Hi, I am not a fan of the series, Just a fan of games, (not to say it is not any good, I never read the books) I was wondering how much fantasy there would be in the game?

Such as Orcs, Dragons, magic, etc

like Battlelore.

Thanks.

-John

The core set looks like just normal 'medieval' units for 2 factions, apart from, maybe, the Stark 'Direwolves' represented by their special unit of 'Kennelmaster'. With the 1st expansion of more Lannister units/leaders - which obviously means another for the Starks - it looks like a long wait before any of the 'fantasy' bits of the books come out. Things like Dragons - Others (undead) - Sorcery(Renly's death) etc. The books do have a reasonable amount of 'fantasy' in them, but the main theme so far is the political and military aspects of power struggles among a number of pseudo medieval factions. I, for one, would love to see some of the more exotic aspects brought into the game, but after a 6 month wait to play the basic game, I know I have a long wait for that. This has got to be FFG's longest gap between an announcement and its actual release.

Cheers

Thank you for the reply. At first I was not interested in the game, but all the previews made me more and more interested in the game.

Can I expect a lot of expansions from the books?

The books are massive in scope. Way up there with 'Lord of the Rings'. As there are already 4 books and a 5th hopefully due out soon, this could go on for ages. Therefore, the potential for expansion is huge. The LCG 'Game of Thrones' has 6 basic factions, as does the boardgame plus expansion, but differ slightly in choice. Only FFG know what factions will be added, but they certainly have choice. My guess is that 'Baratheon' - Stannis and or Renly - is a must, and if they wish to add a naval aspect, then 'Greyjoy' is the answer. The battles on the eastern continent with Daenerys Targaryen, with her Dragons and Dothraki riders, is another fruitful source. I am sure I am not the only one who would like to see her return to Westeros and fight for the Throne. Not in the books yet, but a match up with western Knights against Dothraki riders is mouthwatering! Sorry about waffling on a bit, but to simply answer your query - Yes, there is much for FFG to tempt us with in the way of expansion - if they ever 'hook' us on the original. Still no definite sign of that. Cheers!

The books are definitely more historical and "power behind the throne" esque, especially at first. But, as the books go on they grow in the fantasy aspect. I do not know if we know enough to speculate about where the game will end up fantasy wise because Martin has not finished the story. We have been waiting about 4 years since the last book was published. I would like to think he will add more unusual things in future books. If not, the story is still awesome and just fighting with everyday humans from the houses will still be great fun.

Is the theme of the series Good vs Evil or Stability vs Revolutionism or maybe Savagery vs Civilization?

Grandmikus said:

IMHO, none of the above. What makes these books different from a lot of others out there is that there are no real "good guys" or "bad guys." Lots of shades of gray...

I totally agree that there is no 'Good v Bad' element, or right or wrong, in the books. Everyone has their reasons for doing what they do, wether it be greed, revenge, loyalty or no choice. The reader can make their own mind up about who they like. I will warn you that if you do get to read the books, don't get stuck on any characters in particular. I reckon that about a third of all the 'main' characters are killed off in each book, with others coming in to replace very quickly. Any character that lasts for a couple of books, becomes a favourite, but expect a death - often quite brutal and gruesome - at any time. Minor character - mostly all named and described - have an even higher mortality rate. I wonder how the population growth copes! Of course, there is plenty of romance, sex, incest, **** and inter house marrying to help out. Enjoy! I hope to get my copy of BoW on 4th July, but I don't expect it will have all that from the previous sentence. Pity, but that would be a great game! Cheers!

Just started reading the first book, quite dreadful theme and VERY well laid out characters. R.R. Martin is an impressive writer, I must mention that in my futer review of BoW

The Books are inspired by Englands War of the Roses,or the US 2000 Presidential Election,so it's a struggle to control the Realm ,either way i's rather messy

OD

Just a caveat about the novels. I understand that this may be a reason for some people to want to read them. . . but here is my warning anyway: The first book is very enjoyable and what others have said above is all true about depth of character, brutality, intrigue, etc. He deals with very adult sexual scenes in a fairly non-graphic way. After the first book, however, George R.R. Martin decided to use much more foul language (especially the "c" word) and very descriptive sex scenes. Honestly, I don't know why I ever needed to read what one of the male characters "package" actually looked like. So, for those of you who are not into porn, just be warned that it is in the books. And I call it porn, because not only is it very descriptive, it is gratuitous, having no other purpose than to try to turn the reader on.

Like I said, some people may see this as a reason to read the books, but I thought I would let the potential reader be made aware.

I’m going to have to disagree with oshfarms. The sex scenes serve a dramatic purpose and lend greater emotional impact to events later on, though this might not become apparent till you are most of the way through the third book. It’s a much more graphic and gritty world but that is true of the violence as well as the sex and language and that was the case from the start of book one.

Spike: I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I have read all of the books so far, and I don't think the graphic nature of the sex scenes serves any type of emotional purpose or character development. It is true that the violence was present from book One, but the graphic sexual content became more explicit after book One. The same is true of the use of the "C" word. I detest the use of that word, so I noticed when he used it one time in the first book. Then book two came along, and the word was used so frequently that it seems he had to make a macro in order to speed up his typing.

I am not trying to convince you of my opinion, I just thought others might want to be made aware. Perhaps they will feel that the graphic sexual content does indeed serve a purpose of character development. I just think there are ways to describe things without being over the top. For instance (spoiler free), the couple that Bran spies on are involved in sexual activity, but it was described in such a way that wasn't overtly graphic. I found that to be an extremely well written scene and one in which character development did take place, without the graphic descriptions.

And thank you for the civil discussion.

I am always up for a civil debate.

Admittedly I'm not the first person to ask if something has too much strong language or sexual content. The sex scenes became more graphic in part due to the fact that characters whose perspective you see things from are the ones having sex. Certainly they could have been described in less detail but I don't feel the detail they were described in was out of step with the graphic descriptions of violence. I'd also be pretty disappointed by the level of description if I was looking for erotica. Overall I feel they are very well written and the sexual content adds to the narrative rather than taking away from it.

Okay, we're way off topic.

There's more fantasy than you realize but it'll be a while till any of that is reflected in the game. Maybe once it gets to content from the later books.

As stated, the 'fantasy' aspect of the books is fairly low early on in the books, as the inhabitants look upon Westeros as a world in which magic, etc. has left. As the books continue, we are slowly introduced to the 'fantasy' elements as these become more and more prevelant. The magic is returning; is coming back from hiding, however you wish to look on it. I would hope the expansions will follow the same course, though I'm also glad I don't have to figure out how to do so.

To the original question of is the series Good vs Evil, I've always felt the answer is yes, just warped. There are a ton of GvsE moments, the only problem is that, as in real life, people don't fall into one category or the other. Good people can make bad decisions, Evil people can do things that positively impact others. Does that make the Good people Bad, or the Evil people Good? At what point do the lines blur, or the places switch? There is no black and white, only gray.

As far as the sex in the books, my opinion is that it comes across rather well. Is there sex in the series? Yes, however I think that if anyone were to read the books for that reason, they would come away disappointed.

Hopefully HBO will take a 'less-is-more' attitude towards it next year, because what sex there is in the series doesn't need to be augmented, more would only take away from the story.

Titeman said:

And the characters evolve, such that the ones you're sure are good or bad may not turn out that way after all.

I love this series and have read the available books multiple times.

If I was to use one word to describe the series, it is intrigue. Yes main characters do die, but it adds to the intrigue of the series because it makes you wonder how the Houses from which the characters die will survive.

Waiting for BoW to arrive via the post, can't wait to play it.

Grandmikus said:

Its an illustration of power in politics - who wants it, why they want it, what they do with it and how it affects them and those around them in both real and perceived terms. At least that was in the first two or three books, which is what I have read.

myrm said:

All books released so far are like that. Another very important teme in the books are the different lifetragedies and how war destroys whatever it touches. What I love most about the boks is how its not one character that takes the plot forward but everyone and everything ha their part in the big whole.

I just ended the first book and Its now at the top of my TOP 10 books and top 10 fantasy/medieval novels. Im still waiting for the game due to some recless preordering but gosh...how did they manage to make a tactical wargame out of this book O_o

Grandmikus said:

there are three other books in the series with which they drew upon.

Titeman said:

Really? Every Stark I can think of(minus two) is decidedly good; at worst a very light shade of gray. Also, Hodor is a beacon of all that is pure and just.

qwertyuiop said:

While it's true that the Stark are the most squeaky-clean of the bunch, most of the first book is told from their perspective, so our sympathy lies with them.

The remarkable thing about the series is that Martin continually takes characters that we initially view as villainous, and then makes them sympathetic, even heroic.

Ultimately, one could argue that there are no "bad guys" in the Song of Ice and Fire because everyone's behavior seems to be determined by the circumstances of their birth and upbringing, and the experiences that have shaped them.

qwertyuiop said:

I had to stop myself from laughing. Hodor is about as good as a child is, given his nature, oh, but that was a good one.

My particular view is about par for the course: it's not about good versus evil directly, but in the interplay of human emotion in politics, and what they'll do to see what they want come to pass. Sure, the Starks live and die by their Honor, the Tullys by their sense of Obligation, but not everyone is so willing to bet on an abstraction to save them. Some are in it to right what they consider a wrong done to them in the past, and others just to make sure they stay in a position of comfortable power. The fantastic elements are woven in subtly at times, but never so heavy-handed as to make it a real sword-and-sorcery type of series... at least, so far... assuming he ever finishes the next book.

Since the thread was necroed, I might as well join the dog-pile

Grandmikus said:

I'd say, at its simplest, it's real, realistic people vs other real, realistic people. It's not quite as grey, I think, as the others here make it out to be. Some factions are clearly more villainous than others, but no villain is a cheap, simple superhero cartoon villain. There are no stock characters or Mary Sues in the books, and most of the more villainous characters have complex, multi-faceted personalities and multiple, sometimes conflicting aims.