I stopped playing MTG because the cards were becoming ever more expensive, especially with the addition of the Mythic Rares. I love the AGoT LCG, but recently stopped playing for much the same reason.

I bought all of the old expansions and chapter packs, as they were released. But, now am left buying multiple chapter packs and expansions to get playsets, etc. I love card games, but think that FFG has gotten too greedy with this one. Power creep is obvious, and each new cycle doesn't add interesting new cards, it adds a power dynamic that one must buy into in order to be competitive.

As I said goodbye to MTG, now I must say goodbye to this game. Sad but true.

The LoTR LCG is excellent, because I can play at my own pace, and have no inclination to ever compete with it. I also enjoy the AGoT board game.

But, FFG, you have gotten greedy with the AGoT LCG. Shame.

I know that the haters will hate, and the fanboys will start writing about how little AGoT costs to play compared to playing certain variants of MTG, etc. But, the fact of the matter is this; for a player to get in to this game right now, and be seriously competitive, is probably similar to the price of what would make you competitive at a Type-II Friday Night Magic event.

Is there anyone else out there like me, who, after collecting for a while, has just given up and switched to board games, video games, other CCG/LCGs, or just not playing card games at all?

can i have your stuff?

and for the record i completely disagree with 100% of your post. asking for $11.99 every six weeks is pretty much the exact opposite of greed. i can't really think of a cheaper hobby actually other than counting my grandfathers liver spots. i contemplated quitting recently and ultimately decided not to strictly because it was so cheap to continue on.

for comparison, it costs $18.50 for a ticket to see Batman in IMAX here in DC, and that only lasts 3hours.

dcdennis said:

Pretend you have no cards, and want to get into the game. First you have to buy 3 core sets, and then the reprints of the old chapter packs, sometimes multiples if they have not been reprinted to include full playsets, and all of the expansions, sometimes multiple copies.

If you want to get into this game right now, and actually go to an event and be competitive, it would be at least $700.00 or so.

I have fallen behind by a cycle, and was thinking of buying all of the chapter packs that I need. But, then I considered, looking at all of my old MTG stuff, that I could basically just go back to that.

divinityofnumber said:

why? you dont need every card in existence to enjoy the game. if you have a complete-ist's compulsion to do so that is one thing (i do too), but it is FAR from required in order to play, competitive or otherwise.

dcdennis said:

Right, it isn't required to play. But, if you want a couple of decks that run like well-oiled machines, and are going to consistently win games in a competitive atmosphere…you need a near complete collection of cards (i.e., playsets of everything).

I sympathize with your sentiment regarding power creep, but I disagree that we've reached the point where you have to buy every pack to be competitive. For any given "tier-1 build," it seems like you may need 1-2 packs from each cycle. The exception, I think, are builds that rely significantly on a single mechanic such as maesters, seasons, etc. But even then, you buy more of that cycle and less of others.

Look at the top builds that are winning regionals these days. Sure they use new cards, but the majority of the deck is cards printed last year or earlier:

Stark Knights, Moonboy classic decklist here.

Targ maesters, Chicago regionals decklist here.

Targ KotHH, Cincinatti regionals decklist here (I couldn't find the European player's decklist who won with KotHH, but it's on the internets somewhere).

GJ winter, NYC regionals…Fatmouse didn't post his decklist (I think), but it was mostly all cards from 1+ years ago.

Stark Seige (I think), DC regionals…not posted online, but from what I remember the biggest threats were Meera (released last year), No Quarter and Narrow Escape.

I think if you were to buy the Core + each house expansion + maester cycle, you'd probably have enough there to then need to only buy a chapter pack here and there to run the maesters in any house. That is still the dominant agenda.

In fact, the only houses where I feel you really need to spend more than $30 (2 chapter packs) to get a lot of new cards that are commonly used would be GJ and potentially Baratheon. Otherwise you can skip chapter packs as you feel. You won't be able to build a tier-1 maester deck, but you can still build a tier-1 seasons, wildlings, choke, etc. without buying more than a couple chapter packs here and there.

Here is the DC champ deck, not a single card from the newest cycle and only 3 or 4 from the entire last cycle.

http://www.agotcards.org/deck/v/11731

dcdennis said:

So, about $500.00 or so then?

I don't have time to do the math…I just wanted to raise the point for discussion -- as an LCG progresses, the things that differentiated it from the CCG (MTG, in my case), seem to be deteriorating, and making me contemplate just going back to MTG.

And, let me be clear -- I love FFG. Their games are amazing, the team that they have is incredible, and I have spent thousands and thousands buying up their products. I have just found myself transitioning to LoTR, MTG, and board games after missing a cycle or so of AGoT, and wanted to raise the topic for discussion.

Could your problem be with the model in general? Any CCG or LCG that releases new expansions, cards, or variations has such costs associated with the new stuff.

This topic just makes no sense is all. You raise the concern of the high cost of an LCG after missing one cycle, and claim to be considering going back to a CCG in MtG where EVERY CARD you own will be illegal in 3 months due to rotation. In that format you HAVE TO keep buying. At least in the LCG format your investment is perpetually safe. There is no logic here, only trolling for some underlying reason. My guess is you just got beat by a maester deck on OCTGN and are taking out your frustrations on us

I don't get it. Either the game remains static--no new cards--or they give us new toys to play with. I decided to get into this game in large part because it wasn't going to require me to spend hundreds of dollars a year to keep up (which was why I quit M:TG over a decade ago). Not having to buy multiple booster boxes in hopes of getting a significant percentage of the best single cards (and then spending tens of dollars each on the remaining ones I need) is a godsend. Since I love the constructed deck concept, I was delighted to find a model that was also affordable over the long term.

Yes, a new player is looking at a substantial cost to get completely caught up (which can be mitigated somewhat by looking around for collections people sell). But from that point on then it's 15 bucks a month or so at worst. That's three lattés at Starbucks. Hardly greedy.

Power creep is kind of inevitable, too, though to the extent they've created some with the current CP cycle, it is (at least in part) because FFG explicitly designed this cycle with new players in mind. IOW, if this one's more powerful overall than other recent cycles it's precisely because they're trying to help new players field competitive decks without having to get every card in existence in triplicate. Whether that strategy works or not remains to be seen, but it certainly doesn't suggest greediness as the motivating factor. Either way, I don't begrudge them my 15 bucks a month over it.

So, sorry you're leaving. But I don't think your stated reasons make much sense.

dcdennis said:

In CCGs, at least MTG, things rotate in and out -- not every card…but cards make reappearances. In the LCG model, your investment is not perpetually safe; play with one core set and one chapter pack of the first few cycles against someone who has 3 core sets and a playset of every card up until the current…if they are a decent deck-builder, you will lose.

I posted because I love the AGoT LCG, but, when thinking about spending 100+dollars to "catch up," and looking at all of my old MTG stuff, just contemplated giving it up.

I was wondering if anyone else has felt the same?

divinityofnumber said:

Are you looking to compete or just play around a few times with friends? I mean, if you are looking at buying a 2nd core set for just one or two extra cards, you could always use a proxy for the time being if you playing for fun.

I think people should take your point more seriously. However I don't think you find the gruesome necessity of spending near as much as you have to in MTG.

divinityofnumber said:

The first statement I've left in the quote confuses me. When Clash of Arms, Time of Ravens, King's Landing, and Defenders of the North were first released, you would have to have bought three of each chapter pack to get a full playset of every card. Now that all of them (except Clash of Arms) have been rereleased, you only need to buy one of each chapter pack to have a playset of everything. Same goes for the expansions. So I don't understand why you are "now am left buying multiple chapter packs and expansions"

I would also argue with the power creep argument. If that were the case, cards from the first two cycles would no longer be played, but they are.

To answer the question you ended your original post with: No. There certainly have been times when I was not buying any card games, but that did not mean I stopped playing them. In fact, the only CCG that I have stopped playing entirely is Magic. There are base mechanics of the game that I do not enjoy.

That being said, I also used to collect the 7th Sea CCG, as well as Warlord, and UFS. I still have decks for these games, and still play them with friends, even though none of us has bought a new card in years.

The reason we continue to play these games, and the reason I have never abandoned card games entirely, is that they are a unique play experiance, an play style and feeling not created by any other medium of gaming.

And as to the discussion of start up cost: Yes, if you want a complete card library of AGoT, you must spend hundreds of dollars. If you want a complete Standard/Type II card library of Magic you must spend hundreds of dollars. However, I will also point out that most of the Magic players that shop at my store also buy at least 1 box of a new Magic set. That's more than $100 every three months, and chances are you won't even get a playset out of it. AGoT is somewhere in the neighborhood of a third the cost over the same period of time.

The startup costs may be comparable (though I disagree that you NEED 3 core sets and every chapter pack… I myself have never bought more than 1 core set), the mantainence costs are significantly lower of GoT, and to me, that is a strong factor.

But the other point here is: If people think GoT costs too much, fine. I don't feel the need to convince anyone that they need to play. Whatever.

The "catch up" consideration is a good point of discussion. This is one of the reasons some people believe rotation may be inevitable (another being power creep). To some extent, a player does need access to most of the cards (let's say 80-90%) to really explore the variety the game has to offer. This is something that FFG will probably need to deal with at some point, but I still feel we are a ways away.

I'm not sure how FFG will approach this issue. To be sure, FFG could limit competitive gameplay somehow by restricting deck lists to using only a certain # of cycles. In effect, that's what rotation does, only rotation always restricts to the most recent cycles, whereas an argument may be made that you don't need to rotate so long as you have restriction. (Obviously, play testing and design is significantly easier with rotation though.)

Just to dispel one claim that I think is a bit obfuscated in one of the replies above (in case newer players are reading these forums and don't know), I believe it WILDLY inaccurate to claim that Dennis' DC deck had $500 worth of cards. It probably is accurate to say that you need to have spent roughly $300-400 to *own* all the cards in a tier-1 competitive deck. Unlike MTG and most other CCGs though, the $300 worth of packs buys you enough cards to make many decks, and multiple tier-1 competitive decks. In MTG, you spend $300 on choice rares for a single deck…in this game you spend $300 on fixed packs that will build you maybe 6-8 decks with many of them very competitive. This expense may be shared among a variety of players (if you can get your friends to "buy-in") so that any one individual's cost is significantly lower. In fact, the Two Guys One Throne podcast was advertising $20 for a whole cycle's worth of any one house. Rather than spend $90 retail for a full cycle, you can spend $20 for the cards from just your favorite house.

In addition, many new players don't buy all their cards. For example, a Targ deck may be significantly more expensive if it plays 3x Forever Burning rather than 2x. That is because only 1x Forever Burning comes in each Core Set, and a Core Set costs $40 retail. But many new players, at least those who play in NYC, are encouraged to borrow a second or third copy of a card they don't have from a friend/metamate. In the long-run, having a third Core Set and thus a playset of every Core Set card is advantageous, but there are ways to manage costs.

I think that this topic could be transformed into a "How can I enjoy this game and still afford it?"

Some players stick to 1 or 2 houses and build decks ONLY around that house.

Some players only buy chapter packs as they need cards from those specific chapter packs when building certain decks.

Others split boxes with friends and try to share the cards.

If you have already purchased a lot of the expansions and CP cycles, then you are most of the way there already. Instead of getting overwhelmed and giving up, you can always try to pick and choose what your next one or two purchases will be and build decks around those cards only. We have wonderful online resources available in agotcards.org and cardgamedb.com to help you decide which packs are best for your current deck building interest.

Like dcdennis had said above, you do not need every card ever printed to be able to build a deck you can compete with. You don't even need 3x of a specific card to be able to do that. There are many decks that only use 1x or 2x of any card that are currently competing.

When I first got into this game last year, I had started off slow. I went with 1x Core Set, 1x Kings of the Storm, and I may have bought parts of CP cycles at a time that I thought sounded fun. Eventually my collection became more complete. Building it slowly helps a lot if you plan on getting all the cards eventually. I generally bought the sets that had the cards as I needed those cards for some of my decks.

Perhaps a different approach will rejuvenate your interest in the game. If you lose the perspective that you need every set to build a competitive deck, you should have much less of an overwhelming feeling when it comes to buying cards. Try sticking to buying the cards you need at that moment in time and I think you'll help yourself overcome the frustrating financial obligation you seem to have hanging over your head.

I agree with bomb. I also feel that as the card pool grows, there is a lot of overlap in card effects. For example, for a Targ burn deck there isn't a great replacement for a card like Illyrio, but Harried by Dragons can fill some holes if you're missing a second/third Forever Burning, as can Incinerate. If you don't have 3x Flame-Kissed, you can go with 1-2x and fill in the extras with a Dragon Skull (which is great when paired with Shadow Seer) and Harried. Frequently I find that although card X may be the optimal, it is so minutely better than card Y that the difference is marginal or situational, at best.

The same can be said for Stark…it's hard to replace Meera, so you just have to buy that pack. But you don't have to buy the pack with No Quarter if you're tight for cash…Die by the Sword + Seductive Promise do a pretty good job, and so does Bear Island. You definitely are much more limited in the types of "competitive" builds you can create if you don't have access to a larger card pool (either by buying or borrowing), but you are NOT limited to a tier-2 deck.

If I could "like" the above post, I totally would. Very smart.

I agree with twn2dn. I placed top 5 in a regional earlier this year with just 2 Cores, a Targ box, and the defenders of the north cycle. I shared some plots from my friends Stark box. Yes, it wasn't a hotly contested regional, but we did have some long time players there. Since then, I've grown my card pool by buying new, buying on eBay, trading, and getting cards from longtime players. Additionally, our local store sells singles and house packs so you can avoid getting every last CP if you want to (teamcovenant.com).

I would say that I by now have spent about 200 for almost 2/3 of the card pool. Which is not free, but it is doable. And I believe I can be competitive with what I have--both in Targ and others.

I likewise have found that I don't need 3 of EVERY card; many work pretty well as a substitute. For a long time, I didn't have summer, so I ran KOTHH. Still good. Now, I dont have the Brotherhood cycle, so no Dothraki, but daemon blackfyre does the job. And so on.

I think the big difference is that with a AGoT, because the game is a few years old now the buy in is a little higher (up front) but once you purchase that cards your upkeep costs will be a LOT lower than Magic the Gathering or other CCGs.

Why is this post getting so much dissenting opinion? The guy is right, LoL.

If you look at the cards that are in the Stark Knight deck, there's $340 worth of chapter packs and expansions if you get them all for 2/3 of the original price. $510 if you get them all. Sure you can make 6 decks from that, but the fact still stands that $300+ need to be spent to build that deck. If you split it, well then you have less variety to play.

I think the same thing every time I buy a chapter pack, "Why am I doing this?"

If not for the likability of the guys in my meta, I would have probably quit after a few weeks playing against tier 1 decks. At this point, I'm effectively paying to play with them (by buying chapter packs) and I get some minor satisfaction out of messing around with my deck. I'd rather have 6 - 20 good board games than all these cards myself.

Or maybe a new TV… Or 10 video games… Or a new mattress…

mdc273 said:

All I know is that when I buy a chapter back, what I think is "Sweet! I'm picking up a full playset of every new card this month for less than $20."

mdc273 said:

Different perspectives?

I'm just glad I can enjoy a deckbuilding game completely for about 100-150 euro's each year. In any CCG that's about the price of a boosterbox which only gives 1/6 of the Rare playset (talking about L5R, MTG is too long ago). I only play melee with a limited local meta so i'm not gonna argue about competitive joust decks but the LCG format has allowed me to have around 35+ fun decks (I do had to print some proxies, mainly plots and streets of …)

The discussion about Start up costs is also quite tricky and has more to do with how you want to play the game then the game itself.

My opinion after discussing this issue with a few of my friends who are avid MtG players and at least one of them had a huge collection of rares/etc. at some point of his life: In the end, the amount of money you'll spend on AGoT depends on whether you get into a group where everyone is participating in "arms race" playing best decks possible, tinkering them, buying all the sets, etc. or if you play with guys who will be fine playing core set decks till the end of time. In first case, you'll be forced to spend more and more and at some point you'll find that you've spent a few hundred dollars already. In second case, you won't spend any money.=)

About MtG: it's essentially the same as with AGoT. If you play with your friends or FNM for fun, you can get away with spending about 100-150 per year (about 15-20 bucks per set of 4x commons/uncommons + a few cheap rares if you care) and later selling the cards when they go off Standard (probably only rares will be worth anything) and this way games have very similar upkeep/first pay costs. That's what my friend did and it worked pretty well. If you go for anything more serious, you'll have to spend a loot of money (about thousand dollars per year probably).

So bottom line: AGoT and MtG will have very similar costs per year if you play for fun/entertainment, and MtG becomes 5-10 times more expensive compared to AGoT if you get really serious.