Do you think we will see another expansion for the 4th book of the series? Or has this game more or less been abandoned for now by FFG. People seem pretty happy with Swords... Looking for more or is the game maxed out?

"Crows"doesn't seem to offer too much in the way of an Expansion.A lot of its actioned was in the North or beyond the Westros.I don't see another possible expansion until Daenerys returns to claim her own...& then wooden Dragons

OD

The only elements of the story that can be touched so far are Dany's doings across the sea (which would be a whole new game in itself) and beyond the Wall (same as above). You MIGHT be able to do the Sparrows as a faction in KL but we don't know enough to go through with that. You could have the jack ass houses (Bolton/Frey) that appear if you fail to reach certain objectives and are under another faction's control but that would only affect Stark since no other factions have that problem (so far).

I would like to see a board with EVERY major house and divided so you could play whichever house you want like the 9-player (minus Tully and Dany if we're being true to the book).

Or they could add more neutral or "free lord" areas that can actually sway the game if you can beat/ally with them and outlaw "units" who move secretly around the board working for a particular house but whose alignment isn't revealed until they're caught, if they have any. That would be tough though.

Although I do not see sufficient elements in a Feast for Crows to justify a new expansion (since, in my opinion, most of the story is an intrigue one ( altough I didn't read the books in English but in French, so I do not know where the Feast for Crows book begins (because in French, the 4 books have been divided in 12 regular books)), I would be happy that FFG decides to make a new expansion anyways, to augment my pleasure while playing the storm of swords map (the one with 4 players). Me and my friends found out that, after 3-5 games, the storm of swords map gets quite repetitive (in my group, it always end up greyjoy vs stark and baratheon vs lannister). Could be nice to add a new house, like house Arryn in the Val, so that we add more flexibility to this 4 players map (like they did for the original game by adding house Martell. Or they could add some barbarians in the val and bandits elsewhere (so that when you enter such and such territory, you have a sort of encounter).

Sure, it wouldn't follow that much the storyline, but to be honest, the game doesnt reflect the actual story anyways. Many house cards characters are doing things they wouldn't even have done in the story. I will show you what I mean : For example, when playing house Baratheon, with the different house cards sets, you may have Renly as a house card (he never joined Stannis in his quest for crown), Patchface (come on, he is just a **** jester with a damaged brain, not a military leader with a very powerful ability) and so on ... So I feel like adding a new house like house Arryn (which never participated in a conflict in the books) would cause more good then harm.

Just my sayings...

I'd like to see an expansion for Storm of Swords. A 5/6 player expandable map for the bottom and some more ally decks. There is a 6 player Storm of swords map for PBeM games on the net I have enjoyed playing. Theme wise I think a 5/6 player game where Dany and her dragons invade westeros would be fun.

As far as the specifics I'm not sure, and I agree with others here that it would be tough, however I would love to see another expantion and I'd no doubt pick up a copy (as I've done with the Arkham and AGOT products to date). I think that an expantion per novel would be simply amazing and adds for me a way to renforce to my gaming group that they want to pick up both the books and the games for the whole series.

I imagine new expansion quite well. Why couldn't it be something like Lord of The Rings: The Battles of The Third Age where two players battle each other. It could be well at the Wall where wildlings try to scale it and not-yet-Lord Snow tries to push them back. Or the battle of Whispering Woods. Or the battle for kings landing. It would be about time for them to think something for 2 players and AGoT diceless system fits me much better than those **** dice that woun't roll right no matter what game I'm playing. The weak point at this would be the lack of diplomacy... But go figure, they just might think of something

Ove said:

How about this:

Aegon's Conquest, starts out the Aegon player against everyone, but the other players can switch over (ie if they are REALLY weak, and happen to start out very near to Dragonstone)

That would require some other point-counting system. Individual goals would be perfect for this. Else it would be just another "I-can't-win-nobody-can" since everyone would be our for their own strongholds not for any-one's else. I think I'm not the only one who has seen allies turn against each-other when one one of them comes too close for winning. Something like our good Stefan is doing.

If the ally is strong I'd see no reason to go against him/her (not that I wouldn't if there's a chance for me to win ). If he/she wins I win with him/her and probably get a warm place near the throne and not to mention whole bunch of land.

The new expansion could put more pessure on the diplomatic side where the King is not only the draw-solver and throne-warmer. At least that's what I'd expect...