I just saw the spoilers for hidden agenda and was really disappointed with the dragons trag got. If you haven't seen them, http://www.agotcards.org/set/listing/110 I was hoping for something a lot better then that. The other house got some interesting stuff to bad for my targ dragon deck.

I think they are for a different deck than the Ambush dragons. Meaning, now you have some cheaper options that don't depend on influence and you can replace that influence with different locations or characters. It's a novel idea whether or not it takes off. I love alternate options.

They're not flashy ("French vanilla" is the rising term, I think?), and they don't slot into the existing dragon deck, so I can understand why they don't have the "WOW, COOL!" factor people are hoping for...

...but, do NOT underestimate the awesomeness that is 3 CBK characters on the board at the same time.

I agree with Bomb - they're likely to become the backbone of new "Dragons & ..." builds. You'll be able to use these guys to mix dragon-tech with, for example, Dothraki, Maesters, or Shadows ("Young Griff and the Dragons" -- hmmmm...) in ways that the other ones never could.

I also like the fact the FFG is trying to create multiple options for targ but, the good cards in this game seem to rely on one other cards to be good. Where as the great cards are just good by themselves. These dragons all need to be out there together in order to be good. Plus I was reading an article on cardgamedb that was saying the cards should be more like the books ie. dragons should have a high cost and high strength not be just as strong as most characters. Come on a dragon is just as strong as Tyrion lannister? Makes no sense.

I wouldn't approach the game with that thought. STR isn't measured by physical size or strength in this game. Otherwise the INT and POW challenges would need to be looked at quite differently compared to MIL challenges when looking at STR. Tyrion is a perfect example where he SHOULD have high STR in intrigue challenges at least.

STR in this game can't be measured in that way because its not used for only MIL challenges.

I wouldn't approach the game with that thought. STR isn't measured by physical size or strength in this game. Otherwise the INT and POW challenges would need to be looked at quite differently compared to MIL challenges when looking at STR. Tyrion is a perfect example where he SHOULD have high STR in intrigue challenges at least.

STR in this game can't be measured in that way because its not used for only MIL challenges.

You could say the STR is the impact a character has on a certain conflict.

I was reading an article on cardgamedb that was saying the cards should be more like the books ie. dragons should have a high cost and high strength not be just as strong as most characters. Come on a dragon is just as strong as Tyrion lannister? Makes no sense.

I've been hearing this argument for years and have never thought much of it. I mean, if the cards "should be more like the books," then no dragon should ever have any icon other than MIL. It's not like they personally participate in the political struggles that are represented by the INT and POW icons. I think you also have a hard time justifying "stealth" for any dragon under this argument. But somehow, this argument only ever seems to be used when considering a dragon's STR.

And all of that is without the question of when in the books the cards should be reflective of. I think the new "CBK-circle" dragons are very reflective of how they were in the books right after Dany takes Meereen - where they are about the size of large dogs. They certainly aren't "hatchlings" at that point, but they aren't the huge, untamable things they are by the end of DwD, either.

Also, Tyrion's a boss militarily. Trained soldiers are dying left and right and he survives without losing anything other than his nose? C'mon, he could totally tangle with a dragon - especially if it's an intrigue challenge.