Well, not fully, but a little bit.

Mainly, I wanted to get back into the game and get my playgroup playing weekly with the new HBO series. Since I didn't want to reuse all my REALLY old cards and start fresh I ordered the Core set, the Baratheon expansion box, and two chapter packs.

But...

The Core Set and one of the chapter packs didn't come with full playsets like I was expecting. Super lame, now I'll have to buy singles or trade online. I was really hoping I could do one-stop shopping for what I wanted with the LCG model. If the packs have full playsets of some cards and not others, they're basically just fixed-content booster packs :/

The Core Sets of all of the LCGs do not include complete playsets. They never have.

Chapter packs only started coming with 3x each card about a year or so ago; its possible that the two chapter packs you purchased were printed before the change over.

That would make sense, as one of them was quite recent and the other one was 2-3 blocks back in the release cycle. Still, the way people had told me about the distribution I was expecting full playsets, so it just didn't meet my expectations.

Not that that kept me from building 3 new decks with all my goodies
- Stannis/Asshai
- Robert/Power-Rush
- Renly/Knights of the Realm

Yeah, the core set not having playsets is the one flaw with the system. (I think even the deluxe expansions contain playsets of every card.)

I've really been enjoying the new LotR LCG that came out last month, with Quest packs beginning later this month. The cooperative mechanic is quite unique for the LCG/CCG format; and thus far it has been executed brilliantly.

That's interesting, because when I tried it at GenCon, I found it to be terrible. Granted, I dislike the idea of a cooperative ccg to start with...

You would.

You'd be happy playing a game with no winner? Even if you play games more for fun than competition, I don't see the point in that. If others enjoy it, have at it I suppose.

Cooperative card games are for losers. And girls.

are we talking about the same game, because AGoT LCG has winners. Before their switch to the LCG format, that was the game I got to play most regularly.

Then I guess you don't see the point in RPGs either. Hell I know you play WoW...so unless you're in PvP zones all the time you've been enjoying a cooperative game for years.

It's a unique concept and granted if someone is out to prove that their manhood is bigger than everyone else's then the concept is not for them.

@Carter: Lord of the Rings = Cooperative LCG; Game of Thrones = Competitive LCG

RPGs are different IMO, because they allow you to stretch your creativity and use imagination. I see no such benefit in a CCG. And it's funny you mention WoW; it's mostly a time-filler along the lines of Farmville for me, and I've come to recognize that and cancel my account.

Meh, just giving you a hard time.

A cooperative CCG does sound a bit silly, but I've played a couple cooperative board games that were cool.

Yeah I think I'd even be okay with a board game. It's just the combination of CCG (which for me is more analytical than creative- card x clearly better than card y, etc) and no winner. It probably was also tainted by the fact that the OTHER LOTR TCG was so elegantly designed in my mind, and the demo I received for this one was SO poor.

Since we're hi-jacking my thread with LOTR nonsense anyway:

Y'know what was the best LOTR-based card game? Middle Earth CCG. Ah the memories. Too bad our 6-to-8-person multiplayer games literally took multiple days to finish...

Rich: Their talking about the Co-op LOTR LCG, not AGoT LCG.