Seraphim Luxury Playing Cards live on KS

[PipChick]

[TheGentlemanWake]

My initial thought is that the creator doesn’t know what “luxury” means. Premium? Maybe. Luxury? I reserve that classification for foil or spot uv or gilded edges. I don’t even consider metallic inks more than premium anymore.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[PipChick]

My initial thought is that the creator doesn’t know what “luxury” means. Premium? Maybe. Luxury? I reserve that classification for foil or spot uv or gilded edges. I don’t even consider metallic inks more than premium anymore.

totally agree; I resent the fact that a lot of creators take way too much liberty with card-jargon in describing & marketing their product; yes, of course language is subjective, but this is a clear example of an unjust overstatement; and I really doubt he intended the use of "luxury" to be interpreted as a hyperbole, but that's exactly how I see these cards and, as a reflection on the creator, it's also hard to take him seriously as well.

Although, the kid is really freakin' cute, I don't think this campaign is going to take off... but who knows; there's always a deck out there for someone lol.

[theCapraAegagrus]

Things to like about this campaign:

-

Now that we're passed that, things not to like about this campaign:

- Not a luxurious deck, despite being advertised as such.
- The small and sharp corner borders won't be good if printed by USPCC.
- Clip art 1-way back design.
- The AoS is terrible.
- The Jokers are even worse...
- The tuck case is boring.
- The "Gold" tier is just a ridiculous money grab. No real incentive.
- Stretch Goal for gold ink? Wtf?
- I'm sure there's more, but I'll stop here.

[vasta41]

Things to like about this campaign:

-

Now that we're passed that, things not to like about this campaign:

- Not a luxurious deck, despite being advertised as such.
- The small and sharp corner borders won't be good if printed by USPCC.
- Clip art 1-way back design.
- The AoS is terrible.
- The Jokers are even worse...
- The tuck case is boring.
- The "Gold" tier is just a ridiculous money grab. No real incentive.
- Stretch Goal for gold ink? Wtf?
- I'm sure there's more, but I'll stop here.

You know, for people who say UC or you is/are too negative, I say it's not our/your fault that there are soooooo many crap decks coming out lately. I guess it's not a bad thing because there are some really, really awesome decks coming out these days too. But decks like this make me wish we had a whole separate forum outside of "New & Custom Decks" (maybe "Playing Card Follies"?) so I don't have to waste my time looking at these sub-par decks.

[Merlebird]

Although, the kid is really freakin' cute, I don't think this campaign is going to take off... but who knows; there's always a deck out there for someone lol.

What is with all these tweens launching Kickstarter campaigns...? When I was their age I was content to keep my fumbling artistic endeavors on LiveJournal, as God intended!

[theCapraAegagrus]

Things to like about this campaign:

-

Now that we're passed that, things not to like about this campaign:

- Not a luxurious deck, despite being advertised as such.
- The small and sharp corner borders won't be good if printed by USPCC.
- Clip art 1-way back design.
- The AoS is terrible.
- The Jokers are even worse...
- The tuck case is boring.
- The "Gold" tier is just a ridiculous money grab. No real incentive.
- Stretch Goal for gold ink? Wtf?
- I'm sure there's more, but I'll stop here.

You know, for people who say UC or you is/are too negative, I say it's not our/your fault that there are soooooo many crap decks coming out lately. I guess it's not a bad thing because there are some really, really awesome decks coming out these days too. But decks like this make me wish we had a whole separate forum outside of "New & Custom Decks" (maybe "Playing Card Follies"?) so I don't have to waste my time looking at these sub-par decks.

This is a good/interesting idea. My only concern would be how to choose what deck goes where. While I consider reading this campaign a complete waste of time, other people might like it, for some reason (I guess)...

You're right that this particular forum can make 'us' look like a bunch of Negative Nancys, but that's because the majority of decks "launched" in the last couple years have been real duds. Too many people trying too many things, and many of them executed very poorly (also a lot with maybe 8 hours total time/effort put into it). Not that there isn't a fair share of great artistry on playing cards, because there definitely (obviously) is, but they are outnumbered by average and bad decks.

I try to reply as often on good efforts as I do putting these ones down. There needs to be a balance of constructive criticism, hatred, and love.

I hate this deck here, though.

[Magic_Orthodoxy]

He contacted me a while back for advice, earlier he had the whole kitchen sink thrown in ....

Traditional Cut, Magic Finish, Deck stack ....

I told him all that would cost more to have printed. He didn't know that.

He insisted that "magic finish" is free. He told me...

Also "Magic" finish is just another name for embossed finish or aircushoned, the finish actually doesn't change as USPCC only offers smooth or embossed finish. I just like using the name "Magic" finish.

So .... "IF" the deck funds. His customers WON'T get Magic Finish as advertised.

But I guess they WILL get "magic" finish.

[vasta41]

He contacted me a while back for advice, earlier he had the whole kitchen sink thrown in ....

Traditional Cut, Magic Finish, Deck stack ....

I told him all that would cost more to have printed. He didn't know that.

He insisted that "magic finish" is free. He told me...

I'm sorry, WHAT!? Do you think it would behoove someone to do some basic research before creating a KS campaign? All that tells me is that this "creator" said, "hey, people seem to making some money off playing cards- why don't I try!" You're asking people to give you $7,500 for you to make something that you don't even know the basic details about??

[PipChick]

You know, for people who say UC or you is/are too negative, I say it's not our/your fault that there are soooooo many crap decks coming out lately. I guess it's not a bad thing because there are some really, really awesome decks coming out these days too. But decks like this make me wish we had a whole separate forum outside of "New & Custom Decks" (maybe "Playing Card Follies"?) so I don't have to waste my time looking at these sub-par decks.

This is a good/interesting idea. My only concern would be how to choose what deck goes where. While I consider reading this campaign a complete waste of time, other people might like it, for some reason (I guess)...

You're right that this particular forum can make 'us' look like a bunch of Negative Nancys, but that's because the majority of decks "launched" in the last couple years have been real duds. Too many people trying too many things, and many of them executed very poorly (also a lot with maybe 8 hours total time/effort put into it). Not that there isn't a fair share of great artistry on playing cards, because there definitely (obviously) is, but they are outnumbered by average and bad decks.

I try to reply as often on good efforts as I do putting these ones down. There needs to be a balance of constructive criticism, hatred, and love.

I hate this deck here, though.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

I most definitely recognize that this campaign is a total fail (along with an ever growing list of others), but I posted it anyways because, love it or hate it, content of any kind can be launchpad to engaging convo - either about the deck itself, or other card-related stuff. If there's no content, there's also nothing to talk about. With that said I don't think voicing an opinion (ie this clip-art deck sucks) necessarily makes UC negative as a whole and I think it's kinda interesting to hear from other opinions even if it asserts the opposite of one's own.

And, for all those "aspiring deck designers" out there, I think those that actually care to take the time to research the market would find posts like these helpful in hopefully deterring them from putting out similar crap designs (or at least think twice about doing so) *we can hope, can't we* lol.

I dunno, I'm still just the new girl here, so what do I know

[Magic_Orthodoxy]

well.... I was wrong. I tried to clear it up with USPCC and this is what they told me about Magic Finish

Magic finish started around 10 years ago and was actually the term for a separate coating. Now all decks have that coating so it’s not a separate ‘finish’. Magic finish, Linen, Air-cushion and Cambric are all marketing terms for ‘embossed’.

So ... apparently ALL new USPCC decks have performance coating? It used to have a distinct chemical smell .....

[Reylek]

Yup, when Magic Finish was first made an option, custom runs started preferring and using it so much that USPCC went ahead and made it the standard coating for custom runs. That has been the case for years.

Magic Finish, a special stack, and traditional cut do not add any additional cost to a run. This has also been the case for years. The stack might add a TINY amount to artwork fees, but it's pretty minimal impact to the overall run.

It DOES cost more to switch to thin-crush stock. (I don't care for the broad term "Crushed Stock" since ALL stock is crushed to one thickness or another, but that's my own hangup, lol)

TBH, I admire what the guy has put together for his first time out of the gate. No, the art is not the best, and there is no way USPCC could pull off those ultra thin borders. But he has presented himself pretty well overall and put together a nice campaign page. Way better than some things I've seen from people twice his age. Give him a few more years and a few more attempts, and he'll probably put together something pretty nice.

We all were young once, and I have to give credit to anyone in their teens trying to make a project like this happen, I like to see the ambition.

The deck itself isn't my cup of tea, but it's clear that he didn't slap all of this together overnight.

[wingedpotato]

You know, for people who say UC or you is/are too negative, I say it's not our/your fault that there are soooooo many crap decks coming out lately. I guess it's not a bad thing because there are some really, really awesome decks coming out these days too. But decks like this make me wish we had a whole separate forum outside of "New & Custom Decks" (maybe "Playing Card Follies"?) so I don't have to waste my time looking at these sub-par decks.

You're right that this particular forum can make 'us' look like a bunch of Negative Nancys, but that's because the majority of decks "launched" in the last couple years have been real duds. Too many people trying too many things, and many of them executed very poorly (also a lot with maybe 8 hours total time/effort put into it). Not that there isn't a fair share of great artistry on playing cards, because there definitely (obviously) is, but they are outnumbered by average and bad decks.

I try to reply as often on good efforts as I do putting these ones down. There needs to be a balance of constructive criticism, hatred, and love.

I hate this deck here, though.

[insert 2 pennies:] As someone relatively new to these boards, I've been trying to nail down why they feel so negative. I've come to the conclusion that what makes UC appear excessively negative is that many people can't refrain from posting about how much they hate/disdain something, rather than not posting at all. "If you can't say something nice..." I think there is a place for constructive criticism and witticism, but what I read here often just comes across as bashing. Most of these sub-par decks just don't inspire a response from me.

[vasta41]

You know, for people who say UC or you is/are too negative, I say it's not our/your fault that there are soooooo many crap decks coming out lately. I guess it's not a bad thing because there are some really, really awesome decks coming out these days too. But decks like this make me wish we had a whole separate forum outside of "New & Custom Decks" (maybe "Playing Card Follies"?) so I don't have to waste my time looking at these sub-par decks.

You're right that this particular forum can make 'us' look like a bunch of Negative Nancys, but that's because the majority of decks "launched" in the last couple years have been real duds. Too many people trying too many things, and many of them executed very poorly (also a lot with maybe 8 hours total time/effort put into it). Not that there isn't a fair share of great artistry on playing cards, because there definitely (obviously) is, but they are outnumbered by average and bad decks.

I try to reply as often on good efforts as I do putting these ones down. There needs to be a balance of constructive criticism, hatred, and love.

I hate this deck here, though.

[insert 2 pennies:] As someone relatively new to these boards, I've been trying to nail down why they feel so negative. I've come to the conclusion that what makes UC appear excessively negative is that many people can't refrain from posting about how much they hate/disdain something, rather than not posting at all. "If you can't say something nice..." I think there is a place for constructive criticism and witticism, but what I read here often just comes across as bashing. Most of these sub-par decks just don't inspire a response from me.

I agree with everything you said. Another thing to consider is that no matter if a post is positive or negative, it is a post nonetheless. And that bumps a topic whether a deck is good or bad. "There's no such thing as bad publicity" so to speak. But on the other hand... one of the most fundamental purposes of a forum is to discuss. If it starts with keeping quiet on posts about bad decks, where does it end? While we're busy quoting things, "Now, we must all fear evil men. But, there is another kind of evil which we must fear most … and that is the indifference of good men!" -Boondock Saints, 1999 In other words I'm not a fan of censorship so if someone had a bad thought about a crappy deck that was posted but didn't comment, I would feel slighted as a member of this forum. To me it all goes back to my original point.
EDIT: Having said all that this isn't the worst deck of cards ever but it's not far from the bottom (or top?) of that list. Given his age maybe this isn't a money grab. Maybe I was admittedly biased towards yet another deck of minimalist playing cards. Maybe I just can't help but equate laziness to minimalism. And I suppose my comments about not knowing the industry we're out of line given the new info about stock. For that I apologize. But this deck is still not for me. And I'm not sure if this is the case here but I hate to think that so many minimalist decks are trying to mimic Fontaines and Virtuosos as an easy cash grab.