ROYAL GUARD by Happyakrz -- First Draft

[Happyakrz]

Hi Everyone,

I've been working on a number of design concepts for playing cards that I'd like to produce, and have finally gotten the nerve up to share the first with you this morning. I'm wide open to constructive criticisms and suggestions, so please don't hold back. I really want to develop something in which others can find excitement from artistic, collectibility, and useability standards, so I want it (and all others to come) to live up to some pretty high standards.

In terms of production, I don't want to skimp in any way, so I'm thinking/planning that the cards would be printed through one of the top card printers -- I'm leaning toward Cartamundi or EPCC. I have a few USPCC decks that I really like, as well, but have some lower-end decks from them that I really don't care for the feel at all. So if you have suggestions on the pros and cons of one printer over another, please share. Here are the specific printing/publishing aspects that I am considering:

• Metallic inks on fronts and backs of all cards -- subtle or specific without over-doing it

• High grade stock and finish to appease players, cardists, and magicians

• Tuck box with foil stamping -- again, simple, elegant, and attractive -- perhaps with some embossing

At present, I'm not really thinking about deck variations/levels (color variations, gilded decks, etc.) -- I want to focus more on the design presently and let those things come as the interest level (hopefully) rises for the deck.

So, with all of that said, here's the concept and art-to-date:

Royal Guard by Happyakrz

This deck is a celebration of the dedicated knights of the royal court who put their lives at the mercy of the protection of their Royal Family. Each suit represents a different wing of the guard specialities: Spades = swords, Diamonds = spears/lances, Clubs = Maces, and Hearts = bows/arrows. The pips have all been custom designed, and their layout on the number cards denote the protective stances taken to protect their principal (marked on the central dais by their crown). The court cards will all depict the guard members from each division, with their suit denoted prominently on their armor. I want to keep the Aces relatively clean, but as the negative space within each design feels kind of massive to me at present, I may want to add something within them to create more complexity to the design (without drawing too much attention). As nine is my favorite number, I intentionally pushed the "Captain of the Guard" out of the circle on the nines, otherwise all other cards are symmetrical.

I am currently working on the tuck case design -- it would employ the same design elements as the card backs, with the castle fortifications shown at top and bottom continuing around the box -- most likely, there will be turrets on the sides of the box. On a trip to England in my younger days, we visited many castles (both well-kept and nearly destroyed) and I was amazed at the stone-work that went into the outer walls and barricades, allowing archers firing angles and swordsmen fencing room. I want to present that subtly here.

In terms of the face cards, I've been using Photoshop vector paths to create my characters, and I like the general feel in the two characters created so far. I'm a fan of simple line art and shapes, and want to create poses that scream the action or power that they represent -- I'm just now sure how others will respond to this style. I know that some will want/expect decks like this to be hand-drawn, and while I have the skill set to do this, I've been working in the digital arena for so long now that I'm much more comfortable in that space.

Aces


Spade Court (so far)


Full Spades (so far)


Ace of Spades - close up


King of Spades - close up


Backs - close up


Let me know what you think!

[Happyakrz]

I've been messing around this afternoon with concept work for the tuck case. I like the design I've been using for the backs of the cards, and specifically wanted to continue the castle wall around the bottom edge of the deck, with towers on the sides. I added a couple of latin phrases to the sides of the tuck (as this seems a popular thing to do) ... on one side the tuck reads, "qui amittit animam suam" -- "one forfeits his life ... and the other side reads, "coronae praesidio" -- "to protect the crown"

I've also incorporated the four weapons my royal guards will use on the court cards of the deck -- Spades = swords, Diamonds = spears/lances, Clubs = maces, and Hearts = arrows/bows

What do you think?
(sincerely looking for honest feedback, good and not-so-great alike)



I'm going to try to mock-up a 3D version of the tuck with some cards in Blender .. we'll see how that turns out!

Have a great night!

[Happyakrz]

Good morning, All!

Had a blast in Blender last night -- creating the tuck cases, cards, and lighting arrangements -- I think the end result looks pretty good for a rough draft of a concept deck. Way cheaper than having a prototype deck printed on a design that isn't complete yet!

Curious to hear anyone's thoughts on the deck, designs, and/or renders.

"Is there anybody out there?"

[MagikFingerz]

Hard to find anything specific to constructively critique, here. It's all quite well done and cohesive in my eyes. Though I will say that I think the back design is the weakest part, it's just a bit too simplistic and empty (to me, anyway). I wish I could offer some ideas, but my creativity in this area is severely lacking. But something that improves the visual impact of spreads/fans is always nice.

[rousselle]

Okay, I'll take a stab at this. I usually like to let things percolate a little bit before I jump in (when it comes to new artists' creations), but I'm sure others here will eventually chime in with some keen insights.

First, I'm a font guy, and I gotta say, the choice of font here is perfect. Whatever you change as you go forward, don't change this font choice. It's regal and elegant, yet highly readable. Your choice of size with regard to the indices is also perfect. Lock it in, and let's move on.

Your pips are, likewise, excellent. They are well balanced and weighted. Feel free to lock those in as far as I'm concerned.

Your number cards have a similarly elegant design that matches the theme and sets a pretty awesome tone. They remind me of the Occults decks designed by Johnny Powpow (John Powell) and produced by Gamblers Warehouse, which remains a favorite deck series of mine. Yours compare favorably; they are a little less circular, in favor of the Medieval shield motif, and it's very well executed. I like them. Well done.

The Aces are fine. They are not "ooh, I gotta have this," but they hold their own and work well with the style and tone established by the elements I've mentioned above. These might benefit from a second pass eventually, but they work as they are.

This brings us to the meat and potatoes: the courts, the backs, the tuck, and the overall theme.

The line drawings on the courts are fine. A little simple, perhaps, and they do evoke other well-done decks from the past (for some reason the "Dark Ages" decks by Jamm Pakd Cards comes to mind, but I don't know if I have those -- if I do, I can't find them just now -- but it could be another deck with a Medieval theme that is haunting my brain at the moment.) Frankly, I'm shocked at how good the illustrations are, given how new to this field you seem to be, but at the same time, I think they need a little more linework or *some* other design element to make them hold their own with the number cards. Elegance does involve simplicity, yes, but there's a fine line (heh) between simplicity and just plain simple. Again, these are surprisingly good... they just don't match the superior number cards. I will have to leave it up to others to better articulate possible approaches, if you want to address this concern of mine, but that's where I'm at. They are good, but not good enough to hold their own with the number cards and the indices/pips. I don't think you should scrap them. I think you might start with what you have and build on it.

The backs look like they were designed by a completely different designer. Despite having the crown element from the backgrounds of the court cards, the backs don't really evoke anything like the tone of the faces. I would suggest scrapping this back design, and going for one that has more elegant line work that incorporates thematic elements like the crowns, the shields, armor, and the like. What other iconography speaks to the idea of "Royal Guard"? A crest? A herald's horn? A drawbridge / castle gate / parapet? Chess piece iconography, perhaps? food for thought.

I suggest you take a look at some card backs that work for you. What makes them work? Why do you like them? How do they evoke the theme of their decks as a whole? In particular, look at decks with "Empire," "Imperial," "Regal," or "Royal" in their names. I see you have Shin Lim's Regalia in your collection; that counts, too.

I suggest that if you decide to revisit the backs, you might then use the new backs to inform the tuck.

These are just opinions, of course, and other folks on this board will have other opinions. But, keep in mind, please, I'm just telling you what I'm seeing. What I'm seeing is a lot of promise, and I look forward to seeing more if you choose to continue developing it.

Also, if you want to see how someone started with some basic designs and concepts and developed them over time with feedback here, go back a few years on this Drafting Board forum and see how some others evolved their designs. Look for any topics that have several pages; that will be a good sign that there was a lot of interaction.

Cheers!

[Happyakrz]

Okay, I'll take a stab at this. I usually like to let things percolate a little bit before I jump in (when it comes to new artists' creations), but I'm sure others here will eventually chime in with some keen insights.

....

Cheers!

Wow! Thanks so much for your very kind words, your encouragement, and very productive/constructive critique! I have loads to respond with (mostly in agreement with many of your comments), but agree that allowing thoughts to percolate for a short time might help make my words more precise.

Thanks for reaching through the void to make my day!

Todd

[Happyakrz]

Hard to find anything specific to constructively critique, here. It's all quite well done and cohesive in my eyes. Though I will say that I think the back design is the weakest part, it's just a bit too simplistic and empty (to me, anyway). I wish I could offer some ideas, but my creativity in this area is severely lacking. But something that improves the visual impact of spreads/fans is always nice.

Thanks so much for the kind words! I'm enjoying the process of fine-tuning and re-defining, so it's a work in progress. And I agree that the backs could use some more detail that will please the cardists out there!

[MagikFingerz]

Hard to find anything specific to constructively critique, here.

Okay, I'll take a stab at this.

[Harvonsgard]

As promised I took a look but am kinda in the same camp as Tom aka Neo aka Magik; not really my style or what I'm looking for so, nothing constructive to say.

What I find confusing, in regards to the number cards, is the center pip. I get that you aim for a center detail on the cards and they are visually seperated but still your 2 e.g. comes with three pips; your three with four... and so on and forth. I'd personally refrain from doing that and would replace it with a neutral logo (the crown maybe - but then this could become too repetetive aka on the back, tuck then front as well) or just remove it.

I don't like the seperation of the two halfs of the courts as well. I know it's one of the hardest parts, to create a great transition on two-way courts and sometimes it's better to have none oppossed to a very bad one, but I prefer the courts to be either one-way or proper (imho) two-way with a transition.

[Happyakrz]

Some responses to Rouselle's great critique of my concept so far ...

Okay, I'll take a stab at this. I usually like to let things percolate a little bit before I jump in (when it comes to new artists' creations), but I'm sure others here will eventually chime in with some keen insights.

First, I'm a font guy, and I gotta say, the choice of font here is perfect. Whatever you change as you go forward, don't change this font choice. It's regal and elegant, yet highly readable. Your choice of size with regard to the indices is also perfect. Lock it in, and let's move on.

• I'm glad you like this selection -- it was difficult. I was originally looking for something really old-English-oriented, but the fonts I landed on have been pleasing me so far -- glad you agree

Your pips are, likewise, excellent. They are well balanced and weighted. Feel free to lock those in as far as I'm concerned.

• Thanks, again! I feel like the pip design, including all aspects and sizes is so key to the successful impression of concept to a deck.

Your number cards have a similarly elegant design that matches the theme and sets a pretty awesome tone. They remind me of the Occults decks designed by Johnny Powpow (John Powell) and produced by Gamblers Warehouse, which remains a favorite deck series of mine. Yours compare favorably; they are a little less circular, in favor of the Medieval shield motif, and it's very well executed. I like them. Well done.

• When I came up with the notion of having the pips positioned in the way the actual guard would defend -- viewed from the top -- I wasn't sure if it would work, but I'm happy to hear that you feel as good about it as I do!

The Aces are fine. They are not "ooh, I gotta have this," but they hold their own and work well with the style and tone established by the elements I've mentioned above. These might benefit from a second pass eventually, but they work as they are.

• I agree -- they're decent, but not jump-out-at-you-impressive like many decks these days -- especially in regard to the level of complexity and detail in most decks when it comes to the Ace of Spades. I absolutely love the majority of Theory11 decks for their Ace of Spades, not to mention the intricacy of their backs, but wanted to keep this deck a little more simple (until I better understand how to design something that detailed). I like the concept of the "raised dais" that the thrones would be mounted upon in the royal court, and the simple representation on the faces of the cards works okay ... but it isn't "wowing" me. Perhaps the addition of some columns or banners ... or something .. to give it a little more oomph. I'll work on this.

This brings us to the meat and potatoes: the courts, the backs, the tuck, and the overall theme.

The line drawings on the courts are fine. A little simple, perhaps, and they do evoke other well-done decks from the past (for some reason the "Dark Ages" decks by Jamm Pakd Cards comes to mind, but I don't know if I have those -- if I do, I can't find them just now -- but it could be another deck with a Medieval theme that is haunting my brain at the moment.) Frankly, I'm shocked at how good the illustrations are, given how new to this field you seem to be, but at the same time, I think they need a little more linework or *some* other design element to make them hold their own with the number cards. Elegance does involve simplicity, yes, but there's a fine line (heh) between simplicity and just plain simple. Again, these are surprisingly good... they just don't match the superior number cards. I will have to leave it up to others to better articulate possible approaches, if you want to address this concern of mine, but that's where I'm at. They are good, but not good enough to hold their own with the number cards and the indices/pips. I don't think you should scrap them. I think you might start with what you have and build on it.

• This is really well stated, and I completely agree with you -- many thanks, by the way, for your compliments! The struggle that I've faced since day one of this project (and many others) is the considerable gap between hand-drawn illustrations and digitally developed line art. When I look at traditional Bicycle court cards, I think about how easy it would be to recreate these in Illustrator or Photoshop today, but the reality is that they were hand-drawn for hundreds of years first. I look at Giovanni Meroni's decks, and I see a true master of the modern line art era -- he hads just the right amount of detail, a perfect blend of color/texture, and the space management is wonderful (well balanced design). The two cards I've done so far are rough, to say the least -- they do create a style close to what I want for the final outcome, but they don't have a "polished" feel to them like I see in other decks or designs. The biggest issue in this regard is the shading -- when drawing by hand, this is easy -- when designing digitally, it's a little different. I could simulate the cross-hatch technique, but that would be easier done by hand, and then the transition to digital becomes somewhat messy. I could use more geometric/art deco patterns of shadow shapes to better define the characters, but this would potentially clutter up the simplicity of the overall design. I'll have to do a little experimentation to see what works best -- with posts here to share the results. I'll be very curious to hear what people like or think works best.

The backs look like they were designed by a completely different designer. Despite having the crown element from the backgrounds of the court cards, the backs don't really evoke anything like the tone of the faces. I would suggest scrapping this back design, and going for one that has more elegant line work that incorporates thematic elements like the crowns, the shields, armor, and the like. What other iconography speaks to the idea of "Royal Guard"? A crest? A herald's horn? A drawbridge / castle gate / parapet? Chess piece iconography, perhaps? food for thought.

• I agree. When I first thought about the backs, it was just going to be the circle of pips around the crowns, but that looked too empty. So, I added the symmetrical castle walls at top and bottom (knowing that I wanted to use the idea on the tuck case), and that helped a bit. But I agree, it still doesn't look like it fits well enough with the other side of the cards. I've thought about a couple of options -- the addition of a "wheel of weapons", etc. -- and I'll vamp out some options here as well.

I suggest you take a look at some card backs that work for you. What makes them work? Why do you like them? How do they evoke the theme of their decks as a whole? In particular, look at decks with "Empire," "Imperial," "Regal," or "Royal" in their names. I see you have Shin Lim's Regalia in your collection; that counts, too.

I suggest that if you decide to revisit the backs, you might then use the new backs to inform the tuck.

• Absolutely!

These are just opinions, of course, and other folks on this board will have other opinions. But, keep in mind, please, I'm just telling you what I'm seeing. What I'm seeing is a lot of promise, and I look forward to seeing more if you choose to continue developing it.

Also, if you want to see how someone started with some basic designs and concepts and developed them over time with feedback here, go back a few years on this Drafting Board forum and see how some others evolved their designs. Look for any topics that have several pages; that will be a good sign that there was a lot of interaction.

Cheers!

• I love looking through the drafting boards to see the progression of design in some of the decks of the past. You can really see the creative process flowing through them, especially when the artist gets great feedback, like the above, and works with it to fine-tune and improve the overall work. There is always a place for ego and voice and concept in art, but the best kind of art, in my opinion, is the type in which collaboration with the audience can take place. We need to be true to ourselves, but speak to (and for) the masses.

Thanks SO much for this critique!! I'm excited to start playing with new ideas for this deck design!

Have a great day!

[Happyakrz]

As promised I took a look but am kinda in the same camp as Tom aka Neo aka Magik; not really my style or what I'm looking for so, nothing constructive to say.

What I find confusing, in regards to the number cards, is the center pip. I get that you aim for a center detail on the cards and they are visually seperated but still your 2 e.g. comes with three pips; your three with four... and so on and forth. I'd personally refrain from doing that and would replace it with a neutral logo (the crown maybe - but then this could become too repetetive aka on the back, tuck then front as well) or just remove it.

I don't like the seperation of the two halfs of the courts as well. I know it's one of the hardest parts, to create a great transition on two-way courts and sometimes it's better to have none oppossed to a very bad one, but I prefer the courts to be either one-way or proper (imho) two-way with a transition.

Thank you, Harvonsgard, for your input. You bring up a great point, and I've actually been thinking about changing the central pip (the Royal being protected) to a crown -- I'll try mocking that up on the next draft.

In regard to the separation of halves ... I agree to a certain degree. I like when the "seam" is invisible and the two halves meld together, but in this particular case, I haven't been able to think of a central item/element that can be used effectively. While I really hate the traditional geometrical patterns and confusion of standard courts, they serve their purpose. In my case, I need to come up with a design element that will fit graphically, will work aesthetically, and feel seamless in its continuity of design.

We'll see what I can come up with! Have a great day!

[Happyakrz]

Happy Friday!

I spent some time playing around with a couple of design elements yesterday and would love to hear your feedback on likes/dislikes with the options. I have my favorites, which differ from my family's ... thus the polling here -- if I can figure out how to post a poll below, I will.

To Harvonsgard's comments on the central "pip" of the faces, I swapped out the pip shape with the crown and like it much better. I also added columns to my court room (top view), and while I like the notion, I'm not sure yet ... they might just be too big ... still working on this.



Regarding Rouselle's comments on the backs of the deck, I had a blast creating some options for your review, and look forward to your critiques.

The Original


Option B - Game of Thrones variant


Option C - 52 Sword Fan variant


Option D - 52 Sword Fan variant with Pips


Option E - 52 Sword Fan variant with Clean Borders

[Happyakrz]

I also threw the Crown & Column treatment onto the Aces to see how they look. Again, not sure on the columns, but I think the crowns may work well like this. Comments from the critics?

[rousselle]

Hi, there. Just doing a quick drive-by right now.

Regarding the backs: I suggest completely scrapping what you have and starting over. That said... yeah, B has some promise and is moving in the right direction. (I find C fascinating, while also unconventional, and I can't decide yet if I like it or I really don't like it. Time will tell. D is a definite no from me, but others may disagree... and be wrong.)

Regarding the faces: switching from a differently-stylized pip in the center to a crown works much better. Great job. The columns, on the other hand, look like bolts (as in nuts & bolts, not as in crossbow bolts), and they just don't work at all. They add lots of busy and detract from the attention that should be on the pips and the subtle design elements behind them (crown & shield).

So, I vote "yes" with crown and "no" with column (bolts).

kthxbai

[MagikFingerz]

I gotta agree with the professional writer. B looks promising, though I feel like the white linework needs... something - highlights, shadows, etc, to create more depth. Nay on bolts.

A suggestion for B: extend the maces and the pointy stuff in the corners past the white borders. No idea if it'll work, but it might make it more "cardistry-friendly"

[Harvonsgard]

Unison with the columns comments; they don't add value to the design imho.
Crown instead of pip is a win. Make sure to be consistent with the aces. AoD the crown overlays the center pip; AoC, AoH the crown lays under the center pip. Should be the same for all, imo.

I like a deck more if there is a bigger difference between the back design and the faces. I guess uusi decks or classic Riderbacks are good examples for what I wanna express. Your back and faces have the exact same style. While there is a clear destinction, they still are too similar for my taste. If that makes sense .
Long story short: I mirror Allan's suggestion to start over with the back design.

Side note: I know nowadays with social media we are conditioned to hit "reply" if we wanna have a dialogue but especially in a thread with a lot of pictures, it unnecessarly clutters the thread, if you always quote the posts of others.
Same goes for quoting the post that is prior to your post (and yes, I'm aware that even seasoned members in here are doing this, up to the ridiculousness of whole conversations being quoted multiple times in a row ) which is kinda improper forum etiquette.

[Happyakrz]

Thanks for the input, Harvonsgard! If I ever wondered if people were actually paying attention to the details, you've proven it for me -- I saw the issue with the crowns in the aces, and just haven't addressed the layering issues in the Photoshop file yet -- very good eye!!

I'm liking this direction, but it's different than I had originally planned, and I've recognized the factor that has kept me unsatisfied from the beginning -- my design style is nothing like the "etching" style of the massively intricate decks (simulating the printing techniques of the 1800-early-1900s) that I love so much. What I admire about the Theory11 decks, in particular, is the manner in which their artists have really gone all out on the intricate patterns and designs. Though my designs have some detail, they just don't have the same vibe, and that's something I either have to deal with, or dedicate myself to the education of that other style.

With that said, here are a couple of revisions, per your comments:

First, the 52 Swords Option (that I still love for its unique-ness):


Second, the Assorted Weapons Option (this option is really growing on me as well):


Here's a close-up to see the details better:


And I'm still contemplating other, back-to-the-drawing-board options.

Thanks!

[Harvonsgard]

No worries at all, always fun talking cards.
Given options, the ones with shading are better.

[rousselle]

Notice when you look at the backs of Bicycles that if you cover up the lower half, the right half looks "right side up." The bottom half looks upside down.

For that reason in particular, but also others, I think your "Weapons Array" variation 1 starts with the most promise, and as per Harvonsgard above, I think you should add the shading to that one and go from there. The other two variations are inverted, and as a result, they just don't look right, shading notwithstanding.

Again, just my opinion. Take it as you will.

[Happyakrz]

Thanks, Rousselle!

It took me a few minutes to understand what you were describing, but after getting my coffee and coming back to the monitor, I immediately saw that the shields (per your explanation) were upside-down -- then your comment totally clicked!

I'll try swinging them 180 degrees and see if that is more appealing.

I've done my best to keep all of my designing symmetrical for card backs, and that isn't usually a challenge, but in this case, I'm now understanding that design elements only seen at the top half still need to be right-side-up. I was viewing this back from a "top-down" perspective, so I placed the shields the way they'd be situated while protecting the crowns.

[Happyakrz]

Good morning, All!

Here are the next set of Back revisions:

OPTION A
A basic reproduction of the original line art, with the inclusion of shadows


OPTION B
Addition of the Pips to the Shields (large) -- I'm not sure how people will feel about this -- it obviously destroys the symmetry of the backs, but I'm not sure that it would be a deal-breaker for most. When I produce a fan, it doesn't show enough of the center portion of the cards to have me worry, but I'm sure there are other flourishes in which the pips would show, and if they were topsy-turvy, it might look awkward.


OPTION C
Another anti-symmetrical design, but this one pushes the pips further toward the center of the card and keeps symmetry at the outsides (with the crowns).


The crowns and pips could also be printed in silver (like the rest of the lines), and might not feel so bold in their anti-symmetry.

The other thing that I constantly have to do is zoom out (to about 18% of my original size) to see what the cards will look like at actual size. Working digitally is wonderful for the ability to zoom in and get things lined up perfectly, but so much detail and intricacy is lost (both visually and in print) when you get the image back down to actual size. I think these all work as they are right now, but I wouldn't want to go with much more detail -- it'll just be lost.

Thoughts / Opinions?

[Happyakrz]

And another quick update ... I worked on the court card faces for a little while today, trying to make a number of aspects more balanced and pleasing to the eye. What I ended up with was the design below:

• solid color in the center dais position -- giving a more defined transitional center (rather than white space)

• color swap on the crowns in the background -- the plan is to print all gold and silver in metallic inks so this would be a nice, lush pop of color

• a border that frames the figures and gives shape to the corners opposite the indices

• a slight shadow to the figure -- makes the guard feel like they're coming off the card-face just a little bit

Likes/Dislikes?

[GandalfTheWhite]

Option A looks good. Option B and C with those pips are now one-way back design, right? Personally I prefer two-way back designs. For the court card faces, color and shadow look great (not sure how I feel about the frame though). Two different color tones work well (I understand the flat line art does have subtle gold color but the other design has good amount of gold and blue which balances well).

[Happyakrz]

Hello All,

I've been messing around with the design style of the knights for the face cards. I have been thinking since the beginning that I wanted to do line art of some kind, but the more that I mess with the poses that I want to create, the more problematic it becomes in terms of complexity and depth of character. So, I threw a 3D model together in Blender and began posing it, and then rendered the pose for Photoshop, and then began working with color/tone filtration ... and finally came up with this new look. It's very rough, so please disregard the ragged edges -- if you all like this style, I'll do much higher-res renders and output for the card layouts.

Here are the three side-by-side:


Here's the new design a little bigger:


And finally, a render of what they'd look like on the cards:


I also rendered a fan of the backs the other day .. just a fun, goofy extra:


Any thoughts, opinions, or criticisms?

[rousselle]

Gotta say, this is a big improvement. Of the two new ones, I think I like the one with the "decorative framing" better.

[Happyakrz]

Coming up on a great big Happy New Year, Everyone!

I've been working on the courts for the Royal Guard deck and have a new round of drafts for you to peruse. I'm really pleased with how they've turned out so far, but want to hear your pros and cons about the designs -- there's always room for critiquing and improvements!

As you will see, I've focused on four different weapons used by medieval knights for the suits:

• Spades = Swords
  Diamonds = Spears
  Clubs = Maces
  Hearts = Crossbows

The Kings will typically be in a more formal pose/posture, the Queens are in defensive stances, and the Jacks are on the offensive.






I've also updated the tuck case to align more closely with the design of the deck backs:




And I started working on the design for a "dealer's coin" -- I've been looking at so many Kickstarter campaigns, and beyond the standard embellishments (tuck case upgrades, uncut sheets, etc.), it looks like a common add-on/stretch is the offering of a collectible coin (and perhaps a sticker or two). So I jumped into Blender again and began the rough development of a coin concept for the Royal Guard deck. I only have one side so far, and I'm not sure if people prefer one- or two-sided coins, but looking at the www.coinsforanything.com site, I'm thinking about heading in the 2" diameter, two-sided, bright silver option.




Still a work in progress, but it's fun getting to try to build something new and unique.

Let me know what you think!

Thanks, and have a great New Year's Eve!!

[Happyakrz]

Brief Update: I fine-tuned the Shield-side of the coin a little bit and finished the rough draft of the Sword-side. Here are a few renders to give you an idea of the direction I'm heading. Thoughts?

[Happyakrz]

On December 24th, I ordered two prototype decks of the Royal Guard from MPC (myplayingcards.com), and they just arrived in today's mail -- that is such FAST service!!

I am speechless! All of my fears about line width, print quality, definition and clarity of color, and legibility of the indices and royal court were set at ease. The cards are gorgeous, and I can't even imagine how much more impressive they'll be when I'm using a higher grade stock and finish, not to mention a crushed stock.

Pictures will be forthcoming!

[rousselle]

Hey, there.

I must confess, your coin design as it currently is does not do it for me (although your second attempt is absolutely an improvement over the first design); it's too simple for my tastes. It has no weight to the design, and while I don't often acquire coins, when I do, they have "heft" both physically (I prefer 1.5" or 2" coins with a decent weight, or thicker-than-usual coins that have a smaller diameter) and design-wise. Again, your second design is a step in the right direction, and were I to back your project, I might go for it if the price were right... depending upon my mood that day.

It's more difficult for me to articulate what I like in a coin as opposed to playing cards, and I do like the direction you're going with your playing card design (the backs still could use a little more elements, and I still favor a more diagonal design than the straight up-and-down, left-and-right design you currently are favoring, but that's just my personal preference and I appreciate the fact that you are taking feedback and using it to inform your own vision), but for coins, I'm more in a "I know it when I see it" mode at the moment. I guess it's better to say, I haven't had practice articulating what I like in coins the way I have had with playing cards and other print media.

That said, some examples of coins that I like:
* any coin designed by Jackson Robinson (Kings Wild Project) -- he's the one that first convinced me to occasionally pick up coins.
* any coin designed by Jody Ecklund (Black Ink Press), esp. his earlier designs (but, truly, all of them are great)
* any coin designed by Randy Butterfield (Midnight Playing Cards), with a special shout out to his Draconian coin, which is bizarrely, fascinatingly, mesmerizingly amazing.
* The "Create Your Own Luck" coin (as well as the Spider coin) from JammPakdCards. This one is a personal favorite, and I have given it out as gifts. https://jammpakdcards.com/shop?olsPage= ... er-3d-coin Notice that this one is, kinda like yours, a simple design, and yet somehow feels more... weighty.
* Most of the "Crooked Kings" coins are pretty decent, too. You'll find many of those listed on their Kickstarter project pages; the team itself has long since folded and disappeared into obscurity.
* Most coins, esp. the "Hobo" coins, by Chris Ovdiyenko, aka Dead On Paper. However, those Hobo coins are, themselves, based upon actual money coins, so that's hardly a fair comparison. His yes/no Oracle coins are a little too lightweight, both in terms of heft and design, for my taste, although I had picked one up just because I'm a completionist for his work.
* The "Ephemerid" coin by Mr. Cups is pretty cool.
* The recent "The Conjuring" coin by Kirk Slater (52Ravens) is a nice and thick design and coin. Not wide in diameter, but nonetheless thick and hefty for a coin of narrower diameter.
* The linework on any Thirdway Industry coin is fantastic, and I always pick those up (again, I'm a completionist with regard to Gio's work), but the coins themselves feel a little "flat" because it's more like the lines are carved into the coin rather than shaped and molded. And, even for linework, the effort feels "shallow" compared to the linework on the Jody Ecklund coins, which run deeper and occasionally offer color contrast. (Jody and Randy have occasionally gone with enameled paint effects that truly enhance the experience.) So, this is a case of "I like" Gio's coins a lot, and will always buy them, but I love Jody's coins. You'll note, however, that Gio's designs are still good enough that he enjoys a huge following for his coins.
* One last personal favorite: Rick Davidson's "Origins" coin. Just simply amazing. *This* is a brilliant example of molding; capturing the curves of the images.

Because your courts for this project are less tactile and more line arty, it stands to reason that your coin will be, too. I like that you're shooting for a decent amount of depth. That's great. In this regard, I think JammPakd "Make Your Own Luck," Kirk Slater's "The Conjuring," and Black Ink Press might be the best three places to start, but definitely take a look at the others I mentioned, as well. After you've looked those over, revisit your design and see if any inspiration leaps at you.

(Oh, you'll notice when you're on the JammPakd site that they have also done several Medieval-themed decks, although those designs are more about the shields than anything else. Actually, now that I'm looking at them, I do see a couple interesting points of similarity. Which is fine; don't let that deter you. Still, something to take a peek at just for grins. I think your cards are already heading in a better direction than Jason's, but everyone has their own tastes, and JammPakd does good work.)

[rousselle]

On December 24th, I ordered two prototype decks of the Royal Guard from MPC (myplayingcards.com), and they just arrived in today's mail -- that is such FAST service!!

I am speechless! All of my fears about line width, print quality, definition and clarity of color, and legibility of the indices and royal court were set at ease. The cards are gorgeous, and I can't even imagine how much more impressive they'll be when I'm using a higher grade stock and finish, not to mention a crushed stock.

Pictures will be forthcoming!

Awesome! Can't wait to see the photos!