OATH'S PATREON -details

[Disenchanted_11]

Not a HAVE to have deck for me. I may not be as big a Lotrek guy as I expected to become

I wonder how someone new can be a lotrek guy with all this drama around him.

And look at those FOMO-seeking posts above.

[Bradius]

If anyone here still needs a Mystery III deck, they are out on his public shop for 115 euro.

https://www.oathplayingcards.com/shop

[Timmargh]

If anyone here still needs a Mystery III deck, they are out on his public shop for 115 euro.

[url]https://www.oathplayingcards.com/shop

You have a double [url] in your link.

[kevork]

Not a HAVE to have deck for me. I may not be as big a Lotrek guy as I expected to become

Even as a "Lotrek guy," I wouldn't tell someone the Sanctissimus players edition is a must-have, nor would I base my appreciation of his works on one deck alone. The cards aren't their full potential without the eventual hot foiling, but the tuck is one of my favorites of his in a long time. Much nicer in person.

And look at those FOMO-seeking posts above.

The ridiculousness of the FOMO posts and quotes tells you he's trying to be silly with it, with a slight level of seriousness. Might not have come across as effectively for some.

[PiazzaDelivery]

Not a HAVE to have deck for me. I may not be as big a Lotrek guy as I expected to become

Even as a "Lotrek guy," I wouldn't tell someone the Sanctissimus players edition is a must-have, nor would I base my appreciation of his works on one deck alone. The cards aren't their full potential without the eventual hot foiling, but the tuck is one of my favorites of his in a long time. Much nicer in person.

Totally agree, the tuck is tremendous. Fully captures the art and period the deck is referencing.

[Bradius]

26 left. Yeah, i just had to get another one. Four in total. That isn't too crazy...is it?

[Timmargh]

For you? Not in the slightest.

[kevork]

26 left. Yeah, i just had to get another one. Four in total. That isn't too crazy...is it?

I wouldn't say it's crazy only because in relative terms I was equally crazy. I bought 4 through the Patreon sale and then 1 more from the public sale, to get both versions.

There were 26 left a few hours ago when I checked. Seems to have stagnated.

[PiazzaDelivery]

26 left. Yeah, i just had to get another one. Four in total. That isn't too crazy...is it?

I wouldn't say it's crazy only because in relative terms I was equally crazy. I bought 4 through the Patreon sale and then 1 more from the public sale, to get both versions.

Wait wait wait. Versions? I thought the distinction was a marking on the tuck, no? What's this about a version?

[kevork]

26 left. Yeah, i just had to get another one. Four in total. That isn't too crazy...is it?

I wouldn't say it's crazy only because in relative terms I was equally crazy. I bought 4 through the Patreon sale and then 1 more from the public sale, to get both versions.

Wait wait wait. Versions? I thought the distinction was a marking on the tuck, no? What's this about a version?

Yes, there will be some sort of mark on the tuck to indicate Patreon vs. Public and the Patreon version will have a hand-signed double backer. I consider them different versions for completionists' sake, but Lotrek will keep the numbering consistent throughout them all for a total of 750 max. Others may look at it as the same deck, which it technically is.

[hsbc]

Wait wait wait. Versions? I thought the distinction was a marking on the tuck, no? What's this about a version?

the Patrons decks will have a card that Public decks won't have: A hand signed double backer and a discrete special marking on the tuck to make them stand out from the rest.

[laitostarr777]

Not a HAVE to have deck for me. I may not be as big a Lotrek guy as I expected to become

Even as a "Lotrek guy," I wouldn't tell someone the Sanctissimus players edition is a must-have, nor would I base my appreciation of his works on one deck alone. The cards aren't their full potential without the eventual hot foiling, but the tuck is one of my favorites of his in a long time. Much nicer in person.

Sanctissimus Uncut Tuck.jpg

And look at those FOMO-seeking posts above.

The ridiculousness of the FOMO posts and quotes tells you he's trying to be silly with it, with a slight level of seriousness. Might not have come across as effectively for some.

I do admit that Sanctitisimus tuck is just soooo great!!

If anyone here still needs a Mystery III deck, they are out on his public shop for 115 euro.

https://www.oathplayingcards.com/shop

Checking up the stock and its 9 left

[redux]

I was a bit intrigued to buy another mystery deck, but at €115 it wasn't very difficult to let it go.

[redux]

I ordered Sanctissimus players just before Christmas and it hasn't shipped yet. Have others received something already? Well it's been a month and not years, but still...

And still nothing. Not even an answer to my e-mail or Instagram comment.

This is now sorted out. It was nice of him to include a copy of the test print deck for free because of the delay.

[Bradius]

All sold out. Hmm. 750 times 100 euro is 75,000 euro. Wow. That didn't even break a sweat.

[double_left]

funny how a mystery deck can be pushed out in april (if that actually happens) but cant complete 3 year old promised decks
should i copy and paste the continuing pumps from his patronage site
ffs get your sh!t together man
whatever happen to weekly updates
it was nice when he first started -peeps saw a lot of his work and drawings but now its a site to pump and mislead supporters

then u get smurfs in here that pump his tires by buying 4 decks and brag about selling 750 decks at €100
wow is all i can say to you folk

[Bradius]

double_left, you have a point. I wasn't bragging. Actually, I am a bit as surprised to you that his magic pixie dust still works on others as much as me (maybe more). I will not even blush though at getting four mystery decks. Evidently I am not the only one either and probably didn't get the largest quantity. Anyway, it does surprise me that he sold 750 of them, or anything anywhere close. I was shocked the initial release was grabbed up so fast. Granted those last few struggled a "little bit", but not much. Lotrek can pull in some major money and sell a fairly large amount of them. I think that just has to do with how well respected a lot of collectors have for his work product. Despite all the delay issues, they hold firm.

Should he get his first year Patron decks out? Absolutely! I think it is just as insane as you do that this hasn't been done by now. Do I think he should focus on that before this Mystery III deck? Absolutely I do. Does that stop me from flinging 400 euro at him for four sight unseen decks? Nope. At least I will admit my insanity. I just love his stuff. Full stop.




If you are fine not getting this mystery deck, good on you. I sure am not missing out. Nope. Enjoy your retained funds. Enjoy eBay.

[Strag]

then u get smurfs in here

Digusting that this site still allows this sort of language.

[bdawg923]

then u get smurfs in here

Digusting that this site still allows this sort of language.

Like 30 min ago the word was not "smurfs". Did the mods change the word you quoted in the original post and also in your quote? It's literally insane to me that mods are allowed to do this.

[GandalfPC]

I changed it.

I do normally note changes, but seeing that words are changed to smurf by the system automatically when they violate policy and this word has not yet been added to policy “officially” but I am including it personally and will continue to smurf it.

I also screwed with him with a [] inclusion

[bdawg923]

I changed it.

Why not remove the whole comment, warn the user and if they want, tell them to repost it without the offending word?

It's not the fact that the mods change 1 word here and there. It's the implications that you guys can put words in anyone's mouth here, change whole opinions in a comment, remove stuff you don't agree with philosophically, etc. If a mod has a stake in a kickstarter, and someone posts a negative opinion, what's stopping a mod from editing out that negative opinion in order to not jeopardize their investment. If one of your accounts got compromised, a bad actor could change links to links with malware and viruses. Mods should NOT be able to edit people's comments. Y'all are just too zealous with editing people's comments in this forum. How can anyone know that was they're reading is what the person even originally wrote?

[GandalfPC]

I didn’t feel that word was being used intentionally to violate any policy - just a bad choice of word that the system should edit out but doesn’t. I figured people could get the idea that they shouldn’t use it a bit more gently than requiring an official warning - but should I get push back or see it bandied about a lot I will make more forceful notes.

The idea that people can put words in peoples mouths is not exactly the same as the reality.

We go out of our way to moderate with proper intent.

But - no reason we can’t please everyone in this case - I will notate all further edits rather than just smurfing them.

[hsbc]

Why not remove the whole comment, warn the user and if they want, tell them to repost it without the offending word?

It's not the fact that the mods change 1 word here and there. It's the implications that you guys can put words in anyone's mouth here, change whole opinions in a comment, remove stuff you don't agree with philosophically, etc. If a mod has a stake in a kickstarter, and someone posts a negative opinion, what's stopping a mod from editing out that negative opinion in order to not jeopardize their investment. If one of your accounts got compromised, a bad actor could change links to links with malware and viruses. Mods should NOT be able to edit people's comments. Y'all are just too zealous with editing people's comments in this forum. How can anyone know that was they're reading is what the person even originally wrote?

It's a double-edged sword -- removing the whole comment vs. removing just parts -- and I try to keep comments intact whenever possible.

You're sort of arguing against the entire structure of forums here. What if a user has their account compromised and links replaced with malware? Someone has to be able to edit comments to enforce the rules. And we have multiple mods so that just one account isn't in charge of everything.

But what it comes down to is that UC is and will remain a moderated space -- and in spite of that I have personally had more than a few people tell me they don't like to visit UC because they feel it's hostile or unwelcoming, which honestly sort of hurts. We try to strike a balance. If you want a fully unmoderated space, they're out there, but this isn't it

then u get [XXXXX] in here

Digusting that this site still allows this sort of language.

As has been made clear, we don't

[bdawg923]

Why not remove the whole comment, warn the user and if they want, tell them to repost it without the offending word?

It's not the fact that the mods change 1 word here and there. It's the implications that you guys can put words in anyone's mouth here, change whole opinions in a comment, remove stuff you don't agree with philosophically, etc. If a mod has a stake in a kickstarter, and someone posts a negative opinion, what's stopping a mod from editing out that negative opinion in order to not jeopardize their investment. If one of your accounts got compromised, a bad actor could change links to links with malware and viruses. Mods should NOT be able to edit people's comments. Y'all are just too zealous with editing people's comments in this forum. How can anyone know that was they're reading is what the person even originally wrote?

It's a double-edged sword -- removing the whole comment vs. removing just parts -- and I try to keep comments intact whenever possible.

You're sort of arguing against the entire structure of forums here. What if a user has their account compromised and links replaced with malware? Someone has to be able to edit comments to enforce the rules. And we have multiple mods so that just one account isn't in charge of everything.

But what it comes down to is that UC is and will remain a moderated space -- and in spite of that I have personally had more than a few people tell me they don't like to visit UC because they feel it's hostile or unwelcoming, which honestly sort of hurts. We try to strike a balance. If you want a fully unmoderated space, they're out there, but this isn't it

then u get [XXXXX] in here

Digusting that this site still allows this sort of language.

As has been made clear, we don't

I never argued for an unmoderated space. If a users account gets compromised, you guys should and probably would remove their entire comment if it contained malware, and may even ban the account until the user got it back. I'm perfectly happy with moderating, as long as mods aren't selectively removing parts of a comment. On Reddit for example, mods don't have that ability. They can remove an entire comment, or leave it up. Imagine a mod team on Reddit started editing people's comments. You don't think that would be out of line? Like I said, I wouldn't be bringing this up if you removed the entire comment and then told the user to keep the bad word out. Selectively editing words out is a slippery slope. I stopped visiting uc as much since that whole vxd debacle where mods would shut down any conversation and edit people's comments to remove their ideas. That to me is unwelcoming. Imagine posting something and someone else decides that's not good enough and it'll be edited to their liking.

And yes for the record I completely agree that nobody should be using the the bad word. That's why you remove the comment and send double a warning by dm so they can repost their comment without it. Nothing wrong with enforcing civility. What's wrong is the way you guys do it.

[hsbc]

vxd debacle where mods would shut down any conversation and edit people's comments to remove their ideas

And this brings me to another point I forgot -- lots of times if you Google for a somewhat-obscure deck, UC will be one of the very first results, making it a landing point of sorts for all sorts of people beyond just us regular commenters (we likely have a larger number of lurkers who never post)... So as for VXD, when it came out that the creator had died but people were commenting asking if it's real, what about the decks, the money, etc. -- it's a really, really awful look IMO

On Reddit for example, mods don't have that ability. They can remove an entire comment, or leave it up. Imagine a mod team on Reddit started editing people's comments. You don't think that would be out of line?

Again, you're comparing two very different platforms -- forums have always given mods a wide range of powers, with reddit much more segregated. Not to mention that reddit is exponentially larger than UC

Nothing wrong with enforcing civility. What's wrong is the way you guys do it.

At the very least, we'll try to not prune your comments and delete them (if!) you break the rules -- would you mind replacing the word you agree shouldn't be used with XXXs or something? EDIT: Thanks!

[double_left]

Nothing wrong with enforcing civility. What's wrong is the way you guys do it.

i can answer that
its called communism n clearly its obviously in here with mods modding comments to fit their agenda
sorry didnt know the word [EDITED] would put a pickle up some butts

[hsbc]

its called communism

sorry didnt know the word [EDITED]

[This is your official warning, please do not use that word.]

[Timmargh]

All this because someone edited a swear word? Grow up, guys.

And you need to look up the meaning of communism, double_left.

[GandalfPC]

You can call it communism - I call it an inconvenient need for me to take time out of my busy day to edit language that people should be editing themselves.


Ok - so I guess that was a bit “bad mood” - people do use such language accidentally so to speak from time to time, and I’m not really sure how long users can edit posts for - and of course the system should smurf them for me

But in the end, still just a job that needs to be done by someone, somehow - for as long as smurfs exist to be smurfed when they oversmurf a smurf.

[Adamthinks]

Why not remove the whole comment, warn the user and if they want, tell them to repost it without the offending word?

It's not the fact that the mods change 1 word here and there. It's the implications that you guys can put words in anyone's mouth here, change whole opinions in a comment, remove stuff you don't agree with philosophically, etc. If a mod has a stake in a kickstarter, and someone posts a negative opinion, what's stopping a mod from editing out that negative opinion in order to not jeopardize their investment. If one of your accounts got compromised, a bad actor could change links to links with malware and viruses. Mods should NOT be able to edit people's comments. Y'all are just too zealous with editing people's comments in this forum. How can anyone know that was they're reading is what the person even originally wrote?

It's a double-edged sword -- removing the whole comment vs. removing just parts -- and I try to keep comments intact whenever possible.

You're sort of arguing against the entire structure of forums here. What if a user has their account compromised and links replaced with malware? Someone has to be able to edit comments to enforce the rules. And we have multiple mods so that just one account isn't in charge of everything.

But what it comes down to is that UC is and will remain a moderated space -- and in spite of that I have personally had more than a few people tell me they don't like to visit UC because they feel it's hostile or unwelcoming, which honestly sort of hurts. We try to strike a balance. If you want a fully unmoderated space, they're out there, but this isn't it

then u get [XXXXX] in here

Digusting that this site still allows this sort of language.

As has been made clear, we don't

I never argued for an unmoderated space. If a users account gets compromised, you guys should and probably would remove their entire comment if it contained malware, and may even ban the account until the user got it back. I'm perfectly happy with moderating, as long as mods aren't selectively removing parts of a comment. On Reddit for example, mods don't have that ability. They can remove an entire comment, or leave it up. Imagine a mod team on Reddit started editing people's comments. You don't think that would be out of line? Like I said, I wouldn't be bringing this up if you removed the entire comment and then told the user to keep the bad word out. Selectively editing words out is a slippery slope. I stopped visiting uc as much since that whole vxd debacle where mods would shut down any conversation and edit people's comments to remove their ideas. That to me is unwelcoming. Imagine posting something and someone else decides that's not good enough and it'll be edited to their liking.

And yes for the record I completely agree that nobody should be using the the bad word. That's why you remove the comment and send double a warning by dm so they can repost their comment without it. Nothing wrong with enforcing civility. What's wrong is the way you guys do it.

It's the website software that allows them to edit posts, so outside of changing over the whole site, I don't see how changing that would be possible.