Flesh and Bones Playing Cards (Deckstarter)

[Sher]

http://www.deckstarter.com/campaigns/fl ... ing-cards/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[ivan]

Just launched few hours ago. Didn't see this anywhere... so I thought I will put it up.

Seems like inspired by Misc Good Co deck... Love the artwork of the courts but I wish the tuck has more details.

http://www.deckstarter.com/campaigns/fl ... ing-cards/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Mike Ratledge]

I merged these two into one topic/thread. Another "minimalist" deck? Jeez, I'll just not comment, it's better that I don't.

[volantangel]

Haha Mike these arent minimalist, more like an art deck. Pity about the price though, if shipping was included in the price i might have gotten one.

[snsdmonkey]

I merged these two into one topic/thread. Another "minimalist" deck? Jeez, I'll just not comment, it's better that I don't.

I think bias is starting to show through pretty clearly if you're trying to categorise this into being 'another minimalist deck'.

[Magic_Orthodoxy]

this artwork looks like the stuff in my High School yearbook... wait! Did she go to my High School??????

[Godzillian]

Actually guys, this deck is somewhat of a minimalist deck.

"Contrastingly, the tuck box and back designs are precise and minimal, consisting of illusional line patterns and geometric shapes." - from their Deckstarter page

They even called it "Flesh & Bones"... which means minimal. I can see where Mike thought it was a minimal deck. At the same time, the courts are extravagant and very artsy. So I'd say it's halfway through minimal and an art deck.

[wahl0108]

Well, whatever it is, it gets a pass from me.

[StanKindLee]

Themed with mythical creatures and ancient gods and then titled "Flesh & Bones" is what I don't get.

[Mike Ratledge]

I merged these two into one topic/thread. Another "minimalist" deck? Jeez, I'll just not comment, it's better that I don't.

I think bias is starting to show through pretty clearly if you're trying to categorise this into being 'another minimalist deck'.

Well, not really. After looking closer I kind of like this one, actually. It's not overpriced, it's reasonably well done. I ordered one.

[Diamond Back]

Not a fan of the back at all. It looks like a bunch of unrelated simple designs thrown into one back in my opinion.
The front artwork is okay but not my cup of tea. Pass for me.

[chach]

Maybe it's cause I haven't looked at it in depth and because I'm still fuming over how the refs handed tonight's game to the Kings, but I don't 'get' the concept of the deck. Seems like a hodgepodge of sketches from the artists sketch pad all thrown together into one deck with an odd name slapped on it and a rather bland tuck / back design that seems as a if it were done as a secondary thought. $12 isn't bad for one deck, lord knows I've wasted more on other stuff.

I'll revisit it later and may pick one up just for shits n giggles. Right now though I have a drink to finish and Candyman to watch. Maybe if I say his name enough times he'll go visit those refs that are so blind they can't see bloody goalie interference when it's right in front of them. Bastards.

[Godzillian]

I think this deck is supposed to be a promotional deck for her artwork, which is why the theme is rather inconsistent. Hearts, unicorns, mermaids, woman with a rose coming out of her hair... and the back is successfully minimalist, but heavily contrasts with the courts.

I like the deck, but not enough to pledge for it. DS should've started with this deck first :\ Wtf were they thinking?

[Mirror]

I've seen them tease the deck on Instagram and Facebook for over a year now and I've been wondering when and how they would release it. I didn't expect them to fund this on Deckstarter but I really love the artwork and the back! But I think I'll wait for resellers to get them.

[Stockholm17]

hi!
very nice faces and pips!
the back is a bit "empty"... I mean: with all those nice detailed illustrations with ink, an intricate black-dominant back was better (in my opinion).
The tuck-box... big no
I see the price is decent now I might take one

[Cbkimble]

I just really cant find a way for this to look good in my collection. The art isnt bad, it's just too boring for me.

[Yashi]

Nice try Deckstarter. Maybe your next deck release.

[ecNate]

this artwork looks like the stuff in my High School yearbook... wait! Did she go to my High School??????

Bingo, I feel the same way. Actually any simple pencil like sketch just looks amateur or unfinished on cards. The drawings can be amazing, but it ends up looking unfinished on cards.

Although, I have made some exceptions in the past. Most recently the frontier decks, but those were REALLY well done with great detail and obviously had lots of digital work done after.

I'm just glad we have so many options these days that we can be picky and pass on decks that don't work for us.

[ivan]

Did our usual 7 questions with Chris Biron:

http://www.kardify.com/2014/06/deckstar ... chris.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

interesting read... yeah, was following him for awhile on IG, and i like the artwork. The tuck could be better.

[Mike Ratledge]

$12 for the first 144 decks and $15 after that - plus $4 shipping. That's reasonable. $30 per deck just wasn't. I hope that can recover, despite what people might think I do not wish them ill, but I have always spoken my mind. I guess I'll have to be more prudent in what I say so as not to appear to be biased. I'd like to see this deck funded.

[sinjin7]

Does this come in a Magicpak? I'm guessing not since I haven't seen it mentioned anywhere. As far as I'm concerned, this is sleight of hand from D$D. They grossly overprice the first two decks on D$ at $25 a pop so that this deck looks "reasonable" at $19 a pop. Please. Unless they're really going up the tuck above and beyond basic embossing (and it won't be, its "minimalist", remember?), this is typical price gouging from the greedy twins. Just look at any Uusi deck, then look at Flesh $ Bones and tell me with a straight face if F$B is twice as good.

They art on the faces had effort put into it and may be good depending on your taste, but the back design is way too different and inconsistent for this to be a thematically cohesive deck. Definitely not a deck I feel is worth $19. The back is s prototype, though, so maybe we can make suggestions on their campaign page to help them make improvements. Oh wait, that's right, you can't post comments on D$. Fail.

[Godzillian]

Does this come in a Magicpak? I'm guessing not since I haven't seen it mentioned anywhere. As far as I'm concerned, this is sleight of hand from D$D. They grossly overprice the first two decks on D$ at $25 a pop so that this deck looks "reasonable" at $19 a pop. Please. Unless they're really going up the tuck above and beyond basic embossing (and it won't be, its "minimalist", remember?), this is typical price gouging from the greedy twins. Just look at any Uusi deck, then look at Flesh $ Bones and tell me with a straight face if F$B is twice as good.

They art on the faces had effort put into it and may be good depending on your taste, but the back design is way too different and inconsistent for this to be a thematically cohesive deck. Definitely not a deck I feel is worth $19. The back is s prototype, though, so maybe we can make suggestions on their campaign page to help them make improvements. Oh wait, that's right, you can't post comments on D$. Fail.

But Sinjin, this is an art deck. That is the theme. Therefore, the back doesn't have to be the same "theme" as the front of the cards. And I don't think art decks need to be thematically cohesive anyway, as long as they clearly say that it is an art deck (which this deck doesn't).

[Mike Ratledge]

Unless you've missed the first 144 decks, it should be $16, right? That's not that unreasonable, I don't think. It's not what it should be, perhaps, I won't pass judgment, but it's within reason, certainly better than the $30 "HOW" boxes or whatever they were called. Besides, this one didn't have 3000 of them given away before it was launched (AFAIK).

It is $19 with shipping once those decks are sold, but looking at performance from the past two decks, it's hard to say how it will do. I got one, I'm happy.

[SBurk49]

Again with the boobies? Geez! lol

No to the minimalist vibe, no to the boobies.

[MagikFingerz]

...no to the boobies.

Blasphemy!

[Magic_Orthodoxy]

someone said boobies so I raced over... what's going on? Who has boobies?

[Cbkimble]

someone said boobies so I raced over... what's going on? Who has boobies?

Most women do. Lol

[Mike Ratledge]

someone said boobies so I raced over... what's going on? Who has boobies?

David, David, David... See Tom's link to tits, please. "They're everywhere, they're everywhere!"

[sinjin7]

Unless you've missed the first 144 decks, it should be $16, right? That's not that unreasonable, I don't think. It is $19 with shipping once those decks are sold.

What the #@&% have we come to where $19 a deck is not unreasonable for a deck of this caliber with these specs???

[volantangel]

Unless you've missed the first 144 decks, it should be $16, right? That's not that unreasonable, I don't think. It is $19 with shipping once those decks are sold.

What the #@&% have we come to where $19 a deck is not unreasonable for a deck of this caliber with these specs???

I think mike was saying $16 isnt unreasonable, whereas $19 is.

Either way, its too high for me, maybe $12 with shipping included, but this doesnt justify a higher price than that.