data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/954cc/954cc077b62b6cdecb67e9c6bfd3afb7739738a2" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/144b0/144b0799ec2ed4f56c954cc26360649d72f7ecf4" alt="Image"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/a1416/a141660f9e6642fe073fa1c744b6b19de8413129" alt="Image"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/42ae6/42ae6497da378873818b313745e0541b72b8ae93" alt="Image"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/88d64/88d640cd17b087dbc0f188c3a919f9347035f26f" alt="Image"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/d8286/d828628b89bb8e50aafbc6d34791c63c2c956973" alt="Image"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/aa139/aa139e968ec0d5d0b500889c5080b486c8e6b1aa" alt="Image"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/54e8f/54e8f73412f9870fda5c176fdf703eae9b3c5383" alt="Image"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/17e9f/17e9fbd8b3a3a2d9c3f32f3a4bf52d0213ffe0d2" alt="Image"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/4a127/4a127930c84f82b5f07356a90a3b5f24969bf9ed" alt="Image"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/48748/48748ad8f5b1101da9e7a27a7d52f3082a427a8e" alt="Image"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/16cd9/16cd9c9dd063ae42bbd34558ff26731dade467bd" alt="Image"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/fcda5/fcda5d44fcd0c8201ebcf76d5e428dce209e856f" alt="Image"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/7e8ed/7e8edb5b869d08da3ef3fd55e320ea3f19eb1ba5" alt="Image"
Man, some of you guys are sooooooooo picky about the 2-way backs thing!vasta41 wrote:I really like what I see so far, sans the one-way back. I still like the back, just wish it were somehow 2-way.
Have to agree. If this was the back which it is not, it would be in the close enough category. It's hard to pull off a "1-way" back and make it work. It takes a lot of thought and perception. I do know if you what to do it has to be somewhere in the middle of the card. It can't be on the other edge where you can see it during game play. Chris has given us a perfect example of something that would work. Who knows maybe this could be v2....th4mo wrote:Man, some of you guys are sooooooooo picky about the 2-way backs thing!vasta41 wrote:I really like what I see so far, sans the one-way back. I still like the back, just wish it were somehow 2-way.![]()
![]()
![]()
To me this falls squarely within the "close enough" category!![]()
Plus, It's Chris O., and it's flipping gorgeous!![]()
![]()
I'm excited to hear this! Will most likely be pledging.Ovdiyenko wrote:Hey guys,
Just saw this thread and thought I'd jump on to clear up the one-way back thing. The back of the box (with tree and roots) actually isn't the card back. I have a card back that's a true two way design based on the front of the box. The tree/root design was something I wanted to include on the box because it really fits the theme and "roots" of the tarot in Alchemy - that's why the flap says (in latin) "As above, so below." Hope that helps.
Happy thanksgiving!!
Best,
-c
Amen to that. If Chis has his name on it mine's gonna be on the pledge list. Looking forward to seeing more of this one.Eoghann wrote:I can blindly jump into Lotrek, Gaggiotti and Ovdiyenko projects. They're that good. I like every idea they develop. Absolutely count me in.
And his KS projects aren't overburdened with foofooraw, a nice balance of extras without mass confusion and respectable prices.nECr0MaNCeD wrote:Needless to say I will be pledging for these. Chris' other decks are among my most prized. Can't wait to see more of these.
Maybe Chris could make that a stretch goal... After XX thousand, unlock a tarot deck.ecNate wrote:I was kind of hoping this would be a proper Tarot set, but it appears it will tarot themed standard set. I still don't have any tarot sets so it would have been cool, but I'll be getting this anyhow, looks awesome.
Yes it was rather amusing it was launched without any extra deck add-ons. I'm a bit considered about the high goal of $45K, which seems too much for only two decks (but obviously will cover all his costs with ease). I'm going to get at least 2 of each and hoping that being a staff pick will help make the funding come out all right in the end. Another spectacular deck by Chris!nECr0MaNCeD wrote:I pledged for these. Simply stunning cards. Glad he added a mixed brick. He set the design bar pretty high first day of the year.
@th4mo - I guess you great credit with the "close enough" category. He decided to go with the "1-way" back of card and "1-way" courts. Love the back of card wish he would show a fan. He does have it right with Hearts & Cups, Diamonds & (Coins or Pentagrams), Clubs & Clubs (Polo sticks, staffs), Spades & Swords. He has done his research.th4mo wrote:Man, some of you guys are sooooooooo picky about the 2-way backs thing!vasta41 wrote:I really like what I see so far, sans the one-way back. I still like the back , just wish it were somehow 2-way.![]()
![]()
![]()
To me this falls squarely within the "close enough" category!![]()
Plus, It's Chris O., and it's flipping gorgeous!![]()
![]()
Users browsing this forum: Evilgamer, Timmargh, wingedpotato and 17 guests