Page 9 of 16
Re: Oath Mystery deck #2: DAMASK
Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 11:15 am
by Lotrek
Okay, here's where I'm supposed to throw an insult and never step my foot (fingers, actually) to the forum again!
PipChick, you put it wonderfully and if you're not already you should become a lawyer or even better, a Diplomat!
Jokes aside, we do have an issue here, although different from what I expected. My fear was that you would complain for not printing more blue decks. Apparently the problem is that I printed the blue deck altogether.
It feels strange to be called a liar when I know that: a) I didn't lie b) You're justified to believe I did. I explain:
When I said that this is going to be the only variation, that was the plan. I didn't have in mind the blue at all. But before a begin the foiling, I came across a catalogue with beautiful foil colors and I was just blown away by that turquoise blue. Without much thinking about it, I printed another 150 sheets in blue stock and ordered that damned foil. I thought it would be a very beautiful deck and a cool "extra" to show to the Convention.
How much creativity does it take to do a color variation? Not much, really. I suppose you just need to have an eye to see it before it's done. But sometimes it's so beautiful that you just want to see it done.
I'm always open to criticism and since I know you love my work, I never see your negative comments as "bitching" but as lessons from the collective wisdom here and I'm grateful for that. To cut a long story short:
Should I have resisted the temptation to do the blue deck?
-Absolutely.
Would I ever do that again?
-By all means, no!
Was it a cheap promotional trick?
-No, just a very expensive print run
Was it a plot to make TwoPiece buy the deck?
-Yes but it didn't work. He's too stubborn.
Re: Oath Mystery deck #2: DAMASK
Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 11:18 am
by ICantShuffle
Seriously? F^&* that person. Edit: F^&* you, "playingcards.net". I am never buying from you ever again.
I don't mean to piss in your Cheerios, TwoPiece, but you'll have to stop patronizing anyone that uses Gambler's Warehouse for fulfillment services as well, as I believe PlayingCards.net is GW's on-line retail front end for playing cards.
Re: Oath Mystery deck #2: DAMASK
Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 11:27 am
by theCapraAegagrus
Re: Oath Mystery deck #2: DAMASK
Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 11:27 am
by JacksandJokers
Lotrek wrote:
Jokes aside, we do have an issue here, although different from what I expected. My fear was that you would complain for not printing more blue decks. Apparently the problem is that I printed the blue deck altogether.
Lotrek: I don't think the issue is with either of these. I think it was more of a case of not informing anyone.
Next time (& I know there will be one
), Just shoot an email to all those people who bought the deck blind saying "Look guys, I'm just letting you know there will be 2 variants of this deck & I'll contact you after the 52+ Joker convention if you're interested in buying a slightly different version".
At least then we'll be aware and will have an extra month or 2 to save for it.
Re: Oath Mystery deck #2: DAMASK
Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 11:30 am
by theCapraAegagrus
ICantShuffle wrote:Seriously? F^&* that person. Edit: F^&* you, "playingcards.net". I am never buying from you ever again.
I don't mean to piss in your Cheerios, TwoPiece, but you'll have to stop patronizing anyone that uses Gambler's Warehouse for fulfillment services as well, as I believe PlayingCards.net is GW's on-line retail front end for playing cards.
That's not really how it works. I just won't be giving PCN my money ever again. If I give Lorenzo my money, and he uses GW for fulfillment, I'm not going to punish him (or myself) by not supporting his fabulous work.
Also, I don't eat Cheerios. I eat, almost exclusively, cereals with "Crunch" in their brand. Cinnamon Toast Crunch, Captain Crunch, Raisin Bran Crunch, etc. Frosted Mini Wheats are an exception.
Re: Oath Mystery deck #2: DAMASK
Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 11:33 am
by rousselle
Hi, all.
So, Lotrek, I love the red Damask. It looks awesome and I can't wait to receive mine.
I love the blue Damask. It looks stunning. I'm glad you're going to give your original backers a chance to pick this up, as I most definitely want to bring both into my collection. Like, very much. I would be super unhappy if I didn't have a chance to pick up the blue, so I'm really, really glad you're going to give me and my fellow backers/supporters a chance to pick that up.
Nobody here is asking you to stifle your creativity. Please, keep at it!
That said... allow me to suggest that in the future, you simply consider using the words "I intend" instead of "I guarantee." Likewise, "probably" instead of "absolutely." We realize that English is not your first language, but I think the subtle differences between these sets of words will go a long way toward reducing hurt feelings.
With love to all my fellow collectors and to Lotrek and all our playing card designers here, as well.
Re: Oath Mystery deck #2: DAMASK
Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 11:36 am
by Bradius
I second what misterharmanko said. I was just too slow to say it. Just let us know and vet it out (even if we don't know what the deck actually is). We may prefer to change our order from 4x of one to 2x of two, or from 2x of one to 1x of each or adding two more so they can get 2x of each. Then you would have a good idea of what to print and less people would be upset. Just understand if you said you were going to make them an edible chocolate frogs, someone is still bound to get upset. It is an occupational hazard of being a deck designer I think.
Now, how do I get Gambler's warehouse to accidently slip that Blue Damask into my next order? If only I could pull off a Confundus charm...
Re: Oath Mystery deck #2: DAMASK
Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 11:46 am
by ICantShuffle
That's not really how it works. I just won't be giving PCN my money ever again. If I give Lorenzo my money, and he uses GW for fulfillment, I'm not going to punish him (or myself) by not supporting his fabulous work.
You'd still be providing a revenue stream indirectly to GW/PCN in that situation. But, if you're okay with that, I wouldn't want to miss out on someone's work I liked because of that.
I eat, almost exclusively, cereals with "Crunch" in their brand. Cinnamon Toast Crunch, Captain Crunch, Raisin Bran Crunch, etc. Frosted Mini Wheats are an exception.
That's quite the contrast, there, from cereals that do well maintaining their crunchiness in milk, to frosted mini wheats which are known for basically disintegrating from the surface tension alone of milk. I don't eat cereal very often, but when I do it's Cap'n Crunch Berries.
Re: Oath Mystery deck #2: DAMASK
Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 11:52 am
by theCapraAegagrus
ICantShuffle wrote:That's not really how it works. I just won't be giving PCN my money ever again. If I give Lorenzo my money, and he uses GW for fulfillment, I'm not going to punish him (or myself) by not supporting his fabulous work.
You'd still be providing a revenue stream indirectly to GW/PCN in that situation. But, if you're okay with that, I wouldn't want to miss out on someone's work I liked because of that.
I eat, almost exclusively, cereals with "Crunch" in their brand. Cinnamon Toast Crunch, Captain Crunch, Raisin Bran Crunch, etc. Frosted Mini Wheats are an exception.
That's quite the contrast, there, from cereals that do well maintaining their crunchiness in milk, to frosted mini wheats which are known for basically disintegrating from the surface tension alone of milk. I don't eat cereal very often, but when I do it's Cap'n Crunch Berries.
Once the money is in someone else's hands, I don't care where it goes. Cocaine, hookers, GW... GW and PCN aren't one and the same, though, as far as I'm aware. PCN is a store and GW is fulfillment. I could be wrong but that's how they used to operate.
Frosted Mini Wheats is my go-to, #1, cereal. Relatively healthy, don't scratch the roof of my mouth, and not tiny little sugar pieces to choke me. My mind is still blown that they ceased production of Cinnamon Frosted Mini Wheats years ago. They don't disintegrate as much as just become milk-drunk pillows of fiber. I've loved them since I was around 13.
Re: Oath Mystery deck #2: DAMASK
Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 11:57 am
by vasta41
TwoPiece wrote:I've loved them since I was around 13.
Oh, so you've loved them since last year?
I keed, I keed. Razzle Dazzle Rice Krispies. May they rest in peace.
Re: Oath Mystery deck #2: DAMASK
Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 12:09 pm
by theCapraAegagrus
vasta41 wrote:TwoPiece wrote:I've loved them since I was around 13.
Oh, so you've loved them since last year?
I keed, I keed. Razzle Dazzle Rice Krispies. May they rest in peace.
Re: Oath Mystery deck #2: DAMASK
Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 12:11 pm
by ICantShuffle
Apple Cinnamon Rice Krispies....
Yeah...
Y'know, just eatin my cereal... in the park... listenin' to In Utero...
Re: Oath Mystery deck #2: DAMASK
Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 12:23 pm
by MagikFingerz
Lotrek wrote:It feels strange to be called a liar when I know that: a) I didn't lie b) You're justified to believe I did. I explain:
When I said that this is going to be the only variation, that was the plan. I didn't have in mind the blue at all. But before a begin the foiling, I came across a catalogue with beautiful foil colors and I was just blown away by that turquoise blue. Without much thinking about it, I printed another 150 sheets in blue stock and ordered that damned foil. I thought it would be a very beautiful deck and a cool "extra" to show to the Convention.
As I was one who used the word "lie", I'll admit it wasn't the best choice considering it implies malicious intent. That's why I said "intentional lie", but perhaps I could have formulated a better phrase. Like I said, though, it's important to understand that the end result is the same; you said something that turned out not to be factual (albeit at a later time), and that makes your customers upset and future customers wary. What may just have been an off-handed comment that felt right at the time to you, was a professional guarantee to your customers.
Ok, I've rambled on long enough. What's done is done, and what misterharmanko and rouselle said are good examples of what should have happened or should happen in future situations. Live and learn
Re: Oath Mystery deck #2: DAMASK
Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 12:38 pm
by caniveski
If there are 120 odd blue decks. 16 are gone. Down to 104...if there are more than 104 buyers of red damask, if everybody wants a blue one, then there will be disappointment even more so if people are after 2, 3, 4 of the blue ones.....
Re: Oath Mystery deck #2: DAMASK
Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 12:42 pm
by ICantShuffle
Limiting it to one per buyer might be a good way to go.
I got 2 of the Red decks when the presale was open. I'm only anticipating one blue deck. That would probably ensure those of us that want one get one.
Re: Oath Mystery deck #2: DAMASK
Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 12:48 pm
by Magic Tapp
ICantShuffle wrote:Limiting it to one per buyer might be a good way to go.
I got 2 of the Red decks when the presale was open. I'm only anticipating one blue deck. That would probably ensure those of us that want one get one.
That is a very sensible solution. Otherwise, we will see more blue decks on eBay...
Re: Oath Mystery deck #2: DAMASK
Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 12:54 pm
by Bradius
We will still see some more on eBay for sure. Some really don't want it, but will get it for it's resale opportunity. I guess even though I bought three mystery decks, I also get an option for one. Well, given my drained bank account, I guess that is a good third-party imposed restraint on me.
Re: Oath Mystery deck #2: DAMASK
Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 1:39 pm
by Lotrek
@MagicFingerz: Malicious intend is too crappy even for the worst side of myself. Messing things up due to my inclination to improvising, yes. That's me...
English is not my first language (it's getting to be though) but I know the difference between "intend" and "guarantee" and I'll make sure to keep a safe distance from the latter in the future.
I'm happy this conversation evolved to an in-depth analysis of cereal eating habits, I'd like to let you know though that the decks have already been sent from Greece about 2 days ago, full of Hellenic Post stamps etc. and regarding the Blue Deck:
There is going to be an absolute and strict limit of 1 deck per person. Only Damask Red backers will be personally notified by email, not a newsletter and this will be when I'll be getting back to Greece. Meanwhile, make sure not to spend all of your money to Giovanni and Jackson's Kickstarters.
@TwoPiece:
Re: Oath Mystery deck #2: DAMASK
Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 3:09 pm
by pstaehlin
Lotrek,
"There is going to be an absolute and strict limit of 1 deck per person. Only Damask Red backers will be personally notified by email, not a newsletter and this will be when I'll be getting back to Greece. Meanwhile, make sure not to spend all of your money to Giovanni and Jackson's Kickstarters."
I'll be looking forward to your personal email about the other deck.
Thank you for all your work.
Re: Oath Mystery deck #2: DAMASK
Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 3:23 pm
by Magistrate1500
Lotrek wrote:@MagicFingerz: Malicious intend is too crappy even for the worst side of myself. Messing things up due to my inclination to improvising, yes. That's me...
English is not my first language (it's getting to be though) but I know the difference between "intend" and "guarantee" and I'll make sure to keep a safe distance from the latter in the future.
I'm happy this conversation evolved to an in-depth analysis of cereal eating habits, I'd like to let you know though that the decks have already been sent from Greece about 2 days ago, full of Hellenic Post stamps etc. and regarding the Blue Deck:
There is going to be an absolute and strict limit of 1 deck per person. Only Damask Red backers will be personally notified by email, not a newsletter and this will be when I'll be getting back to Greece. Meanwhile, make sure not to spend all of your money to Giovanni and Jackson's Kickstarters.
@TwoPiece:
Notice he didn’t mention his cereal preference. Clearly he is a monster!
Re: Oath Mystery deck #2: DAMASK
Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 3:27 pm
by Bradius
although I am more partial to fruit oatmeal myself.
Re: Oath Mystery deck #2: DAMASK
Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 3:38 pm
by Magic Tapp
Bradius wrote:
although I am more partial to fruit oatmeal myself.
Ah - the "two youts" movie - one of my absolute favourites...
Re: Oath Mystery deck #2: DAMASK
Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 3:56 pm
by Merlebird
Whew, what a controversy! I'd feel remiss if I didn't weigh in and say:
All-Marshmallow Lucky Charms is clearly the best cereal and if you had even a shred of intellectual honesty you'd admit that, you
hacks.
As far as cards go: if I had my druthers I'd've gotten just the blue version, if I'd bought one at all. As it stands I don't know if I'll keep the red one; I knew when I ordered that I was taking a gamble on whether or not the courts would be "custom enough" for me, and while I agree that foil
is shiny, and that
five foils is
very shiny, I don't know if I'm magpie enough to keep something just because it's shiny. But knowing that the blue variant will only be offered to Damask Red buyers, I feel like I'm leaving money on the table if I
don't pick one up.
I don't know. I never wanted to get into deck reselling or speculation - I resent opportunists trying to make a buck as much as the next hobbyist - but it feels like that's the behavior that's being encouraged, and it doesn't sit well with me.
Re: Oath Mystery deck #2: DAMASK
Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 4:07 pm
by ICantShuffle
although I am more partial to fruit oatmeal myself.
My god man! Steaks well done, fruit oatmeal... what's next...? Are you going to tell me you drive a Prius instead of an F-350?
Aaahh... stereotypes...
Re: Oath Mystery deck #2: DAMASK
Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 4:11 pm
by Merlebird
ICantShuffle wrote:although I am more partial to fruit oatmeal myself.
My god man! Steaks well done, fruit oatmeal... what's next...?
Fruit is delicious. What do you put in your oatmeal?
Sadness?
Re: Oath Mystery deck #2: DAMASK
Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 4:14 pm
by ICantShuffle
I put oats in my oatmeal. The way the one and only true god intended it.
Heathen.
okay maybe brown sugar and cinnamon sometimes, but then I pay my penance
Re: Oath Mystery deck #2: DAMASK
Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 4:19 pm
by Merlebird
ICantShuffle wrote:I put oats in my oatmeal. The way the one and only true god intended it.
Heathen.
If eating your oatmeal plain is the one true path I will
face God and walk backwards into hell.
Re: Oath Mystery deck #2: DAMASK
Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 4:27 pm
by ICantShuffle
Just remember that Steven Tyler agapes you.
However, walking backwards ain't a bad idea, I do it so the streets can't front on me.
Re: Oath Mystery deck #2: DAMASK
Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 4:36 pm
by KT52
Hi Lotrek, firstly thank you for honoring the original buyers by allowing them first dibs for the blue ones. The answer will probably be "No" but still wanted to ask... would it be possible to swap out one of the red decks for a blue deck? I bought 3 reds and a Sanctus deck so my wallet is stretched a little thin right now to add another blue (not that I wouldn't). Thanks for considering!
Re: Oath Mystery deck #2: DAMASK
Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 4:39 pm
by Pablo393
I do not eat cereal anymore because they have wrecked the cereals from my youth. Everything is too colorful and fake and nasty. In the 1970's you could have Crunchberries, Trix, Fruity Pebbles, Fruit Loops and Apple Jacks and it tasted and felt good. Nowadays I walk down the cereal aisle at the store and just shake my head. I will also give a shout out to the original Cookie Crisp cereal before they wrecked it. Alpha-bit cereal and Sugar Corn Pops were also decent. Now I just eat eggs, smoothies, pancakes, etc.....Getting old sucks.