Well really you only describe two ways there:sprouts1115 wrote:Well, you got 1) Horizontal, 2) Diagonal, 3) Ribbon, 4) Object 5) Cloth 6) 1-sided transition?TGunitedcardists wrote:It would be confusing. Keep the 10 a number card.blejanre wrote: I thought poker would be one of the games that a fourth court would actually improve. A royal flush would consist of 4 royals and a high card, instead of 3 royals, a high card, and a ten. I legitimately am really curious though, what problems would the princess cause, in which games? I would really love some examples, because I don't see it. As for being confusing, I can only imagine it being confusing the first time using the deck, or for the first time in a while. And as for whether or not it will fly, if I decide to do a KS campaign for it, the ten can be easily swapped out for a normal pip card at any time before printing.
Sprouts, I think your last comment was intended for me. Thanks for the links. I do see what you mean about the transistions. It's not really a problem for me, I think the images work as a whole; does anyone else think the transitions need more work? What are the 6 ways to divide a card, this sounds like a specific thing that I haven't heard of?
Thanks for the feedback guys, I really appreciate it.
I too would like to know what the 6 ways to divide a card are...
Here is a good example of Object:
A) Horizontal and Diagonal are the SAME. You are talking about a continuous design where there is no obvious line of transition because the design is rotationally symmetrical. In fact that is what we mean by "2 way" - technically we should say "Rotational symmetry of 2 about the centre of the card". Where you put your imaginary line in the design process is utterly irrelevant - as long as it goes through that centre point!
B) Ribbon / object / Cloth are all the same thing too - they are devices to cover the transition so you don't have to bother. I have heard said that the use in the picture posted by Sprouticus above is a 'genius' use of the device. I think it's lazy - nice as the art is.
The cloth link does highlight something though - a brilliant design doesn't necessarily have to be rotationally symmetrical.
I would suggest that there are two classes of design going on here:
Transition:
A) Continuous (smooth / layered, integrated design, no obvious "join")
B) Masked (No integration, but some graphical device used cover the transition line)
C) Broken (No integration, no masking device)
Rotational Design
1) True 2 way - rotational symmetry - identical rotated by 180 degrees.
2) Pseudo 2 way - Mimics Rotational Symmetry - not truely symmetrical when rotated 180 degrees
3) 1-way - no attempt at rotational symmetry
In total you have 7 combinations there (6 if you discount 1 way design)