Branle Tesoro now shipping (NPCC)

[sms69x]

So synthetic are different than imitations but still FAKE, I think we get the idea.. If you feel that calling it synthetic will make your deck better, then lets call it synthetic.

Backers won't have to wait 4+months to receive these decks. We've started Kickstarter campaign so people could find these decks and support. Not because of money, but because of introduction and support. Branle Tesoro won't be produced UNLESS we gain enough supporters. That's the main idea of this project and Kickstarter overall

So how many backers you need to produce the deck. Are the 30+ right now enough?
Your justification to use KS makes no sense.. Guess the risk zero has a big weight in a company like yours...

You should improve in your decks handling instead of doing this type of things. Artificial rarety, synthetic gems... Congratulation on the foil though. hope it will be good enough and doesn't show through the face of the cards.

[Mike Ratledge]

Guys, enough trolling the artist here. Although we might agree that it is odd, it's just not unusual.

[JuFiN]

there isn't even any discount for buying all 5 decks....

Ima try to keep my thoughts quick here,
With a funding goal of $500 its clear they are just using kickstarter to advertise which feels a bit wrong to me. Either that or these decks cost them 5 dollars to produce which makes $75 a deck seem a bit extreme. And as always I'm against artificial rarity on the whole, rubs me the wrong way creating just 100 of something seemingly for the sole purpose of increasing the price.

Yes its double foil and I am a huge sucker for foil, but the choice of color on the backs isnt good and the printing quality isnt good, with this in mind the price is way too high. As always NPCC manages to get nice artwork on the front but after backing a few of their decks and seeing how they handle unless the art really wows me I promised myself I wouldn't back anymore. This deck is making it easy to keep that promise so far.

As far as fake or synthetic gems on the tucks I think all that has done is distract us from the issue that the tucks don't look good.

[montecarlojoe]

Regarding the synthetic vs fake I would have to side with NoirArts here (thought he defensive tone surely doesn't help you).

Synthetic stones are identical in any way that matters to natural stones. In fact synthetic stones are often superior in clarity and purity, and colour can be finely controlled - which is why you'll never see natural stones used for scientific purposes. (e.g. optics)

The only real difference is marketing - once comes from a lab, and another comes from the ground (and more often than not dug up under near slave labour conditions). Quite why the latter should be more real or worth more to anyone is quite beyond me.

Regarding my opinion of the deck.. I do like the cards and the backs. The dual foil and design appeal to me quite a lot, but I also agree that the Red/Gold does look better with the apparent dark background - I don't think that the image was meant to be deliberately misleading in any way and was meant to use shadow to accent the shiny. (Some will see shadow, some will see a dark stock - Kinda reminds me of the blue/gold dress!)

As you probably worked out from the above - the addition of the gemstone doesn't really sway me one way or another - and the tucks seem a little plain if I'm honest. Some laser cut "lace work" perhaps matching the card pattern on the tuck band would do wonders.

Personally I don't mind the 'artificial' rareness aspect - They ARE rare because there wont be many. you either want them or you don't.
I may try for one depending how my budget looks - if it had been on darker stock then the Red/Gold would have been the one for me. As it is I might pledge for the holographic foil version.

I like them. but the criticism was valid - as was the substantive part of the response - but Mike's right - we all need to watch the tone. /mod

[NoirArts]

there isn't even any discount for buying all 5 decks....

Ima try to keep my thoughts quick here,
With a funding goal of $500 its clear they are just using kickstarter to advertise which feels a bit wrong to me. Either that or these decks cost them 5 dollars to produce which makes $75 a deck seem a bit extreme. And as always I'm against artificial rarity on the whole, rubs me the wrong way creating just 100 of something seemingly for the sole purpose of increasing the price.

Yes its double foil and I am a huge sucker for foil, but the choice of color on the backs isnt good and the printing quality isnt good, with this in mind the price is way too high. As always NPCC manages to get nice artwork on the front but after backing a few of their decks and seeing how they handle unless the art really wows me I promised myself I wouldn't back anymore. This deck is making it easy to keep that promise so far.

As far as fake or synthetic gems on the tucks I think all that has done is distract us from the issue that the tucks don't look good.

There is NO purpose of artificial rarity. This project is:
- designed to fit Kickstarter make/100
- amount of time for production is TREMENDOUS
- it has firs-ever-used features for us. Like double foils on the back. Before running big campaigns we have to make sure that everything is doable, that we can actually execute it good enough, in reasonable time frame. Go small scale before offering bigger projects

the printing quality isnt good

Excuse me, but you are absolutely ignorant in printing. That being said, I don't find reasonable to explain or even comment such ridiculous statements from people like you.

I wouldn't back anymore.

Thanks! I would also appreciate if you leave this topic for people who has to say anything valuable for project and community.

[rousselle]

Anybody who is familiar with gems knows that synthetic is not the same as fake; they are a less expensive way to produce the same result. And, as has been noted, there's also the political appeal of avoiding slave labor and supporting problematic military regimes.

That said, when I'm buying playing cards, I'm not quiiiite as interested in purchasing gems along with them. I really like the way these cards look, and would love to get my hands on one of each. Well... two of each, since I like to open one and keep one . It doesn't bother me that they are using KS to gauge interest. And, having dealt with Roman on a couple of occasions outside of standard Kickstarter transactions, I have always found him to be reasonable and above board.

For me, the deciding factor simply comes down to price. It's just too rich for my blood at this time. That said, if future editions with the double-foil treatment become available at a lower price, I'm definitely going to be interested. As I've stated many times elsewhere, I loves me some shiny.

Mike Ratledge said:

Although we might agree that it is odd, it's just not unusual.

This is what's known as the "Tom Jones defense."

Ba-dum-tsss.

[JuFiN]

Apparently I was confused and thought this was a forum to discuss our thoughts on cards but apparently it's a place to circle jerk about how great all decks are. And then throw out defensive personal attacks at people who share negative points of view.

All I know about print quality is that I own multiple decks from LPCC EPCC USPCC and NPCC and NPCC simply doesn't handle as well.

My final thought, double foil is awesome but I will hold off on pledging $75 until after you are sure it's doable, I wouldn't want to pay $375 for 5 decks and then find out that double foil isn't something you can even do.

[Cbkimble]

NoirArts/JuFin this is a place to express your opinion. With that said, we still need to be civil with how we word opinions and how we respond to those opinions. You've both made responses that could lead to problems. I'm asking you both now to please not let those comments escalate. Thank you.

[shaitani]

Just another voice here:
I never open decks (particularly expensive ones), I pretty much just collect to show off the outer appearance.
That said, I HATE the tuck box for this project, but I LOVE the double foil backs. And honestly, I feel like we do have enough gold/red on black backs, it's a little refreshing to see foil on white backs.
Anyway, the price point for something I can't display is enough to keep me out of a pledge.

Now, regarding the Kickstarter project and the peculiarities of using it as a platform like this, even though this project goes against the spirit of Kickstarter, I'm fine with it. Think about it from the point of view of the creator. They don't want to spend all this crazy effort making a 100 of these and then find out no one cares. So, they dip their toes in with Kickstarter and basically ask people who are interested to commit to buying some if they are made. They likely set the goal to $500 so that most early bird buyers would be confident that this was going to be made. That gets the first round of people in, and that drives interest enough for the remaining stock. But I digress, because regardless of the reasoning, I see nothing wrong with this process. Kickstarter is a tool to get commitments for funding projects, regardless of how much money the creator has in their bank account.

[jsantafe]

As it seems there hasn't been enough opinions thrown in this topic, I'll add my invaluable one

I agree with shaitani in the Kickstarter part. It's a tool, marketing tool that can be used, within it's rules (and, in the light of recent projects, even stretching those) the way the project creators want. eBay was meant for auctions and now it's a global marketplace. It's not a philosophy or cult or a club, it's a company and a website that clearly fills very different needs for producers: marketing tool, pre-sales marketplace, financing aid, market research, field test etc. Is it crowdfunding? Maybe not only that. Who really cares? It gets the decks coming and it's mostly positive. CPC, Ellusionit, even Pebble! used it to launch products.

As for the NPCC debate here, I won't enter the quality debate. I just want to point something out: I want to thank Roman for his constant commitment with this community even against critics, and his willingness to participate in this forum. I won't ignore it's also in his benefit, but it's not uncommon at all to have creators leave after the first critic or not even ever show up here.

There were out of tone comments in both ends, but I still think we all benefit from having creators AND PRODUCERS around here.

[Bruno]

..... now comes the time.

Thanks to montecarlojoe, rousselle, cbkimble, shaitani and jsantafe ....
and NoirArts 'course.

[Räpylätassu]

Just got my Branle Tesoro. Quick thoughts:

1. NPCC once again knocked the tuck box out of the park. Amazing tuck.

2. Foiling does not get through the paper from the other side. I tried to see if it shows through the front even a little bit, but no, it does not show through the front at all. Great work!

3. The foiling looks great, but I would have liked the back to be in off-white color.

4. Compared to my original Branle deck my one handed fans with this one are pretty much the same. They feel slightly different because I believe that this one has a chemical coating but still they fan pretty similary in my one handed fans.

5. Like with all of my NPCC decks, slight clumps with fanning right out of the box that disappeared after about 1 minute of fanning and a couple of springs.

Great work, I like it. Now, that Pokemon Gold on my Gameboy won't play itself...