Peedy Tarot Deck

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

There might be some confusion as different people use and have learned different decks. Admittedly, I've mainly used the Thoth deck.

We should all try and use the same terminology so it doesn't get all fucked up. So:
-King
-Queen
-Knight
-Page

No prince or princesses. I know I contributed to the confusion, but hopefully we can all keep from
getting out of hand. 

I'd love it if the finished deck was actually usable, which would mean sticking with common (ryder-waite) terminology, and retaining the suits, or at least maintaining a consistency within the suits, rather than replacing them with whimsical and arbitrary suits. For instance, if we're going to have a Queen of Sparkly Pink Shit, then the ENTIRE SUIT of Cups should be renamed Sparkly Pink Shit.

[Salty]

^THIS.

I'm all about making this as unique as possible, but it would be nice to have consistency.
Also, I love these WOMP cards but we should stick to one deck OR make one from scratch (my preference) with consistent guidleines of one deck.

[Faust]

^THIS.

I'm all about making this as unique as possible, but it would be nice to have consistency.
Also, I love these WOMP cards but we should stick to one deck OR make one from scratch (my preference) with consistent guidleines of one deck.

Why limit ourselves to something someone else has done before. We can make our own, or just circle jerk by putting our pictures in someone elses work, the latter seems pretty dumb as far as I'm concerned.

[Salty]

I had asked about this a few pages back but no one said anything. Anything but a 100% PD deck would be  lame, especially for what we're capable of.

[Rococo Modem Basilisk]

Well, I know nothing about tarot, myself. Internal consistency will need to be someone else's job, if we decide it is worth persuing.

[Cain]

You could always just try, I don't know, reading the thread?  If that's not too much of a challenge, sweetheart.  I wouldn't want you to strain yourself over reading 10 pages or anything.

Thanks for illustrating how reading back ten pages (or even one post) was too much effort for you.

[Salty]

A few ideas:
-Meaning and Terminology. Let's not waste time over the different meanings or names.  We need one list of definitions that we all use whether we make them up from scratch or in synthesis with commonly held interpretations.  

-Imagery. These should be based primarily on our agreed-to definitions. I would prefer we take the time to take pics that suit the card, then manipulate them to fit the meaning. These should also follow some guidelines for consistency and be purely ours.


I have more to say on this but have to go.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Well, I know nothing about tarot, myself. Internal consistency will need to be someone else's job, if we decide it is worth persuing.

Here's a hint: The names of the cards are on the cards. If you look at the cards, you will notice a certain consistency. I am sure your logical abilities will allow you to deduce that consistency.

[Rococo Modem Basilisk]

Well, I know nothing about tarot, myself. Internal consistency will need to be someone else's job, if we decide it is worth persuing.

Here's a hint: The names of the cards are on the cards. If you look at the cards, you will notice a certain consistency. I am sure your logical abilities will allow you to deduce that consistency.

Effort. I am having fun putting faces on cards; I don't much mind whose faces, what cards, or what thread they end up going into. There are obvious correlations, but obvious things are not always (or even typically) true.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Well, I know nothing about tarot, myself. Internal consistency will need to be someone else's job, if we decide it is worth persuing.

Here's a hint: The names of the cards are on the cards. If you look at the cards, you will notice a certain consistency. I am sure your logical abilities will allow you to deduce that consistency.

Effort. I am having fun putting faces on cards; I don't much mind whose faces, what cards, or what thread they end up going into. There are obvious correlations, but obvious things are not always (or even typically) true.

How much effort does it take to notice that there are four suits??? Or that each suit contains a King, Queen, Knight, and Page, plus ten numbered cards?? We're really talking kindergarten-level observation skills, here.

[Rococo Modem Basilisk]

I noticed four suits, and most of them appear to have a king, a page, a princess, a queen, a prince, and the numbers 1-10. There may be more suits and more cards. I don't own a deck. I likewise don't know whether or not the trumps are part of a suit, or if they have variants for suits, or if they have their own suit. Having never seen a tarot deck outside of this thread, I can either spend a good deal of time learning tarot (which I haven't done prior to this thread despite having a passing interest in doing so for the past several years), or I can put faces on cards given faces and cards (which I am perfectly willing to do).

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I noticed four suits, and most of them appear to have a king, a page, a princess, a queen, a prince, and the numbers 1-10. There may be more suits and more cards. I don't own a deck. I likewise don't know whether or not the trumps are part of a suit, or if they have variants for suits, or if they have their own suit. Having never seen a tarot deck outside of this thread, I can either spend a good deal of time learning tarot (which I haven't done prior to this thread despite having a passing interest in doing so for the past several years), or I can put faces on cards given faces and cards (which I am perfectly willing to do).

Sooo...

regardless of the consensus of the other people participating in the project, you're just going to do whatever, because it takes too much work to look at a Wikipedia article?

Rad.

[Salty]

Right.

So. Before this project dies a horrible death before it begins, I have a practical idea for ensuring that we have something we all can be proud of, everyone can enjoy contributing to, and feel their input is valid. Tarot decks are complicated and have many aspects and layers worth devoting attention to. It's obvious a lot of us are excited about this and it could really be something spectacular.

So, if you guys could all wait a little bit to tear into each other and quit altogether before it's even begun, I can have something ready to show you tonight or tomorrow? Huh? Please?

[Rococo Modem Basilisk]

Right.

So. Before this project dies a horrible death before it begins, I have a practical idea for ensuring that we have something we all can be proud of, everyone can enjoy contributing to, and feel their input is valid. Tarot decks are complicated and have many aspects and layers worth devoting attention to. It's obvious a lot of us are excited about this and it could really be something spectacular.

So, if you guys could all wait a little bit to tear into each other and quit altogether before it's even begun, I can have something ready to show you tonight or tomorrow? Huh? Please?

Sounds good to me.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I'm not super attached to it being anything one way or the other, because if it's not usable I just won't try to print and use it. I just thought it was weird because I thought it was a group project started by Yatto, several people were asking for it to have consistency, and Enki's response is "no".

So maybe Enki does his own thing and everyone else works together to make a usable deck? Or 

What does Yatto think?