UnitedCardists.com - The forum for Cardistry, Magic, Custom Decks and All Things Playing Cards.

Now live: https://uusi.us/collections/uusi-playin ... ck-edition

※pagan limited edition / limited edition run of 1000
※52 playing cards / 2 jokers
※custom seal on tuck box
※premium playing card stock with linen finish
※tuck box has an embossed, gold foil design on premium, heavy paper stock
※printed by the Expert Playing Card Company



















Personally on the fence but likely to drop, because shipping to UK is $25..... And that adds up to $55 a piece, for a deck that has no changes to the faces but a different colored back, minorly modified tuck, and changed printer (from USPCC to Expert).

I'm stoked for these I don't have any Pagan decks so this is perfect for me, plus I prefer this new tuck design over the old ones

Pagan is my favourite deck series of all time. Love the new black backs, tuck tweek and new jokers. Shipping cost to U.K. is a pain though.

I was emailing with Linnea recently and she mentioned that this is her favorite version of the Pagan decks, and that always makes me really enjoy something more; when the creator of the thing prefers it to their other work. I also really like the tuck redesign, it breaks up the pattern if one were to display all of the variants together, but I really think this is the strongest design. Wish they had a blue tuck in this redesign..

Here's an interesting quote on the page of their blue edition (aka, V.3, which was manufactured by USPCC):

Keeping on with the tradition of the diptych ad card that Uusi originated in the playing card market, our final Limited Edition printing of the Pagan playing card series – our LE Pagan Blue Backs – has the black wolves, "Geri" & "Freki" painted on them.

https://uusi.us/collections/uusi-playin ... ed-edition

Don't get me wrong. I still love Uusi. But... if we're going to call out others for this kind of thing, we need to call out Uusi, too.

And, yes, I plan to pick up a pair of the black edition. But... I'm going to hate myself in the morning for doing so.

Yep. The old “this is the final de...no, THIS is the final final version of the deck”. Something else that always irked me was that the blue Pagan never had the same tuck box quality or colour detail (the red centres in the repeating motif) as the brown and ivory versions. The Pagan Tarot does. Odd. And annoying.

Now I’m thinking about the blue version with the redesigned tuck. For their final final final version.

That they revamped the tuck and brought back a sold out deck?
Nothing but praise from me. Sure it isn’t an example for integrety but all this „limited ed“ s**t is childish anyways. Everyone that gives something about rarity should rather question himself than the people baiting you with „limited“ and „special“. My 2 cents.

They have already done a Pagan deck with this color! This is the original dark edition with a new Joker and a new tuck box.

Why on earth can't they just make new poker sized decks is beyond me. The demand is huge for them but nah, recolors, tarots and meditation decks...

Räpylätassu wrote: They have already done a Pagan deck with this color! This is the original dark edition with a new Joker and a new tuck box.

Why on earth can't they just make new poker sized decks is beyond me. The demand is huge for them but nah, recolors, tarots and meditation decks...

Original Pagan Dark was an earthy brown, it wasn't black.

And I think Tarot is more interesting for them to create, they seem to have a pretty new-age spiritualist vibe, I think Tarot speaks to that for them, I imagine Linnea as an artist needs to stay where she feels inspired, especially with the incredible amount of work that goes into creating these projects in a traditional artistic way and not digitally. I just don't think she wants to make another poker deck when she is really attached to the Tarot/Oracle decks. That could change, but I think it makes sense.

Räpylätassu wrote:Why on earth can't they just make new poker sized decks is beyond me. The demand is huge for them but nah, recolors, tarots and meditation decks...

Justin has put it beautifully in words. I think nobody should be entitled to tell others what they should do. That said, of course every collector is allowed to express her/his wishes. But still, artists should do what they wanna do. At least in my dictionary this is a key point in the definition to be an artist.
I think everybody that doesn't understand that UUSI isn't poker playing cards missed a point. Sure they do what pays bills aswell. But as artists/designers, they aren't playing cards designers.
So either scrape all your bucks together and commision them (UC2020 deck!? As silly as this thought is, and was intended, anyone interested?) or get comfortable with the idea of no new UUSI poker decks in the near future until they fell like it (or are commisioned to do so).

Of course, I should have known better, that staying for a weekend in a hotel where there is no internet connection, would give this Murphy guy ideas, like a card designer whose work I really like doing some flash sale of a limited edition, selling out before I got a chance to buy a deck... ... and to add to that, the food sucked!!! .... That's life I guess

Harvonsgard wrote:but all this „limited ed“ s**t is childish anyways. Everyone that gives something about rarity should rather question himself than the people baiting you with „limited“ and „special“. My 2 cents.

The reason that limited numbers matter for decks you like, is because that makes it harder to get your hands on one. It's not a matter of 'falling for it', it's a simple matter of economics. There were 4000 of each version of the Heretic decks printed, which sounds like a freaking lot but even they're hard to find these days, it wasn't easy and it wasn't exactly cheap for me to acquire a Noctis this year. Sometimes it's artificial, but that's rare, mostly it's because printing more costs more, and more features also cost more, which is why most kickstarter campaigns are just trying to get enough funding to do a minimum print run, with sometimes a smaller number of decks with better features as well, limited in number so they can control the costs. It's really all about controlling costs, not about baiting anyone. If you print 10,000 blinged out decks it's pretty much guaranteed you won't sell even half of them, and end up losing money, there simply isn't the market to sustain that, to make money you have to be able to sell what you produce. A good example is the Fable decks still for sale on the Oath website, 2 months later.

kat11366 wrote:like a card designer whose work I really like doing some flash sale of a limited edition, selling out before I got a chance to buy a deck... ... and to add to that, the food sucked!!! .... That's life I guess

They still have 847 decks left on Monday 26 Aug at this moment. So this is not going to sell out so fast compared to Junkanoo which only had 225 to start with

Adonael wrote:

Harvonsgard wrote:but all this „limited ed“ s**t is childish anyways. Everyone that gives something about rarity should rather question himself than the people baiting you with „limited“ and „special“. My 2 cents.

The reason that ...

That was not what I meant! Of course there're economic reasons for creators to limit decks.
What I was refering to is, if a collector buys a deck because it is limited, he fools himself!
If you dropped a fortune for a deck because you thought it might be the last chance to get a copy(!) of the artwork, than it is unfortunate, but still you're the fool.

Another thing what I meant with childish, is that the necessity of a limited printed run, like you perfectly mentioned, due to limited funds of the creator and/or not being able to foretell the demand, is sold to us in a lot of campaigns or ad copies as a feature! Like something that we should be happy about and/or praise and should sought after because it is oh so limited. Sorry, not on my watch .

If a creator makes it easier for us to get our hands on her/his decks then I don't see any reason for us as a community to be pissed about.

Even Joker was "a man of my word".

Shame on you, UUSI.

Harvonsgard wrote:If a creator makes it easier for us to get our hands on her/his decks then I don't see any reason for us as a community to be pissed about.

I think you might be overstating our reaction when you say that the community is "pissed about" it. But, certainly, I'm disappointed.

This isn't because "oh, the pwecious thing isn't as wawe as I wanted." Screw that noise. It's because they broke a promise that was very easy not to break, and was very unnecessary to make in the first place. They broke a promise that I didn't care about, and that I didn't ask them to make. I'm not upset about the promise. I'm disappointed that they devalued their word.

I buy the decks I buy because there's something I like about them (the art, the bling, the tuck, the theme, the innovation, the designer, the novelty, whatever). Rarity almost never plays a factor, although it might influence *when* I pull the trigger. However, the integrity of the designer/creator can play a factor (see Natalia Silva).

With this misstep, Uusi doesn't slide as far down the integrity scale as Ellusionist has (and, to be fair, I still purchase Ellusionist decks). Rather, I'm disappointed because they are no longer firmly anchored to the top of the integrity scale, where reside those whose word is taken as a bullet-proof, iron-clad guarantee just because they were the ones who said it.

So, to reiterate what I'd said in my original post: if we're going to bother to call others out for doing this (as we do every time Ellusionist does it), why wouldn't we call out Uusi?

Edit: removed the sentence that is referenced in the post below about Uusi having lied, as I find Justin's argument persuasive.

rousselle wrote: ...they lied to their backers/supporters/customers. They broke a promise...

I think that lies only matter when they are made, they aren't a retroactively binding contract. I give Uusi the benefit of the doubt that, when they claimed they weren't going to make any more poker decks they fully intended that they were done. Having made another poker deck doesn't mean they lied, it just means things change. This, I feel sad that I need to point out (but internet.. so..), isn't a universal standard, and I think integrity plays a part, if Uusi was at the top of your integrity spectrum I would think that earned them the perspective from you to to offer that maybe it wasn't a lie, because they meant it when they said it. Thinking of it as a promise is a little more nuanced, and a lot of people think that your word is a promise, others think promises are only signified by explicitly saying 'I promise/this is a promise' and I think it is fair of you to feel that a promise had been made, and has been broken, and I understand your frustration.

The reason I don't call out Uusi in the same way that I would call out a company like Ellusionist is that Uusi is two people and a handful of help that rely on their products to stay in business, and Ellusionist is a faceless corporation that cranks out a ton of shit and has a rotating cast of probably dozens of employees that are probably only there for the paycheck, with maybe a few exceptions. For my money Uusi is Linnea and Peter who bleed and sweat for every project they make, and Ellusionist is a corporation making money off of other people's hard work.

These are all very fair points, and I especially take your point about lie versus promise (I had toyed with the idea of removing the word "lie" from my original post, and now I'm going to do so). And your distinction that sets apart Uusi from Ellusionist is a perfect answer to my question.

rousselle wrote:These are all very fair points, and I especially take your point about lie versus promise (I had toyed with the idea of removing the word "lie" from my original post, and now I'm going to do so). And your distinction that sets apart Uusi from Ellusionist is a perfect answer to my question.

That's not to say I don't completely sympathize with your frustration in the situation, and it also will give me pause every time Uusi makes a similar type of statement, they have unavoidably lost some credibility so I completely understand your perspective as much as I will always be a stalwart champion of theirs.

Justin O. wrote:The reason I don't call out Uusi in the same way that I would call out a company like Ellusionist is that Uusi is two people and a handful of help that rely on their products to stay in business, and Ellusionist is a faceless corporation that cranks out a ton of shit and has a rotating cast of probably dozens of employees that are probably only there for the paycheck, with maybe a few exceptions. For my money Uusi is Linnea and Peter who bleed and sweat for every project they make, and Ellusionist is a corporation making money off of other people's hard work.

rousselle wrote:It's because they broke a promise that was very easy not to break, and was very unnecessary to make in the first place.

To me, the top quote by Justin reinforces what Allan wrote. Surely it's much easier for one or two people to keep a promise, than a corporation full of people who may not all be on the same page and is perhaps influenced by executives only guided by numbers? I'm not saying we should hold corporations to a lower standard, but I personally certainly expect less from one than from self-employed designers/creators. Which is why I think we should absolutely call out UUSI for this just as much as anyone else.

I agree with the comments about reprint of Pagan. We/I complain about it with others, so fair is fair. I am against reprints. Period.

As for large prints, there were only 450 Fable decks printed. For Lotrek decks, that is on the high end. However, there are only 32 remaining. Now, it may take awhile for the last 32 to sell. Seriously though, that is not a huge over-print. Creators have to over print anyway to send out replacements for lost shipments, which always happens.

rousselle wrote:I think you might be overstating our reaction when you say that the community is "pissed about" it. But, certainly, I'm disappointed.

Nah, all good. I didn't took it as pissed in a sense of furious or mad about it. Pissed for me is like disapponted or annoyed. Always remember, I'm not a native English speaker so maybe you would express the same thing with different words. Furtermore, I tend to speak more in general about my thoughts, even if I add quotes in my posts it is not necessarly a direct response, as it is more meant as a source reference where a question for me originated.

Back to reprints.
I totally understand that people are pointing out the lack of integrity. I'm a huge fan of integrity and I admire humans that live by their words. Big BUT; I'm a realist and I know for a fact that these people are rarer than unicorns. Therefore this arguement while absolutely valid, isn't practicable to me personally.

A point I have in mind there aswell is; I think people are forced (either extrinsic or intrinsic e.g. insecurity, doubts) to a certain lip service, therefore while I'm with you again to almost to 100% when you write:

rousselle wrote:It's because they broke a promise that was very easy not to break, and was very unnecessary to make in the first place.

I can still understand why such statements are made without bad intensions. I give independent creators always the benefit of the doubt, here.

What I intended with my original post was to find another arguement against reprints, because I personally don't have a valid one but I'm always curious to see other peoples perspective.

UUSI knows what they did. They have entered the discussion that doesn't give them "benefit of the doubt" anymore. That's exactly the problem. Their integrity used to be ironclad. Now it isn't. That's why we're disappointed.

I love what uusi does. The original pagan is likely my favorite deck of all time. However as happy as I am to see a new deck—as it justifies my time with regards to featuring the deck in a review on my channel—the reality is that they simple could have reworked some additional aspects of the cards other than the color of the back and the tuck. Perhaps changing the artwork on the courts. Then given the deck a name like “the Dark Pagan” and it wouldn’t be seen as a reprint. But rather an extension.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

TheGentlemanWake wrote: I love what uusi does. The original pagan is likely my favorite deck of all time. However as happy as I am to see a new deck—as it justifies my time with regards to featuring the deck in a review on my channel—the reality is that they simple could have reworked some additional aspects of the cards other than the color of the back and the tuck. Perhaps changing the artwork on the courts. Then given the deck a name like “the Dark Pagan” and it wouldn’t be seen as a reprint. But rather an extension.

I understand your perspective, but to simply 'change the artwork on the courts' would be a huge undertaking. Every court in the Pagan series was an oil painting, arguably one of the most difficult and time consuming mediums out there that requires a lot of set up and take down, and micromanagement throughout. Pagan, out of all of their projects, would be the most difficult project to make changes to.

Overall the sales seem to reflect the lack of interest for this deck with only 184 decks sold so far. 1000 decks used to sell out in a day in the past for them

badpete69 wrote: Overall the sales seem to reflect the lack of interest for this deck with only 184 decks sold so far. 1000 decks used to sell out in a day in the past for them

A lot of people don't like recolors, but also this really wasn't advertised like they have done with their other releases, and doing a pretty silent release right (it's not even on their website's landing page) behind launching a huge kickstarter I think reflects more in the sales than any lack of interest. I wouldn't know about it if Linnea hadn't told me it was coming out that week when I had reached out unrelatedly asking about the Pagan Tarot. I suspect there are a lot of people that might otherwise be interested in this deck that just don't know it was put up for sale.

The quiet release of this says to me that this edition they made for themselves, but EPCC has a 1000 deck minimum so they made all of the extras available to buy.

Justin O. wrote: The quiet release of this says to me that this edition they made for themselves, but EPCC has a 1000 deck minimum so they made all of the extras available to buy.

Based on how they have reprinted their popular decks like Pagans Underworld, which is now in the 4th print; I would assume that they've decided to keep the Pagan poker deck in print. But at least they have made changes to it with the back and tuck that it could be the 3rd/4th edition of Pagan Poker deck. So technically they didn't reprint their blue or earlier editions, but printed a new version.

But it depends on how you want to see it.

Next one coming

oooooooooo WORD

I've been checking eBay religiously for any version as I don't have a single one, glad to see these are back.

Haven't seen them IRL and I can already attest they are some of the most beautiful cards in existence