Which is more important--shuffling or durability?

Thread originally posted on the Aeclectic Tarot Forum on 04 Oct 2003, and now archived in the Forum Library.

HudsonGray	04 Oct 2003
I've narrowed the papers down to two types. Personally I favor long term durability for the deck (that I'm getting printed up) at the expense of easy shuffling. Steve thinks shuffling should be the priority & favors the thinner paper that slides easily. Is it more important to you folks to have an easy to shuffle deck, or one that will last longer because the card stock is thicker? The price for either paper is the same at the printers, I just need to make a final decision here on it.

Ruby7	04 Oct 2003
I prefer thicker more durable paper stock. I am not the best shuffler anyway so I would rather have a deck that will last and not feel "cheap". Ruby7

Dark_angel	04 Oct 2003
I prefer thick cards. People can't riffle them (one of my pet hates) and they last longer as a result. Also, they don't crease as easily and can withstand more stuff happening to them. xxx

WolfyJames	04 Oct 2003
I don't like shuffling, and I don't shuffle much, so I vote for durability too. I'm sure people want their deck to last and to look their best as long as possible. Besides, printing your deck must be expensive, what would it be to add some more money to make sure you get a good quality deck? Otherwise, you would be paying for nothing, might as well use your printer. Edit: Oups! I just reread your post and I noticed the price is the same for the difference of thickness for the paper.

cricket	04 Oct 2003
Even though I do like to riffle shuffle, the thicker paper is much better. Yes it does make shuffling harder, but it's also much more durable. Besides, once you get the 'bend' in the cards, they'll shuffle fairly easily anyway.

Chronata	04 Oct 2003
I am with everyone here... Go with the thicker paper! After spending money for a deck, it's heartbreaking for it to wear out...especially if its a rare, small print one! And although I like rifle shuffling, that is never as important as the durability.( it's easy to choose cards without extensive shuffling anyway...but if the card is too worn that its unreadable...well...)

Le_Corsair	04 Oct 2003
Thin card stock is evil. It tears, it folds, it takes a permanent set. It is far less durable than thicker stock. You should go only with thick card stock. You'll rarely hear people complain about stock being too thick, but lots of complaints if it is too thin. Bob :THERM

Logiatrix	05 Oct 2003
HudsonGray, I refer you to one of the Laws of Tarotivity: THICK Card Stock=Deck Longevity and Happy Tarotphiles. THIN Card Stock=Bargain Bin at Barnes & Noble and Bad Reviews. Okay, not necessarily BAD reviews, but certainly something along the lines of, "Such a beautiful deck, too bad about that flimsy card stock..." Sure, thinner card stock makes a deck more shuffle-able, but the irony is that all the shuffling is gonna destroy the deck anyway, if it's already so thin in the cards. As a tarotphile with small arthritic hands, I would LOVE to have a tarot deck that I could riffle-shufffle all day--but not if it's gonna fall apart on me! Chronate made an excellent point: having to replace a deck you "bonded" with is pretty heart-wrenching, too. There is one Deck With Flimsy Card Stock that I favored for a long time, because it is very beautiful...But now, after replacing it for a third time, I won't be buying another one again. No matter how much I like it, I couldn't bond with it, because I had to replace it so much. Any tarotphile will tell you, even if he or she can read with a deck right out of the box, that THE deck is YOUR deck, the one that you have journeyed with. The quality of the deck is a large component in creating that connection between a tarot deck and it's reader--it's gotta last. A friend of mine who is a proffessional reader even calls his deck his "partner," so there's one example of that relationship. You may very well be creating somebody's "partner"--be it a professional tool or a personal confidant. I can tell that you understand this responsibility, since you are asking such a pertinent question. Clearly, we tarotphiles are in good hands here. Carry on. :D

Sulis	05 Oct 2003
Thick card stock for durability, definately. I think that the card finish is the most important factor when it comes to shufflability (Sp?). I have the Glastonbury tarot and I love it but I find it very difficult to use as the cards are overly glossy and this leaves them feeling sticky and plasticy. Tarot of Prague on the other hand feels gorgeous, the matte finish makes the cards feel older and makes shuffling a dream. Go for thick card stock and a matte finish IMO. Love and light Sulis xx

Astraea	05 Oct 2003
I prefer thicker cardstock, definitely. I'd rather adjust my shuffling to the materials used in the deck than have an easy-shuffling deck that doesn't last.

galadrielsphial	05 Oct 2003
Thicker card stock, definitely. Especially with the price of most decks being at least thirty dollars US for the deck and book, I want to be sure any deck I buy is going to be durable and hold up for a long time. Since I view my decks as investments with a lot of personal meaning as well, I'll take harder shuffling in exchange for a longer deck life.

WolfyJames	06 Oct 2003
Quote: Originally posted by Tauni As a tarotphile with small arthritic hands... You're not the only one on this. I too have small arthritic hands, and shuffling is indeed difficult. That's the reason I don't shuffle. I prefer a thick quality deck anyway.

HudsonGray	06 Oct 2003
Thick it is, absolutely nobody I asked wanted a thinner paper. I really did think this was the better way to go--durability wins.

baba-prague	07 Oct 2003
Hudson, Can I just back up this opinion and throw in something else? I believe very strongly that things should age beautifully - I just hate the "throw away" culture that is around us more and more. I do think that heavier and better quality card stock probably ages with elegance, rather than ending up looking tatty. I think people will keep and use your deck and it would be great if it ends up looking better and better as it's used and enjoyed. Just a thought :-)

HudsonGray	07 Oct 2003
Best way to go would be to have it done up by a playing card manufacturer, but they want a minimum order of 5,000 decks, which is way out of my budget. I'm going to have to settle for what's available locally, material-wise and printing wise, & have to leave it at that. Since it is black & white, and a theme deck at that, both Llewellyn and US Games wouldn't be interested. I am doing up pouch bags for them, and will keep these at low cost (under $15) so even if they do get all used & bent over time, it's still up to the individual to decide whether to throw away or not.

dolphinprincess	07 Oct 2003
by now the jury is in - thick cards are better! i haver returned a few decks that i really liked bc of thin cards. huge pet peeve.. but i really just wanted to say i'm so excited about your deck.. ! i love it!

little	11 Oct 2003
Tarot is an experience that is tactile as well as visual- while you are looking at the cards, you are also holding them in your hands. I think that the way the cards FEEL is therefore just as important as the way they LOOK. The hands as well as the eyes react to them. I can't help thinking of my Tarot de Paris, which is so very beautiful, and yet I rarely read with it because it just doesn't feel good to the touch.

Justin	12 Oct 2003
A new friend of mine, who i actually met on this forum, told me something that might help. As it looks like the choice is going to be the durable stock, and your concerned about shuffling, there's a compromise. Go to any toy shop or place where they have unique games or a Magic Tricks store. Hopefully one of these places will cary a dusting powder ther Magicians use on their cards to keep them in good shuffling shape. The powder doesn't affect the cards at all, except to give them a nice fluid shuffling quality. Hope this helps! (You can thank bacchus --sp?--, he's the one that told me about this!) Justin

HudsonGray	12 Oct 2003
I wonder if that's the same stuff they put down on dance floors at weddings? A sort of silicone powder? The card stock was fine for me to shuffle, when I tested it, it was just a bit stiff. While not as sturdy as the plasticized commercial decks, with care, it should be fine. I've got a deck on 90# paper that someone else made up back in 1985, and even if the corners bend a tad from all the wear & tear, it still shuffles ok for me. If people do wear them out, well, I plan on having this around a long time (I do animal paper dolls too, which have been going pretty good since 1990 on that first design), so replacing a deck later will be possible. Steve's getting a web site up for me soon, just typing in 'ferret tarot' will let people find me. (Actually, the printer did a search on it after our first visit, he found the Aeclectic site here with 2 notations! Said there was 'another deck out there already' - wish he'd looked at the name, he'd have seen it was me! HA!).

WolfSpirit	12 Oct 2003
Hudson, looking forward to seeing your deck ! I hope it will be everything you want it to be :)

lawguy51	12 Oct 2003
Thoth-thick for me. They feel like playing cards. Mythic, too thin, but they have that well-worn look. Alchemical have a nice thick feel but are easy to shuffle. Guess I'm with the 'thicks'. Lawguy51

lark	12 Oct 2003
Something about thick cards that I've noticed.. Over the years as you shuffle them the paper on the edges swells. This gives it a cloth like feel. It's how I wish all my decks felt. So thick card stock please. And good luck with your new deck!

Shadow Wolf	13 Oct 2003
I really don't mind shuffling....... But would still prefer a deck with higher durability!! Even the stiffest decks loosen up and become easier to shuffle in a week or two. Can't beat durability though !!!

The Which is more important--shuffling or durability? thread was originally posted on 04 Oct 2003 in the Talking Tarot board, and is now archived in the Forum Library. Read the active threads in Talking Tarot, or read more archived threads.