Pokémon TCG: Sword and Shield—Brilliant Stars

Question about base sets

P

pokepuzzle

New Member
this might be a nooby question (probably is :lol: ) but I've always wondered:

Exactly how many english base sets exist?

In my mind, there is:

Non-1st Edition, Non-shadowless set (Unlimited)
1st edition, Non-Shadowless set
Non-1st Edition, Shadowless set
1st Edition, Shadowless set

so there are essentially 4 different base sets?

am I right or completely wrong? Please enlighten me. Thanks.
 
1st Edition - Shadowless
Shadowless (unlimited)
Not-Shadowless (unlimited)
Not-Shadowless (1999-2000 copyright date/European release)
 
Thick and thin variants are not different types of cards.

It is just caused by different amounts of ink or pressure on the stamps.
 
Keep in mind that Machamp is the exception to all of those rules - there are 1st Edition, shadowed Machamps. They aren't "real" 1st edition, but they are real cards.
 
pokepuzzle said:
What is this? never heard of this before?
Click to expand...

The experts can probably elaborate but if I'm not mistaken, there was a 4th printing of base set with an updated Copyright that was only shipped for release in Europe. They can be pretty hard to find; I've gone through thousands of base cards and never found one.
 
DJGigabyte said:
Thick and thin variants are not different types of cards.

It is just caused by different amounts of ink or pressure on the stamps.
Click to expand...

I have confirmation that they are indeed different and completely separate runs. It was fully intentional. There is even more to other comments on this forum that can also been disproved. When possible I will post as without the proof I would not believe myself.
 
The 1999-2000 cards are easier to get than you'd think. My boyfriend and I have many commons and uncommons and we're from the US. Got them from some random bulk lots. They're really not worth much more than their "North American" counterparts.

The real rarities are the holos with the 1999-2000 copyright on them. These were probably short printed. Many holos that only have the 1999 copyright found their way into 1999-2000 packs, so far fewer holos have 1999-2000 as their copyright.
 
The_Charizard_Authority said:
I have confirmation that they are indeed different and completely separate runs. It was fully intentional. There is even more to other comments on this forum that can also been disproved. When possible I will post as without the proof I would not believe myself.
Click to expand...

But haven't we had confirmation directly from Wizards that only the very first print run was shadowless, and part of it was sent to be stamped?

The only way this could be true is if it was a choice made by the independent company who added the stamps.
 
DJGigabyte said:
But haven't we had confirmation directly from Wizards that only the very first print run was shadowless, and part of it was sent to be stamped?

The only way this could be true is if it was a choice made by the independent company who added the stamps.
Click to expand...

I was told this "....Usually a brand would produce one run of 1st edition with a run of unlimited at the same time. Then only runs of unlimited after that. But we broke the rules. It was based on numbers provided to C**** from the sales staff on what account orders they needed to fill plus an additional percentage of the run."

I then asked about a difference in the stamps and got a reply "So yes, to your question. That is why the 1st edition symbol looks different from the first run to the rerun of 1st edition cards."

There very well may have been a confirmation of only the 1st run being Shadowless.. idk. I do know that I am getting a direct quote now from someone there who was at the top saying otherwise.

The difference between a "Thick" and "Thin" stamp may be subtle but it is definitely consistent.
 
So who is saying all of this? I read this 3 times and do not know if this is WOTC or the 3rd party company being quoted. I still do not see the connection between a run of sets made by WOTC and the stamp being different from the 3rd party.

While there is a noticeable difference in the stamp, it could of been a number of reasons for why it is that way. In my opinion, it is how it was applied. Some of the 1st ed base cards have a stamp which is more gray than black. This is probably due to the ink being low when stamped, aka lower quality control. If you look at the 1st edition stamps after the base cards they are all consistently black and applied with the same pressure.

I do not see any proof to make claims that they intentionally made them thick and then changed to thin. To me it just looks like quality control came through on the later runs.
 
smpratte said:
So who is saying all of this? I read this 3 times and do not know if this is WOTC or the 3rd party company being quoted. I still do not see the connection between a run of sets made by WOTC and the stamp being different from the 3rd party.

While there is a noticeable difference in the stamp, it could of been a number of reasons for why it is that way. In my opinion, it is how it was applied. Some of the 1st ed base cards have a stamp which is more gray than black. This is probably due to the ink being low when stamped, aka lower quality control. If you look at the 1st edition stamps after the base cards they are all consistently black and applied with the same pressure.

I do not see any proof to make claims that they intentionally made them thick and then changed to thin. To me it just looks like quality control came through on the later runs.
Click to expand...

I am quoting a former WOTC top employee. The top when it comes to WOTC printing.. not just Pokemon. The only proof I have is the exact statements that is was intentionally done coming straight from WOTC.
 
I do not dismiss your resources or credentials, but in my opinion that statement about the cards is not definitive. It reads as a suggestion which does not say outright,"a different stamp was used". Moreover, I am more concerned with a statement from the actual company that stamped the cards, not Wotc. A confirmation about the stamp being different is what is needed. The focus of the statement seemed to be the print runs, not the actual stamps.

I personally highly doubt that the slight difference in apperance is a completely different stamp. The base set was the first set to be stamped, it was the test set if you will. It would make sense that they increased quality control and used a more consistent pressure once they tweaked the settings and found something they liked. This would explain why you have gray stamps and the thicker looking ones in the base set only.

But if you know someone who can confirm your claim I would love to listen!
 
smpratte said:
I do not dismiss your resources or credentials, but in my opinion that statement about the cards is not definitive. It reads as a suggestion which does not say outright,"a different stamp was used". Moreover, I am more concerned with a statement from the actual company that stamped the cards, not Wotc. A confirmation about the stamp being different is what is needed. The focus of the statement seemed to be the print runs, not the actual stamps.

I personally highly doubt that the slight difference in appearance is a completely different stamp. The base set was the first set to be stamped, it was the test set if you will. It would make sense that they increased quality control and used a more consistent pressure once they tweaked the settings and found something they liked. This would explain why you have gray stamps and the thicker looking ones in the base set only.

But if you know someone who can confirm your claim I would love to listen!
Click to expand...

I cannot say they used a different stamp, I can only ask. I was just asserting that there was a variance. It very well could have been just tweaking in pressure. The statement I was given went further into details explaining why it was only the holos that received it. If you did not catch it above it had to do with sales.

I also realize if I could release the entire statement this would make much more sense. If I could get this person on here to back up the info I would! I have a ton of Pokemon news I want to tell about but without proof it would be hard to believe since I am in no way associated with WOTC.
 
Last edited:
Rusty and Scott...A different font was used before the thick stamp went into use.

Note:
The thin version has a thin "1" and a thick "D".
The thick version has a thick "1" and a thin "D" .

If you consider and view closely, you'll realize it can't be a pressure variance because of the "opposite D";)

I hope this clears up any confusion, Gary.
 
Gary,

The "1" is a gap in the ink, whereas the "D" is ink. So extra pressure would create a larger area covered by ink, so the "D" would be larger, the gap creating the "1" would be smaller.

So what you're describing is what would be expected by a pressure change.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top