I thought I would ask Dakka this as the last related topic i could find was around 2013, which was before i got back into the hobby. I did search so hopefully i didn't miss something!

Ok not looking to stoke up Painted vs Unpainted debate - everyone is free to do there own thing! However........

About a year ago i started a fully painted, no proxies, no WAAC players, 21+ only 40k group run from my home, I had low expectation given the strict requirements I had put in place. I got a surprising response... We now have 8 regulars 2-3 infrequent players and 2 more getting stuff together as we speak! all within one year in a relatively remote location.

During this time there have been a few instances of me having to remind potential players of our groups requirements, this has resulted in most amicably deciding this is not for them but one or two have suggested i am being unfair. This prompted me to look on the internet for others thoughts (bad idea right!). The attitudes i found were quite surprising to me!

My take on on how i want to enjoy the hobby is cool looking armies on cool boards played at a chilled pace while having a laugh (and a beer sometimes!), not to say we don't play to win just not at all costs! This means that I will decline to play those without painted armies, i would even decline those who do the 'technically' 3 colour minimum paint job as well as those with proxies. I am not judging anyone who doesn't want to hobby to my standard i just don't want to partake in 1-3 hour game of something i won't enjoy, yet from previous discussions this would indicate i am in line for ridicule such as being a snob!!

Thoughts? Anyone been subject to such 'snob' branding

Depends, if it is a one off game, i do not mind, but expect sneering re-marks during game play. If it is a beginning player that just has begun, days or weeks before, i will help him/her/it with advice concerning painting.

If it is a tournament, unpainted miniatures is a no no.

Your house, your rules. I wouldn't feel bad about it.

From what you've said but you might be skirting the line re snobbery.

Three colours is the usual minimum so being above this is a bit harsh. I say this as you could be doing yourself a disservice on the basis that you might be missing out on more gamers (you can't have enough I reckon) and more personalities for the mix. Plus It's the easiest thing in the world to help another gamer up his/her skills over time and they might be a really sound person to boot.

Also you can over organise what is supposed to be a fun activity. Do you check their armies before gaming? If so you might be taking it a bit too seriously. That might be fine but it's a good question to ask yourself and one that you seem to be doing.

Finally don't get too hung up on painting ability as the rule of 4' always applies. You really won't tell the difference between a top end paint job and three colour minimum standing over a table full of models and scenery.

Your hobby, your choice. Play the game however you like.

I'm a 'snob' and would prefer to go without a game vs play against unpainted.
I'd rather a painting session, terrain building session or chat in the pub with that opponent until we're up to speed.

Sounds fair enough. It's your hobby after all, not something you get paid to endure.

But should you turn down a game with someone, at least offer to help them reach your standards, be that taking the 3-colour army to a higher level or even just getting started painting all together.

Your house, your rules. I wouldn't feel bad about it.

From what you've said but you might be skirting the line re snobbery.

Three colours is the usual minimum so being above this is a bit harsh. I say this as you could be doing yourself a disservice on the basis that you might be missing out on more gamers (you can't have enough I reckon) and more personalities for the mix. Plus It's the easiest thing in the world to help another gamer up his/her skills over time and they might be a really sound person to boot.

Also you can over organise what is supposed to be a fun activity. Do you check their armies before gaming? If so you might be taking it a bit too seriously. That might be fine but it's a good question to ask yourself and one that you seem to be doing.

Finally don't get too hung up on painting ability as the rule of 4' always applies. You really won't tell the difference between a top end paint job and three colour minimum standing over a table full of models and scenery

When i say 'technically' 3 colours minimum i mean those who achieve this requirement on a technicality despite the end result, if your stuff looks cool with 3 colours then cool!

Ha there is no inspecting beforehand!! Normally its someone who has said there stuff is painted and has pitched up with squad where 7 are done 2 grey plastic one is undercoated with no arms etc. At which point we play the game but afterwards i have a polite word.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Your hobby, your choice. Play the game however you like.

I'm a 'snob' and would prefer to go without a game vs play against unpainted.
I'd rather a painting session, terrain building session or chat in the pub with that opponent until we're up to speed.

Yup! Amen brother

I get exactly what you are saying and I also detest playing against unpainted armies.

Not just because I love playing with nicely painted minis but also because I am a very visual person and thhe last 40K game I played was against a half painted but mostly black undercoated army.

I really struggled to tell units apart and it made for an unenjoyable game.

I have spent a long time painting up an army that's fully WYSIWYG and I would hope that my opponents would put put in similar effort.

HOWEVER - It's taken me 6 years to get to that point for one of my armies. I am slow painter and working full time doesn't leave me much free time to build and paint minis.

If I were part of your group I wouldn't have been able to play a game for at least 6 months and that would have been at best about 500pts.

I totally agree that it's right to set standards and expectations but sometimes you have to allow for WIP models.

I also like to try out new units before spending ages painting them.

However if you have specified that your group is for experienced or already invested palyers I think you have every right to do that and I reckon it would be a very cool group to be apart of.

Not everybody is a master painter though, no matter how hard they try which is why most tournies go for the 3 colour rule.

Something that might make me a snob is actually the games table.

I hate palying on a table with rubbish or unpainted terrain, especially as so much is available pre-painted and with the advent of fat mats etc.

It's fairly common for people who don't want to do the work to paint their armies to argue that people who like playing with painted armies adn don't want to play with unpainted armies are snobs.

There isn't any special virtue in playing with unpainted armies that you lack by not wanting to do it.

It's fairly common for people who don't want to do the work to paint their armies to argue that people who like playing with painted armies adn don't want to play with unpainted armies are snobs.

There isn't any special virtue in playing with unpainted armies that you lack by not wanting to do it.

^^THIS!!!

WTF is up with that? I don't wonder up to people with unpainted armies and call them lazy, i accept it may not be a priority for them or they just don't like it. If I did call them lazy i would be chastised by all accounts, yet its no issue for some to call me a snob..




Automatically Appended Next Post:

I get exactly what you are saying and I also detest playing against unpainted armies.

Not just because I love playing with nicely painted minis but also because I am a very visual person and thhe last 40K game I played was against a half painted but mostly black undercoated army.

I really struggled to tell units apart and it made for an unenjoyable game.

I have spent a long time painting up an army that's fully WYSIWYG and I would hope that my opponents would put put in similar effort.

HOWEVER - It's taken me 6 years to get to that point for one of my armies. I am slow painter and working full time doesn't leave me much free time to build and paint minis.

If I were part of your group I wouldn't have been able to play a game for at least 6 months and that would have been at best about 500pts.

I totally agree that it's right to set standards and expectations but sometimes you have to allow for WIP models.

I also like to try out new units before spending ages painting them.

However if you have specified that your group is for experienced or already invested palyers I think you have every right to do that and I reckon it would be a very cool group to be apart of.

Not everybody is a master painter though, no matter how hard they try which is why most tournies go for the 3 colour rule.

Something that might make me a snob is actually the games table.

I hate palying on a table with rubbish or unpainted terrain, especially as so much is available pre-painted and with the advent of fat mats etc.

Shame you're not closer

It did cross my mind that there will be good guys like you who i'm loosing out on but i made the decision that there are plenty of clubs that have no / very little requirements so I wanted to offer an alternative. It seemed to me the guy who didn't want to paint had all the options and the guy who invested the time and effort couldn't go somewhere and 'guarantee' a fully painted experience, thus why i made the choice i did.

P.S. our boards are cool! Fully painted FW city of death, gamemate.eu mats with full scatter and painted terrain - Only way to play!! (for me )

Like others have said Your House, Yours Rules

I'm also a bit of paint snob, like you say I'd rather play against a painted army than a non-painted one, even three colour is better than nothing (and for some horde armys 3 colour for the grunts is fine so long as the elites etc are better)

I'd tend to let people off large models, ie Knights or Demons, that are clearly a WiP but so long as its 3 colour, people do love to play with their shinys ASAP

I think proxys are a bit of a greyer area, given the prices of things, I'd be fine with someone 'testing' a unit they are thinking about buying with similar models for a game or three but generally not ongoing

My first club was pretty strict on painting standards. The core club organizers would often tell you they wouldn't play with your models if they weren't painted. Now, without context, this sounds kind of snobbish and verging on donkey-cave behaviour, but not only did the organizers set up regular painting nights and learning sessions (they were amazing hobbyists), all of their armies were fantastically painted and we always played on fully painted tables, some of which were entirely custom made.

To them, the idea of fielding their painted armies on a table they made from scratch that was also beautifully painted against a grey legion was just not what they signed up to do. However, they'd gladly let you use one of their armies for whatever game we were playing until you had your own force painted up.

That was probably the best club I've ever had and likely will ever have.

Our proxie rules are no model proxies but weapon proxies are ok as long as its not every weapon, I generally run 95% - 100% WYSIWYG

I get the proxy thing, maybe we are a bit harsh with that but I didn't want to slap arbitrary limits on how many times something could be used and monitor it. It's kind just become the norm now that there are no proxies...




Automatically Appended Next Post:

My first club was pretty strict on painting standards. The core club organizers would often tell you they wouldn't play with your models if they weren't painted. Now, without context, this sounds kind of snobbish and verging on donkey-cave behaviour, but not only did the organizers set up regular painting nights and learning sessions (they were amazing hobbyists), all of their armies were fantastically painted and we always played on fully painted tables, some of which were entirely custom made.

To them, the idea of fielding their painted armies on a table they made from scratch that was also beautifully painted against a grey legion was just not what they signed up to do. However, they'd gladly let you use one of their armies for whatever game we were playing until you had your own force painted up.

That was probably the best club I've ever had and likely will ever have.

I find stuff like this inspirational - This shows new players what can be done. My opinion is that far too many clubs these days inadvertently show new players grey unpainted armies are the norm. Perhaps it is the norm now........

If one of the groundrules of the 'club' is fully painted, then that's the rules. People know that when the look at joining. Why not arrange a painting rather than gaming night (social painting is actually very good for learning) if people are struggling getting their stuff together?

Indeed.

Snobbery is only an issue if someone is thumbing their nose at other peoples efforts. Me I appreciate the effort no mater the results and as I say it makes no difference from 4 foot away anyway.

Geordie wrote:


I find stuff like this inspirational - This shows new players what can be done. My opinion is that far too many clubs these days inadvertently show new players grey unpainted armies are the norm. Perhaps it is the norm now........

As it turns out, all the players that came out of that club when that particular leadership ran it when on to paint most of their models and encourage new gamers to as well. There was no animosity in part due to the regular painting nights together instead of gaming, and that they would gladly let you push their models around for a game or play with whatever painted models you did have.

It always felt very reasonable to me and the matches turned out for the better as they were always painted vs painted on a painted, nicely set up board. Plus, it meant we could take massive pictures of all our forces to show off, like my giant spaceship picture of all of our club's fleets.

I wouldn't characterize any private club for a hobby as being "unfair" for having particular requirements to participate unless you were trying to have your town council ban any other club or other such silliness. It's a club, and by nature optional. If someone doesn't want to abide by the rules they can start their own club. Even if you owned a store you'd have a right to enforce such rules; you'd be a fool as you'd be driving away customers, but still within your rights.

The only time you'd need to be concerned about the effects of your rules is if you became the only club in an X mile radius. Then you're not engaging with the hobby just for you, but rather dictating terms to anyone who wanted to get started and stifling the hobby in your area. Then you'd want to give serious thought to holding regular painting nights and such. You're still not wrong per se, but you're doing a bad thing so you may want to examine that. However, that's relatively unlikely scenario to happen in the UK or Europe due to population density, though eminently possible in the rural US.

One question though on proxies since I've seen that word used in a few different contexts; is that meaning a model that is clearly a Space Marine being used as a Necron or Terminator as a Centurion is prohibited, which is how I use the word? Or does that mean only the manufacturer's models for the game and bringing in other ranges, which I would personally call alternative models, is not allowed? That's a very broad can of worms, as with most folks it varies with how good the alternate is (e.g. - random toys off the shelf = no, but alternate bitz makers = fine), but since you're looking to enforce a certain standard on the table I'm just curious about the extent of that rule. Just to put a more concrete example forward, if someone had a full DreamForge Games (random painted examples; worth noting the 2nd link's model is taller than a Knight by a sizable amount) army painted up nicely as AdMech or Imperial Guard, would that force be welcome on the table or is the immersion of the setting more important?

Good on you for actually encouraging people to play with painted armys, I feel pretty muuch the same way you do in relation to the painting, apart from the three colours thing !

I can totally sympathise with people that do not have enough time to paint an army, i am in the same boat, but no excuse is really needed.
If you really want to have an army of a decent standard badly enough, then you will make it happen one way or another.

Its each to his own at the end of the day, if they dont like it they can leave, just be nice about it, accept that other people will feel differently, and dont be drawn into any arguments.

There are plenty of other hobby related activities that can be done with your friends other than playing a full size game.

I wouldn't characterize any private club for a hobby as being "unfair" for having particular requirements to participate unless you were trying to have your town council ban any other club or other such silliness. It's a club, and by nature optional. If someone doesn't want to abide by the rules they can start their own club. Even if you owned a store you'd have a right to enforce such rules; you'd be a fool as you'd be driving away customers, but still within your rights.

The only time you'd need to be concerned about the effects of your rules is if you became the only club in an X mile radius. Then you're not engaging with the hobby just for you, but rather dictating terms to anyone who wanted to get started and stifling the hobby in your area. Then you'd want to give serious thought to holding regular painting nights and such. You're still not wrong per se, but you're doing a bad thing so you may want to examine that. However, that's relatively unlikely scenario to happen in the UK or Europe due to population density, though eminently possible in the rural US.

One question though on proxies since I've seen that word used in a few different contexts; is that meaning a model that is clearly a Space Marine being used as a Necron or Terminator as a Centurion is prohibited, which is how I use the word? Or does that mean only the manufacturer's models for the game and bringing in other ranges, which I would personally call alternative models, is not allowed? That's a very broad can of worms, as with most folks it varies with how good the alternate is (e.g. - random toys off the shelf = no, but alternate bitz makers = fine), but since you're looking to enforce a certain standard on the table I'm just curious about the extent of that rule. Just to put a more concrete example forward, if someone had a full DreamForge Games (random painted examples; worth noting the 2nd link's model is taller than a Knight by a sizable amount) army painted up nicely as AdMech or Imperial Guard, would that force be welcome on the table or is the immersion of the setting more important?

On the only club in X mile scenario. I see what your saying, rightly or wrongly i'm not sure i would budge on my position. Still think I would I stick up for the guy looking for a painted game - Maybe the luxury of the amount of gamers near me allows me to take that position and i would change my tune if i lived in the rural US!

Proxie wise we use the word how you use it, a predator proxied as a vindicator is not ok etc. Once you open the door where does it stop?

As for alternatives to be honest its not really come up yet but its a good issue to consider, maybe worth a group chat in advance of any issue at the next game night. My initial thoughts are no. Now that's not because i don't think some models would be totally fine and work well in the group but again it opens the door.... Not set on that one tbh but i'm generally against having to monitor any grey areas in the group.

A good question though.

Alternative models are really a two-edged sword because it's just a huge spectrum. If you say you don't want them in at all, you cut out some absolutely fantastic kits that could integrate well with 40k. If you say everything is allowed, you may end up facing off against a Breponnian army; to be fair I wouldn't mind such a thing once as a lark as there's a clear commitment to the theme there, but as a regular opponent? No thank you, it's a one-trick pony and once that novelty wears off it's a bit too jarring alongside more traditional miniatures for my tastes.

Might just be a thing where if it looks to reasonably integrate with the setting and WYSIWYG is still applicable then it's fine. I personally am building an Imperial Guard force with Victoria Miniatures Tannenberg Fusiliers which are obviously mimicking the Mordian Iron Guard, and the weapons similarly emulate 40k aesthetics so you can tell a plasma rifle from a lasgun from a flamer. Instead of Leman Russes, I plan on using a variety of Dust SSU vehicles since they too share a common hull with differences in turrets (e.g. - a "Leman Russ Exterminator"). Not the most effective army from a list-building standpoint, but a unified theme and clear "this is that" equivalence. I won't claim that they will be well-painted, but my prototype squad is already up to 12 colors in varying amounts.

As you point out though, saying "X is ok, but Y is not" starts to delve into some grey areas and that can lead to some discord where models more "on the bubble" of integrating come in. At the same time, turning people away because they like different models than what GW makes seems like it could be equally problematic. Definitely a thing to discuss ahead of time and be clear about up-front.

As I get older, I like the social/immersive/narrative/what have you aspects of minis gaming. I enjoy winning, and I play to win, but I'd rather have a fun game, a good brew, some laughs, and some great visuals that anything else. If I were near you, I'd totally show up with some fully painted armies.

I think that holding to higher standards means you tend to keep a core together more. It can be harder to recruit, but when you do, you recruit people that are more committed. And any club worth it's salt probably has an extra army to lend to newer players to use while they paint up their armies.

All told, I've reached a point where I really like painting, and I'd rather paint than play unpainted.

Eh, your club, your house, your rules. But I wouldn't join, despite having fully painted armies myself. I think you're skirting the line of snobbery.

I'm gonna go against the grain here and say I don't really care about unpainted armies. I'd rather have a fun time than play against the most jaw-dropping of armies. Paint splatter isn't what makes it fun, it's the people I play with.

I only field painted armies myself, but I would never begrudge someone for not having a painted army, as I know family/work/school/etc. takes a toll. I also know some people just don't like painting.

Geordie wrote:
I thought I would ask Dakka this as the last related topic i could find was around 2013, which was before i got back into the hobby. I did search so hopefully i didn't miss something!

Ok not looking to stoke up Painted vs Unpainted debate - everyone is free to do there own thing! However........

About a year ago i started a fully painted, no proxies, no WAAC players, 21+ only 40k group run from my home, I had low expectation given the strict requirements I had put in place. I got a surprising response... We now have 8 regulars 2-3 infrequent players and 2 more getting stuff together as we speak! all within one year in a relatively remote location.

During this time there have been a few instances of me having to remind potential players of our groups requirements, this has resulted in most amicably deciding this is not for them but one or two have suggested i am being unfair. This prompted me to look on the internet for others thoughts (bad idea right!). The attitudes i found were quite surprising to me!

My take on on how i want to enjoy the hobby is cool looking armies on cool boards played at a chilled pace while having a laugh (and a beer sometimes!), not to say we don't play to win just not at all costs! This means that I will decline to play those without painted armies, i would even decline those who do the 'technically' 3 colour minimum paint job as well as those with proxies. I am not judging anyone who doesn't want to hobby to my standard i just don't want to partake in 1-3 hour game of something i won't enjoy, yet from previous discussions this would indicate i am in line for ridicule such as being a snob!!

Thoughts? Anyone been subject to such 'snob' branding

The tl;dr answer is ‘your house, your rules’.

The long answer is this. I like painting. I like modelling, and converting. I have no problems spending 3 or 4 hours painting a model that might not even have a game system or rules profile to play it with – in other words, I enjoy painting models for their own sakes. Strangely, what made me realise this was deciding to re-paint my Circle of Orboros army, and then going to a WMH tourney a few years ago, with my army in the middle of ‘reconstruction’ –the army I was fielding was a mix of ‘first draft’ painted models (ie yet to be stripped/repainted), stripped and repainted models (new scheme, more experience/skill so generally a lot ‘better’), and some stripped and greenstuffed conversion-in-progress models that had yet to be painted. As you can imagine, the mix of painted (with 2 paint schemes!) and unpainted was quite jarring and unsatisfying, and afterwards, I swore to myself to never play with unpainted models again. I have kept to that vow. I don’t mind playing against unpainted stuff, but have an overwhelming preference to play against painted models.

Now, when I read your OP, and all I can do is smile Gordie. I want to buy you a beer. And yes, I really mean that. I often feel that gamers are their own worst enemies – we can be a very toxic and bitter community and should come with a ‘hazardous’ label. I think intertia and a lack of proactivity is one of the greatest faults of our community – too many people would rather just sit back and complain, rather than doing anything about it. And here you are, having a ‘vision’ for the game you want to play, for the people you want to play against, and for the type of community you want to be a part of, and what’s more, you went out and made it happen. You built it. That’s it, right there. That’s what I’m always harping on about. Kudos. And not only that – you’ve taken ownership/control of your games and built a community from your home. I’ve gotten into arguments with people online who stated how you simply cant build a community from home. I bet you’ll also start spouting such apparent ‘nonsense’ as communicating with your opponents, co-operating to make fair match ups and other ‘guff’. Frankly, as far as I am concerned, when it comes to the hobby, you are doing it right.

And you have a bunch of ‘restrictions’. Painted armies? Agreed. See above. I have no issues playing against unpainted models, but much rather painted stuff. It adds so much more to the game, and frankly, I feel people are missing out by skipping the painting and modelling (and I say that as a ‘grown up’ with limited time to paint/hobby. I appreciate though not everyone has the time to paint everything to an ‘excellent’ standard ( I certainly don’t!), but so long as ‘some’ effort has gone in, and it looks a somewhat decent ‘table top standard’, you’ll never hear a complaint from me.

No proxies? Generally yes but with caveats. ‘this coke can is a dreadnought’? fair enough. Im against that kind of malarkey. That said, its not cut and dried. I hope you are open to conversions (the line between proxy/conversion can be quite fine at times..). Similarly, alternative third party models that look identical/better’ is a big one for me. Anvil Industry’s Black Ops (http://anvilindustry.co.uk/Black-Ops/Black-Ops-Fireteam) are amazing stand-ins for Space Marines their Republic and Unity Council infantry (http://anvilindustry.co.uk/AFTERLIFE/Republic/Republic-Grenadiers) or Dreamforge’s Eisenkern infantry (http://dreamforge-games.com/collections/infantry/products/eisenkern-stormtroopers-20-man-set) would do great for carapace armoured guard, Space Marine Scouts or Stormtroopers. Frankly, there are some amazing model lines out there and I think its an absolute shame to arbitrarily ban some of these for the simple reason that they don’t have a ‘GW’ stamp on their bums, when they’re perfectly adequate for purpose, and frankly, look absolutely stellar. Then there are the usual exceptions to ‘no proxies’, ranging from ‘Oh damn, I forgot my Chaplain’ to ‘mind if I try something silly’ and use X instead of Y?

No WAAC players? Yup. Surprisingly, I have to agree with you here. I love tournaments, but make a distinction between being ‘competitive’ and being ‘waac’. Competitive is fine. Competitive is great. However, ‘all the competitive, all of the time’ can get tiresome and leads to rapid burnout, if you ask me. However, WAAC players are distinct from ‘competitive’ – they’re a distinct subset of gamers that exist across every spectrum, whether it is casual at all costs scrubs or noobstalking win at all costs PITAs. Its got nothing to do with casual, or competitive, and everything to do with lousy social dynamics, bullying, selfish, smug and condescending attitudes and frankly, its not something I get involved with out of choice. As you say, its about enjoying the hobby with cool looking armies on cool boards played at a chilled pace while having a laugh (and a beer sometimes!).

Age limit? Yup. I’m in my thirties (just). I don’t want to play around kids or teenagers, generally. With respect, I find I am at a point in my life where I have a lot less in common with college ‘kids’ and much prefer hanging out with my peers who are at the same place as I am in life and who I have more in common with. You get older, your perspective changes – that sort of thing.

As you say, it’s about enjoying the hobby with cool looking armies on cool boards played at a chilled pace while having a laugh with mates, and maybe a few beers (or tea). You’d be surprised how much easing off on the ‘arms race’ gets ‘dormant’ players out of the woodwork, and gets ‘extinct’ players active and involved with the game. We mainly play with a group of 4 at a friend’s house on Friday evenings – mainly historicals but some sci-fi and so on. We very much embrace the ‘home brew’ and ‘laid back’ approach and if anything, a more sedate pace is quite a refreshing change for me. Last few weeks have been painting evenings, and I’ve gotten loads of my LOTR ‘historicals’ done. Another group of people I play with are fellow WMH players. I got talking to them after a masters a few years ago, and we all found ourselves, by coincidence to be in the same place in life. Wives, girlfriends, dogs, kids, mortgages, jobs, other hobbies/interests/commitments, and none of us had the time to properly ‘chase the WMH meta’ and being honest, none of us were entirely enjoying the experience of playing against some of the ‘big sharks’ that swim in the tank– they’re nice guys, but play at a level/pace/intensity and understanding that is beyond us frankly and which none of us really enjoy or have the time/interest to keep pace with. And over the course of a few conversations and traded numbers we ended up with us folks meeting up regularly for ‘game days’ amongst ourselves, and playing at a more laid back pace in a friendly environment, sometimes at stores, sometimes at homes. We’ve got a few new guys coming into it through this way too, and its really enjoyable. As you say, the numbers you get by approaching it this way are quite surprising – you have a dozen players actively involved, or semi-involed, or working on projects. We probably have the same, if not more. The fact you do it in a more remote location is all the more impressive in terms of what you have built.

So long as what you are doing doesn’t become some kind of ‘elitist club’ there shouldn’t be any issues. I don’t think you are being unfair, but I can see why people might not want to join – again, ‘play with likeminded folks’ works generally, but for some, your way of playing mightn’t be their idea of ‘fun’. And they’re not necessarily wrong.

All I can say is keep it up Gordie. If you find yourself near Edinburgh, send me a message. There’s a beer in it.

Im firmly in the snob camp then.

Never played with unpainted figures and never will... wouldn't let them on my table either. Luckily my gaming comrades all have the same attitude and we have enough stuff to play while painting up new projects. Plus plenty of stuff for anyone new to use until they have stuff done.

Its gotta look pretty. Otherwise, may as well be a board game.

We are mainly historical gamers though, so that may be a defining difference. Historical gamers don't tend to use unpainted stuff really from what Ive seen over the last few decades.

My house is the same. If it isn't painted then its not going on the table. I put way too much time and money into building nice terrain for someone to plop their gray plastic down on a finished product. If a member needs help painting then we will pitch in no questions asked.

No doubt having this standard has gotten things painted where they never would have been before. As a result, the collective efforts of several guys has given us a pretty good looking set up.

I would never go elsewhere and tell people how to enjoy their hobby, as I understand that people enjoy it for different reasons. But I won't enjoy a game with unpainted minis, so at my house paint it or don't bring it.

I respect how others play in their own places and expect the same in return. No need for name calling.

Congratulations on starting a game club with standards.
As others have said it's your place and it's your rules.
I have a club that also adheres to the fully painted rule. We also only game on well-done terrain. We've been doing so for 6 years and it's great to know that everytime I game it's going to be a visually excellent experience I completely understand the desire to have a gaming experience that meets your aesthetic preferences every time. When your game time is limited, then there's not much reason to settle for an experience that doesn't satisfy. I have very strong ideas about standards in wargaming as enumerated and vigorously debated here:
http://chicagoskirmish.blogspot.com/2014/08/painting-matters-in-defense-of-hobby.html

On the other hand, we don't have a specific painting standard beyond "Painted only" and while we hew very close to WYSIWYG, we welcome and encourage alternate models. Of course our model allowances are almost required since we play mostly generic and indie rulesets for which there are no official rulesets.

I'd not be interested in a club that required all GW minis, but still I'm tempted to say no snobbery. However, before I commit, I'd be curious to hear you clarify what you mean by.

- "I would even decline those who do the 'technically' 3 colour minimum paint job". Did people know ahead of time you had specific standards for the degree of painting required? Exactly how well does a mini have to be painted to be allowed on the table and how well are those standards enumerated and understood?

and

- "No Proxies" Does this simply mean that everything is WYSIWYG in terms of gear, armament and size, or does it also mean only GW figures and no alternate figures at all? Would Victoria or Anvil Industries figures be acceptable? Would properly converted historical models or models from other games that meet a 40k aesthetic and satisfy WYSIWYG be acceptable? What about scratchbuilds?

Snob? Definately! But who the hell cares, its how you want to play it!

Big P wrote:
Im firmly in the snob camp then.

Never played with unpainted figures and never will... wouldn't let them on my table either. Luckily my gaming comrades all have the same attitude and we have enough stuff to play while painting up new projects. Plus plenty of stuff for anyone new to use until they have stuff done.

Its gotta look pretty. Otherwise, may as well be a board game.

We are mainly historical gamers though, so that may be a defining difference. Historical gamers don't tend to use unpainted stuff really from what Ive seen over the last few decades.

That's been my experience too.

Unpainted armies never seemed to be a problem in a club that was mainly based on historicals. There wasn't even a stated rule. Everyone just took it for granted that we played games with painted figures.

I remember various sessions of madly painting units to get them ready for games the next day, force drying them very carefully in a slightly warm oven. When I came to 40K I did the same.

In my role-playing experience too, people used to paint their figures. Of course it's far less of a job to do half a dozen models than a whole army.

To be fair, I have not often come across 40K players who hadn't painted their army or at least were over half-way through the process. I suspect the people who genuinely won't do it at all are a small minority.

To offer the other perspective.

Playing table-top miniature games is an experience wholly unlike anything in an RTS or other video game, and some people really enjoy the gaming aspect.

It's easy to spend 30 minutes clipping and assembling a squad with no paint, primer, or sanding/line removal.

It's not easy to find a way to paint that army if you are a terrible painter, don't want to pay someone else to do it, or don't know what you want your final army list to look like.

For those folks, (I was one), it can be hard to fathom why some guy won't just be cool and play the game, because the game is why we buy these expensive mini's, right?

I've never been denied a game based on paint, but I've seen someone do it, and the rest of the stores response was like.. "Oh. Look at Mr. Fancy pants. Fine, he can not play a game."

We are a close-knit group, and took it as insult he told a really nice guy to bugger off because his plastic wasn't pretty.

Overall, I'm tolerant of any gaming preferences. Just thought I'd offer perspective.

Are you a snob? Probably not.
Are you elitist? Maybe. Not associating with others who don't meet your standards is kinda the definition of the word.
Are you doing something wrong? Nope!

A couple of pics from our group.

Overwhelming surprised by the positive response considering previously researched discussions!

 Thunderfrog wrote:

To offer the other perspective.

Playing table-top miniature games is an experience wholly unlike anything in an RTS or other video game, and some people really enjoy the gaming aspect.

It's easy to spend 30 minutes clipping and assembling a squad with no paint, primer, or sanding/line removal.

It's not easy to find a way to paint that army if you are a terrible painter, don't want to pay someone else to do it, or don't know what you want your final army list to look like.

For those folks, (I was one), it can be hard to fathom why some guy won't just be cool and play the game, because the game is why we buy these expensive mini's, right?

I've never been denied a game based on paint, but I've seen someone do it, and the rest of the stores response was like.. "Oh. Look at Mr. Fancy pants. Fine, he can not play a game."

We are a close-knit group, and took it as insult he told a really nice guy to bugger off because his plastic wasn't pretty.

Overall, I'm tolerant of any gaming preferences. Just thought I'd offer perspective.

Are you a snob? Probably not.
Are you elitist? Maybe. Not associating with others who don't meet your standards is kinda the definition of the word.
Are you doing something wrong? Nope!

This. It's not really a gakky move if it's your house and your club, you can set your own rules. It's another thing to go to a store and judge/mock people for not painting.

 Thunderfrog wrote:

To offer the other perspective.

Playing table-top miniature games is an experience wholly unlike anything in an RTS or other video game, and some people really enjoy the gaming aspect.

It's easy to spend 30 minutes clipping and assembling a squad with no paint, primer, or sanding/line removal.

It's not easy to find a way to paint that army if you are a terrible painter, don't want to pay someone else to do it, or don't know what you want your final army list to look like.

For those folks, (I was one), it can be hard to fathom why some guy won't just be cool and play the game, because the game is why we buy these expensive mini's, right?

I've never been denied a game based on paint, but I've seen someone do it, and the rest of the stores response was like.. "Oh. Look at Mr. Fancy pants. Fine, he can not play a game."

We are a close-knit group, and took it as insult he told a really nice guy to bugger off because his plastic wasn't pretty.

Overall, I'm tolerant of any gaming preferences. Just thought I'd offer perspective.

Are you a snob? Probably not.
Are you elitist? Maybe. Not associating with others who don't meet your standards is kinda the definition of the word.
Are you doing something wrong? Nope!

Well said. It's a very good example of the perspective that views a miniature wargame essentially as a more open-ended board game with no board. This is an entirely valid point of view. For the individual whose primary desire is just to play a game with interesting playing pieces and a rich background, painting is at best secondary, and very possibly not even on their radar.

However, for those of us who entered the hobby for the "Spectacle of Painted armies on beautiful terrain" (which I contend is the long held tradition of wargaming) such a point of view is so foreign as to represent at least a different branch of the hobby and perhaps an entirely different hobby altogether.

The tl;dr answer is ‘your house, your rules’.

The long answer is this. I like painting. I like modelling, and converting. I have no problems spending 3 or 4 hours painting a model that might not even have a game system or rules profile to play it with – in other words, I enjoy painting models for their own sakes. Strangely, what made me realise this was deciding to re-paint my Circle of Orboros army, and then going to a WMH tourney a few years ago, with my army in the middle of ‘reconstruction’ –the army I was fielding was a mix of ‘first draft’ painted models (ie yet to be stripped/repainted), stripped and repainted models (new scheme, more experience/skill so generally a lot ‘better’), and some stripped and greenstuffed conversion-in-progress models that had yet to be painted. As you can imagine, the mix of painted (with 2 paint schemes!) and unpainted was quite jarring and unsatisfying, and afterwards, I swore to myself to never play with unpainted models again. I have kept to that vow. I don’t mind playing against unpainted stuff, but have an overwhelming preference to play against painted models.

Now, when I read your OP, and all I can do is smile Gordie. I want to buy you a beer. And yes, I really mean that. I often feel that gamers are their own worst enemies – we can be a very toxic and bitter community and should come with a ‘hazardous’ label. I think intertia and a lack of proactivity is one of the greatest faults of our community – too many people would rather just sit back and complain, rather than doing anything about it. And here you are, having a ‘vision’ for the game you want to play, for the people you want to play against, and for the type of community you want to be a part of, and what’s more, you went out and made it happen. You built it. That’s it, right there. That’s what I’m always harping on about. Kudos. And not only that – you’ve taken ownership/control of your games and built a community from your home. I’ve gotten into arguments with people online who stated how you simply cant build a community from home. I bet you’ll also start spouting such apparent ‘nonsense’ as communicating with your opponents, co-operating to make fair match ups and other ‘guff’. Frankly, as far as I am concerned, when it comes to the hobby, you are doing it right.

And you have a bunch of ‘restrictions’. Painted armies? Agreed. See above. I have no issues playing against unpainted models, but much rather painted stuff. It adds so much more to the game, and frankly, I feel people are missing out by skipping the painting and modelling (and I say that as a ‘grown up’ with limited time to paint/hobby. I appreciate though not everyone has the time to paint everything to an ‘excellent’ standard ( I certainly don’t!), but so long as ‘some’ effort has gone in, and it looks a somewhat decent ‘table top standard’, you’ll never hear a complaint from me.

No proxies? Generally yes but with caveats. ‘this coke can is a dreadnought’? fair enough. Im against that kind of malarkey. That said, its not cut and dried. I hope you are open to conversions (the line between proxy/conversion can be quite fine at times..). Similarly, alternative third party models that look identical/better’ is a big one for me. Anvil Industry’s Black Ops (http://anvilindustry.co.uk/Black-Ops/Black-Ops-Fireteam) are amazing stand-ins for Space Marines their Republic and Unity Council infantry (http://anvilindustry.co.uk/AFTERLIFE/Republic/Republic-Grenadiers) or Dreamforge’s Eisenkern infantry (http://dreamforge-games.com/collections/infantry/products/eisenkern-stormtroopers-20-man-set) would do great for carapace armoured guard, Space Marine Scouts or Stormtroopers. Frankly, there are some amazing model lines out there and I think its an absolute shame to arbitrarily ban some of these for the simple reason that they don’t have a ‘GW’ stamp on their bums, when they’re perfectly adequate for purpose, and frankly, look absolutely stellar. Then there are the usual exceptions to ‘no proxies’, ranging from ‘Oh damn, I forgot my Chaplain’ to ‘mind if I try something silly’ and use X instead of Y?

No WAAC players? Yup. Surprisingly, I have to agree with you here. I love tournaments, but make a distinction between being ‘competitive’ and being ‘waac’. Competitive is fine. Competitive is great. However, ‘all the competitive, all of the time’ can get tiresome and leads to rapid burnout, if you ask me. However, WAAC players are distinct from ‘competitive’ – they’re a distinct subset of gamers that exist across every spectrum, whether it is casual at all costs scrubs or noobstalking win at all costs PITAs. Its got nothing to do with casual, or competitive, and everything to do with lousy social dynamics, bullying, selfish, smug and condescending attitudes and frankly, its not something I get involved with out of choice. As you say, its about enjoying the hobby with cool looking armies on cool boards played at a chilled pace while having a laugh (and a beer sometimes!).

Age limit? Yup. I’m in my thirties (just). I don’t want to play around kids or teenagers, generally. With respect, I find I am at a point in my life where I have a lot less in common with college ‘kids’ and much prefer hanging out with my peers who are at the same place as I am in life and who I have more in common with. You get older, your perspective changes – that sort of thing.

As you say, it’s about enjoying the hobby with cool looking armies on cool boards played at a chilled pace while having a laugh with mates, and maybe a few beers (or tea). You’d be surprised how much easing off on the ‘arms race’ gets ‘dormant’ players out of the woodwork, and gets ‘extinct’ players active and involved with the game. We mainly play with a group of 4 at a friend’s house on Friday evenings – mainly historicals but some sci-fi and so on. We very much embrace the ‘home brew’ and ‘laid back’ approach and if anything, a more sedate pace is quite a refreshing change for me. Last few weeks have been painting evenings, and I’ve gotten loads of my LOTR ‘historicals’ done. Another group of people I play with are fellow WMH players. I got talking to them after a masters a few years ago, and we all found ourselves, by coincidence to be in the same place in life. Wives, girlfriends, dogs, kids, mortgages, jobs, other hobbies/interests/commitments, and none of us had the time to properly ‘chase the WMH meta’ and being honest, none of us were entirely enjoying the experience of playing against some of the ‘big sharks’ that swim in the tank– they’re nice guys, but play at a level/pace/intensity and understanding that is beyond us frankly and which none of us really enjoy or have the time/interest to keep pace with. And over the course of a few conversations and traded numbers we ended up with us folks meeting up regularly for ‘game days’ amongst ourselves, and playing at a more laid back pace in a friendly environment, sometimes at stores, sometimes at homes. We’ve got a few new guys coming into it through this way too, and its really enjoyable. As you say, the numbers you get by approaching it this way are quite surprising – you have a dozen players actively involved, or semi-involed, or working on projects. We probably have the same, if not more. The fact you do it in a more remote location is all the more impressive in terms of what you have built.

So long as what you are doing doesn’t become some kind of ‘elitist club’ there shouldn’t be any issues. I don’t think you are being unfair, but I can see why people might not want to join – again, ‘play with likeminded folks’ works generally, but for some, your way of playing mightn’t be their idea of ‘fun’. And they’re not necessarily wrong.

All I can say is keep it up Gordie. If you find yourself near Edinburgh, send me a message. There’s a beer in it.

I might take you up on that!! Were looking at Iceland this year and traveling up from Newcastle to Edinburgh for the night - ha be careful what you wish for!!!

I agree with almost all of what you say - we talk about games and pre-arrange list so its a cool battle. We get to use the other 90% of units that the internet tells us are rubbish because in our environment most things are useful! I here you about WAAC vs Competitive, just talk about what you want out of the game first, solves almost every issue! its simple really.

As i say the proxie thing is something i need to think about...

Thank you for the kind words and when it comes to beers i'm not a snob, a bud will do nicely!

I wouldn't say it's snobby, but it's always nice to see fully painted armies over unpainted plastic. Even better if they've done a really good job, but not everyone has the time to bring a fully painted army to play. I certainly don't so I counteracted this by moving to low model armies since I almost refuse to field unpainted models but actually want to get some games still.

But I also don't mind unpainted plastic if they're not a jerk, and it's still nice to see a half painted army slowly get completed anyway.

I'd not be interested in a club that required all GW minis, but still I'm tempted to say no snobbery. However, before I commit, I'd be curious to hear you clarify what you mean by.

- "I would even decline those who do the 'technically' 3 colour minimum paint job". Did people know ahead of time you had specific standards for the degree of painting required? Exactly how well does a mini have to be painted to be allowed on the table and how well are those standards enumerated and understood?

and

- "No Proxies" Does this simply mean that everything is WYSIWYG in terms of gear, armament and size, or does it also mean only GW figures and no alternate figures at all? Would Victoria or Anvil Industries figures be acceptable? Would properly converted historical models or models from other games that meet a 40k aesthetic and satisfy WYSIWYG be acceptable? What about scratchbuilds?

What i am getting at with the three colour thing is i don't really consider models with a blue undercoat, green base and a red helmet 'painted' in my sense of the word. I'm not interested in playing against an army that technically is painted with three colours in the literal sense just to satisfy a requirement, i.e. they player is not interested at all in any painting standard and has just slapped any three colours on to satisfy the requirement. Beyond this we have no defined standard, maybe that will be an issue in the future but for now everyone 'gets it' - perhaps because we slap a big sign up saying 'Fully Painted Only' that we therefore attract players who don't need this explaining

As I mentioned before, we really haven't decided on alternatives / scratch builds but always open to discussions. Weapon proxies are fine and really don't break the immersion (as long as its not over done) but model proxies (this dreadnought is actually a contemptor) is not what we are about.

Being on here is corrupting me, I swear. Or maybe it's just a natural thing and it's happening as I grow up (regarding the hobby ). I've only been doing anything 40k-related since this January, and have been going to school full time and working full time alongside it. So I haven't had much time to hobby, really. Imagine my excitement when my FLGS allows grey models in events! Considering I started 40k to play the game with my friends, that sounded perfect to me. I got some models built and went to a 1000 point event.

It was a lot of fun. I'm still learning the rules and stuff but people were okay with it. Very inclusive. Fantastic!

I started looking at more and more models that were painted, and decided I wanted to start painting my stuff up. It's a slow process due to lack of time (but I'm about to have more with the semester ending). Regardless, I want my models to look good (even though I'm a gak painter right now). As an aside, painting the models was always part of the plan, I was just happy to be able to play before they were fully done. My friends and I talk about how we want to paint our stuff fairly often, so none of us have a "permanent grey is okay" mentality.

However, what I really didn't expect was to start disliking playing the game AGAINST grey models. I've been to 3 events (all 1000 point narrative events), and this last one, I really realized that I had totally different emotional and mental responses when I played against an opponent with painted models versus playing against opponents that have everything unpainted. I didn't think I would become this, because I've always thought of myself as "just a gamer," so the hobby side wouldn't be as big a deal for me if my opponent was all grey, regardless of my own army. How wrong I was. And I feel hypocritical saying it because my stuff still isn't done (fielded a grey wraithlord and some dire avengers that are only primed). Yet I do feel there's a difference between WIP and straight-up not doing it. My primed wraithknight is waiting for me to start painting it, doing so is my graduation gift to myself haha.

Here's hoping more is painted when I start going to 1500 and 1850 point events (for me and my opponents)!

Of course, because I'm okay with WIP, my friends' armies are perfectly fine to me, and because they're my friends, I'm going to enjoy the games no matter what! Banter > anything, as far as I'm concerned

WYSIWYG isn't required at the LGS either, and this I'm okay with for now. Learning the game means I want to bring different loadouts sometimes, so I just put it in my list and make sure my opponent knows what is what. However, I am working on making my models WYSIWYG as quickly as I can. So again, it's my WIP brain going "This is okay for now." My friends are WYSIWYG'ing their hearts out, bless them.

The only problem I've had with proxies was one guy (in the event no less) actually had just a thin piece of corkboard as a proxy. Nothing on top. And then he says "I love this being the proxy because people forget it's there." Yes, they do, because there's literally nothing there. Ugh.

Otherwise I don't have a problem with proxies if we both know what it is and it actually looks feasible (not coke can drop pods, unless it's a casual game where you want to try something out before buying and we talk about it beforehand). For example, for chaos furies, GW has been out since like Wulfen released, so I have some Reaper models I'm painting as proxy. Definitely believable as chaos furies!

 Kilkrazy wrote:

Big P wrote:
Im firmly in the snob camp then.

Never played with unpainted figures and never will... wouldn't let them on my table either. Luckily my gaming comrades all have the same attitude and we have enough stuff to play while painting up new projects. Plus plenty of stuff for anyone new to use until they have stuff done.

Its gotta look pretty. Otherwise, may as well be a board game.

We are mainly historical gamers though, so that may be a defining difference. Historical gamers don't tend to use unpainted stuff really from what Ive seen over the last few decades.

That's been my experience too.

Unpainted armies never seemed to be a problem in a club that was mainly based on historicals. There wasn't even a stated rule. Everyone just took it for granted that we played games with painted figures.

I remember various sessions of madly painting units to get them ready for games the next day, force drying them very carefully in a slightly warm oven. When I came to 40K I did the same.

In my role-playing experience too, people used to paint their figures. Of course it's far less of a job to do half a dozen models than a whole army.

To be fair, I have not often come across 40K players who hadn't painted their army or at least were over half-way through the process. I suspect the people who genuinely won't do it at all are a small minority.

Yes... Even the 40k chaps in our group paint it before use (and are some of the most strict on such things)... But they are also historical gamers.... and indeed its not a rule as you say, its never even been thought to use unpainted stuff. So its never been an issue as its one that's never arisen to be discussed... We do tend to play at each others houses, but the same applies when we play at the club too.

Also with historical stuff, if it wasn't painted you'd be hard pushed to tell some armies apart...

Plus for me... the visual is a big thing;

Sounds reasonable to me. its your House and its your rules.

its the experience you wanted your group to have

so more power to you.

Big P wrote:

Yes... Even the 40k chaps in our group paint it before use (and are some of the most strict on such things)... But they are also historical gamers.... and indeed its not a rule as you say, its never even been thought to use unpainted stuff. So its never been an issue as its one that's never arisen to be discussed... We do tend to play at each others houses, but the same applies when we play at the club too.

Also with historical stuff, if it wasn't painted you'd be hard pushed to tell some armies apart...

Plus for me... the visual is a big thing

...Damnit Big P, keep your illustrations of awesome work that I will never be able to rival in the Historical forums! Stop making me feel inadequate as a painter elsewhere on Dakka!

And yes, I have a dislike of using models that are not painted as well, though I don't enforce that on an opponent depending on other factors. If you're an adult, I have less tolerance for the "3 colors" Geordie mentioned, though I'm going to suspend that if I know the reasoning on why; military and emergency services guys I'll give a pass to barring just donkey-cave behavior in other areas because their time is often not their own. If you're a kid (which I realize is a moot point with the OP) then I'm a little more flexible on what's "painted" because I don't want to push people away from the hobby for the crime of "wrongfun" and new blood is generally a good thing for the hobby. It means more players, more games and more new toys for me.

Post 2016/05/10 14:58:59 Subject: Am I really a painting snob?

To offer the other perspective.

Playing table-top miniature games is an experience wholly unlike anything in an RTS or other video game, and some people really enjoy the gaming aspect.

It's easy to spend 30 minutes clipping and assembling a squad with no paint, primer, or sanding/line removal.

It's not easy to find a way to paint that army if you are a terrible painter, don't want to pay someone else to do it, or don't know what you want your final army list to look like.

For those folks, (I was one), it can be hard to fathom why some guy won't just be cool and play the game, because the game is why we buy these expensive mini's, right?

I've never been denied a game based on paint, but I've seen someone do it, and the rest of the stores response was like.. "Oh. Look at Mr. Fancy pants. Fine, he can not play a game."

We are a close-knit group, and took it as insult he told a really nice guy to bugger off because his plastic wasn't pretty.

Overall, I'm tolerant of any gaming preferences. Just thought I'd offer perspective.

Are you a snob? Probably not.
Are you elitist? Maybe. Not associating with others who don't meet your standards is kinda the definition of the word.
Are you doing something wrong? Nope!

Firstly thanks for putting your perspective over in a friendly way!

Your post kinda highlights why the two different perspectives clash sometimes. "some guy won't just be cool and play the game, because the game is why we buy these expensive mini's, right?" for some of us that's only 50% (or less) of the reason, it might be 100% of the reason for you but not for everyone.

Now i don't know how the guy you mentioned approached the situation but if he was disrespectful and belittling to the player with the unpainted army then F**k that guy. I'd kick him out of our group painted or not. But if he explained politely his preference for painted games then for the most part i'm with the painted guy, having to sit through hours of game your not going to enjoy because the consequence of politely declining is to be ostracized doesn't sound like a good time to me. Having said that if your store is a predominantly unpainted, then by going there only looking for painted games he is putting himself in a position where is preference may cause offence to be taken and he should really be looking for a like minded group - or start his own!!

@Geordie: I think it's perfectly reasonable. Honestly, I'm the exact same way and have tried to influence my friends to take on this manner of thinking. I have had a tiny amount of friction with my friends on the matter, but they're reasonable and wholly understand the desire to have fully painted armies battle on beautiful terrain/scenery. The downside is that some people started to get somewhat alienated and it was, overall, more important to have fun with my friends. So the compromise became...

Painted models have the special rule Preferred Enemy (Unpainted Models).

As long as everyone is respectful, this works nicely in that it still allows everyone to field their new purchase, while promoting the idea of having fully painted armies.

Geordie wrote:
Our proxie rules are no model proxies but weapon proxies are ok as long as its not every weapon, I generally run 95% - 100% WYSIWYG

I get the proxy thing, maybe we are a bit harsh with that but I didn't want to slap arbitrary limits on how many times something could be used and monitor it. It's kind just become the norm now that there are no proxies...

You'll have to clarify though, what do you mean by "proxy"? Because people seem to use it interchangeably to mean both "this flamer is actually a plasma gun, this other flamer is actually a meltagun, and this missile launcher is actually a flamer, mmkay?" and "I'm going to use my own conversion/a third-party model which resembles Official Thing instead of Official Thing". If you restrict the former, fine, sure, but if it's the latter and you mostly only permit Official(tm) GW(tm) Miniatures(tm) then yeah, to my mind that's bordering on snobbery. EDIT: Sorry, have now caught up with the thread: yeah, based on what you've said that's not a group I'd play with personally - asking people not to use coke cans as tanks or action figures as Wraithknights is one thing but for my money anything beyond that borders on unreasonable, and going so far as to require someone to buy and use only the specific official GW model for any given unit entry...wow, that's pretty uptight. Like folk have said, it's your club on your property so what you say goes, but yeah, not somewhere I'd want(or indeed, given the number of conversions and third party models I use, be able to) play.

As for WYSIWYG, that one always makes me a bit leery. It's supposed to be a guideline to keep play fluid, sticking to it religiously whether the resulting model is distinct enough to be what its owner is claiming it to be or not just stifles people's creativity when it comes to conversions IMO.

I don't mind requiring me to paint my armies but if you criticise my paint job or give me flak for using three colors I'm out. (I usually have no problem with this but I have a life. I work I have kids etc. Most of my armies are painted but if I buy something new and want to play with it gray or primed and you get an issue then we aren't gaming together.

I get that playing an all gray unprimed army sucks but when you see how many miniatures I have painted and the level of my paintings you will see I try. I am not rushing a paint job just to field a unit. I have been in this hobby for 25 years and plan to be in it until I die. I take my time painting because a model lasts a lifetime. It gets painted when I am ready and may or may not be partially painted when I field it.

I would initially expect that you wouldn't have much participation in demanding fully painted armies, but you said you have like 8 guys, so it's clearly not a problem for you.

I personally have no issue with playing against unpainted armies, though I generally prefer painted. But it's all make-believe anyways, so it doesn't make a huge difference to me.

StraightSilver wrote:

If I were part of your group I wouldn't have been able to play a game for at least 6 months and that would have been at best about 500pts.

A defined goal will help you get your stuff painted though. Every model that I have used for a very long time has been fully painted and based. This means that if I want to field something I need to paint it, no grey plastic nor hasty undercoats allowed.

This thread has been a great help to me getting stuff done. I have probably painted around 100 miniatures since Christmas, enough to fill 3 shelves in a display cabinet anyway, despite working full time, studying for an MSc and having a young family so if I can make time for painting toy soldiers virtually anyone can.

If I still lived in the North East and I still played 40K I would be looking to join your group Geordie

I don't require anything from other people but I agree about a hardline on proxies, at least for myself. I think it's lame to say these chaos warhounds are flesh hounds, or this cheap dragon I bought is Archaon/Gordrakk/a Stardrake etc. I think conversions/alternative army themes etc are great, but proxies purely to save money are lame. At least for myself.

coldgaming wrote:
I don't require anything from other people but I agree about a hardline on proxies, at least for myself. I think it's lame to say these chaos warhounds are flesh hounds, or this cheap dragon I bought is Archaon/Gordrakk/a Stardrake etc. I think conversions/alternative army themes etc are great, but proxies purely to save money are lame. At least for myself.

Well quite, quite. We wouldn't want any of those peasants involved in our hobby, wot wot? Ye gads man, they might get the idea they're capable of holding high office or owning land! Fahfahfahfahfah.

coldgaming wrote:
I don't require anything from other people but I agree about a hardline on proxies, at least for myself. I think it's lame to say these chaos warhounds are flesh hounds, or this cheap dragon I bought is Archaon/Gordrakk/a Stardrake etc. I think conversions/alternative army themes etc are great, but proxies purely to save money are lame. At least for myself.

How dare someone want to save money? I personally think Chaos Hounds subbed for Flesh Hounds look quite spiffy.

Geordie wrote:

I'd not be interested in a club that required all GW minis, but still I'm tempted to say no snobbery. However, before I commit, I'd be curious to hear you clarify what you mean by.

- "I would even decline those who do the 'technically' 3 colour minimum paint job". Did people know ahead of time you had specific standards for the degree of painting required? Exactly how well does a mini have to be painted to be allowed on the table and how well are those standards enumerated and understood?

and

- "No Proxies" Does this simply mean that everything is WYSIWYG in terms of gear, armament and size, or does it also mean only GW figures and no alternate figures at all? Would Victoria or Anvil Industries figures be acceptable? Would properly converted historical models or models from other games that meet a 40k aesthetic and satisfy WYSIWYG be acceptable? What about scratchbuilds?

What i am getting at with the three colour thing is i don't really consider models with a blue undercoat, green base and a red helmet 'painted' in my sense of the word. I'm not interested in playing against an army that technically is painted with three colours in the literal sense just to satisfy a requirement, i.e. they player is not interested at all in any painting standard and has just slapped any three colours on to satisfy the requirement. Beyond this we have no defined standard, maybe that will be an issue in the future but for now everyone 'gets it' - perhaps because we slap a big sign up saying 'Fully Painted Only' that we therefore attract players who don't need this explaining

As I mentioned before, we really haven't decided on alternatives / scratch builds but always open to discussions. Weapon proxies are fine and really don't break the immersion (as long as its not over done) but model proxies (this dreadnought is actually a contemptor) is not what we are about.

This all seems reasonable and fiarly non-snobbish. I agree with your general feeling regarding the 3-color slap-on-paint. Much like you all, we've never had to enforce it. We definitely have different levels of painting ability. Some are are a bit crude and some don't like scenic basing,, but so far everyone seems to understand the spirit of "painted only" and no one has tried to sneak basically unpainted figs on the table by dabbing 3 colors on a mini.

As for the proxy thing, it seems like you are on the right track, though I think that well-done alternate models (that represent the subject matter properly) and scratcbuilds and the flavor and creativity they bring are part of what makes this hobby great. At our club we're almost more insistent on WYSIWYG than those who play games where the models are prescribed. The flexible rulesets we use tend to allow a player to accurately stat a model based on how it is equipped. This open-endedness makes it even more important that the stats reflect the model so as not to confuse the opponent.

Of course many of the rulesets (Kings of War is a good example) are abstracted enough that a unit can be equipped or represented in quite a number of ways while still staying true to the statline.

Geordie wrote:

I might take you up on that!! Were looking at Iceland this year and traveling up from Newcastle to Edinburgh for the night - ha be careful what you wish for!!!
I agree with almost all of what you say - we talk about games and pre-arrange list so its a cool battle. We get to use the other 90% of units that the internet tells us are rubbish because in our environment most things are useful! I here you about WAAC vs Competitive, just talk about what you want out of the game first, solves almost every issue! its simple really.
As i say the proxie thing is something i need to think about...
Thank you for the kind words and when it comes to beers i'm not a snob, a bud will do nicely!

Oh, ffs – someone else going to Iceland!? (Humourous, tongue-in-cheek and joking rant incoming!) I’m seriously sick of this at this point. Everyone’s going to Iceland. Myself and Mrs.Deadnight went a few years ago (before anyone else we knew, mind!) – it was our first holiday, and we went before it was cool! And since then, virtually all our friends, and most of the people I work with have gone to Iceland. And now random internet strangers are getting in on the act! Damned hipsters, wannabes and bandwagon jumpers, the lot of you! Humourous rant/off. But seriously, if you are going, make sure you visit the blue lagoon and do the golden circle tour. Iceland takes a wee bit of getting used to, as everything smells of fart (all the sulphur). It’s a stunning country and well worth a visit.

And for what it’s worth, Mrs.Deadnight heads down to Newcastle often enough for the football (sunderland fan when it comes to the English leagues), and I nearly got a job there once – I seriously need to pop down again for a trip and visit that little wall that yer man Hadrian built.

Seriously though, the offer for a beer is legit. Just let me know when/if you’re popping by. It won’t be a bud though – lets drink something proper!

 Grimtuff wrote:

coldgaming wrote:
I don't require anything from other people but I agree about a hardline on proxies, at least for myself. I think it's lame to say these chaos warhounds are flesh hounds, or this cheap dragon I bought is Archaon/Gordrakk/a Stardrake etc. I think conversions/alternative army themes etc are great, but proxies purely to save money are lame. At least for myself.

How dare someone want to save money? I personally think Chaos Hounds subbed for Flesh Hounds look quite spiffy.

Aye, they're what I use and I think they're better than the regular ones. The regular Flesh Hounds look downright silly

 Yodhrin wrote:

coldgaming wrote:
I don't require anything from other people but I agree about a hardline on proxies, at least for myself. I think it's lame to say these chaos warhounds are flesh hounds, or this cheap dragon I bought is Archaon/Gordrakk/a Stardrake etc. I think conversions/alternative army themes etc are great, but proxies purely to save money are lame. At least for myself.

Well quite, quite. We wouldn't want any of those peasants involved in our hobby, wot wot? Ye gads man, they might get the idea they're capable of holding high office or owning land! Fahfahfahfahfah.

How many times do I have to write "at least for myself" for it to be read?

Oh, dear boy, it matters not a whit, the peasants can't read!

coldgaming wrote:
I don't require anything from other people but I agree about a hardline on proxies, at least for myself. I think it's lame to say these chaos warhounds are flesh hounds, or this cheap dragon I bought is Archaon/Gordrakk/a Stardrake etc. I think conversions/alternative army themes etc are great, but proxies purely to save money are lame. At least for myself.

Interesting. "Proxy" is a loaded term, but I think that as long as the substitute model is a good representation of the type, size, equipment, and armament and is painted, then it's probably a good thing. Not only is it great to save money in this sometimes costly hobby, it's great to see something new and interesting on the table. I'd much rather see an interesting alternate model (or alternate army) than more of the same-old-same-old.

I think that a painting standard can actually make substitute models more acceptable. When you slap down a random unpainted model and say it's something it isn't then it can be a glaring distraction and your opponent is likely to think that you are just proxying for advantage. However, when the substitute model is painted and based to match the rest of the army, it usually ends up looking "Characterful and unique". It also settles the suspicion that the person using it is just proxying for advantage or engaging in WAAC list tailoring.

I think this is why the old GW "Vehicle Design Rules" stated that a VDR model should be finished and painted before playing. A model that's been based and painted represents an investment of time more significant than will usually be put up by someone who just wants to put something on the table that is more advantageous to the game than what their army currently contains.

 Grimtuff wrote:

coldgaming wrote:
I don't require anything from other people but I agree about a hardline on proxies, at least for myself. I think it's lame to say these chaos warhounds are flesh hounds, or this cheap dragon I bought is Archaon/Gordrakk/a Stardrake etc. I think conversions/alternative army themes etc are great, but proxies purely to save money are lame. At least for myself.

How dare someone want to save money? I personally think Chaos Hounds subbed for Flesh Hounds look quite spiffy.

I think with the added work of the collars they're fine, and I agree. What I meant was subbing one off the shelf model for another. If you had done no work on the warhounds and called them flesh hounds, I'd be fine to play it, I just wouldn't do that myself, just as I'm fine to play unpainted armies but won't play with unpainted minis myself.

If your donating the time to create the group and providing the place to play, I can't see anyone thinking they don't have to follow your rules/guidelines. If they don't want to follow the group's rules, then don't come.

You created the group because you enjoy playing games using painted models. Why create a group and donate your house to play games that aren't going to be enjoyable to you?

I actually have a friend who feel the same way as you-he can't stand playing against unpainted models or terrain. He's only been in the hobby maybe two years but everything is painted. He always gets on me about fielding painted models. Its actually good because it pushes me to paint. I've gotten a lot of stuff finished because of my friend's attitude.

But honestly, playing with painted models on a painted board and terrain is the way to go. Its like the apex of this hobby. When we started, I was using towels and flowerpots as terrain and he said "no no no this isn't gonna do." and over time we really kicked butt and got ourselves nice terrain and even those tiles from Secret Weapon. Playing against unpainted stuff and using flower pots doesn't bother me, but seeing our gaming table now? Wow, we have really come a long way in two years, and I hate to say it but the experience is better.

Good for you for keeping it real.

Here's a quote from Oni, requoting me from back in 2009:
"It's hard to get excited and inspired by hunkering down behind a pepper pot or taking the wine cork objective at the top of that enormous book, not to mention taking dangerous terrain tests on the slippery surface of a glossy magazine." (Alex Kolodotschko, Dakka Dakka) This quote about sums it all up.

A fully painted table and models is what sets this game apart from any other strategy game.
Likeminded people get to play with me on this.....




I'm not going through all of this effort to play against the grey hordes.

It's not snobbery. You set up a club with a vision of a certain kind of experience for your players and set up minimum standards for them to meet. If players disagree with your standards then they are free to join another club. I actually wholeheartedly agree with your rules as 40k has no other appeal to me as a game other than the visuals/lore.

I'm not sure it isn't snobby, but I also don't see a problem with being a snob. It's a group of like minded folks that have shared standards. It's amazing. It could be exclusionary, but it sounds like you're inviting and helpful.

Geordie wrote:

Post 2016/05/10 14:58:59 Subject: Am I really a painting snob?

To offer the other perspective.

Playing table-top miniature games is an experience wholly unlike anything in an RTS or other video game, and some people really enjoy the gaming aspect.

It's easy to spend 30 minutes clipping and assembling a squad with no paint, primer, or sanding/line removal.

It's not easy to find a way to paint that army if you are a terrible painter, don't want to pay someone else to do it, or don't know what you want your final army list to look like.

For those folks, (I was one), it can be hard to fathom why some guy won't just be cool and play the game, because the game is why we buy these expensive mini's, right?

I've never been denied a game based on paint, but I've seen someone do it, and the rest of the stores response was like.. "Oh. Look at Mr. Fancy pants. Fine, he can not play a game."

We are a close-knit group, and took it as insult he told a really nice guy to bugger off because his plastic wasn't pretty.

Overall, I'm tolerant of any gaming preferences. Just thought I'd offer perspective.

Are you a snob? Probably not.
Are you elitist? Maybe. Not associating with others who don't meet your standards is kinda the definition of the word.
Are you doing something wrong? Nope!

Firstly thanks for putting your perspective over in a friendly way!

Your post kinda highlights why the two different perspectives clash sometimes. "some guy won't just be cool and play the game, because the game is why we buy these expensive mini's, right?" for some of us that's only 50% (or less) of the reason, it might be 100% of the reason for you but not for everyone.

Now i don't know how the guy you mentioned approached the situation but if he was disrespectful and belittling to the player with the unpainted army then F**k that guy. I'd kick him out of our group painted or not. But if he explained politely his preference for painted games then for the most part i'm with the painted guy, having to sit through hours of game your not going to enjoy because the consequence of politely declining is to be ostracized doesn't sound like a good time to me. Having said that if your store is a predominantly unpainted, then by going there only looking for painted games he is putting himself in a position where is preference may cause offence to be taken and he should really be looking for a like minded group - or start his own!!

Absolutely.

I'm in it for both sides, personally, and I wish I could put half my ideas to decent paint and scheme.

I will only play with painted models.

Not undercoated, not just basecoated.

I don't play tournaments (just don't enjoy the environment).

I don't care if people call me a painting snob. I also don't particularly care if I get games in. I collect and paint little mandollies as a hobby - the games are a bonus, not a raison d'etre.

 Alex Kolodotschko wrote:

Spoiler:

Here's a quote from Oni, requoting me from back in 2009:
"It's hard to get excited and inspired by hunkering down behind a pepper pot or taking the wine cork objective at the top of that enormous book, not to mention taking dangerous terrain tests on the slippery surface of a glossy magazine." (Alex Kolodotschko, Dakka Dakka) This quote about sums it all up.

A fully painted table and models is what sets this game apart from any other strategy game.
Likeminded people get to play with me on this.....

I'm not going through all of this effort to play against the grey hordes.

That's an absolutely inspiring gaming room. However, the lovely greebled walls do make your gaming table surface look a bit bland...

I run a Kult of Speed and while my vehicles are painted up, I have not really done much on my 300 boyz, 30 Nobz, 60 grotz, and 10 mega-armored nobz, two Mets (one with KFF, and another with SAG). This army is a work in progress and as such it would be an insult to not play it. I put effort in to what I do and eventually every single infantry model will be painted. So what if I have twelve primed boyz jump off a trukk, next week they will be painted. It's really only an issue if you don't see any progress over several weeks of play.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Eilif wrote:

 Alex Kolodotschko wrote:

Spoiler:

Here's a quote from Oni, requoting me from back in 2009:
"It's hard to get excited and inspired by hunkering down behind a pepper pot or taking the wine cork objective at the top of that enormous book, not to mention taking dangerous terrain tests on the slippery surface of a glossy magazine." (Alex Kolodotschko, Dakka Dakka) This quote about sums it all up.

A fully painted table and models is what sets this game apart from any other strategy game.
Likeminded people get to play with me on this.....

I'm not going through all of this effort to play against the grey hordes.

That's an absolutely inspiring gaming room. However, the lovely greebled walls do make your gaming table surface look a bit bland...

I think that's Miniwargaming's set.

You are not a painting snob, especially considering that you started the group and play in your own home with like-minded opponents. Like many have mentioned before, painted armies really bring the game to life. My group always plays with painted models, although some may still need detail work to be considered completed. We even have a few guys that are just getting into the game who show up to game nights to work on building or painting their armies and talk hobby with the those of us that are playing.

We always allow one exception, though. Because we're all so new, it's not uncommon for someone to show up early to meet with the owner of the FLGS for help with list building. If they discover that they don't have models they need and buy them from the FLGS before the game, then we allow them to play with them that night. It helps the FLGS makes a few extra bucks, so we're happy to make an accommodation.

Eilif wrote:That's an absolutely inspiring gaming room. However, the lovely greebled walls do make your gaming table surface look a bit bland...

Cheers. They're not greebles, they're precision balanced instruments essential for space travel. Greebles indeed. Pfff.
Yeah, you're not the first to say that. The surface isn't that bad it's just a 12x6 so any detail gets lost at that distance, especially with the pics being out of focus. It's actually sanded and painted in a couple of mottled tones that don't seem to show well on camera. Yeah it's flatish but versatility is important to me. I was setting up for the Apocalypse and they were the only 3 matching surfaces that I had. Maybe doing a bit of building at the weekend and i'll give them a bit more love.

xraytango wrote:I
I think that's Miniwargaming's set.

I think you're wrong. It's my set in my games room in Bristol, Britain, England, UK, GB so I think they'd have a long way to go to have a game or I've paid a lot on postage.
Speaking of which if anyone has nicely painted models and wants a game in there at anypoint feel free to drop me a PM!

I would love this group!

I will add that a FLGS club should be more inclusive, but if it's your house then up to you.

If you guys are playing out of a house I would not have a paint requirement. If you are in a remote place and theres no gaming going on else where its kind of ridiculous. House rules I guess, but some people want to get into the game but don't have the time/money/skills to paint. Denying them to play with you guys because there army isn't painted is kind of a bummer.

Before anyone brings tournaments up, i realize they do have requirements. Tourneys are also a next level play style and need to have these rules especially since their armies are sometimes judged.

I say get off your high horse and let them play.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
It's fairly common for people who don't want to do the work to paint their armies to argue that people who like playing with painted armies adn don't want to play with unpainted armies are snobs.

There isn't any special virtue in playing with unpainted armies that you lack by not wanting to do it.

The one difficulty with this standard is that it limits experimentation and players who building their armies. It would typically take me a year to paint an army fully, and I like to play around with different variants to keep things interesting.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

This. It's not really a gakky move if it's your house and your club, you can set your own rules. It's another thing to go to a store and judge/mock people for not painting.

This.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Grimtuff wrote:

coldgaming wrote:
I don't require anything from other people but I agree about a hardline on proxies, at least for myself. I think it's lame to say these chaos warhounds are flesh hounds, or this cheap dragon I bought is Archaon/Gordrakk/a Stardrake etc. I think conversions/alternative army themes etc are great, but proxies purely to save money are lame. At least for myself.

How dare someone want to save money? I personally think Chaos Hounds subbed for Flesh Hounds look quite spiffy.

I much preferred Chaos Knights for Juggernauts myself. The reception I had for them has always been extremely positive.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
It's fairly common for people who don't want to do the work to paint their armies to argue that people who like playing with painted armies adn don't want to play with unpainted armies are snobs.

It's also fairly common for people who dislike unpainted armies to disparage those with unpainted armies, so it's not really surprising people who only want to play painted sometimes get labelled snobs.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
It's fairly common for people who don't want to do the work to paint their armies to argue that people who like playing with painted armies adn don't want to play with unpainted armies are snobs.

It's also fairly common for people who dislike unpainted armies to disparage those with unpainted armies, so it's not really surprising people who only want to play painted sometimes get labelled snobs.

This. If you review the old Painted vs. Unpainted threads, both sides tend to get fairly heated, but I'd argue it's more the Painted side who are aggressive. Especially because (not at OP, but other users in those threads bring it up), there's no such thing as clubs that only allow unpainted models.

96% of Dakka users would prefer to use painted armies, according to a poll we did a few years ago.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
96% of Dakka users would prefer to use painted armies, according to a poll we did a few years ago.

And I'd prefer my opponents not be total TFGs, but we don't all get what we want do we? I'd also prefer to play on beautiful tables and quit my job to go pro at 40k, but that ain't happening. You can want something but also realize that the person you're playing against has wants and desires and they may not be the same as yours. I'd be interested in seeing a new poll of people who will/won't play a painted/unpainted army.

Side note: Dakka is not all encompassing. I've had several players at my LGS say they've never heard of it.

There is a bit of a difference between "preference" and "will not play" plus other circumstances to consider.

I prefer to see painted armies and I do not have to quit my job or neglect my children to get them completed.
Argue all you want: it takes less effort grabbing a couple coloured spray cans and doing some fast and dirty painting than assembling the models.
Kinda hard calling some layers of paint being a snob when all that is required is this tiny bit of effort.

I find I start refusing play with those who view their models as little more than chits on the board and dump them all in a pile when the game is done.
It is for them 98% the game and all else is what they can get away with.

I LOVE competitive but I am beginning to like the epic look of it all more.
I am willing to dust-off and play my Chaos Marines army (if I had to) to play a painted Eldar army any day of the week.

I find hosting at home you tend to have some motivation for that.
Possibly enforcing "your rules" could be part of that.
To see everything on a table painted seems awfully compelling.

Very hard for the "chit" player to say the host is "inconveniencing" him when the game is under their roof.
I like standards.
They force us to do better: nothing wrong with that.

 Talizvar wrote:
There is a bit of a difference between "preference" and "will not play" plus other circumstances to consider.

I prefer to see painted armies and I do not have to quit my job or neglect my children to get them completed.
Argue all you want: it takes less effort grabbing a couple coloured spray cans and doing some fast and dirty painting than assembling the models.
Kinda hard calling some layers of paint being a snob when all that is required is this tiny bit of effort.

I find I start refusing play with those who view their models as little more than chits on the board and dump them all in a pile when the game is done.
It is for them 98% the game and all else is what they can get away with.

I LOVE competitive but I am beginning to like the epic look of it all more.
I am willing to dust-off and play my Chaos Marines army (if I had to) to play a painted Eldar army any day of the week.

I find hosting at home you tend to have some motivation for that.
Possibly enforcing "your rules" could be part of that.
To see everything on a table painted seems awfully compelling.

Very hard for the "chit" player to say the host is "inconveniencing" him when the game is under their roof.
I like standards.
They force us to do better: nothing wrong with that.

I said in my original post, it's at OP's house, I had nothing wrong with that. His house, his rules. I just said I wouldn't play there. I don't like being forced to paint. If it strikes me, so be it.

What I'm addressing is the attitude that people that don't paint are lesser for it. Guess what? Every WarmaHordes player at my LGS plays with unpainted figures, but I suppose they are lesser for it.

Also, is globbed on paint better than nothing at all? Paint so thick you can't see the details? But sure, keep your holier than thau attitude about plastic toys that you make "Pew! pew!" noises with.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
96% of Dakka users would prefer to use painted armies, according to a poll we did a few years ago.

There's a difference between "prefer painted" and "enforce painted by rules" and "disparage people with unpainted".

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
96% of Dakka users would prefer to use painted armies, according to a poll we did a few years ago.

There's a difference between "prefer painted" and "enforce painted by rules" and "disparage people with unpainted".

I feel like it's also worth mentioning that sometimes "Sorry, I'd prefer to play against a painted army" is a great way for someone to avoid playing a game with someone they dislike but they don't want to cause a scene.

What I'm addressing is the attitude that people that don't paint are lesser for it.

Who ever said that? Quite a generalisation of gamer's who prefer to only play painted games. It seem pretty unfair to me that if I refuse to play against an unpainted army you assume i think lesser of you. I don't, your free to do what you like! Who am i to say you should or shouldn't paint your army and who are you to say what type of games i should and shouldn't play....

Also, is globbed on paint better than nothing at all? Paint so thick you can't see the details? But sure, keep your holier than thau attitude about plastic toys that you make "Pew! pew!" noises with.

You come across as super defensive, do you get that at no point am I (or the majority of painted guys on here) having having a go at you for not painting? I struggle to see how you justify this attitude.

 jreilly89 wrote:

What I'm addressing is the attitude that people that don't paint are lesser for it. Guess what? Every WarmaHordes player at my LGS plays with unpainted figures, but I suppose they are lesser for it.

Also, is globbed on paint better than nothing at all? Paint so thick you can't see the details? But sure, keep your holier than thau attitude about plastic toys that you make "Pew! pew!" noises with.

Rather than veering dangerously toward insults and hurt feelings, the important thing is to define exactly what is "lesser".

Anyone saying that a human person is "lesser" for their inability, lack of time or unwillingness to paint is clearly a snob and likely a TFG. However it is correct to say that the person's effort is lesser and that in almost all cases unpainted miniatures are lesser than painted ones.

If I have miniatures that are painted and you don't, it's accurate to think that my effort expended has been greater than yours and your figures are lesser than mine. Doesn't make you a bad person, and it doesn't make me "holier-than-thou", it's just a fact. Now, it'd be darn hard to say that without sounding rude, so I probably wouldn't but we both know it's true.

As for Warmahordes I've seen the same thing at the FLGS I used to frequent. For a brief time after my 40k days and early in the creation of my games club the really cool WM minis had me thinking about taking up Warmachine on the side. Unpainted-ness wasn't only deterrent (I'm also not a terribly competitive gamer) but knowing that I'd most likely be playing against mostly unpainted miniatures anytime I gamed at the FLGS was a big part of not going down the WarmaHordes road.

Lastly, the globbed-on-paint example is a straw man argument and not really relevant to most situations since most folks who paint don't simply glob on detail-obscuring puddles of paint. On a table, from a few feet away, even a neatly applied block-color paintjob with no shading/highlights/washes looks better than an hunk of unpainted plastic.

 jreilly89 wrote:
Also, is globbed on paint better than nothing at all? Paint so thick you can't see the details? But sure, keep your holier than thau attitude about plastic toys that you make "Pew! pew!" noises with.

I never thought I would call-out a "straw-man" argument but boy this sure is one.
Yep, when I FIRST started painting I could not make up my mind on what to paint so that one figure I think got 3 coats of Testers enamel paint... boy he was a beauty.
That tends to happen for your first couple, after that you learn rather rapidly.
I typically see few paint jobs that look like garbage, only an honest attempt: nothing to make fun of there.

"Holier than thou."... I think the viewpoint is not "nah-nah I am better than you for painting!" it just looks kinda sad and like we really are pushing bare plastic crappy toys around.
There is nothing compelling there other than possibly the "pure" pursuit of the game and little else.
The only time I have seen anyone new express interest in 40k is when they see painted armies: I honestly never heard any good comment seeing unpainted.

I am sure most of us have a fairly good idea of where the importance of our "man-toys" sit in the scheme of things.
But we cannot make light of our preference for our hobby: we have to fight so hard in this busy world to get our fun in.
We all have our wants and wishes so no-one can be forced to play if they do not want to.

Geordie wrote:

You come across as super defensive, do you get that at no point am I (or the majority of painted guys on here) having having a go at you for not painting? I struggle to see how you justify this attitude.

People tend to get defensive when trying to explain/excuse their use of unpainted armies.

The bottom line is that some people simply don't want to paint their toys, or at least they place a low priority on using painted armies, because if they did want to they would find the time. That's not a judgement, its a simple fact.

As I said earlier in the thread I work full time, I am studying for an MSc and I have a young family yet despite that I have still found the time to fully paint and base 2250 points of Epic Orks, 500 points of Warzone Capitol, a Necromunda gang, a Frostgrave Warband as well as a few odds and ends like objective markers and some Bolt Action stuff; this was all since the new year. If I can do it, virtually anyone else can (barring physical disability).

You know, at this point it's not even worth addressing. You guys clearly seem to have your opinion on how exactly this game should be played and I'll leave you to that in good conscience. Just please, please never darken the door of my shop, as I would never want to play you.

 jreilly89 wrote:
You know, at this point it's not even worth addressing. You guys clearly seem to have your opinion on how exactly this game should be played and I'll leave you to that in good conscience. Just please, please never darken the door of my shop, as I would never want to play you.

And yet you talk about others having a 'holier than thou' attitude...

You know, at this point it's not even worth addressing. You guys clearly seem to have your opinion on how exactly this game should be played and I'll leave you to that in good conscience. Just please, please never darken the door of my shop, as I would never want to play you.

Dude you're entitled to play who you like how you like.

I will never judge you for that, the same courtesy would be appreciated.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
To play devils advocate, after all the unpainted arguments / views so far have not been constructed too well

i can see a couple of negatives to my approach:

- Taking my stance to a club / shop where unpainted armies are the norm and declining to play someone with a unpainted army is creating a potential situation for someone to get offended (rightly or wrongly) and may be discouraging to younger players (thus why i choose to do this at my home home). I am of the opinion that although i don't outright disagree with doing this it should probably be avoided for the benefit of all.

- My stance makes it very difficult for younger players to get involved (assuming i didn't have an age limit on my group). Allowing unpainted armies reduces the barrier for entry and encourages a greater influx of young blood. If we don't have young blood this hobby will eventually die out.


Seems to me both schools of thought work well together for the hobby even if they don't always crossover.

Your hobby, do what you want, but not all of us have the luck to get super-easy models like space marines to paint some of us have armys like Harleys or Dark eldar and are not that great at painting, so while I much prefer seeing painted armies, I wouldn't turn down a game vs one as some armies are very, very hard to make them look good and I would rather play with grey than gloped on paint anyday!

@OP, yeah, you are, but it's fine since it's your prerogative. I prefer a policy of "show you've tried to make some progress even if not fully painted."

I have very few fully painted forces, only one fully painted game, and mostly when I get something new, I want to play it then, not in six months after I've gotten around to painting that specific piece as I bounce between game and faction. This isn't because I don't paint much, but because I have a high standard of what I consider done.

If you want to be more inclusive (to new players, players who want to try new things, slow painters, etc.), I'd suggest something like that as a compromise.

I'm pretty far on the game-first end of the spectrum. Painted armies are a bonus, not an expectation. It's the most inclusive way to play.

 spiralingcadaver wrote:
This isn't because I don't paint much, but because I have a high standard of what I consider done.

I'd much rather play against an army that's 90% unpainted because the person is actually trying to get them painted well instead of rushed to the table.

Most people are looking at upwards of a year to paint an army really well.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 spiralingcadaver wrote:
This isn't because I don't paint much, but because I have a high standard of what I consider done.

I'd much rather play against an army that's 90% unpainted because the person is actually trying to get them painted well instead of rushed to the table.

Most people are looking at upwards of a year to paint an army really well.

I have to agree to a point with op though, since I have well over 10,000 points but very few are painted, but if there were some reason of why I should paint them up, I might have put more effort into it. as of now my main opponents run codex:grey sea so even if I wanted a full painted game, I would be SOL for literally years. My friends nids he started are still incomplete after 3 years but I got mine done in a month or so (swarm) but at the same time... They look real bad in comparison to some.

 cosmicsoybean wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 spiralingcadaver wrote:
This isn't because I don't paint much, but because I have a high standard of what I consider done.

I'd much rather play against an army that's 90% unpainted because the person is actually trying to get them painted well instead of rushed to the table.

Most people are looking at upwards of a year to paint an army really well.

I have to agree to a point with op though, since I have well over 10,000 points but very few are painted, but if there were some reason of why I should paint them up, I might have put more effort into it. as of now my main opponents run codex:grey sea so even if I wanted a full painted game, I would be SOL for literally years. My friends nids he started are still incomplete after 3 years but I got mine done in a month or so (swarm) but at the same time... They look real bad in comparison to some.

My first ever army I painted over the course of maybe 3 weekends, it looked pretty poor.

My Tyranid army took me about 3 years. I probably could have done it in a year and a half if I'd really worked at it, but realistically not much faster. Each unit took me about 2 months if I dedicated most my free time to it. The reason it took 3 years instead of 1.5 is because there's only so many evenings and days off I can dedicate to painting the same fething scheme on the same fething army before I get sick of it and need to spend some free time doing something other than painting models

Even though it's what I did, I don't expect anyone else to paint an army like crap just to get it to the table to play with it. If they want to paint it well, I don't really care. I've played against enough armies that were painted so poorly that they only looked marginally better than an unpainted army to care these days.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 cosmicsoybean wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 spiralingcadaver wrote:
This isn't because I don't paint much, but because I have a high standard of what I consider done.

I'd much rather play against an army that's 90% unpainted because the person is actually trying to get them painted well instead of rushed to the table.

Most people are looking at upwards of a year to paint an army really well.

I have to agree to a point with op though, since I have well over 10,000 points but very few are painted, but if there were some reason of why I should paint them up, I might have put more effort into it. as of now my main opponents run codex:grey sea so even if I wanted a full painted game, I would be SOL for literally years. My friends nids he started are still incomplete after 3 years but I got mine done in a month or so (swarm) but at the same time... They look real bad in comparison to some.

My first ever army I painted over the course of maybe 3 weekends, it looked pretty poor.

My Tyranid army took me about 3 years. I probably could have done it in a year and a half if I'd really worked at it, but realistically not much faster. Each unit took me about 2 months if I dedicated most my free time to it. The reason it took 3 years instead of 1.5 is because there's only so many evenings and days off I can dedicate to painting the same fething scheme on the same fething army before I get sick of it and need to spend some free time doing something other than painting models

Even though it's what I did, I don't expect anyone else to paint an army like crap just to get it to the table to play with it. If they want to paint it well, I don't really care. I've played against enough armies that were painted so poorly that they only looked marginally better than an unpainted army to care these days.

Even though mine look like crap compaired to other peoples here, it feels amazing to drop down a fully painted army. I don't have a problem painting I just don't know HOW to paint. Sure, there are tutorials, but thouse are for specific units and particular colours, I can never seem to find any that work for me.

I don't think there is anything wrong with your approach especially because it is a home group.

I would like to think people would be a bit more inclusive in a FLGS situation to help those who might be newer players.

As it has been said multiple times, people have different goals with this hobby/game, go with what you like. I never understood why people would get bent out of shape when a hobby group didn't match their priorities for the game. It's like going on a date with someone and realizing that you have different goals. You move on. There is no need for name calling/conflict.

ultimately it's up to you to decide is being a "paint snob" is worth missing out on playing some cool new people/introducing others to the game more or whatnot is worth it. As long as that answer is yes, then you are doing the right thing. You obviously have a group that is growing and healthy so keep doing what you are doing.

I don't have a problem with playing against a grey tide or fighting over a coffee can for terrain. I have a very busy life and while i'm making progress on my armies/tables, i'm not there yet and i'm not willing to not play the game I love while I am working on it. but again, different approaches are cool in the hobby.

I hope your group keeps growing and you guys keep having a blast with it!

 jreilly89 wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
96% of Dakka users would prefer to use painted armies, according to a poll we did a few years ago.

And I'd prefer my opponents not be total TFGs, but we don't all get what we want do we? I'd also prefer to play on beautiful tables and quit my job to go pro at 40k, but that ain't happening. You can want something but also realize that the person you're playing against has wants and desires and they may not be the same as yours. I'd be interested in seeing a new poll of people who will/won't play a painted/unpainted army.

Side note: Dakka is not all encompassing. I've had several players at my LGS say they've never heard of it.

Please go ahead and make a poll.

The point about most people wanting to play with painted armies is that it is an attainable goal, and it's a goal that most players seem to attain. As a player, you can choose to paint your army, or buy a painted army (I've got both sorts) and decide not to play with your armies until they are painted.

If you decide you do want to play with your armies before they are painted, you can't fairly blame people for not wanting to play with you if they don't want to play with unpainted armies.

As for DakkaDakka not being the whole wargaming universe, I think if you go on The Miniatures Page you will find it's even more in favour of painting than DakkaDakka, as it has more of a historical focus.

War gamers were painting their armies before electricity was invented.

Very much prefer painted here, won't use unpainted myself as I've found that way madness awaits, its also a very good way to throttle spending.

I'll play against card counters if the person I'm playing is fun to play against, but prefer painted models, that said I'd prefer card counters or unpainted to some of the "three colour maximum" models out there.

Indeed for the likes of marines actually would prefer one colour & wash/dip to some of what I've seen, with maybe black for weapons (or grey washed).

As for being a snob wanting painted models? Hardly, I play historical games mostly and have very seldom seen an unpainted model on the table, the exception typically being something new or a player new to a game and with itchy fingers. I'd be more than happy with properly painted being a rule at a club.

'snob' tends to be a word, like many I won't mention, that gets thrown about by someone with different standards who feels the need to try and excuse their behaviour as opposed to just getting on with life and accepting people differ.

If there are locals who want unpainted models, how about suggesting they start a club and offering to help them do it, in effect becoming two sides of the same coin. You will probably find some playing unpainted wish they could paint (time, experience etc) and some who paint wish they had other models and may be happy to help out, failing that you could set up some wonderful 'grudge matches'

If you want a painted army and a nice table................you have to put the work in. Theres no real way around that.

Even if that "putting the work in" consists of "pay someone else to do it"

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
I'd much rather play against an army that's 90% unpainted because the person is actually trying to get them painted well instead of rushed to the table.

Most people are looking at upwards of a year to paint an army really well.

Of course let's be honest here: most of the people with unpainted armies have them because they don't care about painting, not because they're making steady progress on some awesome painting that takes a lot of time per model. I've seen a lot of armies that are mostly gray plastic with maybe a model or two painted to a very low standard, lots of pieces broken off from being thrown carelessly into boxes, and a very obvious lack of interest in the models beyond their use as game tokens. But I've seen very few that have some gray plastic alongside well-painted models, and an owner that clearly cares about them.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
The point about most people wanting to play with painted armies is that it is an attainable goal, and it's a goal that most players seem to attain.

People wanting to play with painted armies doesn't make it an attainable goal. For many people it isn't an attainable goal in any realistic time frame.

I'm sure a large portion of primed but not painted armies on ebay are a result of people not realising until partway in to a project that, for them at least, it's not an attainable goal.

If you decide you do want to play with your armies before they are painted, you can't fairly blame people for not wanting to play with you if they don't want to play with unpainted armies.

"Blame" is probably the wrong word... think they're dicks, narrow minded or snobbish and probably others would be more accurate.

Personally I don't really care either way, I just don't think there's anything particularly noble about limiting your field of opponents and being exclusionary over something that petty.

Having a painted army is an attainable goal.

Anyone who says they don't have the time/skill/money to achieve it really is saying they don't have the motivation.

Surely dismissing others as dicks because they want to play painted forces on nice tables is narrow minded. Particularly so when all games in the last 30 years are marketed on that basis with colour pictures of models on tables making it a fairly reasonable aspiration to meet.

I'm sure allot of the people that find painting an unobtainable goal still find time for computer games, TV and Dakka.

 notprop wrote:
Surely dismissing others as dicks because they want to play painted forces on nice tables is narrow minded.

Just to be clear, I never said *I* think that, rather I think KK's use of the word "blame" wasn't really an appropriate description of the emotions one would feel.

Deadnight wrote:

All I can say is keep it up Gordie. If you find yourself near Edinburgh, send me a message. There’s a beer in it.

Damn. Was just reading your post thinking 'this sounds like a good guy' but you're literally at the opposite end of the country...

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Anyone who says they don't have the time/skill/money to achieve it really is saying they don't have the motivation.

Anyone who generalises is a sandwich short of a picnic.

Every time we have one of these threads, some people who don't care about playing with unpainted armies bring up words like "snob" and "elitism", and a new strand of argument is that people who don't like to play with unpainted armies are in some way harming the hobby by excludinng people who want to play with unpainted armies.

That makes me feel "blamed" for wanting to play with painted armies and not wanting to play with unpainted armies.

All I am doing is following the hobby of playing with painted toy soldiers.

We wrote:
I don't mind requiring me to paint my armies but if you criticise my paint job or give me flak for using three colors I'm out. (I usually have no problem with this but I have a life. I work I have kids etc. Most of my armies are painted but if I buy something new and want to play with it gray or primed and you get an issue then we aren't gaming together.

I get that playing an all gray unprimed army sucks but when you see how many miniatures I have painted and the level of my paintings you will see I try. I am not rushing a paint job just to field a unit. I have been in this hobby for 25 years and plan to be in it until I die. I take my time painting because a model lasts a lifetime. It gets painted when I am ready and may or may not be partially painted when I field it.

I'm pretty much the same; I usually aim for at least 3 colors before fielding a force. That's normally a colored primer, skin and metal, since that'll usually pass the 4' test. I'd love to field showcase quality painted and based units, but in reality it's never going to happen; I get maybe 5-10 hours of hobby time a month and I'm not going to spend that being guilted about games

That said, it's your house and club so you can do what you want (and I admire your groups commitment). But realistically I'd only ever get a game if I paid a painter, or borrowed an army.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Peregrine wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
I'd much rather play against an army that's 90% unpainted because the person is actually trying to get them painted well instead of rushed to the table.

Most people are looking at upwards of a year to paint an army really well.

Of course let's be honest here: most of the people with unpainted armies have them because they don't care about painting, not because they're making steady progress on some awesome painting that takes a lot of time per model. I've seen a lot of armies that are mostly gray plastic with maybe a model or two painted to a very low standard, lots of pieces broken off from being thrown carelessly into boxes, and a very obvious lack of interest in the models beyond their use as game tokens. But I've seen very few that have some gray plastic alongside well-painted models, and an owner that clearly cares about them.

Are you sure? How do you define "care about painting"?

I'd imagine most people playing with unpainted armies, assuming they are progressing, are just struggling to get it done quickly enough. I'm a glacially slow painter but I love doing it. It took me 3 campaign months to get a 15mm army (maybe 200 minis) from primed to finished. I'd also love to spend 4 hours a night painting, but I work full time and have a baby, so most of my "leisure time" is spend catching up on all the stuff you can't do with an awake baby (housework).

So it's not laziness, it tends to just be other priorities. I dislike the idea that you can only be a gamer if you're willing to dedicate full-time hours to the hobby. It is a hobby, after all.

Herzlos wrote:

We wrote:

So it's not laziness, it tends to just be other priorities. I dislike the idea that you can only be a gamer if you're willing to dedicate full-time hours to the hobby. It is a hobby, after all.

Yep, its a hobby. An escape. A pastime. Its not a job, although some people do seem to treat it as such. If its not enjoyable to spend time on, then its not much of a hobby!