Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

If someone recast their whole army I may play against them, but I'm likely to be annoyed. I find those who recast entire armies to have a TFG mentality oftentimes. Those around where I am who would 3d print are the same who will try to play with entire recast armies.

It's going to depend on why they printed, what they printed, if it looks like the model in question, and where we're playing.


Azrael: There doesn't need to be some magic logic behind it. Your logic is influenced by your "don't tell me what to do" lens. Others are influenced by the logical lens that reproduction instead of buying means that money is not going to the company, and if stores are being played at then those stores. There are plenty of other lenses you need to see through to have a comprehensive argument, and if you're going to be THAT argumentative you need to start looking through all of them.

I personally wouldn't use 3d printed models, but I guess if an opponent chose to use an inferior product that's their choice, in the same way they can use third party models (not saying third arty are necessarily inferior or superior to gw)

At the same time I wouldn't approve of the illegal use

Not everyone can afford the real models. I wouldnt want one myself because of the effort and fragility of it but it it looks decent and I know whats what at a glance. Meh, I dont care.

To be fair, at current costs, to a good standard a 3d printed tank could cost more than gw tanks.

3d printers can cost a small fortune

I wouldn't care really, for a number of reasons, but ultimately, as of right now there's nothing particularly great out that doesn't look like Lego (and thus is an inferior product), and by the time there is great looking stuff out at economical prices, there isn't going to be anything anyone will really be able to do about it, especially, once painted, identifying such may be impossible.

 Paradigm wrote:

 BoomWolf wrote:
.

And the printed models does not "happen to look like", it was DESIGNED to. it was its purpose.

In that case, is be interested to know your stance on 3rd party minis that are quite clearly designed to be stand-ins for 40k? For example, Vic Minis not-Guardsmen or Anvil's not-SM? In the case of either those or 3d printed stuff, the following in true:

They are made, by design, to be a substitute for something in 40k
There are no real savings over GW kits
They are generally only available online, so do not support an LGS
They went through a design and manufacture process from scratch

In other words, how is Anvil making a CAD model that looks like a SM, printing it, casting it in resin and selling it any different from someone else following the same first 2/3 steps? The process is the same, the product is the same or similar, the only difference is that the individual is not selling it himself.

As far as the OP goes, my stance is that I game with the player, not the minis. If you're a decent guy, you can play with 3rd party, recasts, scratch builds, 3D prints, paper cutouts, whatever. I'd you're not, then you feth off even if you have a fully painted, GW only army.

Again you focus at the LEAST important factor, the WHAT.
When I time and time again say that the most important factor is the WHY.

Is there something special in the anvil look the wanted? there are quite a few rather unique things in anvil who I find it completely plausible he wants due to sheer looks, be it guns, the robed figures, the super-poseable bionic legs, or many other cool bits.
Making a complete model and complete armies out of them is also quite possible, not that I know why, its so darn expensive-but its a possibility, and as long its done because of reasons that do not bother me, than the act itself does not bother me.

Same goes for the victoria models, they have their own styles and apperances that differ from the GW ones, sure they represent the same units, but they differ in appearance and offer selections not available through GW,

There is also a great difference between copies, and alternates.

NoiseMarine with Tinnitus wrote:
You're looking for the term "Copyright Infringement". Not theft. Just saying.

At no point have I used the term "theft", so "Copyright Infringement" is not something that I'm looking for at the moment.

 Azreal13 wrote:

Windchild wrote:


The main reason is that I personally feel that it is unethical (it can be compared to stealing IMO) to print copies of models.

Firstly, it is never to correct to refer to IP violations as theft. Theft requires the physical removal of property, and is a criminal act, IP violation does not and is a civil offence.

NoiseMarine with Tinnitus wrote:
You're looking for the term "Copyright Infringement". Not theft. Just saying.

can be compared to stealing

I never said it was stealing/theft, just comparative.

If someone wants to make unique shoulder pads, rhino doors, and other minor aesthetics is great, and I would play against that.

However, if someone was to print entire models, I wouldn't play against it.

Secondly, yet again, as with the recast debate, we have people (not just you) drawing arbitrary lines in the sand with very little hard logic to back it up. Firstly, prints are not akin to recasts, unless you think people are hacking into GW's server and stealing the 3D models off their system, any printed material is likely to be based off of a CAD model designed from scratch. Now, if that model happens to look like an existing model, how do you differentiate between any of the "not-whatever" alternate models out there and a printed model? At what point does a model become too much like the model it is representing to be acceptable?

I guess someone could buy and build the model, laser scan it into a 3D modelling program then make the files available for free online, that might be more akin to recasting, but I can't really see that being a huge issue in the current climate.

Also, morally, there's not really a huge distinction between playing someone who has a single, 3D printed shoulder pad with some IP infringing iconography on it and an entire army

There is a major distinction.

One means that someone originally paid for the models, and just wants to add some flair. Morally, that if fine by me.

The other means that they didn't pay for the models, and just wanted to play without spending money. Morally, that does not sit well with me.

Neither recasts nor 3D prints are free.

In fact, several people have suggested producing a 3D model offers little to no saving over buying the original, so price doesn't appear to be a major component.

Are you saying that someone who 3D prints a shoulder pad with IP infringing iconography is ok because they legitimately obtained the rest of the model?

I'm pretty sure that's not how that law works.

If that's what you're ok with, that's fine, but I'm really struggling to see how the conversation would go where you established how much of your opponents army was 3D printed, decided whether that comprised of things you found acceptable or not and then let them know if you were or were not happy to play them.

"Ok, so it's just some Rhino doors, that chapter logo on the Drop Pod and the shoulder pads on the veterans? Ok, I'm happy to say....wait, where'd you go?"

But bringing a printed copy-type army to the very gaming club that sells said models is a jerk action, and as I don't approve of it, I don't approve playing against it. by that tiny act I am putting my own small influence of "don't do that stuff"

thats my thoughts. I useally play at my FLGS, if I'm doing so I;'m not going to wanna play against someone who 3D printed all their models, it's just a bit insulting really

I don't know, depends on how accurate it is. I play warhammer to face warhammer armies not copies. If someone has a stand in army of slightly differently looking 3d printed models I wouldn't feel like I was playing 40k. I'd feel like I was playing some alternative game just using the rules.

But I don't like stand in models either much so I guess its a personal preference (even worse when they sub another model in their army so half way through a game you think your charging a lowly unit when actually its 'supposed' to be a demon prince and you get caked)

I am trying to wrap my head around how some one could be insulted by a 3D Army.
1] It was not cheap.
2] Work had to go into it.
3] If it is painted there was some more work.

It is not like they are bringing out little green army men.
They Put in Time, Money and Work into it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AtomicEngineer wrote:
I don't know, depends on how accurate it is. I play warhammer to face warhammer armies not copies. If someone has a stand in army of slightly differently looking 3d printed models I wouldn't feel like I was playing 40k. I'd feel like I was playing some alternative game just using the rules.

But I don't like stand in models either much so I guess its a personal preference (even worse when they sub another model in their army so half way through a game you think your charging a lowly unit when actually its 'supposed' to be a demon prince and you get caked)

So you would have an issue with my 20% GW Guard Army even though everything was painted and WYSIWYG?

I don't think that 3D printing models will really do anything to the industry. I actually think it will help it because as 3D printers will become more available, people will 3D print models more as GWs prices are insane. Assuming they don't go full slow, they will then lower their prices and everything will fall back into balance. Think about it, has pirating CDs destroyed the music industry? Has pirating movies destroyed the film industry? Has pirating video games destroyed the video game industry? Then why will pirating models destroy the war gaming industry?

It does not bother me a single bit, if my opponent chooses to field official GW models, 3D copies, Lego minifigs, or blocks of wood as their force. Just so long as his army list is written out completely, and I can refer to it as needed, in determining what unit is what.

Consider this, if a good 3D printer goes for $3000, that is almost 2 full 92nd Cadia army deals. They are $1635 each. And the person has not spent money on plastic materials yet.

Only if he gives me his tech.

 Smotejob wrote:
The other day a guy showed up to my flgs with a space marine army and the infantry were all GW models, but all the land raider and rhino models were clearly 3D printed. Curious what the community thinks.

Would you refuse to play against an all second hand army?

As long as it's clear what every model is supposed to be and it is of appropriate size on a proper base then I don't really care. I'm quite happy with counts as etc.

Bonus points if stuff is painted and modelled etc. slightly annoying if the whole army was recast and 3D prints with no attempt at paint.

You can hide behind "it's not technically theft" all you want. Piracy is wrong and I would not play someone who pirated their army.

Second hand is different because the models were still purchased at some point and the original buyer has more or less passed on his right to use the models to someone else.

3D printing is not piracy. Unless you are suggesting that the files originated at GW and are the ones used to make the actual minis, the printed models have gone through the same design process from scratch. To use a musical analogy, it's the difference between illegally downloading a track (piracy) and recording your own cover version of it which you don't even sell and is in no way illegal.

Just because copyright infraction have no fancy name like "piracy" and "theft" does not mean its legal, or acceptable.

Imagin that you spend years developing some sort of new technology, just to have some other people copy your hard work while paying you no respects and ignoring you, making it so you get nothing for your time and effort.
In a world where the norm is that copying is alright, there is no interest to ever produce anything that can be replicated-because you'll get screwed over doing all the work, yet will reap no profits.

Just as much as you wont make paper prints of a board game, despite it being totally possibly and not even hard, but you'll buy the actual game so I expect as much of minis, and just as reprinting a handful of lost cards off a massive bulk won't make me twitch, so wont minor recreations of bits who might be too hard to acquire on their own.

If you are playing 40k, it means you enjoy the system and at the very LEAST like the style and setting, having a "well, you made it so now I don't need you anymore and got no reason to pay you" mentality might not be illegal (it is), but it is still unpleasant and makes me want to avoid contact with the one practicing it.
Rule of thumb-if I would not enjoy people doing the same with a product of my own design, I do not approve of them doing it with the games I play. (theoretically speaking naturally, I have yet to make a product, being just a student these days and not yet an engineer)

And I won't pretend to be a saint, I've done my fair share of piracy in my life, but never as a end deal, only to try things out and decide, had I liked the game-I bought it, if not-erased it. the only exception are games I bought and for some reason can no longer play regularly (disc damaged/lost/incompatible with new tech/etc)
Printing your own replica models is a very clear indication you got no intention to ever buy them.

I still don't see how it's any different to using non-GW models to play the game in that regard. In either case, GW (the people who made the game) get nothing, and you can still play that game. It's also the same as scratch-building from plasticard and with no GW bits, you're getting an equivalent product similar to the original, but without paying the people that 'originated' the design. Would you play against something like that?

I think if you have the skill, ability and equipment to make something for yoursel, be it a scratch-built Chimera or a printed Space Marine, then all power to you. You're not 'stealing' anything other than a concept (human in power armour is hardly an original idea on GW's part), and as has been pointed out, there are companies out there doing just that that you said you'd be happy to face.

I can understand wanting to be loyal to an LGS, but that's really the only reason I can see that you could have a real issue with it.



Please note that I'm not trying to start an argument, I just can't quite see where you're coming from.

 BoomWolf wrote:
Just because copyright infraction have no fancy name like "piracy" and "theft" does not mean its legal, or acceptable.

You're framing a moral argument as a legal one.

It is not legal to reproduce a company's protected works without permission. A Rhino (for instance) is not protected in it's entirety, although there may be key features that are (such as chapter iconography.)

It is perfectly acceptable, legally speaking, to design and print an APC which looks a lot like a Rhino, as long as there are some differences, which in the case of a 3D printed model designed from scratch are likely to exist naturally. There is the whole "likely to cause confusion" element, but as we are talking, ostensibly, about someone who has made them for themselves and not trying to sell them, isn't really applicable.

You can say that you find the idea of someone producing something themselves to look like something sold commercially wrong, that's your choice, but to call it illegal in this context is not an argument on solid footing. Yes, it could be illegal, but it is in no way a slum dunk in the way recasts are.

Personally I'd have no issue playing vs. anyone using 3rd party, 3d printed or recast models as long as they look good.

Especially for less homogenous forces like Chaos Orks or Guard there just is too much variety in there for non-gw models (regardless of their provenance) to not fit or even be required in somebody's idea of army.

Personally I own a few 3d printed gaming aids (blast templates, as I find my local price of 8€ for a cut sheet of plastic a bit ridiculous and if I were to spend some real cash on templates I'd nuy something like Pyrkol's who actually looks a cerain way to justify the cash) but I wouldn't buy 3d printed units because I don't feel the quality is good enough yet. I will buy 3rd pary models however at some point in the not very distant future when I get around to startung an IG army simply because I don't like the aesthetics of any of GW's guard infantry lines.

I grew tired of trying to speak with you, seeing how you keep intentionally focusing on everything I say OTHER than my main point.

In our group nobody is too opposed to 3d printing, but we all like the models due to their quality. And 3d printing models is far far away from looking as good as the originals. And according to a friend of mine who works for a 3d printer company it will stay like this for a while due to physical constraints.

We're using more and more 3d printed terrain, though. If you use the right material you can spray it with acetone and melt it a bit. This would ruin any detail on models, but gives great organic forms, like stones, trees or hills.

i think one assumption that is bad to have here is that each person with a 3D printed army made the 3d renders themselves before printing.

Let's not lie to ourselves, there is definitely databases that have premade renders of warhammer 40k models out on the net.
Sure they may call it "Sci-Fi APC" instead of Rhino transport, but we all know what it is supposed to be. There is also people who will straight up call it what it is and make it readily available to anyone searching.



If people are just downloading these files and printing them off, is it really ok?

i dont think it is and i am willing to bet more people will be downloading files than making their own.

Oh one simple, practical reason should not be forgotten: You can print only about one, two at best, models per day in (current) high detail with a layer thickness of 0.1mm

That means you will only get one squad in 10 days. Printing your basic Space Marine army would take months. And that in gruesome detail level. I think this discussion is still rather theoretical.

edit: this just inspired me to create a thread for collecting ideas how you can best use your 3d printer legally for the hobby.

I have a few 3d printed models in my army. I have access to a printer at work and it was not terribily expensive. A number of us at work pitched in $100 to have a "share" of the printer.

Here is a Thunderfire cannon I modeled myself and a techmarine wich i made from a regular marine and added some 3d printed arms. Both models are not great, but work fine in my games and have never had anyone complain or refuse to play me. Total cost to print the techmarine and the cannon ~$1.75 worth of material.



I recently found this model online and gave it a try and it came out pretty well. It was printed in 6 pieces and glued together. I need to get it painted up, but I think it will look pretty good when finished. Total printing cost ~$5.00.



This is my best result from the printer so far. I use it as a looted wagon or battle wagon. The base is the printed portion and then I added the bits from the turret up to have a platform. Most people I play against with this do not know it is a 3d printed model unless I tell them, so that indicate to me the quality is good enough to "fool" most people when looking at it from a tables distance. of course if they pick up and look they could see the differences pretty easy. This was printed all as one piece total cost ~$6.50




I have also printed a number of bases for an ork army I bought off a guy that was missing a lot of bases. I probably based 1/2 of them with a 3d printed base. Those can't be detected on the tabel at all even if I told someone some of them are 3d printed and some are not, without picking them up they would never know. I think I saved about 1/2 of what I would have spent if I purchased the bases instead of printing them.

I think I have more than made up the cost of my $100 investment on the printer and have been reasonably happy with the results. I have never had anyone refuse to play with me because of 3d printed models.

As for the moral concerns, for me the thunderfire is easy, I have no issues with that, I modeled the cannon and the techmarine parts based off of looking at an "original" and then made the 3d model from that so it is no different than scratch building my own version from bit or whatever, I am just using a different media. Now the tank models, I simply downloaded them from someone else, so i don't know the exact source of the model, but I suspect the person who modeled it did it like I did the Thunderfire, so again it is a bit like scratch building, it is just a lot easier to share you work with others. So not exactly stealing, but it probably does tread upon intelectual property a bit.

Assumption: In a couple of years when 3D Printers become ubiquitous (a "good" one allready costs merely 300 USD) and of good quality (no layer lines, the resolution is allready almost good enough), 3D printed models will be 90% of what you see. There are a lot of good 3D artists out there who are putting their work up for free. With a community as huge as dakka, I bet there will be more than enough people who will contribute their own unique models GW can't even put a claim to.

 Kosake wrote:
Assumption: In a couple of years when 3D Printers become ubiquitous (a "good" one allready costs merely 300 USD) and of good quality (no layer lines, the resolution is allready almost good enough), 3D printed models will be 90% of what you see. There are a lot of good 3D artists out there who are putting their work up for free. With a community as huge as dakka, I bet there will be more than enough people who will contribute their own unique models GW can't even put a claim to.

From what I got told from inside the 3d printing industry this is not very likely to happen. There are already resin printers which allow higher detail, but it seems to be slower, more expensive in terms of 3d printer technology and printing material, making printing with it less attractive. The "regular" printers seem to have reached a physical barrier in terms of layer lines and z-axis stability. If you want to improve quality with that you're talking of industry scale printers, regarding size, ease of usage and especially price. Paying 3k for a printer will be a barrier for most 40k players. It seems that high detail 3d printers will not be available for prices <1k € within quite some years.

If they looked good, I'd ask him if he could print some models for me too.