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.

 Nodri wrote:


My point is that a group of painters creating their own group so that they can game with like-minded hobbyists is no more wrong than competitive players creating their own group so that they develop their skills a talk tactics. It isn't about exclusion or elitism, it's about engaging that part of the hobby that you enjoy most. That said, it's also important to step outside of your particular niche and be willing to play with those who don't share your views.

Nicely said.

Herzlos wrote:
I can see your point, if you're talking about a skirmish force of a 30 gobbo raiding party. But when there's 240 of them? (6 units of 20)

The ranked stand tends to be more "the model" you push it around rather than the individual 240 of them.
Again, people set limits on how far they will go.

Many had recommended painting fully the front rank and then only heads and weapons on the rest.
Or say only fully paint the outer perimeter models.

It is like deciding if I will paint the interior of a Rhino... no, I am sealing it up and it can be bare plastic: no-one will know.

I would fully assemble a model then paint: if it is hard to paint = hard to see so no big deal missing some fine detail of a chest plate when a gun is covering it.
It has the added benefit of if I am not completely done (say only block-painted) I can still use the model to play.

Pre-mixed spray cans are more available now than ever, with minimal masking methods, painting could literally take minutes rather than hours.

There are a whole bunch of really good skirmish games where you can play with only some 6 models, can anyone really justify not bothering to paint at all on so few models?
As you can see I have trouble identifying with those who have a paint avoidance response: they probably drive Deloreans.

 Talizvar wrote:
There are a whole bunch of really good skirmish games where you can play with only some 6 models, can anyone really justify not bothering to paint at all on so few models?

(Please don't read this as rude as every time I've typed it, its looked that way to me but I in no way intend it to portray that.)

I can justify it in that I dislike painting, just like someone who only likes to build and collect the models can justify not playing the game in that they don't enjoy the game. Like I stated though, I do respect people like to play with pretty models, and I am having my army painted, I'm just not the one doing it.

Like was mentioned earlier, I'd rather spend my time researching the other codices, making strategies, finding synergies and devising tactics. That's what I enjoy. The best part of the hobby for me is having a great game that goes back and forth. Whether I win or not matters little as long as I'm challenged and forced to think.

Other people enjoy the visual. Its a kind of art for them. And thats great, I love they're enjoying themselves their way. I just don't want anyone put down for their preferences.

Geordie wrote:
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.

This jumped out at me for some reason. You seem adamant that your club emphasises painted miniatures, and that unpainted is not allowed... which makes me wonder why anyone would turn up with unpainted miniatures? Admittedly, people can be idiots sometimes, but it might also be something that you are doing, which you aren't aware of.

I work as a freelancer, so I find myself visiting lots of strange, and new (and often out of the way) places. I always try and do as much research as possible before I go somewhere, to avoid being late, or making other awkward mistakes, but you would be surprised how difficult it is. Some places you can't even find the door... it's hidden half way down an ally, or it's an unmarked door at the top of a fire escape... Sometimes I'm not sure if I'm in the right place, or if I'm about to be arrested for breaking and entering. The problem is, the people who are there all the time, and are familiar with the place, don't realise what it's like for someone turning up on their own for the first time. They know where everything is, and how everything works, so they expect everyone else to. You might also be surprised some of the egocentric things people have had a go at me for. One time I got shouted at for flushing a toilet (which apparently could only be flushed once per day), like any sane person could be expected to know something like that, or would leave a toilet unflushed by default. It sounds crazy, but people are like that.

You mention having a polite word with people after the game, but to me "a polite word" sounds like a euphemism for "a reprimand", which is probably going to rub people the wrong way, no matter how politely you do it. I think if I'd had a nice game, and had fun, and I was thinking everything had gone smoothly, and then someone had a "polite word" with me afterwards, I'd be quite embarrassed, and it would probably sour the whole experience.

I would never turn up to a place with unpainted miniatures if I was certain that unpainted miniatures weren't allowed. If I did turn up and discovered that my miniatures weren't allowed, I think I'd actually like someone to tell me straight away, and maybe even apologise for not making it more clear on the website (or whatever). I'd like to see it in big bold letters above the gaming table, so I'd know it's not just one person being uptight, but a strict rule for everyone. THEN, if someone was okay bending the rules, just this once, because I'm new, I think I'd be very grateful.

If you're letting people play with unpainted miniatures, and letting them think everything is okay, and then having "polite words" with them, then I guess you might come across as a snob, or even two faced: "I thought we were having a nice time, and then he had a go at me about my miniatures". Rather than being polite, you should make sure you are being clear. Make sure new people know what to expect (don't assume anything). And don't be afraid to enforce your rules, have a big sign that says "No unpainted models, no exceptions", and just tell people they can't play. When you politely bend the rules for people, you make the rules seem unimportant, and then when you reprimand people about the rules, it's going to make you come across as petty and pedantic.

'Having a polite word' being a reprimand very much sounds like the Internet not conveying tone very well.

Having a Polite word doesn't necessarily mean that at all. It can quite often just be a clarification or a friendly well-meant pointer. I've done it. You've probably done it. Everyone writing here probably has had a 'polite word' with someone a some point in their life, without using it as some kind of negative reinforcement of the way things are done.

I would rather the polite word happen before the game. Something like "Hey the game was planned, we're gonna go ahead and play it, but painted models is the rule, so next time has to be painted models." Then there's a little bit of negative feeling on the unpainted player part, but they're about to play the game, and then if the game is fun, it provides incentive to paint so they can come back. Otherwise the negative feeling is the last thing they feel, which can decrease the possibility of a return.

That said, if someone is bringing unpainted models to a painted-only club, it needs to be something that is said sooner (unless the person was in fact told and just ignored it, but I like to assume good faith violations in casual environments).

Herzlos wrote:like 's-gone?

And I nearly got burnt the other day. By that burning sky-ball. At least it'll be gone tomorrow and we can go back to grey.

Do you work in the city?

Nope. But I Live in leith and work in livi.

Kilkrazy wrote: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.

Agreed.

notprop wrote: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.

This.

I sat down over Xmas, and painted something like 80 models over the course of a week to a decent/good standard - 40 Romans for a mate's historicals, a bunch of metal kasrkin and completed pretty much all my retribution of scyrah army in that time. Basically, Just got into a rhythm and 'production lined' my way through a whole head of my 'outstanding dudes' that needed painted.

I think a lot of folks would genuinely be surprised at how much you can get done over even the course of a few days, if you block off time and focus on it with even a modicum of effort. And not let silly things like tv and computer games get in the way.

I've gone through what I have left to paint, and my 'lead mountain' comprises 251 models. I've hit a bit of a roll lately, and am getting through between about a dozen models, or whatever I define to be 'a painting project' every two or three days over the course of about an hour a night (missus deadnight leaves me alone, bar shouts for tea from about half nine or ten at night, so I do that for an hour or so and then hit the bed ready for the next day). 250models becomes a much smaller number very quickly.

Deadnight wrote:
'Having a polite word' being a reprimand very much sounds like the Internet not conveying tone very well.

It wasn't really the tone that caught my attention. I believe the OP is genuinely polite with his delivery, but it's just one of those things, like having a flatmate who leaves little notes around. No matter how polite the note is, it still makes you want to twist it into a crude spike and ram it up their nose.

No one likes someone politely reprimanding them, or nagging and nudging, especially about little things that don't seem to matter. I think it's better to be clear with people, either something is a big deal and crosses a boundary, in which case: feel free to tear them a new one so they don't do it again. Or, something isn't a big deal, in which case, feel free to shut up and get over it. Skulking about in the prissy middle-ground, having "polite words", and leaving notes, it's just annoying, and no one will like or respect you for it.

I'm just suggesting that if the OP needs to have "polite words", and is so evidently concerned about people dismissing him as "snobby", then perhaps he is not being clear enough with people up front, about his club and his expectations.

Deadnight wrote:metal kasrkin

Are there any others out there?
Tell me the coordinates and i'll send a search party.

 Smacks wrote:

Deadnight wrote:
'Having a polite word' being a reprimand very much sounds like the Internet not conveying tone very well.

It wasn't really the tone that caught my attention. I believe the OP is genuinely polite with his delivery, but it's just one of those things, like having a flatmate who leaves little notes around. No matter how polite the note is, it still makes you want to twist it into a crude spike and ram it up their nose.

No one likes someone politely reprimanding them, or nagging and nudging, especially about little things that don't seem to matter. I think it's better to be clear with people, either something is a big deal and crosses a boundary, in which case: feel free to tear them a new one so they don't do it again. Or, something isn't a big deal, in which case, feel free to shut up and get over it. Skulking about in the prissy middle-ground, having "polite words", and leaving notes, it's just annoying, and no one will like or respect you for it.

I'm just suggesting that if the OP needs to have "polite words", and is so evidently concerned about people dismissing him as "snobby", then perhaps he is not being clear enough with people up front, about his club and his expectations.

I think he is being plenty clear, is neither reprimanding, nagging or whatever nasty terms you choose to ascribe, and in fact it's you that is over reacting and being overly hostile to people that say stuff you don't want to hear.

'Twist it into a crude spike and ram it up their nose'?
'Tear them a new one'?
'Shut up and get over it'?

Very pleasant stuff there, I'm sure.

Referring to them as 'little things that don't seem to matter' is equally insensitive considering how clear op has been both in terms of what matters to him and his group and what he has done to grow his group.

If anything, that's the kind of stuff 'no one will like or respect you for'.
So

Deadnight wrote:

 Smacks wrote:

Deadnight wrote:
'Having a polite word' being a reprimand very much sounds like the Internet not conveying tone very well.

It wasn't really the tone that caught my attention. I believe the OP is genuinely polite with his delivery, but it's just one of those things, like having a flatmate who leaves little notes around. No matter how polite the note is, it still makes you want to twist it into a crude spike and ram it up their nose.

No one likes someone politely reprimanding them, or nagging and nudging, especially about little things that don't seem to matter. I think it's better to be clear with people, either something is a big deal and crosses a boundary, in which case: feel free to tear them a new one so they don't do it again. Or, something isn't a big deal, in which case, feel free to shut up and get over it. Skulking about in the prissy middle-ground, having "polite words", and leaving notes, it's just annoying, and no one will like or respect you for it.

I'm just suggesting that if the OP needs to have "polite words", and is so evidently concerned about people dismissing him as "snobby", then perhaps he is not being clear enough with people up front, about his club and his expectations.

I think he is being plenty clear, is neither reprimanding, nagging or whatever nasty terms you choose to ascribe, and in fact it's you that is over reacting and being overly hostile to people that say stuff you don't want to hear.

'Twist it into a crude spike and ram it up their nose'?
'Tear them a new one'?
'Shut up and get over it'?

Very pleasant stuff there, I'm sure.

Referring to them as 'little things that don't seem to matter' is equally insensitive considering how clear op has been both in terms of what matters to him and his group and what he has done to grow his group.

If anything, that's the kind of stuff 'no one will like or respect you for'.
So

That being said, it may be the perception of a new member that painting is a "little thing that doesn't matter," so the conversation would alter that perception (if they want to continue in the group).

Zarroc1733 wrote:
Like was mentioned earlier, I'd rather spend my time researching the other codices, making strategies, finding synergies and devising tactics. That's what I enjoy. The best part of the hobby for me is having a great game that goes back and forth. Whether I win or not matters little as long as I'm challenged and forced to think.

No arguments there.
I think we have strong agreement on all those points.
Where we differ is probably in reasoning for or against painting.

I play many strategy board games and good old chess so I understand there is no actual gaming mechanic requirement to paint the "game pieces".
<edit>Correction! "go-fasta-red!" made a friend blob red paint on the model when I pointed out there was no red there... it was priceless!
When I started war gaming I figured painting was just a normal price for admission from what I saw of Napoleonics.
Plus 40k at 2nd/3rd edition I saw largely painted armies (many people played tournaments with the painting standards for entry).
For a while I viewed "block painting" as soul sucking.

Oddly, I found I was intrigued by the "tactics" of painting and how to do the least work for the best looking finish (leads to a bi-polar way of looking at things).
Painted armies gave me a more welcome access to a variety of venues that bare plastic would not give me.
I LOVE to build and convert models, painting has graduated from a necessary evil to something I can zen / enjoy and the outcome is not all that disagreeable either.
I am a fan for the look of it all now.

At the very least as a practical aspect: the wife, family and friends can look at the models or a game setup and agree it is "impressive".
Got the bloody mother-in-law to stop saying I am off "playing with my little toys".

I wouldn't say you're being a snob. Particular to be sure, but we all have our own take on the hobby, and if you absolutely don't enjoy playing the game with or against an unpainted army, then who's to say you should be obligated to do so?

I would consider this though: I assume by connection that you like playing against well painted armies. Now as we all know, It takes most players many months, even a year or two, before they can paint their minis to a decent standard. So in striving to keep to the requirements you've set for your group, newcomers will likely end up rushing their painting and neglecting researching and developing their skills with a brush. The result being armies that will pain the eyes to look upon. If that''s an issue for you then letting them paint an army in their own time and temporarily having to fight their bare plastic hordes may be the lesser of the two evils?

I would personally prefer to play against a well painted army. But failing that I'd prefer to play against an unpainted one than a badly painted one. A mediocre paint job does nothing for me.

Personally, I think it breaks down into the following:
-If you're playing in your home, your rules on painting must be adhered to. If people want to play there badly enough, they'll make it happen.
-If you're playing in a store and you try to enforce your house rules, expect people to be rightfully offended. The store's rules must trump yours.

On the subject of flesh-hounds that showed up on page 2; I run OOP flesh hounds that still look like dogs. I think the lizard ones look like crap. I even cannibalized 2 of them so that I could turn a third into Karanak. Chaos war hounds would mix in perfectly with them, while modern fleshhounds would look terribly out of place.

Deadnight wrote:
I think he is being plenty clear, is neither reprimanding, nagging or whatever nasty terms you choose to ascribe

Well you can think that, but you have no way of knowing it, any more than I do. I will point out again that the OP is evidently concerned about how he is coming across to people, which might imply he has had a bad experience with someone. It's all very well the OP coming here, looking for validation for his views, but that won't solve is problem if he isn't articulating them clearly to other people. Remember, we're only hearing one side of the story here. Of course we are going to agree that his expectations aren't unreasonable, all I'm suggesting is that the OP take a look at what he is doing, and try to see if there is anything more he could be doing to communicate those expectations to the people in his club.

Deadnight wrote:
in fact it's you that is over reacting and being overly hostile to people that say stuff you don't want to hear.

'Twist it into a crude spike and ram it up their nose'?
'Tear them a new one'?
'Shut up and get over it'?

Very pleasant stuff there, I'm sure.

Well that's just silly, you are taking me out of context. I was discussing things that rub people the wrong way, and cross boundaries, and I used the hyperbolic language to describe how actions can induce hostility in other people. In fact, the "shut up and get over it" part was about exercising restraint and patience with other people, which is completely the opposite context to how you have presented it.

Deadnight wrote:
Referring to them as 'little things that don't seem to matter' is equally insensitive considering how clear op has been both in terms of what matters to him and his group and what he has done to grow his group.

You have misunderstood and misinterpreted my point. I never "insensitively" suggested that his concerns were 'little things that don't seem to matter', at all. I agree 100% that his views are valid and important. When I said 'little things that don't seem to matter', the operative word is "seem". The OP has told us that this is important to him, but he has also told us that people turn up with unpainted models, that he bends his own rules for those people, and he has strongly implied that someone might have dismissed his views as merely "snobby".

Just because he has been clear with us, doesn't mean he has been so clear with his group. If he bends his own rules and treats them like they aren't important, then that is how they will "seem" to other people in the group. I'm not talking about what is or isn't important, I'm talking about how those ideas are being communicated and interpreted.

Hm, to me, I think it's not really the content of the message that was critisized, but maybe the way it was said/received.

If someone call you a snob, that may be because he felt that you were snobbing him/her - and that has nothing to do with your real intention. How you say it, how you show it and how it is received are generally the causes of misunderstanding. Maybe these players feel that you were "despising them" for not having "the right standards" to play with "truly fully painted" armies. Note that it is not how I see it, it is just a fictional example.

In a few words, it sounds like a communication misunderstanding more than anything.

The debate is still interesting, though. It is true that you have the right to have you own way to appreciate the game/Hobby. However, the fact is you can't really play alone at GW games (or it becomes quickly boring if you do ). So, if people feel that you are too much "a pain in the ass" to play with you, the danger is indeed to have less players to play along.

That may be fine for some players, though, and this is perfectly right. The true question is; is it really what you want to have?

 Smacks wrote:

Deadnight wrote:
Referring to them as 'little things that don't seem to matter' is equally insensitive considering how clear op has been both in terms of what matters to him and his group and what he has done to grow his group.

You have misunderstood and misinterpreted my point. I never "insensitively" suggested that his concerns were 'little things that don't seem to matter', at all. I agree 100% that his views are valid and important. When I said 'little things that don't seem to matter', the operative word is "seem". The OP has told us that this is important to him, but he has also told us that people turn up with unpainted models, that he bends his own rules for those people, and he has strongly implied that someone might have dismissed his views as merely "snobby".

Just because he has been clear with us, doesn't mean he has been so clear with his group. If he bends his own rules and treats them like they aren't important, then that is how they will "seem" to other people in the group. I'm not talking about what is or isn't important, I'm talking about how those ideas are being communicated and interpreted.

Just as a point re: rules being bent; like your statements the context matters immensely. If they're being bent for a brand-new release or a huge model that's WIP and there's improvement to the paintwork week-on-week, that's a reasonable situation. Another example is second-hand army similarly just acquired with a terrible paint scheme that will be replaced, but the new owner wants to see on the table how the army performs and what other things they may want to buy to paint at the same time. While it may grate against "the rules," in the end it's going to result in a new force with a better paint job so the investment in gritting teeth pays off later.

Then you have the more realistic human end of things; people in the thread saying "anyone can paint an army if they want to" are not wrong, but adding the phrase "at a specific point in time" massively alters the equation. If one of your regulars is going through a rough patch (e.g. - a family member in the hospital, or being "made redundant" and struggling to find work and looking for a break from not finding it), yes the rules would likely get bent in most groups to allow some latitude. That's human empathy, and it's no bad thing to say that some things are bigger than the rules. Being there for other people in the down times is a big reason we form groups, after all.

Some would throw hissy-fits that rules weren't being consistently enforced 100% of the time, but those people are, quite frankly, idiots. This is a gaming club, not a set of national laws. Social rules are there to establish a framework, but it's not really possible to account for every possible circumstance that may arise and some situations, if they were thought about ahead of time, likely would have completely different rules from normal. Zero-tolerance, "must always be enforced" rules are typically the ones that create far more problems than the situation they're nominally meant to deal with. It only becomes a problem when it's certain people who get the rules bent because of who they are and not necessarily what they're doing/enduring (e.g. - the cute girl gets to have unpainted models for months because boobs, or the university friend can have undercoat-only models because he knows where the incriminating photos are, etc.).

From what I can read, I doubt the OP is one of those "dear GOD, I see a spot of plastic...BANNED FOR SIX WEEKS" people, nor does it seem like he runs on the "everyone but my friends has to follow these rules" type (though there's less evidence to the latter). I'd be surprised to learn that he's even communicating expectations poorly, as he seems to be fairly accommodating given that the club's actual theme is "bring painted models." From what I can tell from the one side of the story, it's most likely he's being called a snob by someone who values the games more highly than the models and doesn't want to expend the effort to be in the club, but resents that there are 8-9 people in the area he can't get games against because he's not part of the club. Thus, as the person who started it, the OP is a "snob" because he wants to engage the hobby in the way he prefers, rather than the way another individual wants to.

 thegreatchimp wrote:
Now as we all know, It takes most players many months, even a year or two, before they can paint their minis to a decent standard. So in striving to keep to the requirements you've set for your group, newcomers will likely end up rushing their painting and neglecting researching and developing their skills with a brush. The result being armies that will pain the eyes to look upon. If that''s an issue for you then letting them paint an army in their own time and having to fight their bare plastic hordes may be the lesser of the two evils?

I think you're exaggerating. You can get really nice looking model with a black primer, simple basecoats, and a wash or two.

Excellent post Krinsath, you raise a lot of good points, and get an exalt from me.

 Krinsath wrote:
It's most likely he's being called a snob by someone who values the games more highly than the models and doesn't want to expend the effort to be in the club.

I agree with you that this seems "most likely", it seems that way to me too. However, the most likely scenario isn't always the actual scenario, so I think it's always good to challenge assumptions. That's why I put forward an alternative point of view. I appreciate that I'm perhaps playing devil's advocate here, but I'm doing it to be constructive.

infinite_array wrote:
I think you're exaggerating. You can get really nice looking model with a black primer, simple basecoats, and a wash or two.

I really am not, not from what I've seen of newcomers that felt they had to paint an army in a hurry anyway. I could churn out an adequate looking unit wit the free time I have, say every week. But that's with 200+ painted models and 3 years experience. Half of the new players I've encountered don't even know how to drybrush or use a wash. let alone do it to any kind of decent standard.

As a Demo Agent for a different company I say 100% that you are indeed a snob.

But guess what? I'm fine with that. Everyone is allowed to have their opinions and make their choices.

I feel the point of the minis is to play a game. You have a small club, run out of a home, so that level of snobbery and elitism (it is) is perfectly fine.

But if you are at a store and guy wants to play that just got into the game 10 days ago and hasn't gotten his army painted yet and you refuse to play him, that's not cool. That creates an exceptionally negative view of the hobby and gaming community and should be avoided at all costs.

But in your house? Go for it. WarGame Police aren't going to come for you.

As a relatively new player to the 40k universe, I understand where you are coming from and respect your stance on painted versus non-painted models in your club. I play with a group of guys in the Memphis are that allow some unpainted minis but that is only allowed if you are showing fewer and fewer unpainted minis between games. Happy WarGaming guys and remember, it's just a game so let people do with it as they would like to

BFTBG!!!!

 Mattlov wrote:
As a Demo Agent for a different company I say 100% that you are indeed a snob.

But guess what? I'm fine with that. Everyone is allowed to have their opinions and make their choices.

I feel the point of the minis is to play a game. You have a small club, run out of a home, so that level of snobbery and elitism (it is) is perfectly fine.

But if you are at a store and guy wants to play that just got into the game 10 days ago and hasn't gotten his army painted yet and you refuse to play him, that's not cool. That creates an exceptionally negative view of the hobby and gaming community and should be avoided at all costs.

But in your house? Go for it. WarGame Police aren't going to come for you.

Except it shouldn't be viewed as negative in his house. It isn't. It's like playing basketball with full rules (his house) vs playing "barnball" as we grew up calling rule-less basketball (the game store). Both are fun, they just have differing guidelines. Look, I have maybe 1/10th of my total model count painted. I'm not offended by him wanting fully painted models in his house. I'd happily play there if I got an invite and had the models I needed painted. But if he turned me away at a game store, I'd be miffed. That's like playing barnball where anything goes and one guy shows up and says "nope, that was 3 steps, you're playing wrong"-it would be wrong in basketball, it's overlooked in barnball. Know your environment. It really is that simple.

Yeah, this little debate will rage-on for as long as it is in existence.
Oddly, I do not get into the argument playing X-wing...

Refusal to Play Unpainted
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/308803.page

Playing With Unpainted Miniatures
http://www.beastsofwar.com/groups/painting/forum/topic/playing-with-unpaint-miniatures/

" The current trend to use unpainted miniatures " Topic
http://theminiaturespage.com/boards/msg.mv?id=67443

Painted or unpainted miniatures...
https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/286845/painted-or-unpainted-miniatures

I Am Sick Of Playing Against Unpainted Armies !
http://www.librarium-online.com/forums/40k-armies/12170-i-am-sick-playing-against-unpainted-armies.html

Unpainted Models In Battle
http://www.bugmansbrewery.com/topic/39157-unpainted-models-in-battle/

Painting Matters: In Defense of Hobby Standards
http://chicagoskirmish.blogspot.ca/2014/08/painting-matters-in-defense-of-hobby.html

A couple of questions for the OP.

Is your game group only for experienced gamers or do you have some way to accommodate new gamers?

Do you have an army or two that you would let a new player use if they had not yet painted their own force? As much of a painted-only guy that I am, I still realize that it can take quite some time for a newbie to paint up an entire army.

I ask because as I've said before, our club is painted only, but because we deliberately want to bring in new blood, we've always got figures to share. Usually this is easy because we play mostly small skirmish games but even when we do one of our big Apocalpyse-with-better-rules (Warpath 1.0) games we are able to provide a 40k army to whomever might not have one.

Just to clarify, I don't think it's a bad thing to have a club exclusively for intermediate/advanced gamers, I'm just curious how your club handles this.

I totally agree with the "your House your Rules" vibe. People can't come into your home and expect to tell you how to run stuff.

Personally, I think the rules are harsh, but I wouldn't call it snobbery unless it was actively used as a means to keep people out.

By which I mean, if you guys are willing to actually help bring people up to the standards you expect with coaching etc, then it's not as much about excluding people, but encouraging others to improve their hobby.

I have personally spent most of my time in the hobby playing against half-painted armies, so it doesn't bother me much.
I do prefer seeing two fully painted armies playing over gorgeous terrain, but I have had some seriously fun games playing against half painted/undercoated armies over bedsheets, books and pringles cans.

*Shrug* your club, your rules OP. People don't like it, they can start their own club. Simple as that. One man's "snob" is another man's "reasonable", after all.

Though as someone that is personally 100% about using fully painted, WYSIWYG armies, even if it leaves me disadvantaged playing regularly against people that don't give two feths about painted or WYSIWYG, I may be a little biased.

 Smacks wrote:
Excellent post Krinsath, you raise a lot of good points, and get an exalt from me.

 Krinsath wrote:
It's most likely he's being called a snob by someone who values the games more highly than the models and doesn't want to expend the effort to be in the club.

I agree with you that this seems "most likely", it seems that way to me too. However, the most likely scenario isn't always the actual scenario, so I think it's always good to challenge assumptions. That's why I put forward an alternative point of view. I appreciate that I'm perhaps playing devil's advocate here, but I'm doing it to be constructive.

Ever since RT in the late 80's, I've played in clubs or groups that have had pretty strict "no paint, no play" rules. When I began wargaming it was explained to me that the painting requirement was there actually for the benefit of the gamers -- it prevented richer players from just buying stuff, quickly assembling it, and playing it. Instead, if you wanted to use something, you had to put some effort into painting it, thus making the (financial) ability to just buy more models less impactful.

Of course, back then, most of the 40k models were single piece metal, and it took 2 seconds to "assemble" one (glue it to the base)

If someone had these restrictions on who they would and would not play against then yes, I would possibly call them a snob. (Usually only if they had offended me personally though, since 'snob' seems kind of insulting--if they were a friend I would probably just tell them they were too picky.)

That being said, if someone has an elite set of requirements for playing the game how they think it should be played, my usual response would be something along the lines of "If you only want to play those games in those circumstances, go find your own place to play where you can restrict the community to the people only you want."

It sounds like the OP has done exactly that. I don't like his restrictions, and wouldn't play in that environment (which is totally fine--they'd never have me anyway!) but it isn't FOR me. I can honestly say that I'm supremely happy for the OP. He has a group with good terrain, multiple players, and no everyone bending to his whim. It sounds like a mighty fine setup, one I wish I had in my own garage!

I do think you're coming across as a bit of a snob. But then again, on the internet it's hard to tell and... Well... Your house, your rules...

Also, you come across as a.. Shall we say... A bit hypocritical... You say that you won't judge those who don't paint to your standards. And yet, you outright refuse to play against them, arguing that they don't confirm to your vision of how the game is supposed to look.

It is, of course, a jugement you're free to make. But it is a judgement nonetheless...

Personally, I couldn't care less about painted or unpainted models. I see a sharp divide between assembling and painting models as a hobby and playing tabletop wargames as a game. After all, as far as the game is concerned, the models are simply just counter representing a set of dice. You could play with cardboard cutouts or pieces of paper, and the game would still play the same.

My time is limited, and I'd rather have a game with unpainted models than not have a game at all.

Buy hey, each to his own, right? If you and your friends all agree that this is how you want to play the game, then go ahead. But do keep in mind that you'll be missing out on a lot of fun by refusing games.