Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:5 skeleton warriors.

Basecoat bone with paint X

Wash bone with paint Y

Drybrush bone with paint Z.

Total time less than 1hr. Skill level 2/10

divide 1hr by a month.

I don't think there is anybody on this thread who could truthfully say that they could not do something like the above if they had 4 weeks to do it.

This kind of argument is always just so stupid. I could also knit a sweater too. So what? What does literally having the time have to do with anything? People have other things to do that are either more important ot them or more fun. So again what is your point?

inquisitorlewis wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Squidmanlolz wrote:The most upsetting thing is people who don't paint their Infinity models. Every model in the line is gorgeous and deserves a paint job to match. Besides, you only need to field around eight models... that's a week's worth of painting, a month if you only paint a few hours a week.

And I'll give you the same response.
I'll kick you in the junk once for each mini I paint, deal? We'll both get about the same level of enjoyment.
It doesn't matter how gorgeous the models are - in fact I'll likely never try the game now because of what you said.
My painting will never be that good - just like my skill at playing the cello won't ever be that good.
If my paint job ruins a "gorgeous model" that deserves a gorgeous paint job, I'll just refuse to sully them.

I'm starting to wonder if youre to busy obsessing over other peoples "junk" to find the time to pick up a brush. The whole thing is pretty lame.

That's funny. I've been wondering why some of you are so obsessed over whether or not other people pick up a paint brush. So much so that you can't find the time to seek out people who play to your standards. The whole thing is pretty lame.

Delephont wrote:I wonder what would happen if people said:

"Well, I put complete sprues on the table straight out of the box, because I hate modelling!!"

I wonder what people would say to that? The bottom line is that everything to do with TTgaming is "optional", but to ignore one aspect of the hobby because you don't want to do it is unreasonable. To expect people to take you seriously (within a gaming context is also unreasonable).

Whether people like it or not, the hobby is model, paint, play....whether you outsource the bits you don't like, or struggle through is immaterial, you don't have a complete product until all of those criteria are met.

I'm not going to bore you with analogy, there are so many, but every hobby has multiple facets (layers) which comprise that hobby, take anyone away and you actually have a completely different hobby, or in some cases a hobby that isn't even recognised.

I have seen the variation of this theme.

It's called- glue legs on the bases, and write out a list of what you wish you really had on the table. This tick only goes a week or two before the offender is dubbed- half nelson, or stubbs.

I don't think the "I won't cut my models out of the sprues but I can play!" will fly. You can't play the game when you don't cut the models from their sprues. Or it will be a really, really weird game where you don't know if there's 5 tactical marines in one sprue (since it has five sets of legs) and why are 5 marines just as big as a Rhino.

Hahaha!
My next army is going to be bases with a pile of bits glued to the top of each of them. It will be totally WYSIWYG! And when people look at me funny, I'll just blurt out, "I hate modeling!"
I wonder who would play me then.
XD

That said, I obviously support people not painting their models. And now, I also support people not building their models.

heartserenade wrote:IYou can't play the game when you don't cut the models from their sprues.

Not 40K, but you can with Warmachine, which uses base volume determined by base size for LoS.

Not saying I'd play constantly against someone who did that(though I probably would), but it's useful for proxying units you plan to buy and doing demos on the fly(since the quick start rules download provides the cards to play what's in the battle group boxes).

Delephont wrote:I wonder what would happen if people said:

"Well, I put complete sprues on the table straight out of the box, because I hate modelling!!"

I wonder what people would say to that? The bottom line is that everything to do with TTgaming is "optional", but to ignore one aspect of the hobby because you don't want to do it is unreasonable. To expect people to take you seriously (within a gaming context is also unreasonable).

Whether people like it or not, the hobby is model, paint, play....whether you outsource the bits you don't like, or struggle through is immaterial, you don't have a complete product until all of those criteria are met.

I'm not going to bore you with analogy, there are so many, but every hobby has multiple facets (layers) which comprise that hobby, take anyone away and you actually have a completely different hobby, or in some cases a hobby that isn't even recognised.

This argument again...

Okay genius, here we go. While there are no rules requiring painting, there are rules covering modeling for advantage (a flattened model on a sprue would be able to take advantage of Block LoS cover) and there are rules stating that a model must be glued to the base that is provided with it.

You and many others keep repeating that by not painting, people are one aspect of 'the hobby'. This foolish statement assumes that painting is part of this thing you refer to as 'the hobby'. Not everybody's hobby is the same as yours. The world does not revolve around you and some people may actually look at things differently than you do. Get over yourself and off of your high horse and worry about how you enjoy your hobby, instead of worrying about how others enjoy their hobby.

I still cant believe how much you lot are arguing about it..

Some people like painting, some don't, is there really any point in an argument? If you want to refuse to play people with unpainted models, again, that's your business.

I paint all my army, my best mate doesn't, so what?

I'm still struggling to see an actual debate here.

What i meant is that it's a ridiculous statement that's not on the level of not painting your minis. You can still play the game if you don't paint your minis, you can't play it if you didn't cut off the sprues. I'm just suggesting at least write an example that makes more sense.

mattyrm wrote:I still cant believe how much you lot are arguing about it..

Some people like painting, some don't, is there really any point in an argument? If you want to refuse to play people with unpainted models, again, that's your business.

I paint all my army, my best mate doesn't, so what?

I'm still struggling to see an actual debate here.

Matty, it's the internet. That alone should tell you everything you need to know about why it's going on.

Painting isn't fun for me.

I still do it.

Why?

Because I'm a grown-up, and grown-ups know that sometimes we HAVE TO DO STUFF WE DON'T LIKE in order to get to do stuff we do. That's how life works. It's about trade-offs and compromises. You don't get what you want without giving something up first.

So people who don't paint are acting childish? In order to be a grown-up one must first have painted armies? You do realize how stupid this sounds. Hurry up and delete your post before more people see this rubbish...

Pacific wrote:
In all honest, there seems to be a lot of quite belligerent sounding posts being made, but I don't think anyone has said either:
a ) they refuse to play an unpainted army

DakkaDakka is known for espousing this exact sentiment. For example.

Platuan4th wrote:
When did I say there was anything wrong with it?

I just probably wouldn't play at your club. Sometimes, I feel like using my armies that aren't fully painted(I have faction ADD due to finding playing the same army week after week boring). I also don't like using other people's models. Since you're a paint only club, my unpainted armies(generally unpainted because I got tired of painting them and moved on to a different army) aren't welcome and thus, I wouldn't be playing.

So then who misses out? The gaming club obviously has no issues holding its members to that standard. I'm sure they won't lose any sleep over missing out on a chance to have a member that would argue that the sky wasn't blue, or any of the other silly multiple arguments that you seem to thrive on.

Plain and simple, play an unpainted army and miss out on chances to game. Tournaments with a 3 standard rule, clubs that have painting restrictions, and the general population of gamers that want to play painted armies. You will end up missing out on all of those chances.

inquisitorlewis wrote:

Platuan4th wrote:
When did I say there was anything wrong with it?

I just probably wouldn't play at your club. Sometimes, I feel like using my armies that aren't fully painted(I have faction ADD due to finding playing the same army week after week boring). I also don't like using other people's models. Since you're a paint only club, my unpainted armies(generally unpainted because I got tired of painting them and moved on to a different army) aren't welcome and thus, I wouldn't be playing.

So then who misses out? The gaming club obviously has no issues holding its members to that standard. I'm sure they won't lose any sleep over missing out on a chance to have a member that would argue that the sky wasn't blue, or any of the other silly multiple arguments that you seem to thrive on.

Plain and simple, play an unpainted army and miss out on chances to game. Tournaments with a 3 standard rule, clubs that have painting restrictions, and the general population of gamers that want to play painted armies. You will end up missing out on all of those chances.

Of course the exact opposite can be said: insist on only playing against fully painted armies and you'll miss out on playing against people that don't have said fully painted armies, tournaments that don't have a fully painted mandatory rule, leagues that as a general rule also don't enforce fully painted rules, campaigns, etc.

And fortunately, paint snobs aren't the general population around here and everyone will happily play against everyone else despite the amount of paint present or absent in their opponents army. Even the Napoleonics and DBM folks will generally play you if you have one or two unpainted units in your army!

helium42 wrote:So people who don't paint are acting childish? In order to be a grown-up one must first have painted armies? You do realize how stupid this sounds. Hurry up and delete your post before more people see this rubbish...

Like I said, some people use it to make themselves feel superior.

inquisitorlewis wrote: I'm sure they won't lose any sleep over missing out on a chance to have a member that would argue that the sky wasn't blue, or any of the other silly multiple arguments that you seem to thrive on.

If it's such a silly argument, then why are you even participating?

Also, you missed my point entirely. That being, why should a member be forced to miss out on one night because he just happens to be playing with an army that isn't painted yet.

PhantomViper wrote:

inquisitorlewis wrote:

Platuan4th wrote:
When did I say there was anything wrong with it?

I just probably wouldn't play at your club. Sometimes, I feel like using my armies that aren't fully painted(I have faction ADD due to finding playing the same army week after week boring). I also don't like using other people's models. Since you're a paint only club, my unpainted armies(generally unpainted because I got tired of painting them and moved on to a different army) aren't welcome and thus, I wouldn't be playing.

So then who misses out? The gaming club obviously has no issues holding its members to that standard. I'm sure they won't lose any sleep over missing out on a chance to have a member that would argue that the sky wasn't blue, or any of the other silly multiple arguments that you seem to thrive on.

Plain and simple, play an unpainted army and miss out on chances to game. Tournaments with a 3 standard rule, clubs that have painting restrictions, and the general population of gamers that want to play painted armies. You will end up missing out on all of those chances.

Of course the exact opposite can be said: insist on only playing against fully painted armies and you'll miss out on playing against people that don't have said fully painted armies, tournaments that don't have a fully painted mandatory rule, leagues that as a general rule also don't enforce fully painted rules, campaigns, etc.

And fortunately, paint snobs aren't the general population around here and everyone will happily play against everyone else despite the amount of paint present or absent in their opponents army. Even the Napoleonics and DBM folks will generally play you if you have one or two unpainted units in your army!

The difference is, I can take my fully painted army and play in any of those events. You can't.

Some people just dont have the time, i personally love panting and try to encourage others to paint also

I have fully painted armies(5K or so) and I have unpainted armies(4-6k or so). In the end, I dont care about painting- what I do care about is playing number 1, coverting number 2.

If you have a hissy cow because people dont paint, I wouldnt want to play you anyway- with my painted or unpainted armies. A douche bag with a fully painted army isnt a better opponent then a guy with a consistantly unpainted army. I'd play the later, not former.

matphat wrote:Hahaha!
My next army is going to be bases with a pile of bits glued to the top of each of them. .

I thought you already played Orks?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

mattyrm wrote:I still cant believe how much you lot are arguing about it..

Some people like painting, some don't, is there really any point in an argument? If you want to refuse to play people with unpainted models, again, that's your business.

I paint all my army, my best mate doesn't, so what?

I'm still struggling to see an actual debate here.

Wins thread.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

helium42 wrote:The world does not revolve around you and some people may actually look at things differently than you do. Get over yourself and off of your high horse and worry about how you enjoy your hobby, instead of worrying about how others enjoy their hobby.

Also wins thread.

I think the thing to remember is that there is "The Hobby" and then there is always "Your Hobby". If you don't want to play with people outside of "Your Hobby" then that is your prerogative.

Me personally, i enjoy all the fluff to it's fullest, so if my opponent doesn't know all the background about their army I simply won't play them because its not as enjoyable.

Platuan4th wrote:

inquisitorlewis wrote: I'm sure they won't lose any sleep over missing out on a chance to have a member that would argue that the sky wasn't blue, or any of the other silly multiple arguments that you seem to thrive on.

If it's such a silly argument, then why are you even participating?

Also, you missed my point entirely. That being, why should a member be forced to miss out on one night because he just happens to be playing with an army that isn't painted yet.

Um, because that's the standards that the club wishes to uphold.

It's a club. They have no obligation to cater to anyone.

inquisitorlewis wrote:

Platuan4th wrote:

inquisitorlewis wrote: I'm sure they won't lose any sleep over missing out on a chance to have a member that would argue that the sky wasn't blue, or any of the other silly multiple arguments that you seem to thrive on.

If it's such a silly argument, then why are you even participating?

Also, you missed my point entirely. That being, why should a member be forced to miss out on one night because he just happens to be playing with an army that isn't painted yet.

Um, because that's the standards that the club wishes to uphold.

It's a club. They have no obligation to cater to anyone.

They have also done the guy they have excluded a favor: he can see what kind of peopel they are and find another group to play with elsewhere...

He will have more fun in the long run going elsewhere.

CT GAMER wrote:

inquisitorlewis wrote:

Platuan4th wrote:

inquisitorlewis wrote: I'm sure they won't lose any sleep over missing out on a chance to have a member that would argue that the sky wasn't blue, or any of the other silly multiple arguments that you seem to thrive on.

If it's such a silly argument, then why are you even participating?

Also, you missed my point entirely. That being, why should a member be forced to miss out on one night because he just happens to be playing with an army that isn't painted yet.

Um, because that's the standards that the club wishes to uphold.

It's a club. They have no obligation to cater to anyone.

They have also done the guy they have excluded a favor: he can see what kind of peopel they are and find another group to play with elsewhere...

He will have more fun in the long run going elsewhere.

That may very well be true. In that case it sounds like a win win. This all boils down to preference. If someone doesn't want tom play an unpainted army that's their choice. It doesn't make them a bad person. It's just that they have certain expectations when playing a game. There's no right or wrong here.

I have actually considered using being a paint snob as a way to say no to players at my flgs. I hang out and paint there all the time so I get a lot of "wanna play a game?" and it's hard to say no to some while yes to others. My empire is coming slow and being painted as I build it. My vc on the other hand is 3/4 painted (model count wise). Most of the people I play are the same way. I may start saying "is your army painted" to avoid the FOTM armies and the complete newbs who I don't know. I paint socially. I play to have fun. If I don't know you, then I don't wanna play with you. I've met too many douches in this hobby to play just anyone. Hang out with me first and paint with me! That's what the paint bar is for. Our paint bar is just crazy with humor and fun.

Stoupe wrote:I have actually considered using being a paint snob as a way to say no to players at my flgs. I hang out and paint there all the time so I get a lot of "wanna play a game?" and it's hard to say no to some while yes to others. My empire is coming slow and being painted as I build it. My vc on the other hand is 3/4 painted (model count wise). Most of the people I play are the same way. I may start saying "is your army painted" to avoid the FOTM armies and the complete newbs who I don't know. I paint socially. I play to have fun. If I don't know you, then I don't wanna play with you. I've met too many douches in this hobby to play just anyone. Hang out with me first and paint with me! That's what the paint bar is for. Our paint bar is just crazy with humor and fun.

Can i have a romantic date please, this 'paint bar' sounds so cool. We could maybe have a little look and feel with one another models later in the night. Then when we are in the right mood we could bring in some games , but don't worry i wont introduce a third party into this relationship as it might be a step too far.

sorry had too , i see your point as you dont wanna play with people you dont like(but its not a case of here is my profile job....its more of just talking to others in a polite manner etc) but thats not really the argument (errr i meant discussion).

Oh and the whole you can prime/ wash and add 3 colours thing with ease..... now people with unpainted models dont want rubbish ones. Im sure if you play them often (friends/club mate) then paint them urself, im sure they would be happy for you to do it with a small charge(for the paint not a proper commission job). If you dont play them often, then its a 1 off....so dont play them if you dont want to... but it might be a case of play unpainted or dont play...thats your choice

Platuan4th wrote:There's no rule or law or contract or anything saying it's required. This statement is exceedingly outrageous.

There's also no rule saying that wearing clothes is required while playing, nor that one must be polite or nice while playing.

Why should I waste my time playing against people like that though?

Why don't you go play in the corner while the adults talk, ok?

Kaldor wrote:
Why don't you go play in the corner while the adults talk, ok?

That would require that there are adults talking.

Your statement is just as childish as the assertion that painting is the "adult thing to do".

You're both essentially saying "I don't like you, I'm taking my toys and going home." Let's leave that attitude and behavior on the playground it belongs, ok, kid?

The people that don't like painting/can't be bothered/too busy could at least spray the minis in one colour and wash them so they are not ugly grey/ metal. Maybe put a mark on the base to help distinguish which one is in which squad, is that really too much to ask?


(Image taken from albinoorks blog, check it out... http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/30/353140.page)

Heck I actually think a green spray with a green wash, maybe with a little black would actually look quite good, like those classic plastic army men.

MetalOxide wrote:The people that don't like painting/can't be bothered/too busy could at least spray the minis in one colour and wash them so they are not ugly grey/ metal. Maybe put a mark on the base to help distinguish which one is in which squad, is that really too much to ask?


(Image taken from albinoorks blog, check it out... http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/30/353140.page)

Heck I actually think a green spray with a green wash, maybe with a little black would actually look quite good, like those classic plastic army men.

Because ugly green trumps ugly grey?

hotsauceman1 wrote:But what is the point of converting if you dont paint?

Honestly I dont care for painting all that much, but I LOVE to build and convert. I see painting more as a necessary evil. I really hate painting multiples of the same mini, like you have to in "army" scale games like 40k. Probably why I have never actually finished a 40k sized army. Back when I was an active Battletech player I had about 120 mechs, no 2 painted the same.

Thats one big draw to WarmaHordes...low model count means not much painting. Also giving each warbeast a slightly different paint job allows you to tell them apart during the game.


My solution/advise for people who have absolutly no need or compulsion for painting...dip/wash. Base coat your army in a color...say light grey or light brown, then wash or dip in a darker shade. Finish with black on the base and maybe a varnish or dullcote. This will bring out the detail on the minis and take very little time or effort...and look better than just bare plastic or primer.


Another thing occurred to me as well...some people just dont paint very well, and would rather be grumbled at a bit for no paint, than outright torn up for poor painting. In that case I cant blame them. Ive seen many people (plenty on Dakka) who seriously rip into anything that isnt Golden Demon quality. For some people that could ruin their whole day of gaming.

Well grey is the most dull boring colour you can get.

helium42 wrote:

MetalOxide wrote:The people that don't like painting/can't be bothered/too busy could at least spray the minis in one colour and wash them so they are not ugly grey/ metal. Maybe put a mark on the base to help distinguish which one is in which squad, is that really too much to ask?


(Image taken from albinoorks blog, check it out... http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/30/353140.page)

Heck I actually think a green spray with a green wash, maybe with a little black would actually look quite good, like those classic plastic army men.

Because ugly green trumps ugly grey?

It's a WIP, check the thread FFS..

Mad4Minis wrote:

hotsauceman1 wrote:But what is the point of converting if you dont paint?

Honestly I dont care for painting all that much, but I LOVE to build and convert. I see painting more as a necessary evil. I really hate painting multiples of the same mini, like you have to in "army" scale games like 40k. Probably why I have never actually finished a 40k sized army. Back when I was an active Battletech player I had about 120 mechs, no 2 painted the same.

Thats one big draw to WarmaHordes...low model count means not much painting. Also giving each warbeast a slightly different paint job allows you to tell them apart during the game.
.

This is absolutely true. Painting for skirmish scale games is a lot more fun. It doesnt use up as much time, you can add more personal details to each model, and the army doesnt get repetitive. With say, a marine army you have 40 randos with boltguns to paint. A good skirmish game you might have a total 5 of the same type of guy.

MetalOxide wrote:Well grey is the most dull boring colour you can get.

hotsauceman1 wrote:But what is the point of converting if you dont paint?

Artistic expression. Bringing an idea to life.

I had an idea for a ork warboss on a jetbike. Took half a dozen kits and some creativity. But it came out great. And its on a shelf and will stay there for a long while.

Painting it wasnt the point. Building it was.

Platuan4th wrote:That would require that there are adults talking.

Your statement is just as childish as the assertion that painting is the "adult thing to do".

You're both essentially saying "I don't like you, I'm taking my toys and going home." Let's leave that attitude and behavior on the playground it belongs, ok, kid?

Nothing wrong with that. Someone with a self entitled "I don't have to paint if I don't want to" attitude is not someone worth wasting my time on.

Kaldor wrote:

Platuan4th wrote:That would require that there are adults talking.

Your statement is just as childish as the assertion that painting is the "adult thing to do".

You're both essentially saying "I don't like you, I'm taking my toys and going home." Let's leave that attitude and behavior on the playground it belongs, ok, kid?

Nothing wrong with that. Someone with a self entitled "I don't have to paint if I don't want to" attitude is not someone worth wasting my time on.

The reverse is also true.

brettz123 wrote:This kind of argument is always just so stupid. I could also knit a sweater too. So what? What does literally having the time have to do with anything? People have other things to do that are either more important ot them or more fun. So again what is your point?

He's saying that the "I don't have time to paint" argument is an excuse.

I happen to agree. I'd rather have someone tell me they just aren't interested. That's honest, whereas "no time" isn't reality for 99% of hobbyists.

Kaldor wrote:

Platuan4th wrote:That would require that there are adults talking.

Your statement is just as childish as the assertion that painting is the "adult thing to do".

You're both essentially saying "I don't like you, I'm taking my toys and going home." Let's leave that attitude and behavior on the playground it belongs, ok, kid?

Nothing wrong with that. Someone with a self entitled "I don't have to paint if I don't want to" attitude is not someone worth wasting my time on.

I think when you're at a point in your life that you value human beings based on their philosophy on how to paint toy soldiers, you've become a bit too invested in your hobby.

I haven't read this thread, but I'm guessing it's become the typical "you guys have fun in a slightly different way than I do? You're killing the hobby!"

Mad4Minis wrote:

hotsauceman1 wrote:But what is the point of converting if you dont paint?

Honestly I dont care for painting all that much, but I LOVE to build and convert. I see painting more as a necessary evil. I really hate painting multiples of the same mini, like you have to in "army" scale games like 40k. Probably why I have never actually finished a 40k sized army. Back when I was an active Battletech player I had about 120 mechs, no 2 painted the same.

But I honestly don't get that attitude. An extensively converted model will be a hippy dippy mish mash of bare metal, grey plastic or resin and green stuff and just looks terrible. A quick squirt of black spray covers a multitude of sins. Please, if you're not prepared to paint them, at least meet us halfway here.

So, to get this straight.
These:


Look better than these in your eyes?

BrookM wrote:

helium42 wrote:

MetalOxide wrote:The people that don't like painting/can't be bothered/too busy could at least spray the minis in one colour and wash them so they are not ugly grey/ metal. Maybe put a mark on the base to help distinguish which one is in which squad, is that really too much to ask?


(Image taken from albinoorks blog, check it out... http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/30/353140.page)

Heck I actually think a green spray with a green wash, maybe with a little black would actually look quite good, like those classic plastic army men.

Because ugly green trumps ugly grey?

It's a WIP, check the thread FFS..

Check this thread Brook. The poster was presenting that pic as an alternative to using grey plastic armies.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kaldor wrote:

Platuan4th wrote:That would require that there are adults talking.

Your statement is just as childish as the assertion that painting is the "adult thing to do".

You're both essentially saying "I don't like you, I'm taking my toys and going home." Let's leave that attitude and behavior on the playground it belongs, ok, kid?

Nothing wrong with that. Someone with a self entitled "I don't have to paint if I don't want to" attitude is not someone worth wasting my time on.

How exactly do you come to the conclusion that people who choose not to paint their armies have a self-entitled attitude?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Grimtuff wrote:

Mad4Minis wrote:

hotsauceman1 wrote:But what is the point of converting if you dont paint?

Honestly I dont care for painting all that much, but I LOVE to build and convert. I see painting more as a necessary evil. I really hate painting multiples of the same mini, like you have to in "army" scale games like 40k. Probably why I have never actually finished a 40k sized army. Back when I was an active Battletech player I had about 120 mechs, no 2 painted the same.

But I honestly don't get that attitude. An extensively converted model will be a hippy dippy mish mash of bare metal, grey plastic or resin and green stuff and just looks terrible. A quick squirt of black spray covers a multitude of sins. Please, if you're not prepared to paint them, at least meet us halfway here.

So, to get this straight.
These:

Spoiler:

Look better than these in your eyes?

Spoiler:

Comprehension fail Grimmy. The poster never said that an unpainted converted model looked better than a painted converted model.

Kaldor wrote:

Platuan4th wrote:That would require that there are adults talking.

Your statement is just as childish as the assertion that painting is the "adult thing to do".

You're both essentially saying "I don't like you, I'm taking my toys and going home." Let's leave that attitude and behavior on the playground it belongs, ok, kid?

Nothing wrong with that. Someone with a self entitled "I don't have to paint if I don't want to" attitude is not someone worth wasting my time on.

If I dont feel you are as cool/socially acceptable outside the game store as I am, then I dont want to waste my time on you. I have a hard time imagining someone who basis part of their value of other people by how/if they paint their mandollies is anything but a massive grognard.

Grimtuff wrote:

Mad4Minis wrote:

hotsauceman1 wrote:But what is the point of converting if you dont paint?

Honestly I dont care for painting all that much, but I LOVE to build and convert. I see painting more as a necessary evil. I really hate painting multiples of the same mini, like you have to in "army" scale games like 40k. Probably why I have never actually finished a 40k sized army. Back when I was an active Battletech player I had about 120 mechs, no 2 painted the same.

But I honestly don't get that attitude. An extensively converted model will be a hippy dippy mish mash of bare metal, grey plastic or resin and green stuff and just looks terrible. A quick squirt of black spray covers a multitude of sins. Please, if you're not prepared to paint them, at least meet us halfway here.

So, to get this straight.
These:

Spoiler:

Look better than these in your eyes?

Spoiler:

Maybe he is ok with the first part, and feels thats all the work he wants to put in? I am sure that we all could agree that the kind of models that win golden demons, or are top rated on coolminiornot are absolutely stunning. I dont think most of us would be willing to put in the time/effort to paint our models like that though, same thing.

oI ImMoRTaL Io wrote:

Stoupe wrote:I have actually considered using being a paint snob as a way to say no to players at my flgs. I hang out and paint there all the time so I get a lot of "wanna play a game?" and it's hard to say no to some while yes to others. My empire is coming slow and being painted as I build it. My vc on the other hand is 3/4 painted (model count wise). Most of the people I play are the same way. I may start saying "is your army painted" to avoid the FOTM armies and the complete newbs who I don't know. I paint socially. I play to have fun. If I don't know you, then I don't wanna play with you. I've met too many douches in this hobby to play just anyone. Hang out with me first and paint with me! That's what the paint bar is for. Our paint bar is just crazy with humor and fun.

Can i have a romantic date please, this 'paint bar' sounds so cool. We could maybe have a little look and feel with one another models later in the night. Then when we are in the right mood we could bring in some games , but don't worry i wont introduce a third party into this relationship as it might be a step too far.

sorry had too , i see your point as you dont wanna play with people you dont like(but its not a case of here is my profile job....its more of just talking to others in a polite manner etc) but thats not really the argument (errr i meant discussion).

Oh and the whole you can prime/ wash and add 3 colours thing with ease..... now people with unpainted models dont want rubbish ones. Im sure if you play them often (friends/club mate) then paint them urself, im sure they would be happy for you to do it with a small charge(for the paint not a proper commission job). If you dont play them often, then its a 1 off....so dont play them if you dont want to... but it might be a case of play unpainted or dont play...thats your choice

Yes you may! Half the fun of our paint bar is gay chicken. Idk. I feel like if I can't joke around with you, playing you is more a chore than fun. To me the paint bar is more fun than the gaming table. I'd rather spend my time there and I hate painting.

Grimtuff wrote:
But I honestly don't get that attitude. An extensively converted model will be a hippy dippy mish mash of bare metal, grey plastic or resin and green stuff and just looks terrible. A quick squirt of black spray covers a multitude of sins.

Maybe you should learn to convert better. because while yours does, mine looks a hell of alot better then what you describe.

Stoupe wrote:
Yes you may! Half the fun of our paint bar is gay chicken. Idk. I feel like if I can't joke around with you, playing you is more a chore than fun. To me the paint bar is more fun than the gaming table. I'd rather spend my time there and I hate painting.

Homosexual Poultry...

Please explain.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

carmachu wrote:

Grimtuff wrote:
But I honestly don't get that attitude. An extensively converted model will be a hippy dippy mish mash of bare metal, grey plastic or resin and green stuff and just looks terrible. A quick squirt of black spray covers a multitude of sins.

Maybe you should learn to convert better. because while yours does, mine looks a hell of alot better then what you describe.

Ooooh. Someone pass me the Aloe Vera.

helium42 wrote:How exactly do you come to the conclusion that people who choose not to paint their armies have a self-entitled attitude?

I think it comes from believing that painting is an essential part of playing the game... so the people saying they don't have to are (if you look at it that way) just trying to make excuses as to why they shouldn't have to do something that 'everyone' (meaning 'all right thinking people') knows that they have to do.

I personally don't get why there are some people do some cool conversions only to not paint it.

insaniak wrote:

helium42 wrote:How exactly do you come to the conclusion that people who choose not to paint their armies have a self-entitled attitude?

I think it comes from believing that painting is an essential part of playing the game... so the people saying they don't have to are (if you look at it that way) just trying to make excuses as to why they shouldn't have to do something that 'everyone' (meaning 'all right thinking people') knows that they have to do.

I mean, even if the progress is at a practically glacial pace then no-one is really going to care. As it shows you're actually making progress, however slow it may be. Then you have the guys who will never paint ANYTHING. I used to live with a guy like that who would say he had no time. The guy had no job and would just play Xbox/watch TV all day. You can easily multitask and do a spot of painting whilst watching TV or a movie. The latter is one of the better options for me, stick on a film that fits the mood and/or you've seen loads of times before so can half watch it very easily and paint away.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

MetalOxide wrote:I personally don't get why there are some people do some cool conversions only to not paint it.

Neither do I, for the reasons I posted earlier. So many conversions look a lot better in my eyes after you've sprayed them, hell there are even bits you may have missed when they were unpainted that only became apparent after you undercoated it. It just seems like the thing to do rather than half arse it.

Grimtuff wrote:I mean, even if the progress is at a practically glacial pace then no-one is really going to care. As it shows you're actually making progress, however slow it may be.

Why does anyone have to 'show' that they are making progress?

Grimtuff wrote:

insaniak wrote:

helium42 wrote:How exactly do you come to the conclusion that people who choose not to paint their armies have a self-entitled attitude?

I think it comes from believing that painting is an essential part of playing the game... so the people saying they don't have to are (if you look at it that way) just trying to make excuses as to why they shouldn't have to do something that 'everyone' (meaning 'all right thinking people') knows that they have to do.

I mean, even if the progress is at a practically glacial pace then no-one is really going to care. As it shows you're actually making progress, however slow it may be. Then you have the guys who will never paint ANYTHING. I used to live with a guy like that who would say he had no time. The guy had no job and would just play Xbox/watch TV all day. You can easily multitask and do a spot of painting whilst watching TV or a movie. The latter is one of the better options for me, stick on a film that fits the mood and/or you've seen loads of times before so can half watch it very easily and paint away.

You are absolutley spot on! If somebody finds painting a chore, then just whack on some music, or an audio book, it really does help!

insaniak wrote:

Grimtuff wrote:I mean, even if the progress is at a practically glacial pace then no-one is really going to care. As it shows you're actually making progress, however slow it may be.

Why does anyone have to 'show' that they are making progress?

Because it shows you're not some lazy goit that is prepared to paint their models?

But why should they have to? Why should they have to enjoy the hobby the same way you do?

Grimtuff wrote:

insaniak wrote:

Grimtuff wrote:I mean, even if the progress is at a practically glacial pace then no-one is really going to care. As it shows you're actually making progress, however slow it may be.

Why does anyone have to 'show' that they are making progress?

Because it shows you're not some lazy goit that is prepared to paint their models?

Why does it matter?

some confused guy wrote:You are absolutley spot on! If somebody finds painting a chore, then just whack on some music, or an audio book, it really does help!

Or how about, if somebody finds painting a chore, they don't paint? /newsflash

Grimtuff wrote:

insaniak wrote:

Grimtuff wrote:I mean, even if the progress is at a practically glacial pace then no-one is really going to care. As it shows you're actually making progress, however slow it may be.

Why does anyone have to 'show' that they are making progress?

Because it shows you're not some lazy goit that is prepared to paint their models?

Who cares? Its mandollies. Congrats, you feel someone is lazy for not applying layers of paint to overpriced plastic toys. Serious question time; Is your social life built around gaming?

Grimtuff wrote:Because it shows you're not some lazy goit that is prepared to paint their models?

And why is it important to show that? Who is the arbiter here?

This is the problem with what is being suggested in this thread. A bunch of people have apparently decided that if you don't participate in the hobby their way, then you're doing it wrong, and now we have the suggestion that there is some sort of 'rating standard' that you have to pass in order to be participating in the hobby.

Can you honestly not see how that is just a little bit crazy?

If someone is not interested in painting and just wants to play a wargame, who the hell are any of us to tell them they can't, or to look down on them because they don't enjoy something that we do?

Eidolon wrote:But why should they have to? Why should they have to enjoy the hobby the same way you do?

I'm not saying they have to. But the vast majority of "permanent grey hordes" players I've come across are nothing short of lethargic that hang around the local GW all day then play Xbox/watch TV by night yet claim they have no time to paint their armies.

I'll play whoever, but I'll give preference to a painted army over an unpainted one.

Eidolon wrote:

Grimtuff wrote:

insaniak wrote:

Grimtuff wrote:I mean, even if the progress is at a practically glacial pace then no-one is really going to care. As it shows you're actually making progress, however slow it may be.

Why does anyone have to 'show' that they are making progress?

Because it shows you're not some lazy goit that is prepared to paint their models?

Who cares? Its mandollies. Congrats, you feel someone is lazy for not applying layers of paint to overpriced plastic toys. Serious question time; Is your social life built around gaming?

I paint my armies but I know my social life isn't built round 40k.

Grimtuff wrote:

Eidolon wrote:But why should they have to? Why should they have to enjoy the hobby the same way you do?

I'm not saying they have to. But the vast majority of "permanent grey hordes" players I've come across are nothing short of lethargic that hang around the local GW all day then play Xbox/watch TV by night yet claim they have no time to paint their armies.

I'll play whoever, but I'll give preference to a painted army over an unpainted one.

Really? Whats hanging around the local gw all day? 7 days a week? Just saturday and sunday? I find it hard to believe there are people, who arent teenagers on summer break, who spend all day at the game store and all night playing video games.

MetalOxide wrote:

Eidolon wrote:

Grimtuff wrote:

insaniak wrote:

Grimtuff wrote:I mean, even if the progress is at a practically glacial pace then no-one is really going to care. As it shows you're actually making progress, however slow it may be.

Why does anyone have to 'show' that they are making progress?

Because it shows you're not some lazy goit that is prepared to paint their models?

Who cares? Its mandollies. Congrats, you feel someone is lazy for not applying layers of paint to overpriced plastic toys. Serious question time; Is your social life built around gaming?

I paint my armies but I know my social life isn't built round 40k.

Likewise, I have gaming friends and non gaming friends. If one were to draw a Venn diagram sometimes these groups cross over. I'll admit, my personal interest in painting waxes and wanes. I can go through a massive splurge of painting stuff (incidentally just like now where I've conveniently had a fortnight off work) then I can go for months without painting anything. It's just these "models to paint" and "muse to paint" has to align at the right time.

Grimtuff wrote:

Stoupe wrote:
Yes you may! Half the fun of our paint bar is gay chicken. Idk. I feel like if I can't joke around with you, playing you is more a chore than fun. To me the paint bar is more fun than the gaming table. I'd rather spend my time there and I hate painting.

Homosexual Poultry...

Please explain.

Have you never played chicken? Gay chicken is just a version of that where we increasingly flirt with each other until one member of the party either gets disgusted or breaks out laughing. It's quite funny and often all about getting reactions out of others. My gf actually dies laughing at it. I have a sense of humor toward the outrageous though, so it's definitely crazy.

It doesn't have to be humor, but I want to play people who I can have a conversation with. Silent, or worse yet socially awkward, players are a chore to play with. Hanging out at the store and painting is way to fix this and let me know your someone I can talk to while playing.

Eidolon wrote:

Grimtuff wrote:

Eidolon wrote:But why should they have to? Why should they have to enjoy the hobby the same way you do?

I'm not saying they have to. But the vast majority of "permanent grey hordes" players I've come across are nothing short of lethargic that hang around the local GW all day then play Xbox/watch TV by night yet claim they have no time to paint their armies.

I'll play whoever, but I'll give preference to a painted army over an unpainted one.

Really? Whats hanging around the local gw all day? 7 days a week? Just saturday and sunday? I find it hard to believe there are people, who arent teenagers on summer break, who spend all day at the game store and all night playing video games.

Believe me. They exist and I've shared a house with one.

Eidolon wrote:

Grimtuff wrote:

Eidolon wrote:But why should they have to? Why should they have to enjoy the hobby the same way you do?

I'm not saying they have to. But the vast majority of "permanent grey hordes" players I've come across are nothing short of lethargic that hang around the local GW all day then play Xbox/watch TV by night yet claim they have no time to paint their armies.

I'll play whoever, but I'll give preference to a painted army over an unpainted one.

Really? Whats hanging around the local gw all day? 7 days a week? Just saturday and sunday? I find it hard to believe there are people, who arent teenagers on summer break, who spend all day at the game store and all night playing video games.

The local GW I go to has a guy like that. At least he's there every time I go in. (different days, times etc) But... he's sitting there painting minis.

I do believe he supplies all his own paints. I think it is a good thing for the store because the staff member isn't the most knowledgeable on painting techniques.

What gives any of you the right to tell me how to enjoy these wargames or this hobby?

If I don't want to paint and would rather deflect your barrage of questions by saying I don't have the time, then that is my right and none of your business. If you want to be an Eliteist Snob and don't want to play me that's your right and none of my business.

This has been 12 pages of painters trying to be right about painted armies. 12 Pages of "you do have the time, you're lazy, and you're not playing the game right" just to feel superior than everyone else. Get off your high horse and quit telling everyone how to enjoy THEIR hobby.

insaniak wrote:
This is the problem with what is being suggested in this thread. A bunch of people have apparently decided that if you don't participate in the hobby their way, then you're doing it wrong, and now we have the suggestion that there is some sort of 'rating standard' that you have to pass in order to be participating in the hobby.

Can you honestly not see how that is just a little bit crazy?

Though you usually play with others and not on your own, in which case your hobby overlaps with others. I'm not bothered by what a group of friends agree between each other, but when going to public venues where you play strangers, and play in front of the public (like at a wargames show) it seems basic good etiquette to paint your stuff IMO. An expectation of a painted army does not seem like an unreasonable standard to meet for gaming in general.

Howard A Treesong wrote:. An expectation of a painted army does not seem like an unreasonable standard to meet for gaming in general.

The thing is, it's a very short step from there to 'Your army must be 'this' good to play'...

I've seen several armies over the years that would have looked better if the owner had never tried painting them. I've seen quite a few more that were just basecoated, which several people in this thread have said is acceptable (because it shows some 'effort') but which, frankly, doesn't seem any different to just running bare plastic.

Expecting models to be assembled is one thing, because that is more or less required for the game to function as written. But painting has no practical effect on the game... it just makes it prettier to look at. Which, in my mind, makes it a preferable alternative, but certainly not a necessity.

gorgon wrote:

brettz123 wrote:This kind of argument is always just so stupid. I could also knit a sweater too. So what? What does literally having the time have to do with anything? People have other things to do that are either more important ot them or more fun. So again what is your point?

He's saying that the "I don't have time to paint" argument is an excuse.

I happen to agree. I'd rather have someone tell me they just aren't interested. That's honest, whereas "no time" isn't reality for 99% of hobbyists.

No it isn't an excuse it is a reason. There is a big difference. If I have other things I am going to do that take up my free time then it is a legitimate reason not to paint. Just because a person has free time without any commitments doesn't mean they have time to paint. It really isn't that big of a mental stretch to understand that.

I skipped a lot of the discussion because it started going in a circle around page 3. Lets agree to two things at least.

1. Not everyone enjoys/physically able/cares/wants to paint models.

2. Although it is not written in the rules, for a great number of people, they have more fun playing against a painted army.

I know my paint jobs are not great and have only played one game. This is because I'm new to the whole scene as a whole. I would like to add that I really like some of the paint jobs that people have done on their models, but some people lack the technical skill, steady hands, or simply time to paint all their models or in some case, any of their models. A lot of people also work a fourty hour a week job, so when it comes to sleep or painting, sleep will always win. Or at least should, but thats a different topic.

helium42 wrote:How exactly do you come to the conclusion that people who choose not to paint their armies have a self-entitled attitude? :facepalm.

People can choose to do whatever they want with their 'armies' And I use the term loosely, because I want to cover not just painting, but proxying and counts-as.

But the instant they get indignant and self-righteous because someone else doesn't want to play against them because of their choice to field a crap army, they become self entitled.

This doesn't just apply to painting, it applies to everything. Don't waste your time playing against armies/gamers that you don't want to.

Kaldor wrote:

helium42 wrote:How exactly do you come to the conclusion that people who choose not to paint their armies have a self-entitled attitude? :facepalm.

People can choose to do whatever they want with their 'armies' And I use the term loosely, because I want to cover not just painting, but proxying and counts-as.

But the instant they get indignant and self-righteous because someone else doesn't want to play against them because of their choice to field a crap army, they become self entitled.

This doesn't just apply to painting, it applies to everything. Don't waste your time playing against armies/gamers that you don't want to.

Your argument doesn't equate with what we are seeing in this thread. Find me a single thread that was started by a non-painter who was feeling indignant and self-righteous because somebody decided to pass on playing against their unpainted army. I don't think you can. However you can find many threads started by people who play with painted armies who get indignant and self-righteous because somebody dared to show up at their FLGS to play with an (gasp) unpainted army.

It is some of the people in the painted crowd who are getting bent out of shape here. I could give a rats ass if somebody didn't want to play against one of my unpainted armies, and I would have no ill feelings toward them for it, as long as they didn't give me a hard time about the fact that I didn't paint said army. I think there is plenty of room for painters/non-painters/and those who don't care either way. I understand that there are people who enjoy their wargames in a different manner than I do.

I get bent out of shape when some of the people in the painted army crowd want to start new threads every month calling out others as being lazy, childish, self-entitled, or any of the other barbs thrown in this thread today.

i personally cant stand people who dont paint or make an effort to paint their armies it ruins the game for me i enjoy playing with a painted force against a painted force personally or someone whos in the process of painting is fine so long as each time we play together something else has been completed not the same grey stuff every week

victor.IG wrote:i personally cant stand people who dont paint or make an effort to paint their armies it ruins the game for me i enjoy playing with a painted force against a painted force personally or someone whos in the process of painting is fine so long as each time we play together something else has been completed not the same grey stuff every week

I personally can't stand people who don't use punctuation or proper capitalization. It ruins the forum for me. I enjoy reading posts by literate people, or by someone who attempts to write like they're over the age of 10.

On a more serious note:

"I don't have the time" is a terrible excuse. You do have the time. Maybe you spend it playing PS3. Maybe you spend it hiking, or reading, or writing, or participating in other activities you find enjoyable. You should be spending that time painting. How dare you spend your leisure time on activities you find more enjoyable than painting? For shame.


(massive sarcasm intended)

Well, you are expected to paint your army as part of the hobby. Painting is a key part of it and contributes to its overall success.

I would say a 3 colour minimum is the least anyone should be prepared to adhere to. It's part of the hobby and if you just see fit to remove what you don't like then it's no longer 40k, it's just a bunch of unfinished GW miniatures being pushed around on a table.

No one but an ***hole is going to give you stick for not being a good painter, but you are going to ruin the experience for a lot of players that do put the effort into painting their armies. It's not just about you and your preference, it's about others who also participate, put the effort in where you do not, and I might add, are the very same people who you also depend on to enjoy it yourself.

hotsauceman1 wrote:Ok, So today i went to a warmachine league to see if i like that game and see if anyone is willing to help me learn a little(they did alot)
But i noticed, alot of people still dont have painted armies, and i dont mean models in the army that arent painted, i mean feilds of gray. This is the same at my 40k night.
Out of the 8-10 people ther only 3 can field a fully painted 1500 the rest have primer and show they give a little bit about painting. This may change though because we will be giving people points for the campaign for coming with a fully painted army.
But is it too much to ask people at least attempt to paint there armys? I know alot of people dont have the time but i see people buying more and never painting.
Am i asking to much?

I still have a lot of unpainted models, but thats because I'm always adding new stuff to my many armies. So my stack of unpainted mini's builds up. But hey at least ill have something to do on a rainy day.

Also, when i first started with the hobby i happily just slapped on the paint and called it done. But as you get better ad it you start to xritisize your own work more and more ( least I do. ) and you start setting higher and higher standards for yourself. Wich in turn slows down the painting process. thus the pile of grey plastic never seems to shrink ( much )

At least this is how it is for me. I dunno if other people do this but just my 2 pennies.

Da Mediokre Painta wrote:Well, you are expected to paint your army as part of the hobby. Painting is a key part of it and contributes to its overall success.

I would say a 3 colour minimum is the least anyone should be prepared to adhere to. It's part of the hobby and if you just see fit to remove what you don't like then it's no longer 40k, it's just a bunch of unfinished GW miniatures being pushed around on a table.

This may be one of the most daft things I have read in this thread.

If I play a game with or against an unpainted model/army it IS indeed still a game of WHW40K.

Some people have no desire to be a "hobbiest" they simpy enjoy playing the game, and assembled models meet the requirement for gameplay as defined by the rules.

If you don't enjoy playing with/against unpainted models then don't play that person.

This thread is mind numbing...

Some people have real life gak to attend with, aka kids, working a gakky job and then facing a 4 hour commute home every day. Mix that with kids and then I understand and empathise if you don't turn up with any painted models.

But if you are a lazy donkey-cave who smokes weed all day and doesn't work out of choice then that pisses me off quite a bit.

I find people who "make no attempt" (i.e. never will attempt to paint) a bit silly. Especially in 40k or Fantasy where you will spend obscene sums of money. Taking forever to paint an army, partially painted armies, or whatever are all fine. Personally I'm a terrible painter and have been working to get models up to tabletop standard (certainly not anything for display our tourneys).

Win at all costers are still by far the worst though.

Harriticus wrote:I find people who "make no attempt" (i.e. never will attempt to paint) a bit silly. Especially in 40k or Fantasy where you will spend obscene sums of money.

Why is it silly because you spend alot of money? I can tell you from experience unpainted models have more trade value then painted ones when you go to trade or sell them(unless you paint EXTREMELY well, but even then you'll never get the value your looking for for that good a paint job).

Something I want to point out is that the people who I have met who are really serious about painting, basically dont care about how other people paint their armies when playing. If they are confident their models look good, and are happy with them, they dont go out of their way to browbeat others for not painting/painting poorly. It seems to be a kind of grognard mentality, and has nothing to do with the actual quality of modeling/painting.

Kaldor wrote:

helium42 wrote:How exactly do you come to the conclusion that people who choose not to paint their armies have a self-entitled attitude? :facepalm.

People can choose to do whatever they want with their 'armies' And I use the term loosely, because I want to cover not just painting, but proxying and counts-as.

But the instant they get indignant and self-righteous because someone else doesn't want to play against them because of their choice to field a crap army, they become self entitled.

This doesn't just apply to painting, it applies to everything. Don't waste your time playing against armies/gamers that you don't want to.

But, nobody who doesnt paint is getting self righteous. None of the 'i dont paint crowd' is saying that you cant paint, or that they wont play you. What makes you entitled for someone else to spend hours of their time doing something so that you get to look at toy soldiers with different colors on them than grey? Deciding you wont play against and to look down on someone who doesnt paint is a very shallow approach to gaming. And whats a 'crap army'? If my models are really well painted, and yours are only table top quality, I, by your logic, have the right to go 'nah, your army looks like gak, ill play someone who puts more time into painting'. If you get offended by this, you are feeling entitled and self righteous.

victor.IG wrote:i personally cant stand people who dont paint or make an effort to paint their armies it ruins the game for me i enjoy playing with a painted force against a painted force personally or someone whos in the process of painting is fine so long as each time we play together something else has been completed not the same grey stuff every week

You should probably stop making 40k such an important part of your life then, and not worry so much about how far along others are coming along with their painting. I know that I dont track other peoples progress week to week.

Da Mediokre Painta wrote:Well, you are expected to paint your army as part of the hobby. Painting is a key part of it and contributes to its overall success.

I would say a 3 colour minimum is the least anyone should be prepared to adhere to. It's part of the hobby and if you just see fit to remove what you don't like then it's no longer 40k, it's just a bunch of unfinished GW miniatures being pushed around on a table.

No one but an ***hole is going to give you stick for not being a good painter, but you are going to ruin the experience for a lot of players that do put the effort into painting their armies. It's not just about you and your preference, it's about others who also participate, put the effort in where you do not, and I might add, are the very same people who you also depend on to enjoy it yourself.

Its only people with too much time on their hands, and too much obsession over gaming who think like this. Once again with the work out analogy. Some people look for the entire 'exercise' experience, some people only want parts of it. The body builders leave the distance runners alone, and vice versa. I have never seen someone get off a weight machine, walk over to a treadmill and say 'hey, the fact that youre running 5 miles today makes me feel lonely and ruins my gym experience, I think you should spend 30 minutes lifting each time you are in here. Dont tell me you dont have time for it, cut some distance of your running.'

I think all the people saying they don't have the skill is laughable. You'll never GET the skill if you don't pick up the brush. That's what practice is for.

Also there is no excuse for not at least doing the old GW store playing standard of 'three colors and based'

If not it's just being lazy in my book.

Furthermore if I'm spending 40-80 bucks on a miniature(s) I'm going to put forth some love and effort into building, converting and painting it.

People that just slap together thier models, stinks of the rich gamers that just buy everything they need to win and don't care about the actual hobby itself.

KingmanHighborn wrote:I think all the people saying they don't have the skill is laughable. You'll never GET the skill if you don't pick up the brush. That's what practice is for.

Also there is no excuse for not at least doing the old GW store playing standard of 'three colors and based'

If not it's just being lazy in my book.

Furthermore if I'm spending 40-80 bucks on a miniature(s) I'm going to put forth some love and effort into building, converting and painting it.

I can agree with this, but the tone is stupid.

People that just slap together thier models, stinks of the rich gamers that just buy everything they need to win and don't care about the actual hobby itself.

Oh, so you lost to someone with a grey legion and are butthurt about it? Must be that they are incredibly wealthy and just dont care about the same, very important things you do. Things that should be important to all of us.

Personally, I'm using painting as motivation to start a new project. I want to start a WHFB Dark Elves army, but I don't like the idea of having two unfinished armies. My goal is to get my Space Wolves 100% painted before I buy a single model or army book for those Dark Elves.

Not liking something should not equal not liking people who do it.

It's totally fine for you to like painting, prefer playing painted armies, or even refuse to play against unpainted armies. Those are your preferences, and you are entitled to them. There's nothing wrong with them, and there's nothing wrong with you for having them. Those preferences don't make you elitist, or a snob, or a douche.

Someone else might not want to play against WAAC gamers, or Tau players, or strangers. I have a lot of difficulty getting up the nerve to play strangers at stores/conventions.

Moving from having your own preferences to making assumptions about other people based on your preferences is what turns someone into an elitist, snob, or douche. If someone doesn't paint their army, guess what? All you can tell is that they don't paint their army. They might be lazy; they might be physically impaired; they might not like painting; they might have an entirely painted army in the case and just prefer to assemble a force before painting ANY of it. You can't tell. If you think you can tell just by the fact that their are unpainted, you are a douche.

I'm uncomfortable and nervous playing strangers. That's my own personal situation. If I then say that strangers are dangerous rapists, I'm a douche (or demented).

I'm sure that it is true that some people with unpainted armies are lazy. However, you just can't make that blanket assumption by the presence of an unpainted army, unless you are a douche.

I like to buy and assemble my armies based much more on appearance and fluff than effectiveness. That means that I tend to lose, hard, when playing people with well-designed, optimized lists chosen for their effective build. Given that I don't particularly enjoy getting a butt-whupping, I tend to seek out other gamers who also don't create 'killer' lists. I don't assume, however, that the person with a well-constructed list is a jerk, or an egotist, or trying to prove something. I have my preferences, and I act on my preferences, but I don't make prejudicial assumptions about people based on my preferences. That is being a douche.






Also, life isn't perfect. I'd enjoy the game most if both armies were painted to a high standard, the terrain was modeled and painted well, my army and my opponent's army were both well-designed and well-constructed, and my opponent was an attractive, flirtatious lady who brought barbecue to the game. Sadly, I'm not going to get many games like that (so far, none). Having preferences and standard, even demanding preferences and standards, is totally acceptable, but it also might mean that you miss out on a game/person that might be worthwhile (I'm willing to lower my standards for an attractive lady gamer---she can have an unpainted army, and could even just bring burgers







If you are someone who feels they can look down, criticize, or dislike people who don't paint their models because they aren't participating completely in 'the hobby', think about this:

All around you, any where you go, there could be other people who don't participate completely in 'the hobby'. Those strange and unlikable people buy, assemble and paint models, but never play games with them. You'll never see them at the gaming table! How will you know to look down on them? How will you know who you should shun and hate? Maybe you should avoid associating with anyone in case they are a hidden incomplete hobbyist!

Kaldor wrote:

helium42 wrote:How exactly do you come to the conclusion that people who choose not to paint their armies have a self-entitled attitude? :facepalm.

People can choose to do whatever they want with their 'armies' And I use the term loosely, because I want to cover not just painting, but proxying and counts-as.

But the instant they get indignant and self-righteous because someone else doesn't want to play against them because of their choice to field a crap army, they become self entitled.

This doesn't just apply to painting, it applies to everything. Don't waste your time playing against armies/gamers that you don't want to.

Once again, your "reasoning" means exactly the same thing in reverse. The instant people get indignant and self-righteous because they won't play against a non-painted army, they become self-entitled.

Da Mediokre Painta wrote:Well, you are expected to paint your army as part of the hobby.

No, I'm not.

Painting is a key part of it and contributes to its overall success.

No, it's not.

I would say a 3 colour minimum is the least anyone should be prepared to adhere to. It's part of the hobby and if you just see fit to remove what you don't like then it's no longer 40k, it's just a bunch of unfinished GW miniatures being pushed around on a table.

Show me where the rulebook states that painting is a required part of 40k. Oh yeah, you can't...

No one but an ***hole is going to give you stick for not being a good painter, but you are going to ruin the experience for a lot of players that do put the effort into painting their armies.

Actually, in my experience, very few people actually speak out about non-painted armies. Also, very few people feel their experience is ruined by playing against a non-painted army.

It's not just about you and your preference, it's about others who also participate, put the effort in where you do not, and I might add, are the very same people who you also depend on to enjoy it yourself.

It's not just about your preference either Einstein. Here's an idea. If your game experience is ruined by playing against an unpainted army, don't play against unpainted armies. You won't offend anybody by choosing not to play them. You will offend them though, when you try to force your idea of what it is to game on them. Crying about unpainted armies on this forum isn't going to change the minds of those who enjoy the game but not the painting experience.

It's not just about your preference either Einstein. Here's an idea. If your game experience is ruined by playing against an unpainted army, don't play against unpainted armies. You won't offend anybody by choosing not to play them. You will offend them though, when you try to force your idea of what it is to game on them. Crying about unpainted armies on this forum isn't going to change the minds of those who enjoy the game but not the painting experience.

But there is a part there that applies to the "non-painters" and their champions, you shouldn't try and force your ideas on others. Its a pretty up system with free speech. I don't game with idiots, bigots, and so forth because the game isn't the real reason I'm on the store. I'm there to hang out with people, make new friends and so forth. The game itself is secondary. Although I will agree that the "Must Paint Army" need to relax on the issue and stop trying to force their ideals as well. This is a conversation best over a few shots and a few beers for those who can drink.

edit to fix quotes

Is it just me but are there a lot of nonpainters getting Pissy about the way people word things. I read the people saying you should paint as just that. However it feels like some people are getting hostile about nothing.

Unless its a tournament, I won't play a completely unpainted army.** I will play a half painted army as long as its not the same half painted army I saw for the past 6 months. I don't mind proxies, especially if your testing out a model and your force is completely painted (shows me your investment is more than just monetary and you want to ensure its worth it).

Why don't I play unpainted armies? I put time and effort into mine over months. Grey armies could do the same, but more often then not it's the kind of player I dislike playing. Is this everyone? By all means no. But in my mind, you have to prove your worth playing before I play you and having a fully painted army is one big step toward this proof. This is because while I enjoy playing, I only enjoy playing a certain kind of player.

**I will play unpainted armies if they my gf or a friend learning how to play. Or if it's someone I already know trying out his new army. In these cases I already know the person I'm playing and they've proven their worth over the course of time.

If this makes me a paint snob so be it. I'm a geek. I'm a nerd. I'm a hobbyist. I'm a Old school juggalo. I'm a gamer. Don't like it? Oh well.

helium42 wrote:

Da Mediokre Painta wrote:Well, you are expected to paint your army as part of the hobby.

No, I'm not.

Yes, you are.

Painting is a key part of it and contributes to its overall success.

No, it's not.

Yes, it does.

I would say a 3 colour minimum is the least anyone should be prepared to adhere to. It's part of the hobby and if you just see fit to remove what you don't like then it's no longer 40k, it's just a bunch of unfinished GW miniatures being pushed around on a table.

Show me where the rulebook states that painting is a required part of 40k. Oh yeah, you can't...

You're right, there's no exact quote telling you to paint your miniatures.

There is, however, an entire section devoted to painting miniatures. In fact, you'll find such a section in most mainstream miniatures rulebooks.

Now, you do something for me. Go and find me a picture in any 40k book that shows a game being played or miniatures being shown (excluding miniatures are in the process of being painted) that has one, single unpainted miniature.

I bet you can't.

And you know what? From seeing this thread, I give up. If wanting to play with and against painted miniatures makes me a snob, so be it. If offering to paint my friend's miniatures so I can do so makes me elitist, then that's what I am. If holding the hobby to a higher standard makes me a jerk, hey, then I guess I'm that too.

And as I agree with the nonpainters apparently getting very technical with how people word things, I'll add a disclaimer: if you are physically unable to paint, as in Curran's case, or mentally unift, then that's completely acceptable. In fact, I'd probably help to paint your models if you were blind, or had one army, or the attention span of a small rodent.

I have a friend who prefers painting and modeling but rarely plays. Since he is not into all parts of the hobby is he less deserving? No.

I prefer to play compared to paint and I don't care if any armies are painted.

Da Mediokre Painta wrote:No one but an ***hole is going to give you stick for not being a good painter, but you are going to ruin the experience for a lot of players that do put the effort into painting their armies.

Hyperbole, much?

If your gaming experience is being 'ruined' by unainted armies, you're possibly investing a little too much into the hobby.

It's not just about you and your preference, it's about others who also participate, put the effort in where you do not, and I might add, are the very same people who you also depend on to enjoy it yourself.

Ok. So why is the enjoyment of those who like painting more important than the enjoyment of those who don't?

Your enjoyment hinges on someone else doing something they want to do. Theirs hinges on just playing the game, which requires no extra effort on your part.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Stoupe wrote:Is it just me but are there a lot of nonpainters getting Pissy about the way people word things.

Being called lazy and self-entitled, and accused of ruining the hobby for those who are doing it the 'right' way tends to have that effect on people.

I came because i was called.

whitedragon wrote:

Kaldor wrote:

helium42 wrote:How exactly do you come to the conclusion that people who choose not to paint their armies have a self-entitled attitude? :facepalm.

People can choose to do whatever they want with their 'armies' And I use the term loosely, because I want to cover not just painting, but proxying and counts-as.

But the instant they get indignant and self-righteous because someone else doesn't want to play against them because of their choice to field a crap army, they become self entitled.

This doesn't just apply to painting, it applies to everything. Don't waste your time playing against armies/gamers that you don't want to.

Once again, your "reasoning" means exactly the same thing in reverse. The instant people get indignant and self-righteous because they won't play against a non-painted army, they become self-entitled.

Uh, yeah. I said exactly that. If someone doesn't want to play you, just shrug and move on. Don't get your panties in a twist because they want you to paint your toy soldiers / not use proxies / bathe more often / whatever.

It applies to everyone, for everything.

And for reference, I quoted platuan4th because he was the one demonstrating the self-entitled attitude I mentioned. Also helium42.

And you know what? From seeing this thread, I give up. If wanting to play with and against painted miniatures makes me a snob, so be it. If offering to paint my friend's miniatures so I can do so makes me elitist, then that's what I am. If holding the hobby to a higher standard makes me a jerk, hey, then I guess I'm that too.

You're either missing the point over and over again or simply ignoring it. I don't think that somebody who only plays with and/or against unpainted armies is a snob. I believe that you are every bit as entitled to enjoy the game in the manner that you desire as I feel I am. What makes some people in this thread snobs is that they refuse to see that some people might enjoy the hobby in a way different to their own and then they go on to throw insults toward those people. Play the way you like, just don't call me lazy/childish/self-entitled/etc. for doing the same. There are a lot of 40k players, plenty for all of us to find like-minded opponents.

helium42 wrote:

And you know what? From seeing this thread, I give up. If wanting to play with and against painted miniatures makes me a snob, so be it. If offering to paint my friend's miniatures so I can do so makes me elitist, then that's what I am. If holding the hobby to a higher standard makes me a jerk, hey, then I guess I'm that too.

You're either missing the point over and over again or simply ignoring it. I don't think that somebody who only plays with and/or against unpainted armies is a snob. I believe that you are every bit as entitled to enjoy the game in the manner that you desire as I feel I am. What makes some people in this thread snobs is that they refuse to see that some people might enjoy the hobby in a way different to their own and then they go on to throw insults toward those people. Play the way you like, just don't call me lazy/childish/self-entitled/etc. for doing the same. There are a lot of 40k players, plenty for all of us to find like-minded opponents.

I actually agree with this statement 100%.

Stoupe wrote:Is it just me but are there a lot of nonpainters getting Pissy about the way people word things.

Being called lazy and self-entitled, and accused of ruining the hobby for those who are doing it the 'right' way tends to have that effect on people.

My point was, simply, I see more people. Claiming we painters are saying these things than painters who actually are. Are grey armies typically fotm armies unpainted to hold some resale value? No, the majority isn't. But the minority is a significant number.. Are grey armies typically less fun to play? Well add in the random game factor, them yes.

The fact is, I don't know you. A grey army is harder to comment on and therefore harder to make into a conversation. Add in the I don't know you factor and it creates more often then not an awkward game. (If you feel you are the exceptin here, by all means. But everyone I know knows how bad socially awkward games can be.)

If I don't know you and you wanna play a game. Be painted. Conversations become much much easier to start that way.

I hate silent games.

I have been playing the game since september. I bough the battle force and just went to building. I still have sprue chunks on a model here and there because I wasn't into the whole cleaning all the lines off. I proxied models and amongst my local group, it was acceptable as long as it was well explained. I built my force up fast using ebay and a lot of birthday and christmas money... I went from the battle force to near 3000 pts by January. I am past 4000 as I type this.

Up until the first week of June, my army was anything but wysiwyg. After some help of one of my groups founders and veterans of 40k, we took some of his extra bits and made my army wysiwyg. I now have 2 2000 pt armies ( Death company list and normal list.)

Once all that was done I drove a couple hours back home and began to prime my models and build the remaining minis. I have just now started painting my force, I have about 15 models done.

I have played over 20 games with a bare plastic/primed army. I play this game because it is fun. Yes painting is another cog in the machine of 40k/tabletop gaming, but its not an essential one for these great games to be enjoyed. If I was shunned until I had a painted army, I doubt I would have spent so much money, time, and effort in this hobby. I wouldn't have the friends I have today if I was forced to have the painted army. So I ask, no I plead with you. Its just a game. If you don't want to play against an unpainted army, have fun playing the same old people and not make new friends.

Side note, I am also an avid golfer and seeing how some of the older members treat the new ones, I doubt the new golfers will enjoy the sport as much as I did. The future of this game is in our hands ladies and gentlemen. Treat people as you would like to be treated. Grow this hobby. I welcome new players. I was there once, heck, I'm just now on the upslope of becoming a better hobbiest.

Stoupe wrote:But the minority is a significant number..

Is it? How many would you say makes up that 'significant number'?


And, really, so what? I want to play a game. I don't much care why my opponent chose the army he has.

The fact is, I don't know you. A grey army is harder to comment on and therefore harder to make into a conversation. Add in the I don't know you factor and it creates more often then not an awkward game. (If you feel you are the exceptin here, by all means. But everyone I know knows how bad socially awkward games can be.)

If I don't know you and you wanna play a game. Be painted. Conversations become much much easier to start that way.

I hate silent games.

To be honest, conversation based around the army generally takes place over the first couple of minutes while we're setting up, and from there on in tends to revolve around the actual game in progress. I'm not at my most comfortable socially with people I don't know... but generally have little trouble keeping game-related conversation going on, painted armies or no.

helium42 wrote:

And you know what? From seeing this thread, I give up. If wanting to play with and against painted miniatures makes me a snob, so be it. If offering to paint my friend's miniatures so I can do so makes me elitist, then that's what I am. If holding the hobby to a higher standard makes me a jerk, hey, then I guess I'm that too.

You're either missing the point over and over again or simply ignoring it. I don't think that somebody who only plays with and/or against unpainted armies is a snob. I believe that you are every bit as entitled to enjoy the game in the manner that you desire as I feel I am. What makes some people in this thread snobs is that they refuse to see that some people might enjoy the hobby in a way different to their own and then they go on to throw insults toward those people. Play the way you like, just don't call me lazy/childish/self-entitled/etc. for doing the same. There are a lot of 40k players, plenty for all of us to find like-minded opponents.

Gimme till morning. I've got this whole response thought out, with examples of what 'expectations' are in this hobby and example from other hobbies I have. I just don't want it to sound like it's coming from a frothing maniac.

In short: I'm ignoring that point because that's not the point I'm trying to combat. I'm fighting against the conception of 'my hobby' vs. 'the hobby at large' and that painting isn't an expected part of the miniature gaming hobby.

Also, I noticed you ignored my request.

it takes a lot of effort and energy to paint even a single model not to mention time not really an excuse i know and my Helghast IG are almost fully painted but i understand why people dont do it


Automatically Appended Next Post:
not to mention that any models i do paint look crap compared to GW painted minis

Kaldor wrote:

helium42 wrote:How exactly do you come to the conclusion that people who choose not to paint their armies have a self-entitled attitude? :facepalm.

People can choose to do whatever they want with their 'armies' And I use the term loosely, because I want to cover not just painting, but proxying and counts-as.

But the instant they get indignant and self-righteous because someone else doesn't want to play against them because of their choice to field a crap army, they become self entitled.

This doesn't just apply to painting, it applies to everything. Don't waste your time playing against armies/gamers that you don't want to.

The problem is now you are starting to make things up and change your argument. This isn't what you have been saying during this thread at all. You have been calling people lazy and entitled because they don't paint not because they get mad people won't play against them. Make up your mind and stick with a position but don't try and change your position and then pretend you were right all along.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Stoupe wrote:

Stoupe wrote:Is it just me but are there a lot of nonpainters getting Pissy about the way people word things.

Being called lazy and self-entitled, and accused of ruining the hobby for those who are doing it the 'right' way tends to have that effect on people.

My point was, simply, I see more people. Claiming we painters are saying these things than painters who actually are. Are grey armies typically fotm armies unpainted to hold some resale value? No, the majority isn't. But the minority is a significant number.. Are grey armies typically less fun to play? Well add in the random game factor, them yes.

The fact is, I don't know you. A grey army is harder to comment on and therefore harder to make into a conversation. Add in the I don't know you factor and it creates more often then not an awkward game. (If you feel you are the exceptin here, by all means. But everyone I know knows how bad socially awkward games can be.)

If I don't know you and you wanna play a game. Be painted. Conversations become much much easier to start that way.

I hate silent games.

1. You should probably actually read the thread and you will see that it is basically a small number of people who won't play against unpainted armies telling non-painters that they are lazy. This tends to annoy people because it isn't really all that logical and it also happens to be incredibly rude.

2. If your ability to hold a conversation revolves around someone having painted their army perhaps you need to broaden your horizons.

For most of us, the fun of the game is competing in a visually impressive spectacle. We like playing through the epic face off of an eldar craftworld and a space wolf company. Unpainted armies detract from that holistic experience. If you don't have an interest in painting why are you buying these
miniatures. They are so inflated in price because of the detail/paintability. I will not refuse to play against someone with unpainted armies, but I would rather play with someone else. A fully painted army reflects that this gamer has a similar respect and interest for the warhammer world. It shows we are on the same page as gamers. Skill is not an excuse. A badly painted army is better than an unpainted army. I started out with horrible painting skills. Now I am a lot better but still have a long way to go. You get no sympathy if you claim you don't paint bc you are bad. Anyone can basecoat wash and dry brush, I don't care who you are.

Stoupe wrote:

The fact is, I don't know you. A grey army is harder to comment on and therefore harder to make into a conversation. Add in the I don't know you factor and it creates more often then not an awkward game. (If you feel you are the exceptin here, by all means. But everyone I know knows how bad socially awkward games can be.)

If I don't know you and you wanna play a game. Be painted. Conversations become much much easier to start that way.

I hate silent games.

You know what that basically says? It says this.

"My comfort zone is painting, and discussing painting related topics.
Im not used to chatting about army, army builds, and army composition and synergy,
However, I expect everyone in the world to be just a painter like me, with no possibility of them been a gamer."

This thread that happens monthly always have one simple problem.
People only think their personal aspect of warhammer exists, and cannot tolerate other aspects.

brettz123 wrote:The problem is now you are starting to make things up and change your argument. This isn't what you have been saying during this thread at all. You have been calling people lazy and entitled because they don't paint not because they get mad people won't play against them. Make up your mind and stick with a position but don't try and change your position and then pretend you were right all along.

Not sure if trolling...

No, your reading comprehension leaves a little to be desired. Not painting is fine. Refusing to play against not painted armies is fine.

Getting upset because someone doesn't like your unpainted army is not fine.

That's been my line all through this thread.

I have 2 armies at 2k. My Necrons are 60% tabletop quality, 35% primed and 2 coats, and 5% primer. My Orks are 5% painted, 80% primed, and 15% skin painted.

I have so many things working against me.

Time: owning a house is time consuming. So is work. So is unwinding and family time.

Shiny new builder syndrome: I love models. I love buying them and putting them together and then smiling at how awesome they look, even with just some primer. Then I buy more.

Research and playvelopment: I love reading about lists and tactics and spend lots of time refining my lists and hunting for what new shiny will make my armies better. I also really really like playing this game too.

Painting is hard for me for these reasons and a few more (caution: first world problems ahead!) I don't have a dedicated paint area. I don't have a good space for one that would not near close to a TV (must have for when I am painting). To paint in the only area that fulfills my TV needs, I have to curl up my spine to hunch over the model and that gets painful quick.

I see too many awesome paint jobs on magical internet land that I feel bad about the paint jobs I do even though I get feedback that I'm doing well. Well doesn't cut it for me and I get frustrated.

The only thing that motivates me is there are a LOT of unpainted/very poorly painted armies in the area. After playing with/against/near them, I usually get the motivation to paint a few models.

seriously people it comes down to one simple point......play who you want and when you want.....everyone has that right to make that choice

Da Butcha wrote:Not liking something should not equal not liking people who do it.

It's totally fine for you to like painting, prefer playing painted armies, or even refuse to play against unpainted armies. Those are your preferences, and you are entitled to them. There's nothing wrong with them, and there's nothing wrong with you for having them. Those preferences don't make you elitist, or a snob, or a douche.

Someone else might not want to play against WAAC gamers, or Tau players, or strangers. I have a lot of difficulty getting up the nerve to play strangers at stores/conventions.

Moving from having your own preferences to making assumptions about other people based on your preferences is what turns someone into an elitist, snob, or douche. If someone doesn't paint their army, guess what? All you can tell is that they don't paint their army. They might be lazy; they might be physically impaired; they might not like painting; they might have an entirely painted army in the case and just prefer to assemble a force before painting ANY of it. You can't tell. If you think you can tell just by the fact that their are unpainted, you are a douche.

I'm uncomfortable and nervous playing strangers. That's my own personal situation. If I then say that strangers are dangerous rapists, I'm a douche (or demented).

I'm sure that it is true that some people with unpainted armies are lazy. However, you just can't make that blanket assumption by the presence of an unpainted army, unless you are a douche.

I like to buy and assemble my armies based much more on appearance and fluff than effectiveness. That means that I tend to lose, hard, when playing people with well-designed, optimized lists chosen for their effective build. Given that I don't particularly enjoy getting a butt-whupping, I tend to seek out other gamers who also don't create 'killer' lists. I don't assume, however, that the person with a well-constructed list is a jerk, or an egotist, or trying to prove something. I have my preferences, and I act on my preferences, but I don't make prejudicial assumptions about people based on my preferences. That is being a douche.






Also, life isn't perfect. I'd enjoy the game most if both armies were painted to a high standard, the terrain was modeled and painted well, my army and my opponent's army were both well-designed and well-constructed, and my opponent was an attractive, flirtatious lady who brought barbecue to the game. Sadly, I'm not going to get many games like that (so far, none). Having preferences and standard, even demanding preferences and standards, is totally acceptable, but it also might mean that you miss out on a game/person that might be worthwhile (I'm willing to lower my standards for an attractive lady gamer---she can have an unpainted army, and could even just bring burgers







If you are someone who feels they can look down, criticize, or dislike people who don't paint their models because they aren't participating completely in 'the hobby', think about this:

All around you, any where you go, there could be other people who don't participate completely in 'the hobby'. Those strange and unlikable people buy, assemble and paint models, but never play games with them. You'll never see them at the gaming table! How will you know to look down on them? How will you know who you should shun and hate? Maybe you should avoid associating with anyone in case they are a hidden incomplete hobbyist!

I wasn't going to join in on this thread, but this is very insightful, and worth re-reading.

On topic: Some people have said that the non-painters are getting hung up on wording, which I think is true to a certain extent. However, I don't think that invalidates their points. If someone asks me about their painted army and I don't like the color-scheme, I could say: "Wow, your army is really ugly." Of course, that comes off as extraordinarily rude. On the other hand, I could say, "well, the color scheme is not my cup of tea, but..." and find something to compliment. In the second case, I've voiced my opinion without making an (implied) attack on the painter.

I think the same is true of this issue here. For someone to say "You're ruining the hobby for everyone" as opposed to "I'd prefer not to play against unpainted armies," that person is making a value judgment on the way non-painters enjoy their hobby, which leaves non-painters feeling justifiably insulted. True, if a person believes that unpainted armies are ruining Warhammer 40k, they are free to voice that opinion, but attributing that opinion to players (e.g. you are ruining the hobby) makes that person sound like a jerk (in my opinion, of course).

For the record, my stance is basically the same as Da Butcha's, though I'd wager I'm a bit more competitive

Also, slightly off topic: I thought I was the only one who gets really uncomfortable playing against strangers.

Kaldor wrote:

whitedragon wrote:

Kaldor wrote:

helium42 wrote:How exactly do you come to the conclusion that people who choose not to paint their armies have a self-entitled attitude? :facepalm.

People can choose to do whatever they want with their 'armies' And I use the term loosely, because I want to cover not just painting, but proxying and counts-as.

But the instant they get indignant and self-righteous because someone else doesn't want to play against them because of their choice to field a crap army, they become self entitled.

This doesn't just apply to painting, it applies to everything. Don't waste your time playing against armies/gamers that you don't want to.

Once again, your "reasoning" means exactly the same thing in reverse. The instant people get indignant and self-righteous because they won't play against a non-painted army, they become self-entitled.

Uh, yeah. I said exactly that. If someone doesn't want to play you, just shrug and move on. Don't get your panties in a twist because they want you to paint your toy soldiers / not use proxies / bathe more often / whatever.

It applies to everyone, for everything.

And for reference, I quoted platuan4th because he was the one demonstrating the self-entitled attitude I mentioned. Also helium42.

I quoted you because you are showing the exact self-entitled attittude as well. Because as you've agreed before, the door swings both ways. The solution is to live and let live, not chastise people that don't agree with you, that's what I said. Don't get your panties in a twist because someone doesn't want to paint their toy soldiers.

Kaldor wrote:

brettz123 wrote:The problem is now you are starting to make things up and change your argument. This isn't what you have been saying during this thread at all. You have been calling people lazy and entitled because they don't paint not because they get mad people won't play against them. Make up your mind and stick with a position but don't try and change your position and then pretend you were right all along.

Not sure if trolling...

No, your reading comprehension leaves a little to be desired. Not painting is fine. Refusing to play against not painted armies is fine.

Getting upset because someone doesn't like your unpainted army is not fine.

That's been my line all through this thread.

Btw, that hasn't been your "line" through this thread, because just above this, you say you should not play against people you don't want to. The part we are disagreeing about is your comment that you shouldn't get upset because someone doesn't like unpainted armies. By reverse, you should also not get upset about someone having a non-painted army.

whitedragon wrote:I quoted you because you are showing the exact self-entitled attittude as well. Because as you've agreed before, the door swings both ways. The solution is to live and let live, not chastise people that don't agree with you, that's what I said. Don't get your panties in a twist because someone doesn't want to paint their toy soldiers.

This.

Your toy soldiers are your hobby. Someone elses toy soldiers are their hobby. What they do with them has zero effect on you. If they don't want to paint them, and that kills your fun, you simply don't include them in your hobby by not playing them, just like if someone is a complete douchebag to play against, you don't include them in your hobby by not playing them. Let them have their hobby, there's no reason for you get upset over it. Life has plenty of other real things to get worked up about.

Da Mediokre Painta wrote: Painting is a key part of it and contributes to its overall success.

How does it contribute to the overall success of the game? It doesnt make you a better player, it doesnt make you a better person at the table. It doesnt make your rules knowelege better.

It just makes the table prettier.

The thing I find most odd about this is that most of the non-painted armies you see are for 40k. Now I think this is a great shame, because a lot of the models are incredible stylish and there are few sights as cool in wargaming as a well painted 40k army on some good terrain.

But, if you lose that aesthetic appeal, then what do you have?

A tactical experience? Not really, while moving models on a board will always be fun, there isn't the depth within the game mechanics to have a truly tactical experience.

A strategic experience? Namely list building - while this isn't really my thing, I know that a lot of people enjoy this and while the game itself is lacking in tactical complexity, this is where the more enthusiastic and committed 40k players can find their focus. But, with the 6th edition ally rules creating something of a free-for-all in terms of army composition, will this still be a draw for the game?

Speaking personally, I have become jaded to 40k partly because it was so difficult to find opponents with painted/assembled armies, who wanted to do more than just set up 24" apart every week and repeat the same rather vacuous gaming experience week after week. By contrast, some of my favourite ever wargaming experiences (and this includes the entire hobby and non-GW games) have been from themed campaign and tournament weekends. Namely, some Pre-Heresy events that had a dozen or so guys, each with amazingly-realised armies that they had obviously spent a great deal of time preparing. Combined with a narrative for the games (actually had one written by Graham McNeil in one case) and it was a stunning experience. Now you could say that this set an unreasonable benchmark for my subsequent playing experiences, but to me having a pair of disembodied legs on a base, a WFB movement tray representing an Orc-War buggy, or any other number of examples makes the game damn near unplayable - there just isn't the 'meat' in the game itself for it to be able to be carried on the game mechanics alone. As far as I am concerned it needs attention lavished on it - be it through campaigns and narrative, or with pretty armies to set up on the tabletop.

Pacific wrote:The thing I find most odd about this is that most of the non-painted armies you see are for 40k. Now I think this is a great shame, because a lot of the models are incredible stylish and there are few sights as cool in wargaming as a well painted 40k army on some good terrain.

40k is one of the most popular games in this niche hobby. It can be expected that this would be the case due to popularity alone. The farther you get into the niche, there are less players but the players themselves generally become more devoted, due to this it is less common to see unpainted armies that are less popular than 40k.

LunaHound wrote:

Stoupe wrote:

The fact is, I don't know you. A grey army is harder to comment on and therefore harder to make into a conversation. Add in the I don't know you factor and it creates more often then not an awkward game. (If you feel you are the exceptin here, by all means. But everyone I know knows how bad socially awkward games can be.)

If I don't know you and you wanna play a game. Be painted. Conversations become much much easier to start that way.

I hate silent games.

You know what that basically says? It says this.

"My comfort zone is painting, and discussing painting related topics.
Im not used to chatting about army, army builds, and army composition and synergy,
However, I expect everyone in the world to be just a painter like me, with no possibility of them been a gamer."

This thread that happens monthly always have one simple problem.
People only think their personal aspect of warhammer exists, and cannot tolerate other aspects.

You know what it says to me? I don't give a fething gak about army builds, composition and synergy. I'd rather looks at an army as a reflection of ones self, which opens a whole possibility of new topics. Oh your theme is what? How come? Did you write your own personal story or did you take it from gw/pp/history? Out of all the armies on the wall made you pick that one and paint it in that way? What was your inspiration? More often hen not these questions can lead to conversations about life and philosophy in general. Talking about army lists and everything is just boring drivel to me. I'd rather shoot myself.

Note I didn't say that it was necessary to create a conversation, it does help.

brettz123 wrote:

Stoupe wrote:

Stoupe wrote:Is it just me but are there a lot of nonpainters getting Pissy about the way people word things.

Being called lazy and self-entitled, and accused of ruining the hobby for those who are doing it the 'right' way tends to have that effect on people.

My point was, simply, I see more people. Claiming we painters are saying these things than painters who actually are. Are grey armies typically fotm armies unpainted to hold some resale value? No, the majority isn't. But the minority is a significant number.. Are grey armies typically less fun to play? Well add in the random game factor, them yes.

The fact is, I don't know you. A grey army is harder to comment on and therefore harder to make into a conversation. Add in the I don't know you factor and it creates more often then not an awkward game. (If you feel you are the exceptin here, by all means. But everyone I know knows how bad socially awkward games can be.)

If I don't know you and you wanna play a game. Be painted. Conversations become much much easier to start that way.

I hate silent games.

1. You should probably actually read the thread and you will see that it is basically a small number of people who won't play against unpainted armies telling non-painters that they are lazy. This tends to annoy people because it isn't really all that logical and it also happens to be incredibly rude.

2. If your ability to hold a conversation revolves around someone having painted their army perhaps you need to broaden your horizons.

1. I see more non painters claiming we are calling them these things than painters who actually are. I've read the thread. More often the. Not people are twisting words, picking and choosing what to reply to and claiming offense when there nothing offensive.

2. It doesn't. It merely assists diverting the conversation to something more meaningful the. Lists, synergy, rules, etc. which for me creates a game that isn't mere boring drivel.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

insaniak wrote:

Stoupe wrote:But the minority is a significant number..

Is it? How many would you say makes up that 'significant number'?


And, really, so what? I want to play a game. I don't much care why my opponent chose the army he has.

Enough that I made the ruling for my own self not to play armies that arent at least half painted. You want to play? I want to hang out with friends and paint and maybe just maybe I'll play 1-2 games a week. I'm not complaining about my number of games per week am I? More often then not I just use it as an excuse not to play at all.

Don't like it? Oh well.

The fact is, I don't know you. A grey army is harder to comment on and therefore harder to make into a conversation. Add in the I don't know you factor and it creates more often then not an awkward game. (If you feel you are the exceptin here, by all means. But everyone I know knows how bad socially awkward games can be.)

If I don't know you and you wanna play a game. Be painted. Conversations become much much easier to start that way.

I hate silent games.

To be honest, conversation based around the army generally takes place over the first couple of minutes while we're setting up, and from there on in tends to revolve around the actual game in progress. I'm not at my most comfortable socially with people I don't know... but generally have little trouble keeping game-related conversation going on, painted armies or no.

In your experience maybe. I find painted armies easier to talk about themes and influences which leads to other interests which leads to more entertaining conversations.

I don't play unpainted armies and all this complaining just makes me prouder of the fact that I don't.

" Are grey armies typically fotm armies unpainted to hold some resale value?"


Yes. This is what I said back in the beginning. Little johnny goes online, prints off the tourney killer, then finds that he wasted his money when he doesn't table all comers when he plays his first couple of games. I have seen this more then a few times, then the conversation revovles around what little johnny needs to get to do the do...

Rinse and repeat, until either little johnny comes to terms with the game, and its inherent lack of balence, or he says the heck with it, and puts it back up on Fee bey and tries his hand at whatever everyone else is into at the time.

Those of you baying at the moon over this subject know what I'm talking about. SOmetimes, when it all comes down to it, its more about playing the game. Of course there is the half nelsons, and the TFG's with the three dots of paint on each grey faceless minion, but in the long term, we're talking playing a minis game.

I've found a few more other times then a few, that local peer pressure is the dictator of the painting game. A couple of good painters inspire a few others, then a couple of other guys get in, get some lessions, or they go see the "PAinters, and throw a few bucks thier way, and pretty soon, the games are really looking tight, and the communities are all the more better for it.

Let me put it out there though, it is entirly on the local game scene and the enthusiasm for the game.

These days, I'm seeing the enthusiasm for 40k waining, based on the GW corperate whore mode of retail. ( I don't care, Why should you!?!?!)


To me, this type of assclownery attitude and trying to push the "Shut up and Take my money" hype that just isn't there any more is one of the direct responses that the "Grey armies of the faceless" have become.

It boils down to keeping up with the joneses. Case in point- Valkries.

I saw a metric asston of valkries, and none were painted for the forst three months after they came out. eventually though- the pride came back for those that kept them, the others put them up on fee bey, and they went back to thier own particular feel of army.... until the next titan, rules book, or new unit came ot bear...


In the end, it comes down to your gameing community, and if you have an ingrown standard of how you all play there.

Stoupe wrote:Is it just me but are there a lot of nonpainters getting Pissy about the way people word things.

I'm actually a painter, converter and terrain builder yet me thinks many of you sound like elitist pricks.


And lets not forget which camp started this thread and the hundreds more just like it that have cropped up in the past.

Someone mentioned earlier, bu it bears repeating: show me one thread like this started by a "non-painter being pissy aboout painters". I'd love to see the link...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

orkybenji wrote:For most of us, the fun of the game is competing in a visually impressive spectacle. We like playing through the epic face off of an eldar craftworld and a space wolf company. Unpainted armies detract from that holistic experience. If you don't have an interest in painting why are you buying these

And I would still argue this is bunk. If this was true thenthe setting should be just as important yet I see far more crappy looking tables with mismatched/unthemed and busted up terrain than unpainted armies...

I don't see it as a subject to get worked up about. personally. Interesting, the way in which its devolving, though.....

kinda scary in a car wreck sort of a way... You can't help but watch how it ends....

Honestly I see it the other way around CT. Yes some gak created the post but for every 1 painter complaining about it, there's 5 non painters offended. Most painters who like me are just saying "I won't play them". It's our choice. I can have it. I'm not complaining about the number of games I have to play or the difficulty in which it is to just get a game.

The fact of the matter is, if your complaining about the number of games your getting is too low, then maybe your standards is too high. I was getting too many games. Too many of them were unsatisfactory. So I raised my standards, which includes only playing half painted or better armies.

If that's elitist, then I'm an elitist.

Stoupe wrote:Honestly I see it the other way around CT. Yes some gak created the post but for every 1 painter complaining about it, there's 5 non painters offended.

When you create a thread that targets a specific group attempts to paint them as lazy/entitled gits who arent playing the game right, are ruining the hobby and state they deserve contempt and exclusion(paraprhraasing the various statements), then is it really that hard to imagine that you will get a strong and numerous response from said target group?

Do you wanna take bets on how many tournament/competative players would respond in a thread if I started one bashing them using the same tone and terminology used here? I bet the ratio would easily meet your cited 5:1 ratio or higher.

When you attack people they respond...

IF it wasnt an attack and you are simply "not ging to play" any non-painted armies you encounter, then why the need for the thread to begin with? Why do I need to know that some random strangers on the interwebs are not going to play some other random strangers due to them not liking unpainted models?

Because it is more fun to stir up trouble and be an internet tough guy (as evidenced in this thread), thats why...

Pathetic.

CT GAMER wrote:

Stoupe wrote:Honestly I see it the other way around CT. Yes some gak created the post but for every 1 painter complaining about it, there's 5 non painters offended.

When you create a thread that targets a specific group attempts to paint them as lazy/entitled gits who arent playing the game right, are ruining the hobby and state they deserve contempt and exclusion(paraprhraasing the various statements), then is it really that hard to imagine that you will get a strong and numerous response from said target group?

Do you wanna take bets on how many tournament/competative players would respond in a thread if I started one bashing them using the same tone and terminology used here? I bet the ratio would easily meet your cited 5:1 ratio or higher.

When you attack people they respond...

IF it wasnt an attack and you are simply "not ging to play" any non-painted armies you encounter, then why the need for the thread to begin with? Why do I need to know that some random strangers on the interwebs are not going to play some other random strangers due to them not liking unpainted models?

Because it is more fun to stir up trouble and be an internet tough guy (as evidenced in this thread), thats why...

Pathetic.

You did read the beginning of the thread, correct?

infinite_array wrote:

CT GAMER wrote:

Stoupe wrote:Honestly I see it the other way around CT. Yes some gak created the post but for every 1 painter complaining about it, there's 5 non painters offended.

When you create a thread that targets a specific group attempts to paint them as lazy/entitled gits who arent playing the game right, are ruining the hobby and state they deserve contempt and exclusion(paraprhraasing the various statements), then is it really that hard to imagine that you will get a strong and numerous response from said target group?

Do you wanna take bets on how many tournament/competative players would respond in a thread if I started one bashing them using the same tone and terminology used here? I bet the ratio would easily meet your cited 5:1 ratio or higher.

When you attack people they respond...

IF it wasnt an attack and you are simply "not ging to play" any non-painted armies you encounter, then why the need for the thread to begin with? Why do I need to know that some random strangers on the interwebs are not going to play some other random strangers due to them not liking unpainted models?

Because it is more fun to stir up trouble and be an internet tough guy (as evidenced in this thread), thats why...

Pathetic.

You did read the beginning of the thread, correct?

Go back. The first insult start being thrown around by the nonpainters.

The first insult is implied in the title of the thread...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

infinite_array wrote:

CT GAMER wrote:

Stoupe wrote:Honestly I see it the other way around CT. Yes some gak created the post but for every 1 painter complaining about it, there's 5 non painters offended.

When you create a thread that targets a specific group attempts to paint them as lazy/entitled gits who arent playing the game right, are ruining the hobby and state they deserve contempt and exclusion(paraprhraasing the various statements), then is it really that hard to imagine that you will get a strong and numerous response from said target group?

Do you wanna take bets on how many tournament/competative players would respond in a thread if I started one bashing them using the same tone and terminology used here? I bet the ratio would easily meet your cited 5:1 ratio or higher.

When you attack people they respond...

IF it wasnt an attack and you are simply "not ging to play" any non-painted armies you encounter, then why the need for the thread to begin with? Why do I need to know that some random strangers on the interwebs are not going to play some other random strangers due to them not liking unpainted models?

Because it is more fun to stir up trouble and be an internet tough guy (as evidenced in this thread), thats why...

Pathetic.

You did read the beginning of the thread, correct?

Nice edit.

Stoupe wrote:Honestly I see it the other way around CT. Yes some gak created the post but for every 1 painter complaining about it, there's 5 non painters offended. Most painters who like me are just saying "I won't play them". It's our choice. I can have it. I'm not complaining about the number of games I have to play or the difficulty in which it is to just get a game.

The fact of the matter is, if your complaining about the number of games your getting is too low, then maybe your standards is too high. I was getting too many games. Too many of them were unsatisfactory. So I raised my standards, which includes only playing half painted or better armies.

If that's elitist, then I'm an elitist.

The non-painters are not complaining about somebody saying that they choose not to play against them, but are rather complaining at the assertion that we are lazy/childish/self-entitled/etc. When you bring out insults like that, you should expect a large and intense response. Had the OP came out and asked why non-painters don't paint, or said he doesn't understand our point of view I seriously doubt that the response would have been so angry. But instead insults were thrown early and often. Condescending people offered tips on how to quickly paint an army, and others claimed that their hobby was being ruined by the self-entitled non-painters.

Tournaments, clubs, and individuals should all feel free to restrict or open up play as they see fit. Anyone feeling excluded, or feeling unsatisfied by their group can find other like-minded opponents. We're lucky in a sense that 40k is such a large hobby, it means that we don't really have to settle playing against people who share a different vision of how to enjoy the game than we do. There are plenty of players out there.

infinite_array wrote:Also, I noticed you ignored my request.

Of course I ignored your request. I chose not to engage in your straw man argument. But if you insist, here we go. Without looking, I know I won't find any pictures in the GW rulebook depicting unpainted miniatures on the table. My answer to that is that GW is in the business of selling paint, flock, hobby tools, and other bits to jazz up your models. That has nothing to do with some all-encompassing expectation of what the game should be or how it should be played though.

What insult is there? It's giving a hint at the thread's topic.

If the title had been, 'Does anyone else thing nonpainters are a bunch of whiny, lazy, self-entitled gits?', then that's an insult.

If any of that had been in the OP, then that's an insult.

None of it was, though. The OP was asking, simply, why he saw so few painted armies. In fact, the post originally used Warmachine/Hordes players as the main culprit!

It's like you're one of those stereotypical Facebook screencaptures - you know, the ones where someone makes a status update, and some girl freaks out, thinking it's about her? And then everyone else has a laugh at here expense.

helium42 wrote:

infinite_array wrote:Also, I noticed you ignored my request.

Of course I ignored your request. I chose not to engage in your straw man argument. But if you insist, here we go. Without looking, I know I won't find any pictures in the GW rulebook depicting unpainted miniatures on the table. My answer to that is that GW is in the business of selling paint, flock, hobby tools, and other bits to jazz up your models. That has nothing to do with some all-encompassing expectation of what the game should be or how it should be played though.

What strawman? You attempted to say that, thanks to the omission of any sort of 'rule' that you needed to paint your models, you didn't have to.

Here, let me quote a few other rulebooks that I own:

Black Powder: 'However, it must be said that the majority of players prefer to paint their own models, and most enjoy doing so - for there is undeniably something satisfying about completing each new regiment and adding it to the growing army'. And look, no pictures of unpainted miniatures! And no 'corporate speech' to try and get you to buy the nonexistent Warlord Games Hobby range.

Field of Glory: 'Today wargaming is an absorbing and fascinating pastime involving elements of tactical skill and chance, where armird of accurately researched and painted figurines march across realistically modeled battlefield to re-fight bygone wars'. And look, a section in the back that talks about painting, and mentions a variety of different paint brands.

Battles in the Age of War: 'Time spent painting and modelling is time well spent'. And, hey, a section in the book on painting, and some suggested reading material to see what Samurai and other Japanese military units would have looked like in the Sengoku period!

Battletech: Total Warfare: 'Hopefully, this section offers you enough guidance to paint some cool miniatures. However, you don't need to rely on this information alone. Ask other painters how they like to paint their miniatures, Ask the people at your local hobby shop how they do it. Most people will be happy to talk about their hobby.

Cold War Commander: 'Some people love it, some hate it. I find painting to be a necessary evil, but once I'm immersed in painting-up a load of minis, I quite enjoy it. However the best bit for me is seeing them finished and on the table!'

Flames of War: 'Painting is an integral part of the wargaming hobby. Most wargamers hate to play with unpainted miniatures - and for good reason; the visual tactile nature of well painted models and terrain is what separates tabletop wargaming from other, less fun creative pastimes.'

helium42 wrote:

Stoupe wrote:Honestly I see it the other way around CT. Yes some gak created the post but for every 1 painter complaining about it, there's 5 non painters offended. Most painters who like me are just saying "I won't play them". It's our choice. I can have it. I'm not complaining about the number of games I have to play or the difficulty in which it is to just get a game.

The fact of the matter is, if your complaining about the number of games your getting is too low, then maybe your standards is too high. I was getting too many games. Too many of them were unsatisfactory. So I raised my standards, which includes only playing half painted or better armies.

If that's elitist, then I'm an elitist.

The non-painters are not complaining about somebody saying that they choose not to play against them, but are rather complaining at the assertion that we are lazy/childish/self-entitled/etc. When you bring out insults like that, you should expect a large and intense response. Had the OP came out and asked why non-painters don't paint, or said he doesn't understand our point of view I seriously doubt that the response would have been so angry. But instead insults were thrown early and often. Condescending people offered tips on how to quickly paint an army, and others claimed that their hobby was being ruined by the self-entitled non-painters.

Tournaments, clubs, and individuals should all feel free to restrict or open up play as they see fit. Anyone feeling excluded, or feeling unsatisfied by their group can find other like-minded opponents. We're lucky in a sense that 40k is such a large hobby, it means that we don't really have to settle playing against people who share a different vision of how to enjoy the game than we do. There are plenty of players out there.

infinite_array wrote:Also, I noticed you ignored my request.

Of course I ignored your request. I chose not to engage in your straw man argument. But if you insist, here we go. Without looking, I know I won't find any pictures in the GW rulebook depicting unpainted miniatures on the table. My answer to that is that GW is in the business of selling paint, flock, hobby tools, and other bits to jazz up your models. That has nothing to do with some all-encompassing expectation of what the game should be or how it should be played though.

The thread title could have said "What are the reasons people don't paint?" or "Can people explain to me why they use unpainted models?" Instead the thread title is loaded in it's assumption that people who use unpainted models are "making no attempt" hence the reason must be some sort of character flaw (laziness, entitlement, etc.). And this smell of blood in the water was all the paint-snobs needed to start frenzying as documented in the various posts.

I know a guy that has very poor eyesight do to a medical condition. He can make out general shapes but has to pick up dice close to his face to read them, etc. His ability to do detailed work on small objects like miniatures is near immpossible so he does not paint his models.

I have witnessed people who are unaware of his conditiondropping comments like those spouted in this thread at him or behind his back all the while snickering and thinking they are clever. His response is usually "well I'm practically blind so F*ck you". Point being: making assumptons about people's motivations for doing/not doing something is a bad habit and makes you look like a moron more often than not...

infinite_array wrote:There is, however, an entire section devoted to painting miniatures. In fact, you'll find such a section in most mainstream miniatures rulebooks.

Now I'm required to have the big rule book to play? Since you're obviously not aware, the book from the AoBR set doesn't include that section. None of the small set books ever have.

It's almost like different people ply 40k for different reasons. Odd that.

Kaldor wrote:
Not sure if trolling...

No, your reading comprehension leaves a little to be desired. Not painting is fine. Refusing to play against not painted armies is fine.

Getting upset because someone doesn't like your unpainted army is not fine.
.

Except people aren't saying that now are they? And my reading comprehension is fine..... I guess I am just trolling at this point

Stoupe wrote:Honestly I see it the other way around CT. Yes some gak created the post but for every 1 painter complaining about it, there's 5 non painters offended. Most painters who like me are just saying "I won't play them". It's our choice. I can have it. I'm not complaining about the number of games I have to play or the difficulty in which it is to just get a game.

The fact of the matter is, if your complaining about the number of games your getting is too low, then maybe your standards is too high. I was getting too many games. Too many of them were unsatisfactory. So I raised my standards, which includes only playing half painted or better armies.

If that's elitist, then I'm an elitist.

Its not non painters. I am willing to bet you that the majority of us who take offense to the kind of elitist painter attitude brought up here are painters. Heres the armies I have played in the last 10 and a half years.
Vanilla marines
Biel tan
deathwing
Tyranids
Imperial Guard
Iron warriors
13th company
Pre heresy Imperial fists
Pre heresy death guard
mech eldar
draigowing
coteaz mech grey knights
flesh tearers
tyranids again
foot space wolves.

Every single one of those armies has been painted to at least 3 colors. The earlier ones were painted very poorly, as I was 11 when I started painting. The later ones have been done fairly well. Thats something like 50k points of minis I have owned and painted, not including commission work and just general helping other people paint their armies. I can agree painted armies look better. I can agree that I would rather see 2 really well painted armies fighting it out on nice terrain than 2 grey legions fighting. I can also realize that if somebody else doesnt want to paint its not my business. Im a man, I have more important things that concern me than how somebody elses mandollies look.

If you are approached by somebody else for a game, and they dont have a painted army, and you turn them down for this reason, youre an donkey-cave

Let me show you the kind of people who get offended by these posts.

This isnt non painters being outed as lazy turds who only want to play the latest power army before ebaying it because we cant win. This isnt people smoking too much weed to paint, and then making excuses for it. I go to tournaments based around battlepoints and I place top 3 in them. I go to hobby based events where painting is more than 50% of your score? I place top 3 in them. The tournaments where I havent won best general/painted, I tend to get best sportsman at. I meet new kids who want to get involved in the game? I break out 500 pts of tyranids and play goofy games to show them how the rules work while losing. I give people models with my tournament winnings. I am captaining a team to go to the ATC this July, and am the youngest member by about 10 years.

Im not offended as a lazy non painter who just cant be bothered to care about this hobby. I am offended as an 11 year veteran who grew up in this hobby, as someone who knows the fluff inside and out, can paint and model well, and is a very competitive player. I am offended as someone who wonders why less people play this game, and then I see people talk about how they wont play against unpainted armies because it offends their sensibilities. Its not an issue for me of personal painting choice, its going after elitist attitudes, which drag down such a small hobby and turn it into the stereotypical neckbeard circle jerk. I am offended as someone who, in addition to having a fantastic social life that has nothing to do with gaming or nerdiness, probably paints and plays better than you, and knows the fluff more as well. At which point do you stop with the elitism?

Should I view myself as some kind of gaming ubermensch? Should I refuse to play people who dont have good background knowledge, as well as multiple tournament wins and a really well painted army? Sounds far, i put in the effort to learn the game and get good at it. I put in the effort to highlight and shade the hell out of my models, and I put in the effort to read the fluff. Dont tell me you dont have time, thats just an excuse, make time. You see how fething stupid this kind of attitude of 'im better than you at mandollies' is?

infinite_something or other wrote:What insult is there? It's giving a hint at the thread's topic.

If the title had been, 'Does anyone else thing nonpainters are a bunch of whiny, lazy, self-entitled gits?', then that's an insult.

If any of that had been in the OP, then that's an insult.

None of it was, though. The OP was asking, simply, why he saw so few painted armies. In fact, the post originally used Warmachine/Hordes players as the main culprit!

The OP edited the offensive remarks out of the post.

same troll as above wrote:It's like you're one of those stereotypical Facebook screencaptures - you know, the ones where someone makes a status update, and some girl freaks out, thinking it's about her? And then everyone else has a laugh at here expense.

Troll harder troll.

So, instead of actually countering anything I say... you just call me a troll.

OP edits his post? Good, then he saw what he said was offensive, and changed it to be less so.

I'm ashamed to see that we're the same age.

Eidolon wrote:

Stoupe wrote:
Im not offended as a lazy non painter who just cant be bothered to care about this hobby. I am offended as an 11 year veteran who grew up in this hobby, as someone who knows the fluff inside and out, can paint and model well, and is a very competitive player. I am offended as someone who wonders why less people play this game, and then I see people talk about how they wont play against unpainted armies because it offends their sensibilities. Its not an issue for me of personal painting choice, its going after elitist attitudes, which drag down such a small hobby and turn it into the stereotypical neckbeard circle jerk. I am offended as someone who, in addition to having a fantastic social life that has nothing to do with gaming or nerdiness, probably paints and plays better than you, and knows the fluff more as well. At which point do you stop with the elitism?

Should I view myself as some kind of gaming ubermensch? Should I refuse to play people who dont have good background knowledge, as well as multiple tournament wins and a really well painted army? Sounds far, i put in the effort to learn the game and get good at it. I put in the effort to highlight and shade the hell out of my models, and I put in the effort to read the fluff. Dont tell me you dont have time, thats just an excuse, make time. You see how fething stupid this kind of attitude of 'im better than you at mandollies' is?

this guy gets it...

as someone who just started 40k 2 months ago and at the moment i'm staring at 3000 points of unpainted blood Angels and about 600 points of unpainted Tau. i can only tolerate painting for about 2-3 hours a day and i'm really slow. i'd also rather have a "field of gray" than horribly painted minis that look like they were painted by stephen hawking.

if someone refused me a game because my minis weren't painted i would laugh at them for pulling such an elitist forever alone move on me. nerds that do this are no better than the jocks and bullies that used to give them gak in middle school.