Anyone here refuse to play with unpainted armies? How about against unpainted armies?
Any set standards of quality for yours or his minis before you would play a game?
I refuse to play with any of my Blood Angels until they are at the very least basecoated with every color I plan to use. I'm ok with playing against any quality army. I don't like proxies, but I'll accept good ones. But now that I'm starting Fantasy, I'm wondering when the hell I'll have time to paint all my mini's, and seriously considering showing up with a Chaos Black Army.
I don't mind versing unpainted armies from time to time. If you verse the same person, overtime you see it progress until it becomes complete.
Though there aren't many completed armies around here >_>
They're always nicer than grey plastic or just primed, but that's no real reason to refuse a game against someone.
n0t_u wrote:I don't mind versing unpainted armies from time to time. If you verse the same person, overtime you see it progress until it becomes complete.
Though there aren't many completed armies around here >_>
They're always nicer than grey plastic or just primed, but that's no real reason to refuse a game against someone.
I hear ya. I'd say for the regulars in my place, maybe 60% go with Grey Plastic.
JSK-Fox wrote:I don't mind, but a recent rule at my GWS means we all need to paint our guys to play.
I don't really care, helps bring up standards.
Back in the mid-90's you couldn't play in a GW with unpainted minis (or at least such were the rules in my areas). As for myself I prefer to show up with painted minis, but I don't have time to paint all models for the battle I'll apologize to the opponent. My objective is to play with finished minis (one of the reasons why my orks didn't see many battles so far )
Mattlov wrote:I have no problems playing against and unpainted army, or playing with an unpainted army. It is a game.
The refusal to play against one is utterly ridiculous. You CAN'T support that position without being a total D-bag.
+1
it's a great way to make yourself look a pompous ass. i don't even care if it's wysiwyg within reason. the dude bought the army. it's about having fun. as long as the guy isn't trying to use quarter as a bloodthirster, i'm pretty much down with anything.
Dont care as long as you have models. Even a decent proxy, although not an entire army of them, as it start getting confusing. DOnt care if any of the models on the table are painted, mine or theirs.
I refuse to play with unpainted armies, but that's mainly because I have 10 fantasy armies of 5000pts + that are all fully painted, so I really have no excuse.
I'm at the point now where I can only tolerate unpainted when I'm forced to (in a tournament that doesn't require painting). In friendly games I only play guys that are like minded (it's about the hobby as much as the game). I voted for both mine and theirs must be painted. I never used to be as harsh about painting but I have seen some things that just ruin the game over the past few years, not to say that you can't do what you want with your hobby... I just don't have to play you.
I voted that I have to have mine painted, but I'm not as hung up on the other guy having his painted. That may seem weird, but I don't like the idea of forcing my ideas about the hobby onto my opponent.
Now, as it happens, a majority of the armies at the store where i currently play are painted, so it doesn't really come up that often!
As I said in the thread on this very topic not even three or four days ago...
Nobody minds unpainted armies to the extent that they'll refuse games. The only time you'll ever see it really become an issue is when you actively are known as a bandwagon hopper or have a bad reputation for proxy armies(which really only is an issue with the Marine 'dexes).
Then the "I only play painted armies." excuse comes in real handy for your opponent.
The state of the game now is that many many players have unpainted armies, so going to a store for a pick up game means facing a lot of gray plastic and bare metal.
In my group of friends its 3 colours minimum, basing optional. always has been and always will be.
I don't mind unpainted armies but it seems strange that this situation seems to be endemic in a hobby where playing the game and painting and modeling are so interlinked (my opinion anyway).
I really don't enjoy painting at all, so I'll pretty much always have grey plastic or at most primed models. Don't care what my opponent has out either
However, most of my stuff will be converted to some degree.
In the FLGS that I work and play at, anyone is allowed to play, tournament or friendly games with unpainted minis: it's the owning player choices. We also allow proxies. However, since I created the tournament rules, I have added so that painting scores are added into a player's total score: 0 points for a bare plastic/primed army or less than 35% painted; 1 point for 35% or more, but not yet based (flock of any kind); 2 points (maximum) for fully painted/based army. I don't lower scores for the quality of painting (some people struggle with it) as long as the attempt is there. My players know they are welcome to play with any amount of painting of their choice, but they also know that not painting their army will dock them a few points in the tournament. All of them find it perfectly acceptable, and 95% of the time everyone gets 1 point because nobody has ALL of their models painted, but most of them have at least 50% done.
I would always prefer to play against a well-painted army, on a nice looking table, with a nicely painted army, myself. I, however, don't have a painted army, so who am I to judge? Perhaps I'll become more selective once all my models are painted and I have a nice big pool of opponents, but I doubt it. I'd rather have a fun game against a friendly opponent with a gray plastic army than play against an army of GD winning models with a head for a general.
I tend not to enjoy playing with and against unpainted armies and prefer it when my opponent at least puts in some effort (hell, even if they're just sprayed one solid colour is still much better than just raw plastic/metal.)
Playing with painted units is a matter of pride in our group. We'll play no matter what, but the expectation is progress is to be made until the army is fully painted.
Usually both armies have one or maybe two units that are in some stage of partial completion. This is usually due to an expansion or testing something out to see if it's worth putting the time into.
Deciding to play a new army is about a 6 month committment for us. You not only have to buy and build the army, but you also have to have at least the 500 point core painted up (at least basecoats, highlighting and details can come later although usually not). I'll probably get to actually play my first game with my IG army around Christmas.
/shrug, it's part of the hobby to us. There's boardgames, videogames, and RPGs if we want to just have a battle.
I don't care if my opponent's army is painted, fully assembled, or completely WYSIWYG. I'll play against anything. (Except Dark Eldar. And Tyranids.)
I demand all my stuff to be painted. And I will only use something that isn't WYSIWYG if I can't make the points value with the stuff I have. Just a personal pride thing.
I want all my stuff to be painted, to the point I won't play until I'm done painting a 1500 point army. On the other hand I never played against a fully painted army.
The results don't really show much but a large spread... I think it would've been easier to see a trend if this was just a poll about "my" army, or my "opponent's" army... not either/or.
For example, someone willing to play with completely unpainted armies might have chosen the first or fourth option. That would make the section about playing with unpainted models about 60% of the vote, with about 25% saying their own army must be painted, and the rest scattered among the other options.
I also think the "primed" options are not helpful... maybe it's different elsewhere, but I've never seen anyone care about something being primed... just whether it's painted or unpainted. I don't personally see something being primed as being any different from it being unpainted.
I try to keep my army at least primed and have my HQ at least painted when I play with an army that I am just building. However, my black templar army is nearly completely painted and its running up in the 9k points. I also would rather play with a primed model than some of my first ever painted BTs that I did like 6 years ago...
Its weird cause when I was younger, I use to never play with a unit that was not fully painted, now its like. "Oh alright, all primed, 3 dudes painted, lets go!" But of course my skill in painting has become far better than that of my 13 year old self...
I try to field painted as best I can, but not having something painted (or even necessarily completely assembled/converted) won't necessarily stop me from fielding it.
As for my opponent, well, if I refused to play against anyone whose army wasn't completely painted, I think I may have only ever played like 3 games ever.
I field only 100% WYSIWYG and fully painted models. I have pride in my work and respect my opponent's enjoyment by not burdening them with proxies or forcing upon them unpainted models as to many, the game is a small part of the hobby and just an excuse to push painted minis around a board.
I usually prefer to play against people who are at least WIP painting. I like to see people who are working on achieving a painted army and like to see the 'in progress'. I also tend to choose events where the expectation is 100% WYSIWYG and painted.
I don't have to refuse games, but often by having a fully painted army, I am offered so many games and have so many opponents to choose from, I can simply choose the opponents who paint and deny non-painters by simply choosing someone else.
The only advice I can give someone is 100% WYSIWYG and painted army will be accepted by 100% of opponents. So if you always want a game you know the standard you need to meet.
nkelsch wrote:I field only 100% WYSIWYG and fully painted models. I have pride in my work and respect my opponent's enjoyment by not burdening them with proxies or forcing upon them unpainted models as to many, the game is a small part of the hobby and just an excuse to push painted minis around a board.
I usually prefer to play against people who are at least WIP painting. I like to see people who are working on achieving a painted army and like to see the 'in progress'. I also tend to choose events where the expectation is 100% WYSIWYG and painted.
I don't have to refuse games, but often by having a fully painted army, I am offered so many games and have so many opponents to choose from, I can simply choose the opponents who paint and deny non-painters by simply choosing someone else.
The only advice I can give someone is 100% WYSIWYG and painted army will be accepted by 100% of opponents. So if you always want a game you know the standard you need to meet.
Well, after having one fully painted army after another deep sixed by GW, I don't worry about it as much as I used to. I paint when I can, and generally field armies that are completely or mostly painted. But I've grown disillusioned over the years and just find it hard to care whether mine or someone else's army is fully painted.
Besides, we get lots of newbs at our club nights, and there's no way I'm going to tell some young guy or gal that they have to go home and finish painting that army before we'll let them play. I'll encourage them to paint it as they're able to, but to go 'paint nazi' on them. No thanks.
I have to play with painted, its a point of simple pride.
my opponent can play with unpainted, but they have to be assembled properly or look the part. I wont play with partialy assembled figures on the table be it vehicles or units..(legs glued to base for example..)
I will not bring an unpainted army to a game store, club, tournament, etc. I just plain will not. Also, the army must be WYSIWYG, with a few exceptions--things like Look-Out Gnoblars don't worry me too much.
This only applies to "going out" with miniatures. If my brother comes over to goof off, I have no problems using unpainted models. But I won't embarass myself by bringing less than my best out with me.
If given my choice, I would likewise only play against an opponent with a fully-painted, WYSIWYG army as well, and I despise playing against a bare plastic army (or worse, a solid black army where you cannot tell what anything is supposed to be). I'm not saying I would never play against them, but if my choices were between two identical players, one with an unpainted army, the other with a fully-painted army, I'd rather play the latter.
Quite the contrary. If those models are not 100% unpainted, I want nothing to do with them. Bare bases are a plus too. This one time I broke this rule and accidently played against a guy who had a primed army. BIG misake. He went on for literally FIVE MINUTES about his fluff and how his Tau were from a planet made of obsidian and so they were all colored black as camoflauge. Total fluff-bunny. He then made fun of me for my unpainted army and accused me of being a WAAC guy. Never again.
So sarcasm aside, everytime one of these threads come up, the question I always ask is "Why?" Why does it matter if their army is painted or unpainted? I can understand the need for your own army to be painted. I'd love to have all of my 5000+ points of IG painted, then maybe I could work on any of the other 3 armies I have. I've actually got the SM most of the way done, but there are much fewer of them. There just isn't enough time in the day. As far as what I'll play against? I'd play against empty bases and beer bottle drop pods. I know how tall everything is supposed to be and where to draw LOS from; it's not a problem. We actually did that for an Apoc game once. It was pretty good.
I have a hard time understanding the crowd who refuses to play against an unpainted army. The game is the same either way. I they want to pigeon hole themselves into a position where they may not get in a pick up game with someone from time to time because the army is unpainted they are only hurting themselves.
augustus5 wrote:I have a hard time understanding the crowd who refuses to play against an unpainted army. The game is the same either way. I they want to pigeon hole themselves into a position where they may not get in a pick up game with someone from time to time because the army is unpainted they are only hurting themselves.
I have a hard time understanding why someone would bother to read a book when you can simply watch the movie. The story is the same either way.
Some people *LIKE* reading books... Just like some people *like* seeing painted models by others, seeing armies, talking about paint techniques, asking how someone did something, giving tips on painting and so on. It is not simply 'a game' but a social experience and unlike many things that are based around no effort and instant gratification, there is something 'more fun' when a game can be a cinematic narrative between two waring armies instead of the raw mechanics of 'just a game'.
There is a significant difference to me when playing on a cardboard mat with coke-can terrain and grey unpainted models and playing with two fully-painted armies on a detailed terrain board. Even in the raw gameplay. So I would hardly say the 'game is the same either way' because it really isn't.
I will say many times I will choose to *not* play a game with unpainted opponents to set up shop at the painting table and socialize with people who are painting. Often I will even paint some minis for them or help them assembly line some stuff or learn/teach techniques from/to others. It is something I enjoy and I can avoid participating in a game with unpainted models which I may not enjoy depending on the prospective opponents. But I usually never have a problem finding an opponent. Usually someone who has a WIP army is enough for me to have enough in common with to have a good gaming experience.
Oh, I like seeing painted armies and all that, but I'm not going to discriminate against someone because they're just getting started and they're all excited about the game and they haven't painted their army yet. That's how we LOSE gamers. Encourage them, support them, help them, play them. But don't get all hoity-toity on them and tell them that you won't play them until they finish painting their army and basing it and all taht crap. That is NOT what building the hobby is all about.
To use your book movie analogy. Sure, I'd much rather read the book. But if I only have two hours to spare, then all I can manage to do is watch the movie. Soemday, when I get time, I'll go back and read taht book. And putting that in gaming terms? Play time is limited, so that's when I'm going to play, and if someone's army isn't painted, so be it. When I (or they) get time, sure, paint on that army as you can. But again, don't look down on someone because, for whatever reason, their army is unpainted. That's just elitist snobbery at it's worst! Seriously, read what you've written and see if you're not coming off as a paint nazi snob.
don_mondo wrote:Oh, I like seeing painted armies and all that, but I'm not going to discriminate against someone because they're just getting started and they're all excited about the game and they haven't painted their army yet. That's how we LOSE gamers. Encourage them, support them, help them, play them. But don't get all hoity-toity on them and tell them that you won't play them until they finish painting their army and basing it and all taht crap. That is NOT what building the hobby is all about.
To use your book movie analogy. Sure, I'd much rather read the book. But if I only have two hours to spare, then all I can manage to do is watch the movie. Soemday, when I get time, I'll go back and read taht book. And putting that in gaming terms? Play time is limited, so that's when I'm going to play, and if someone's army isn't painted, so be it. When I (or they) get time, sure, paint on that army as you can. But again, don't look down on someone because, for whatever reason, their army is unpainted. That's just elitist snobbery at it's worst! Seriously, read what you've written and see if you're not coming off as a paint nazi snob.
Wait, I have to sacrifice my experience and enjoyment in order to "bring new people into the hobby" now? My gaming time is limited too... Why should I sacrifice my experience by playing against unpainted models to make others happy? They only care about getting themselves a game and care not for thier opponent's experience so why shouldn't I be exactly the same way. Pushing unpainted minis on opponents is no more or less selfish than deciding not to play someone with unpainted minis because all you are doing is putting your instant gratification first.
I will gladly sit down at a painting table with a new person and help them paint and teach them techniques if they are new to the hobby, how is that elitist? Social activity is social activity be it gaming, painting, modeling or shooting the bull... All of it is the same hobby to me. There is more than "just a game".
I remember when GW refused to allow unpainted model in stores and FLGS forced painted minis to prevent theft as people would pop open blisters and glue them together quickly and they would be indistinguishable from other models in an unpainted army. That is just how it was. The only reason it is 'accepted' is because some people are flat out lazy and make up excuses about how busy they are and how limited time is. We are all busy, we all have responsibilities and some people still find time to paint. And those same responsibilities existed 10 years ago and people were capable of painting back then. So I accept no excuse because it all boils down to: "I don't feel like it and if it is not forced as a requirement then I won't do it because I can't wait a week or two to put a minimal paint job on my minis"
Personally, I choose to go to events that require painting since I enjoy meeting other modelers and painters and playing against painted armies. I do not sacrifice my opponent's experience because I show up with a fully painted and WYSIWYG army for him to play against. If I go to a place for open gaming that doesn not require painted figures, I often will play against others who have done some sorts of painting. And if the place is void of painting, I will set up shop at the painting table or simply game elsewhere. I never have a shortage of opponents or the ability to enjoy the hobby.
I would rather help someone paint figures for 2 hours than to have a bad game against some unpainted proxies.
I try to get stuff painted, but generally, not too much of a concern for me. The only army I really have any sort of standards with are for my Cryx, because Warmachine armies are small enough that if I don't really have an excuse to paint them. Not that I've ever played with unpainted WM models though...
don_mondo wrote:Oh, I like seeing painted armies and all that, but I'm not going to discriminate against someone because they're just getting started and they're all excited about the game and they haven't painted their army yet. That's how we LOSE gamers. Encourage them, support them, help them, play them. But don't get all hoity-toity on them and tell them that you won't play them until they finish painting their army and basing it and all taht crap. That is NOT what building the hobby is all about.
To use your book movie analogy. Sure, I'd much rather read the book. But if I only have two hours to spare, then all I can manage to do is watch the movie. Soemday, when I get time, I'll go back and read taht book. And putting that in gaming terms? Play time is limited, so that's when I'm going to play, and if someone's army isn't painted, so be it. When I (or they) get time, sure, paint on that army as you can. But again, don't look down on someone because, for whatever reason, their army is unpainted. That's just elitist snobbery at it's worst! Seriously, read what you've written and see if you're not coming off as a paint nazi snob.
Wait, I have to sacrifice my experience and enjoyment in order to "bring new people into the hobby" now? My gaming time is limited too... Why should I sacrifice my experience by playing against unpainted models to make others happy? They only care about getting themselves a game and care not for thier opponent's experience so why shouldn't I be exactly the same way. Pushing unpainted minis on opponents is no more or less selfish than deciding not to play someone with unpainted minis because all you are doing is putting your instant gratification first.
I will gladly sit down at a painting table with a new person and help them paint and teach them techniques if they are new to the hobby, how is that elitist? Social activity is social activity be it gaming, painting, modeling or shooting the bull... All of it is the same hobby to me. There is more than "just a game".
I remember when GW refused to allow unpainted model in stores and FLGS forced painted minis to prevent theft as people would pop open blisters and glue them together quickly and they would be indistinguishable from other models in an unpainted army. That is just how it was. The only reason it is 'accepted' is because some people are flat out lazy and make up excuses about how busy they are and how limited time is. We are all busy, we all have responsibilities and some people still find time to paint. And those same responsibilities existed 10 years ago and people were capable of painting back then. So I accept no excuse because it all boils down to: "I don't feel like it and if it is not forced as a requirement then I won't do it because I can't wait a week or two to put a minimal paint job on my minis"
Personally, I choose to go to events that require painting since I enjoy meeting other modelers and painters and playing against painted armies. I do not sacrifice my opponent's experience because I show up with a fully painted and WYSIWYG army for him to play against. If I go to a place for open gaming that doesn not require painted figures, I often will play against others who have done some sorts of painting. And if the place is void of painting, I will set up shop at the painting table or simply game elsewhere. I never have a shortage of opponents or the ability to enjoy the hobby.
I would rather help someone paint figures for 2 hours than to have a bad game against some unpainted proxies.
The problem is I've just finished painting 1K of marines, I'm about to expand to 1.5K, but what do I take? Dev's? Sternguard? Assault marines, I just don't know what!
I know I've a spare tac squad, let try them out as all three a couple of times, then I'll make a decision, paint and buy!
Maybe give people a little slack when they're starting out, if you were in their shoes wouldn't you appreciate it?
I am more of a hobbiest than a gamer. I would not refuse to play against unpainted. I also don't play strangers, just my friends. Since they're all working on their stuff to some degree, I know don't mind playing against completely unpainted armies. Obviously, that's what I've been doing for the last 2 years.
My preference is for painted stuff, though. Normally, my army list is around 80% painted or so. My list for the current round of our Planetary Empires campaign is completely painted, for the first time. Something I'm proud of and worked hard at. I can't wait until my friends can do the same. It makes the experience much better, IMHO. I give my friends a hard time about not painting between games. We've had a few painti-nights where we get together and watch crappy movies and paint our miniatures.
While I love painting and seeing a fully painted army on the field, I'm really freakin' lazy, so it rarely happens, even with my 'Jack heavy Warmachine lists. Doesn't help that I'm a bit of a collector as well, so I own most of the ranges that I play. I do have a few armies worth of painted models due to the yearly Hardcore tournament I attend, but I'll rarely play the same list twice these days.
As for playing against unpainted models, unless it's Hardcore I don't really give a crap. I'll gladly chat about the hobby, painting techniques, etc., and will even go so far as to paint stuff for other players (reasonable rates!), but the hobby isn't the game. If another player just isn't interested in painting, I'm not going to be TFG by forcing them to do something they hate (although I might nudge them towards one of several commission painters I know).
The problem is I've just finished painting 1K of marines, I'm about to expand to 1.5K, but what do I take? Dev's? Sternguard? Assault marines, I just don't know what!
I know I've a spare tac squad, let try them out as all three a couple of times, then I'll make a decision, paint and buy!
Maybe give people a little slack when they're starting out, if you were in their shoes wouldn't you appreciate it?
Now you are talking 'playtesting' and 'proxies' which is a whole different kettle of fish. There is a huge difference when you ask someone to help you playtest something and general gaming. I would be glad to help you playtest something with proxies as you scale up to 1500 points. I would not want to play you if you were simply going to proxy all your plasmaguns as flamers because you simply want to change your army on the spot with proxies to tailor to combat my specific army. I see little fun in tailoring armies pre-game to specifically tackle your opponent. That is a crutch and makes the game not competitive or usually fun for both parties. Playtesting can also be 'not fun' because if your opponent isn't aware of how a unit works or isn't good with them the whole game can be spent muddling through that learning curve. Which is why it might be better to let your opponent know that this game would be a playtesting game so if they want a competitive game they might want to try someone else... or play 1000 points with models and units you know and are familiar with.
Sometimes talking to an opponent and realizing different people want different things out of a social activity like playing a game makes things go smoother... And sometimes it is better for two people not to play each other if they are looking for different things. Playtesting is an excellent example of something you tell an opponent about before a game and not feel any hard feelings if he is not interested (or possibly realizes he is not a good person to help with playtesting and doesn;t want to waste your time.)
I agree with don_mondo. Also, looking at where he's coming from (being an active part of a gaming club and getting others into the hobby) is, imho, a great way to go about gaming. Of course, in this environment you're not going to demand things be painted. It would turn people away that you're trying to help learn the game, etc.
However, I can also see nkelsch's point about wanting to play against painted armies. Among friends, who have worked hard to paint their own armies, I can see this standard. However, it'd be silly to go to a store to find a pick-up game, only to turn someone down if their army wasn't painted, since they're not part of your group and might not have the same standards.
An event is different, though- if it has a standard of being painted, then all of the armies should be... painted! No questions there
I don't think it's really something that people are that split over. Everyone wants things to be painted, it's just that some don't have the committed group of friends/gamers who paint their armies to play against, or aren't near enough to a large store to participate in painted-only events and the like. I don't know anyone who really wants to play with unpainted models. But as the owner of a fully painted army, I definitely plan to get some games in with my next one before it's painted. In fact, someone's starting an escalation league for just that purpose- getting people to support the store and start a new army, and letting them get some games in while they're getting it painted. It's a win-win, imho!
My Dad has gotten into the hobby somewhat recently, and before he got his army assembled we started playing. In the first few games all his troops were just the feet glued onto the bases. It was the funnest thing I've ever played against. I gave him a hard time and said all his profile stats should be halved. There were also a few Monty Python jokes.
Of course the game is a better experience with painted armies and great terrain. But in the absence of that I won't turn down a game against someone with an unpainted army and crappy terrain at the expense of not getting a game in.
nkelsh you have every right to sit on your high horse but you're just denying yourself potential games with people who you may learn a thing or two from. Or perhaps against people you could teach a thing or two too.
Of myself and those I play with, only one of us has a fully painted army while the rest of us are lucky to haev em at least half painted (or at the very least... base coated).
it really doesnt bother us if minis are painted or not, we only make a minor fuss if the mini isn't WYSIWYG, but even then that gets sorted in no time!
Game on people.... Game on!
I would never refuse to play anyone at least not for arbitrary reasons like having an unpainted army. However, I bother my arse to try and make my army look presentable so why shouldn't others?
Mattlov wrote:I have no problems playing against and unpainted army, or playing with an unpainted army. It is a game.
The refusal to play against one is utterly ridiculous. You CAN'T support that position without being a total D-bag.
Well, we all play the game for different reasons. I never field unpainted models, and I don't like playing against unpainted armies. For me, the thing I really enjoy about this game is the spectacle. I enjoy seeing other people's armies and how mine look on the field of battle. In the same vein, my group will usually try and keep the table clear of dice, templates, books etc, and always use painted terrain. One of the things we really enjoy is how it looks. I consider 'how cool my army looks' much more important than 'how often it wins'.
Playing against an unpainted/primed army is just not as much fun for me, so I reserve the right to say that I'd prefer not to play. I won't do it in every situation, I might be up for a game against a friends test models etc, someone new getting into the game, whatever, but I'd certainly does affect how much enjoyment I get from the game, and I'd much rather play a painted army then an unpainted one.
don_mondo wrote:Oh, I like seeing painted armies and all that, but I'm not going to discriminate against someone because they're just getting started and they're all excited about the game and they haven't painted their army yet. That's how we LOSE gamers. Encourage them, support them, help them, play them. But don't get all hoity-toity on them and tell them that you won't play them until they finish painting their army and basing it and all taht crap. That is NOT what building the hobby is all about.
This is a somewhat disingenuous argument, in my experience the bulk of people fielding unpainted armies have not "just started", first evidenced by the size of their army, but because they "don't want to" or "can't be bothered". If you're playing with unpainted miniatures after 6 months then you've made a choice not to. That's their bag, they don't have a right to game, there are plenty of other players. Players and pick and choose who they play with, if a person does miss out on a game because they only play painted armies then so be it, maybe they do only play once a month, maybe that's as often as they can take a whole day out their weekend. And maybe they really enjoy seeing those gorgeous armies lined up to battle over an afternoon even if only occasionally. Because a lot of players don't value the game and the dice rolling over the painting, and don't judge their gaming experiences by the quantity of games they play. A few really enjoyable games is all that's needed.
nkelsch wrote:Wait, I have to sacrifice my experience and enjoyment in order to "bring new people into the hobby" now? My gaming time is limited too... Why should I sacrifice my experience by playing against unpainted models to make others happy? They only care about getting themselves a game and care not for thier opponent's experience so why shouldn't I be exactly the same way. Pushing unpainted minis on opponents is no more or less selfish than deciding not to play someone with unpainted minis because all you are doing is putting your instant gratification first.
Quite right, I've always seen fielding painted models as showing respect for your opponent and the quality of the game. It's always the same story on these threads, people who want painted miniatures get maligned as elitist. It's some kind of fear of judgement by people who don't paint, but there's no equivalent. A person not painting their models doesn't really have anything to get over a person that does. Unless they turn out to be a total douchbag when playing. So that's why we get all this bluster and accusations of elitism. When in fact painting the models has always been part of the hobby as a whole.
The spread of unpainted armies is mostly a GW thing I feel, I don't see it so much in other games systems. I think it's all a result of GWs sell fast policies, that's why they don't demand people paint their figures to use in the shop any more. Because their business is so angled towards making fast sales and bleeding new customers as fast as possible, they want to remove all barriers to playing. If you tell little Timmy he has his AoBR box game but has to paint everything before he can play then it'll end up in the back of a drawer pretty fast. They want him in the shop gaming and buying all the new products they can throw at him quicker than he can build or paint them.
Mattlov wrote:I have no problems playing against and unpainted army, or playing with an unpainted army. It is a game.
The refusal to play against one is utterly ridiculous. You CAN'T support that position without being a total D-bag.
Why? What reasons are acceptable for turning down a game in your book? A person's reasons for gaming are their own, I see nothing wrong in wanting to play painted armies. The hobby has always been this way.
The spread of unpainted armies is mostly a GW thing I feel, I don't see it so much in other games systems. I think it's all a result of GWs sell fast policies, that's why they don't demand people paint their figures to use in the shop any more. Because their business is so angled towards making fast sales and bleeding new customers as fast as possible, they want to remove all barriers to playing. If you tell little Timmy he has his AoBR box game but has to paint everything before he can play then it'll end up in the back of a drawer pretty fast. They want him in the shop gaming and buying all the new products they can throw at him quicker than he can build or paint them.
Actually, most game systems I know of don't require painted models. Privateer doesn't, Corvus Belli doesn't, Wyrd doesn't, Catalyst doesn't... Really, GW is one of the only ones to require painted models for their events.
My club only plays with painted stuff... Never even considered using unpainted stuff to be honest, but we play historicals and I have never seen unpainted stuff in use among historical players...
I guess we are too anal for that sort of carry on!
My club only plays with painted stuff... Never even considered using unpainted stuff to be honest, but we play historicals and I have never seen unpainted stuff in use among historical players...
I guess we are too anal for that sort of carry on!
Historicals tend to be another can of worms entirely regarding painting. I mean, it's not just having it painted, it's having it painted in the proper camo scheme for the unit, front, and time period you're representing, and god save you if you want to have a Gay Hitler army...
I try to play with painted figures only (and since I am really slow at painting, that means my selection is not all that great despite having several armies - I only ever play my CSM), but I will use partially or unpainted models if I don't have units painted up (ie I use raptors every game but still have not got round to painting them, so they are played just with primer on).
Ideally I'd love to play with and against fully painted and based models on a fully done up board, however, I will play against whatever people will bring - though I don't really like proxies if there are a lot of them. I have trouble remembering what everything is supposed to be
I'd like to see pics of some of the table/terrain setups the people who only play vs. painted armies are using.
I have always found it ironic that many of the "paint snobs" I have encountered have utter ass tables or terrain or accept playing on such.
I personally expect the terrain to match the quality of the miniatures being used on it, so if someone is gonna demand my army be painted they better have some quality terrain to play on.
Detailed, based, painted with shading and highlights, themed to the table being used, etc., etc.
Otherwise shut up about non-painted armies "ruining" the visual, because that coke bottle tower and foam core building that looks like a five year old made it as an art project just aren't gonna cut it, and are ruining my enjoyment of the game...
Most of my 40k models are painted, and about a 1/3 of my fantasy army is, but I won't play against anyone who requires you to have a painted army.
I pay to have my armies painted. It's taken me years to get what I have done, done. I do this because I want my models to look good, and were I to paint them they'd be anything but.
I'll be the last person to prejudice against anyone who doesn't have the skill or ambition to paint their models, and I won't entertain anyone who would.
I prefer to play with and against painted armies, but we have lots of Navy guys here so they don't really have time to paint.
Overall if you have the right parts, or are at least clear what something is i'm up for a game!
I was very excited yesterday walking into my local game store when I saw two guys getting ready to set up for a 40K game. I got my paint, looked at the Tau Empire codex for a while, and wandered back to see their armies. As near as I could tell, they were both playing the headless armless space marine horde, one supported by Tyranid monstrous creatures, the other by Tau drones and vehicles. I was very disappointed.
I almost makes me sad when I play an army that isn't even primed while mine is nearly all painted and definately all primed. I see it as an insult. Afterall, if you put enough time into the game you have got to at least prime your stuff, just professional I think.
CT GAMER wrote:I'd like to see pics of some of the table/terrain setups the people who only play vs. painted armies are using.
I have always found it ironic that many of the "paint snobs" I have encountered have utter ass tables or terrain or accept playing on such.
BITE ME...
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Laughing Man wrote:
My club only plays with painted stuff... Never even considered using unpainted stuff to be honest, but we play historicals and I have never seen unpainted stuff in use among historical players...
I guess we are too anal for that sort of carry on!
Historicals tend to be another can of worms entirely regarding painting. I mean, it's not just having it painted, it's having it painted in the proper camo scheme for the unit, front, and time period you're representing, and god save you if you want to have a Gay Hitler army...
Blessed be the rivet-counter. Its something us historicals have to put up with... I like to make them sweat by having fictional wars using historical figures.
Though I once saw a guy at a show moan about the way some naked Greek slingers were painted...
CT GAMER wrote:I'd like to see pics of some of the table/terrain setups the people who only play vs. painted armies are using.
I have always found it ironic that many of the "paint snobs" I have encountered have utter ass tables or terrain or accept playing on such.
BITE ME...
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Laughing Man wrote:
My club only plays with painted stuff... Never even considered using unpainted stuff to be honest, but we play historicals and I have never seen unpainted stuff in use among historical players...
I guess we are too anal for that sort of carry on!
Historicals tend to be another can of worms entirely regarding painting. I mean, it's not just having it painted, it's having it painted in the proper camo scheme for the unit, front, and time period you're representing, and god save you if you want to have a Gay Hitler army...
Blessed be the rivet-counter. Its something us historicals have to put up with... I like to make them sweat by having fictional wars using historical figures.
Though I once saw a guy at a show moan about the way some naked Greek slingers were painted...
Nice table.
And good job taking my above quote out of context.
The second part which you conveniently left out clearly states that I have no complaints if said persons ALSO put as much of a demand on terrain as they do minis, which your pic is an example of. It is the hypocrites who refuse to play people because it "ruins the visual" and then proceeded to play on a table with horrible terrain (I see it all the time). I think it's less about "the visual" and more about elitism and snobbery...
Also, you might be the exception not the rule, so while your pic is nice, it really doesn't change much, and also I'm talking specifically about the people that posted in this thread that they wouldn't play people...
I can see this is a polarising issue . . . surely it's a little counter-productive to call anyone with the opposite view a douchebag, are you personally offended that one person would rather play miniature games with someone else?
I didn't vote in the poll, on account of being a normal person with flexible standards. I would not refuse to play someone whose army was unpainted, but if there are two strangers offering a game, I know nothing about them except one's army is unpainted and one's is painted, I'm picking the guy with the painted army as my opponent.
Conversely, with my own army I try to have everything painted. I have often fielded at least some of the army black or grey/metal. But I reduced the amount of unpainted stuff until I could play with a fully-painted force. (of course now, I want to add more units and change my tactics, so I will buy more, and then play a half-painted army for a while longer . . . I really wish I could paint faster)
My point is, very few people will always play fully painted, and I consider that fine. What I prefer, with myself and opponents, is people who work towards painted armies. If someone's stuff starts unpainted, and he can only make very slow progress, that's fine. Shows he has a life outside models, if anything. But if there was a bloke in my group who showed up for months with the same crap-looking, unpainted force, I'd really start playing the other available opponents and avoiding games against him.
Don't be a nazi about it, but if you paint your models, it is natural, reasonable and expected that you will want to play painted opponents. (and on decent terrain)
P.S. If you hate painting, dear god, why did you start this hobby!? Feel free to play against other like-minded people, but you will probably never be my favorite opponent. I may think you're a great guy, and relish the occassional game with you to try tactics or have a laugh, but overall, I'd rather look at a pretty table.
And good job taking my above quote out of context.
No its not out of context.
You asked, and I showed you that some 'paint-snobs' as you so wittily put it, do play on 'acceptable' tables.
I cant comment on others, all the games at my club are like this and we tend to put as much effort into terrain as the armies... Perhaps thats another historicals hang-up? Then again I have seen some shocking tables used for historical games... Plain chipboard with the terrain features drawn on with chalk. Ok if it floats your boat but terrible to my 'Elitist' viewpoint.
None of my club, even the 40k players, will play with unpainted stuff. Just the way some of us are I guess... Never even considered it as the hobby to me is playing with painted stuff, otherwise I may as well use counters.
What others do is upto them... Couldnt careless if people play with unpainted stuff... Just not my thing, and as all our club feel the same (several ex-GW staff and long-time players amongst us) its never been an issue.
And good job taking my above quote out of context.
No its not out of context.
You asked, and I showed you that some 'paint-snobs' as you so wittily put it, do play on 'acceptable' tables.
I cant comment on others, all the games at my club are like this and we tend to put as much effort into terrain as the armies... Perhaps thats another historicals hang-up? Then again I have seen some shocking tables used for historical games... Plain chipboard with the terrain features drawn on with chalk. Ok if it floats your boat but terrible to my 'Elitist' viewpoint.
None of my club, even the 40k players, will play with unpainted stuff. Just the way some of us are I guess... Never even considered it as the hobby to me is playing with painted stuff, otherwise I may as well use counters.
What others do is upto them... Couldnt careless if people play with unpainted stuff... Just not my thing, and as all our club feel the same (several ex-GW staff and long-time players amongst us) its never been an issue.
My FLGS is the other way around from this.
We have beautifully painted Terrain (And lots of it) on a well-made table crafted by our dedicated staff.
And most of them play with unpainted, half-assembled armies.
CT GAMER wrote:And good job taking my above quote out of context.
The second part which you conveniently left out clearly states that I have no complaints if said persons ALSO put as much of a demand on terrain as they do minis, which your pic is an example of. It is the hypocrites who refuse to play people because it "ruins the visual" and then proceeded to play on a table with horrible terrain (I see it all the time). I think it's less about "the visual" and more about elitism and snobbery...
Also, you might be the exception not the rule, so while your pic is nice, it really doesn't change much, and also I'm talking specifically about the people that posted in this thread that they wouldn't play people...
You made a total strawman argument based on generalizations. I have made and donated loads of painted terrain over the years. I have worked on more than a dozen 'static cinematic tables', some of which are still alive and kicking in GW stores. For every 1-2 units I paint, I usually also crank out a piece of terrain so we will always have stuff to play on.
If you can make a worthless generalization and you say it is about 'snobbery' and not actually about painting models... then I can make one too!
Not painting is about being a power WAAC gamer who has no real skill at the game and simply buys up 300$ of the new flavour of the month army codex to try to beat people with an army no one is familiar with and they know not gluing/painting the models means they can easily get top dollar on eBay when it comes time to dump this army and move to the next flavour of the month army. Primed, assembled and painted models often lose value on eBay. They care nothing about the game, or the models, or opponents... just being the first to win as many games by exploiting new codexes and to move on to the next WIN.
See? I can make total generalizations based on a minor shred of truth but probably doesn't actually apply to 95% of the people out there. I know most people are just simple gamers trying to build an army and are WIP trying to paint as they can. I know the 'refuse to paint for eBay value' is a very small subset and while not common, does exist.
I know it is odd to some, but I care more about how my army looks than if I win games. The game is nothing more than an excuse to push painted minis around a board. Anyone who thinks 'the game' is serious business needs to look into chess. Warhammer, 40k in particular is an unbalanced trainwreck of a game system which is hardly capable of being played competitively and is so random and actually so simple I kinda laugh when people claim "you may learn some skill or tactics from these excellent non-painters who take the game so seriously."
The only GW game I consider a true test of some skill is Bloodbowl as it is one of the better balanced and tactical games GW has made. If you want to call in a game that is real mental skill and capacity, let's do an all human BB tourney. I probably wouldn't mind as much about painted minis simply because the expectation would be this is a game-based event.
Everything else 40k, the game is to occupy time and facilitate the painting and social activities that go with it. If you really think 40k is all about skill and tactics and some sort of test of competitive gaming then maybe you should go play connect 4 or checkers...
Modquisition on.
Lets all mellow out people. Warning-I haven't banned anyone in at loeast three days and am getting antsy. Just putting that out there.
Now to show my beneficence, enjoy the awesomeness of weiner dogs.
I try to always field a fully painted army. Sometimes I'll field WIP's, but never anything less than that. I take it as an insult if someone plays with bare plastic or primed only models. So I will try to avoid playing them if possible.
I try to paint most of my stuff and I really don't care what the state of my opponents models are so long as I can figure out what is what mid game. I think the fact that my stuff is painted is the reason I win most of my games.
I will not play in public with an unpainted army and I am not really often in a situation where I would expect to have an oppenent with an upainted army (nor would I want to).
If someone suggested they wanted to play a game and had an unpainted army I might play to be polite (and really it would depend more on whether I wanted to spend a few hours with this person than the painiting situation) -- and I do try things out with proxies and occasionally unpainted figures (in the privacy of my own home, mostly -- we did have a few Russians bulking up an Italian unit in a FOW campaign game this weekend as a few people were behind in their painting).
In our club we try to encourage new people by having loaner armies, running small games that only require a few figs and running games where the GM supplies all the figs (something which seems more acceptable in historical games than others). We have people at our club who have played for years without (as far as I know) painting a single figure but they are happy to use someone else's.
If I went to game in a public space where unpainted armies are allowed and someone had an unpainted army, of course I would play them because that is what is expected there (and I think it would be rude to refuse to play someone for that reason in that case) BUT that is not really what I enjoy so I am not likely to put myself in that situation.
I don't put models on the table that aren't painted. Like others have noted, I enjoy my army better that way and feel I am offering my gaming partner the best experience I can.
My order of preference with a mixture of variables; Dicktitude is more of an issue for me :
1. Not a dick, fully painted. and I didn't play you yesterday.
2. Not a dick, mostly painted.
3. Not a dick with nothing painted - sure a small game, then lets go chat at the painting table and work on something.
4. Not a dick, fully painted and I did play you yesterday - rather play the same guy everyday then the next bunch.
5. Dick with all painted - a dick is still a dick but I'll play them rather then go home sometimes. At least the battle reports will look nice.
6. Dick with most painted - not likely.
7. Dick with nothing painted, I'd rather chat with the others at the paint table or go home and wash my dog
Dick could probably be put in some gradations too as there are people I'd just never play with no matter how well done their army is.
There is something always to be said about Painted Mini's on Painted Mini's fight. It just looks good. In tournments, I have never seen one held that doesnt have the 3 color Rule! I am not against that.
However, for fun games. Unless you are a Dedicated League with established rules with regards to this, I have never had a problem with Plastic of Primed Minis. I have been playing 40k for just over Ten years now, have about 5 seperate armies of 1500+ points and only 3 of them, honestly are fully painted. I simply dont have the time or focus to paint them. Or honestly, that skilled. Unfortunately I get disheartened easily when I see 100+ models to paint..
I have been a longtime removed from a Club/Gaming Store atmosphere, but the one I Was in we all strived to paint our Models. This was before the Hayday of Ebay so alot of times, people would play that day with freshly assembled models. We even had a setup out back to prime them if they so wanted.
Personally, I think you should at least Prime the models. That shows at least an intention of Painting them. Its the first step in Prep work. However, as some have pointed out, this line can and should be drawn if a player shows no intent on advancing an army's appearance. Afterall, I have recently poured myself into Tyranids. Collecting off EBAY for unpainted or primed models. Wholesellers and what not and have a rather sizable brood. Sporting roughly 240 Hormoguants. Its unrealistic for me to not want to play with that many before each individual is painted. However, they are all "based" so they stay standing and all are primed. It is my intention (with a deal with my wife on the matter) to complete this army!
To those that would refuse to play with me on the grounds that my army wasnt painted and somehow, I would be insulting their dedication to the Hobby, reducing their experience and enjoyment of the game, de-valueing their minatures, or some other inane excuse as to why you wouldnt play with an unpainted army. screw off! All you are doing is making yourself look like a self-righteous snob and are losing perspective oppenents in the future. I certainly wouldnt play with you again on those reasons alone.
Would it be so hard to come up with a "lame" excuse to get out of the challenge? Like, I feel like taking a break, or simply not interested?
Big P wrote:My club only plays with painted stuff... Never even considered using unpainted stuff to be honest, but we play historicals and I have never seen unpainted stuff in use among historical players...
I guess we are too anal for that sort of carry on!
Ditto.
I don't see the point of playing miniature wargames unless you do it with nice figures. For me that means painted.
Would it be so hard to come up with a "lame" excuse to get out of the challenge? Like, I feel like taking a break, or simply not interested?
Are you saying you would accept 'simply not interested' as an answer? Would you then be all fussy and redfaced if 20 minutes later I ended up playing against someone else with a painted army? And I laugh again at the idea of 'challenge' due to the uncompetitive nature of 40k...
I see a lot of "You can't fire me, I QUIT!" attitude from angry people who are upset that someone somewhere won't play against them and then a lot of insults and personal attacks.
Good news is for people who like painted armies:
1. Most events or game venues usually have a 'store' standard so you can know what to expect and choose where to go before you step foot in the location. Then you basically can choose if you are willing to play by 'that standard' by attending or leaving the store. Considering there is no end to events that require painting, this makes it really easy to find opponents.
2. There are lots of ways to bring people into the hobby and support painting without requiring it. Escalation leagues are a good way to promote painting and allow lower point games as people build up. it also builds mutual respect and support in helping people paint armies.
3. You can always 'not play' the game and paint at the public painting table, which is fun to do.
But I guess it is more fun to rage against the machine because someone somewhere doesn't want to play against your unpainted minis than accept most people are very reasonable and there is nothing actually wrong with wanting to play against painted opponents.
Discrimination: treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person or thing based on the group, class, or category to which that person or thing belongs rather than on individual merit:
"not painting" is not a protected class... Not playing against you because your models are unpainted is not discrimination or prejudice because you are being treated as is an individual judgement based upon your own actions and merit. You are not unfairly being denied from events and avoided by opponents due to something out of your control but based solely upon your own actions or in-actions. If you want to be able to play against 100% of opponents, the standard required is 100% painted and WYSIWYG.
CT GAMER wrote:I'd like to see pics of some of the table/terrain setups the people who only play vs. painted armies are using.
I have always found it ironic that many of the "paint snobs" I have encountered have utter ass tables or terrain or accept playing on such.
I personally expect the terrain to match the quality of the miniatures being used on it, so if someone is gonna demand my army be painted they better have some quality terrain to play on.
Detailed, based, painted with shading and highlights, themed to the table being used, etc., etc.
Otherwise shut up about non-painted armies "ruining" the visual, because that coke bottle tower and foam core building that looks like a five year old made it as an art project just aren't gonna cut it, and are ruining my enjoyment of the game...
All the best terrain is built by the most enthusiastic modellers, people who model terrain will certainly model their army. I can't think of many people who don't paint armies armies choose to make high quality terrain. Doesn't add up. The best blogs for terrain building are by people who regularly paint their armies.
Wait, I have to sacrifice my experience and enjoyment in order to "bring new people into the hobby" now? My gaming time is limited too... Why should I sacrifice my experience by playing against unpainted models to make others happy? They only care about getting themselves a game and care not for thier opponent's experience so why shouldn't I be exactly the same way. Pushing unpainted minis on opponents is no more or less selfish than deciding not to play someone with unpainted minis because all you are doing is putting your instant gratification first.
I will gladly sit down at a painting table with a new person and help them paint and teach them techniques if they are new to the hobby, how is that elitist? Social activity is social activity be it gaming, painting, modeling or shooting the bull... All of it is the same hobby to me. There is more than "just a game".
I would rather help someone paint figures for 2 hours than to have a bad game against some unpainted proxies.
Yes, IMO, every veteran gamer should be willing to sacrifice to help build the hobby. Maybe it's my years as a GW Outrider/Kommando that make me feel this way, the many demos, the intro games, the paint clinics, etc etc etc. Maybe that's why our local club is around 100 paid members annually for the last several years, and games at four different local stores. Maybe, well, you get the idea.
I am glad to hear that you are at least willing to help someone learn how to paint. Course, what if he doesn't want a painting lesson but would really appreciate it if someone would help him learn how to play..?
BUT! why do you automatically assume taht just because their models are not painted that it will be a "bad game"?
Are you saying you would accept 'simply not interested' as an answer? Would you then be all fussy and redfaced if 20 minutes later I ended up playing against someone else with a painted army? And I laugh again at the idea of 'challenge' due to the uncompetitive nature of 40k...
I see a lot of "You can't fire me, I QUIT!" attitude from angry people who are upset that someone somewhere won't play against them and then a lot of insults and personal attacks.
...
"not painting" is not a protected class...
I have, and I would for the record. Especially if there are other possible choices to arrange a game with; and if I so happen to find an opponent then what do I care if you play a game twenty minutes later with someone else? The entire social setting could be broken down if you want, however there is no need
"Challenge" okay, was a poor choice of words. Invitation to a game, a request, and / or Offer. What have you. However, it takes very little effort to be polite in refusing to play or turning down a request then it does to refuse someone simply because you do not want their unwashed, unpainted minatures "assaulting" the painted minatures you invested your time in.
Cause as you said above, While "Not Painting" should not be a protected class, "Painting them" should not be one as well.
But, I do agree, there are ways to encourage players to paint them and bring them up to those standards. However to simply refuse some one on the grounds that their minatures are not painted and yours are smacks of arrogance.
Just to add, I know I'm one for letting people against me play with unprimed unpainted mini's.
Last night I took my new eldar army out for a whirl, it's all been painted since february except my shining spears who'd I'd just undercoated - they ruined the look, and whilst it was fun to use the army, the way they looked just ruined it for me - it's the first time in at elast a year i've not used a fully painted army, and I won't be making that mistake again soon!
40k is a hobby that requires approximately infinity hours. I'm a player, not a hobbyist. If I invest a few hundred dollars in the models and then a few hours assembling them, I don't care if they're painted or not, I'm playing with them. I'll paint them whenever I have free time (which is rare for me), but I'm not going to not use my hundreds of dollars because I'm concerned they don't look perfect.
That said, I'm not about to hold someone else to a higher standard than myself. If the guy I'm playing has an unpainted army, he has a reason for it. I respect that.
Yeah, for me i won't field an unpainted army. I won't criticise others for it, and i will play them But i like the idea of having an Army with an Identity and that they belong to me. I do find that sometimes people have a lack of courage to commit to painting and some gentle encouragement, practice and commitment and you can have a very creditable Table top army in no time. Encouraging people is better than berating them for a 3rd rate paint job and its not really in the spirit of the Hobby.
Frosty Hardtop wrote:40k is a hobby that requires approximately infinity hours.
How does it require infinity hours?
*It takes a finite number of hours to buy an army and learn the rules.
*It takes a finite number of hours to assemble the models.
*It takes a finite number of hours to paint the models.
It takes an infinite number of hours to potentially play the game. You can always sacrifice gameplay to complete the task of painting as it is a finite number of hours to complete. It only takes a few *MORE* hours to paint assembled models.
What if someone said "If I invest a few hundred dollars in the models, I don't care if they are assembled or not, i'm playing with them! and I have a reason you must respect that!" are you going to allow him to play with armless marines or bare bases?
What if someone said "I don't have 100$s of dollars to spend, so I printed these paper versions out on the internet and i'm playing with them, and I have a reason you must respect that!" Would you have no problem allowing him to use those paper stand-ins?
Remember, if you apply *ANY* level of standard to *anyone* and refuse to play him for *ANY* reason regardless of your personal enjoyment, you smack of arrogance and are a bad person!
I-bounty-hunt-the-elderly wrote:My point is, very few people will always play fully painted, and I consider that fine. What I prefer, with myself and opponents, is people who work towards painted armies. If someone's stuff starts unpainted, and he can only make very slow progress, that's fine. Shows he has a life outside models, if anything. But if there was a bloke in my group who showed up for months with the same crap-looking, unpainted force, I'd really start playing the other available opponents and avoiding games against him.
Don't be a nazi about it, but if you paint your models, it is natural, reasonable and expected that you will want to play painted opponents. (and on decent terrain)
I think I'm pretty much the same as you on this.
P.S. If you hate painting, dear god, why did you start this hobby!?
I'm with you 100% on this and I've never seen a satisfying answer.
Although people will claim that there isn't an intrinsically visual nature to miniatures wargaming, and that they just enjoy the gameplay. To which I tend to respond:
"If you like gaming, dear god, why did you start this game!?"
Gorgon, gald to see there are other people who view this issue in a reasonable way, not as some sort of ideological war!
Like this guy here:
caddock wrote:I don't put models on the table that aren't painted. Like others have noted, I enjoy my army better that way and feel I am offering my gaming partner the best experience I can.
My order of preference with a mixture of variables; Dicktitude is more of an issue for me :
1. Not a dick, fully painted. and I didn't play you yesterday.
2. Not a dick, mostly painted.
3. Not a dick with nothing painted - sure a small game, then lets go chat at the painting table and work on something.
4. Not a dick, fully painted and I did play you yesterday - rather play the same guy everyday then the next bunch.
5. Dick with all painted - a dick is still a dick but I'll play them rather then go home sometimes. At least the battle reports will look nice.
6. Dick with most painted - not likely.
7. Dick with nothing painted, I'd rather chat with the others at the paint table or go home and wash my dog
Dick could probably be put in some gradations too as there are people I'd just never play with no matter how well done their army is.
I agree completely with this. If you don't paint your army, we're not enemies, I'm not really judging you (except in a very narrow sense, the way we judge everyone) but that is one factor against you if there are other opponents available.
And don mondo made a good point about helping new people. Obviously it's a pretty cool thing to do to help a new player practise the rules (unless, as pointed out by caddock, he's a dick). New players are a perfectly good reason to discount whether their army is painted or not when deciding whether to play them.
Painted armies are a bonus. I play because there is a great bunch of guys I play with. They could put almost anything on the table from barely assembled to fully painted, it doesnt matter. Its the guys behind the armies that make the game enjoyable.
*shrug* I have the fully painted 5K of sisters, that looks great. But I also have 5K or so of orks thats most likely never going to be painted. I'll play either one, and folks have a good time.
This comment may tick some people off, but it's just an observation: people in my metagame, who play with fully painted armies, tend to have a better understanding of the rules and the game itself than players who show up with unpainted or shoddily painted armies. This isn't to say that the paint makes the difference, but that the people who put in the time to paint the minis to a decent standard also put in the time to learn the game, learn the rules, and learn the tactics that allow them to play something other than a complete pushover game.
You see I am merciful when it comes to this, I would Perfer if someone had a painted army to play against, I really would, but being someone who started around christmas this last year and having a horde army, I can understand it not being paint, if you have 200 models for a 1850 game vs someone who has 40 ya, then ya the 200 models may not get done in time. As it is right now, I am now to the point were I don't field something that isn't painted.
Automatically Appended Next Post: In addition to this, I am also of the opinion that if someone is doing something rather special with their army that take a extra amount of time, for example, a feathering effect and other special effect, I will also cut them some slack.
I've never seen an unpainted army fielded, ever. My playing experience is at long-running clubs, with a higher proportion of older players. These sorts of venues have a culture that you don't play with unpainted figures. It is the standard culture of wargaming from as old as we know about model soldiers.
I'm not claiming any moral high ground from this. I just don't understand the idea that I should feel obliged to play with unpainted soldiers because some young chap wants to, while he should not feel obliged to play with painted soldiers because some old chap wants to.
I don't mind unpainted or primed, Everyone loves two well painted armies clashing on the battlefield, but to be frank I have seem a few paintjobs where the army would have looked better just primed and left at that.
nevertellmetheodds wrote:I don't mind unpainted or primed, Everyone loves two well painted armies clashing on the battlefield, but to be frank I have seem a few paintjobs where the army would have looked better just primed and left at that.
That would be the case with anything I field
But at my club we're all friendly and understands that everyone else is a lazy gak and doesn't always get their army done, though sometimes we give people crap about not having a finished army so yeah we'll play unpainted, though I usually at least prime my guys, it makes me feel awkward otherwise.
Kilkrazy wrote:I'm not claiming any moral high ground from this. I just don't understand the idea that I should feel obliged to play with unpainted soldiers because some young chap wants to, while he should not feel obliged to play with painted soldiers because some old chap wants to.
I completely agree with this sentiment, however;
Kilkrazy wrote:
I've never seen an unpainted army fielded, ever. My playing experience is at long-running clubs, with a higher proportion of older players. These sorts of venues have a culture that you don't play with unpainted figures. It is the standard culture of wargaming from as old as we know about model soldiers.
It is exactly this kind of atmosphere that prevented me from ever getting involved at my LGS. While they weren't quite as "conservative" as this, I still got the distinct impression that most players there would rather not play than play an unpainted army. As a gamer who started less than a year ago, and a snail-slow painter to boot, I felt absolutely no reason to engage with the wargaming community at large - especially when I could have a load of fun playing some games with my buddies in one of their basements. TBH, I felt somewhat pushed out "until I could get a painted army."
Truth be told, I would very much always prefer to play a fully painted army against another fully painted army, on a nice table with good terrain, against a friendly and fun opponent. Unfortunately, this idyllic scenario is out of reach for me. My army is not fully painted (though some of it is), and since I can't go to the LGS without a fully painted army (and because it's fairly out of the way for some of my friends) I have to play against their armies, which are mostly unpainted, and mostly made of card-stock circles. Furthermore, none of us have the money for a table or terrain, so we make do with what we can get our hands on. So really, the only thing I've learned to care about in my games is playing against a friendly and fun opponent.
So as much as I agree with the painted-only sentiment, the sad truth is that for some of us, we simply can't afford the time or money to make our games so picturesque. Obviously then, I'm not going to decline a game for purely hobby-ing reasons; it would be quite hypocritical of me to do so.
Kilkrazy wrote:I'm not claiming any moral high ground from this. I just don't understand the idea that I should feel obliged to play with unpainted soldiers because some young chap wants to, while he should not feel obliged to play with painted soldiers because some old chap wants to.
I completely agree with this sentiment, however;
Kilkrazy wrote:
I've never seen an unpainted army fielded, ever. My playing experience is at long-running clubs, with a higher proportion of older players. These sorts of venues have a culture that you don't play with unpainted figures. It is the standard culture of wargaming from as old as we know about model soldiers.
It is exactly this kind of atmosphere that prevented me from ever getting involved at my LGS. While they weren't quite as "conservative" as this, I still got the distinct impression that most players there would rather not play than play an unpainted army. As a gamer who started less than a year ago, and a snail-slow painter to boot, I felt absolutely no reason to engage with the wargaming community at large - especially when I could have a load of fun playing some games with my buddies in one of their basements. TBH, I felt somewhat pushed out "until I could get a painted army."
Do you want to know a secret?
Those people who generally give you that vibe? They're my kind of people. And you know...they're not going to toss you out on your butt for not having an unpainted army to start with. They'll just want to see progress. Speaking for myself...I have no issues with facing an unpainted army once or twice. I start to get a little irked when we're getting into our double digits for games played, and you haven't even primed anything whatsoever.
Xca l iber wrote:
Truth be told, I would very much always prefer to play a fully painted army against another fully painted army, on a nice table with good terrain, against a friendly and fun opponent. Unfortunately, this idyllic scenario is out of reach for me. My army is not fully painted (though some of it is), and since I can't go to the LGS without a fully painted army (and because it's fairly out of the way for some of my friends) I have to play against their armies, which are mostly unpainted, and mostly made of card-stock circles. Furthermore, none of us have the money for a table or terrain, so we make do with what we can get our hands on. So really, the only thing I've learned to care about in my games is playing against a friendly and fun opponent.
So as much as I agree with the painted-only sentiment, the sad truth is that for some of us, we simply can't afford the time or money to make our games so picturesque. Obviously then, I'm not going to decline a game for purely hobby-ing reasons; it would be quite hypocritical of me to do so.
Pretty much, yep. I've said it a few times now and I'll say it again:
Nobody is going to outright refuse to play against you for having an unpainted army. Will it make the game for them less enjoyable? Maybe.
However, at least from my experience, people who turn someone down for having "an unpainted army"? They're using it as an excuse to get out of playing someone who's considered TFG in the gaming group.
At the kind of clubs I played at, if you had a unpainted army rather than encourage you to play with it, we would lend you one of our own armies.
Hell, you could come without any army at all and you would still get a game. Even if you didn't know the rules you would get given a 2-in-C position with an experienced player.
I'm always very disappointed when someone can't even take a stab at painting their army. That's a major part of the game, and I don't even know why you would get into wargaming if the idea of painting and modeling your army didn't even appeal to you at all. Even if you can't paint very well, you have to start somewhere.
However, I'm not a pompous ass, so I would never refuse to play a game with someone because their army isn't painted. I almost always offer to help someone with painting techniques or what have you if they have an unpainted army, as I find that it's usually just people who are afraid to show their own skills that don't paint their armies. Oftentimes my own dedication towards painting and modeling is enough to inspire people to finish their armies. I answer any questions that they have for me, offer sound advice that's appropriate for their skill level, and sometimes even show them how to execute a painting technique if everything is already set up.
Back when I used to buy and play 40k regularly (it's been a while), I convinced quite a few people to work on painting their armies. I did it not through ostracizing them, but through the power of suggestion.
Kilkrazy wrote:At the kind of clubs I played at, if you had a unpainted army rather than encourage you to play with it, we would lend you one of our own armies.
Hell, you could come without any army at all and you would still get a game. Even if you didn't know the rules you would get given a 2-in-C position with an experienced player.
<3 Made me feel warm and fuzzy~!
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Chrysaor686 wrote: That's a major part of the game
And that's the beginning and end of it, you think it's a major part of the game - others feel this falls into the 'hobby' box - they want to play 40K a game of 40k infact while you want to sit down and paint... how can you say what you're doing has any kind of 'major part' of playing 'a game'?
Now, if for some reason painting your minis made the dice listent o you more....
It'd remind me of beginner magic players, who refuse to use sleeves. They see it as an unresonable expense from this already exensive game and refuse, the next time is when someone points out their cards become damaged - they don't care their just playing it, not collecting. Finally they throw down their deck losing for the Nth time and someone explains to them that "You know why all the pros use sleeves right? It's because it means one is able to shuffle more easily/better. That's why you're always mana-screwed."
So accoring to my own story I refuse to paint my minis because there is no effect in game and in addition to this I refuse to play against painted armies because there my be some reason (or benifit) from the said painting and I don't play against cheetos =P
I-bounty-hunt-the-elderly wrote:My point is, very few people will always play fully painted, and I consider that fine. What I prefer, with myself and opponents, is people who work towards painted armies. If someone's stuff starts unpainted, and he can only make very slow progress, that's fine. Shows he has a life outside models, if anything. But if there was a bloke in my group who showed up for months with the same crap-looking, unpainted force, I'd really start playing the other available opponents and avoiding games against him.
Don't be a nazi about it, but if you paint your models, it is natural, reasonable and expected that you will want to play painted opponents. (and on decent terrain)
I've already posted my preference towards painted armies, but this post made me think.
In our group we, of course, like progress too. But we tend to play all-painted. This doesn't mean that I expect newer players (or those with a new army) to paint the whole 2000pts before we play. When we start a new army, we tend to start playing games with it when maybe 750pts is painted and ready to go. This can be very quick. Then, of course, the army develops over the course of months (years!) as more and more stuff becomes painted, and you move to playing bigger and bigger games with your army.
I don't think it's therefore particularly bad to ask new(ish) players to have painted models - for a new Marine player the basic AOBR contents could be painted very quickly AND allow them to start playing games at a reasonable point level.
I hate playing like 80-90% full grey armys. If some just bought a Batleforce or somthing, im down. But if I know that you have 1500 Points of X, and all you have done have painted A,B, and half of C? Ehh... I kinda lose Respect for you. If you have a Job and like....4 Hours of free time in the weekdays? Alright, fair game. But im 14. What else are you doing apart from Modern Warfare? a High Schooler should be able to put work into an Army.
Chrysaor686 wrote: That's a major part of the game
And that's the beginning and end of it, you think it's a major part of the game - others feel this falls into the 'hobby' box - they want to play 40K a game of 40k infact while you want to sit down and paint... how can you say what you're doing has any kind of 'major part' of playing 'a game'?
It's a major part of the game because the miniatures come unpainted, and they are intended to be painted.
The customization of tabeltop games is one of the things that really sets it apart from everything else. You have something completely personal invested in the game itself.
I guess I should've said 'Hobby', but I don't really get that hung up on technicalities.
I have never, ever been able to understand why someone would spend so much money on something, and not even try to see it through to completion.
A lot of good points have been raised in this thread, on both sides.
It’s easy to buy minis and a lot harder to paint them well.
GW does seem to push them on you faster than most people can paint,
And you have to feel sorry for the person, who paints all his models to a high standard,
Only for a new codex to come out, and make them useless...
Will as much effort be made on the next models?
We all like to play against a painted army, on good terrain but how much leeway are we prepared to give in order to encourage new blood into the hobby.
Two bare or primed armies fighting on a basic table is pretty dire to look at,
And it only takes a little paint to spice thinks up.
Paint is the difference between me fielding an ork army, and fielding MY ork army.
There where a couple of guys that used to play at my local club that where very hard arsed on the painting line, that in the end we refused to play them, they always insisted on only painted armys, with no excuse. and it came to a head when we was getting ready for the club tourny where most of the memebers where play testing differnt builds, and in the case of one guy, building a new army, so a lot of unpainted units where in use, while people where trying to decide what to use, and these 2 players who insisted on painted only armys, would refuse to play, even though they would be helping test an army, they tried to demand that we paint every unit, even if it didnt make the final tourny list, they where that hard arsed about it
my main opponent has many multiple thousands of points of Orks that are at least at the priming stage, and over the months of playing against each other, him facing my painted army has inspired him to work on his... BUT he paints about as fast as molasses on a glacier.
And we have come to this one irrefutable truth: a unit must either be fully painted, or fully primed, or fully grey... As soon as you make one person in the unit slightly different, whether its just getting his skin tone down, etc. but making ONE model in a unit different from the rest will make that unit HORRIBLE!!!
While I wouldn't refuse to play a game without painted figs I would prefer to play with and against a fully painted army whenever I play. It's just far more fun that way for me.
That being said. I had my army stolen so until I paint all of the replacement figures I will be playing with an unpainted army at all times sadly.
NuggzTheNinja wrote:This comment may tick some people off, but it's just an observation: people in my metagame, who play with fully painted armies, tend to have a better understanding of the rules and the game itself than players who show up with unpainted or shoddily painted armies. This isn't to say that the paint makes the difference, but that the people who put in the time to paint the minis to a decent standard also put in the time to learn the game, learn the rules, and learn the tactics that allow them to play something other than a complete pushover game.
Might just be a longevity issue. Those of us with fully painted armies (yes, in spite of my defense of unpainted, I do indeed have several fully painted armies play in too many tournies not to) have been in the game a lot longer, maybe? And therefor have a better understanding of the rules than some newb that has been involved in the hobby for three months and doesn't yet have a painted army? Or we have stayed with a particular army for a long time (I've been playing IG since 2nd ed) and are thoroughly familiar with it, as opposed to someone that jumps to a new army with every codex release, never staying with one long enough to learn it properly.
So while there might be a slight corollary between fully painted and knowing the rules, I'd be more inclined to say that it's a mix of how long you've been playing that leads to both fully painted and knowing the rules.
Painting requires time, patience, and discipline. A lot of gamers don't have one or all of these traits. However, they can be developed. It's true that it is no one's responsibility to make others paint, we can always helpfully suggest and still have a good game.
Besides, painted models fight better!
And on that note, I'll play against anyone with painted/non-painted army just so I can get better. Yes, my models are painted. Yes, it took me upwards of 2 years to get them done. Yes, they win awesomely and lose awesomely. My only restriction for gaming isn't paint but poor hygiene. If I can smell my opponent before I see him... fugettaboutit!
BladeWalker wrote:I'm at the point now where I can only tolerate unpainted when I'm forced to (in a tournament that doesn't require painting). In friendly games I only play guys that are like minded (it's about the hobby as much as the game). I voted for both mine and theirs must be painted. I never used to be as harsh about painting but I have seen some things that just ruin the game over the past few years, not to say that you can't do what you want with your hobby... I just don't have to play you.
Yeah.....those people new to the hobby are totally unworthy of playing the game!!!
I've posted on this before. I might be repeating others views, as I haven't read all pages in this thread, but I do not play unpainted, or against unpainted. I also do not place books, note books, rule books, or tokens unrelated to game play on the playing surface... I enjoy miniture gaming but only in it's fullest form. To me that is fully painted armies, on a fully painted surface, with fully painted terrain. I don't think soldiers in the future will be triping over giant rule books, and soda bottles as they fight xenos, so seeing clutter on the gaming surface takes just as much away from my experience.
I've also found that those who share my opinion are far far more entertaining to not only be around but game with. They are far more patient to get an army on the table, because they paint it, so they aren't jonesing to rush some waggh list to the table where they seek to bend every rule in the book at the same time. Granted we take much pride in the army lists we put together, but the added maturity of "If I'm going to do something I'm gonna do it all the way" really comes out during game time. Before I took this stance, it seemed that everytime I heard the most absurd understanding of the rules was from someone who took no interest in painting.
This is an expensive hobby, and unless I'm getting all I can out of it, I do not wish to play those individuals who do not share that view. Please save me the song and dance of how you get more from one aspect of the hobby over the other etc etc... I love the game, and the strategy, and all aspects away from the paint brush just as much as anyone else, but either go big or go home. Do it all to the best of your ability or find something that you can.
On a side note. I simply can't see unpainted minis, and distinguish what's what if it's sold black, white, or grey. So that's usually my canned response.
I am only buying one box of models at a time and wont buy another until they are painted. I enjoy painting but part of my problem i think has been that i will get an entire army, then the task of painting those 200+ models just seems so incredibly daunting that i have trouble getting motivated.
If i get one box at a time, paint them, and know when im done i get a new box to paint (and can mix it up a bit) i think it will help me out a little more.
Also the wife is fine with it, 30-60 dollars a week is a lot easier to convince her to let me get then 350 at once.
I voted that mine can be primed, theirs can be any state. But the reality is that I will only play with mine primed when I'm testing a concept or when I buy a larger army and haven't had time to paint it all.
And while I'll play against someone with an unpainted army, if they don't make any effort to paint it over time, I'll make snide comments about the Great Grey Horde.
ShivanAngel wrote:I am taking a new aproach to my next army.
I am only buying one box of models at a time and wont buy another until they are painted. I enjoy painting but part of my problem i think has been that i will get an entire army, then the task of painting those 200+ models just seems so incredibly daunting that i have trouble getting motivated.
If i get one box at a time, paint them, and know when im done i get a new box to paint (and can mix it up a bit) i think it will help me out a little more.
Also the wife is fine with it, 30-60 dollars a week is a lot easier to convince her to let me get then 350 at once.
This used to be how the hobby was managed. If you played marines, like I have, you'd get a a tac squad, paint that, play it in your army for a few weeks, then get a dred, paint that wash, rinse, repeat... and eventually you had a whole army, and the cost was more spread out. Additionally no one showed up with an unpainted army- that's just how it was. Things changed in the late 90's 2000 ish and kids started to show up en masse with 2000 pts of unpainted wanting to proxy an unpainted termi for a dred...
I have personally played unprimed and against unprimed. Even against unfinished models (spearhead land raider waiting to get the LC assembly put together).
My opinion is that unless its unassembled, its playable (WYSIWYG rules). However, as a matter of taste, painted models would be preferable, but sometimes not practical.
ShivanAngel wrote:I am taking a new aproach to my next army.
I am only buying one box of models at a time and wont buy another until they are painted. I enjoy painting but part of my problem i think has been that i will get an entire army, then the task of painting those 200+ models just seems so incredibly daunting that i have trouble getting motivated.
If i get one box at a time, paint them, and know when im done i get a new box to paint (and can mix it up a bit) i think it will help me out a little more.
Also the wife is fine with it, 30-60 dollars a week is a lot easier to convince her to let me get then 350 at once.
This used to be how the hobby was managed. If you played marines, like I have, you'd get a a tac squad, paint that, play it in your army for a few weeks, then get a dred, paint that wash, rinse, repeat... and eventually you had a whole army, and the cost was more spread out. Additionally no one showed up with an unpainted army- that's just how it was. Things changed in the late 90's 2000 ish and kids started to show up en masse with 2000 pts of unpainted wanting to proxy an unpainted termi for a dred...
I think theres a big difference between proxies and unpainted/primed and even WYSIWYG....
If you say that guy on a horse is general on a dragon.... uhhhh no.
Testing an army is one thing in friendly games, and I and some of my friends dont mind using a proxy for testing before we drop 50 bucks on a model..
But trying to get a pick up game and saying these are that and this is actually this... Yeah dont feel like taking the time to remember all that...
Or i have seen people show up with just legs and torsos glued to bases....
Hahhh I dont care just bring your army painted or not. I was at a tourney once were 1/2 my army was primer and my two predators were not GW models and a guy refused to face me in the second game, tourney official said he looses by default for not fielding his army. I won that tourney and was thanking God I did not have to face his Eldar army hvy with Falcon tanks.
Personally all my models HAVE to be painted before I can use them, its just what I do. As for my opponent's army I could'nt care less, I only ask I can tell what is what on the board.
Considering that only my tanks are fully painted, I really can't say anything about other people's armies. By FLGS decree, all models must be at least primed (if a model isn't primed one week after its first appearance, the opponent can legally ask them to take it off the board) before being used. Granted, it's not really enforced, since it's just an opponent's decision and none of the guys at the store are jerks, but it actually did motivate people to start painting.
That said, I can understand why people don't have fully painted armies - they're new, they have a tight work schedule (I know I do, or at least am too exhausted to paint any days other than days off) or go to school and work - college is a bitch. What I can't understand is why people would pass up a game just because their opponents don't have fully painted armies - and that would be an automatic epic defeat in my FLGS league.
*sigh*
Once again:
People don't pass up a game just because their opponents don't have fully painted armies. "I only play fully painted" is just a convenient scapegoat to avoid playing TFG or Billy Bandwagoner.
However, of course, if you go to a tournament--you're required to have things fully painted or you get docked points.
Locclo wrote:Considering that only my tanks are fully painted, I really can't say anything about other people's armies. By FLGS decree, all models must be at least primed (if a model isn't primed one week after its first appearance, the opponent can legally ask them to take it off the board) before being used. Granted, it's not really enforced, since it's just an opponent's decision and none of the guys at the store are jerks, but it actually did motivate people to start painting.
I have seen that enforced mainly to curb theft. It is easy to break open a blister, glue it on the spot and play with it and not pay and claim you brought it in with you. If the owner requires everything be primed, then it makes those unprimed minis stick out and are easy to watch like a hawk. So there is method to the madness of 'must be primed'.
That said, I can understand why people don't have fully painted armies - they're new, they have a tight work schedule (I know I do, or at least am too exhausted to paint any days other than days off) or go to school and work - college is a bitch. What I can't understand is why people would pass up a game just because their opponents don't have fully painted armies - and that would be an automatic epic defeat in my FLGS league.
Most people, probably 99% of them including myself abide by the rules of the house/event. If it is an event like a Leauge that allows unpainted models to participate, then I know this before joining and am not going to come stomping into it going "Fe Fi Fo Fum! I smell an unpainted 2500 point army!" That is why there are House rules, standards and requirements. I would probably choose to participate in an event or at a club that had a similar mindset as I did and required painting if I was really upset about it. You don't know who doesn;t want to play you because they chose not to join your leauge in the first place.
Luckily since most houses/events declare what is acceptable before you even show up at the establishment, it is really easy for those people who want to paint/play painted to find events that will require it and those who don't care to find events that don't require it. Everyone is happy and gets what they want.
The store that I play at and the people that I have played in the past have the same belief. Which is that if you continually play with the same people or at the store, then you should show some progress with your painting. Whether it be a grey unit being primed the next time or a unit fully painted. I don't mind people coming to a table with unpainted armies. What I get upset over are the guys whose armies are always coming in and it is the same composition as before but no paint has been placed. I actually saw someone come to a gaming group I was with in Maine who put a dot of paint on each of his models to get around the house rule.
Painted or unpainted? Doesn't matter to me as long as you are enjoying the hobby as well as the game. If you don't like painting, then buy a painted army and call it done.
tuathal1 wrote:
Painted or unpainted? Doesn't matter to me as long as you are enjoying the hobby as well as the game. If you don't like painting, then buy a painted army and call it done.
Ok some people really really hate painting, but love the game.
A painted army can cost 2-10x the cost of just the models, I honestly dont think its fair to tell them to spend tons of money just so you enjoy looking at their models.
[quote=ShivanAngel
Ok some people really really hate painting, but love the game.
A painted army can cost 2-10x the cost of just the models, I honestly dont think its fair to tell them to spend tons of money just so you enjoy looking at their models.
My words were a little harsh. It is unfair to tell someone to spend that money on painting rather than enjoy the game.
)
head for a general.
