....your local club or gaming group automatically awarding lists Preferred Enemy when playing against unpainted or unfinished armies?

Disregarding how likely or unlikely that is to happen, I'm interested to know how well such a rule would go down.

For. Paint your models.

However, I would make it per-unit, not for the entire army. Every 100% painted unit gets preferred enemy against any unit that contains at least one unpainted model. That way you punish people for taking unpainted models, but don't impose too harsh a price on people who include a small number of models they haven't finished yet in a mostly-painted army.

I would be against this.

It's easy enough to say "paint your models," but you have to keep in mind that not everyone has the time to paint everything. I'm a slow painter, and these days I barely have enough time for a personal life, let alone painting models.

And then there are those that just really don't enjoy painting. Not their fault either, they just want to enjoy a game (how someone could possibly enjoy 6th edition 40k is beyond me, but that's not my prerogative).

Sounds like crap. Plain and simple; some people aren't in this for the painting aspect.

Why make games significantly more frustrating for them?

Sure, its just preferred enemy, but next game you play, give your opponent preferred enemy against you; see that it's a little nuisance that can be a big annoyance.

Terrible idea.

Some people simply don't care to paint. Unless you're a TO, making people have painted armies or suffer penalties just to play a casual game makes you an arse.

 Necroshea wrote:
Some people simply don't care to paint. Unless you're a TO, making people have painted armies or suffer penalties just to play a casual game makes you an arse.

Spray base color, put some silver on the gun, wash/dip. You don't have to be an awesome painter, but refusing to make even the most minimal effort to paint your models is just being lazy. And really, also disrespectful to your opponents who probably prefer to play games where everything is painted.

 Fafnir wrote:
It's easy enough to say "paint your models," but you have to keep in mind that not everyone has the time to paint everything. I'm a slow painter, and these days I barely have enough time for a personal life, let alone painting models.

So play smaller games. I don't have as much of a problem with someone who just got new models (for example, I wouldn't inflict this penalty on a newbie playing their first game) and hasn't had a chance to paint them yet, but let's be honest here. There are a lot of people who just never bother to paint anything no matter how much time they have available, and leave stuff unpainted for months/years at a time.

I voted on the fence.

Everything I field is unpainted, unless it's literally brand new, and I like facing off against painted armies, though I'm aware that this isn't going to happen as often as I like. Not everyone has the time, patience, or skill to paint all of their armies- painting is a creative outlet for me, and relaxing, but for some people it's a chore, so I don't expect other people's armies to be painted- though it's a nice perk if they are. This idea, would pretty much ensure that new players couldn't get involved in the group, since their combination of inexperience and rules disadvantage would be crippling. I think it's just a lot easier for a TO to say, regarding certain events, 'all models must be painted to a clear standard (3 colors and a wash or whatever)' and leave it at that. Announce it early, so nobody's surprised, make your expectations clears (three colors and a wash, or three colors and basing, or whatever floats your boat), and see what happens.

I don't field any unpainted models when playing. That being said I play with my friends and some of them don't paint all their models and I would never hold it against them.

It is interesting how many people are seeing this as a penalty/punishment for unpainted armies rather than a reward for painted ones.

I'm for it. So some people just want to play a game, and don't want to paint? Well, this is perhaps not the best hobby they could have chosen then.

 Peregrine wrote:
Spray base color, put some silver on the gun, wash/dip. You don't have to be an awesome painter, but refusing to make even the most minimal effort to paint your models is just being lazy. And really, also disrespectful to your opponents who probably prefer to play games where everything is painted.

No, it's not lazy. There is no rule that says you need painted armies to play. Paint adds NOTHING to an army beyond visual flare. TO use it because they want the event to look as nice as possible, which is well within there rights. Even aside from that, the why isn't important. Their roof, they're the boss.

I didn't have to paint my army. I didn't have to stay up all night before a tourny putting finishing touches on my infantry. Does that mean I'm going to cry because my opponent fields a sea of grey? No. I'm not there to see his painted army, I'm there to play a game. Which as mentioned before a painted army has nothing to do with that.

The idea that how your army looks is in any way disrespectful to your opponent is...well it's a joke. You army is a representation of you and your skill. A bad army makes you look bad (if that at all).

Seriously you paint snobs need to get a grip.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Necroshea wrote:
Some people simply don't care to paint. Unless you're a TO, making people have painted armies or suffer penalties just to play a casual game makes you an arse.

Spray base color, put some silver on the gun, wash/dip. You don't have to be an awesome painter, but refusing to make even the most minimal effort to paint your models is just being lazy. And really, also disrespectful to your opponents who probably prefer to play games where everything is painted.

I'd rather not compromise the quality of my models just to please some TFG that demands everything be painted. I don't get many models painted because the ones I do paint take a long time to do, and I rarely have time to paint. It's just as disrespectful to expect me to do a gak job painting just to please someone else.

 Fafnir wrote:
It's easy enough to say "paint your models," but you have to keep in mind that not everyone has the time to paint everything. I'm a slow painter, and these days I barely have enough time for a personal life, let alone painting models.

So play smaller games. I don't have as much of a problem with someone who just got new models (for example, I wouldn't inflict this penalty on a newbie playing their first game) and hasn't had a chance to paint them yet, but let's be honest here. There are a lot of people who just never bother to paint anything no matter how much time they have available, and leave stuff unpainted for months/years at a time.

40k is not a game that likes small point levels. Some army loadouts won't even work at small levels. So you assume that I should compromise all the fun parts of my army and my game just because someone doesn't like the way an army looks?

If someone had a stick that far up their ass, I just wouldn't play them.

I have no time in my life for painting - it has taken me 1.5 years to paint 3000 points of tyranids - but they are done and done well. I absolutely hate to field unpainted models and very much prefer to play against painted armies. Voted 'for' and it's true that not painting is laziness. It's easy to do given enough time.

SBG wrote:
its easy to do given enough time.

So is memorizing every fact in existence. But some of us don't have time for either feats.

SBG wrote:
It's easy to do given enough time.

That's a luxury I'd love to have. I really would. I haven't had a chance to paint in months. I'm sure there are plenty of people out there in a similar boat.

Voted against. I like to play, I like to model, and I like to paint.

But if someone tried to pull this at a friendly match I'd walk. If someone tried to make it a club rule I'd find a new club.

Just play the damn game. Don't try to handicap people who like different things than you do. It's "stop liking what I don't like" and it really has no place in a cooperative game like this.

I would just say follow tournament rules, you need at least 3 colors on your model. this means you can simply paint 3 stripes on his food and its good.

 Backspacehacker wrote:
I would just say follow tournament rules, you need at least 3 colors on your model. this means you can simply paint 3 stripes on his food and its good.

Mini needs to be fully painted at least three colors. Not painted three colors.

 18th Krasnograd wrote:
Voted against. I like to play, I like to model, and I like to paint.

But if someone tried to pull this at a friendly match I'd walk. If someone tried to make it a club rule I'd find a new club.

Just play the damn game. Don't try to handicap people who like different things than you do. It's "stop liking what I don't like" and it really has no place in a cooperative game like this.

It could be seen as a handicap from a half empty mindset. On the flipside it could be viewed as a reward for appreciating every aspect of the hobby. i.e. if you have time to give to the hobby then you have time to paint.

 Glorioski wrote:
It could be seen as a handicap from a half empty mindset. On the flipside it could be viewed as a reward for appreciating every aspect of the hobby. i.e. if you have time to give to the hobby then you have time to paint.

Yes, a reward by giving a handicap to another player.

And if "your hobby" has such arbitrary ultimatums, I want no part of it. Just a TFG of another colour.

 Fafnir wrote:

 Glorioski wrote:
It could be seen as a handicap from a half empty mindset. On the flipside it could be viewed as a reward for appreciating every aspect of the hobby. i.e. if you have time to give to the hobby then you have time to paint.

Yes, a reward by giving a handicap to another player.

And if "your hobby" has such arbitrary ultimatums, I want no part of it. Just a TFG of another colour.

Do you consider GT 3 colour minimum rules to be arbitrary and their TOs to be TFGs in general?

well painted armies are a pleasure to fight against, and i will be honest that i don't like playing against tinboys from an aesthetic POV, but painting takes time, and painting well takes even more time. Even if you have a completely painted army, sometimes you will have just bought something, and only had time to assemble and basecoat it before your next game.

My own club takes the view that as long as you undercoat things, and on a week to week basis make some progress with your painting, then thats fine, otherwise they will ask you to make some progress. I personally would much rather see slow progress over time, and a good overall finish, than having to paint everything and make a mess of it because its a rushed job. I have some experience with this, the first tournament i went to, i decided to leave my painting to literally the last minute. i got it all finished (barely) but the army looked totally AWFUL.

That said, if you don't have time, or simply dont want to paint, thats fine too, but bear in mind, two well painted armies facing each other is quite the visual treat, and lends a force the personal touch that bare plastic and metal just cannot match

It's their tournament. I couldn't care less. If I go into the tournament, I go in agreeing to the terms in place.

A well-painted army should be its own reward. If you do it looking for some sort of extrinsic reward, you're probably not really enjoying the "hobby" aspect that much in the first place.

 Fafnir wrote:
It's their tournament. I couldn't care less. If I go into the tournament, I go in agreeing to the terms in place.

A well-painted army should be its own reward. If you do it looking for some sort of extrinsic reward, you're probably not really enjoying the "hobby" aspect that much in the first place.

The idea would obviously be to encourage painted armies within a club/group with a compromise rather than an outright ban as it is at GTs and in GW stores (at least in the UK).

It's not: "With this house rule in place in my group I will be unbeatable mwahahaahaha"

 Glorioski wrote:

 Fafnir wrote:
It's their tournament. I couldn't care less. If I go into the tournament, I go in agreeing to the terms in place.

A well-painted army should be its own reward. If you do it looking for some sort of extrinsic reward, you're probably not really enjoying the "hobby" aspect that much in the first place.

The idea would obviously be to encourage painted armies within a club/group with a compromise rather than an outright ban as it is at GTs and in GW stores (at least in the UK).

It's not: "With this house rule in place in my group I will be unbeatable mwahahaahaha"

It doesn't matter what it does or what it's trying to encourage, because it's still a stupid rule.

Yes I have noted your stand already Fafnir. I was addressing your: "If you do it looking for some sort of extrinsic reward" comment.

I have nerve damage in my arm and any kind of worthwhile painting is an impossibility, leaving me either at the mercy of painting services or friends if I want a painted army. If I want to try units, I'm penalized because of this nerve damage.

Another impossibly smug "oh paint your armies if you have so much time and available skill" piece of utter crap from someone who is looking for another reason to pat themselves on the back for how awesome they are. Please.

Guess what I voted?

In general, I'd be against that. It's easy to say that not painting is lazy. I'm one of those guys that's a slow painter. I take a long time because I'm not very good at it, but I don't want my models to look like crap, either. if I just slapped a basecoat, wash, and highlights on a mini, it might only take me five to ten minutes per model, but it'd look like crap and I'd be more embarrassed to field that than an unpainted mini. Then there's those of us that run lotz o' boyz. You want to penalize me for running a fluffy army instead of the latest GK/DW termie cheese list? Painting 180 boyz takes time.

Unpainted mini = I haven't gotten to it yet. Poorly painted mini = I don't care.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
My local FLGS does escalation leagues every so often, and painting is rewarded by a monthly competition with store credit as a prize.

 Fafnir wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 Necroshea wrote:
Some people simply don't care to paint. Unless you're a TO, making people have painted armies or suffer penalties just to play a casual game makes you an arse.

Spray base color, put some silver on the gun, wash/dip. You don't have to be an awesome painter, but refusing to make even the most minimal effort to paint your models is just being lazy. And really, also disrespectful to your opponents who probably prefer to play games where everything is painted.

I'd rather not compromise the quality of my models just to please some TFG that demands everything be painted. I don't get many models painted because the ones I do paint take a long time to do, and I rarely have time to paint. It's just as disrespectful to expect me to do a gak job painting just to please someone else.

I voted against for this very reason.

my old GW bought in this rule to motivate people to paint and it was one of the factors for me not going in as much due to the fact that i have a life outside of warhammer and when I paint something I want it to look good, not

Spray base color, put some silver on the gun, wash/dip.

 curran12 wrote:
I have nerve damage in my arm and any kind of worthwhile painting is an impossibility, leaving me either at the mercy of painting services or friends if I want a painted army. If I want to try units, I'm penalized because of this nerve damage.

Another impossibly smug "oh paint your armies if you have so much time and available skill" piece of utter crap from someone who is looking for another reason to pat themselves on the back for how awesome they are. Please.

Guess what I voted?

Can't imagine you know yourself, what with the nerve damage in your arm.

FYI I did present this topic from an unbiased standpoint and don't feel I deserve the personal insult, thanks.

The rule is not good.

How about you reward people for painting, not punish them for not painting?

 DeathReaper wrote:
The rule is not good.

How about you reward people for painting, not punish them for not painting?

fair point but in his eye's thats what he's doing :/ only an in game reward kinda craps over the other side

 Glorioski wrote:


Can't imagine you know yourself, what with the nerve damage in your arm.

FYI I did present this topic from an unbiased standpoint and don't feel I deserve the personal insult, thanks.

Trust me, it is not personal. It's directed to everyone who assigns a benefit from two completely unrelated things. Should a basketball player be given a free throw if the opponent has mismatching socks? It's just as relevant as this.

Now I fully agree that two painted armies on a great board is one of the BEST aspects of the hobby. It's what makes the best moments. But that's the reward of it. You are punishing those who for whatever reason can't paint, as unbiased as you claim to be. It's just the end result no matter how much you dress it up or claim to be.

And, since you're interested, any time I try to do precision work with my right arm (such as handwriting, working with tools or hey! Paintbrushes!) I have a nice set of spasms and twitches. Result of a fall as a child that broke the ball of my elbow in half inside the arm.

 Fafnir wrote:
It doesn't matter what it does or what it's trying to encourage, because it's still a stupid rule.

Except it's not, because it's a good rule.

 Kaldor wrote:

 Fafnir wrote:
It doesn't matter what it does or what it's trying to encourage, because it's still a stupid rule.

Except it's not, because it's a good rule.

I do not see how a rule that gives players an unfair advantage for doing something unrelated to the gameplay can be a good rule.

I'd be fine with it amongst a group of friends trying to motivate each other to get everything painted.

I'd be opposed to it as a set rule at a store or club. I think new players should be able to begin painting at their own pace. It can be incredibly daunting to attack these expensive kits with an unskilled hand.

It is a horrible idea for bringing new players into the game, since it punishes them (they are at a disadvantage to painted armies) on top of already being new to the game and learning strategies.

If you wanted to apply it in an escalation league instead of restricting players to completely painted models, or applying it to someone who takes forever to paint at their discretion, it could be used as a fun way to encourage. As a blanket rule it is terrible.

 Glorioski wrote:

 curran12 wrote:
I have nerve damage in my arm and any kind of worthwhile painting is an impossibility, leaving me either at the mercy of painting services or friends if I want a painted army. If I want to try units, I'm penalized because of this nerve damage.

Another impossibly smug "oh paint your armies if you have so much time and available skill" piece of utter crap from someone who is looking for another reason to pat themselves on the back for how awesome they are. Please.

Guess what I voted?

Can't imagine you know yourself, what with the nerve damage in your arm.

FYI I did present this topic from an unbiased standpoint and don't feel I deserve the personal insult, thanks.

Whereas he clearly deserved your mocking of his physical deformity?

You should feel ashamed of yourself for saying this.

Edited by Manchu.

 Fafnir wrote:
I'd rather not compromise the quality of my models just to please some TFG that demands everything be painted. I don't get many models painted because the ones I do paint take a long time to do, and I rarely have time to paint. It's just as disrespectful to expect me to do a gak job painting just to please someone else.

And again, let's be realistic here: most people who play with unpainted models aren't doing it because they care a ton about how their stuff looks and won't paint it until they have time to do it right (if they did they probably wouldn't glue it all together yet), they're playing with unpainted models because they don't give a about how they look and don't intend to ever paint anything.

Also, if people are so lacking in time, how do they have time to build anything? How do they have time to spend on removing mold lines, filling gaps, etc, and making the models they care so much about look nice in every way but painting?

 Necroshea wrote:
The idea that how your army looks is in any way disrespectful to your opponent is...well it's a joke.

It's entirely serious. Many people value the aesthetic appeal of two fully painted armies fighting on nice terrain. By taking an unpainted army what you're saying to those people is that you don't care enough about their enjoyment of the game to spend even a minimal amount of time painting your models.

 Peregrine wrote:

And again, let's be realistic here: most people who play with unpainted models aren't doing it because they care a ton about how their stuff looks and won't paint it until they have time to do it right (if they did they probably wouldn't glue it all together yet), they're playing with unpainted models because they don't give a about how they look and don't intend to ever paint anything.

Citation needed. Anything at all to back that up?

Against. Some people don't have time to paint as other have said. also, I really don't care if the other persons models are painted, I paint mine and am happy with that, but if someone doesn't want to make their army look nice, its their loss.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Fafnir wrote:
I'd rather not compromise the quality of my models just to please some TFG that demands everything be painted. I don't get many models painted because the ones I do paint take a long time to do, and I rarely have time to paint. It's just as disrespectful to expect me to do a gak job painting just to please someone else.

And again, let's be realistic here: most people who play with unpainted models aren't doing it because they care a ton about how their stuff looks and won't paint it until they have time to do it right (if they did they probably wouldn't glue it all together yet), they're playing with unpainted models because they don't give a about how they look and don't intend to ever paint anything.

Also, if people are so lacking in time, how do they have time to build anything? How do they have time to spend on removing mold lines, filling gaps, etc, and making the models they care so much about look nice in every way but painting?

Assembling doesn't take that long to do, and reaches a bare minimum of playability. It doesn't take nearly as long to assemble a model as it does to paint it, nor does it take nearly as much attention.

You're punishing people who don't care what their models look like because they just want to play a game and have fun, and you're punishing people who don't have the time or resources to properly finish their models. Either way, you're discouraging people from enjoying the game for your own sense of self gratification.

If you don't like that someone doesn't have their army painted, then don't play against them. It's as simple as that.

You will have a hard time bringing in new players with a rule like this. Especially those that are totally new to wargaming in general.

Why should a person play in your group or frequent a place of business if they know that those who have been at it longer not only have the advantage of a more diverse selection of models but also have probability skewing rules in place to help them solely because they are a veteran player? If this is a play group enforcing this rule then they are stifling their growth and if this is a store then they are losing money and will most likely not be open much longer. Probably the only thing a store can do that would be worse is to charge people to play.

And if you're into conspiracy theories then it sounds like someone is trying to penalize high model count armies...

CrowSplat wrote:
You will have a hard time bringing in new players with a rule like this. Especially those that are totally new to wargaming in general.

Why should a person play in your group or frequent a place of business if they know that those who have been at it longer not only have the advantage of a more diverse selection of models but also have probability skewing rules in place to help them solely because they are a veteran player? If this is a play group enforcing this rule then they are stifling their growth and if this is a store then they are losing money and will most likely not be open much longer. Probably the only thing a store can do that would be worse is to charge people to play.

And if you're into conspiracy theories then it sounds like someone is trying to penalize high model count armies...

Not to mention making models that give or benefit from the use of preferred enemy redundant.

 curran12 wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

And again, let's be realistic here: most people who play with unpainted models aren't doing it because they care a ton about how their stuff looks and won't paint it until they have time to do it right (if they did they probably wouldn't glue it all together yet), they're playing with unpainted models because they don't give a about how they look and don't intend to ever paint anything.

Citation needed. Anything at all to back that up?

Just personal experience (and you know perfectly well there's no official statistics to cite). People who don't paint don't ever paint, and the few painted models they might have tend to look like garbage because they invested minimal effort into it.

 Fafnir wrote:
Assembling doesn't take that long to do, and reaches a bare minimum of playability. It doesn't take nearly as long to assemble a model as it does to paint it, nor does it take nearly as much attention.

Only if you don't care how your models look and are willing to accept mold lines, parts that don't fit properly, bare plastic on areas that can't be painted easily once the model is assembled, glue puddles leaking out of the joints, etc. I invest a lot of effort into painting and I still find that cleaning up a model and preparing it to be painted can take a third of the total time and effort, if not more.

And of course given the rushed-looking assembly quality of the unpainted armies I tend to see, I seriously doubt that they're taking very much care with that part either.

You're punishing people who don't care what their models look like because they just want to play a game and have fun, and you're punishing people who don't have the time or resources to properly finish their models. Either way, you're discouraging people from enjoying the game for your own sense of self gratification.

And playing with bare plastic because you're too lazy to paint is punishing people who care about having battles between painted armies.

If you don't like that someone doesn't have their army painted, then don't play against them. It's as simple as that.

So it's better to refuse to let them play at all than to have a rule that lets them play, but with a bit less chance of winning?

Please keep in mind that Rule Number One is Be Polite. Thanks!

 Fafnir wrote:
You're punishing people who don't care what their models look like because they just want to play a game and have fun

Those people should be punished. If they didn't want to paint models, they chose the wrong hobby.

Honestly Peregrine, it sounds like that whole insulting your opponent with an unpainted army is a problem you have. If anything, in my experience I've met nobody like that ever.

I recently went to a flgs to try out warmachine. I show up with a completely painted Orboros army that I think I did a good job on. I even got compliments. I told them that I would have come sooner, but it wasn't until recently that my stuff was painting. Every single person there pretty much said in unison "why?"

I'd be willing to bet that most people care more about playing the game, then playing a well painted army.

 Peregrine wrote:


Just personal experience (and you know perfectly well there's no official statistics to cite). People who don't paint don't ever paint, and the few painted models they might have tend to look like garbage because they invested minimal effort into it.

Then perhaps we shouldn't say for sure what 'we all know', then? My personal experience is that most of those I play with have school or long-hours jobs and are more interested in throwing down for a game. Which of our personal experiences is more valid? Do you see how completely silly this line of logic is?

Now, I want to emphasize that there's few things better than two well-painted armies on a nice board. One of the best part of the hobby and a reason I take my camera to games. But it's frosting. It's not what the game is about to me. And assigning ingame benefits to out of game things is incredibly silly if you expand it to any further level. You are comparing apples to oranges.

 Peregrine wrote:

Only if you don't care how your models look and are willing to accept mold lines, parts that don't fit properly, bare plastic on areas that can't be painted easily once the model is assembled, glue puddles leaking out of the joints, etc. I invest a lot of effort into painting and I still find that cleaning up a model and preparing it to be painted can take a third of the total time and effort, if not more.

We'll have to agree to disagree on this point. For the most part, model cleanup is a fairly quick process. Unless I'm doing conversion work, of course, but that's another story.

You're punishing people who don't care what their models look like because they just want to play a game and have fun, and you're punishing people who don't have the time or resources to properly finish their models. Either way, you're discouraging people from enjoying the game for your own sense of self gratification.

And playing with bare plastic because you're too lazy to paint is punishing people who care about having battles between painted armies.

Which is why, if it's so important, they just shouldn't play one another.

If you don't like that someone doesn't have their army painted, then don't play against them. It's as simple as that.

So it's better to refuse to let them play at all than to have a rule that lets them play, but with a bit less chance of winning?

 curran12 wrote:
Then perhaps we shouldn't say for sure what 'we all know', then? My personal experience is that most of those I play with have school or long-hours jobs and are more interested in throwing down for a game.

That's still a personal choice. It's not that they don't have time and are unable to paint, it's that they don't care enough about painting to spend time on it instead of doing other things.

The rules do not take painting into account. There is no reason to punish people for not painting models.

Now if you were to reward them for painting that would be okay.

If you have a group member that does not like to paint, maybe tell him you will buy him a Mountain Dew if he finishes painting a particular squad.

While I don't subscribe to "punishing" people for playing unpainted armies, I'm not sure that whether the army is painted is necessarily an "out of game" consideration. We are talking about table top wargaming after all. For many, many folks (but not all) the hobby aspects are definitely a big part of "the game." The usual slippery slope argument reduces the question to whether miniatures need be used at all if all that matters is distance, some kind of LOS determination, and dice math.

 Kaldor wrote:

 Fafnir wrote:
You're punishing people who don't care what their models look like because they just want to play a game and have fun

Those people should be punished. If they didn't want to paint models, they chose the wrong hobby.

As I said, it's not always so simple. I have a full Krieg army just waiting to go, but getting the time to actually paint it all is very difficult to do, not to mention the daunting nature of a project so large (and if you've seen my painted Krieg models, that's the standard I envision for the entire army).

I enjoy painting, and I enjoy playing because of the social environment the game provides. But because my time is not limitless, I chose the wrong hobby? I'm not allowed to find enjoyment in these things in the small windows of time that I can find to do so?

 DeathReaper wrote:
tell him you will buy him a Mountain Dew

Ah, the neckbeard's ambrosia!

 Fafnir wrote:
We'll have to agree to disagree on this point. For the most part, model cleanup is a fairly quick process. Unless I'm doing conversion work, of course, but that's another story.

In any case, the main point of what I was saying about cleanup time is that most of the unpainted models I see are also poorly assembled in ways that pretty clearly demonstrate that the issue isn't "I don't want to ruin a model by rushing to get it painted and playable". It's just a very obvious case of not caring how bad the model looks as long as it wins the game.

Which is why, if it's so important, they just shouldn't play one another.

That's great in theory, but if you have open 40k night at a store/club it's easier said than done. People either have to accept games against unpainted armies, or not play at all.

 Fafnir wrote:
As I said, it's not always so simple. I have a full Krieg army just waiting to go, but getting the time to actually paint it all is very difficult to do, not to mention the daunting nature of a project so large

It's also worth noting that actually getting to play with an army can provide an incentive to finish painting it.

 Peregrine wrote:


That's still a personal choice. It's not that they don't have time and are unable to paint, it's that they don't care enough about painting to spend time on it instead of doing other things.

In a world of families, mandatory 10-hour workdays and who knows what else, that is a vast oversimplification of it. If someone doesn't like painting, the last thing they want to do with their free time is do something that's a chore to them. If something is a chore, they are not going to want to do it, and if they want to use their free time to get a game in, I'm more for that.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Fafnir wrote:
We'll have to agree to disagree on this point. For the most part, model cleanup is a fairly quick process. Unless I'm doing conversion work, of course, but that's another story.

In any case, the main point of what I was saying about cleanup time is that most of the unpainted models I see are also poorly assembled in ways that pretty clearly demonstrate that the issue isn't "I don't want to ruin a model by rushing to get it painted and playable". It's just a very obvious case of not caring how bad the model looks as long as it wins the game.

That's more an issue with the person themselves, rather than the state of their models. If they were to paint it (for, example, a tournament standard), it would likely be done just as carelessly.

Which is why, if it's so important, they just shouldn't play one another.

That's great in theory, but if you have open 40k night at a store/club it's easier said than done. People either have to accept games against unpainted armies, or not play at all.

Or they can just get off the high-horse and not worry about it. Enjoy the games against the fully painted, great looking armies as they come, and enjoy the games against the unpainted armies for what they are.

 curran12 wrote:
In a world of families, mandatory 10-hour workdays and who knows what else, that is a vast oversimplification of it. If someone doesn't like painting, the last thing they want to do with their free time is do something that's a chore to them. If something is a chore, they are not going to want to do it, and if they want to use their free time to get a game in, I'm more for that.

If they hate painting so much (and aren't saving their models for when they're going to do an amazing paint job) then they should have no problem painting with the basic "spray, boltgun metal, dip" approach. In the time they spend playing a single game they could probably paint their entire army like that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Fafnir wrote:
That's more an issue with the person themselves, rather than the state of their models. If they were to paint it (for, example, a tournament standard), it would likely be done just as carelessly.

Of course it's about the person. My point is that people who don't care seem to be far more common than people like you, who care a lot about appearance but just can't afford the time to paint everything properly.

And careless painting is better than no painting at all. I'd much rather play against someone with basic spray/dip painting than bare plastic.

Or they can just get off the high-horse and not worry about it. Enjoy the games against the fully painted, great looking armies as they come, and enjoy the games against the unpainted armies for what they are.

That's the whole point of having a minor penalty for unpainted armies. You still get to play the game, but you're encouraged to make a serious effort to get your stuff painted instead of playing with bare plastic month after month because everyone lets you get away with it.

Of course I do kind of think that preferred enemy is a bit too much. One idea I like better is that all units with an unpainted model get -1 LD because their morale is suffering from the fact that you don't care enough about them to give them paint. It's still a penalty, but less likely to swing the outcome of the game like universal preferred enemy would.

Against. I'd have to pay someone to paint for me and they'd have to be damn good at it because no matter how great a model is put together, best pose ever achievable, etc. A bad coat of paint ruins the whole thing. It looks like a piece of excrement fielded on a table and its something to be ashamed of and lessen your chances of playing the game.

All the things I own that are painted are that way because I bought them painted. I have fun but also a lot of difficulty building models due to nerve damage and the results of alcohol abuse when I was young.

I wouldn't care if a house rule penalty was made that both players agreed to E.g. Grey Knights Preferred enemy was limited to only models from Codex: Chaos Daemons. So that an Eldar player fielding the Avatar isn't penalised when really the Avatar isn't a malevolent Daemon of the warp, its a "Living God", etc.

 Peregrine wrote:

If they hate painting so much (and aren't saving their models for when they're going to do an amazing paint job) then they should have no problem painting with the basic "spray, boltgun metal, dip" approach. In the time they spend playing a single game they could probably paint their entire army like that.

Again. If I hate painting, and I have the choice between a game and painting, why would I choose painting? Again, you are simplifying the issue down to time, when there is far more to it than that.

If we are going to boil this down to any one issue, it should be a person's desire to do what they want with their free time. If they want to play, let them, if they want to paint, wonderful. But their decision to do one or the other should not be penalized.

Think about it on the flipside:

If you don't have the time to write a proper army list, why are you bothering painting? You should not put a single drop of paint on a model until you know its position in your list.

If you don't know your army's fluff and lore, you should not paint it. After all, if you don't care about the army's lore and won't take the time to research it, why are you applying colors that are completely unfitting?

All of these would be laughed out of the door.

SkyD wrote:
because no matter how great a model is put together, best pose ever achievable, etc. A bad coat of paint ruins the whole thing. It looks like a piece of excrement fielded on a table and its something to be ashamed of and lessen your chances of playing the game.

I'd say the exact same thing about an unpainted model.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 curran12 wrote:
Again. If I hate painting, and I have the choice between a game and painting, why would I choose painting? Again, you are simplifying the issue down to time, when there is far more to it than that.

Because the amount of effort required to paint to a minimum standard is trivial. Spray the whole unit at once (30 seconds to a minute), paint the gun or other major details a single color (maybe a minute per model, max), wash/dip (a few seconds per model). Refusing to spend even 15 minutes painting an entire unit is just a lack of respect for any opponent who cares about the aesthetic value of having two painted armies.

If you don't have the time to write a proper army list, why are you bothering painting? You should not put a single drop of paint on a model until you know its position in your list.

Irrelevant because painting extra models has nothing to do with your opponent's experience. If I bring an appropriate army to the game it doesn't matter how many hours I've spent painting other models that you don't see.

If you don't know your army's fluff and lore, you should not paint it. After all, if you don't care about the army's lore and won't take the time to research it, why are you applying colors that are completely unfitting?

Irrelevant because, in my experience, nobody ever asks about fluff, even people who have nicely painted armies. So it might be a bit annoying if someone doesn't spend even a token few minutes thinking of a general idea for what their army represents, it's a lot less likely to ruin the experience for their opponent.

Huh..well I would say preferred enemy against HQ's that are not painted. That is about it.

 Peregrine wrote:

SkyD wrote:
because no matter how great a model is put together, best pose ever achievable, etc. A bad coat of paint ruins the whole thing. It looks like a piece of excrement fielded on a table and its something to be ashamed of and lessen your chances of playing the game.

I'd say the exact same thing about an unpainted model.

Both are true in my experience. My first attempt at an army was SoB, which is my favorite faction. My painting has never been great so you can imagine I wasn't pleased with my first try. Being discouraged by such results, I left the other models with just a base coat. The net result is that I didn't want to appear in public with either the painted or unpainted parts of my "army." But let's call it as it is: my own personal hang up. If someone else feels no embarrassment taking a poorly painted or unpainted army to the LGS, it's not my place to try and embarrass them. In fact, all that would likely end up happening is me embarrassing myself.

For, Totally for, but make it different.
Like my group you get a points system for the campaign, if you dont have a Rulebook, stuff you need(like dice or templates) and unpainted models. you get a point loss for each of those.
And the prize at the end of the month was money.
But if you want to discourage Unpainted, make it a percentage, like is less then 50% is painted then do the preffered enemy.

Because the amount of effort required to paint to a minimum standard is trivial. Spray the whole unit at once (30 seconds to a minute), paint the gun or other major details a single color (maybe a minute per model, max), wash/dip (a few seconds per model). Refusing to spend even 15 minutes painting an entire unit is just a lack of respect for any opponent who cares about the aesthetic value of having two painted armies.

Irrelevant because painting extra models has nothing to do with your opponent's experience. If I bring an appropriate army to the game it doesn't matter how many hours I've spent painting other models that you don't see.

Irrelevant because, in my experience, nobody ever asks about fluff, even people who have nicely painted armies. So it might be a bit annoying if someone doesn't spend even a token few minutes thinking of a general idea for what their army represents, it's a lot less likely to ruin the experience for their opponent.

Honestly, you keep putting your personal experience as "fact of the world that is irrefutable." My personal experience is different, I play with folks big into fluff, and we are back into this circular argument. You are not the world. Your personal experience is not the world.

I think this is going to be a matter of agreeing to disagree.

 Fafnir wrote:
I would be against this.

It's easy enough to say "paint your models," but you have to keep in mind that not everyone has the time to paint everything. I'm a slow painter, and these days I barely have enough time for a personal life, let alone painting models.

And then there are those that just really don't enjoy painting. Not their fault either, they just want to enjoy a game (how someone could possibly enjoy 6th edition 40k is beyond me, but that's not my prerogative).

While I appreciate your comments on painting, why don't you like 6th? I have really enjoyed it so far.

 curran12 wrote:
Honestly, you keep putting your personal experience as "fact of the world that is irrefutable." My personal experience is different, I play with folks big into fluff, and we are back into this circular argument. You are not the world. Your personal experience is not the world.

Sure, and in that situation refusing to spend even a small amount of time coming up with some basic fluff would be disrespectful and I would have no problem with imposing a penalty on no-fluff armies.

valace2 wrote:

 Fafnir wrote:
I would be against this.

It's easy enough to say "paint your models," but you have to keep in mind that not everyone has the time to paint everything. I'm a slow painter, and these days I barely have enough time for a personal life, let alone painting models.

And then there are those that just really don't enjoy painting. Not their fault either, they just want to enjoy a game (how someone could possibly enjoy 6th edition 40k is beyond me, but that's not my prerogative).

While I appreciate your comments on painting, why don't you like 6th? I have really enjoyed it so far.

That's a subject for another thread that's been discussed to death. If you'd like to talk about it, find or create another thread, but that's not what this is for.

 Fafnir wrote:
As I said, it's not always so simple. I have a full Krieg army just waiting to go, but getting the time to actually paint it all is very difficult to do, not to mention the daunting nature of a project so large (and if you've seen my painted Krieg models, that's the standard I envision for the entire army).

And I have a Nurgle army I'm waiting to get to as well. Not to mention at least a dozen other projects on the go. But until I'm happy with it, it won't be seeing table time. And when I start using it, it will be smaller games that accommodate the models I have finished. We all use unfinished models from time to time, and it's not a big deal. But people who never bother painting, not because they have time constraints but because they just don't want to, those people have chosen the wrong hobby.

That's a crude assumption. There are plenty of reasons for people to get into this hobby, and painting isn't the only one, nor is it necessarily the most important.

Some people enjoy it for the game itself (hard, I know, but some people manage to do it).
Some people like it for the social aspect that you just can't get while playing against a screen.
Some people legitimately enjoy arguing and discussing the rules.
Some people enjoy the fluff of it all.

And a myriad of other reasons. You can't say that they chose the wrong hobby just because one facet of it might not necessarily appeal to them.

For a campaign these rule is fine but in general it's a bad idea. It punishes new players and makes everyone quickly paints model in a hurry which in the end doesn't look good and defeats the whole purpose of painting it.

 Fafnir wrote:
That's a crude assumption. There are plenty of reasons for people to get into this hobby, and painting isn't the only one, nor is it necessarily the most important.

Some people enjoy it for the game itself (hard, I know, but some people manage to do it).
Some people like it for the social aspect that you just can't get while playing against a screen.
Some people legitimately enjoy arguing and discussing the rules.
Some people enjoy the fluff of it all.

And a myriad of other reasons. You can't say that they chose the wrong hobby just because one facet of it might not necessarily appeal to them.

There are plenty of games that offer rules, and face-to-face social interaction without the requirement for painting. I can't understand why anyone who doesn't like the idea of painting little toy soldiers would ever get into wargaming.

Also...

Some people enjoy it for the game itself

Who are these masochists?

 Glorioski wrote:
It is interesting how many people are seeing this as a penalty/punishment for unpainted armies rather than a reward for painted ones.

To be honest, having a fully painted army already has a reward in the form of compliments given by people who see it. The tangible ingame benefit suggested in the original post (which I might add is a very potent ingame benefit - see Old Adversary Tyrants backing up Hive Guard and Devilgants) is punitive in nature as it only applies against someone who has an unpainted force rather than applying to the person who has a painted one. Ergo, it isn't a reward for the player who painted their force as much as a punishment for the person who does not have their amy painted (fully or otherwise).

If the goal is to simply reward someone for having their force painted in a league-type match, it would probably be better to just have a small quantity of bonus points that could be awarded rather than tamper with ingame balance. In pick-up games it shouldn't matter, as you can always elect to not play them if something about their force is problimatic to you.

 Kaldor wrote:

There are plenty of games that offer rules, and face-to-face social interaction without the requirement for painting. I can't understand why anyone who doesn't like the idea of painting little toy soldiers would ever get into wargaming.

And yet I know people who are into it for just that. Does that make the enjoyment they get out of the game wrong?

Some people enjoy it for the game itself

Who are these masochists?

Sick bastards, the lot of them.

 TheCaptain wrote:
Sounds like crap. Plain and simple; some people aren't in this for the painting aspect.

Why make games significantly more frustrating for them?

Sure, its just preferred enemy, but next game you play, give your opponent preferred enemy against you; see that it's a little nuisance that can be a big annoyance.

You're right, that's why I like my local shop. Can't field unpainted units.

 Fafnir wrote:

 Kaldor wrote:

There are plenty of games that offer rules, and face-to-face social interaction without the requirement for painting. I can't understand why anyone who doesn't like the idea of painting little toy soldiers would ever get into wargaming.

And yet I know people who are into it for just that. Does that make the enjoyment they get out of the game wrong?

No, it doesn't make the enjoyment they get out of it wrong. But I reckon they would be happier if they got into pen-and-paper RPGs, or M:TG, or something like that.

This is a stupid idea. You'll anger a lot of friends who may or may not have the time, money, or ability to paint to their liking, now you're proposing to penalize them even more?

Just play...

I painted a full 2000 point army in 3 hours. They aren't winning any Golden Daemons, but they're not bad. However I paint for the fun and the added narrative, if someone just wants to play then I don't give a rats ass what their army looks like, I'll play them whenever TFG wont

We had something close to this at a tournament at my FLGS but instead of preferred enemy against the entire army it was twin linked against any unpainted unit. Which was kinda funny because not a single person used it as most thought it unsporting and would rather fight a fair battle.

I'm against.

i have a painted army and i'm a 1/4 way through another. I play with both.

now I wonder how much free time all the "For" have? I mean i was lucky to start this Amazing hobby @ age 11, so i have had many of my childhood free time painting.

now i'm 23 and find it very hard to get that free time to finish painting that army i have to work around everything (work,uni, GF and social life) to finish 1/4 army (there are also over 200+ minis in this army), and i cant see this as motovation to paint it'd make me feel like i shouldn't play the hobby.

now i take time with my painting, even small detail, IC take days to finish. i havent palyed in 1 month due to not having a painted army i feel happy at seeing my fully painted army, but to be penalised for not having it done, I would feel insulted by such a rule.

Against.

If anything people should be rewarded for fully painted armies never punished.
This form of elitist crap always make me sick.

If this was enforced it would turn the hobby into a chore.

So here is a thought? Would you choose A.) Unpainted Army or B.) Horribly Painted army with.no.effort made?

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:


You're right, that's why I like my local shop. Can't field unpainted units.

There was a GW near me that used to have that rule.... They stopped because they were losing business.

I paint all my armies, but that rule is just stupid...I was once told I couldn't field the unit I just bought from their store and built just before the game.... I have nearly 2k of fully painted models sitting on the table and your going to not let me field a single unpainted unit I just bought from you? Terrible store policy...

I would rather play against painted armies, but I accepted the fact that lots of people don't have time or just don't like it...

lynxstrife wrote:
So here is a thought? Would you choose A.) Unpainted Army or B.) Horribly Painted army with.no.effort made?

A; let people focus on the part of the hobby they like. If painting isn't it, don't force people to do it.

 BarBoBot wrote:

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:


You're right, that's why I like my local shop. Can't field unpainted units.

There was a GW near me that used to have that rule.... They stopped because they were losing business.

I paint all my armies, but that rule is just stupid...I was once told I couldn't field the unit I just bought from their store and built just before the game.... I have nearly 2k of fully painted models sitting on the table and your going to not let me field a single unpainted unit I just bought from you? Terrible store policy...

I would rather play against painted armies, but I accepted the fact that lots of people don't have time or just don't like it...

Considering the Owner is a hobbyist who loves painted models, and gives amazing prize support for tournies. I have no complaints, besides it gets me off my butt to paint.

Against, simply because some people don't have the time or inclination to paint.

For example, I have a friend who loves to play. Massively into the fluff and is genuinely fun to play against. His lists range from hard to simply for fun. He has more Marines and Eldar than I could ever hope to own.

He also works nights, has 3 kids and is married. He simply does not have the time or energy to sit down and paint. My brother occasionally paints some of his Eldar when he gets the urge to paint Eldar, but other than that, his stuff is largely unpainted.

This sort of rule would simply mean I don't get to play him anymore, rather than get him to paint, like I'm sure it would a lot of people without the time/energy/ability to paint.

Yes, it's nice seeing two fully, competently painted armies square off. No, it's not central to the enjoyment of the hobby, and you've got no right to tell someone they're enjoying their hobby wrong.

 -Loki- wrote:
He also works nights, has 3 kids and is married.

So he has time to play and time to assemble his models, but not enough time to spend an hour or two doing a basic paint job on the entire army? Maybe he should just give up a single game of 40k and spend that time painting everything so he never has to paint again.

 Peregrine wrote:

 -Loki- wrote:
He also works nights, has 3 kids and is married.

So he has time to play and time to assemble his models, but not enough time to spend an hour or two doing a basic paint job on the entire army? Maybe he should just give up a single game of 40k and spend that time painting everything so he never has to paint again.

Or hell if he has the Cash flow to invest into that many models for his limited availability, he should pay someone to paint them.

If you have time to give to the hobby you have time to paint. It's just a case of how you appreciate that aspect of the hobby.

Maybe it is a UK thing but the majority of groups I have been involved in have had rule on fielding painted models (i.e. if they're not painted they're not allowed on the tabletop). I saw this as a compromise rather than a radical exclusive penalty.

 Glorioski wrote:
If you have time to give to the hobby you have time to paint. It's just a case of how you appreciate that aspect of the hobby.

Not true at all. If my friend has time to get away and play a game of 40k, he'd rather do that than paint. And that's up to him. It's not disrespectful to any opponent - telling him to bugger off and paint because he's not worthy of playing until he paints his stuff, that's disrespectful.

 Glorioski wrote:
Maybe it is a UK thing but the majority of groups I have been involved in have had rule on fielding painted models (i.e. if they're not painted they're not allowed on the tabletop). I saw this as a compromise rather than a radical exclusive penalty.

Lucky them. That doesn't mean every group is going to be the same. I'd wager not every group in the UK is like that.

Get off your high horse, Peregrine. Facts:

You don't know everything.

Some people have different opinions.

Some people only have the time to assemble armies, because they may enjoy other things as well.

Some people are not good at painting, and they feel embarassed if their army is not painted good. Thats why I have only played one game at my FLGS: Because I spent so much on my space marines, even though their paintjob is mediocre, because it is embarassing to have a bad army. I would prefer fielding unpainted to fielding horribly painted.

Against. Reward the painters for hard effort invested in such a beautiful army; do not penalise people who are not good enough, embarased or actually do not have enough time to make a good army.

 -Loki- wrote:

 Glorioski wrote:
If you have time to give to the hobby you have time to paint. It's just a case of how you appreciate that aspect of the hobby.

Not true at all. If my friend has time to get away and play a game of 40k, he'd rather do that than paint.

In that case it is true isn't it. As he has time to give to the hobby and appreciates the gaming aspect more than painting.

In response to people claiming that it is lazy to not paint an army; yes, you can do a simple and easy scheme across your entire army with minimal effort, and yes, it would be lovely if everyone had nicely painted forces to game with.

However, this is not inclusive to everyone's situation. I love painting models, and I look eagerly forward to the day my army is finished and painted. I do however, like to take my time painting each model. I try to be as meticulous and detailed as I can on each model - I'm not claiming to be a fantastic painter, but I have no intentions of painting my army to anything but my best abilities. Unfortunately, between studying and my various other commitments, I am only able to spend a few hours a week painting, if that. I don't expect to have 2000pts of painted models for several years minimum, and I'd rather not be limited to smaller games (Peregrine; I believe you once stated that 40K was unplayable below 1000pts).

If my local group instigated a penalty for unpainted armies, I would likely just stop playing with them. Fortunately, I have a few close friends whom I game with separately. Many others don't have this alternative.
In summary, I feel that it would be an inconstructive and unfair rule to set in place.

 Glorioski wrote:

 -Loki- wrote:

 Glorioski wrote:
If you have time to give to the hobby you have time to paint. It's just a case of how you appreciate that aspect of the hobby.

Not true at all. If my friend has time to get away and play a game of 40k, he'd rather do that than paint.

In that case it is true isn't it. As he has time to give to the hobby and appreciates the gaming aspect more than painting.

Well no. That time where he is playing a game with us is his time getting out of the house. If he's painting, he's not accomplishing 'getting out of the house for a few hours'. Building a squad takes 10 minutes. Painting a squad takes a lot longer. It's easier to find the time to quickly build a squad than it is to find the time to sit down and paint it.

People have their own time commitments. Making a rule that disadvantages them because they don't conform to your idea of hobby time is extremely disrespectful.

Legion of Flame wrote:
Some people only have the time to assemble armies, because they may enjoy other things as well.

Then give up an hour or two of assembling units and do a basic paint job on your entire army. Or skip buying a unit and get someone to do it for you.

Some people are not good at painting, and they feel embarassed if their army is not painted good. Thats why I have only played one game at my FLGS: Because I spent so much on my space marines, even though their paintjob is mediocre, because it is embarassing to have a bad army. I would prefer fielding unpainted to fielding horribly painted.

You honestly think that badly painted armies are better than bare plastic ones?

Against. Reward the painters for hard effort invested in such a beautiful army; do not penalise people who are not good enough, embarased or actually do not have enough time to make a good army.

In a zero-sum game a reward to one player is a penalty for the other. You can't magically reward painting without simultaneously penalizing anyone who doesn't qualify for that reward.

 Aun Tier wrote:
However, this is not inclusive to everyone's situation. I love painting models, and I look eagerly forward to the day my army is finished and painted. I do however, like to take my time painting each model. I try to be as meticulous and detailed as I can on each model - I'm not claiming to be a fantastic painter, but I have no intentions of painting my army to anything but my best abilities. Unfortunately, between studying and my various other commitments, I am only able to spend a few hours a week painting, if that. I don't expect to have 2000pts of painted models for several years minimum, and I'd rather not be limited to smaller games (Peregrine; I believe you once stated that 40K was unplayable below 1000pts).

As I said before in this thread, in my experience you are in the minority on this. Most, if not all, of the unpainted armies I encounter also have sloppy assembly, broken parts that were never fixed, puddles of glue everywhere, etc. And if they have a painted model somewhere, the painting sucks. These aren't expert painters who are reluctant to ruin a model by painting it too quickly, these are people who just don't give a about how their army looks as long as it wins games.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 -Loki- wrote:
Building a squad takes 10 minutes. Painting a squad takes a lot longer.

Actually painting a squad takes 10 minutes. Spray with colored primer, spend a few minutes painting simple single-color details like faces/guns/etc, then wash/dip the entire model.

Also, you're only assembling an entire squad in 10 minutes if you don't give a about how it looks and ignore all the mold lines, leave glue puddles everywhere, never fill the gaps between parts, etc.

 -Loki- wrote:

 Glorioski wrote:

 -Loki- wrote:

 Glorioski wrote:
If you have time to give to the hobby you have time to paint. It's just a case of how you appreciate that aspect of the hobby.

Not true at all. If my friend has time to get away and play a game of 40k, he'd rather do that than paint.

In that case it is true isn't it. As he has time to give to the hobby and appreciates the gaming aspect more than painting.

Well no. That time where he is playing a game with us is his time getting out of the house. If he's painting, he's not accomplishing 'getting out of the house for a few hours'. Building a squad takes 10 minutes. Painting a squad takes a lot longer. It's easier to find the time to quickly build a squad than it is to find the time to sit down and paint it.

People have their own time commitments. Making a rule that disadvantages them because they don't conform to your idea of hobby time is extremely disrespectful.

It takes me like 10-15min per guy.

Snip, trim flashing, re-trim flashing,Pin(yes even simple plastic models)(practice), Glue.

I just did this with about 90 or so Ork boyz I had gotten second hand. Was changing them from Choppa/slugga to shootaz, oh my what a frickin mess that was.

I personally hate painting. It's hard to find the time to do it, but once it's done the army looks 100% better, even with a mediocre paint job.

 -Loki- wrote:

 Glorioski wrote:

 -Loki- wrote:

 Glorioski wrote:
If you have time to give to the hobby you have time to paint. It's just a case of how you appreciate that aspect of the hobby.

Not true at all. If my friend has time to get away and play a game of 40k, he'd rather do that than paint.

In that case it is true isn't it. As he has time to give to the hobby and appreciates the gaming aspect more than painting.

Well no. That time where he is playing a game with us is his time getting out of the house. If he's painting, he's not accomplishing 'getting out of the house for a few hours'. Building a squad takes 10 minutes. Painting a squad takes a lot longer. It's easier to find the time to quickly build a squad than it is to find the time to sit down and paint it.

People have their own time commitments. Making a rule that disadvantages them because they don't conform to your idea of hobby time is extremely disrespectful.

So once again he has time to give to the hobby and plays instead of paints.

Getting out of the house has little to do with it. Painting can be a social activity, taking paints and a few models along on gaming night to paint while others play is pretty standard.

 Peregrine wrote:
[

Some people are not good at painting, and they feel embarassed if their army is not painted good. Thats why I have only played one game at my FLGS: Because I spent so much on my space marines, even though their paintjob is mediocre, because it is embarassing to have a bad army. I would prefer fielding unpainted to fielding horribly painted.

You honestly think that badly painted armies are better than bare plastic ones?.

You got it wrong. I think unpainted are better than badly painted ones. It depends though.

If they literally suck at painting, I will congratulate them for giving it a go. But, if they were good painters, but didn't have enough time, it would be embarrassing for them to field badly painted models. Why feel uncomfortable playing a game you're supposed to enjoy?

Legion of Flame wrote:
But, if they were good painters, but didn't have enough time, it would be embarrassing for them to field badly painted models.

Except, as I've said several times already, "good painters which don't have time right now to paint to their acceptable level" do not seem to be anywhere near a majority of the unpainted army owners. In my experience most people who don't paint their armies don't paint because they don't care how it looks, and are happy to play with carelessly assembled (and often broken) models and then just toss them in a box when they're done like cheap toys.

Even though I would prefer to see painted armies on the field, I think rewarded those that do is more preferable to those that don't. This hobby is expensive and time consuming enough as is to put someone in a tough spot just because they have stock gray marines.

And I do see this as a punishment because if players were going to get preferred enemy on me just because I didnt manage to get those new meganobz painted in time for tourney (but have all 300 boyz done beautifully) It wouldn't be worth going to tourney. And TBH, I probably would find another tourney or FLGS to go to for my games. (got a lot of options locally.)

When you think of the new player just getting in, or a player that really sucks at painting and wants to save up for a commission but still wants to play, or those on this thread that are just slow at playing, your asking them to not play even though they have a pretty good reason not to paint.

When you say its disrespectful to you that they do not paint their stuff, yet I see it as pretty darn disrespectful to them to tell them they cant have fun today unless they at least to some crappy spray can job on their models.

For tournament its definatly understandable that unpainted or partially models be given penalties. For casual games definatly not. That's being far too strict. Especialy with new players and people who just got new figures to play with. Painting is extremely time consuming

 Glorioski wrote:
If you have time to give to the hobby you have time to paint. It's just a case of how you appreciate that aspect of the hobby.

Maybe it is a UK thing but the majority of groups I have been involved in have had rule on fielding painted models (i.e. if they're not painted they're not allowed on the tabletop). I saw this as a compromise rather than a radical exclusive penalty.

BS.

I work full time, go to school full time, am married, and have three kids all aged 4 years or younger. I have to find time for all of that, my other hobbies, and get the occasional game in. My armies are painted because I pay people to get them done.

The idea of the original OP is just more elitist crap that would just make me get up and walk away from the game, even with my painted armies.

 Glorioski wrote:

So once again he has time to give to the hobby and plays instead of paints.

Again and again, you keep saying this. "Time to give to the hobby," like it's some sort of charity or job or something venerable. It's just a hobby that people enjoy in different ways.

You come off as some 15 year old who has all the free time in the world and a single-minded reverence for all things GW.

If such is the case, I can only encourage you to enjoy the time you have to spend on your hobbies. It won't be long before it begins fleeting.

djones520 wrote:
I work full time, go to school full time, am married, and have three kids all aged 4 years or younger. I have to find time for all of that, my other hobbies, and get the occasional game in. My armies are painted because I pay people to get them done.

So how is it that you have time to assemble your models (if you do it yourself) and play the game, but can't find a couple hours to paint your entire army and never have to do it again?

 Fafnir wrote:
You come off as some 15 year old who has all the free time in the world and a single-minded reverence for all things GW.

You don't need "all the free time in the world" to have a fully painted army. If you don't care much about painting (IOW, you're not a dedicated painter who is just in the middle of a busy month at work) you can paint an entire army with a small one-time investment of hobby time. Give up a single game and the rest of your games will be played with a fully painted army.

 Fafnir wrote:

 Glorioski wrote:

So once again he has time to give to the hobby and plays instead of paints.

Again and again, you keep saying this. "Time to give to the hobby," like it's some sort of charity or job or something venerable. It's just a hobby that people enjoy in different ways.

You come off as some 15 year old who has all the free time in the world and a single-minded reverence for all things GW.

If such is the case, I can only encourage you to enjoy the time you have to spend on your hobbies. It won't be long before it begins fleeting.

The point is if you have time to play you have time to paint.

I work 60 hours a week ftr.

How about something simpler... like can't seize the initiative on a painted army unless you are a painted army... painted armies always win initiative against unpainted ones?

Gives a little bump to the painted guy without being a constant pain and rubbing it in all game. IF a club was looking for an ingame bonus for finished forces, this is how I'd go at it.

 Peregrine wrote:

djones520 wrote:
I work full time, go to school full time, am married, and have three kids all aged 4 years or younger. I have to find time for all of that, my other hobbies, and get the occasional game in. My armies are painted because I pay people to get them done.

So how is it that you have time to assemble your models (if you do it yourself) and play the game, but can't find a couple hours to paint your entire army and never have to do it again?

A couple hours? Hardly. A couple hours might see a squad done, if you want it to look like crap. I have 4 differant armies for the three games that I play. I'm slowly working on my 5th.

I find time to play about twice a month, if that. I usually go months at a time without playing.

The time that I do get to play, I don't want ruined by jerks who can't appreciate that other people have other things in life. Thankfully, in my experience you people seem to only exist on the internet.

djones520 wrote:
A couple hours? Hardly. A couple hours might see a squad done, if you want it to look like crap.

Colored primer spray, few minutes of simple detailing, wash/dip. Yes it looks terrible, but we're talking about people who never paint at all, assemble their models as fast as they can and do a shameful job of it, and then throw them around like a $1 dog toy.

I'd rather fight an army of silver surfers than some 12yr old who maxed his parents CC over xmas and massacred the models in the process of assembling/smothering with paint.

Most of my stuff is unpainted because I lack the time, sometimes the motivation, and the expertise to churn out models to a standard I'm happy with. If that makes you not want to play me, well, lets just say I won't lose any sleep over it.

 -Loki- wrote:
People have their own time commitments. Making a rule that disadvantages them because they don't conform to your idea of hobby time is extremely disrespectful.

I have to say, I don't think painting falls under some elitist idea of 'hobby time'. I think painting models falls under the most basic and generic definition of the wargaming hobby. I just don't understand why someone would choose a hobby that involves painting, if they don't like painting.

 Peregrine wrote:

djones520 wrote:
A couple hours? Hardly. A couple hours might see a squad done, if you want it to look like crap.

Colored primer spray, few minutes of simple detailing, wash/dip. Yes it looks terrible, but we're talking about people who never paint at all, assemble their models as fast as they can and do a shameful job of it, and then throw them around like a $1 dog toy.

Should resist getting dragged into this...

So just to clarify, you would rather play against armies which look like a dog's breakfast than armies which are unpainted, or half (well) painted.

Also, against

 Kaldor wrote:

 -Loki- wrote:
People have their own time commitments. Making a rule that disadvantages them because they don't conform to your idea of hobby time is extremely disrespectful.

I have to say, I don't think painting falls under some elitist idea of 'hobby time'. I think painting models falls under the most basic and generic definition of the wargaming hobby. I just don't understand why someone would choose a hobby that involves painting, if they don't like painting.

Because it is what their mates play and they want in on the gaming side, but don't care so much about the painting?

 motyak wrote:
So just to clarify, you would rather play against armies which look like a dog's breakfast than armies which are unpainted, or half (well) painted.

Well, the basic spray/detail/wash approach isn't very good, but it's far from "dog's breakfast" like the horror stories of models with 10 layers of caked-on house paint. And yes, I'd rather see an army painted with a minimal level of painting than an army with nothing but bare plastic that will never be painted.

Righto. And you'd slap everyone who hadn't got to painting their stuff yet on the wrists with a penalty (well you aren't doing it, but you support it)

My army (which is about 50/50 painted as of the last month of holidays from uni) deserves to be penalised because I go to uni and work and when I have days off from work/going to uni I'm hammering away at assignments? Doesn't really seem fair or logical.

Normally I like the points you raise, even if you raise them in a slightly brow-beating fashion, but on this I have to strongly disagree with you.

 motyak wrote:
My army (which is about 50/50 painted as of the last month of holidays from uni) deserves to be penalised because I go to uni and work and when I have days off from work/going to uni I'm hammering away at assignments? Doesn't really seem fair or logical.

Like I said before, in my experience this just isn't the case with unpainted armies. It isn't people who make a legitimate effort to paint but just can't do it fast enough without sacrificing quality, it's people who don't give a about how their army looks refusing to put even a minimal amount of effort into painting. I have sympathy for the former (and I'd consider a rule with a grace period for newly purchased units), but IMO the latter group should be glad they're allowed to play with unpainted models at all.

Well in my experience it is much more likely the case that they are too busy/when they find spare time they'd rather punch out a game than paint a squad rather than they don't give a f*** about it.

That is why 'in my experience' isn't a valid argument. Or maybe in the sense of implementing a rule like this at a local club, it is the most valid argument. My club would see this as ridiculous because we honestly want our models to be well painted, and they are getting there slowly, we just don't have the time. Your club would see it as a positive for all your reasons.

This is the kind of thing we are never going to reach agreement on, because we come from very different groups of gamers.

djones520 wrote:

 Glorioski wrote:
If you have time to give to the hobby you have time to paint. It's just a case of how you appreciate that aspect of the hobby.

Maybe it is a UK thing but the majority of groups I have been involved in have had rule on fielding painted models (i.e. if they're not painted they're not allowed on the tabletop). I saw this as a compromise rather than a radical exclusive penalty.

BS.

I work full time, go to school full time, am married, and have three kids all aged 4 years or younger. I have to find time for all of that, my other hobbies, and get the occasional game in. My armies are painted because I pay people to get them done.

The idea of the original OP is just more elitist crap that would just make me get up and walk away from the game, even with my painted armies.

This is the truth, though some of you refuse to accept it.
I have a few painted figures, some halfdone ones simply because I don't have the time anymore.
Once every few months I can squish some time out for a game now and then, a few weeks pass and them maybe I can find an hour to assemble a new model or two.
I would love to sit down and paint but it's impossible for me.
It's easy to the elitists to cry foul if you aren't in the same situation and devote every spare minute of your spare time to GW.

If you don't see unpainted figures only go to places where they aren't allowed, then you'll be happy.

See I don't see it as an 'elitist' kind of thing, they just look for different opportunities in the hobby.

Maybe where some would buy up a whole army and paint it gradually while playing, they buy one squad, and in those moments some would snatch for a quick game, they assemble and paint, and then game with after. It is a perfectly acceptable way to go about it.

And if their entire club is like this, and they get onto new players early with this mentality, rule like this could have a place (probably modified, but yes, a place) without damaging the uptake of new players (new players they want mind you, just like in a laid back club [not saying these guys aren't laid back] may not want a TFG in their midst, they may not want grey hordes)

 motyak wrote:
Or maybe in the sense of implementing a rule like this at a local club, it is the most valid argument. My club would see this as ridiculous because we honestly want our models to be well painted, and they are getting there slowly, we just don't have the time. Your club would see it as a positive for all your reasons.

Exactly. I wouldn't try to impose it as a universal rule for every 40k player everywhere in the world, but where I play I would support it 100%.

I don't understand the people who rather play against an army that that splashed with random paint than any painted army.
In my opinion those armies are more a pain to the eye than unpainted ones.

I always scare the new kids by saying that unpainted models will always fail their saves/shooting/other stuff. After all blue paint makes 'em lucky.

One time I was playing against this kid who had terminators unpainted. I said to him "Those terminators are extra unlucky and propably will fail" He just scoffed at my comment. Turn 2 those termies deepstrike infront of my csm, shoot and kill nothing. In my turn I attack them 5 man csm squad with a sorcerer and a flamer. Lets just say there was nothing to assault.

I resent the insinuation that I have not painted my army because I'm lazy. I have not painted my army because I'm deluded, meticulous, egotistical, have the artistic abilities of a slightly rotten carrot, AND am lazy.

 Kaldor wrote:

 -Loki- wrote:
People have their own time commitments. Making a rule that disadvantages them because they don't conform to your idea of hobby time is extremely disrespectful.

I have to say, I don't think painting falls under some elitist idea of 'hobby time'. I think painting models falls under the most basic and generic definition of the wargaming hobby. I just don't understand why someone would choose a hobby that involves painting, if they don't like painting.

Because it's wargaming. He enjoys putting his army on the table for a few hours and being social. He would rather do that with any free time he can dedicate to the game than sit at a table being unsocial painting. People enjoy the hobby for different reasons - no one is more right than anyone else. You enjoy what you enjoy. If he had the time to paint, he would (and he used to). He simply doesn't get that time anymore, so he doesn't.

Incidentally, he has asked me about ways to paint quickly. I did mention to him the prime/touch up/dip or wash method, and he was super keen to give it a try. Then Army Painter discontinued the colour primer he wanted to use (their dark blue spray). While he is occasionally looking for other ways, his only chance to get it done is the quick and dirty method, which he has no qualms doing. He just doesn't even find the time to do that.

The OP mentioned he works 60 hour weeks. So does my friend. On top of having 3 kids and a wife and all the responsibilities that come with having a family. Hobby time isn't easy to come by for some, and for some, like him, having a fun game is more important than making some plastic soldiers look pretty.

 Peregrine wrote:

 -Loki- wrote:
He also works nights, has 3 kids and is married.

So he has time to play and time to assemble his models, but not enough time to spend an hour or two doing a basic paint job on the entire army? Maybe he should just give up a single game of 40k and spend that time painting everything so he never has to paint again.

I am guessing you are single? Or have no kids?

At my current pace it will take me a year to finish my army, if I lucky.
A rule like this would effectively punish me for being disabled in a hobby and game I enjoy.
Even when I do get the chance to paint I may not desire to paint a 40k army, which can often have 30+ of the same model in it.
And how could you enforce such a rule agenst new players, who often get pushed to purchase more models than they can paint quickly by this very community.
In this you have large army's for a standard games often, I just can't see anyone being able to enforce it without cutting there longer players from the new players.

I'm a wargamer who likes the challenge of a game, loves the background, and uses the hobby as one of my main social activities. I also don't like painting - I'm really slow and very bad at it, and it's disheartening and demotivating to spend so much time on doing something when the results are so mediocre at best - especially when those with fully painted armies are also excellent painters. There's always been a feeling along the lines of "I can leave my models unpainted and look rubbish compared to them, or I can spend ages painting my models... and still look rubbish compared to them."

I know this is a weakness I have, and so with my new army I'm forcing myself to spend the time to get each unit painted to a basic tabletop standard before I start on the next.

The best way I've found to get stuff painted to a basic level is to get your friends to help. They will appreciate playing against a painted army as much as you will appreciate having on. Therefore buy them pizza, supply a decent DVD, and get 4-6 people round for an evening's production line painting. Your painted model count will go up like anything...

Forterix wrote:
I resent the insinuation that I have not painted my army because I'm lazy. I have not painted my army because I'm deluded, meticulous, egotistical, have the artistic abilities of a slightly rotten carrot, AND am lazy.

- best thing I've read all day

And on topic -

I voted for.

Just because I prefer to see armies painted on the table. It beats seeing things like a 4 way battle, with grey knights, space wolves, dark eldar and blood angels with nothing painted. Then when squads die, they were just scooped up and dropped into a 'dead pile'. I know they are well within their rights to do this but I just felt disappointed that they didn't show the same care and attention most of the people I regularly play against do (and also it seemed they'd all gone for the 'latest kill everything army' this was during 5th ed)

The other good use for painting mini's is to stop theft/arguments - If someone tried to walk off with any of my eldar I'd immediately know. Because I don't think anyone else has used Warlock Purple and Skull White as the base for an eldar army. Hearing two kids each trying to claim in GW that it's "My (completely unpainted/damaged) Abaddon" was a little depressing.

I'm not fussed about extra rules gamewise and I'd still play against unpainted armies, but I'd love there to be an incentive for everyone to have everything painted all the time. But then, I'd also quite like world peace, which judging by the 2 sides in the thread is possibly more likely

 SoloFalcon1138 wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 -Loki- wrote:
He also works nights, has 3 kids and is married.

So he has time to play and time to assemble his models, but not enough time to spend an hour or two doing a basic paint job on the entire army? Maybe he should just give up a single game of 40k and spend that time painting everything so he never has to paint again.

I am guessing you are single? Or have no kids?

Kids, I wouldn't know. But if you are struggling to find your own time when you've got a girlfriend you need to man up. If i had to spend every minute of my non working life with a woman I'd go insane.

 Glorioski wrote:

 SoloFalcon1138 wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 -Loki- wrote:
He also works nights, has 3 kids and is married.

So he has time to play and time to assemble his models, but not enough time to spend an hour or two doing a basic paint job on the entire army? Maybe he should just give up a single game of 40k and spend that time painting everything so he never has to paint again.

I am guessing you are single? Or have no kids?

Kids, I wouldn't know. But if you are struggling to find your own time when you've got a girlfriend you need to man up. If i had to spend every minute of my non working life with a woman I'd go insane.

Lol based on that statement I know you aren't married. And if that's your attitude then you probably never will be.

Ever heard the saying "Happy wife, happy life?"

I'm just saying if "manning up" and painting my army means I'm sleeping on the couch for a while then I'll be more than happy with my grey plastic minis.

I cheat - I get my wife to paint

Solves all the problems. That and she's better at it than I am.

CrowSplat wrote:
Ever heard the saying "Happy wife, happy life?"

wife..happy life?

I'm all for promoting the hobby and using painted models as much as possible, but I wouldn't play in a club/store/tournament that has this rule, and I have enough painted stuff to never field unpainted models.

 Glorioski wrote:
It is interesting how many people are seeing this as a penalty/punishment for unpainted armies rather than a reward for painted ones.

It is both of these things at the same time.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Peregrine wrote:

 curran12 wrote:
Honestly, you keep putting your personal experience as "fact of the world that is irrefutable." My personal experience is different, I play with folks big into fluff, and we are back into this circular argument. You are not the world. Your personal experience is not the world.

Sure, and in that situation refusing to spend even a small amount of time coming up with some basic fluff would be disrespectful and I would have no problem with imposing a penalty on no-fluff armies.

. This game is different things to different people and expecting all of the other players to look at the game with your priorities is disrespectful and completely unrealistic. For me, the Fluff is completely irrelevant, it is in a very distant third place compared to painting and actual gameplay (IMO the most fun part of the hobby). My main army is fully painted, but mostly because I bring it to tournaments and I want to get a full paint score. I would have painted it eventually anyway, but the tournaments were the spur that got me to complete it. I have no problems playing against people that have unpainted (or even not fully assembled) units. It just doesn't bother me at all as long as I can determine what is what when the game starts. I might prefer playing fully painted armies, and I do enjoy getting compliments for mine and giving the same for other armies that I see, but for me it all comes down to rolling the dice on the table.

 Fafnir wrote:

SBG wrote:
It's easy to do given enough time.

That's a luxury I'd love to have. I really would. I haven't had a chance to paint in months. I'm sure there are plenty of people out there in a similar boat.

QFT

I do have a painted 40k Army that comes in at around 3000 pts painted

However most of my fantasy is unpainted (You try painting over 300 tiny rats with details).

Painting is a choice I have a friend who is a VP in a spin-off company from a large government contractor. He has 3 huge armies and he has most of his models assembled but to be hinest he doesn't even have as much time as i do to paint ( I get 2-3 models done a week.)

People should nvere be penalized for enjoying the hobby. Now if it has been approximately 3 months and you know they have plenty time then there is no excuse for not having started.

Also I feel Most tournaments using painting as a way to keep people from just building an army and hopping from codex to codex with out effort.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Eldarain wrote:
I'd be fine with it amongst a group of friends trying to motivate each other to get everything painted.

I'd be opposed to it as a set rule at a store or club. I think new players should be able to begin painting at their own pace. It can be incredibly daunting to attack these expensive kits with an unskilled hand.

GOod points this explains how i feel concisely.

Wait Wait Wait. I have maybe 3 hours of free time each evening and I should get punished because I dont spend every moment of that painting?

I have 3 armies with about 2000 points in each. They are getting done slowly but I'm not going to rush them just so they're done.

I'm sorry but this is a silly idea, it wouldn't work. New players wouldn't want to play because they'd be at such a disadvantage (Even more than usual) and people without the time or interest to paint would just stop the hobby altogether, it would kill GW.

i voted against cause frankly i can see why people wouldnt want to paint all there models or any.
i dont spend every night painting but in about 2 weeks (4 days of actual painting) i only have 21 ork boyz ready and compared to most people they look awfull, its frankly daunting to keep going at it because i would like a green tide so badly, just the thaught of having to paint 100+ models is just well discouraging, i will paint them all.
anyhow what im trying to say is dont punish people for an unpainted army as far as im aware it doesnt state in the rulebook that your army has to painted to enjoy the game.
tourneys might have rules on that but other then that let the people enjoy the game

 Reeeen wrote:
Wait Wait Wait. I have maybe 3 hours of free time each evening and I should get punished because I dont spend every moment of that painting?

I have 3 armies with about 2000 points in each. They are getting done slowly but I'm not going to rush them just so they're done.

I'm sorry but this is a silly idea, it wouldn't work. New players wouldn't want to play because they'd be at such a disadvantage (Even more than usual) and people without the time or interest to paint would just stop the hobby altogether, it would kill GW.

I think you are taking the OP's discussion off track. He's not saying you need to spend all your spare time painting, he's just saying you spend too much time doing other things....

Seriously, the OP may want to get out of the basement, have a drink, and get laid. Proposed a rule like this is ridiculously elitist, not to mention asinine and divisive. There are some of us who enjoy this hobby that have time issues, like two jobs, kids, significant others, etc. Not all of us have the advantage of living in our parents' basements, not having a job, and having alk the time in the world to have Golden Demon-ready armies for playing.

Seriously, if you voted anything but against on this, you really need a life.

Some people just like to see two fully painted armies face off.
2 wweeks ago, a guy came in and asked me right off the bat to play?
Why? Because im one of the few who has an entirely painted army there and he thought it would look great and cinematic.
Looking at a table of fully painted models is great. I put time into every model i paint so i can have that impressive look on the table.
It just sucks that no one else feels that way sometimes.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Some people just like to see two fully painted armies face off.
2 wweeks ago, a guy came in and asked me right off the bat to play?
Why? Because im one of the few who has an entirely painted army there and he thought it would look great and cinematic.
Looking at a table of fully painted models is great. I put time into every model i paint so i can have that impressive look on the table.
It just sucks that no one else feels that way sometimes.

Don't get me wrong, I love painting and I love seeing fully painted and modelled armies. However, things like life can get in the way. So you're telling me that, in our hypothetical gaming club, my friends would penalize me for not having the same dedication to thw game that they do? What's next? My army loses a mini everytime I don't talk like 40k character? Or that my flyers are grounded because I didn't wear a custom made costume of a Necron lord?

This thread is asinine trolling at its finest.

 SoloFalcon1138 wrote:


Seriously, if you voted anything but against on this, you really need a life.

I agree, its great to see a fully painted army, but people also need to do other things

As for me, I paint as much as I could, I am very slow as I want perfection and take days to decide even tiny details of my armies, I love them really. I never field bare plastic, everything is at least primed and really dislike plastic on the field.

That said, it's a game first with models and fluff second, otherwise the whole affair just doesn't make sense and I may as well buy 40 times the same book to collect on my shelf. Tons of boardgames have unpainted plastic figures or blocky pieces of wood for units and have great gameplay and guess what, mood. The rule is HAAC TFG facist collectors idea that would be laughed at when applied to any other serious game around as it's the game that is important not looking at pretty dioramas, do it at home if you love it so much.

I came to like painting but at the beginning it's a chore and I can imagine that for most people it's a huge waste of time. On the other hand it is huge waste of money to buy a beautiful 70$ model and leave it plastic grey, that's not my business though but the owner.

 Glorioski wrote:
Kids, I wouldn't know. But if you are struggling to find your own time when you've got a girlfriend you need to man up. If i had to spend every minute of my non working life with a woman I'd go insane.

So... you don't know what it's like being married and having kids. Yet you are arguing as if you do know. How about you man up and admit that your are wrong here?

Nah, that's not going to happen.

 -Loki- wrote:

 Glorioski wrote:
Kids, I wouldn't know. But if you are struggling to find your own time when you've got a girlfriend you need to man up. If i had to spend every minute of my non working life with a woman I'd go insane.

So... you don't know what it's like being married and having kids. Yet you are arguing as if you do know. How about you man up and admit that your are wrong here?

Nah, that's not going to happen.

Wrong about what? I have barely made any objective statements in this thread so far.

 -Loki- wrote:

 Glorioski wrote:
Kids, I wouldn't know. But if you are struggling to find your own time when you've got a girlfriend you need to man up. If i had to spend every minute of my non working life with a woman I'd go insane.

So... you don't know what it's like being married and having kids. Yet you are arguing as if you do know. How about you man up and admit that your are wrong here?

Nah, that's not going to happen.

I'm married with kids. I think all wargamers should be able to take the time to get their models painted. Especially the people in this thread who have time to post on Dakka, but apparently don't have time to paint...

 Kaldor wrote:
I'm married with kids. I think all wargamers should be able to take the time to get their models painted. Especially the people in this thread who have time to post on Dakka, but apparently don't have time to paint...

I don't know about anyone else here, but I do most of my posting and forum reading while at work. Busting out some paints and toy soldiers in my cube might attract a bit more notice.

 Kaldor wrote:

 -Loki- wrote:

 Glorioski wrote:
Kids, I wouldn't know. But if you are struggling to find your own time when you've got a girlfriend you need to man up. If i had to spend every minute of my non working life with a woman I'd go insane.

So... you don't know what it's like being married and having kids. Yet you are arguing as if you do know. How about you man up and admit that your are wrong here?

Nah, that's not going to happen.

I'm married with kids. I think all wargamers should be able to take the time to get their models painted. Especially the people in this thread who have time to post on Dakka, but apparently don't have time to paint...

Posting to dakka from work? from your mobile when bored on a train? That is a silly point to try and make

Voted against, fairly surprised at some of the reactions in this thread...Didn't realise that certain people feel so strongly about playing against unpainted armies, don't think any one of my friends has a fully painted army. Most of us barely have the time to get a 2 hour game in once every month or so, let alone paint an army lol...

Some people don't like how other people spend their off time when playing a tabletop war game? I really could care less. I have a fully painted army and I try to field only painted models. But that is my choice that I made. I would never try to impose my own personal standards on someone else.

Though if I ever met someone who really hated playing against an I painted army that he'd make a judge of character or expect a penalty, I'd like to know. Because I'd never play against them or at an establishment that would enforce such a policy. I don't care how pretty your models are. It's not going to make you less of a jerk on the inside. And that's really what I care about in this game. The people.

 Savageconvoy wrote:
Some people don't like how other people spend their off time when playing a tabletop war game? I really could care less. I have a fully painted army and I try to field only painted models. But that is my choice that I made. I would never try to impose my own personal standards on someone else.

Though if I ever met someone who really hated playing against an I painted army that he'd make a judge of character or expect a penalty, I'd like to know. Because I'd never play against them or at an establishment that would enforce such a policy. I don't care how pretty your models are. It's not going to make you less of a jerk on the inside. And that's really what I care about in this game. The people.

So most tournaments go worse and disallow unpainted armies altogether. Are their TOs also jerks?

Tournaments are different. They have their own rules and set their limits. They have points given out to well painted armies, entry requirements and actually make some dedicate time to attend one. Not everyone's schedule matches tournament times. And they can ban legitimate units. Such as Forgeworld and fortifications.

But a casual game at "friendly" game store is something different. That's like expecting someone to get a full uniform to play basketball at the gym because that's what the pros do.

 Glorioski wrote:

 Savageconvoy wrote:
Some people don't like how other people spend their off time when playing a tabletop war game? I really could care less. I have a fully painted army and I try to field only painted models. But that is my choice that I made. I would never try to impose my own personal standards on someone else.

Though if I ever met someone who really hated playing against an I painted army that he'd make a judge of character or expect a penalty, I'd like to know. Because I'd never play against them or at an establishment that would enforce such a policy. I don't care how pretty your models are. It's not going to make you less of a jerk on the inside. And that's really what I care about in this game. The people.

So most tournaments go worse and disallow unpainted armies altogether. Are their TOs also jerks?

That's not what your thread is about. Its about casual gaming in your local group/club. I don't carebof a TO requires it, that's part of the price of admission.

I voted for?

I just think that you are buying into a hobby that really includes painting, modelling and wargaming. Not just wargaming. I have school, five days a week, with ridiculous amounts of homework every night and even more during the weekend. That's without including study. But I still make time for the hobby that I enjoy.
I don't get this business of "Oh I don't have the time to do such and such!" I have the mindset that you make time for the things you enjoy, some things have to be done but I make the time everyday for some sort of painting, be it half an hour or fifteen minutes, I get something done, even just minimal stuff.
I understand if someone has a new army that hasn't had paint on it yet or some of the army is partially painted but when I see a grey army that should be painted from the amount of time they have had it it makes no sense to have it painted.

Some people have school, work, and families. Try telling a single parent that he/she is lazy because they don't paint to make you happy.

Some people do have genuine reasons, like the one you mentioned Savageconvoy, but the only reason I voted for was because I was thinking about people who say they don't have time when they really do.

 SoloFalcon1138 wrote:

 Glorioski wrote:

 Savageconvoy wrote:
Some people don't like how other people spend their off time when playing a tabletop war game? I really could care less. I have a fully painted army and I try to field only painted models. But that is my choice that I made. I would never try to impose my own personal standards on someone else.

Though if I ever met someone who really hated playing against an I painted army that he'd make a judge of character or expect a penalty, I'd like to know. Because I'd never play against them or at an establishment that would enforce such a policy. I don't care how pretty your models are. It's not going to make you less of a jerk on the inside. And that's really what I care about in this game. The people.

So most tournaments go worse and disallow unpainted armies altogether. Are their TOs also jerks?

That's not what your thread is about. Its about casual gaming in your local group/club. I don't carebof a TO requires it, that's part of the price of admission.

Sure. The question was put towards Savageconvoy who didn't specify when he said "an establishment". It wasn't rhetorical either, I am interested in his viewpoint.

I already stated my opinion at the top of this page.

So you want to penalize people starting out? Booooo all I do now is plan out tactics and paint. I have only played 1 game in 2 months since starting since the place i play at has a painted rule. Its sad really.

Can we get a mod lock now?

 Savageconvoy wrote:
Some people have school, work, and families. Try telling a single parent that he/she is lazy because they don't paint to make you happy.

So what you're saying is, all the people with unpainted armies are single parents working 60 hours a week?

Also, apparently everyone posts from work and on the train. I don't know what all you people do when you get home.

 SoloFalcon1138 wrote:
Can we get a mod lock now?

Seconded

My example isn't supposed to cover every person, but it still stands. You don't know what anyone else's schedule is, nor do you dictate how they spend their time out side the game.

And I'm posting while working on projects.

 Kaldor wrote:

 Savageconvoy wrote:
Some people have school, work, and families. Try telling a single parent that he/she is lazy because they don't paint to make you happy.

So what you're saying is, all the people with unpainted armies are single parents working 60 hours a week?

Also, apparently everyone posts from work and on the train. I don't know what all you people do when you get home.

The point he was trying to make was that not everyone has the same amount of time. I do not have anywhere near enough time to paint any of my three armies due to the fact that I'm moving, I have school, I have a job, and I have a significant other. As much as I like 40k, it is not at the top of my priorities, just as it isn't for plenty of people. Not everyone prioritizes their hobby above everything else, especially if those people are extremely busy with, you know, life.

I've spent probably $1k on my three armies, and I'll be damned before some tool decides that he gets Preferred Enemy because I don't have the time required to paint about 4 dozen models. Although, I haven't even had toime to play a game of 40k since 6th came out.

I have been lurking here for a year, ever since I returned to Warhammer after a 20 year break.

I feel so strongly about this topic, I had to register.

It's my experience that the people with unpainted armies are WAAC Tryhards with more money than talent, who go out and purchase whatever the current OP Netlist happens to be. If you go out and look, your going to see a lot of unpainted Necroissant Armies, flamer/screamer hordes and Gk Termie blobs. I imagine there's a virtual Air Force of unpainted Valkyries and Vendettas out there right now. I can't imagine having the sheer stupid audacity to put down an unpainted wall of Razorbacks.

I would rather pick an army, paint it, tweak it and learn how to win with it. I have no respect for people who must pick up whatever the Internet says is best, and I don't play with those people.

At my local GW, those people (mostly kids who live at home and can afford a new army every time Matt Ward makes a new codx) play each other, and the grown ups play each other.

Oddly I've never seen the flavor of the month/Waac players with less than 75% painted units. Just what I've seen personally. And I haven't played at many stores.

I'm with savage. Whenever someone plays me with a cheesy list, it actually tends to be painted more often than not.

Not that I don't believe you. Such a situation is logical enough, but kind of silly. Most tournies have painting requirements, and why would you want to be a WAAC player outside of those? That just makes you a TFG that nobody likes and nobody wants to play after the first round.

 Necroshea wrote:
I'm with savage. Whenever someone plays me with a cheesy list, it actually tends to be painted more often than not.

Not that I don't believe you. Such a situation is logical enough, but kind of silly. Most tournies have painting requirements, and why would you want to be a WAAC player outside of those? That just makes you a TFG that nobody likes and nobody wants to play after the first round.

You're throwing around words, large insulting words like TFG and WAAC, quite willy nilly. Makes it seem like you don't fully understand what they mean or the gravity behind such a name.

It wasn't directed at anyone. It's just a simple analogy. They can't have much less weight than that.

MakesKidsKill wrote:
It's my experience that the people with unpainted armies are WAAC Tryhards with more money than talent, who go out and purchase whatever the current OP Netlist happens to be.

I love anectodal evidence. To use one I used in another thread - I never see anyone buying or playing Flames of War at my FLGS. No one in the entire world plays Flames of War.

Your experience is just that - your experience. Trying to pass it off as accurate in the larger community in any way makes you look stupid.

McNinja wrote:The point he was trying to make was that not everyone has the same amount of time.

This is pretty much the best post. To expand on it - not everyone has the same amount of free time, and not everyone prioritises things the same way. That doesn't make their priorities wrong, it just makes their priorities different to other people, because people are individuals with different priorities.

 -Loki- wrote:

MakesKidsKill wrote:
It's my experience that the people with unpainted armies are WAAC Tryhards with more money than talent, who go out and purchase whatever the current OP Netlist happens to be.

I love anectodal evidence. To use one I used in another thread - I never see anyone buying or playing Flames of War at my FLGS. No one in the entire world plays Flames of War.

Your experience is just that - your experience. Trying to pass it off as accurate in the larger community in any way makes you look stupid.

Yeah, in my experience unpainted armies cover the whole range from competitive to awful, and none of them have been TFG. The only thing they've had in common is the owner not giving a about how their army looks.

Honestly does it matter?

Want to play games against fully painted armies? Don't play games against unpainted armies.

Don't mind playing games against the grey/metal horde? Go play then.

One is not strictly better than the other and both individual and mass opinion on the matter doesn't really affect the fact that those of us with fully painted armies will play games against unpainted armies (regardless of preference).

 Cryonicleech wrote:
Honestly does it matter?

Want to play games against fully painted armies? Don't play games against unpainted armies.

Don't mind playing games against the grey/metal horde? Go play then.

One is not strictly better than the other and both individual and mass opinion on the matter doesn't really affect the fact that those of us with fully painted armies will play games against unpainted armies (regardless of preference).

Well stated

 -Loki- wrote:
This is pretty much the best post. To expand on it - not everyone has the same amount of free time, and not everyone prioritises things the same way. That doesn't make their priorities wrong, it just makes their priorities different to other people, because people are individuals with different priorities.

While their priorities aren't wrong, they are at odds with the hobby. It involves painting. Why start the hobby, if you don't like painting? It'd be like joining a soccer team if you didn't like soccer.

 Kaldor wrote:

 -Loki- wrote:
This is pretty much the best post. To expand on it - not everyone has the same amount of free time, and not everyone prioritises things the same way. That doesn't make their priorities wrong, it just makes their priorities different to other people, because people are individuals with different priorities.

While their priorities aren't wrong, they are at odds with the hobby. It involves painting. Why start the hobby, if you don't like painting? It'd be like joining a soccer team if you didn't like soccer.

I think it's more like joining a soccer team and you don't like being a goalie.

 Kaldor wrote:

 -Loki- wrote:
This is pretty much the best post. To expand on it - not everyone has the same amount of free time, and not everyone prioritises things the same way. That doesn't make their priorities wrong, it just makes their priorities different to other people, because people are individuals with different priorities.

While their priorities aren't wrong, they are at odds with the hobby. It involves painting. Why start the hobby, if you don't like painting? It'd be like joining a soccer team if you didn't like soccer.

I hate painting. I thoroughly enjoy Building/Converting and playing the game in a competitive environment. Luckily I have a friend who loves to paint more than he likes to play.

No. It's like learning how to repair a car engine, but not learning how to paint the car itself. Like learning how to grow vegetables but not learning how to cook. It's a tabletop game.

You're not playing someone in a paint off. You're playing someone on a table with models in a strategy game. Asking them to make their property pleasing to aesthetic tastes is not part of that game.

 Kaldor wrote:

 -Loki- wrote:
This is pretty much the best post. To expand on it - not everyone has the same amount of free time, and not everyone prioritises things the same way. That doesn't make their priorities wrong, it just makes their priorities different to other people, because people are individuals with different priorities.

While their priorities aren't wrong, they are at odds with the hobby. It involves painting. Why start the hobby, if you don't like painting? It'd be like joining a soccer team if you didn't like soccer.

It's not the hobby, it's the expensive tabletop game with great models that are sold unpainted. You can make it into your hobby by converting, painting like a pro, writing fan fiction or sth but using "this is hobby" as an argument reminds me of GW trying to push 40k tabletop game as a "Games Workshop Hobby" like it was something unique in the gaming world.

I hate this elitist attitude that people with unpainted stuff are inferior in some way. My LGS (distinct lack of Friendly there) semi-recently dropped the ultimatum of if your army isn't painted, you can't play there. Period. Mine is about 1/3 of the way there, but I'm just not really motivated to paint very often.

Not everyone has that kind of time OR inclination. I'm a sophomore engineering student, I spend the entire day with a pencil in my hand, the last thing I usually want to do in my free time is pick up a brush. I'd rather watch TV, or play some Xbox, spend time with my girlfriend, read a book, etc. Painting just seems like a chore to me, and I'm sure there are plenty of other people who feel the same way. I'm not a very good painter, so it takes about an hour per model to get them looking any sort of decent. Why would I want to spend my really limited hobby time on that when I could go get in a game?

Be honest, does it really ruin your whole week to see unpainted or partially painted minis across from you? And if it does, how bad is it to just not play them and let someone with a little less prejudice enjoy the game?

 Kaldor wrote:

 -Loki- wrote:
This is pretty much the best post. To expand on it - not everyone has the same amount of free time, and not everyone prioritises things the same way. That doesn't make their priorities wrong, it just makes their priorities different to other people, because people are individuals with different priorities.

While their priorities aren't wrong, they are at odds with the hobby. It involves painting. Why start the hobby, if you don't like painting? It'd be like joining a soccer team if you didn't like soccer.

It's a multifaceted hobby.

That's remarkably obvious.

It involves modeling, playing, and painting. That's clear to (almost) everybody.

Soccer involves Offense, Defense, and Goalkeeping.

You can do all three of both, but you can also get along perfectly doing one or two.

 -Loki- wrote:

MakesKidsKill wrote:
It's my experience that the people with unpainted armies are WAAC Tryhards with more money than talent, who go out and purchase whatever the current OP Netlist happens to be.

I love anectodal evidence. To use one I used in another thread - I never see anyone buying or playing Flames of War at my FLGS. No one in the entire world plays Flames of War.

Your experience is just that - your experience. Trying to pass it off as accurate in the larger community in any way makes you look stupid.

Dude, what's wrong with stating my experience? Literally, ones experiences are the only thing a person can truly trust. I've been playing GW games for 25 years, I believe my experience is hugely accurate about the community.

What would you use to judge what sort of people play unpainted armies, if not your experience? The massive peer reviewed databases full,of data?

MakesKidsKill wrote:

What would you use to judge what sort of people play unpainted armies, if not your experience? The massive peer reviewed databases full,of data?

Uh, yeah.

Peer reviewed databases full of data would be a lot better. Experience is not representative of anything but said experience.

How is that not obvious?

MakesKidsKill wrote:

 -Loki- wrote:

MakesKidsKill wrote:
It's my experience that the people with unpainted armies are WAAC Tryhards with more money than talent, who go out and purchase whatever the current OP Netlist happens to be.

I love anectodal evidence. To use one I used in another thread - I never see anyone buying or playing Flames of War at my FLGS. No one in the entire world plays Flames of War.

Your experience is just that - your experience. Trying to pass it off as accurate in the larger community in any way makes you look stupid.

Dude, what's wrong with stating my experience? Literally, ones experiences are the only thing a person can truly trust. I've been playing GW games for 25 years, I believe my experience is hugely accurate about the community.

What would you use to judge what sort of people play unpainted armies, if not your experience? The massive peer reviewed databases full,of data?

How about don't pass judgement on randoms who you've never met from communities different to yours?

pre-emptive edit: lol at the idea of not judging, this is the internet, what am I thinking

and this is still going nowhere, to echo solofalcon's post earlier...

Edited by Manchu.

Edited by Manchu.

A persons experience is literally all we have to go on

Something being the only available source does not make it a good source.

It's still the best available.

Lock time, now?

 TheCaptain wrote:
Edited by Manchu.

A persons experience is literally all we have to go on

Something being the only available source does not make it a good source.

It literally makes it the only source.

MakesKidsKill wrote:

 TheCaptain wrote:
Edited by Manchu.

A persons experience is literally all we have to go on

Something being the only available source does not make it a good source.

It literally makes it the only source.

False. Other people's experiences are another source.

Experiences are still horrible sources in reference to a larger populace than that affected by your experience.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/90/484235.page#5042921

The last comment is for the OP...

 Kaldor wrote:

 -Loki- wrote:
This is pretty much the best post. To expand on it - not everyone has the same amount of free time, and not everyone prioritises things the same way. That doesn't make their priorities wrong, it just makes their priorities different to other people, because people are individuals with different priorities.

While their priorities aren't wrong, they are at odds with the hobby. It involves painting. Why start the hobby, if you don't like painting? It'd be like joining a soccer team if you didn't like soccer.

Whose hobby, your hobby? If someone decides to not play at all, but instead builds diaramas for entry into Golden Daemon, are they to be disrespected for not playing the game as much as people get disrespected for playing the game but not painting their models? They're ignoring a facet of the hobby. They've got just as much impact on the hobby as someone playing with an unpainted army for you - absolutely none, because just like you'll never get to play the person only making diaramas, you don't have to play those people with unpainted armies.

This whole thread is basically people telling other people that they have to do what they want them to do. Some people don't want to or can't paint their models for various reasons. There's no rule in any rulebook saying that armies have to be painted. Thus, stop pushing your idea of the hobby on other individuals. If their enjoyment of the hobby conflicts with yours, simply do not play them.

Anything to get models painted is a good idea. If you don't like painting your models whats the point of having them.

I think it comes down to a different strokes for different folks thing. Some people think its a must to paint your army to play the game, others do not. How you treat your mini's is an individual thing.

It also depends on how you view it. To me its a game with miniatures. Just a game, not a hobby. A hobby for me would be building them, painting them and making dioramas. Or in my case, collecting toys and making photo comics.
If it was say model aeroplanes then like 99.9% of people will build and paint, its just a norm for building models. It "completes" the overall effect personally for that person.

I personally don't find painting my minis a must. I care about playing the game, I want to play the game, playing it makes me happy. Getting frustrated on substandard paint jobs or how its not working out how I want it to makes me depressed. So for me, I just want to play the game. I admire people who have great paint jobs, I imagine how my things could look as great if I had their skill but I don't.
My brother paints his things, he has a lot of study to do for his course, plus the house maintenance, looking after the kids etc. But he finds the time to paint his mini's because he makes it a shared activity with his eldest child as well as being a way he unwinds. Where as I unwind via music and playing board/video games, even if I have to play by myself. The times where I do artistic work is when I am in my deepest depression but my art is writing poems.

But the different strokes for different folks thing, I think is what is most important to remember with all the anger and hurtful remarks being made here. Some people like Picasso and Basquiat, others Dali or Da Vinci.

I'm sure I'm not the only one that finds themselves glued to members of the Imperium or staring at a recently built mini and thinking... You look like you fell off the ugly tree... I have Catachans that look like drugged zombies... Or Mutants...

 -Loki- wrote:
Some people don't want to or can't paint their models for various reasons.

Ok. So why choose a hobby that involves painting models?

 Kaldor wrote:

 -Loki- wrote:
Some people don't want to or can't paint their models for various reasons.

Ok. So why choose a hobby that involves painting models?

For the same reason that some people pick up the hobby but don't play games.

 Kaldor wrote:

 -Loki- wrote:
Some people don't want to or can't paint their models for various reasons.

Ok. So why choose a hobby that involves painting models?

but it doesnt . no where in the game rules does it say your models have to be painted. there are sections about rules , LoS[so models have to be there in physical form to use them] , about rolling [when , what and where] . no where in the rules does it say and to play a 2k pts IG army you need to have it painted with at least X colors .

people pick up the hobby to play a game , if there are those who want to paint and even are good at it , awesome for those people . But why should those decide what the game is about , when the rules clearly dont mention painting .

Makumba wrote:
but it doesnt . no where in the game rules does it say your models have to be painted. there are sections about rules , LoS[so models have to be there in physical form to use them] , about rolling [when , what and where] . no where in the rules does it say and to play a 2k pts IG army you need to have it painted with at least X colors .

So what? Nobody is arguing that the rules of the game require painting, they're arguing in favor of a house rule that requires it (or at least punishes unpainted models to some degree). Pointing out that it's a house rule isn't really a relevant criticism.

yes, a house rule for supposedly friendly play...

 Kaldor wrote:

 -Loki- wrote:
Some people don't want to or can't paint their models for various reasons.

Ok. So why choose a hobby that involves painting models?

Why do people get into the hobby just to make dioramas? Why do people only paint individual models? Both of these people are ignoring the gaming aspect. If you struck up a conversation at a store with them, would you talk down to them for not playing the game? That's as big a part of the wargaming hobby as painting.

It's not up to you to tell someone else that they're not allowed to enjoy their hobby the way they want to, or penalise them for not enjoying the hobby the way you do.

Thank you, Loki.

/thread

 -Loki- wrote:
Why do people get into the hobby just to make dioramas? Why do people only paint individual models? Both of these people are ignoring the gaming aspect. If you struck up a conversation at a store with them, would you talk down to them for not playing the game? That's as big a part of the wargaming hobby as painting.

It's not up to you to tell someone else that they're not allowed to enjoy their hobby the way they want to, or penalise them for not enjoying the hobby the way you do.

The difference is that the person who only paints doesn't involve anyone else in their choices, while the person who refuses to paint changes their opponent's experience of the game as well as their own. Sure, you can choose not to play them, but that's exactly what the proposed rule does: it excludes or punishes people who the OP doesn't want to spend their hobby time with.

Threads like these are proof that there will never be peace on our planet as there will never be complete consensus and some always want to push their opinions onto others or refuse any opinion other than their own.

This hobby is what you make of it. For some it's only the gaming, for others it's only modeling, though many combine them. NONE of them are wrong nor right.
Painting the figures is an option, nothing more.

Also no one should be allowed to dictate how people spend their free time.

 Peregrine wrote:

 -Loki- wrote:
Why do people get into the hobby just to make dioramas? Why do people only paint individual models? Both of these people are ignoring the gaming aspect. If you struck up a conversation at a store with them, would you talk down to them for not playing the game? That's as big a part of the wargaming hobby as painting.

It's not up to you to tell someone else that they're not allowed to enjoy their hobby the way they want to, or penalise them for not enjoying the hobby the way you do.

The difference is that the person who only paints doesn't involve anyone else in their choices, while the person who refuses to paint changes their opponent's experience of the game as well as their own. Sure, you can choose not to play them, but that's exactly what the proposed rule does: it excludes or punishes people who the OP doesn't want to spend their hobby time with.

Then just don't spend your hobby time with them..

Oh, look, problem solved. No need to insult someone for no reason other than to be a smug elitist.

I thaght to ask. For the people for this rule in a club or shop, how would you enforce it? And how would you deal with someone that motivated or not cannot meet your deadline?

 SoloFalcon1138 wrote:
Lock time, now?

In before. Threads about painted minis vs unpainted minis always end the same.

- I prefer painted models.
- You have no girlfriend, you have no social life, you are a moron.

 angel of ecstasy wrote:

 SoloFalcon1138 wrote:
Lock time, now?

In before. Threads about painted minis vs unpainted minis always end the same.

- I prefer painted models.
- You have no girlfriend, you have no social life, you are a moron.

And that's pretty much how it went.