It beats facing crappy AI in video games by a long shot. When you face a competent opponent in a wargame it actually feels like a tactical exercise and it rather enjoyable.
As for children, they tend to like the idea of gaming, but often grow tiresome of the effort involved in setting up.
I applaud you for getting them painted one way or another. I guess I'm talking about the people that just leave the models grey. Seems hard to justify the purchase.
I hate playing with unpainted grey models, I will make sure everything at least gets a base coat before it goes onto the table, which reminds me I need to sort a LandSpeeder before Friday... but I digress.
I love to see a fully painted and based army, to any level of skill, if you can see effort went in even if the results are a little 'shaky' it makes me respect the persons interest in the hobby a little more.
Saying all that I am however completely willing to play on an unpainted wooden board with unpainted wooden buildings on it...
Some people like the game and don't like painting. Others just started the army and wanted to get everything put together quickly so they can play and will worry about painting later. I'm a LEO working the night shift. When most people are playing, I'm at work. My days off are Sunday and Monday, the GW I play at is closed Monday. That gives me Monday to paint. Sunday I have to choose between painting my army or actually playing games with them, which is what I bought them for. For people with limited time, it's at lot easier to justify playing with grey models than having a well painted army that you've never played a game with because all your free time went into painting.
I myself have adhd so I dont get much painted. I also have so many armies and I enjoy the modeling possibilities. I enjoy customizing and building models. I seem to find building the models more fun then painting, although I have recently slowed down my model purchasing in hopes of getting more models painted.
Im in the same position as Toofast.
Due to working long hours, it comes down to painting or gaming, so painting is a very long and drawn out process for me.
Now i enjoy painting, but i prefer actually gaming, so its an easy call for me.
I paint them when I have to for a tournament or league but other than that it's something I do when GW and the shooting range are both closed and there's no good games on TV.
I love painting, but I'm also - a) incredibly slow. b) somewhat OCD about getting everything "perfect" making my slow painting even slower as I want all my models to match the mental image I have in my head.
Thus, I end up fielding a goodly number of primed/solo coloured models since I can spend literally an entire day just getting a single model done.
Because some people (like me) actually hate painting, and just prefer to play against people (which says something, considering I'm not overly social in person, let alone on the internet).
I'm not bad at painting, but I sure as hell hate it. I'd rather sit and play. If you don't like to play against unpainted models, that's fair enough. I have over 50% of my stuff painted, around 5% is either grey or under coated, the rest is "I started painting it, and had to set it aside to go to bed. I never got back to it". I will get back to it eventually, I just don't know when. My main reason for hating painting is that I hate painting Space Marines (barring Terminators, Ironclads, Drop Pods, Sanguinary Guard, and the non-armour on Centurions), but love how they play. I do love painting my Ork Boys when I'm in the mood for painting, but I've not played with their new 'dex yet, they just seem "meh" compared to their last 'dex.
Is it too late to start the countdown until someone tells someone with a social life, spouse, and/or kids that they should dedicate countless hours to painting to play a game?
Also, reasons to not paint:
-40K seems to be going in a bad direction and accelerating it's decent. It's looked that way for a long time for me. It's very hard to find motivation to paint for a game that I believe is either going to go away or just lose my interest entirely.
Between working four twelve hour NIGHT shifts a week and having a family to take care of, I paint when I can. I have undercoated about half of my army, and fully painted about a fourth of it or less. So, when I use my very few waking hours of free time to go play the game, I am most concerned with the fact that the models are assembled and look good. Having the models basecoated, washed, and highlighted is the goal, but as of right now, it is icing on the cake. I generally can only manage a few minis fully painted a week, tops.
Psienesis wrote: People who don't paint their models play 40k for the exact same reason everyone else does: Because they want to.
I had some big ole post typed out ready to go about all the different reasons why someone would play any game but then I saw this post and deleted mine as quite frankly nothing more needs to be said.
You can still enjoy the hobby, despite your models not being painted. There's no rule saying they can't. Some people aren't good painters, and would prefer to have grey models as opposed to models that looked like a kindergarten got ahold of them. I have no qualms with someone leaving their army unpainted, or just primed. It's THEIR army. Not mine.
Daly, I enjoy your attempts to troll the forum as much as the next slightly irritated by your continued presence on Dakka poster, but at least get some new material, some of us have looong memories.
The position taken by Daly would be more effective if he wasn't currently selling his Dark Eldar (the subject of many of his more volatile threads) which are almost all unpainted.
Eldarain wrote: The position taken by Daly would be more effective if he wasn't currently selling his Dark Eldar (the subject of many of his more volatile threads) which are almost all unpainted.
Swastakowey wrote: It beats facing crappy AI in video games by a long shot. When you face a competent opponent in a wargame it actually feels like a tactical exercise and it rather enjoyable.
But if that's what you want then why play 40k, a game with horrible rules and very little tactics? If you don't love the models I can't see why 40k would be appealing at all, unless it's the only wargame that anyone in your area plays and you'd rather play a bad game than no game at all.
How much do you really enjoy the fluff of a bunch of gray plastic? For me that just kills all hope of experiencing a game as a fluffy story in the world of 40k and brings it back to an exercise in throwing dice for a couple hours. I would've thought that fluff players would place the highest priority on painting.
I play plenty of other games for the same reason. 40K players have more intelligence and make a far better game than computer AI can achieve still (usually).
Swastakowey wrote: It beats facing crappy AI in video games by a long shot. When you face a competent opponent in a wargame it actually feels like a tactical exercise and it rather enjoyable.
But if that's what you want then why play 40k, a game with horrible rules and very little tactics? If you don't love the models I can't see why 40k would be appealing at all, unless it's the only wargame that anyone in your area plays and you'd rather play a bad game than no game at all.
How much do you really enjoy the fluff of a bunch of gray plastic? For me that just kills all hope of experiencing a game as a fluffy story in the world of 40k and brings it back to an exercise in throwing dice for a couple hours. I would've thought that fluff players would place the highest priority on painting.
How dare they like things differently from you eh Peri?
I must just have a better imagination than you, I dont even need models or an opponent just a table and some dice. Heck I bet I could imagine that too. I'm probably imagining this right now.
But really, who cares what other people do or don't as long as they don't do it to me.
Toofast wrote: For me the order of fun is
1. Gaming
2. Modeling
3. Painting
I paint them when I have to for a tournament or league but other than that it's something I do when GW and the shooting range are both closed and there's no good games on TV.
When just considering 40k my list would be:
1. Gaming
2. Reading fluff
3. List building
4. Discussing the hobby (fluff, lists, battles etc)
5. Modeling
6.Finding contradictory/unclear rules qnd discussing how they would function
7. Watching battles
8. Looking at all the pretty pictures/mates models
9. Having a break and a cup of tea (I don't even like tea)
99. Painting.
Im sure given long enough I could find 89 other things to do with 40k that i enjoy more than painting to fill up the list...
Automatically Appended Next Post: Oh I've thought of a couple more:
-looking on ebay for deals on painted models.
-finding ways to irritate people who think they are better than you because they have more time to paint and enjoy that part of the hobby.
Dalymiddleboro wrote: I applaud you for getting them painted one way or another. I guess I'm talking about the people that just leave the models grey. Seems hard to justify the purchase.
Because.....life. 40k is a hobby to most. A hobby that offers plenty of different aspects to those who have decided to take part in it.
Modelling (not just the cat walk) and painting (not just nudes) are the aspects that appeal to me the most.
I game when I can with friends who are just as busy as myself.
I enjoy painting, but I also enjoy spending time with my family, friends and saving kittens from tall trees whilst dressed as Captain Jack Sparrow.
If you don't enjoy playing against people with unpainted armies, break into their house when they sleep, paint their figures for them, help yourself to their cheerios and then your problems will be solved.
Personally I enjoy playing games. I enjoy building, converting, magnetizing models. I enjoy talking about warhammer40k, in person and on forums. I enjoy the fluff. I do not enjoy painting them, even though I've painted around half my army (which would be close to the model count of most non-ork armies) and didn't do a too shabby job on it. However, since I have a lot less free-time since I've got my current job I'd rather not spend it on things I do not enjoy.
I don't need my warboss to be painted to imagine a green eight foot tall brute wearing enough armor to build two tanks. I also don't need my converted tank-busta named Uhh-oh to be painted in order to imagine him dropping one of the seven tankbusta-bombs he's hold with both arms.
Dalymiddleboro wrote: I applaud you for getting them painted one way or another. I guess I'm talking about the people that just leave the models grey. Seems hard to justify the purchase.
They might like the grey color.
Actually, I like grey models a lot more than black or white primed models which prevent you from seeing any detail at all. I've actually thought about priming my metal, fine cast and green-stuff heavy models grey to make them look the same.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
NurglesTurtle wrote: Because.....life. 40k is a hobby to most. A hobby that offers plenty of different aspects to those who have decided to take part in it.
Modelling (not just the cat walk) and painting (not just nudes) are the aspects that appeal to me the most.
I game when I can with friends who are just as busy as myself.
I enjoy painting, but I also enjoy spending time with my family, friends and saving kittens from tall trees whilst dressed as Captain Jack Sparrow.
If you don't enjoy playing against people with unpainted armies, break into their house when they sleep, paint their figures for them, help yourself to their cheerios and then your problems will be solved.
Best solution ever. Bonus points if done while dressed as Captain Jack Sparrow.
Lol. Definetly. However if you have enough green stuff, you could model your face to look like Davey Jones, then you would get AAAAALLLL the bonus points and then some
Psienesis wrote: People who don't paint their models play 40k for the exact same reason everyone else does: Because they want to.
I had some big ole post typed out ready to go about all the different reasons why someone would play any game but then I saw this post and deleted mine as quite frankly nothing more needs to be said.
Agreed with these two posters. I paint my gak, and try to field fully or mostly painted miniatures as much as a I can, but I don't begrudge people that don't.
Also, this looks like another "Fire and Forget", stir-em-up thread from DailyMiddleBorro...
Dalymiddleboro wrote: Why not just play xwing or hero clix? How do non painters justify their cost of purchase?
Cos I like 40k I can more than afford to pay people to paint my models to a much higher standard than I coud acheive.
I have limited free time and I choose to do other stuff that paint.
I don't actually see what the issue is with some people obessing over what other people do or don't do with their own models - whilst I can see that grey armies can be a little off putting - at least they are assembled.
When I first started Warhammer, I grabbed a whole pile of Orks, and quickly realised the sight of them unpainted presented too daunting a task to complete. Next I fielded Necrons as they aren't difficult at all. So I'm in the "I play for fluff/models/gaming" boat, and don't like to field unpainted models as it detracts from those elements in my opinion.
However, my brother is very committed to both university and home work, and hence cannot afford the time required to paint models, particularly as he works in an art field and therefore likes to paint excellent models rather than speedpaint. That's just one reason why people might play 40k with unpainted models.
Other reasons... Family (and otherwise "I have a life" ), not interested in it, not good at it, etc.
Dalymiddleboro wrote: Why not just play xwing or hero clix? How do non painters justify their cost of purchase?
It is a table top game. It is ment to be played. If someone wants to paint there are cheaper and better looking models out there. There is also better stuff out there, if someone is in to modeling.
This for me as well. I know GW keeps telling us they are a 'model' company. What they seem to forget is htat 80-90 percent (my guess-timation) of the people that buy the models primarily buy them to play the game.
Toofast wrote: For me the order of fun is
1. Gaming
2. Modeling
3. Painting
I paint them when I have to for a tournament or league but other than that it's something I do when GW and the shooting range are both closed and there's no good games on TV.
I think there should be an effort to get your models painted, as it just looks so much better when two well painted armies go at it, and also as a courtesy to other players who have spent ages making their minis look great. Having said that I'm the slowest painter ever - it took me about 10 years to get my Emperor's Children 90% finished (and then the new dex came out and invalidated half of them lol). I will get there, but I don't put pressure on myself to finish quickly. Plus, I want to do a good job which takes time. I would much rather play unpainted models than really badly painted ones.
Dalymiddleboro wrote: I applaud you for getting them painted one way or another. I guess I'm talking about the people that just leave the models grey. Seems hard to justify the purchase.
They justify it by asking: "Is the enjoyment I'm getting out of these models worth the cost to me?" Apparently the answer is yes.
There are many reasons people don't paint. Some people don't have time. Some might have a medical condition (my dad, for example, got to the point he needed me to paint his armies for him, which is also why I was rather attached to them). Some people are actually afraid of painting models and having them turn out bad (I was actually told that once by a guy, but he has since started painting his models).
My preference is for painted models. I'd love to play against them, even if they don't look "great." Sure, playing against an army of brilliant models is great, but hey, if someone's trying, that's cool, I won't knock them at all. I'm getting close to wrapping up painting enough Orks as Blood Axes to have variety to play, and doing it in a relatively short time frame while having to work a 9-5 job (with a not-so-short commute time thanks to using public transit) gives me an appreciation for some of the concerns people have. I've resorted to just going a simplistic method for a lot of the models, no fancy layer painting and stuff. It still looks decent on the table, at least.
And if you're wondering, since the Morkanaut was released, I've painted a Morkanaut, a mob of 24 Shoota Boyz, a mob of 20 Shoota Boyz, two mobs of 20 Grots, eleven Mega-Nobz, one mega-armored Big Mek with swappable options, five Meks, two Burna Boyz, a Stompa, two Deff Dreads, six Killa Kanz, a unit of 11 Lootas, a unit of 15 Lootas, and two Battlewagons. And on my desk I have, to complete, five Deffkoptas, twelve artillery pieces, two Warbosses, a Painboy, a Mek on bike with basic KFF conversion, a Weirdboy, and a Battlewagon... all of which I can complete by the end of next week, if I didn't need to build and paint a diorama by then for a contest.
And, you know, typing all that out makes me realize how much bloody effort I've had to put into the army, setting aside other projects, and how tired I've gotten some nights, having to press through an aching back (lingering injury) and just getting so tired of painting. At least I could switch up unit colors for variation. Looking at my piled of Space Wolf sprues and boxes, I want to play games with them, but man, I am just so sick of painting right now, and jumping into a project that won't allow for as much variation and will take more effort on a model-by-model basis? Yikes! So, what, should I not play a game with them until such time as I can get them fully painted? Heck, that's how I test out armies to figure out what combos I like most so I know who goes to the front of the painting queue.
People want to enjoy the hobby their way. Sometimes their way doesn't involve painting. It doesn't mean they get less value out of it.
If it really bugs you that much, try to talk them into painting the models. Let them know it's not really that difficult, and there's some very basic techniques that will work just fine. (For example, some armies work fine just painting a set of basic colors on the parts of the model and then washing it all with Agrax Earthshade. Boom, instant shading, and it tones down metal, too!) Encourage them, give them advice, don't talk down to them. I've converted a few people this way. And when they do paint, no matter how it looks, continue to be encouraging. Some people just aren't able to paint well, and that's fine, they should never feel disheartened.
I get into painting ruts and sprees. I have also drastically improved my speed/efficiency when painting over the past few years. Unfortunately that means I have a large number of languishing painting projects to work on as well as staring at my fiance's mostly unpainted army. She paints when inspiration strikes but focuses on other hobbies rather than painting in any large amount.
Hopefully I can knock out some of my projects over the next few weeks as real life is settling down and I managed to kick out a big project of mine. Using the momentum. I really enjoy having my army as painted as possible because it's fun and it boosts my ego a bit, plus I love seeing what others have painted when they play. On the other hand, I don't judge those who don't paint. It's just unfortunate that we can't talk about a cool paint job they have while we play.
I make it a point to encourage those are painting or learning to paint regardless of skill level, better or worse than my own. It really helps when someone praises me so I try and pay it forward. I only offer advice when prompted, since unsolicited criticism can be a detractor. On the other hand, if someone doesn't seem interested, I don't push it. It's their army, so I feel like they can do what they please. I won't accept/refuse a game based on painted minis.
I do admit I get inspired when someone breaks out a nicely painted army for me to play against. It helps me get in the mindset to do so.
I think Psienesis nailed it: It's because you want to.
for me cost of purchase is significantly less than cost of time to paint.
there was a time in the past where the cost of time was much less, and I had time to paint whole armies. I enjoy the painting aspect of the hobby, but often playing is more enjoyable. I used to paint with friends, which was fun as we would often argue about whether white or black primer was best. I like white because the colors come out better, they almost always love black because you can hide imperfections and the unpainted areas better.
I enjoy playing, chances are I will never again have a fully painted army as I now have 3 kids, work, wife. Just not going to happen short of paying a service to do it.
I prefer to play with a fully painted army but I enjoy playing the game a lot more than painting so I'm afraid most of my games have some unfinished models.
Dalymiddleboro wrote: Why not just play xwing or hero clix? How do non painters justify their cost of purchase?
Exalted, agreed 100%. It's bad enough in warmachine when 90% of the models are unpainted (I'm one of the few in my local area with a fully painted army) - in 40K? the game is x10 more enjoyable painted.
I've refused to game with someone who has a poorly built/grey plastic horde of models. Unless they're new at the game/hobby - I have no interest in playing someone who doesn't care for one of the primary points of the hobby
Personally I'm of the opinion that unpainted models are terrible, and I refuse to play with or against them in most circumstances. One of the core tenets of our club is that we try to only play with painted armies whenever possible.
That said, I think it's actually pretty easy to understand why many folks show up to the table with grey hordes.
1) The initial attraction for many to 40k is the background and fluff, both things that don't need to be enjoyed via painting.
2) The points level at which most folks play often requires a poop-ton of miniatures. Many folks buy a bunch of minis to play the game and get overwhelmed at the idea of painting them all, or simply can't keep up with painting the figures as fast as they buy and assemble them.
3) The local scene in most places seems to provide almost ZERO incentive to field painted minis. There is no hostility against painted, but when almost everyone is fielding some unpainted minis, and many folks are playing armies that are almost all bare, there is no shared expectation that a person field a fully painted army.
4) GW pushes out new and stronger codicies constantly, so there is real impetus to be continually collecting new armies. Even someone who is working toward a fully painted army, the will be tempted by a new army as soon a they complete the army they have.
All this to say, that if GW doesn't care if you paint your armies…
… and your FLGS doesn't care if you paint your armies…
... and most likely your local gamers don't care...
...why would you?
The answer is that only folks who are madly in love with the beautiful spectacle of painted armies on the tabletop are going to be disciplined enough to field painted miniatures exclusively or primarily.
One last point that a friend raised to me. We have always been a bit shocked by how Warmachine seems to have even more unpainted minis than GW games (which have ALOT). It was explained to my friend that the current trend at this store was for someone starting a new faction to buy EVERY model at once and then begin experimenting with different combinations until they learn all the combinations that work well against different enemies. No wonder nothing gets painted when folks are buying entire lines of minis at once.
I don't get it when people field unpainted models time after time. Once or twice, fine, but I've played at my local store and some folks have had the same unpainted models for the past five months. For me the painting is a big part of the experience, and the more I do it the more I enjoy it. I binge painted 36 dwarf warriors in one night ahead of a gaming group day, it was awesome.
As for the "I don't have time" argument. If it's family that is taking up time, why not ask them to help you paint? I paint with my mom when I go home to visit. I either show her some of my already painted models or just explain, I'd like phylo blue as the base color, then use a light brown for skin, and gunmetal on the guns. Some of my best painted models were painted by my mom on those visits. It's a hell of a better shared experience than sitting around watching sitcoms.
Alcibiades wrote: Chits on a table don't work in 40K because of true line-of-sight.
Sorry, did not explain my experience:
A guy printed pictures and pasted on hardboard cut-outs and put on cut dowel ends as bases so they were the proper size just don't take side shots!
Obviously a bit of work went into it but hard to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.
Was told it was the only way he could afford playing a bunch of grotesques.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I do agree painting makes for a much better experience.
Yes, if you have the models for a while, why not pretty them up?
Better to leave bare plastic than do the matt black-prime, you cannot see a thing on them... you MUST paint them then.
I think the only part I take offense is when the models are not fully assembled or falling apart, it just shows you do not care about them at all.
I don't particularly enjoy painting, but I love having a fully painted army. The collector in me gets me to paint. Actually playing is my favorite though.
Dalymiddleboro wrote: Why not just play xwing or hero clix? How do non painters justify their cost of purchase?
I had to have corneal transplants, so not being able to see well made me cringe to look at my work before i finally got the surgery. So for me it was just the physical difficulty of doing it well. I didn't want my stuff to look bad. My Tau were my first army and are painted anywhere from terribad to mediocre at best depending on which one youre looking at. So when I got future armies, I just was really really shifty on painting them.
My painting has gotten SO much better and now with the surgeries behind me, Im having a much easier time of it.
I think a lot of people would rather do it well or not at all and so they nd up with lots of unpainted stuff. I also hate painting alone and so if there's other people like me, who just dont find it to be fun when alone, then maybe thats also holding them back. could be.
Stevefamine wrote: I've refused to game with someone who has a poorly built/grey plastic horde of models. Unless they're new at the game/hobby - I have no interest in playing someone who doesn't care for one of the primary points of the hobby
And that's a totally reasonable stance to take. You're always free to refuse to play against someone who gets their enjoyment from the game differently to you.
It's when people start to try to hold their definition of 'fun' up as something that everyone should automatically aspire to that you start to have problems. Some people paint because they prefer to use painted models. Some people don't. Neither of those are more 'correct' than the other.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
TheSilo wrote: I...and some folks have had the same unpainted models for the past five months.
Amateurs. I have unpainted models that are going on 20 years old now.
For me the painting is a big part of the experience, and the more I do it the more I enjoy it.
Good for you. And for what it's worth, I'm more or less the same... I much prefer playing with and against well-painted models.
But I've also come to accept that my personal preference doesn't amount to a whole hill of beans to someone who just wants to play the game... and some of my most enjoyable games over the years have been against unpainted or partially painted armies.
The fact that my hobby includes painting doesn't mean that the next guy's does.
It's the same thing if I asked: "Why some people like toast, but hate to eat its edges?"
There are different people, liking and hating different things.
I actually know a table-gaming friend who has no interest on painting, but the playing instead - so I paint the models for him. Sometimes I may even get something in return for it
It's easy to pass judgement on people for bringing unpainted minis when you have been in the hobby for years, have loads of painted models, and just need to add the odd unit. Someone starting from scratch is going to need time to get them ready, and it seems a bit unfair to refuse to play them until they are all/mostly painted. I mean, minimum size for a game is usually around 1500 points (YMMV) which is a lot to get done just for the privilege of playing a game you might not like.
I think the best thing to do is offer incentives for getting models painted, e.g one VP for each unit finished since the last club night, prizes for best painted armies, escalation leagues with bonuses for getting units finished etc.
I love to build, and paint the kits, I'll set up a list I think works for me, collect up what I don't have, build and paint it. Unfortunately the last time I played was 6th ed, at a tournament, about three years ago. So its really the opposite for me. I would however, play against someone who has unpainted models, and kits. I would ask why they haven't painted, and encourage them to paint. If they say they can't paint, or wouldn't know where to start, I would assist them in whatever ways possible. I used to enjoy painting with good friends over beers and such.
I can see the attraction to 40K vs the Hero Click games. Some folks love the build, but may not have time to paint, or perhaps they just don't know how.
Like many here, I have a "live and let live apart" attitude towards folks who don't paint their miniatures. It basically boils down to "that's fine for you, but you'll have to find someone else to play against." though I'm wiling to make exceptions for folks in-progress. Still, I'm not so relativistic as to be willing to give as much weight and approval to those who don't paint and say that they're involvement in the hobby is "just as good as mine".
Like any activity, there is something of of a hierarchy of involvement in the hobby, with those who play with painted miniatures bringing more "to the table" and those with grey hordes as "less". It may sound elitist, harsh, and no one seems to like the word "hierarchy" anymore, but consider that every other hobby activity has standards, by which they judge a member's degree of involvement and commitment to the hobby. Why should wargaming be any different than these hobbies that require painting or any other hobby with standards?
-If you're a part of a car club, but don't paint or keep your car up, you're going to be viewed differently.
-If you're part of a military modeling club, but just assemble and convert your models, but don't paint them, no one is going to think that you've "finished" them or want you to display with the club.
-If you show up to a train club with a bunch of ready-to-run "Bachman" models with plastic wheels eyebrows may raise.
Likewise, if you show up to the table with grey hordes and aren't actively painting them, you simply "aren't there yet", and I'm not going to applaud you for your "approach" to the hobby. That does not make you (or me) a bad person, it does not reflect on your character, or your behavior outside of wargaming. However, make no mistake, painted models are part of wargaming and have always been. If you're content to repeatedly bring your bondoed-up camaro to the car show that's your choice, but don't expect the same level of esteem and approval. Like any hobby, there's loads of people out there ready with tips and techiques to help you get your stuff done (or will do it for you for a price), and ready with encouragement to do so, but it's up to you see that it gets done.
Lastly, I realize that this applies to myself as well. I paint my minis with fairly quick block paint schemes and a dip. It's a standard I'm happy with and looks good on the tabletop, but I don't expect to get the same kind of props or respect as someone who paints their miniatures to a higher standard. In fact, sometimes I'm actually a tiny bit disappointed that things have gotten so bad that I receive quite a bit of kudos for figures that are tabletop painted, just because they are all painted.
Sum up, the hobby has standards. If you choose not to meet them, then that's up to you, but they do exist.
I love the fluff of 40k and the fluff and rules of WHFB, but I absolutely hate painting. Like, really hate it! So I just have them painted by professionals and still enjoy the game
Eilif wrote: Like many here, I have a "live and let live apart" attitude towards folks who don't paint their miniatures. It basically boils down to "that's fine for you, but you'll have to find someone else to play against." though I'm wiling to make exceptions for folks in-progress. Still, I'm not so relativistic as to be willing to give as much weight and approval to those who don't paint and say that they're involvement in the hobby is "just as good as mine".
Like any activity, there is something of of a hierarchy of involvement in the hobby, with those who play with painted miniatures bringing more "to the table" and those with grey hordes as "less". It may sound elitist, harsh, and no one seems to like the word "hierarchy" anymore, but consider that every other hobby activity has standards, by which they judge a member's degree of involvement and commitment to the hobby. Why should wargaming be any different than these hobbies that require painting or any other hobby with standards?
-If you're a part of a car club, but don't paint or keep your car up, you're going to be viewed differently.
-If you're part of a military modeling club, but just assemble and convert your models, but don't paint them, no one is going to think that you've "finished" them or want you to display with the club.
-If you show up to a train club with a bunch of ready-to-run "Bachman" models with plastic wheels eyebrows may raise.
Likewise, if you show up to the table with grey hordes and aren't actively painting them, you simply "aren't there yet", and I'm not going to applaud you for your "approach" to the hobby. That does not make you (or me) a bad person, it does not reflect on your character, or your behavior outside of wargaming. However, make no mistake, painted models are part of wargaming and have always been. If you're content to repeatedly bring your bondoed-up camaro to the car show that's your choice, but don't expect the same level of esteem and approval. Like any hobby, there's loads of people out there ready with tips and techiques to help you get your stuff done (or will do it for you for a price), and ready with encouragement to do so, but it's up to you see that it gets done.
Lastly, I realize that this applies to myself as well. I paint my minis with fairly quick block paint schemes and a dip. It's a standard I'm happy with and looks good on the tabletop, but I don't expect to get the same kind of props or respect as someone who paints their miniatures to a higher standard. In fact, sometimes I'm actually a tiny bit disappointed that things have gotten so bad that I receive quite a bit of kudos for figures that are tabletop painted, just because they are all painted.
Sum up, the hobby has standards. If you choose not to meet them, then that's up to you, but they do exist.
Standards of a hobby are created by the vast majority of the participants. When looking around stores and this thread, having everything painted doesn't seem to be a standard at all. About one in ten players has their entire army painted in more than two colors. The few people who have completely painted armies are admired and commented on a job well done - you wouldn't do that to people who just meet standards.
Not even GW tells us that you need to paint your miniatures when describing the hobby. They tell us that painting a very satisfying and fun aspect of the hobby. It's an annoying chore to me. Why should I spend my free time with an annoying chore? Because someone who likes painting tells me to? Painting models, converting models and gaming with models are all separate hobbies which happen to be sold under the label of "Warhammer40k". No one is forced to play with their models, no one is forced to convert or kitbash models. Somehow painters still think that everyone is forced to paint their models. Should I look down on people who haven't fully magnetized their units? Should I look down on people who don't use greenstuff anywhere in their army? Should I look down on people who have a bunch of models that don't combine into a functioning army?
I accept that someone who put a lot effort into his army wants to see it fight another painted army. After all, you obviously care more about aesthetics of a game than me. What I do not accept is someone being condescending about having his army painted and telling me to get the feth out of his hobby.
-If you're a part of a car club, but don't paint or keep your car up, you're going to be viewed differently.
-If you're part of a military modeling club, but just assemble and convert your models, but don't paint them, no one is going to think that you've "finished" them or want you to display with the club.
-If you show up to a train club with a bunch of ready-to-run "Bachman" models with plastic wheels eyebrows may raise.
Aside from the first, the other ones don't also have an aspect beyond 'modeling' being the only part of the hobby, where as 40k has actual game playing. Some people just hate painting and would rather just play the game.
As has been pointed out very well: your version of "the hobby" could very well not match mine.
There are so many other ways to up your skills/game that there are few ways we can all match.
I want conscripts for my IG/AM army so I am leaning on the 3 part soldier models (base, body, gun/arm) which are cheaper and fast to assemble.
They are not as nice as the 7 part models (base, legs, arms rh/llh, torso, head, ammo/canteen belt items) but when painted, do not detract much.
Someone "could" take offense to that as well.
Not painting, not removing mold lines, not gap filling joins, using/not using magnets, block painting only, 3 part blending only, not customizing, making a custom army (non-canon), one guy I know cringes when he sees people who paint fully assembled rather than with arms out of the way: the list is endless of what is "ideal".
40k can be looked at as playing a board game, it is not necessary for the mechanics of the game for there to be paint. WYSIWYGis just for proper representation of the units on the table (so partially assembled models can fall contrary to that).
I enjoy playing with and against fully painted armies.
Armies not painted do not prevent me playing them however.
What were we discussing again? My train of thought derailed: there were no survivors...
Or you have time for one or the other but not both. For me, I leave for work at 0530, get home around 1930. So on the rare occasion when I get time to do one or the other, I'm going to choose to play if possible. Sure, I prefer to field a painted army, but it ain't always gonna happen.
Jidmah wrote: [
Standards of a hobby are created by the vast majority of the participants. When looking around stores and this thread, having everything painted doesn't seem to be a standard at all. About one in ten players has their entire army painted in more than two colors. The few people who have completely painted armies are admired and commented on a job well done - you wouldn't do that to people who just meet standards.
Not even GW tells us that you need to paint your miniatures when describing the hobby. They tell us that painting a very satisfying and fun aspect of the hobby. It's an annoying chore to me. Why should I spend my free time with an annoying chore? Because someone who likes painting tells me to? Painting models, converting models and gaming with models are all separate hobbies which happen to be sold under the label of "Warhammer40k". No one is forced to play with their models, no one is forced to convert or kitbash models. Somehow painters still think that everyone is forced to paint their models. Should I look down on people who haven't fully magnetized their units? Should I look down on people who don't use greenstuff anywhere in their army? Should I look down on people who have a bunch of models that don't combine into a functioning army?
I accept that someone who put a lot effort into his army wants to see it fight another painted army. After all, you obviously care more about aesthetics of a game than me. What I do not accept is someone being condescending about having his army painted and telling me to get the feth out of his hobby.
Stores and this thread do not represent the entirety of the wargaming hobby nor the history of the wargaming hobby. The "painting doesn't matter" opinion is really only something you see alot in the 40k/WM/WHFB crowd. Historical wargamers don't try to defend not painting your models or try to water down the value of having painted models, nor is such a perspective something that the wargming hobby has endorsed historically. If you really don't think GW supports (explicitly or implicitly) painted armies, then show me how many GW-published game reports feature unpainted armies, or how many GW-sponsored events (when they had them) allowed unpainted armies.
Greenstuff and magnetization have never been standards for the community, rather they have always been indicators of "going the extra mile".
I do understand that many groups of wargamers don't care, but that doesn't mean that painting is therefore not a vital part of the wargaming hobby. I'm not going to tell you to get out of the hobby, but I'm not going to applaud you for having an unpainted army. Having standards is not condescending. Metaphorically patting someone on the head and saying "you didn't meet standards, but your army is just as good as anyone else's" is condescending.
ZebioLizard2 wrote:
-If you're a part of a car club, but don't paint or keep your car up, you're going to be viewed differently.
-If you're part of a military modeling club, but just assemble and convert your models, but don't paint them, no one is going to think that you've "finished" them or want you to display with the club.
-If you show up to a train club with a bunch of ready-to-run "Bachman" models with plastic wheels eyebrows may raise.
Aside from the first, the other ones don't also have an aspect beyond 'modeling' being the only part of the hobby, where as 40k has actual game playing. Some people just hate painting and would rather just play the game.
Wrong. All those hobbies have an active and cooperative part of the hobby as well as a modeling part. In fact almost every hobby or activity has a social part of the hobby that involves sharing it with others as well as standards of measurement of quality. Ours is gaming. As for others...
-Car clubs go cruising and have shows, and some even race and have cross country ralles
-Military Modeling clubs take their models to exhibitions and have competitions.
-Train clubs run their trains and some even simulate schedules, freight exchanges and all manner of railroad operating procedures.
Talizvar wrote:
Not painting, not removing mold lines, not gap filling joins, using/not using magnets, block painting only, 3 part blending only, not customizing, making a custom army (non-canon), one guy I know cringes when he sees people who paint fully assembled rather than with arms out of the way: the list is endless of what is "ideal".
40k can be looked at as playing a board game, it is not necessary for the mechanics of the game for there to be paint. WYSIWYGis just for proper representation of the units on the table (so partially assembled models can fall contrary to that).
I enjoy playing with and against fully painted armies.
Armies not painted do not prevent me playing them however.
All the details you mention other than painting are varrying degrees of quality of finsihing a model and folks will rate the models accordingly based on the results. None of that changes that painted models are part of the wargaming hobby.
As for 40k being a board game. It's simply not. It's not played on a boardgame, It's a tabletop war game.
What I'm pushing back against is the bland relativism that says "there are no standards". Such an approach dilutes the hobby as a whole. I'm not endorsing abusing those who don't hold to the standards, or denying them the right to play the way they want to. However, abandoning those standards does the hobby no favors and makes no sense when compared to how other hobbies deliberately maintain high standards.
Eilif wrote: Stores and this thread do not represent the entirety of the wargaming hobby nor the history of the wargaming hobby.
History is just that: History. The American history had standards about where people were allowed to sit on a bus, depending on their color of skin. I think neither of us mourns the departure of those standards. Ever since I started playing a couple of years ago, unpainted armies have been the norm among newer players, only veterans who have played for more than a decade tend to keep everything painted. Times change.
The "painting doesn't matter" opinion is really only something you see alot in the 40k/WM/WHFB crowd. Historical wargamers don't try to defend not painting your models or try to water down the value of having painted models, nor is such a perspective something that the wargming hobby has endorsed historically.
So, apparently "painting doesn't matter" seems to be a standard about the hobby in question, right? Also, no one is watering down the value of painted models. As I explained, the common response to fully painted armies is usually awe, not shrugging one's shoulders. I also like painted models, especially if they are well done. Painted models is not the same as painting models. As you can see, many people on this thread have had other people paint their army. Sadly I don't know anyone who would paint my army for a reasonable price, so I don't have all my models painted.
If you really don't think GW supports (explicitly or implicitly) painted armies, then show me how many GW-published game reports feature unpainted armies, or how many GW-sponsored events (when they had them) allowed unpainted armies.
I've only participated in a single GW-sponsored event (War on Armageddon campaign) before they axed them, and no one had a problem with unpainted models. In fact, I remember losing my half-painted 30 kopta formation when an unpainted baneblade exploded.
Greenstuff and magnetization have never been standards for the community, rather they have always been indicators of "going the extra mile".
So, I'm not allowed to modify models unless I paint them?
I do understand that many groups of wargamers don't care, but that doesn't mean that painting is therefore not a vital part of the wargaming hobby.
Well... it's not a vital part. You can do everything in Warhammer 40k without painting, which would make it not vital. If anything, the only vital part of the wargaming hobby is assembling the model at all. You can't do anything without assembling the models.
I'm not going to tell you to get out of the hobby, but I'm not going to applaud you for having an unpainted army. Having standards is not condescending. Metaphorically patting someone on the head and saying "you didn't meet standards, but your army is just as good as anyone else's" is condescending.
Applauding and accepting unpainted armies are two things. No one is asking for applause - most are just asking for the condescending behavior a la "If you have time to play, you have time to paint" to stop. It's not as if non-painters were some lower-class hobbyist which have to sit in the back of the bus - which is also the vibe you're implicitly putting in your posts.
ZebioLizard2 wrote:All the details you mention other than painting are varrying degrees of quality of finsihing a model and folks will rate the models accordingly based on the results. None of that changes that painted models are part of the wargaming hobby.
So, hypothetically, if all my models were unpainted, I wouldn't be part of the hobby?
As for 40k being a board game. It's simply not. It's not played on a boardgame, It's a tabletop war game.
You're splitting hairs. It's a tabletop game. Tabletop games can, but don't need to include any modeling activities. The aforementioned heroclix and X-Wing games are proof of that. You can enjoy Warhammer40k by reading books, building models and playing the game without even owning a single pot of paint.
What I'm pushing back against is the bland relativism that says "there are no standards". Such an approach dilutes the hobby as a whole. I'm not endorsing abusing those who don't hold to the standards, or denying them the right to play the way they want to. However, abandoning those standards does the hobby no favors and makes no sense when compared to how other hobbies deliberately maintain high standards.
Didn't you just say that you're not telling me to get the feth out?
Well painted models look awesome. They still will if no one gives a gak about painting anymore. However, there is no magic standard which makes the game more enjoyable when there is paint or primer on your models. As I described earlier on this thread, I purposely leave my models unprimed, so you can still see orks in them, rather than black blobs of something. I've played a tau player who painted his army white/grey/black - he used some strange paint, so the entire thing looked as if he had painted them using thick toothpaste which basically deleted all details of the plastic and he was so bad at painting that the black details he meant to highlight were more like black smears on this toothpaste soldiers and tanks. However, according to your standards, his army was somehow more acceptable than mine. Why? Even though his army defeats all the reasons given in this thread for having painted armies, it's fine? There are some competitive players who turn their armies into modern pieces of art, paying absolutely no heed to the model itself, but rather painting them in some quickly done 3-colored pattern using three colors of primers because the tournament enforced an "at least three colors" rule.
Unlike the other hobbies you named, a lot of players aren't in it for the modeling and painting aspect. I doubt someone joins a train club with the top priority looking at his trains drive in a circle. Many have moved to the game due to the Dawn of War PC games, which have nothing to do with that aspect at all. If you like strategic games, you're mostly limited to PC games, but the appeal of Warhammer40k is that you're able to get out and play a game with real people, while still having access to all the stuff you know from StarCraft, Dawn of War or Command&Conquer. Painting was actually what kept me away from 40k for years - when I finally started I was still in college and had and overabundance of time, so I simply sat down and got my stuff painted when I had nothing better to do, often cursing loudly and even throwing a model out the window when I missed its tusk for the eighth time. However, about 2500 points of orks later, I've probably painted more models than most marine players and I'm sick of painting. Due to a lot less time available, I also no longer have times when I have nothing better to do, so me starting painting out of boredom is not going to happen anytime soon.
Enforcing those standards doesn't do a thing for the hobby, but tell people who don't like painting to suck it or go away. People going away isn't good for the hobby.
I really wish GW would just sell pre-painted models.
Jidmah wrote: There are some competitive players who turn their armies into modern pieces of art, paying absolutely no heed to the model itself, but rather painting them in some quickly done 3-colored pattern using three colors of primers because the tournament enforced an "at least three colors" rule.
Yep, still remember an army at one of the US GWGTs, guy used an airbrush to paint the legs yellow, the torso red and left the head white, And not neatly, just waved it across the models. Yet he met the "fully painted in three colors" requirement. Those GTs did have a no unpainted models rule and I actually saw them make a player take an unpainted unit off the table. One of the reasons I used to finish an army was for the GTs, but now, less time and energy means newer stuff takes a lot longer to finish. Can't remember the last time I went anywhere, whether open gaming or tournament, that required fully painted armies. Probably NOVA (2-3 years ago?) or some such, one of the large organized events.
-Some standards are worth letting go, and some are worth holding on to. I think that this is one that is worth holding on to.
-I don't make a distinction between the 40k hobby and the wargaming hobby as a whole.
-Prepainted minis are not something I have a problem with any more than having someone else paint your minis.. They are still painted after all. I even have some prepainted minis that I've rebased and dipped and used in my KoW army. You and I are in agreement about 40k selling prepainted minis. For the ridiculous prices that they charge, there should be an option for them to come prepainted.
-I said no such thing about greenstuffing and magnetizing.
-Using the example of the odd player who seems to literally throw paint at his models as an argument against standards of painting is silly. He's an outlier, and an exception.
-If all your models are unpainted, you are still "in the hobby" but your army is going to get as much respect as the bondoed camaro I mentioned earlier.
-You said that assembling the models is a the only vital part of the wargaming hobby. That's a slippery slope and why stop there, why not just play with bases or appropriately sized cubes? If just just playing is enough, then there's no real reason to have miniatures at all and it ceases to be miniatures wargaming. That's what happens when you start dropping standards and why I'll continue to insist that painted models be a standard in the tabletop wargaming hobby.
So, apparently "painting doesn't matter" seems to be a standard about the hobby in question, right?
Also, no one is watering down the value of painted models. As I explained, the common response to fully painted armies is usually awe, not shrugging one's shoulders. I also like painted models, especially if they are well done. Painted models is not the same as painting models. As you can see, many people on this thread have had other people paint their army. Sadly I don't know anyone who would paint my army for a reasonable price, so I don't have all my models painted.
GW and PP games, despite what people think, exist in the larger cultural umbrella of 'wargaming.' Most wargamers paint their models. Grey and half painted hordes is very much a phenomenon almost exclusively seen in these specific games. It really says something about the player base.
Commander OB wrote: I myself have adhd so I dont get much painted. I also have so many armies and I enjoy the modeling possibilities. I enjoy customizing and building models. I seem to find building the models more fun then painting, although I have recently slowed down my model purchasing in hopes of getting more models painted.
I recognise a lot of this I absolutely love assembling, converting and customising new models. I get bored when working on one army for too long (which is why I have a lot of very small armies). I do try to get everything painted, but I tend to get distracted very easily, so I am a very slow painter. Painting also takes too much time, so by the time I finish a single unit, I am usually bored of painting and have started working on assembling an entirely new army already. It is kinda a problem, because I don't want to use unpainted units, so my pool of available units for a game is usually very small.
Eilif wrote: -You said that assembling the models is a the only vital part of the wargaming hobby. That's a slippery slope and why stop there, why not just play with bases or appropriately sized cubes? If just just playing is enough, then there's no real reason to have miniatures at all and it ceases to be miniatures wargaming. That's what happens when you start dropping standards and why I'll continue to insist that painted models be a standard in the tabletop wargaming hobby.
The rules actually require you to have assembled models, both explicitly and implicitly, so that point is kind of moot. The details of a model have impact on the game (for example, when determining cover or fire arcs), so you can't really do without.
Otherwise I think we can agree to disagree. We come from different backgrounds - you are obviously seeing WH40k as just another modeling hobby with an attached game, while I see WH40k as a game first and models as no more than pretty game pieces. I respect that you want a game to be moving diorama for your models, so I'd appreciate if you could respect that other people are just playing a game. Not applaud, not play them. Just respect them.
Jidmah,
The application of respect (as an active thing rather than a passive acceptance) is a fine line. I try to always respect the person, you won't find me talking down to other folks at the FLGS for their unpainted armies. I accept that their view of the hobby is different than mine and they seem to be enjoying it. However I don't see anything to be gained in actively giving respect to an approach to the game that I think is diluting the quality of the hobby.
I agree that we have different views on the hobby, and I'm fine with agreeing to disagree. However, I would disagree with your assessment that I "see it as just another modeling hobby with an attached game". My perspective is quite different in that I don't see one as preeminent , but rather view both as equally integral parts of the tabletop miniature wargaming experience.
don_mondo wrote: So Eilif, a new guy shows up at your local gaming group, has all his new toys assembled but not painted. Will you play him? Are you going to give this newcomer to the gaming community a hard time because he hasn't (and may not want to) painted his toys before bringing them out? That's the other slippery slope, the turning away of newcomers into the hobby with what we used to call the 'paint Nazi" attitude (I think GW has a trademark out on the phrase... J/K). GW stores (DC area, including Northern VA and Baltimore - where the US HQ used to be) used to have a painted model restriction. They dropped that when so many players quit coming to their stores to go elsewhere. It's one thing to " insist that painted models be a standard" and another to encourage fellow gamers to paint. The second is far more acceptable. Just sayin'.
I'm glad you brought this up. We don't use either approach, but rather have found a third way. At our club we only play painted minis, though we do make exceptions for in-progress minis sometimes. However, we've made a point of ALWAYS having enough painted minis available for any guest to play whatever game we are playing on a given night. Our "painted only, but we've got minis to share" is known by all club members and one of the core values of the club.
Though we've made painted minis and great terrain a central tenet of the club, we are actually quite laid back as people and try not to put ANY barriers in the way of visitors and newbies having a good time with us.
A few ways we facilitate a club being both all-painted and all-welcoming
1-Playing alot of skirmish games. It's easy to provide all sides of a game when there's only 10-20 minis per side.
2- Planning ahead. If we're going to play a big game of 40k, Warpath, KoW or somesuch, it's always known ahead of time and we are able arrange to have forces available for guests or for members for whom that's not a game they collect.
3- Being flexible in miniature choices. While we try to stay relatively WYSIWYG, we play alot of generic rulesets where having the right brand of mini is not an issue and when we do play more commercial rulesets, rule of cool rules the day..
4-Painting for each other. We all have different strengths and no one wants to get burned out on painting hordes of troops, so members will frequently trade units for painting. I often make terrain for members in exchange for painting line troops.
5-Prepainted miniatures. When we wanted to try small scale gaming as a club, we went with 10mm prepainted mechwarrior clix units, rebased and used with various rulesets. This allowed a really low buy-in (A few bulk buys and folks each trading to get one or two factions) and a relatively low amount of effort required to get them to the table (just some new bases and basing). The object was to get everyone on board quickly as easily as possible. Some folks repainted theres, but most didn't.
6- Splitting armies. "Here buddy, why don't you take command of half of my Chaos hordes for this battle, we'll show those do-gooders who's boss." This means giving up some of your own units in a game and letting someone else handle them, but we've never had any major breakages and it's always fun to see what someone else will bring to the game.
All this to say, I think that holding to a painted-only standard doesn't mean you have to be an arrogant-illegitimate. We (and I suspect many other gamers would also) find that the minor sacrifices and inconveniences listed above are a small price to pay to never have to see one bare mini on the table while remaining welcoming. We're mostly 30 somethings with limited game time outside of our meetings on alternating Thursdays, so we're quite happy with the motto "Life is too short for unpainted miniatures".
Eilif wrote: All the details you mention other than painting are varrying degrees of quality of finsihing a model and folks will rate the models accordingly based on the results.
This is also representative of varying capability and effort vs. reward of the hobbiest.
None of that changes that painted models are part of the wargaming hobby.
They are part of it... where applicable.
It used to be good enough to be a cut piece of cardboard with a graphic on it.
We approach "wargaming" with different needs: some are purely tactical while others require an aesthetic.
As for 40k being a board game. It's simply not. It's not played on a boardgame, It's a tabletop war game.
We tend to play the game on "a board" since normal tables tend to not be the dimensions we need if we must quibble about it, but GW would love you to play on their modular boards.
When it comes to many mechanics there is little difference other than not being anywhere near as self contained.
I would not get too caught-up in saying it is vastly removed from board games that are out there now.
What I'm pushing back against is the bland relativism that says "there are no standards". Such an approach dilutes the hobby as a whole.
As pointed out: company hosted games would have the rule that only a painted army could play. Really easy way to set a minimum standard. Not sure how you as an individual can push things in that direction in a meaningful way. GW no longer officially or unofficially create conditions to force this.
I'm not endorsing abusing those who don't hold to the standards, or denying them the right to play the way they want to.
Sane way to approach things, it would be interesting to see you try!
However, abandoning those standards does the hobby no favors and makes no sense when compared to how other hobbies deliberately maintain high standards.
I take issue with "abandoning", most people hold what they do to a certain standard.
People playing "grey legion" models do not make me want to abandon my standard of playable models.
It makes me want to do a better job to shame them into at least making an attempt.
I personally agree with your viewpoint of the game is so much better with nicely painted miniatures but forcing your personal will on others can only go so-far.
You may have to accept that there are various "factions" of players within a specific game environment and you need to join with like-minded players.
In my club about 3 or 4 years ago most armies werent painted or at least not fully painted.
Nowadays 95% of the models fielded in any game system are painted and most of the time people field fully painted armies.
Why? People paint slow but they do it. I field unpainted models too but that is soon to be a thing of the past since around 80% of my army are already painted and the rest will be by the end of the year.
We have an environment where no one would look down on someone fielding non-painted miniatures (at least in 40k my flames of war and hordes armies are painted as well as 5 dreadball teams and a bunch of other stuff) but people paint them anyway since they see how awesome it is to see a bunch of ~1500pt armies that are all painted being fielded against each other.
Thats how you get others motivated to paint - not by complaining that their armies are grey.
tyrannosaurus wrote: It's easy to pass judgement on people for bringing unpainted minis when you have been in the hobby for years, have loads of painted models, and just need to add the odd unit. Someone starting from scratch is going to need time to get them ready, and it seems a bit unfair to refuse to play them until they are all/mostly painted. I mean, minimum size for a game is usually around 1500 points (YMMV) which is a lot to get done just for the privilege of playing a game you might not like.
I think the best thing to do is offer incentives for getting models painted, e.g one VP for each unit finished since the last club night, prizes for best painted armies, escalation leagues with bonuses for getting units finished etc.
The GW I started to play at when I started in highschool had a 'You cannot play if your army isn't painted" rule. 3 Color/Base min.
Forced me to paint my goofy Ultramarines army poorly and base it. That incentive to play painted started me into the hobby more then if they let me play a primed army (Which I was fine with doing)
The funny thing is when I asked why GW did away with the 3 color base rule I was told that they found a lot of people just doing the bare minimum or doing really badly rushed jobs on their miniatures so they could play. They said they prefer people taking their time and doing a good paint job, if the player was working hard and painting their miniatures to a high standard they had no problem with them fielding unpainted models, they would also prefer someone playing unpainted models than having someone field and army that poorly slapped on three random colors and based them so they could just play.
Alpha 1 wrote: The funny thing is when I asked why GW did away with the 3 color base rule I was told that they found a lot of people just doing the bare minimum or doing really badly rushed jobs on their miniatures so they could play. They said they prefer people taking their time and doing a good paint job, if the player was working hard and painting their miniatures to a high standard they had no problem with them fielding unpainted models, they would also prefer someone playing unpainted models than having someone field and army that poorly slapped on three random colors and based them so they could just play.
Also a slippery slope.
Assembly is always fast for me, painting to 3 colors I did in two evenings only getting the block coloring done.
If you try even a little, assembly line painting can be quickly, heck, you can get base color in spray cans not just primer.
I remember my friend fielding Orks and most of his vehicles were still bare plastic.
He was finishing his moves and said "plus the one inch".
I asked "Why that?"
"Go fasta red!"
"Where?"
He then frowned, picked up a brush and paint-pot and smeared some red on the rolla on the front.
I then said, "Good, carry on".
Hehehe...
Sometimes there are things you just cannot ignore...
As for me if I had delusional "Standards" of painted armies them I'm pretty sure I would never get a game. end of. fact.
For me I have given 40k a break in terms of gaming as I find I have lost a lot of interest in the game as I feel its too "shooty" now these days..
What I do instead now is paint up my models, currently I am painting up my Khorne force and I also do a small commission business between my friends in my group as well, so for me I get a little bit extra out of painting
Do I enjoy painting? only if I like the process of how the colours are turning out and how the end result looks, sometimes I do find painting a chore if I don't know how to make a process of painting things to my own personal standard I do find it a chore.
Talizvar wrote: I remember my friend fielding Orks and most of his vehicles were still bare plastic.
He was finishing his moves and said "plus the one inch".
I asked "Why that?"
"Go fasta red!"
"Where?"
He then frowned, picked up a brush and paint-pot and smeared some red on the rolla on the front.
I then said, "Good, carry on".
Hehehe...
Sometimes there are things you just cannot ignore...
For me the "red paint job" on my Blood Axes' vehicles would be represented simply by the literal blood axes (twin crossed axes painted with Blood for the Blood God to represent them painting the emblem on with the blood of their enemies). Any more than that wouldn't really look right. But thankfully, it's a moot upgrade these days, so I don't have to worry about it.
(Oh, right, there was also my old Painboss trukk that had red crosses painted on it.)
Because painting is not only a giant waste of your free time but also your health. (you cannot argue that sitting hunched over a desk spraying paint with an airbrush for hours is in any way healthy)
it can be enjoyable in small doses.
painting other people stuff for pathetically small amounts of money is also a waste of your life.
kb305 wrote: Because painting is not only a giant waste of your free time but also your health. (you cannot argue that sitting hunched over a desk spraying paint with an airbrush for hours is in any way healthy)
it can be enjoyable in small doses.
painting other people stuff for pathetically small amounts of money is also a waste of your life.
One could argue spending time browsing nerd forums on the internet is a waste of time, and also bad for your health.
kb305 wrote: Because painting is not only a giant waste of your free time but also your health. (you cannot argue that sitting hunched over a desk spraying paint with an airbrush for hours is in any way healthy)
it can be enjoyable in small doses.
painting other people stuff for pathetically small amounts of money is also a waste of your life.
One could argue spending time browsing nerd forums on the internet is a waste of time, and also bad for your health.
it is, same with playing video games but at least it is fun and relaxing.
painting is a different animal. painting tiny details and doing good blending can actually get stressful - it will start to take a toll on your nerves after awhile.
kb305 wrote: Because painting is not only a giant waste of your free time but also your health. (you cannot argue that sitting hunched over a desk spraying paint with an airbrush for hours is in any way healthy)
it can be enjoyable in small doses.
painting other people stuff for pathetically small amounts of money is also a waste of your life.
One could argue spending time browsing nerd forums on the internet is a waste of time, and also bad for your health.
it is, same with playing video games but at least it is fun and relaxing.
painting is a different animal. painting tiny details and doing good blending can actually get stressful - it will start to take a toll on your nerves after awhile.
My favourite part about this whole issue is that the phenomenon of chronically unpainted armies is almost excusively limited to 28mm sci fi/fantasy games published by GW and PP.
kb305 wrote: Because painting is not only a giant waste of your free time but also your health. (you cannot argue that sitting hunched over a desk spraying paint with an airbrush for hours is in any way healthy)
it can be enjoyable in small doses.
painting other people stuff for pathetically small amounts of money is also a waste of your life.
One could argue spending time browsing nerd forums on the internet is a waste of time, and also bad for your health.
it is, same with playing video games but at least it is fun and relaxing.
painting is a different animal. painting tiny details and doing good blending can actually get stressful - it will start to take a toll on your nerves after awhile.
Some could argue they find painting relaxing.
I dont think it is. if it was actually relaxing more people would be doing it instead of paying other people for painted models.
kb305 wrote: Because painting is not only a giant waste of your free time but also your health. (you cannot argue that sitting hunched over a desk spraying paint with an airbrush for hours is in any way healthy)
it can be enjoyable in small doses.
painting other people stuff for pathetically small amounts of money is also a waste of your life.
One could argue spending time browsing nerd forums on the internet is a waste of time, and also bad for your health.
it is, same with playing video games but at least it is fun and relaxing.
painting is a different animal. painting tiny details and doing good blending can actually get stressful - it will start to take a toll on your nerves after awhile.
Las wrote: My favourite part about this whole issue is that the phenomenon of chronically unpainted armies is almost excusively limited to 28mm sci fi/fantasy games published by GW and PP.
To be fair, what other games have 1. Relatively large model number requirements and 2. Are played by a population that either in school or working?
Most other sci-fi or fantasy games are skirmish or require less models to paint overall. Or they're Historicals and played by a generally older population. Guy's like me (early 20s) are something of a rarity outside of FoW. Oftentimes I'm the only twenty something at our historical community games.
Then again, I also blamed the near stupid amount of details on some miniatures GW produces, which discourages the average painter.
This might sound insane, but...maybe...different people enjoy different parts of the hobby. And maybe, you don't need to try to prove another person's opinion "wrong".
Las wrote: My favourite part about this whole issue is that the phenomenon of chronically unpainted armies is almost excusively limited to 28mm sci fi/fantasy games published by GW and PP.
To be fair, what other games have 1. Relatively large model number requirements and 2. Are played by a population that either in school or working?
Most other sci-fi or fantasy games are skirmish or require less models to paint overall. Or they're Historicals and played by a generally older population. Guy's like me (early 20s) are something of a rarity outside of FoW. Oftentimes I'm the only twenty something at our historical community games.
Then again, I also blamed the near stupid amount of details on some miniatures GW produces, which discourages the average painter.
If you're into historicals then I don't think I have to point out the huge model counts of napoleonics and ancients (both of which are often played at 28mm). However I think you're right about the age difference. Still I'd argue that older players tend to have even less free time with family and long term career obligations as indeed people have mentioned ITT. I still think it's something in the WH/WM water.
Las wrote: My favourite part about this whole issue is that the phenomenon of chronically unpainted armies is almost excusively limited to 28mm sci fi/fantasy games published by GW and PP.
To be fair, what other games have 1. Relatively large model number requirements and 2. Are played by a population that either in school or working?
Most other sci-fi or fantasy games are skirmish or require less models to paint overall. Or they're Historicals and played by a generally older population. Guy's like me (early 20s) are something of a rarity outside of FoW. Oftentimes I'm the only twenty something at our historical community games.
Then again, I also blamed the near stupid amount of details on some miniatures GW produces, which discourages the average painter.
If you're into historicals then I don't think I have to point out the huge model counts of napoleonics and ancients (both of which are often played at 28mm). However I think you're right about the age difference. Still I'd argue that older players tend to have even less free time with family and long term career obligations as indeed people have mentioned ITT. I still think it's something in the WH/WM water.
What 28mm mass battle historicals are you taking about.
Sigvatr wrote: This might sound insane, but...maybe...different people enjoy different parts of the hobby. And maybe, you don't need to try to prove another person's opinion "wrong".
Just a wild guess.
^ This, reminds me of the time this thread came up or something similar a while back. Wont say names but he told me basically that "since you are in the army you should have the discipline and fortitude to paint your models" I nearly died laughing! Sorry, I have a very busy schedule with work, school, girlfriend and friends on top of military duites and comparing painting to the military is utterly ridiculous. Just because you don't like it does not mean you have the right to judge and refuse to play other peoples armies on the basis that they are not painted. Personally I pay people to paint my armies since I am already paying a lot to buy it might as well pay to have it look decent, and I am in the Hobby more so for fluff then anything else. Don't get me wrong I understand that painted armies look great fighting each other, however some of you need to realize that some people other priorites take precedence.
Las wrote: My favourite part about this whole issue is that the phenomenon of chronically unpainted armies is almost excusively limited to 28mm sci fi/fantasy games published by GW and PP.
To be fair, what other games have 1. Relatively large model number requirements and 2. Are played by a population that either in school or working?
Most other sci-fi or fantasy games are skirmish or require less models to paint overall. Or they're Historicals and played by a generally older population. Guy's like me (early 20s) are something of a rarity outside of FoW. Oftentimes I'm the only twenty something at our historical community games.
Then again, I also blamed the near stupid amount of details on some miniatures GW produces, which discourages the average painter.
If you're into historicals then I don't think I have to point out the huge model counts of napoleonics and ancients (both of which are often played at 28mm). However I think you're right about the age difference. Still I'd argue that older players tend to have even less free time with family and long term career obligations as indeed people have mentioned ITT. I still think it's something in the WH/WM water.
What 28mm mass battle historicals are you taking about.
Fields of glory, pike and shotte, hail Caesar etc. warlord games alone has tons of 28mm historicals for use with these systems. Hell, just google 28mm napoleonics for some quick examples.
kb305 wrote: Because painting is not only a giant waste of your free time but also your health. (you cannot argue that sitting hunched over a desk spraying paint with an airbrush for hours is in any way healthy)
it can be enjoyable in small doses.
painting other people stuff for pathetically small amounts of money is also a waste of your life.
Paint with your family. Buy some cheap third party models, prime them, give your SO/kids/parents five colors, and sit down at the table and paint with them.
If they like scifi, get some Infinity models. If they like fantasy get some Dreamforge skeletons or Orks. If they like history, buy some Greek Hoplites or WWII infantry. If they like animals, get some cavalrymen.
I painted with my mom, and she was always asking if I used the models she painted on the table. When she came to visit she wanted to paint again. My buddy gave his wife a Dark Elf sorceress to paint, she painted it pink and covered it in glitter, looks awesome on the table. Give it a shot.
kb305 wrote: Because painting is not only a giant waste of your free time but also your health. (you cannot argue that sitting hunched over a desk spraying paint with an airbrush for hours is in any way healthy)
it can be enjoyable in small doses.
painting other people stuff for pathetically small amounts of money is also a waste of your life.
One could argue spending time browsing nerd forums on the internet is a waste of time, and also bad for your health.
it is, same with playing video games but at least it is fun and relaxing.
painting is a different animal. painting tiny details and doing good blending can actually get stressful - it will start to take a toll on your nerves after awhile.
Some could argue they find painting relaxing.
Some others argue that they don't give damn what you think about painting, as long as you're doing it.
Las wrote: My favourite part about this whole issue is that the phenomenon of chronically unpainted armies is almost excusively limited to 28mm sci fi/fantasy games published by GW and PP.
To be fair, what other games have 1. Relatively large model number requirements and 2. Are played by a population that either in school or working?
If you're into historicals then I don't think I have to point out the huge model counts of napoleonics and ancients (both of which are often played at 28mm). However I think you're right about the age difference. Still I'd argue that older players tend to have even less free time with family and long term career obligations as indeed people have mentioned ITT. I still think it's something in the WH/WM water.
What 28mm mass battle historicals are you taking about.
Las is right. Historical players just shake their heads at the idea that folks can't be bothered to paint their armies.
Infinite Array,
I'm afraid your criteria doesn't hold up. Most historical games require lots of painting and are played by an adult population that is working, often have kids and other responsibilities.
Noir,
There are dozens (hundreds probably) of historical rulesets that play out in 28mm. Some even wargame in 54mm!
A few of the popular rulesets for 28mm historicals that would be platoon level and above (you'd rarely find "mass battle" in the title or description) include:
Hail Caesar
Pike and Shotte
Bolt Action
Warhammer Historicals
Black Powder
LaSalle
Among many, many others.
Historical players are also known to play many different sets of rules with the same sets of figures as they find rules they like better, but that doesn't mean they have less figures to paint. Ask your average player if they are able to confine themself to one faction and one era. They're likely going to give you a whole list of factions and eras that they collect, paint and play. Many historical players also use smaller scale minis like 15mm, but that's also not really a painting time saver because as the scale shrinks, the number of minis often increases exponentially.
Historical players don't have more free time or have less figures. They simply tend to paint the minis they play with.
Though not a historical player myself, I find myself in roughly the same lot as them. I play several different Sci-Fi and Fantasy games and have quite a few different factions for those games. I'm an adult with kids and responsibilities, but somehow I still find time to paint everything that hits the table.
Yeah, I'm probably wrong. But I'll definitely agree that if there's a segment of the wargaming community that gets its painting done before a game, it's the majority of historical players.
Assembling and painting many armies takes way longer than playing a game per week. If you only have a few hours a week to spend on the hobby, you could spend a year assembling and painting a decent sized army before you even get a game.
At the end of the day, an army with 50 or so models will usually take me 50 to 150 hours to assemble and paint. If you can't find that sort of time it won't get done.
I do not pain my armies. I work full time, at 40+ hours a week, and enjoy hanging out with friends who are not interested in Warhammer 40K. I do not have funds to pay somebody to paint for me, and since I do not participate in tournaments where painting is required (to be more precise I do not participate in tournaments with an entry fee), painting is a low priority to me.
If somebody does not want to play against me because I field a grey army, that is their choice. There are others who are just happy to get a game in.
Some of us just don't have any artistic talent or even worse, an issue with unsteady hands making painting not only difficult but impossible to appear even halfway decent. My paint skills are 'drybrushing' and 'spray basecoating'. I have models that are 10 years old and unpainted. 2nd Edition Tyranids in plastic gray and metal silver. It sucks that I have matte black models against a beautifully painted army, but frankly, I can live with that. If someone else has an issue, they can paint them for me for no charge. Otherwise, you get what you get.
It doesn't surprise me in the slightest that people drawn to historics are the sorts of people more inclined to paint their army before playing with it.
At the end of the day, it's a decent slab of time you have to invest to paint an army. You both need that time to spare and also the desire to spare it.
These days I only ever play with painted models, but I don't judge people who don't want to spend the time painting. These days it takes me over a year to assemble and paint a new 40k/WHFB army, compared to my first Lizardmen army that I did in about a month when I was 10 years old.
While I agree it's a good idea to encourage people to paint their armies, I don't think it's a good idea to discourage people who can't paint their armies from playing. In the case of historics, I think the people who can't paint their armies just never get involved in the first place, which in the context of 40k isn't a desirable situation.
... Is it odd that I, in the older end of the teenage bracket, will play mostly painted, on the rare occasion I get a game? I do have pushfits going on 4+ years unpainted, but that's because I paint before assembling fully, so if I can pry it appart/disassemble is safely to paint later (ie push-fits), I'll put it on a lower priority than the regular kits. While 5 of my cultists are painted, the other 15 aren't, and are in line behind a militarum tempestus force and other models in the chaos army, plus recent warmachine models. Thing is, while I don't dislike painting, I find it hard to get started, to allocate the time to sit down and pick up a brush. I have a model that's been half painted for at least a couple weeks. (Being a slow painter doesn't help.)
I do fully intend to paint everything I have, though, one model at a time.
I used to really suck at painting and just played ravenguard so i could just spraypaint everything black and be done with it. But nowadays i have a lot more patience and actually find painting really therapeutic. Still, i struggle to keep up with purchases and tournaments so when I played in my last i had a couple of unpainted models. I have less of a problem with unpainted models than i do proxies as i struggle to remember whats what unless its the actual model.
kb305 wrote: Because painting is not only a giant waste of your free time but also your health. (you cannot argue that sitting hunched over a desk spraying paint with an airbrush for hours is in any way healthy)
it can be enjoyable in small doses.
painting other people stuff for pathetically small amounts of money is also a waste of your life.
One could argue spending time browsing nerd forums on the internet is a waste of time, and also bad for your health.
it is, same with playing video games but at least it is fun and relaxing.
painting is a different animal. painting tiny details and doing good blending can actually get stressful - it will start to take a toll on your nerves after awhile.
Some could argue they find painting relaxing.
It definitely is for me. While I don't devote a whole lot of time to it, I do enjoy it a lot. I generally only paint one miniature at a time, though. When I gang paint, I kinda feel a little bit like I am working. However, I do love watching a bolter go from a blank slab of gray plastic, to a black undercoated one, to a black and metal basecoated one, to an inked one (my favorite step since the black ink really brings out the details and makes the metal look real), to a detailed one.
However, I can totally empathize with someone that doesn't want to paint their army or only undercoat them. It is VERY time consuming and stressful to some people. My brother-in-law is talking about possibly starting an army, but he has said that he either will leave the minis unpainted or pay someone to paint them. He doesn't handle stress very well and I could see him getting worked up just trying to paint. And if he shows up and all he has is a bunch of gray plastic, I won't mind. The game itself doesn't really require paint to work.
SharkoutofWata wrote: Some of us just don't have any artistic talent or even worse, an issue with unsteady hands making painting not only difficult but impossible to appear even halfway decent. My paint skills are 'drybrushing' and 'spray basecoating'. I have models that are 10 years old and unpainted. 2nd Edition Tyranids in plastic gray and metal silver. It sucks that I have matte black models against a beautifully painted army, but frankly, I can live with that. If someone else has an issue, they can paint them for me for no charge. Otherwise, you get what you get.
Step 1: apply spray paint
Step 2: apply nuln oil shade
Step 3: profit
No artistic ability required, and it's perfect for Tyranids. I've got nine genestealers that came with an eBay buy, sprayed them white, coated them with nuln oil, they look great. Pick a color you like for the spray/base coat, the shade will fill the nooks and add a shadow look. Your army will look cool, and if you ever want to improve the paint job, then you already have the base coat done.
I used to skip on painting and hated myself for it. I don't like to paint, but I've promised myself I'd paint every unit I buy/make now that I've started playing 40K again. Will it cut into my game time? Will it increase the time before I get to play games? Sure it will, but when I'll get to play with fully painted units, I'll like it more than playing with unpainted or WIP miniatures.
I don't have anything against the people who don't paint, like I said, I had a phase when I skipped painting whenever I could. For me personally, playing with a painted army increases my enjoyment of the game, which is why I'm trying to keep up with the expansion of my army/armies.
If my opponent doesn't have a fully painted army, I don't care much. Ideally most of his units will be back in their case soon as my waaagh! starts rolling.
I don't know. It seems like whenever I'm in the shop I see people who have spent hundreds and hundreds of dollars on their models, accessories, carrying bags, and all the swag, just to leave them unpainted (MAYBE primed) and looking like some dirty toddler's unloved toys.
I began reading this thread on my phone the other day. I became so enraged I walked to the library to type a long and hateful rant but found the doors locked for the day....
That being said, I've had time to better form my opinion on the matter and now have a desk top infront of me.
I'll begin with a disclaimer...
I'm not trying to offend or flame here. I'm just voicing my opinion as a long time 40k player. 40K PLAYER! I'M TALKING ABOUT 40K ONLY HERE!!!!
I hate it when people don't paint their models. I see it as lazy and a waste of money. If you can't "find the time" to paint then you don't have time to play the game.
I have, over many years, collected several armies. I have painted most of them and sold those that I didn't get around to because I refuse to play with a gray army.
If you have any of the lame excusses, ie Family, School, Work, I'm no good at painting ect, you're full of it.
Family: I kinow plenty of people with families that find time to paint.
School: Classes aren't 24-7.
Work: Also, ain't 24-7. I have friends that work 70+ hours a week and still get models done.
No good: No one cares. As long as you try that's all that matters.
Ect: Stop being lazy.
It really doesn't take long to paint models. If you're trying to win a golden daemon with each model in your army than yeah... it'll take you a few years to finish.
But at least everytime you game you game you can show off the new unit you've been working on.
I can finish a 10 man squad of space marines in about 4.5 hours with all the bells and whistles. Sure they aren't as perfect as I'd like but those "Best Apperance" awards on the wall speak for themselves.
Simply put, I've put alot of time and money into THE HOBBY of warhammer 40k. I buy, build, convert, paint, play, read fluff, read black library and generally collect. I PLAY 40k.
if you buy models, build them and play. No painting of any effort.... You aren't into 40k. You're just another wargammer. Go buy a copy of risk. No painting needed.
Edit: If you are one of the people complaining that painting is stressful... unless you're painting for someone else and have a deadline... you're doing it wrong.
2nd Edit: The Eldrad in my avatar isn't quite finished but what you see there is about 30 minutes of effort. Thats a cup of coffee and a bit of reading or an episode of Adventure Time. You really can't make the sacrifice?
I just don't really enjoy painting mainly because I'm not good with my hands when it comes to painting small figures and I don't really find the activity fun.
I understand that some people hate playing against a non-painted army. In fact a while back somebody started a thread wondering why people hate playing against an unpainted army and I was the first to respond.
Not everyone enjoys painting. Not everyone enjoys assembling the models. I work 6 days a week. I get home and I have a few hours before I go to bed. During that time, I spend time with people who have no interest in Warhammer or other table top games, or I enjoy one of my many other hobbies. If I have the chance I go and play once or twice a week against people who do not need painted armies to immerse themselves in the game. Would they prefer a painted army? Most likely. However, they are there to play a game, and as long as there is someone to play against they are happy.
If somebody only has a few hours each week to devote to Warhammer, do you think they would rather play, or paint their models?
People who paint are just as likely to have full time jobs, meaningful personal relationships and educational obligations as those who don't. We just tend to prioritize the hobby as a whole over one of its components.
Las wrote: Well, clearly it would depend on the person.
People who paint are just as likely to have full time jobs, meaningful personal relationships and educational obligations as those who don't. We just tend to prioritize the hobby as a whole over one of its components.
I'm confused. Are you saying that just playing and not painting is not prioritizing?
If I may make a suggestion to people who are strapped for time: Take your paints with you. Really, all you need to paint besides your materials is a source of water and a flat surface. You may not have much time to do it but all those short sessions add up. Only do this if the area you are in permits, of course.
Las wrote: Well, clearly it would depend on the person.
People who paint are just as likely to have full time jobs, meaningful personal relationships and educational obligations as those who don't. We just tend to prioritize the hobby as a whole over one of its components.
I'm confused. Are you saying that just playing and not painting is not prioritizing?
Think of Warhammer 40K as being comprised of 3 parts. Assembling the models, painting the models, playing the game. Some people prioritize the various parts differently, which is why you'll have people who assemble the models and paint but don't play, and you have people who paint and play but don't assemble.
People who set aside time to do all three prioritize their time to investing in to the hobby as a whole, instead of say me, who invests most of my WH time playing, and occasionally assembly (I have about 4 unopenend boxes, plus quite a few sets that are partially assembled).
Stop being elitist and imposing your own ideals on others.
But really, I'm sure there aren't too many people who genuinely can't find time if they wanted to. The problem is people don't WANT to find time to do it because they don't value it above other things in their lives. If someone has a spouse and kids and works long hours, I'm not going to judge them for wanting to spend what little free time they have painting instead of with their family or friends or doing something they genuinely enjoy doing instead of something they feel is a chore.
I can finish a 10 man squad of space marines in about 4.5 hours with all the bells and whistles. Sure they aren't as perfect as I'd like but those "Best Apperance" awards on the wall speak for themselves.
That's actually quite impressive. It would take me 4.5 hours just removing them from their sprues, cleaning mould lines, assembling, spraying the primer and basing them. The only models I can go from opening the box to finished model are snap fit models with very simple schemes and not a lot of small detail. My Space Wolves, even for a "meh" paintjob take me an hour to get from sprue to finished model, realistically I spend about 2 hours per model because I don't like my Space Wolves looking "meh", I'd rather have grey plastic.
The fastest models I paint which only take about half an hour each are Termagants, Imperial Guard, Orcs, Night Goblins all the snap fit varieties (the Night Goblins are 1 piece). Except I need a metric ton of those models to actually make an army.
I'm not saying you can't paint a squad of Space Marines in 4.5 hours... I'm just saying I doubt most people could, even to a reasonably low standard.
Simply put, I've put alot of time and money into THE HOBBY of warhammer 40k. I buy, build, convert, paint, play, read fluff, read black library and generally collect. I PLAY 40k.
if you buy models, build them and play. No painting of any effort.... You aren't into 40k. You're just another wargammer. Go buy a copy of risk. No painting needed.
Yeah, because it's not possible for someone to like some aspects of 40k and not other aspects
I guess people who only like reading the books "aren't into 40k".
I guess people who only like painting models and never play the game "aren't into 40k".
You must like all aspects of the hhhobby to be in to 40k!!! /sarcasm
Edit: If you are one of the people complaining that painting is stressful... unless you're painting for someone else and have a deadline... you're doing it wrong.
Yes, because what you enjoy, don't enjoy and find stressful is totally the same as what everyone else should enjoy, not enjoy and find stressful. Otherwise they're just doing it wrong! God forbid the world is made up of different people.
But really, I don't game with unpainted models (I also don't really game much any more and it takes me months to paint a unit). But I find people railing against unpainted models to be vastly more obnoxious than people who play with unpainted models.
Personally I'd much rather spend time with people in my spare time than spend it sitting by myself painting. I tried turning painting in to a social activity at my FLGS, didn't really work, I'd spend half the day there and only get 1 or 2 models painted and frequently I'd be stuck because I'd need to do something that I couldn't do in the shop.
DeffDred wrote: I'll be as elitist as I want. God forbid iI have my own opinion. Don't you realize others may feel differently than you?
The difference is I'm not imposing my opinions on others, you are.
Saying things like:
I hate it when people don't paint their models.
lame excusses
Ect: Stop being lazy.
You aren't into 40k. You're just another wargammer. Go buy a copy of risk. No painting needed.
you're doing it wrong.
Those go beyond just having an opinion and put you in the obnoxious pile. I find such attitudes far more obnoxious than unpainted models.
If YOU don't like playing with unpainted models that's fine for YOU and I'm not judging YOU for only wanting you play with painted models. If you think that's what I'm judging you for, you need to get yerself some reading comprehension.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
DeffDred wrote: I'm not talking about detail. I'm talking about NOT BEING GRAY PLASTIC!
I dont care if my opponent has black space marines with three colors worth of dots on the shoulder!
Spray 'em pink and then spray again with purple and blue. Done.
I dont need a masterpiece. I just want color.
For me, the difference between playing against crappily rush job painted models and playing against grey plastic is very small. A model with sprayed primer and a couple of hastily slopped on colours only looks mildly better than unpainted plastic, I'd rather they take their time painting their army and play with grey plastic for however long it takes them to paint them to the quality they see fit.
You mentioned earlier you think not painting models is a waste of money... I'd argue crappily painted models is an equally big waste of money in addition to being a waste of time.
Why is it such a big deal that your opponent plays with painted minis? Does the model have the right base size? THAT matters. Is the model the right approximate size for LOS? THAT matters. I've played against a person who scratchbuilds all his IG vehicles and has use buttons for wheels. Buttons! Like, from a shirt! But his models were all roughly the size they needed to be and he wasn't a jerk.
Conversely, I couldn't see wanting to play with someone who has the same attitude as DeffDred because the game would probably be a miserable experience. Ugh, I can picture how nitpicky and shrill. Gross.
If you can't "find the time" to paint then you don't have time to play the game.
This - what does this even mean? The two activities aren't even equivalent. It's like saying "if you can't 'find the time' for artisinal breadmaking then you don't have time to ride a dirtbike."
I'd argue crappily painted models is an equally big waste of money in addition to being a waste of time.
"Three colors" technically means it can look like a toddler blobbed on paint without paying attention where it goes or what it covers. That's much worse than clean grey plastic. Not that I'd discriminate, if the person is cool I'll still play against those models, but it's much more of an eyesore.
Multimoog wrote: Why is it such a big deal that your opponent plays with painted minis? Does the model have the right base size? THAT matters. Is the model the right approximate size for LOS? THAT matters. I've played against a person who scratchbuilds all his IG vehicles and has use buttons for wheels. Buttons! Like, from a shirt! But his models were all roughly the size they needed to be and he wasn't a jerk.
Conversely, I couldn't see wanting to play with someone who has the same attitude as DeffDred because the game would probably be a miserable experience. Ugh, I can picture how nitpicky and shrill. Gross.
If you can't "find the time" to paint then you don't have time to play the game.
This - what does this even mean? The two activities aren't even equivalent. It's like saying "if you can't 'find the time' for artisinal breadmaking then you don't have time to ride a dirtbike."
I'd argue crappily painted models is an equally big waste of money in addition to being a waste of time.
"Three colors" technically means it can look like a toddler blobbed on paint without paying attention where it goes or what it covers. That's much worse than clean grey plastic. Not that I'd discriminate, if the person is cool I'll still play against those models, but it's much more of an eyesore.
The only thing that kind of annoys me playing against an unpainted army is because there's no contrast sometimes it's hard to see what things are. The difference between a Wolf Guard unit, a Grey Hunter unit and a Blood Claw unit can be hard to see if they're not painted with different markings.
Of course, that applies to poorly painted miniatures as well and also to well painted armies where they painter has decided to paint in such a way that you can't tell things apart.
Think of Warhammer 40K as being comprised of 3 parts. Assembling the models, painting the models, playing the game. Some people prioritize the various parts differently, which is why you'll have people who assemble the models and paint but don't play, and you have people who paint and play but don't assemble.
People who set aside time to do all three prioritize their time to investing in to the hobby as a whole, instead of say me, who invests most of my WH time playing, and occasionally assembly (I have about 4 unopenend boxes, plus quite a few sets that are partially assembled).
I would say that you have indirectly put your finger on the problem with the Warhammer/40k/Warmachine hobbies in their relationship to the wargaming hobby as a whole. Only (mostly only) in those three sub-hobbies do people separate the three parts (some would add the fourth part of fluff and research) so far from one another that it is seen as acceptable practice to completely neglect the painting part. You certainly don't see that in historical miniaiture wargaming, and it wasn't even as much present in sci-fantasy wargaming until this last decade or so.
I completely understand the emphasizing and enjoying of one aspect over others, but it's a sad state of affairs when the WH/40k/WM tables are compared to the rest of the hobby.
If some random guy sitting across from me at my FLGS get's his panties in a wad over my grey marines, then that's his problem. I don't care what they think and neither should anyone else, it's a hobby, done for fun. External influences outside funds, people's opinions, and other extraneous crap not related to said hobby doesn't matter (of course this has to be within reason; selling ones body or family for money to feed the habit, murdering people over plastic soldiers, etc.). No one said you had to play against me, in fact the only thing I require when playing against someone is that they're a good sport.
That all being said, it's a pretty rewarding sort of feeling when you field a painted army against another painted army. That 'forged' narrative really takes off when you have variously painted armies murdering each other.
Glad to know that having nerve damage making painting nigh impossible is a lame excuse and makes me lazy and I'm doing it wrong.
Get bent.
While I cannot speak for other people, I can say that I would never, ever suggest something like that. I also think that the poster you are referencing probably didn't intend to infer that either.
Edit: upon reading his response to you, yeah that's a bummer thing to say to someone.
Some of the best players I know play grey armies (grarmies?). I love painting my guys, especially washing them, it makes them look so damn crisp and gives me the warm fuzzies inside. That being said, you wanna run your grarmies against me? BRING IT ON!
The point of the game is FUN. Whether that is painting or playing, or mixing both, do what makes you happy. Don't harp on others if they're not harping on you.
jreilly89 wrote: Some of the best players I know play grey armies (grarmies?). I love painting my guys, especially washing them, it makes them look so damn crisp and gives me the warm fuzzies inside. That being said, you wanna run your grarmies against me? BRING IT ON!
The point of the game is FUN. Whether that is painting or playing, or mixing both, do what makes you happy. Don't harp on others if they're not harping on you.
Basically this. /thread
Also, I wasn't aware that the OP is like the sixth type of thread he's posted, I want the three minutes back it took my to write my post.
I don't see why it's a problem. 40k, WHFB, Warmachine, they are more mainstream. They attract people who are interested in any aspects of the hobby, not just people who are interested in the entirety of the hobby***. I don't see this as a problem or as a bad thing. It's a price you pay for having a larger group of people interested in something, not everyone will like the same aspects of that something.
***though I admit plenty of historics people are only interested in the modelling and not the gaming. I don't see those people as a problem for never bringing their awesomely painted models to a gaming table any more than I see it as a problem the people who bring unpainted models to the table.
jreilly89 wrote: Some of the best players I know play grey armies (grarmies?). I love painting my guys, especially washing them, it makes them look so damn crisp and gives me the warm fuzzies inside. That being said, you wanna run your grarmies against me? BRING IT ON!
The point of the game is FUN. Whether that is painting or playing, or mixing both, do what makes you happy. Don't harp on others if they're not harping on you.
Basically this. /thread
Also, I wasn't aware that the OP is like the sixth type of thread he's posted, I want the three minutes back it took my to write my post.
People keep saying that Daly posts these threads, but they keep answering him!
Honestly, I don't find the actual game itself to be worth all the effort and money to play by itself. Most of the fun for me is in working on my models, painting them up really nice, then letting them loose on the tabletop. I'll run a squad of greys right next to them, though. I let how something works on the tabletop affect how I convert and paint the paint things in the future, as well, though. I also will work on units simply due to their fluff. That said I have units that are extremely fun to convert and paint that are just not very good on the tabletop. I definitely am not in the game just to win, though. I've only won two matches in the last few years, lol. There's plenty of video games that offer much deeper experiences as far as gameplay goes, though. I just think it's nice to have a game to play with all of my models once they're done instead of working on model planes or something that just sit on the shelf forever. Some things just feel way more worthy of a nice paintjob than others. Besides, if you're a tournament player, you'll wind up having to paint your models eventually anyway. A lot of people started when a gaming store opened in my area, and a few years ago all you ever played were grey or metal models. Now most everyone has at least the 3 color minimum on everything. It does make them a lot more attractive to play against, though, and it definitely feels better to lose to a model that's somebody's pride and joy than yet another grey plastic force. I think the hobby and the game are just different sides of the same coin, and if you are running everything unpainted just to play the game, you really are not getting your money out of your purchases.
DeffDred wrote: I began reading this thread on my phone the other day. I became so enraged I walked to the library to type a long and hateful rant but found the doors locked for the day....
That being said, I've had time to better form my opinion on the matter and now have a desk top infront of me.
I'll begin with a disclaimer...
I'm not trying to offend or flame here. I'm just voicing my opinion as a long time 40k player. 40K PLAYER! I'M TALKING ABOUT 40K ONLY HERE!!!!
I hate it when people don't paint their models. I see it as lazy and a waste of money. If you can't "find the time" to paint then you don't have time to play the game.
I have, over many years, collected several armies. I have painted most of them and sold those that I didn't get around to because I refuse to play with a gray army.
If you have any of the lame excusses, ie Family, School, Work, I'm no good at painting ect, you're full of it.
Family: I kinow plenty of people with families that find time to paint.
School: Classes aren't 24-7.
Work: Also, ain't 24-7. I have friends that work 70+ hours a week and still get models done.
No good: No one cares. As long as you try that's all that matters.
Ect: Stop being lazy.
It really doesn't take long to paint models. If you're trying to win a golden daemon with each model in your army than yeah... it'll take you a few years to finish.
But at least everytime you game you game you can show off the new unit you've been working on.
I can finish a 10 man squad of space marines in about 4.5 hours with all the bells and whistles. Sure they aren't as perfect as I'd like but those "Best Apperance" awards on the wall speak for themselves.
Simply put, I've put alot of time and money into THE HOBBY of warhammer 40k. I buy, build, convert, paint, play, read fluff, read black library and generally collect. I PLAY 40k.
if you buy models, build them and play. No painting of any effort.... You aren't into 40k. You're just another wargammer. Go buy a copy of risk. No painting needed.
Edit: If you are one of the people complaining that painting is stressful... unless you're painting for someone else and have a deadline... you're doing it wrong.
2nd Edit: The Eldrad in my avatar isn't quite finished but what you see there is about 30 minutes of effort. Thats a cup of coffee and a bit of reading or an episode of Adventure Time. You really can't make the sacrifice?
Isn't that like telling people without their own computer and home internet. That they are lazy becouse they don't work hard enough to own a computer and pay for internet. So shouldn't post online becouse they don't care enough to do it right.
The real thing is to encourage people to paint their models instead of hating on them. I definitely get more praise for my painted CSM than the grey blobs that nobody cares about. Also, having them painted can actually help you keep up with them on the tabletop. I don't know why more people don't use actual camo patterns, though, as I've actually overlooked (and seen others overlook) things because they were so similar to the terrain they were on.
Munga wrote: The real thing is to encourage people to paint their models instead of hating on them. I definitely get more praise for my painted CSM than the grey blobs that nobody cares about. Also, having them painted can actually help you keep up with them on the tabletop. I don't know why more people don't use actual camo patterns, though, as I've actually overlooked (and seen others overlook) things because they were so similar to the terrain they were on.
Because most Necrons/Eldar/Nids/SM stick out like a sore thumb? Don't get me wrong, that's genius, but camo is for the heretics and squishy guard
DeffDred wrote: I began reading this thread on my phone the other day. I became so enraged I walked to the library to type a long and hateful rant but found the doors locked for the day....
That being said, I've had time to better form my opinion on the matter and now have a desk top infront of me.
I'll begin with a disclaimer...
I'm not trying to offend or flame here. I'm just voicing my opinion as a long time 40k player. 40K PLAYER! I'M TALKING ABOUT 40K ONLY HERE!!!!
I hate it when people don't paint their models. I see it as lazy and a waste of money. If you can't "find the time" to paint then you don't have time to play the game.
I have, over many years, collected several armies. I have painted most of them and sold those that I didn't get around to because I refuse to play with a gray army.
If you have any of the lame excusses, ie Family, School, Work, I'm no good at painting ect, you're full of it.
Family: I kinow plenty of people with families that find time to paint.
School: Classes aren't 24-7.
Work: Also, ain't 24-7. I have friends that work 70+ hours a week and still get models done.
No good: No one cares. As long as you try that's all that matters.
Ect: Stop being lazy.
It really doesn't take long to paint models. If you're trying to win a golden daemon with each model in your army than yeah... it'll take you a few years to finish.
But at least everytime you game you game you can show off the new unit you've been working on.
I can finish a 10 man squad of space marines in about 4.5 hours with all the bells and whistles. Sure they aren't as perfect as I'd like but those "Best Apperance" awards on the wall speak for themselves.
Simply put, I've put alot of time and money into THE HOBBY of warhammer 40k. I buy, build, convert, paint, play, read fluff, read black library and generally collect. I PLAY 40k.
if you buy models, build them and play. No painting of any effort.... You aren't into 40k. You're just another wargammer. Go buy a copy of risk. No painting needed.
Edit: If you are one of the people complaining that painting is stressful... unless you're painting for someone else and have a deadline... you're doing it wrong.
2nd Edit: The Eldrad in my avatar isn't quite finished but what you see there is about 30 minutes of effort. Thats a cup of coffee and a bit of reading or an episode of Adventure Time. You really can't make the sacrifice?
Isn't that like telling people without their own computer and home internet. That they are lazy becouse they don't work hard enough to own a computer and pay for internet. So shouldn't post online becouse they don't care enough to do it right.
DeffDred wrote:
I hate it when people don't paint their models. I see it as lazy and a waste of money. If you can't "find the time" to paint then you don't have time to play the game.
That's fair enough, but some people have legitimate reasons. Me? I just hate painting, love playing. I love writing fluff for my army, I love writing rules.
If you have any of the lame excusses, ie Family, School, Work, I'm no good at painting ect, you're full of it.
Family: I kinow plenty of people with families that find time to paint.
School: Classes aren't 24-7.
Work: Also, ain't 24-7. I have friends that work 70+ hours a week and still get models done.
No good: No one cares. As long as you try that's all that matters.
There are legitimate reasons. People do care.
People YOU know with time to paint? Okay, but you don't know everyone with a family. Someone might have to look after a sick family member on top of a job and school. They might easily jump at the chance for a game, y'know?
You're right that school is not 24-7, but over here (in merry old, tea drinking, crumpet eating England), School is normally somewhere around 7 hours, that's just the school day itself. You then have to get to and from school/college/uni/wherever. There's also sleep, we will assume is 8 hours a night considering that's the "recommended amount" last time I checked. Let's call that 16 hours. At a younger age, sure you might have more time. When you're in high school, you have less time due to more and more assignments (this varies from place to place, I know), and if you're off of school a lot for medical reasons or personal reasons (like I used to be), then you have to spend more time to catch up, giving less time to paint.
College is around 3 - 5 days a week, and they give a crap-tonne of assignments (again, this varies). This can take up a lot of your time, leaving you wanting to just relax and watch something, maybe just an early night.
Yes, this is all very dependant on the area you're in, but that's my point. When I was in high school, I wasn't playing 40K. In college? Yeah, I did play. College took up most of my time because of how demanding the course was.
It really doesn't take long to paint models.
It does if you hate painting.
AllSeeingSkink wrote:
But really, I'm sure there aren't too many people who genuinely can't find time if they wanted to. The problem is people don't WANT to find time to do it because they don't value it above other things in their lives.
This, really.
I personally could find the time.
I go to my LGS Fri - Sun for the entire day- open 'til close.
That leaves me Mon - Thurs where I currently do nothing other than stay at home. I could very easily paint, but I absolutely hate doing it.
Once I start painting I can do it for a while, but I rarely feel like it. I normally sit and play games, convert a couple of models (or heavily contemplate it), or write rules for custom 40K missions and my chapter of marines. I try to find anything to do that isn't painting. As such, I have around 20-ish models I've actually completely painted (I have around 4 - 5K of marines and 1K of Orks, just to put that into perspective) I have (at most) 10 models grey, the rest are either undercoated or have the base army colour (purple) on them. Hell, my marines (mostly) only have two colours: purple and silver.
jreilly89 wrote:
Because most Necrons/Eldar/Nids/SM stick out like a sore thumb? Don't get me wrong, that's genius, but camo is for the heretics and squishy guard
*nervous laugh*
Ha... yeah. Heretics... *sweating*
I'll be back. I er... I left my Boltgun on!
*Runs home to start repainting the camo squad of marines*
I still actually have my squad of marine I painted up as camo. One of my first squads, thought it would be cool. I enjoy their look, and they were the easiest to paint, I just prefer my purple marines more.
I've never understood how most people sit and actively watch TV. I have to be doing something else. I can't just sit and be mesmerized. I think you'll probably find that most painters are like that. I paint while watching a tv show or listening to music, etc.
I paint my models. They don't appear painted though. Only some are painted. However, unlike most people I do not view time as a straight line. More like a mural. So technically all my models are painted even though they aren't by the standards of mortal beings.
DeffDred wrote: I began reading this thread on my phone the other day. I became so enraged I walked to the library to type a long and hateful rant but found the doors locked for the day....
That being said, I've had time to better form my opinion on the matter and now have a desk top infront of me.
I'll begin with a disclaimer...
I'm not trying to offend or flame here. I'm just voicing my opinion as a long time 40k player. 40K PLAYER! I'M TALKING ABOUT 40K ONLY HERE!!!!
I hate it when people don't paint their models. I see it as lazy and a waste of money. If you can't "find the time" to paint then you don't have time to play the game.
I have, over many years, collected several armies. I have painted most of them and sold those that I didn't get around to because I refuse to play with a gray army.
If you have any of the lame excusses, ie Family, School, Work, I'm no good at painting ect, you're full of it.
Family: I kinow plenty of people with families that find time to paint.
School: Classes aren't 24-7.
Work: Also, ain't 24-7. I have friends that work 70+ hours a week and still get models done.
No good: No one cares. As long as you try that's all that matters.
Ect: Stop being lazy.
It really doesn't take long to paint models. If you're trying to win a golden daemon with each model in your army than yeah... it'll take you a few years to finish.
But at least everytime you game you game you can show off the new unit you've been working on.
I can finish a 10 man squad of space marines in about 4.5 hours with all the bells and whistles. Sure they aren't as perfect as I'd like but those "Best Apperance" awards on the wall speak for themselves.
Simply put, I've put alot of time and money into THE HOBBY of warhammer 40k. I buy, build, convert, paint, play, read fluff, read black library and generally collect. I PLAY 40k.
if you buy models, build them and play. No painting of any effort.... You aren't into 40k. You're just another wargammer. Go buy a copy of risk. No painting needed.
Edit: If you are one of the people complaining that painting is stressful... unless you're painting for someone else and have a deadline... you're doing it wrong.
2nd Edit: The Eldrad in my avatar isn't quite finished but what you see there is about 30 minutes of effort. Thats a cup of coffee and a bit of reading or an episode of Adventure Time. You really can't make the sacrifice?
Isn't that like telling people without their own computer and home internet. That they are lazy becouse they don't work hard enough to own a computer and pay for internet. So shouldn't post online becouse they don't care enough to do it right.
A computer and internet access will cost a couple thousand $. Spray paint, gunmetal/white/black for dry brushing, and a pot of shade costs about $20.
I dont paint for a simple reason I hate it, well that and I am terrible at it, you can say "who cares" all you want I do and I know people who have verbally insulted me for my crappy painting, so I am sorry I dislike painting, but deal with it. I do build my models (albeit slowly) and as you can see from some of my threads I am making an effort to paint my armies, but why would I waste my time doing something I dislike when I can spend my time doing things I love? Hell the only reason I paint anything is becuase I have to or there is nothing else I can do that captures my attention.
If you have unpainted models great! If you have painted models awesome! If you have a mix of the two thats great! If you dont want to play against my grey horde thats fine, you are still a classy fellow. If you try and say I shouldnt be playing with my unpainted horde of grey doom thats not classy.
TheSilo wrote: A computer and internet access will cost a couple thousand $. Spray paint, gunmetal/white/black for dry brushing, and a pot of shade costs about $20.
And a decent slab of your life. Scary thought was just that it takes me ~$400 worth of time to paint a squad of Grey Hunters... all of a sudden my desire to paint my army has dropped like a rock
DukeBadham wrote: I dont paint for a simple reason I hate it, well that and I am terrible at it, you can say "who cares" all you want I do and I know people who have verbally insulted me for my crappy painting, so I am sorry I dislike painting, but deal with it. I do build my models (albeit slowly) and as you can see from some of my threads I am making an effort to paint my armies, but why would I waste my time doing something I dislike when I can spend my time doing things I love? Hell the only reason I paint anything is becuase I have to or there is nothing else I can do that captures my attention.
If you have unpainted models great! If you have painted models awesome! If you have a mix of the two thats great! If you dont want to play against my grey horde thats fine, you are still a classy fellow. If you try and say I shouldnt be playing with my unpainted horde of grey doom thats not classy.
Because sacrificing in the moment for a better future is worth it in the long run.
Furyou Miko wrote: Making models is fun. Playing 40k is fun with the right opponent.
Painting is an exercise in tears, frustration, muscle cramp and eyestrain.
Painting is not fun. It is a chore that eventually gets done.
Heh - one of the big reasons I paint my models is that for me, kitbashing and scratchbuilding are two of the big draws for both the models and the army I play (orks). Painting them hides the fact that there are at least three shades of plastic and obviously-repurposed action figure parts in the models I field.
DukeBadham wrote: I dont paint for a simple reason I hate it, well that and I am terrible at it, you can say "who cares" all you want I do and I know people who have verbally insulted me for my crappy painting, so I am sorry I dislike painting, but deal with it. I do build my models (albeit slowly) and as you can see from some of my threads I am making an effort to paint my armies, but why would I waste my time doing something I dislike when I can spend my time doing things I love? Hell the only reason I paint anything is becuase I have to or there is nothing else I can do that captures my attention.
I hadn't really thought of this, but yeah, I remember when I was starting out having a couple of people tease me that I just painted my bases green. The models themselves were never terribly painted, but my first army just had green bases. And I can think of at least 2 occasions in my local GW where people were teased for how poorly painted their army was.
I can totally understand why people would want to spend the time painting their models well instead of just slopping paint on them (which frankly still takes time especially if you're inexperienced) or simply not painting them at all.
If you have unpainted models great! If you have painted models awesome! If you have a mix of the two thats great! If you dont want to play against my grey horde thats fine, you are still a classy fellow. If you try and say I shouldnt be playing with my unpainted horde of grey doom thats not classy.
At the end of the day I much prefer playing with an against painted models. It's something me and my mates figured out after a few months of gaming, the game is much more entertaining when you are playing with painted models on a nice looking table with nice looking terrain. But given how long it takes to paint models, I'm not going to tell people they MUST paint their armies, especially not tell them they have to paint them crappily just to get them done. Obviously I'd prefer to play against the player in my FLGS that has a painted army rather than the one who doesn't though.
I really love playing the game but I hate assembling my models. It's ok if I just glue some legs to bases, right? And you're TFG if you complain about it, because some people just enjoy different parts of the game.
But how can you be satisfied with "making" a model that is just ugly gray plastic? I can understand hating the whole modeling and painting side of the hobby and just wanting to get your game pieces ASAP (though why you're playing such an awful game if you don't enjoy the models is a mystery), but I don't understand how people can love building the models but not finishing them. It's like saying you hate painting but really love spray priming everything.
Peregrine wrote: I really love playing the game but I hate assembling my models. It's ok if I just glue some legs to bases, right? And you're TFG if you complain about it, because some people just enjoy different parts of the game.
But how can you be satisfied with "making" a model that is just ugly gray plastic? I can understand hating the whole modeling and painting side of the hobby and just wanting to get your game pieces ASAP (though why you're playing such an awful game if you don't enjoy the models is a mystery), but I don't understand how people can love building the models but not finishing them. It's like saying you hate painting but really love spray priming everything.
You dont understand why people do a lot of the things you dislike it seems... A very common trend with you.
If someone enjoys making models, surely that means they are satisfied with the result of making that model. If someone enjoys playing a game, surely they simply enjoy the results of playing the game. If someone enjoys both, surely they enjoy the results of making models and playing the game. If someone hates playing the game, but loves painting the models and making the models, then they must be satisfied by making and painting models.
Pretty simple really. Its not all or nothing with war gaming. If people are willing to buy models and not paint them, where is the issue or misunderstanding or confusion here?
Painting is a chore, and for many yields little positive results. One mans chore is another mans hobby etc etc...
My interests have shifted over the years. When I started collecting model planes as a kid I enjoyed assembling and not painting them. I have a ton of planes that are assembled and ready for paint from when I was a kid. When I moved to wargaming, one thing I disliked was how the models weren't satisfying to assemble. The aircraft kits were complex and satisfying.
Over the years I've shifted more towards enjoying painting rather than assembly. The assembly just feels like a chore... though this is probably because wargaming kits aren't as fun to assemble as typical display model kits.
However, I only enjoy painting the first 1 or 2 models in a unit. By the 3rd or 4th model I'm thoroughly bored. Painting a single model is entertaining for me, painting a whole squad let along a whole army is an exercise in how long I can endure boredom and muscle cramps.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Peregrine wrote: I really love playing the game but I hate assembling my models. It's ok if I just glue some legs to bases, right? And you're TFG if you complain about it, because some people just enjoy different parts of the game.
Pointless hyperbole is pointless. If you're only putting legs on bases you can't tell what the model is and what it's equipped with.
TheSilo wrote: A computer and internet access will cost a couple thousand $. Spray paint, gunmetal/white/black for dry brushing, and a pot of shade costs about $20.
And a decent slab of your life. Scary thought was just that it takes me ~$400 worth of time to paint a squad of Grey Hunters... all of a sudden my desire to paint my army has dropped like a rock
Unless you're making $400 an hour, you are vastly overestimating how long it takes to spray, shade, and dry brush.
And complaining about the time investment on Space Marines of all things...
TheSilo wrote: A computer and internet access will cost a couple thousand $. Spray paint, gunmetal/white/black for dry brushing, and a pot of shade costs about $20.
And a decent slab of your life. Scary thought was just that it takes me ~$400 worth of time to paint a squad of Grey Hunters... all of a sudden my desire to paint my army has dropped like a rock
Unless you're making $400 an hour, you are vastly overestimating how long it takes to spray, shade, and dry brush.
And complaining about the time investment on Space Marines of all things...
Spray, shade and drybrush looks like arse and I'd sooner leave them as grey plastic, I'm talking about how I actually paint them, which is the minimum standard I think is worth spending ANY time on for those models.
Peregrine wrote: I really love playing the game but I hate assembling my models. It's ok if I just glue some legs to bases, right? And you're TFG if you complain about it, because some people just enjoy different parts of the game.
But how can you be satisfied with "making" a model that is just ugly gray plastic? I can understand hating the whole modeling and painting side of the hobby and just wanting to get your game pieces ASAP (though why you're playing such an awful game if you don't enjoy the models is a mystery), but I don't understand how people can love building the models but not finishing them. It's like saying you hate painting but really love spray priming everything.
Could be in part that colours are pretty desaturated for me and I like the colour grey in any case.
DukeBadham wrote: I dont paint for a simple reason I hate it, well that and I am terrible at it, you can say "who cares" all you want I do and I know people who have verbally insulted me for my crappy painting, so I am sorry I dislike painting, but deal with it. I do build my models (albeit slowly) and as you can see from some of my threads I am making an effort to paint my armies, but why would I waste my time doing something I dislike when I can spend my time doing things I love? Hell the only reason I paint anything is becuase I have to or there is nothing else I can do that captures my attention.
If you have unpainted models great! If you have painted models awesome! If you have a mix of the two thats great! If you dont want to play against my grey horde thats fine, you are still a classy fellow. If you try and say I shouldnt be playing with my unpainted horde of grey doom thats not classy.
Because sacrificing in the moment for a better future is worth it in the long run.
Sorry but at the end of the day watching movies with my friends, talking to my friends, reading intresting educational books, taking care of my family, preparing for college, joining societies (like the IOP and the Old Williamsonians) all these things I do instead of painting have a much better future then painting my man dollies. I dont enjoy painting, I find it drainging and stressful and on many days I just can not deal with it, my life isnt roses, its not the worst life but it doesnt mean I cant have issues. Yes I might not have nerve damage or children or any reason why I cant paint, but I dont paint because I cant, its just too much some days and the other days I am busy giving myself life long friendships (I hope) or joining societies to improve my name in the corprate world or just doing what I must not to curl up into a ball and cry, and I am sorry that these lame excuses arent good enough for you but honestly...I dont have enough energy to care.
AllSeeingSkink wrote:
DukeBadham wrote: If you have unpainted models great! If you have painted models awesome! If you have a mix of the two thats great! If you dont want to play against my grey horde thats fine, you are still a classy fellow. If you try and say I shouldnt be playing with my unpainted horde of grey doom thats not classy.
At the end of the day I much prefer playing with an against painted models. It's something me and my mates figured out after a few months of gaming, the game is much more entertaining when you are playing with painted models on a nice looking table with nice looking terrain. But given how long it takes to paint models, I'm not going to tell people they MUST paint their armies, especially not tell them they have to paint them crappily just to get them done. Obviously I'd prefer to play against the player in my FLGS that has a painted army rather than the one who doesn't though.
If you prefer playing against painted models thats fine, and if you would rather play against a guy with painted models sure go ahead, its your choice, but acting like Dalymiddleboro is not a classy way to act, if you accept people might not paint all their models before wanting to play thats fine, if you say that people who dont paint shouldnt be in the hbby thats not fine.
I mean you seem like a classy fellow, if we met I would shake your hand (with your permission of course), give you a curt nod of approval and ask for a game, and then when you see my horribly painted terminators (I tried to paint raven guard...I failed...) you realize its a good thing I havent painted all my stuff yet
It's really weird that people will jump around talking about all the meaningful things they are doing instead of painting as if it's this worthless EXTRA thing in wargaming. Look, if you wargame at all, you're committing time away from all those things you mentioned anyway. How you prioritize that wargame time is your business but you're not gonna get brownie points for participating in 2/3 of the hobby because you're doing life stuff.
Life stuff is obviously more important than wargaming, but don't act like one facet of the hobby is somehow a more ridiculous way to spend your time than the other in the grand scheme of things.
Las wrote: but you're not gonna get brownie points for participating in 2/3 of the hobby because you're doing life stuff.
I don't think any one is looking for brownie points. People are looking to not be derided.
Life stuff is obviously more important than wargaming, but don't act like one facet of the hobby is somehow a more ridiculous way to spend your time than the other in the grand scheme of things.
Eh, you can easily argue that the facet which involves actually being with mates, socialising, drinking together, laughing together, etc. is less ridiculous than the facet that (more often than not) has you sitting at home by yourself for hours on end. Not that I'd say that facet is "ridiculous" (I don't think anyone claimed as such?), but it's easy to see why many people are likely to see the value of gaming in their life over the value of painting in their life.
It was brought up on pages past that historic gamers are the types who won't play with unpainted models compared to 40k/WHFB/Warmahordes players... I think the reason for that is simply that players in the latter group are more mainstream and more inclined to be in to the social aspects of the hobby.
Las wrote: Also do none of you ever paint with friends?
Nope. The friends I have who are into the hobby have conflicting work schedules with me, and as such the only time we see each other is on game night at the FLGS.
TBH I almost never get to game so I dont proitize one part of the hobby other another, I dislike painting and what I am saying there are things I do instead of painting because I like them more, but having an attitude like Dalymiddleboro is just wrong I fee;
Toofast wrote: For me the order of fun is
1. Gaming
2. Modeling
3. Painting
I paint them when I have to for a tournament or league but other than that it's something I do when GW and the shooting range are both closed and there's no good games on TV.
and no golf, fishing, yard work, car work, bow practice, cat brushing, vacuuming...
I enjoy the game and try to like painting, but after painting and selling 3 complete armies 20 years ago its hard to commit.
Las wrote: Why would sci fi players be more social? Wargaming is inherently social.
I didn't say that, I said those particular sci-fi games are more mainstream and the mainstreamers, at least in my opinion would be more attracted to the social aspects than the non-social aspects (I have not attempted to gather evidence, it just seems logical to me)
Also do none of you ever paint with friends? Couple beers, pizza, bad action movies = one or two units done in an easy going night with some buds.
I've done that a bit. It never really got me far. Of the few hundred models I've painted, maybe 3 or 4 were painted while hanging out with mates. It seems most my friends would rather do things like playing pool or video games or anything than painting models... probably because most of them find it boring
Most the time we just get distracted doing other things, and even when we do get down and paint some models, we'll only hang out for a few hours a week when we can make time, and most my armies have taken me 100+ hours to assemble and paint.
I've also tried painting in my FLGS and didn't get far. It just takes so fething long and since my house is better equipped and I have a more comfortable chair than the FLGS, it just seems to be making life harder for no good reason.
I'm not saying social painting is bad, it's just in my experience social painting doesn't get an army done. If you manage to get your army done while social painting, I'm jealous
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Byte wrote: and no golf, fishing, yard work, car work, bow practice, cat brushing, vacuuming...
I enjoy the game and try to like painting, but after painting and selling 3 complete armies 20 years ago its hard to commit.
One of the stupidest things I did was selling my first army. It was painted like arse, I bought most the models already assembled and I spent 3 or 4 solid weekends getting the core of it done. Even though it looked terrible, selling it meant I didn't have a painted army for many years because I could never get the motivation to paint another terrible army and painting models to look half decent meant it took me a few years before I actually got another army up to snuff. Though that first army was done in 5th edition WHFB and armies were a lot smaller back then, these days I wouldn't find a game playing such a small army.
AllSeeingSkink wrote: I didn't say that, I said those particular sci-fi games are more mainstream and the mainstreamers, at least in my opinion would be more attracted to the social aspects than the non-social aspects (I have not attempted to gather evidence, it just seems logical to me).
I don't really understand. What do you mean by 'mainstream'? Its a weird assumption to pose that a group of people would arbitrarily not enjoy social aspects to a social hobby.
AllSeeingSkink wrote: I've done that a bit. It never really got me far. Of the few hundred models I've painted, maybe 3 or 4 were painted while hanging out with mates. It seems most my friends would rather do things like playing pool or video games or anything than painting models... probably because most of them find it boring
Most the time we just get distracted doing other things, and even when we do get down and paint some models, we'll only hang out for a few hours a week when we can make time, and most my armies have taken me 100+ hours to assemble and paint.
I've also tried painting in my FLGS and didn't get far. It just takes so fething long and since my house is better equipped and I have a more comfortable chair than the FLGS, it just seems to be making life harder for no good reason.
I'm not saying social painting is bad, it's just in my experience social painting doesn't get an army done. If you manage to get your army done while social painting, I'm jealous .
Well, the key is to do it with your friends that also play 40k
DukeBadham wrote: I know people who have verbally insulted me for my crappy painting,
First of all, let me ask... Was it the variety of friendly crap-talking that you see among mouthbreathing neckbeards you find at any FLGS? They tend not to have good communication skills, and shades of aspergers. So normally don't take it to heart.
I'm a terrible painter, and I have a hard time with it. My space wolves I painted two years ago when I started are comically bad... Two years of occasional effort, maybe 3-4 paint sessions a month, lasting 4-6 hours each... I've drastically improved, though I'm still not even close to decent. No one makes fun of my new painted models anymore, which is a reward in itself. When I fully complete a model, I actually feel proud showing it off now, so I feel it's worth the occasional effort. I typically listen to standup comedies while I paint by the way. And yes, most of my models are either grey or base coated, but look at my signature... Too many models, I just go slow.
I play for the fluff, and the tactics, by the way. Not the painted models. And I hear some stores penalize unpainted models in their house rules and tournaments.. I just avoid those places.
AllSeeingSkink wrote: I didn't say that, I said those particular sci-fi games are more mainstream and the mainstreamers, at least in my opinion would be more attracted to the social aspects than the non-social aspects (I have not attempted to gather evidence, it just seems logical to me).
I don't really understand. What do you mean by 'mainstream'? Its a weird assumption to pose that a group of people would arbitrarily not enjoy social aspects to a social hobby
I feel like you're having some fundamental misunderstanding of what I'm saying.
I'm not saying that historic gamers would not enjoy the social aspects.
Wargaming is a niche, but 40k/WHFB/Warmachine are vastly less of a niche than historics. My hypothesis is that people traditionally drawn to historics are the sort of people who are likely to enjoy both the social and non social (or in many cases, only the non social) aspects of the hobby otherwise they would be less likely to be drawn to it in the first place. Because 40k/WHFB/Warmachine have a much wider sphere of influence (ie. more mainstream), they are more likely to encompass people who are only interested in the social aspect in addition to those who are interested in both the social aspect and non-social or only the non social aspect.
I'm not saying all historic wargamers are hermits and all 40k/WHFB/Warmachine gamers are social butterflies... I'm saying the latter group encompasses a larger slice of the community at large and so it's constituents are more likely to have wider ranges of specific interests and that is not a bad thing (unless you have the "get off my lawn" attitude and would rather wargaming stay as niche as possible so it doesn't water down what you personally like about it).
DukeBadham wrote: I know people who have verbally insulted me for my crappy painting,
First of all, let me ask... Was it the variety of friendly crap-talking that you see among mouthbreathing neckbeards you find at any FLGS? They tend not to have good communication skills, and shades of aspergers. So normally don't take it to heart.
I'm a terrible painter, and I have a hard time with it. My space wolves I painted two years ago when I started are comically bad... Two years of occasional effort, maybe 3-4 paint sessions a month, lasting 4-6 hours each... I've drastically improved, though I'm still not even close to decent. No one makes fun of my new painted models anymore, which is a reward in itself. When I fully complete a model, I actually feel proud showing it off now, so I feel it's worth the occasional effort. I typically listen to standup comedies while I paint by the way. And yes, most of my models are either grey or base coated, but look at my signature... Too many models, I just go slow.
I play for the fluff, and the tactics, by the way. Not the painted models. And I hear some stores penalize unpainted models in their house rules and tournaments.. I just avoid those places.
It was the "dude your painting is gak" and stuff of that ilk from people I considered friends, wasnt a joke or something just actually insulting my painting.
but don't act like one facet of the hobby is somehow a more ridiculous way to spend your time than the other in the grand scheme of things.
But it is.
Facet 1. The game itself, putting models on the table and playing the game. For ME, that's number 1 and what all the other facets are there to support.
Facet 2. Assembling models, cause yeah, even I think it's silly to put out a base with legs on it or the box that vehicle came in or a coke can .
Facet 3, and the least important to me personally, the one that I will ignore for either of the other facets and for the many other things that occur in life, painting. It's drudgery. It's boring. It's time consuming, because I suck at painting but I'm going to try and do a decent job anyways, so a single model can take a couple of hours or more. And I just flat out don't like doing it. But I do, and eventually things get painted. In the meantime, when I'm ready to game I pack those unpainted or partially painted models into the case and I use them as they are. Don't like it, tough, deal with it.
There's a reason the term "paint Nazi" was coined back in the day, and I'm seeing a lot of that attitude here. So fine, don't want to play me because I have some unpainted or partially painted models. So be it, I can live with that. But to tell me to get out of the hobby or that I MUST paint before I can play. Well, as Flo used to say, Kiss My Grits.
What, there actually exist people that won't play you if you have unpainted models? Haha, that is so ridicilous. If someone was like that in my presence I'd just laugh in their face so bad.
Las wrote: I'm not telling you to get out. What some of us are saying is that you just aren't fully a wargamer.
Riiiight. Whatever.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
RunicFIN wrote: What, there actually exist people that won't play you if you have unpainted models? Haha, that is so ridicilous. If someone was like that in my presence I'd just laugh in their face so bad.
Desubot wrote: To be fair War gaming is a hobby and a game
You can be a hobbiest and never have to play the game
or you can be a gamer and never paint
but to be a "Wargamer" you generally should be doing both no?
No. Because not all wargames require painting.
So let's just drop the elitest attitude that those that have the time, desire, inclination to paint are somehow better than those of use who don't care to paint or don't want to paint or don't have the time to paint. That's what irks me. "You're not a wargamer". Forget kissing my grits, you can kiss my .....
To me being a wargamer is playing the wargame, if you just collect the minis you are a collector and just painting the minis you are a painter, and you all always a hobbiest.
Desubot wrote: To be fair War gaming is a hobby and a game
You can be a hobbiest and never have to play the game
or you can be a gamer and never paint
but to be a "Wargamer" you generally should be doing both no?
No. Because not all wargames require painting.
So let's just drop the elitest attitude that those that have the time, desire, inclination to paint are somehow better than those of use who don't care to paint or don't want to paint or don't have the time to paint. That's what irks me. "You're not a wargamer". Forget kissing my grits, you can kiss my .....
Don't get so defensive. I didn't say you were a bad person. People who paint, play and model aren't "better" than those who only do 2 of 3, however they are unquestionably more complete, full and dedicated wargamers.
No, it's not. Sure, you can have your own opinions and values and split the hobby in whichever way you see fit. But it's all subjective to you. For example:
...For ME, that's number 1...
...the least important to me personally...
This is the right way to express your thoughts on the matter, it's just that you only seem to be half applying it as you soon return to:
It's drudgery. It's boring.
To you, maybe. Others could just as easily say they find trying to battle against grey plastic as drudgery and boring, they may be into the hobby for the fluff, background, aesthetics and storytelling reasons first and for the maths and dice throwing second.
It's time consuming, because I suck at painting but I'm going to try and do a decent job anyways, so a single model can take a couple of hours or more.
I see this excuse time and time again in these types of threads... "I suck at painting", "It takes too long", "I'll never get them looking perfect so I'll just not bother", etc. Sorry, but it doesn't stick with me. Why? Because it basically boils down to people moaning about not being able to churn out batches of minis to 'Eavy Metal standard from the starting line. No, you start off and you probably suck at first because painting, like any skill, takes practice to get better. However, after the first few models you settle into in and get better. And then you get even better, and faster. Then muscle memory kicks in and familiarity with the materials, and you're now even better and even faster at it. It takes even less effort to reach a more than satisfactory table top standard. Seriously, three colours, base -> wash -> dry/highlight -> done... with even a little bit of practice this looks good on the table and far superior to leaving them bare. Still not "good enough" for you? Time for a reality check on your expectations.
Is the same not true of building them? Converting them? List building? I bet you sucked at these too and they took forever when you first started. But you keep trying and you get better. The trouble seems to be that some people do this with the building and gaming and let the painting fall further and further behind... until before you know it you've got multiple armies assembled and plenty of games under your belt but a wall of grey starring at you and no experience on the painting table... well of course it's a chore/takes too long now, because you didn't put the time and effort in back when it was more manageable!
Sorry... that became a rant about the issue on a more general level and with that particular excuse that I see come up a lot. It's not all just directed at you, Don Mondo. Getting back to your post:
And I just flat out don't like doing it. But I do, and eventually things get painted.
I commend you for this. If you gain zero enjoyment from it but still make an effort to get your stuff painted, that's dedication and kudos to you.
This should help with people's definitions. It's hard to hold a coherent discussion when definitions can't be agreed upon.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wargaming
Sure, it's a board game. Is there a reason that a board game cannot also e a wargame? Risk. Axis and Allies. All the Avalon Hill board games based on historical battles/campaigns/wars. I'm sure there are many others that can be listed.
And yes, I also consider the clix games, X-Wing, etc to be wargames.
Do you have to use a strategic element building a list? Yes.
Do you have to use tactical elements in game? Yes.
Are they "wargames"? Yes
Glad to see that I'm not as dedicated to my hobby because I am unable to hold a brush still because of nerve damage. Insecure elitism is all over the place here with this kind of "well you're not AS dedicated as me" nonsense.
curran12 wrote: Glad to see that I'm not as dedicated to my hobby because I am unable to hold a brush still because of nerve damage. Insecure elitism is all over the place here with this kind of "well you're not AS dedicated as me" nonsense.
I already clarified my position on this. Christ, no decent person would insinuate what you just said and niether would I.
Especially when the line comes with: "unquestionably more complete, full and dedicated wargamers". By that logic of yours, I am unable to be a complete and dedicated wargamer, plain and simple. I'm calling it as I see it; it's a backhanded compromise at best where you still try to grab onto a position of superiority because of your position. Couching it with a "you aren't a bad person" doesn't change that.
It's like saying "I'm not saying you're BAD...I'm just saying I'm better." That's what I'm hearing.
Anfaugir, sorry I left off the "IMO" and "to me" tags regarding painting being boring and drudgery. I guess I thought they were implicit from the first part of the post. Sure, some enjoy it. I don't. And I've been doing it for 20+ years.
And Las, 'More dedicated"? Really. How many tournaments and paint clinics and game demos have you run? FYI, I used to be a GW Outrider, so my answer is hundreds over the last 20 years. How many people have you introduced to and brought into gaming. Again, my answer is hundreds.
My point is, painting is only one part of the hobby, and anyone that wants to claim that someone who doesn't paint for whatever reason is not a wargamer or is less of a gamer than someone who does paint is wrong. What's next, do we have to play a certain number of games every week before we can count as a "complete gamer"? Do we have to possess a certain number of models and/or different armies before we are a "more complete, full and dedicated wargamers"? Is there going to be a requirement to play in a certain number of tournaments?
So get off your high horse, join those of us that are merely mortal, and just enjoy the game. And let others enjoy it as they see fit, without statements that they are not "complete, full and dedicated wargamers".
Especially when the line comes with: "unquestionably more complete, full and dedicated wargamers". By that logic of yours, I am unable to be a complete and dedicated wargamer, plain and simple. I'm calling it as I see it; it's a backhanded compromise at best where you still try to grab onto a position of superiority because of your position. Couching it with a "you aren't a bad person" doesn't change that.
It's like saying "I'm not saying you're BAD...I'm just saying I'm better." That's what I'm hearing.
Okay fine, believe whatever you want.
@don_mondo
I'm not going to have a dick measuring contest with you on the internet. If you don't like painting that's fine, but yeah you aren't as invested the hobby as a whole as someone who makes that extra effort.
This kind of crap pisses me off because it is pure insecurity lashing out. To me, and I could be wrong, you're not interested in furthering the hobby. You're interested in proving your worth, and you've decided to do this by going after those who you have deemed not as dedicated as you, as if 'dedication' meant something to a wargame.
And here's the thing, I do field painted armies, but I have to use commission painting services to do that, and that gets expensive (in both time and money). Because of my nerve damage, any time I want to expand an army, I have to buy it, find a commission service, spend money on them, ship the models, wait anywhere from a few weeks to half a year and THEN I can use them. But again, I apparently am not as 'dedicated'.
We all want to feel superior, I get that. But making up qualifiers (that you match, naturally) to elevate yourself over others doesn't really do that. It just makes you appear like a jackass.
curran12 wrote: This kind of crap pisses me off because it is pure insecurity lashing out. To me, and I could be wrong, you're not interested in furthering the hobby. You're interested in proving your worth, and you've decided to do this by going after those who you have deemed not as dedicated as you, as if 'dedication' meant something to a wargame.
And here's the thing, I do field painted armies, but I have to use commission painting services to do that, and that gets expensive (in both time and money). Because of my nerve damage, any time I want to expand an army, I have to buy it, find a commission service, spend money on them, ship the models, wait anywhere from a few weeks to half a year and THEN I can use them. But again, I apparently am not as 'dedicated'.
We all want to feel superior, I get that. But making up qualifiers (that you match, naturally) to elevate yourself over others doesn't really do that. It just makes you appear like a jackass.
Nerve damage is obviously an exception. I have stated this before. I wouldn't call a person with no arms lazy for not painting and I wouldn't do it to you either.
Especially when the line comes with: "unquestionably more complete, full and dedicated wargamers". By that logic of yours, I am unable to be a complete and dedicated wargamer, plain and simple. I'm calling it as I see it; it's a backhanded compromise at best where you still try to grab onto a position of superiority because of your position. Couching it with a "you aren't a bad person" doesn't change that.
It's like saying "I'm not saying you're BAD...I'm just saying I'm better." That's what I'm hearing.
Okay fine, believe whatever you want.
@don_mondo
I'm not going to have a dick measuring contest with you on the internet. If you don't like painting that's fine, but yeah you aren't as invested the hobby as a whole as someone who makes that extra effort.
But we already have the measuring tapes even. And I never said I didn't paint. In fact, read my earlier posts....
Over the years I've painted at least 20 or more complete armies (1500-2000 points or more), many of them for single use at a GW Grand Tournament. And while I think my painting sucks, I've never been ashamed to put one of my armies on the table. It's a decent tabletop quality, I guess it's just that I hang around too many master-class, Golden Daemon winner, GT Best Army winners to think my painting is 'good'.
What I object to is the "I paint so I'm better than those who don't" attitude. So have a nice day.
Did anyone read Eilif's excellent blog article? I suggest you do in order to have a much better explained example of my point of view on the subject. I'd like to know what some of you think.
Nerve damage is obviously an exception. I have stated this before. I wouldn't call a person with no arms lazy for not painting and I wouldn't do it to you either.
But what does this rule, exceptions or not, get you?
I mean, let's be honest, if I put down some unpainted units, would you really think that through? I'm guessing not. My guess is that you'd see unpainted and your mind would default to 'lazy' because that is how the human brain works. You've got your assumption, and it makes you feel better about yourself, so why change it?
But again, what does calling other people lazy, and making up levels of 'dedication' gain you?
Edit: That "essay" uuughhhhh. The same "I'm not saying YOU'RE bad, I'm just saying that I'm SO MUCH BETTER" bull.
Nerve damage is obviously an exception. I have stated this before. I wouldn't call a person with no arms lazy for not painting and I wouldn't do it to you either.
But what does this rule, exceptions or not, get you?
I mean, let's be honest, if I put down some unpainted units, would you really think that through? I'm guessing not. My guess is that you'd see unpainted and your mind would default to 'lazy' because that is how the human brain works. You've got your assumption, and it makes you feel better about yourself, so why change it?
But again, what does calling other people lazy, and making up levels of 'dedication' gain you?
It doesn't 'gain' me anything, its just an opinion on the subject.
Look at it this way; I like biking. I do it every other day. It consider myself a cyclist of sorts. However, I have a friend that actively maintains and constructs his bikes, I do not. He follows professional cycling, I do not. He keeps track of his times and constantly tries to improve himself through research and technical skill. I could do all those things but I do not for the same reason many in this thread don't paint. I am perfectly capable of doing so. I could allocate more of the time I devote to biking to these things, however they don't interest me as much and seem like a chore. As a result, I am without a doubt less of a cyclist than he is. This is despite the fact that I have probably spent hundreds of hours of my life on a bike.
"Like many here, I have a "live and let live apart" attitude towards folks who don't paint their miniatures. My philosophy is generally, "That's fine for you, but you'll have to find someone else to play against," "
That's what I'm talking about when I say elitest attitude. You are certainly going to encourage someone to get more involved in gaming with that attitude. And that's not "Live and let live", that's do it my way or I won't play with you.
Does he have another article talking about how many games you have to play every week before you can be considered a "complete gamer" Or does this elitism only apply to painting?
In other words, you read the opening paragraph and then stopped. I can only assume as much because you didn't even mention or confront the meat of the article.
It's not an opinion on the "subject" though. It is an opinion levied against those you play against. The cycling analogy falls short because, unlike cycling, wargaming requires at least two to tango. Indeed, wargaming is an exceptionally social game. While certainly, you can cycle in groups and participate in any number of social organizations around cycling, but you do not need to.
You can get the full cycling experience alone. You cannot wargame without another player.
And here's the crux of the matter. This opinion is not "I like playing against nicely-painted armies". I totally understand and agree with that, as a matter of fact. There's a great spectacle in two good-looking armies on a good-looking table that is very memorable and enjoyable. However, that is not your opinion, or at least that is not what you said. What you said is "stop being lazy", a strike against those who are necessary to participate in the hobby. You said "you are not fully a wargamer" to the people you might play with. Those are attacks, plain and simple.
As Don mentioned. It is not "live and let live", it is "my way or the highway." THAT'S where my problem is, not in that you like painted armies.
curran12 wrote: It's not an opinion on the "subject" though. It is an opinion levied against those you play against. The cycling analogy falls short because, unlike cycling, wargaming requires at least two to tango. Indeed, wargaming is an exceptionally social game. While certainly, you can cycle in groups and participate in any number of social organizations around cycling, but you do not need to.
You can get the full cycling experience alone. You cannot wargame without another player.
And here's the crux of the matter. This opinion is not "I like playing against nicely-painted armies". I totally understand and agree with that, as a matter of fact. There's a great spectacle in two good-looking armies on a good-looking table that is very memorable and enjoyable. However, that is not your opinion, or at least that is not what you said. What you said is "stop being lazy", a strike against those who are necessary to participate in the hobby. You said "you are not fully a wargamer" to the people you might play with. Those are attacks, plain and simple.
As Don mentioned. It is not "live and let live", it is "my way or the highway." THAT'S where my problem is, not in that you like painted armies.
I have not called anyone lazy for not painting.
What I have said and continued to say, is that those who do not paint (medical impairments aside of-holycowwhywouldIevenneedtosaythis-course) do not participate in the entirety of the hobby and prioritize segments of it over the whole. Therefore they are not as into wargaming as an enthusiast who participates in every aspect of the hobby. AND THAT IS TOTALLY FINE. But it is still a thing.
For the record, I do play against grey armies and have never once derided someone for having unpainted models, outside of close friends ripping on eachother.
I wouldn't call a person with no arms lazy for not painting and I wouldn't do it to you either.
So you would call someone lazy for not painting for other reasons?
Well, my buddy has been procrastinating on an ork trukk for a month and because I know him to enjoy painting and to do it regularly, yeah I'd jab him for it in fun.
Would I blanket state that everyone who doesn't paint is lazy? No.
I look at it the way I look at participation in Dungeons and Dragons. In my group, everyone takes turns as Dungeon Master. If you're new we allow you a few sessions to get the hang of things before you're expected to participate in that aspect.
If someone in our group said "you know what guys, I just really don't feel like being Dungeon Master, ever. You guys just cover that, aight?" we would probably still let them play, but it'd be disappointing; a clear sign that they don't value our games (or our company) as much as the rest of us. Not everyone likes DM'ing- we have a few players who groan when it's their turn. But they all put forth the effort, and that's appreciated.
Wow. In my group, the general consensus is one person (99% of the time me) is the DM, everyone else plays. No one else wants the hassle of writing or running a game.
I like the idea of defining some terms. I have myself been guilty of assuming shared definitions when there are variations.
Wargaming as a whole can encompass board wargaming, card wargaming and miniature wargaming.
Board and card wargaming don't tend to involve painted minatures, but the previously linked wikipedia entry makes it clear that "miniature wargaming" typically involves painted miniatures. It has been such throughout the entire history of "miniature Wargaming" which streteches back much further than games workshop, or the fairly recent (10 years or so) trend toward disregarding painting.
You can see more about the longer history of wargaming here
http://www-personal.umich.edu/~beattie/timeline2.html Nothing groundbreaking, but it might help to put things in context a bit. The upshot is that not-painting wargames figures is a relatively recent aberration, and that based on the definition of "miniature wargaming", folks who are not painting their miniatures, are essentially participating in a different hobby.
Painting is such a part of miniature wargaming, that I hesitate to even apply the the term "miniature wargaming" to those who play without intent to paint. Sure they're wargaming of a sort, but to call it "miniature wargaming" seems like the awarding of a term to an activity that doesn't match the definition. Perhaps (only half kidding here) wargaming without the expectation of painting needs a new term. Maybe it could be called tactical wargaming, or "board-less" wargaming. Perhaps the most accurate term would be "The Games Workshop and Privateer Press Hobby".
You know in the early days of 40K, several units were nothing more than flat pieces of cardstock paper with an image printed on it, right?
Sure, a painted army looks better (usually. Hopefully.) but I don't care if I'm fighting Space Wolves-of-the-Grey-Legion because the other player cba to paint forty figures, a dozen wolves and three tanks. It just doesn't bother me.
Sisters? Sisters are easy. It's mostly gloss black, red and white.
Eilif wrote: Painting is such a part of miniature wargaming, that I hesitate to even apply the the term to those who play without intent to paint. Without paint, they might as well be tokens.
Oh, come on. Do you really believe that unpainted models have absolutely no aesthetic value at all? If paint is all that matters, why aren't you playing with painted tokens?
Psienesis wrote: You know in the early days of 40K, several units were nothing more than flat pieces of cardstock paper with an image printed on it, right$.
A few points:
-40k does not the entire wargaming hobby make.
-Rogue Trader was essentially an RPG with a squad of figs.
-Those cardstock standees were only intended as stopgap until one acquired the requisite models. I have the RT rulebook and the 2nd edition stand-up dreadnoughts (3 of them actually…)
Eilif wrote: Painting is such a part of miniature wargaming, that I hesitate to even apply the the term to those who play without intent to paint. Without paint, they might as well be tokens.
Oh, come on. Do you really believe that unpainted models have absolutely no aesthetic value at all? If paint is all that matters, why aren't you playing with painted tokens?
Unpainted models have aesthetic value so low that it would almost be playing with tokens, and it's moot anyway, since miniature wargaming is wargaming with painted miniatures.
I never said that paint is all that matters, (you can put that straw man right back in the barn) I've stated in various places that I stick to the entire definition of miniature wargaming.
Psienesis wrote: Wow. In my group, the general consensus is one person (99% of the time me) is the DM, everyone else plays. No one else wants the hassle of writing or running a game.
Yes, I understand that's how it works for most groups. But our group has been playing at least once a week for 14 years, and we've never suffered "DM burnout" or had any lasting grudges or disputes, which was pretty common in other groups I've played in. Everyone is expected to contribute to the fluff of our games worlds, and it's lead to some pretty awesome games. It felt pretty hodge-podge when we were all teenagers, but it's gotten a lot better.
It's obvious though that some individuals are more dedicated to their hobbies ( be it whatever ) than others. Someone not having the same amount of time for their hobby doesn't change this - the person investing more is still more dedicated, even if they have the advantage of not being busy with things that demand their attention ( family, work, whatever. ) I hit the gym as a hobby, and am serious about it, but my time is limited. I give it all I got with the time I have for said hobby. Someone spending twice my hours in there is still more dedicated, be it an amateur or a professional bodybuilder. Me not having the time doesn't change it at all.
If you can only spend 2 hours on something a week due to other things taking up your time, the guy without distractions who spends 12 hours a week is still more dedicated. That's just how it is, and not being capable to admit something like this is just being in denial.
If you can only spend 2 hours on something a week due to other things taking up your time, the guy without distractions who spends 12 hours a week is still more dedicated.
Chiming into the discussion for the first time, quoting the above for relevance. I have three points to make.
First - I have limited free time. Given a choice between spending that limited free time painting, or playing a game....I'd prefer to play the game. I enjoy visualizing battles in my head while playing them out on the field, the chess-like move/counter-move turns ahead of time planning, the thrill of winning, especially with an underpowered army. That's the hobby I enjoy, and painting isn't part of it.
Second- I enjoy fluff as much as other people enjoy painting. I own most of the Black Library books. But a hobby is what you choose to do and enjoy. The title of this thread, "Why do people play 40k when they don't even paint" could easily be substituted for one of the following:
"Why do people play 40k when they don't even make competitive lists?"
"Why do people play 40k when they don't know their chapter/race/other" history?
Those are equally important parts. Painting isn't weighted heavier in what "makes this a hobby." Imagine this conversation: How can Space Wolves players possibly field their armies as other than counts as Chaos? Leman Russ was a lapdog of Horus, and the Space Wolves are pretty much solely responsible for the Horus Heresy in the 31st Millenium, and the 10,000 years of war since then. How can Space Wolves POSSIBLY field themselves allied to Space Marines? They are the REASON the 41st Millenium is the Grimdark.
To each their own. You might spend three hours a night painting, and enjoying it. I find more pleasure in spending that time reading. I remember being more excited about the release of "Prospero Burns" than over any Codex release.
Third- People naturally enjoy what they are good at, unless forced to do something until they are good at it, at which point they will start to enjoy it. I am a terrible painter. I don't have steady hands. I've attended painting classes, tried the dipping method....it's just not for me. I spent two nights and probably 6 hours trying to do a good paint job on Mad Dok Grotsnik years ago, painstakingly painting under a magnifying glass and everything. It looked second rate when I was done, didn't have clean lines, and I was ashamed of having spent so much time on it. I don't enjoy doing it because I have no talent for it. My armies are still painted, but it was either my wife who painted them (My Pink Pajama Orks) or I had them professionally painted. Not because I prefer painted models over unpainted models, but because painting is compulsory in most organized events.
How you enjoy your hobby is only as right or wrong as you deem it. But your personal worldview should never be imposed on other people. So you don't think that people who don't paint are hobbyists. Well, I think that people who can't recite the Primarchs by memory, world of origin, and write detailed essays without references on the history of various races aren't hobbyists.
An Ork player who doesn't know about Brainboyz, and the genetic coding imbued in Orks that gives them tendencies to join different tribes and technical know-how? A Necron player who hasn't researched every possible rumor into whether the Omnissiah is a C'Tan? And did the Emperor really chain a C'Tan on Mars?
To each their own. For you...painting and playing. For me, fluff and playing. We're both right.
RunicFIN wrote: If you can only spend 2 hours on something a week due to other things taking up your time, the guy without distractions who spends 12 hours a week is still more dedicated. That's just how it is, and not being capable to admit something like this is just being in denial.
Or maybe they just don't see painting as of much of an important part of the hobby? But even if you're right....so what? Okay, you're....more "dedicated" at toy soldiers? Well done you!
I always find this discussion literally incomprehensible. I like painting, but I can accept some people don't like painting. Why on earth would I insist someone must do a part of the hobby they don't enjoy?
(edit) You know, I've never seen a thread where someone insists that someone who collects miniatures solely to paint is somehow lesser for not gaming with them. Has anyone else?
RunicFIN wrote: If you can only spend 2 hours on something a week due to other things taking up your time, the guy without distractions who spends 12 hours a week is still more dedicated. That's just how it is, and not being capable to admit something like this is just being in denial.
Or maybe they just don't see painting as of much of an important part of the hobby? But even if you're right....so what? Okay, you're....more "dedicated" at toy soldiers? Well done you!
I always find this discussion literally incomprehensible. I like painting, but I can accept some people don't like painting. Why on earth would I insist someone must do a part of the hobby they don't enjoy?
(edit) You know, I've never seen a thread where someone insists that someone who collects miniatures solely to paint is somehow lesser for not gaming with them. Has anyone else?
@your edit: because that's just called modeling, it's a similar but distinct hobby from miniature wargaming.
Colpicklejar wrote: I look at it the way I look at participation in Dungeons and Dragons. In my group, everyone takes turns as Dungeon Master. If you're new we allow you a few sessions to get the hang of things before you're expected to participate in that aspect.
If someone in our group said "you know what guys, I just really don't feel like being Dungeon Master, ever. You guys just cover that, aight?" we would probably still let them play, but it'd be disappointing; a clear sign that they don't value our games (or our company) as much as the rest of us. Not everyone likes DM'ing- we have a few players who groan when it's their turn. But they all put forth the effort, and that's appreciated.
How does that work? So you guys do a different campaign every session or just take turns doing the same campaign? Seems like it would be kind of odd to both play in the campaign and have a hand in running it at the same time. Doesn't seem like there'd be much that would stay hidden.
Dashofpepper wrote:How you enjoy your hobby is only as right or wrong as you deem it. But your personal worldview should never be imposed on other people.
This.
Elemental wrote:Why on earth would I insist someone must do a part of the hobby they don't enjoy?
And This.
Las wrote:Did anyone read Eilif's excellent blog article? I suggest you do in order to have a much better explained example of my point of view on the subject. I'd like to know what some of you think.
Yep, I read it, it reads like a fluff piece for people who like to be obnoxious to people who want to enjoy the hobby in different ways. I find that article more obnoxious than unpainted miniatures, because it actively tells people they suck (not directly, but obviously it is implied). Let's pull out some quotes from that article:
"Those who don't choose to paint their models have a different approach to the hobby and it's just as valid as yours."
Balderdash, I say! Pish posh and poppycock!
So, you're imposing your own view of the hobby on others.
*a bunch of pointless analogies*
I was going to discuss each of those analogies in turn, but after doing 1 realised I was wasting my time. I'll just say the analogies aren't analogous and thus aren't useful.
But I don't ever expect to get the same kind of props or respect as someone who paints their miniatures to a higher standard any more than I would expect a best-painted award at a convention.
Except no one is asking for "props" for not painting models. They are asking not to be attacked, called lazy, told they aren't wargamers, told they're "doing it wrong".
and does no one any favors.
Balderdash, I say! Pish posh and poppycock!
It does a lot of people favours, it opens up wargaming to a far larger set of people. Yes, obviously having unpainted models in games has its bad points. So does telling a bunch of people "no, you aren't allowed to join my hobby unless you spend 50 hours doing something you don't want to do first".
And frankly I can make the same argument for crappily painted models. Yes, I'd prefer to play against painted models than unpainted models... but I'd just as equally (if not more) prefer to play against WELL painted models than crappily painted models. It benefits the hobby if everyone spends time on their models to make them look good instead of just roughly painting 3 colours on. We could just as equally say allowing poorly painted models do no one any favours because well painted models look better, make for a more overall entertaining game and the aesthetic is more appealing to onlookers. To me, the level of standards looks something like this....
1. Well Painted models - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2. Extremely poorly painted models - <-------------------------------------------Where you are placing your "hobby standard to be considered wargaming" 3. Unpainted models - - - 4. Well painted/printed 2D standing cut outs - - 5. Flat tokens with a nice image on them - - 6. Flat tokens with names on them
Obviously I prefer to play against #1, but frankly I consider all of it "wargaming" and unpainted vs poorly painted is rather close in my personal opinion because I find poorly painted models as aesthetically jarring as unpainted ones (the only reason it's higher on the list is because I'm willing to give people an A for effort Otherwise they'd probably be on the same level).
Frankly, the only reason it would slightly grate me playing against #4 is admittedly I would find it annoying that someone spent almost no money to play the game when most people are suckered in to it by GW Realistically I'd be fine with it, I think aesthetically it would look fine and I know there's groups who play like that.
@your edit: because that's just called modeling, it's a similar but distinct hobby from miniature wargaming.
So....painting in itself is a complete hobby, and I'm not going to be accused of not being "into painting" if I don't game with the miniatures. But painting is an integral part of wargaming, and I am going to be accused of not being "into wargaming" if I don't paint. Seems a bit circular, but I'm sure you'll "clarify" it.
Colpicklejar wrote: I look at it the way I look at participation in Dungeons and Dragons. In my group, everyone takes turns as Dungeon Master. If you're new we allow you a few sessions to get the hang of things before you're expected to participate in that aspect.
If someone in our group said "you know what guys, I just really don't feel like being Dungeon Master, ever. You guys just cover that, aight?" we would probably still let them play, but it'd be disappointing; a clear sign that they don't value our games (or our company) as much as the rest of us. Not everyone likes DM'ing- we have a few players who groan when it's their turn. But they all put forth the effort, and that's appreciated.
How does that work? So you guys do a different campaign every session or just take turns doing the same campaign? Seems like it would be kind of odd to both play in the campaign and have a hand in running it at the same time. Doesn't seem like there'd be much that would stay hidden.
The same campaign. We've done it in a variety of ways. In the past our campaigns were pretty episodic- there were over-arching narratives, but for the most part each session contained its own adventure, set within the world we created. It kind of helped that we would play 6-8 hours at a time...
More recently we've taken to "handing off" the story to the next DM. We leave off on cliffhangers all the time, and the next DM resolves them in a way that they like and continues the existing narrative. In a way there's no reason to keep things "hidden" because it's a surprise to everyone.
I think it helps a lot. More of a collaboration than one person trying to herd cats.
Las = Ignore
DoP = Well said.
Don Mondo = Ignore Las
This thread = complete fail and I can't believe the mods have left it the way it is. Other topics get shredded so fast and sleeper cell non-sense like this lingers on...
Or maybe they just don't see painting as of much of an important part of the hobby? But even if you're right....so what? Okay, you're....more "dedicated" at toy soldiers? Well done you!
I always find this discussion literally incomprehensible. I like painting, but I can accept some people don't like painting. Why on earth would I insist someone must do a part of the hobby they don't enjoy?
(edit) You know, I've never seen a thread where someone insists that someone who collects miniatures solely to paint is somehow lesser for not gaming with them. Has anyone else?
The first sentence of my post is:
RunicFIN wrote: It's obvious though that some individuals are more dedicated to their hobbies ( be it whatever )
...and you still managed to somehow think that I´m talking about myself, or painting. Well, I wasn't, and no amount of possible twisting of my words after this post will change that fact. I'm clearly talking in general. I currently spend 6 hours a week to paint max, mostly around 4. I believe I'm in the lower end of the spectrum.
Just painting more than the next guy makes someone a more dedicated painter, not much else. The only way I could see someone being a more "dedicated wargamer" is that guy A spends more time on everything that "wargaming" encompasses ( fluff, gaming, painting, modeling, terrain building, what else ) than guy B. If guy C spends 12 hours gaming and guy D spends 12 hours painting weekly, then I see them as equally dedicated, just to different areas of "wargaming."
Painting is probably my favorite part of the hobby and I love to face beautifully painted armies and groan inside when I face the Gray enemies.
However, I'll never tell them they're doing it wrong. The hobby is for fun and if they don't find painting to be fun, then why on earth should they have to do it?
For me, being a wargammer is more a mindest. A guy can have only two unpainted squads of marines but if he's got the passion and drive and thinks about it when he should be working, then he's a wargammer to me.
It depends on how long the persons been playing. If hes been playing for years and still hasnt even put 3 colors on his models then I dont usually game with them. So far all the people Ive ran into that are like that only play a few games a year and arent very fun to play against since they might as well be constantly brand new to the game. No one likes every game to be a teaching game.
Las wrote: For real, though. Why are you so worked up about this? Methinks there's a nerve being struck.
Yeah, that'll happen when you suggest that you're more important than someone else due to some artificial limit that you've applied yourself.
All of this 'You're not a 'real' wargamer unless you do the things that I consider an important part of the hobby' is ridiculous and elitist.
Eilif wrote: ...Sure they're wargaming of a sort, but to call it "miniature wargaming" seems like the awarding of a term to an activity that doesn't match the definition.
Are miniatures not miniatures until they are painted?
Perhaps (only half kidding here) wargaming without the expectation of painting needs a new term.
Or maybe people could stop trying to impose labels on folk who participate in the hobby differently to themselves, and just accept that different people like doing different things?
Las wrote: For real, though. Why are you so worked up about this? Methinks there's a nerve being struck.
Yeah, that'll happen when you suggest that you're more important than someone else due to some artificial limit that you've applied yourself.
All of this 'You're not a 'real' wargamer unless you do the things that I consider an important part of the hobby' is ridiculous and elitist.
Or he could not resort to name calling over a differing opinion on the definition of wargaming. For folks constantly insisting that people's opinions on the hobby should be absolutely respected you guys sure get worked the feth up when someone dares to disagree with you.
Las wrote: For folks constantly insisting that people's opinions on the hobby should be absolutely respected you guys sure get worked the feth up when someone dares to disagree with you.
Someone having a different opinion is not the issue. How that opinion is presented is where the problem comes from.
It's perfectly acceptable for you to prefer to play with painted models exclusively. Pointing out that you prefer to play with painted models exclusively is likewise perfectly acceptable,
Telling someone that they're not a 'real' gamer unless they do the things you like to do? That's just going to get people riled, and if you honestly can't see that, I don't know what to tell you. This isn't just a gaming thing... Any time you tell people they're not doing something 'properly' because they're not doing it your way, you're going to annoy people.
Las wrote: For real, though. Why are you so worked up about this? Methinks there's a nerve being struck.
Yeah, that'll happen when you suggest that you're more important than someone else due to some artificial limit that you've applied yourself.
All of this 'You're not a 'real' wargamer unless you do the things that I consider an important part of the hobby' is ridiculous and elitist.
Or he could not resort to name calling over a differing opinion on the definition of wargaming. For folks constantly insisting that people's opinions on the hobby should be absolutely respected you guys sure get worked the feth up when someone dares to disagree with you.
They don't get mad when you disagree with them. They get mad when you insinuate that they will never be 'complete wargamers' due to some standard that you set. Do you understand the difference?
EDIT:insaniak, you never told me you were a ninja!
Las wrote: For real, though. Why are you so worked up about this? Methinks there's a nerve being struck.
Yeah, that'll happen when you suggest that you're more important than someone else due to some artificial limit that you've applied yourself.
All of this 'You're not a 'real' wargamer unless you do the things that I consider an important part of the hobby' is ridiculous and elitist.
Or he could not resort to name calling over a differing opinion on the definition of wargaming. For folks constantly insisting that people's opinions on the hobby should be absolutely respected you guys sure get worked the feth up when someone dares to disagree with you.
They don't get mad when you disagree with them. They get mad when you insinuate that they will never be 'complete wargamers' due to some standard that you set. Do you understand the difference?
EDIT:insaniak, you never told me you were a ninja!
Yeah, I understand. That's still just my opinion based on what wargaming is and I don't think that's worth calling someone an 'ass-hat' over. One may think that about me, I honestly couldn't care less. It is however pretty strange to get that riled up in the first place over the issue at hand.
For the record whether people paint their models or not doesn't make me mad in the slightest. Theyre yours do what you like with them. The definition of what wargaming and is considered to be by the majority of hobbyists (those outside of 40k) doesn't change just because of you only like what you like.
Yeah, my position is elitist but I don't remember ever pushing any of your moms down the stairs. Get over it.
Yeah, I understand. That's still just my opinion based on what wargaming is and I don't think that's worth calling someone an 'ass-hat' over. One may think that about me, I honestly couldn't care less. It is however pretty strange to get that riled up in the first place over the issue at hand.
For the record whether people paint their models or not doesn't make me mad in the slightest. Theyre yours do what you like with them. The definition of what wargaming and is considered to be by the majority of hobbyists (those outside of 40k) doesn't change just because of you only like what you like.
Yeah, my position is elitist but I don't remember ever pushing any of your moms down the stairs. Get over it.
So you insulted folks (unknowingly or unknowingly) by insinuating that they will never be 'complete wargamers', then wonder why they get riled up about it?
Do I understand your position properly?
In general, best not to imply folks are inferior to you by some metric of your own defining. Tends not endear people to you. Nor does being flippant about any insult you may have caused, for that matter.
Is being a complete participant in wargaming important enough to this guy to call people names like a teenager? If playing with grey dudez is fine for them why would it matter?
Las wrote: Is being a complete participant in wargaming important enough to this guy to call people names like a teenager? If playing with grey dudez is fine for them why would it matter?
The topic under discussion here was why people play without painting, not explaining why making offensive comments annoys people.
But I think we've about run the course here. Moving on.
), not interested in it, not good at it, etc.
