106383
Post by: JNAProductions
Inspired by this trainwreck, I'm curious as to what the general value people place on having painted models.
Please do NOT repeat the rudeness and rules-breaking of that thread. Keep it civil and tolerant.
63000
Post by: Peregrine
Painting is a basic requirement for playing the game. No painted models, please do not show up and expect a game. So in that context this thread doesn't make much sense. It's like asking how much you value assembled models or knowing the rules or whatever, even people who don't specifically enjoy assembling models or studying rulebooks can value those things highly and consider them mandatory requirements for participation. So my answer that fits the intent of a poll as a rating scale, the strongest "painting matters" response, is not true as-written for me. It isn't the entire hobby, but it is of maximum importance.
106383
Post by: JNAProductions
 Peregrine wrote:Painting is a basic requirement for playing the game. No painted models, please do not show up and expect a game. So in that context this thread doesn't make much sense. It's like asking how much you value assembled models or knowing the rules or whatever, even people who don't specifically enjoy assembling models or studying rulebooks can value those things highly and consider them mandatory requirements for participation.
Why do you say that? I can perfectly well understand you saying " I will not play you if you don't have painted models," but to say that as a universal seems pretty presumptuous.
63000
Post by: Peregrine
 JNAProductions wrote:Why do you say that? I can perfectly well understand you saying " I will not play you if you don't have painted models," but to say that as a universal seems pretty presumptuous.
Because unpainted models look like  , and there's no excuse for bringing them into a public gaming space. It's like having a bunch of bases with space marine legs on them proxying as an AOS army. The whole reason we play a miniatures game instead of using cardboard tokens on a map grid is for the aesthetic value of the miniatures, and bringing miniatures ruins that aesthetic value. And TBH even if two players agree to use unpainted models it still gives the hobby a bad reputation to have that kind of thing happening in public. So I'm all in favor of stores/clubs/whatever having a policy that unpainted models are banned.
(And before one particular poster shows up, yes, reasonable accommodations can be made for someone who has a legitimate disability that prevents them from painting. But the vast majority of unpainted armies are the result of laziness, not disability. Their owners don't care about painting and refuse to do it even though they are entirely capable of it. The disability argument is nothing more than an attempt to divert the discussion onto an irrelevant tangent and provide excuses for the not-disabled majority.)
106383
Post by: JNAProductions
That's an opinion you have. I'd appreciate you not presenting it as a universal truth.
Again, you're free to refuse to game against someone who hasn't painted their models. But to say it's your way or the highway demonstrates a lack of understanding of other viewpoints, or possibly a lack of caring.
99
Post by: insaniak
To be clear here, this thread is asking about your personal opinion on painted miniatures.
If we could all try to avoid making sweeping statements that suggest that our own opinion is the only valid way to play, that would be helpful.
19296
Post by: Da-Rock
LOL.....oh that made me laugh. A Store banning unpainted models.....Hahahaa! Oh my, tears down my cheeks!
Oh mah garsh that was a good one......more please?
63000
Post by: Peregrine
And I'd appreciate it if people stop bringing unpainted models.
Again, you're free to refuse to game against someone who hasn't painted their models.
I will do exactly that. I will also advocate for stores/clubs/etc to ban the use of unpainted models.
But to say it's your way or the highway demonstrates a lack of understanding of other viewpoints, or possibly a lack of caring.
It's a lack of caring. I don't care about excuses for why people don't want to meet the basic standards of playing the game, just like I don't care what excuses someone has for not bothering to learn the rules. Automatically Appended Next Post:  Da-Rock wrote:LOL.....oh that made me laugh. A Store banning unpainted models.....Hahahaa! Oh my, tears down my cheeks!
What's so wrong with that? A major reason to have in-store gaming space is to take advantage of customers who are willing to provide free advertising for the products you sell. A game with two nicely painted armies does a good job of selling the game as an enjoyable experience and getting customers to stop and look. A "game" with a bunch of random space marine legs on bases, broken gray plastic everywhere, etc, does not do this and likely convinces potential customers to stay away from the hobby. Take away the free advertising and what are you left with? Paying to provide gaming space for people who bought most of their models years ago and just keep coming in for the free tables?
56277
Post by: Eldarain
I personally prefer painted games. I played my first game at a local store recently and they have a everything must have three colors rule. I thought it a bit elitist and offputting to new players but after thinking about it I think it fosters a better community and showcases the products on sale far better.
I think it might be helpful for people to embrace Perigrines more hardline stance. The addictive hoarding so many players partake in would at least be lessened if they couldn't get any games in until fully painted.
120215
Post by: StormX
JNAProductions wrote:Inspired by this trainwreck, I'm curious as to what the general value people place on having painted models.
Please do NOT repeat the rudeness and rules-breaking of that thread. Keep it civil and tolerant.
Glad i inspired you. I didn't mean to come off as rude, just trying to take a tougher stance to encourage more people to stick to tradition.
99
Post by: insaniak
Da-Rock wrote:LOL.....oh that made me laugh. A Store banning unpainted models.....Hahahaa! Oh my, tears down my cheeks!
Oh mah garsh that was a good one......more please?
I'm not sure what you find funny about it, too be honest. I couldn't say where it's all at these days, but it used to be not that uncommon.
Most tourneys and some gaming clubs have had similar rules.
The reception of this rules has always been somewhat varied, but ultimately if you're playing in someone's space, you follow their rules.
For myself, I prefer painted models for games, and will generally only use what I have painted unless it's just to try something out, but I'd rather play the game than stress about how much paint is on my opponent's models.
122753
Post by: DeathKorp_Rider
I don't care that much. I suck at painting so I can't do it, and it's expensive to get them painted. I spend enough on the models, I'll get around to having someone paint them one day.
Frankly if someone told me that didn't want to play with me because my models aren't painted, I would look at them and straight-up say I wouldn't want to play with someone like that because of how petty they are.
120215
Post by: StormX
DeathKorp_Rider wrote:I don't care that much. I suck at painting so I can't do it, and it's expensive to get them painted. I spend enough on the models, I'll get around to having someone paint them one day.
Frankly if someone told me that didn't want to play with me because my models aren't painted, I would look at them and straight-up say I wouldn't want to play with someone like that because of how petty they are.
Do you feel happy knowing you are actively contributing to the destruction of the tradition ?
63000
Post by: Peregrine
DeathKorp_Rider wrote:Frankly if someone told me that didn't want to play with me because my models aren't painted, I would look at them and straight-up say I wouldn't want to play with someone like that because of how petty they are.
So wanting to have a more enjoyable game experience is now "petty"? Is it also petty to expect my opponent to use appropriate models and not a bunch of space marine legs on bases?
106383
Post by: JNAProductions
 Stormatious wrote:DeathKorp_Rider wrote:I don't care that much. I suck at painting so I can't do it, and it's expensive to get them painted. I spend enough on the models, I'll get around to having someone paint them one day.
Frankly if someone told me that didn't want to play with me because my models aren't painted, I would look at them and straight-up say I wouldn't want to play with someone like that because of how petty they are.
Do you feel happy knowing you are actively contributing to the destruction of the tradition ?
Tradition is simply the way something was done before. That doesn't make it good.
I'm sure we can all think of many examples of things people used to do that isn't done anymore and that's for the better. I certainly can, but I can't really say them due to forum rules.
122753
Post by: DeathKorp_Rider
Stormatious wrote:DeathKorp_Rider wrote:I don't care that much. I suck at painting so I can't do it, and it's expensive to get them painted. I spend enough on the models, I'll get around to having someone paint them one day.
Frankly if someone told me that didn't want to play with me because my models aren't painted, I would look at them and straight-up say I wouldn't want to play with someone like that because of how petty they are.
Do you feel happy knowing you are actively contributing to the destruction of the tradition ?
It's a game, you're supposed to have fun with people. That's the only tradition there is.
106383
Post by: JNAProductions
Peregrine wrote:DeathKorp_Rider wrote:Frankly if someone told me that didn't want to play with me because my models aren't painted, I would look at them and straight-up say I wouldn't want to play with someone like that because of how petty they are.
So wanting to have a more enjoyable game experience is now "petty"? Is it also petty to expect my opponent to use appropriate models and not a bunch of space marine legs on bases?
Peregine, again-there's nothing wrong with your standards being "Painted or GTFO." But to insist everyone have the exact same standards... Well, that's just rude. I mean, how would you feel if I told you you had to have every single rule memorized to play a game with me? No referencing books at all. And I demand that standard from EVERYONE, regardless of how experienced they are or skilled they are.
122753
Post by: DeathKorp_Rider
Peregrine wrote:DeathKorp_Rider wrote:Frankly if someone told me that didn't want to play with me because my models aren't painted, I would look at them and straight-up say I wouldn't want to play with someone like that because of how petty they are.
So wanting to have a more enjoyable game experience is now "petty"? Is it also petty to expect my opponent to use appropriate models and not a bunch of space marine legs on bases?
This was about painting, not modeling.
99
Post by: insaniak
Stormatious wrote:
Do you feel happy knowing you are actively contributing to the destruction of the tradition ?
Dial down the hyperbole, there. I've been playing 40k for 25 years now, and the number of unpainted armies I saw when I started is pretty much the same as now.
This isn't some new trend.
63000
Post by: Peregrine
DeathKorp_Rider wrote:It's a game, you're supposed to have fun with people. That's the only tradition there is.
And seeing unpainted models on the table is not fun. Automatically Appended Next Post:
But why is modeling any different? Painting a model is just as much a part of finishing it as gluing together all of the pieces, and an unpainted model is no different from a random set of space marine legs glued on a base because "I'll finish it someday".
106383
Post by: JNAProductions
For you.
For a lot of people, it doesn't matter.
For me personally, painted is better, but hardly a dealbreaker. I'm 100% happy to play a game of grey minis, it'd just be a little cooler to have paints on them.
122753
Post by: DeathKorp_Rider
Having fun is in the game, or modeling, or painting. Whatever you enjoy, you should do. But when you try imposing your standard on others, it stops being fun for them.
99
Post by: insaniak
Peregrine wrote:
So wanting to have a more enjoyable game experience is now "petty"?
You're perfectly free to play the game however you think best.
It's your continuing insistence that everyone else should go out of their way to accommodate your preferences or get out of the hobby that rubs folk the wrong way.
120215
Post by: StormX
DeathKorp_Rider wrote:
Having fun is in the game, or modeling, or painting. Whatever you enjoy, you should do. But when you try imposing your standard on others, it stops being fun for them.
What about some thing else like i don't know, any thing.... If you don't have the main requirements usually people wont allow you to participate in alot of "insert what ever hobby"
Hobby being / Racing cars / playing sports etc etc etc
63000
Post by: Peregrine
You know what is rude? Playing with unpainted models in a public space.
I mean, how would you feel if I told you you had to have every single rule memorized to play a game with me? No referencing books at all. And I demand that standard from EVERYONE, regardless of how experienced they are or skilled they are.
That's not a reasonable comparison at all. Painting to a basic tabletop level is within the abilities of virtually everyone and significantly improves the game. Literal perfection in rule memorization is not something most people can do and it adds very little to the game when those rulebooks do exist and it's easy to quickly look up something if you aren't sure. The more appropriate comparison to flawless memorization would be expecting to have every army painted to golden demon winning standard, and that is not something I am asking for. The equivalent to tabletop standard, what I am asking for, would be expecting my opponent to know things like how to roll the basic hit-wound-save sequence without me having to explain that BS 4+ means you need a 4 or better on the die to hit.
106383
Post by: JNAProductions
Stormatious wrote:DeathKorp_Rider wrote: Having fun is in the game, or modeling, or painting. Whatever you enjoy, you should do. But when you try imposing your standard on others, it stops being fun for them.
What about some thing else like i don't know, any thing.... If you don't have the main requirements usually people wont allow you to participate in alot of "insert what ever hobby" Hobby being any thing - Cars / engines /sports / what ever.
Why is painting a main requirement for a wargame? That'd be like saying owning your class's spell cards is a requirement for D&D-it's handy, sure. It makes the game better, sure. But it's not needed to play the game. Peregrine wrote: You know what is rude? Playing with unpainted models in a public space. I mean, how would you feel if I told you you had to have every single rule memorized to play a game with me? No referencing books at all. And I demand that standard from EVERYONE, regardless of how experienced they are or skilled they are.
That's not a reasonable comparison at all. Painting to a basic tabletop level is within the abilities of virtually everyone and significantly improves the game. Literal perfection in rule memorization is not something most people can do and it adds very little to the game when those rulebooks do exist and it's easy to quickly look up something if you aren't sure. The more appropriate comparison to flawless memorization would be expecting to have every army painted to golden demon winning standard, and that is not something I am asking for. The equivalent to tabletop standard, what I am asking for, would be expecting my opponent to know things like how to roll the basic hit-wound-save sequence without me having to explain that BS 4+ means you need a 4 or better on the die to hit.
Why is that rude? As a universal, not as a personal thing to you. And I consider them to be basically equivalent. I'm a bad painter-I struggle to reach basic competence on my models. But rules memorizing is easy-it comes naturally to me. Basically, Peregine, I have fun with the game because of the game. (Or, perhaps, in spite of, considering the quality of 40k rules.  ) The models are secondary. Is that wrong?
63000
Post by: Peregrine
 insaniak wrote:It's your continuing insistence that everyone else should go out of their way to accommodate your preferences or get out of the hobby that rubs folk the wrong way.
I am not terribly concerned with this given the fact that I don't want those people around. If they don't like the expectation of painted models and choose to remove themselves from my presence, well, I'm considering that a win.
122753
Post by: DeathKorp_Rider
Stormatious wrote:DeathKorp_Rider wrote:
Having fun is in the game, or modeling, or painting. Whatever you enjoy, you should do. But when you try imposing your standard on others, it stops being fun for them.
What about some thing else like i don't know, any thing.... If you don't have the main requirements usually people wont allow you to participate in alot of "insert what ever hobby"
Hobby being any thing - Cars / engines /sports / what ever.
But you don't need paint to play the game.
63000
Post by: Peregrine
It isn't required for a wargame. It's required for a miniatures game. The aesthetic value of the models is the whole reason we're playing a game with miniatures instead of cardboard tokens like many other wargames use, and miniatures are not finished until they are painted. It's like asking why you should have to put models on the table at all and insisting that you're entitled to use empty bases instead. Automatically Appended Next Post: DeathKorp_Rider wrote:Having fun is in the game, or modeling, or painting. Whatever you enjoy, you should do. But when you try imposing your standard on others, it stops being fun for them.
And when I have to see unpainted models it stops being fun for me. So paint your models and have some respect for my enjoyment.
122753
Post by: DeathKorp_Rider
Peregrine wrote:
It isn't required for a wargame. It's required for a miniatures game. The aesthetic value of the models is the whole reason we're playing a game with miniatures instead of cardboard tokens like many other wargames use, and miniatures are not finished until they are painted. It's like asking why you should have to put models on the table at all and insisting that you're entitled to use empty bases instead.
I'm sorry, I don't remember anything in the 40K rulebook, or any rulebook saying painting is required.
106383
Post by: JNAProductions
Peregrine wrote:
It isn't required for a wargame. It's required for a miniatures game. The aesthetic value of the models is the whole reason we're playing a game with miniatures instead of cardboard tokens like many other wargames use, and miniatures are not finished until they are painted. It's like asking why you should have to put models on the table at all and insisting that you're entitled to use empty bases instead.
Well that's easy. If I used empty bases, my store manager would get mad at me since I'm not buying anything from him, or at least only buying bases, which are 50 times cheaper than models.
But honestly, if someone wanted to play me with empty bases, so long as I know they're not gonna be a jerk on LoS... Sure, why not?
120215
Post by: StormX
DeathKorp_Rider wrote: Stormatious wrote:DeathKorp_Rider wrote:
Having fun is in the game, or modeling, or painting. Whatever you enjoy, you should do. But when you try imposing your standard on others, it stops being fun for them.
What about some thing else like i don't know, any thing.... If you don't have the main requirements usually people wont allow you to participate in alot of "insert what ever hobby"
Hobby being any thing - Cars / engines /sports / what ever.
But you don't need paint to play the game.
Well in my opinion you actually do. While i see this is a controversial opinion obviously... that's a shame.
99
Post by: insaniak
Peregrine wrote:
I am not terribly concerned with this given the fact that I don't want those people around. If they don't like the expectation of painted models and choose to remove themselves from my presence, well, I'm considering that a win.
No problems. So, since you've stated your opinion and don't care about anyone else's, your participation in this discussion would seem to have run its course.
Kindly move on and allow the thread to return to its stated purpose of asking others for their thoughts.
122753
Post by: DeathKorp_Rider
Stormatious wrote:DeathKorp_Rider wrote: Stormatious wrote:DeathKorp_Rider wrote:
Having fun is in the game, or modeling, or painting. Whatever you enjoy, you should do. But when you try imposing your standard on others, it stops being fun for them.
What about some thing else like i don't know, any thing.... If you don't have the main requirements usually people wont allow you to participate in alot of "insert what ever hobby"
Hobby being any thing - Cars / engines /sports / what ever.
But you don't need paint to play the game.
Well in my opinion you actually do. While i see this is a controversial opinion obviously... that's a shame.
I understand that you prefer to play people to have painted models, but it your opinion and not a rule.
63000
Post by: Peregrine
DeathKorp_Rider wrote:I'm sorry, I don't remember anything in the 40K rulebook, or any rulebook saying painting is required.
It's basic common sense. GW doesn't think that their customers are so clueless that they need to be explicitly told that painting is a thing. You will, however, note that in GW's event rules they state that painted (and WYSIWYG) models are required to participate.
120215
Post by: StormX
DeathKorp_Rider wrote: Stormatious wrote:DeathKorp_Rider wrote: Stormatious wrote:DeathKorp_Rider wrote:
Having fun is in the game, or modeling, or painting. Whatever you enjoy, you should do. But when you try imposing your standard on others, it stops being fun for them.
What about some thing else like i don't know, any thing.... If you don't have the main requirements usually people wont allow you to participate in alot of "insert what ever hobby"
Hobby being any thing - Cars / engines /sports / what ever.
But you don't need paint to play the game.
Well in my opinion you actually do. While i see this is a controversial opinion obviously... that's a shame.
I understand that you prefer to play people to have painted models, but it your opinion and not a rule.
Yeah, but it is tradition. Weather that's important or not is up to each individual i guess.
122753
Post by: DeathKorp_Rider
Peregrine wrote:DeathKorp_Rider wrote:I'm sorry, I don't remember anything in the 40K rulebook, or any rulebook saying painting is required.
It's basic common sense. GW doesn't think that their customers are so clueless that they need to be explicitly told that painting is a thing. You will, however, note that in GW's event rules they state that painted (and WYSIWYG) models are required to participate.
Events are fine, I am talking casual play where nothing has to be perfect.
63000
Post by: Peregrine
insaniak wrote:So, since you've stated your opinion and don't care about anyone else's, your participation in this discussion would seem to have run its course.
I absolutely care about other opinions, just not those of people who decide that because I have a strong opinion they're going to avoid me. People who want to have a conversation about those opinions are welcome to talk to me.
106383
Post by: JNAProductions
Peregrine wrote: insaniak wrote:So, since you've stated your opinion and don't care about anyone else's, your participation in this discussion would seem to have run its course.
I absolutely care about other opinions, just not those of people who decide that because I have a strong opinion they're going to avoid me. People who want to have a conversation about those opinions are welcome to talk to me.
You don't seem to be accepting of any other opinions though.
It sounds like the conversation you want is "You're totally right and I agree with you."
63000
Post by: Peregrine
But why should "casual" play be any different? In fact, shouldn't a "casual" game have higher standards for painting, since there's no longer the "I must buy this new army to keep up with the metagame and don't have time to paint it before the next tournament" pressure of competitive play? A "casual" player should be 100% fine with using only painted models even if it means they can't build a perfectly optimized list. Or they can play a 500 point game instead of the 2000 point tournament standard, etc. So why, when fielding a fully painted army is easier, do the expectations for doing so go down?
99
Post by: insaniak
JNAProductions wrote:
Well that's easy. If I used empty bases, my store manager would get mad at me since I'm not buying anything from him, or at least only buying bases, which are 50 times cheaper than models.
But honestly, if someone wanted to play me with empty bases, so long as I know they're not gonna be a jerk on LoS... Sure, why not?
I've played against armies that included blank bases. I've faced units of Kroot legs. Armless marines. And in one tournament game, a Land Raider Crusader with no weapons and a hull held together with rubber bands. (although that latter model was at least sprayed black!)
I've played against Golden Demon level armies. I've faced Inkwashed Hordes. Three color standard armies. And one marine army that had literally been dipped in a tin of house paint.
In all of those cases, the attitude of my opponent counted far more towards whether or not the game was enjoyable than the amount of paint on the models did.
106383
Post by: JNAProductions
Peregrine wrote: But why should "casual" play be any different? In fact, shouldn't a "casual" game have higher standards for painting, since there's no longer the "I must buy this new army to keep up with the metagame and don't have time to paint it before the next tournament" pressure of competitive play? A "casual" player should be 100% fine with using only painted models even if it means they can't build a perfectly optimized list. Or they can play a 500 point game instead of the 2000 point tournament standard, etc. So why, when fielding a fully painted army is easier, do the expectations for doing so go down?
Because not everyone is that concerned with painting. insaniak wrote: JNAProductions wrote: Well that's easy. If I used empty bases, my store manager would get mad at me since I'm not buying anything from him, or at least only buying bases, which are 50 times cheaper than models. But honestly, if someone wanted to play me with empty bases, so long as I know they're not gonna be a jerk on LoS... Sure, why not?
I've played against armies that included blank bases. I've faced units of Kroot legs. Armless marines. And in one tournament game, a Land Raider Crusader with no weapons and a hull held together with rubber bands. (although that latter model was at least sprayed black!) I've played against Golden Demon level armies. I've faced Inkwashed Hordes. Three color standard armies. And one marine army that had literally been dipped in a tin of house paint. In all of those cases, the attitude of my opponent counted far more towards whether or not the game was enjoyable than the amount of paint of the models did.
Well said.
122753
Post by: DeathKorp_Rider
I'm not saying that painting isn't important, but it isn't a necessity. 40k (or any game for that matter) is about having fun with other people. If you become hung up on paint, you miss the entire point of the game.
63000
Post by: Peregrine
Then why play a miniatures game at all, instead of spending a tiny fraction of the money on a wargame with cardboard tokens? And why play 40k of all games, a game with dumpster fire rules where the sole redeeming factor is that the miniatures are amazing? I can understand why someone wouldn't care about the aesthetic value of a miniatures game, but I see those people playing map-and-token games with superior rules and a $50 price tag.
93221
Post by: Lance845
Stormatious wrote: JNAProductions wrote:Inspired by this trainwreck, I'm curious as to what the general value people place on having painted models.
Please do NOT repeat the rudeness and rules-breaking of that thread. Keep it civil and tolerant.
Glad i inspired you. I didn't mean to come off as rude, just trying to take a tougher stance to encourage more people to stick to tradition.
Tradition can suck a fat one.
I would like you to take a moment to look back on history and all the atrocious crap that has been done and said in the name of tradition. If the only reason you have for trying to enforce something on someone else is personal preference and "tradition" then you don't have much of a argument at all.
Here is how this works. This is a game. The game has a rule book. If you follow the rules in the rule book when playing the game then you are not breaking any rules and everything should be fine. The moment you can reference a rule in the rule book that requires even a single drop of paint on the model you have an argument. If you can't then you don't. People should be encouraged to have fun in all and any way in which they themselves have fun. That means helping people get into painting if they want. Doing some kit bashes and scratch builds if that is up their ally. At no point should anyone be made to feel less than, segregated, or banned because they don't enjoy the totally, 100% optional, not a rule on any level, aspect of the hobby that is painting a model.
I am open to being proven wrong the moment anyone can find a rule in the rule book that requires otherwise.
99
Post by: insaniak
Peregrine wrote:
It's basic common sense. GW doesn't think that their customers are so clueless that they need to be explicitly told that painting is a thing.
I'll just leave this here...
1
93221
Post by: Lance845
Peregrine wrote:
Then why play a miniatures game at all, instead of spending a tiny fraction of the money on a wargame with cardboard tokens? And why play 40k of all games, a game with dumpster fire rules where the sole redeeming factor is that the miniatures are amazing? I can understand why someone wouldn't care about the aesthetic value of a miniatures game, but I see those people playing map-and-token games with superior rules and a $50 price tag.
Because they want to. People are free to spend however much they want on any dumb thing they want for their own enjoyment.
122753
Post by: DeathKorp_Rider
insaniak wrote: Peregrine wrote:
It's basic common sense. GW doesn't think that their customers are so clueless that they need to be explicitly told that painting is a thing.
I'll just leave this here...
Ah thanks, I wanted to quote that but I didn't remember it exactly and didn't want to flip through the book looking for it.
120215
Post by: StormX
insaniak wrote: Peregrine wrote:
It's basic common sense. GW doesn't think that their customers are so clueless that they need to be explicitly told that painting is a thing.
I'll just leave this here...
Just because GW says you dont need to paint, does not mean its not tradition, because i can see your sarcasm.
GW doesn't define tradition, they didn't create wargaming.
122753
Post by: DeathKorp_Rider
Stormatious wrote: insaniak wrote: Peregrine wrote:
It's basic common sense. GW doesn't think that their customers are so clueless that they need to be explicitly told that painting is a thing.
I'll just leave this here...
Just because GW says you dont need to paint, does not mean its not tradition, because i can see your sarcasm.
GW doesn't define tradition, they didn't create wargaming.
True, but neither did you.
63000
Post by: Peregrine
 Lance845 wrote:Here is how this works. This is a game. The game has a rule book. If you follow the rules in the rule book when playing the game then you are not breaking any rules and everything should be fine. The moment you can reference a rule in the rule book that requires even a single drop of paint on the model you have an argument. If you can't then you don't. People should be encouraged to have fun in all and any way in which they themselves have fun. That means helping people get into painting if they want. Doing some kit bashes and scratch builds if that is up their ally. At no point should anyone be made to feel less than, segregated, or banned because they don't enjoy the totally, 100% optional, not a rule on any level, aspect of the hobby that is painting a model.
I am open to being proven wrong the moment anyone can find a rule in the rule book that requires otherwise.
The rulebook is not a complete listing of everything that is required to have a game. To give an extreme example, nowhere in the rules does it say that bathing is required. But yet I think everyone will agree that if you haven't bathed in a month then you're TFG and nobody is going to have any sympathy when you're removed from the store/club/whatever. So "it isn't explicitly stated in the rules" is not a compelling defense. The social contract of what obligations you have in participating in a gaming community go beyond the written rules of the particular game, and I am 100% in favor of making painting one of those things.
120215
Post by: StormX
DeathKorp_Rider wrote: Stormatious wrote: insaniak wrote: Peregrine wrote:
It's basic common sense. GW doesn't think that their customers are so clueless that they need to be explicitly told that painting is a thing.
I'll just leave this here...
Just because GW says you dont need to paint, does not mean its not tradition, because i can see your sarcasm.
GW doesn't define tradition, they didn't create wargaming.
True, but neither did you.
True, i didn't whats your point?
63000
Post by: Peregrine
A statement which, I suspect, was written by GW's marketing department and not by actual gamers. I understand why GW would want to sell models to people who hate painting, but that doesn't mean that such behavior should be considered acceptable by the community. And GW seems to understand this on some level, as their event rules require fully painted and WYSIWYG models and the whole "paint, whatever, do what you like" attitude disappears entirely.
106383
Post by: JNAProductions
Except it's explicitly stated that:
It is not necessary to paint models before you use them,
So... Yeah, rules say you don't need to.
Again, you're free to only play painted armies. My store manager has the same policy. The difference is, he doesn't insist everyone have the exact same preferences.
102537
Post by: Sgt. Cortez
Well, the appeal for the models, rules and background is still there, even for people who play with unfinished armies. There are lots of reasons why people don't have enough time to paint all their minis (mostly job or family related). And in that case, because I only get to play about once per month it's more important to me to have a game at all than having a game against painted minis only. It also increases the variety of lists. If I made painted only a rule I'd probably face the same armies again and again with only 1 unit difference each time...
122753
Post by: DeathKorp_Rider
Peregrine wrote: Lance845 wrote:Here is how this works. This is a game. The game has a rule book. If you follow the rules in the rule book when playing the game then you are not breaking any rules and everything should be fine. The moment you can reference a rule in the rule book that requires even a single drop of paint on the model you have an argument. If you can't then you don't. People should be encouraged to have fun in all and any way in which they themselves have fun. That means helping people get into painting if they want. Doing some kit bashes and scratch builds if that is up their ally. At no point should anyone be made to feel less than, segregated, or banned because they don't enjoy the totally, 100% optional, not a rule on any level, aspect of the hobby that is painting a model.
I am open to being proven wrong the moment anyone can find a rule in the rule book that requires otherwise.
The rulebook is not a complete listing of everything that is required to have a game. To give an extreme example, nowhere in the rules does it say that bathing is required. But yet I think everyone will agree that if you haven't bathed in a month then you're TFG and nobody is going to have any sympathy when you're removed from the store/club/whatever. So "it isn't explicitly stated in the rules" is not a compelling defense. The social contract of what obligations you have in participating in a gaming community go beyond the written rules of the particular game, and I am 100% in favor of making painting one of those things.
Well, bathing is a different matter because it can effect the health of you and people around you. Not having paint can't cause disease.
120215
Post by: StormX
DeathKorp_Rider wrote: Peregrine wrote: Lance845 wrote:Here is how this works. This is a game. The game has a rule book. If you follow the rules in the rule book when playing the game then you are not breaking any rules and everything should be fine. The moment you can reference a rule in the rule book that requires even a single drop of paint on the model you have an argument. If you can't then you don't. People should be encouraged to have fun in all and any way in which they themselves have fun. That means helping people get into painting if they want. Doing some kit bashes and scratch builds if that is up their ally. At no point should anyone be made to feel less than, segregated, or banned because they don't enjoy the totally, 100% optional, not a rule on any level, aspect of the hobby that is painting a model.
I am open to being proven wrong the moment anyone can find a rule in the rule book that requires otherwise.
The rulebook is not a complete listing of everything that is required to have a game. To give an extreme example, nowhere in the rules does it say that bathing is required. But yet I think everyone will agree that if you haven't bathed in a month then you're TFG and nobody is going to have any sympathy when you're removed from the store/club/whatever. So "it isn't explicitly stated in the rules" is not a compelling defense. The social contract of what obligations you have in participating in a gaming community go beyond the written rules of the particular game, and I am 100% in favor of making painting one of those things.
Well, bathing is a different matter because it can effect the health of you and people around you. Not having paint can't cause disease.
Well you could call greys a disease lol ( joking )
63000
Post by: Peregrine
DeathKorp_Rider wrote:Well, bathing is a different matter because it can effect the health of you and people around you. Not having paint can't cause disease.
No, and that's not the point. The two are not equivalent, the point is that there are expectations that go beyond the written text of the rulebook. Nothing in the 40k rulebook says that you have an obligation to mitigate the spread of disease, that's a rule that we as a community have decided on and enforce. All of us understand entirely how to have community rules that aren't included in the rulebook and consider it the universal standard. The only debate is whether or not painting should be one of those obligations that exists on top of the written rules, and "but it isn't in the rulebook" is a meaningless statement in that debate.
93221
Post by: Lance845
Peregrine wrote: Lance845 wrote:Here is how this works. This is a game. The game has a rule book. If you follow the rules in the rule book when playing the game then you are not breaking any rules and everything should be fine. The moment you can reference a rule in the rule book that requires even a single drop of paint on the model you have an argument. If you can't then you don't. People should be encouraged to have fun in all and any way in which they themselves have fun. That means helping people get into painting if they want. Doing some kit bashes and scratch builds if that is up their ally. At no point should anyone be made to feel less than, segregated, or banned because they don't enjoy the totally, 100% optional, not a rule on any level, aspect of the hobby that is painting a model.
I am open to being proven wrong the moment anyone can find a rule in the rule book that requires otherwise.
The rulebook is not a complete listing of everything that is required to have a game. To give an extreme example, nowhere in the rules does it say that bathing is required. But yet I think everyone will agree that if you haven't bathed in a month then you're TFG and nobody is going to have any sympathy when you're removed from the store/club/whatever. So "it isn't explicitly stated in the rules" is not a compelling defense. The social contract of what obligations you have in participating in a gaming community go beyond the written rules of the particular game, and I am 100% in favor of making painting one of those things.
This is a dumb straw man argument.
The "social contract" of people meeting in public is non existent. Shocking maybe? But people can go out into public unwashed. They are free to. They will suffer the consequences of their lack of cleanliness when people tell them they smell bad. But regardless of all that, a game is not the same as being clean. Not being clean has societal repercussions like diseases. I don't think your going to catch anything from some grey plastic. Your argument does not compute. What is needed to play the game is 100% in the rule book. And if people decided it would be cool to get together a do nude 40k (Like skinny dipping but games!) they are free to get together and do some nude 40k and they would still be playing the exact same game that you do.
The state of their cleanliness is not a factor. And the state of their models paintedness isn't either. Automatically Appended Next Post: Peregrine wrote:DeathKorp_Rider wrote:Well, bathing is a different matter because it can effect the health of you and people around you. Not having paint can't cause disease.
No, and that's not the point. The two are not equivalent, the point is that there are expectations that go beyond the written text of the rulebook. Nothing in the 40k rulebook says that you have an obligation to mitigate the spread of disease, that's a rule that we as a community have decided on and enforce. All of us understand entirely how to have community rules that aren't included in the rulebook and consider it the universal standard. The only debate is whether or not painting should be one of those obligations that exists on top of the written rules, and "but it isn't in the rulebook" is a meaningless statement in that debate.
No, it's not. "It's not in the rulebook" is the only statement of ANY value when playing a game. We are not talking about a painting competition.
99
Post by: insaniak
Peregrine wrote:
A statement which, I suspect, was written by GW's marketing department and not by actual gamers.
Sgt. Cortez wrote:Well, the appeal for the models, rules and background is still there, even for people who play with unfinished armies. There are lots of reasons why people don't have enough time to paint all their minis (mostly job or family related). And in that case, because I only get to play about once per month it's more important to me to have a game at all than having a game against painted minis only. It also increases the variety of lists. If I made painted only a rule I'd probably face the same armies again and again with only 1 unit difference each time...
I remember speaking to one player years ago who loved the models, but was a rubbish painter and preferred the way they looked in grey plastic to the way they looked once he had splashed paint on them.
For many others, they're just tokens, and whether or not they are painted is no more relevant in 40k than it would be in Monopoly.
63000
Post by: Peregrine
Lance845 wrote:This is a dumb straw man argument.
The "social contract" of people meeting in public is non existent. Shocking maybe? But people can go out into public unwashed. They are free to. They will suffer the consequences of their lack of cleanliness when people tell them they smell bad. But regardless of all that, a game is not the same as being clean. Not being clean has societal repercussions like diseases. I don't think your going to catch anything from some grey plastic. Your argument does not compute. What is needed to play the game is 100% in the rule book. And if people decided it would be cool to get together a do nude 40k (Like skinny dipping but games!) they are free to get together and do some nude 40k and they would still be playing the exact same game that you do.
The state of their cleanliness is not a factor. And the state of their models paintedness isn't either.
You're missing the point. It doesn't matter what the reasons for mandatory bathing are, or that they are very good reasons, the only thing that matters is that "you must bathe regularly" is not a rule found in the 40k rulebook and yet it is a near-universal truth that a person who does not bathe regularly will be removed from whatever space is hosting a 40k game. It is indisputable fact that the rules for playing a game of 40k go beyond what is written in the rulebook, so "painting isn't in the rulebook" is a meaningless argument. I don't care if it is or isn't in the rulebook, I want any store/club/whatever that I associate with to have a policy that unpainted models are not permitted. Automatically Appended Next Post: Lance845 wrote:No, it's not. "It's not in the rulebook" is the only statement of ANY value when playing a game. We are not talking about a painting competition.
Can you cite the rules in the 40k rulebook prohibiting the use of loaded dice? Would you consider it reasonable for a player to use loaded dice in a game and defend their behavior with "the rules don't say I have to use fair dice"?
93221
Post by: Lance845
Peregrine wrote: Lance845 wrote:This is a dumb straw man argument. The "social contract" of people meeting in public is non existent. Shocking maybe? But people can go out into public unwashed. They are free to. They will suffer the consequences of their lack of cleanliness when people tell them they smell bad. But regardless of all that, a game is not the same as being clean. Not being clean has societal repercussions like diseases. I don't think your going to catch anything from some grey plastic. Your argument does not compute. What is needed to play the game is 100% in the rule book. And if people decided it would be cool to get together a do nude 40k (Like skinny dipping but games!) they are free to get together and do some nude 40k and they would still be playing the exact same game that you do. The state of their cleanliness is not a factor. And the state of their models paintedness isn't either.
You're missing the point. It doesn't matter what the reasons for mandatory bathing are, or that they are very good reasons, the only thing that matters is that "you must bathe regularly" is not a rule found in the 40k rulebook and yet it is a near-universal truth that a person who does not bathe regularly will be removed from whatever space is hosting a 40k game. It is indisputable fact that the rules for playing a game of 40k go beyond what is written in the rulebook, so "painting isn't in the rulebook" is a meaningless argument. I don't care if it is or isn't in the rulebook, I want any store/club/whatever that I associate with to have a policy that unpainted models are not permitted. Automatically Appended Next Post: Lance845 wrote:No, it's not. "It's not in the rulebook" is the only statement of ANY value when playing a game. We are not talking about a painting competition.
Can you cite the rules in the 40k rulebook prohibiting the use of loaded dice? Would you consider it reasonable for a player to use loaded dice in a game and defend their behavior with "the rules don't say I have to use fair dice"?
It is not indisputable. I am disputing it. Prove me wrong. YOU can choose to create additional barriers to entry all you want. People have been posting "No girls allowed" signs on their tree houses for thousands of years. YOU creating that criteria is simply that. YOU doing so. It has no impact on the activity itself except to shrink the pool of people you have to play with and potentially turn away new comers when they see your elitism. The first of those I could not care less about. The second is a travesty we all suffer the consequences of.
106383
Post by: JNAProductions
It's also explicitly stated that you do NOT need to paint models.
It's not a grey area, according to the rulebook.
102537
Post by: Sgt. Cortez
Bathing is nothing that is related to 40K specifically and therefore has no place in the 40K rulebook. Your example of loaded dice is a bit better, but it's also a rule that goes beyond 40K (and if you go by GW you'd only use the dice they provide as these are the only dice mentioned in the rulebook - and these are not loaded  )
Anything wargaming related, like painting, has a place, and GW has adressed that with the Paragraph insaniak posted. But because you don't like what they put in the rulebook you dismissed it.
120215
Post by: StormX
Sgt. Cortez wrote:Bathing is nothing that is related to 40K specifically and therefore has no place in the 40K rulebook. Your example of loaded dice is a bit better, but it's also a rule that goes beyond 40K (and if you go by GW you'd only use the dice they provide as these are the only dice mentioned in the rulebook - and these are not loaded )
Anything wargaming related, like painting, has a place, and GW has adressed that with the Paragraph insaniak posted. But because you don't like what they put in the rulebook you dismissed it.
No its because GW doesn't Define tradition of war-gaming, and its like peregrine said, why do you think GW would say that?, there not speaking from a gamers point of view obviously.
93221
Post by: Lance845
Stormatious wrote:Sgt. Cortez wrote:Bathing is nothing that is related to 40K specifically and therefore has no place in the 40K rulebook. Your example of loaded dice is a bit better, but it's also a rule that goes beyond 40K (and if you go by GW you'd only use the dice they provide as these are the only dice mentioned in the rulebook - and these are not loaded )
Anything wargaming related, like painting, has a place, and GW has adressed that with the Paragraph insaniak posted. But because you don't like what they put in the rulebook you dismissed it.
No its because GW doesn't Define tradition of war-gaming, and its like peregrine said, why do you think GW would say that?, there not speaking from a gamers point of view obviously.
Again, tradition isn't just meaningless it's toxic. Do you have something better than tradition?
122753
Post by: DeathKorp_Rider
Can't we all just agree that if someone wants to only play someone with painted models, that is their prerogative like stores requiring it for official tournaments if they choose to. But you can't tell people they can't play a casual game in a public area because they are using unpainted models.
120215
Post by: StormX
Lance845 wrote: Stormatious wrote:Sgt. Cortez wrote:Bathing is nothing that is related to 40K specifically and therefore has no place in the 40K rulebook. Your example of loaded dice is a bit better, but it's also a rule that goes beyond 40K (and if you go by GW you'd only use the dice they provide as these are the only dice mentioned in the rulebook - and these are not loaded )
Anything wargaming related, like painting, has a place, and GW has adressed that with the Paragraph insaniak posted. But because you don't like what they put in the rulebook you dismissed it.
No its because GW doesn't Define tradition of war-gaming, and its like peregrine said, why do you think GW would say that?, there not speaking from a gamers point of view obviously.
Again, tradition isn't just meaningless it's toxic. Do you have something better than tradition?
Oh ok, so having only painted minis allowed to participate in battles is toxic and meaningless according to you?
99
Post by: insaniak
Stormatious wrote:
Oh ok, so having only painted minis allowed to participate in battles is toxic and meaningless according to you?
I suspect the point was more that being traditional doesn't inherently make something good, or worthwhile.
93221
Post by: Lance845
Stormatious wrote: Lance845 wrote: Stormatious wrote:Sgt. Cortez wrote:Bathing is nothing that is related to 40K specifically and therefore has no place in the 40K rulebook. Your example of loaded dice is a bit better, but it's also a rule that goes beyond 40K (and if you go by GW you'd only use the dice they provide as these are the only dice mentioned in the rulebook - and these are not loaded )
Anything wargaming related, like painting, has a place, and GW has adressed that with the Paragraph insaniak posted. But because you don't like what they put in the rulebook you dismissed it.
No its because GW doesn't Define tradition of war-gaming, and its like peregrine said, why do you think GW would say that?, there not speaking from a gamers point of view obviously.
Again, tradition isn't just meaningless it's toxic. Do you have something better than tradition?
Oh ok having only painted minis allowed to participate in battles is toxic and meaningless according to you?
Well, yes. But that is not what I said. You harp on about "tradition" as your baseline argument. Again, look back at humanities long history of the things they have done with, to, and about people because of "tradition". Tradition is a argument for nothing. Doing something only "because thats the way we used to do it" is a dumb way to do anything. You stagnate. You alienate. It has no good reasoning behind it and it has toxic effects on the community.
I know people who don't play 40k because they have seen people get chewed out for having unpainted models and decided the entire community could feth off. "Why would I want to get involved in a game with a community like that?"
Key word in that sentence is game.
But instead of it just being a bad apple up there you want to instill policy and make it a matter of enforcable standard that everyone should be happy to be a part of. Basically, in the name of tradition you want to turn a game into a systemic system of shaming those who don't want to do the optional thing you enjoy. That is basically text book toxicity.
120215
Post by: StormX
Stormatious wrote: insaniak wrote: Stormatious wrote:
Oh ok, so having only painted minis allowed to participate in battles is toxic and meaningless according to you?
I suspect the point was more that being traditional doesn't inherently make something good, or worthwhile.
Never mind sorry, i withdraw from this subject. I have stated my opinion.
120215
Post by: StormX
Sorry that last comment was a bad comparison. Ill just stop talking on this subject, but i respect every ones opinion. I didn't read what you said properly. My bad. ( insaniak )
122753
Post by: DeathKorp_Rider
Stormatious wrote:Sorry that last comment was a bad comparison. Ill just stop talking on this subject, but i respect every ones opinion. I didn't read what you said properly. My bad. ( insiniak )
No worries, you just got caught up in the heat of the moment.
93221
Post by: Lance845
Yeah man. I took no offence to anything you have said thus far. I 100% disagree with your stance and your reasoning. But I am not offended by it. There are entire countries whos values I disagree with. Getting offended by each individual would be exhausting.
90374
Post by: Pain4Pleasure
If I could somehow make the biggest 40k event possible, where one word from a participant about not liking the lack of painting on a model was uttered, they were booted I would. That’s my stance. I playtest models at my locals time and time again before deciding whether they fit my army or not. I only paint what I end up for sure using. Tell me other wise and you’re wrong.. because it’s my opinion and how I play, not yours.
29120
Post by: NH Gunsmith
While I rarely have a fully painted army (due to always trying out new games), I do not allow myself to go out to play games unless there has been progress on my armies. Be it basing, painting, or assembling stuff I want to use.
I have that as my motivation to get paint on my army (posting this while letting paint dry), but do not hold others to that, and will not tell them how to enjoy their hobby.
107817
Post by: Panzerkanzler
DeathKorp_Rider wrote: Stormatious wrote:DeathKorp_Rider wrote:
Having fun is in the game, or modeling, or painting. Whatever you enjoy, you should do. But when you try imposing your standard on others, it stops being fun for them.
What about some thing else like i don't know, any thing.... If you don't have the main requirements usually people wont allow you to participate in alot of "insert what ever hobby"
Hobby being any thing - Cars / engines /sports / what ever.
But you don't need paint to play the game.
You don't need miniatures either in order to play the game. You can use counters or the bases with a symbol scrawled on them. Of course, that would make for a gak game.
90374
Post by: Pain4Pleasure
Panzerkanzler wrote:DeathKorp_Rider wrote: Stormatious wrote:DeathKorp_Rider wrote:
Having fun is in the game, or modeling, or painting. Whatever you enjoy, you should do. But when you try imposing your standard on others, it stops being fun for them.
What about some thing else like i don't know, any thing.... If you don't have the main requirements usually people wont allow you to participate in alot of "insert what ever hobby"
Hobby being any thing - Cars / engines /sports / what ever.
But you don't need paint to play the game.
You don't need miniatures either in order to play the game. You can use counters or the bases with a symbol scrawled on them. Of course, that would make for a gak game.
If you’re cool with it then they’ll use that
93221
Post by: Lance845
It's also just wrong. You measure from any part of the model to any part of the model. The rules specifically require a model to play.
Just another strawman argument that is not making any actual point.
102537
Post by: Sgt. Cortez
Well, actually you need miniatures to draw a proper line of sight. These miniatures aren't fully defined, though, I just need to compare my Plague Marines from 3rd edition with those from 8th edition. Or an old and a new GUO. Both are valid models, though. And both are valid, even if they're not painted.
119380
Post by: Blndmage
Peregrine wrote:
(And before one particular poster shows up, yes, reasonable accommodations can be made for someone who has a legitimate disability that prevents them from painting. But the vast majority of unpainted armies are the result of laziness, not disability. Their owners don't care about painting and refuse to do it even though they are entirely capable of it. The disability argument is nothing more than an attempt to divert the discussion onto an irrelevant tangent and provide excuses for the not-disabled majority.)
Oh, you mean me!
Honestly, I'm tired of you ingoring me and my fellow disabled gamers.
In a casual, not tournament setting, unpainted models are fine, it might take a few games before deciding on wargear/equipment.
Some people don't put painting at the top of the list. For me, it's:
Modelling
Playing
Lore
Painting
Obviously decending priority.
There's nothing wrong with that.
In a tournament situation, or a narrative game where pics and models are more to the forefront, I agree that painting is more important, in a perfect world I would love to have my full army painted, but if there's a unit that's taking a while, I won't play it. Personally, I'll feild either grey or fully painted (in comparison to the rest of the army), I won't have a half done unit unless I gave no other option.
Painting a single squad can take weeks if not months. That's a reality for some of us, and that should be fine.
21358
Post by: Dysartes
Painting models has gameplay benefits. Take, for example, a Brigade's mandatory six Infantry Squads of Catachans. Assuming identical upgrades (or lack thereof, in today's tournament environment), once the units have been deployed to the table it becomes pretty much impossible to determine which unit a given model belongs to unless the models are painted. See also mobs of Ork Choppa Boyz, swarms of Termagants, etc - painting is the best method to distinguish between otherwise identical models.
Even between different units of similar-looking models, the application of paint can help with unit recognition at a distance.
Also, painting is the one area of the wargaming hobby where the rules can't spoil your enjoyment - regardless of whether your codex is poor or OP, you should get the same enjoyment out of painting the figures. Heck, even if the game or faction is cancelled, you can still enjoy painting them.
121430
Post by: ccs
Peregrine wrote:
But why should "casual" play be any different? In fact, shouldn't a "casual" game have higher standards for painting, since there's no longer the "I must buy this new army to keep up with the metagame and don't have time to paint it before the next tournament" pressure of competitive play? A "casual" player should be 100% fine with using only painted models even if it means they can't build a perfectly optimized list. Or they can play a 500 point game instead of the 2000 point tournament standard, etc. So why, when fielding a fully painted army is easier, do the expectations for doing so go down?
Ahh yes, a variant of the Dakka answer to everything: "Wait"
Anyways....
As I've said in other threads, this casual player pretty much only paints when depressed or really stressed out. I'm a gamer 1st, then a modeler, & somewhere far far after that, when things are going really wrong, a painter. If I'm painting more than a single random one-off (like say a D&D mini or an occasional monster), then there's a problem.
For ex;
Way back in my college days I got stuff painted, most often around exam times. There was a bit of stress involved.
The other year when my father died? I got a hell of a lot of stuff painted.
A while back things at work were bad & far beyond my ability to even affect, let alone fix. All there was was stress & more stress. Did I mention there was stress? I got some painting done.
My friends & the people I actually play these games with (I.E. those who matter) accept this. Since you're not one of those people, you can off.
93221
Post by: Lance845
 Dysartes wrote:Painting models has gameplay benefits. Take, for example, a Brigade's mandatory six Infantry Squads of Catachans. Assuming identical upgrades (or lack thereof, in today's tournament environment), once the units have been deployed to the table it becomes pretty much impossible to determine which unit a given model belongs to unless the models are painted. See also mobs of Ork Choppa Boyz, swarms of Termagants, etc - painting is the best method to distinguish between otherwise identical models.
Even between different units of similar-looking models, the application of paint can help with unit recognition at a distance.
"Painting" CAN help make those units stand out IF they are painted with differences. My Termagants and Hormagaunts have no special markings by unit. They are exactly as indistinguishable painted as they were in grey plastic.
Also, painting is the one area of the wargaming hobby where the rules can't spoil your enjoyment - regardless of whether your codex is poor or OP, you should get the same enjoyment out of painting the figures. Heck, even if the game or faction is cancelled, you can still enjoy painting them.
2 points.
1) Modeling requires no rules. People kit bash, scratch build, do all kinds of stuff with models just for the fun of it. Paint doesn't stand alone in any capacity.
2) YOU enjoy painting. For others it's a miserable experience.
101510
Post by: happy_inquisitor
Unpainted models are not good for the hobby, they are uninspiring and if the games are uninspiring the hobby will die out over time because not enough people are inspired to take it up.
Both my local GW and independent store put a fair amount of time and effort into having good looking models and scenery so that when they put on games it is visually enticing. It is the absolute fundamentals of business to try to present your product well. It is good for the rest of us because if new people do not enter the hobby then when you are all old codgers like me there will be no people to play with.
Then on the other hand little timmy/tammy wants to get his/her models on the table as soon as possible - which is also understandable and of course the store owners are cool with this. All the while the same store owner is being really encouraging with the painting side of things, helping out with tips and techniques to get those models looking good as soon as possible. They have to maintain a balance between encouraging what is good for the hobby and avoiding gatekeeping for youngsters new into the hobby.
Grizzled veterans turning up with grey plastic because they can't be bothered painting their new tournament army until they know it will smash face (and even then only because the tournament makes them do it) are a different thing. They may be a bit of a cash cow for the store owner if they turn over new armies on a regular basis but they are rarely any sort of good advert for the hobby when it comes to enticing in new players. Again the store owner needs to balance this, if the store becomes dominated by this sort of player it can be profitable in the short term but is probably doomed in the longer term due to the lack of fresh players coming through. If that same tournament player gets most of their stuff on eBay or cheap online retail then they are pretty much just a drag on the store and a liability to its sustainability should they come to dominate the local scene.
60684
Post by: Drager
Painting is very much secondary to me. Playing and having fun is more important. I like to play with and against painted armies, but also with abs against new toys. It's also rather play against an army that steadily model by model gets better looking week on week, even if its mostly bad plastic to start is more pleasant than a hurried mess applied. I've rarely played against anyone who refused to play unpainted minis. I've been glad they refused when it's come up as they've turned out to be people I wouldn't want to play.
112587
Post by: GrinNfool
Pretty middle ground on this, painting isn't a priority but it is important is what I voted for. I absolutely believe though for every person in the hobby this is different and there isn't a right or wrong answer. Enjoy the hobby the way you want to enjoy it.
That said for me personally I don't need people to be Michelangelo, but at least get a base coat before you throw them on the table IMO. Plastic is just lazy to me, I don't care if you paint like Bob Ross or like a 5 year old finger painting, seeing a little color on the table makes it pop visually which, to me, is enjoyable.
Will also say if you are going to an event make sure to reach the minimums in a reasonable way. Was at LVO recently and had to play against a ynnari at 2-2 (how you go 2-2 with ynnari I got no clue) but the guy had literally painted half the model brown and the other half tan. Honestly that was a little insulting to the event IMO, and a bit disrespectful to the people there.
However I haven't nor would I ever tell some 1 I won't play them because of paint or lack there of, its not for me to police some one else's enjoyment of the hobby.
93221
Post by: Lance845
happy_inquisitor wrote:Unpainted models are not good for the hobby, they are uninspiring and if the games are uninspiring the hobby will die out over time because not enough people are inspired to take it up.
Both my local GW and independent store put a fair amount of time and effort into having good looking models and scenery so that when they put on games it is visually enticing. It is the absolute fundamentals of business to try to present your product well. It is good for the rest of us because if new people do not enter the hobby then when you are all old codgers like me there will be no people to play with.
Then on the other hand little timmy/tammy wants to get his/her models on the table as soon as possible - which is also understandable and of course the store owners are cool with this. All the while the same store owner is being really encouraging with the painting side of things, helping out with tips and techniques to get those models looking good as soon as possible. They have to maintain a balance between encouraging what is good for the hobby and avoiding gatekeeping for youngsters new into the hobby.
Grizzled veterans turning up with grey plastic because they can't be bothered painting their new tournament army until they know it will smash face (and even then only because the tournament makes them do it) are a different thing. They may be a bit of a cash cow for the store owner if they turn over new armies on a regular basis but they are rarely any sort of good advert for the hobby when it comes to enticing in new players. Again the store owner needs to balance this, if the store becomes dominated by this sort of player it can be profitable in the short term but is probably doomed in the longer term due to the lack of fresh players coming through. If that same tournament player gets most of their stuff on eBay or cheap online retail then they are pretty much just a drag on the store and a liability to its sustainability should they come to dominate the local scene.
I would argue that the most enticing thing is not painted models but people having fun playing the game. Monopoly has sold a insane number of companies over the years without me ever seeing a painted house/hotel. If people enjoy the game they play it. If people see people enjoying the game they want in on the fun. The painted models can look cool and be a boost too. But grey plastic is not a reversal on that. It's never a detriment to have 2 people with unpainted models having a great time.
In fact, 2 people with beautifully painted models looming over their table stern and determined and taking the game deathly seriously is more of a detriment to new players being enticed then 2 people with grey plastic laughing and smiling and having singular great time playing.
The tourny player you described is often in those stern and determined camp. They are not there for fun. They are there to win. And that... determination often comes with an attitude that effects the way the game looks in a way that is not enticing to new players.
71077
Post by: Eldarsif
Oh god, this type of thread again.
Here is the lowdown: These threads will bring out the worst in people as there are a lot of vocal gatekeepers in the hobby. Gatekeepers who in most likelihood played with grey minis back back in the day but have for some reason decided to be the Judge, Jury, and Executioner of all things Warhammer.
Personally I enjoy playing with and against painted miniatures but in no way will I let this arbitrary metric stop me from enjoying the game with other people. Only place I feel like being painted is a requirement is at a large tournament level where the game becomes a spectator hobby.
120215
Post by: StormX
Lance845 wrote:happy_inquisitor wrote:Unpainted models are not good for the hobby, they are uninspiring and if the games are uninspiring the hobby will die out over time because not enough people are inspired to take it up.
Both my local GW and independent store put a fair amount of time and effort into having good looking models and scenery so that when they put on games it is visually enticing. It is the absolute fundamentals of business to try to present your product well. It is good for the rest of us because if new people do not enter the hobby then when you are all old codgers like me there will be no people to play with.
Then on the other hand little timmy/tammy wants to get his/her models on the table as soon as possible - which is also understandable and of course the store owners are cool with this. All the while the same store owner is being really encouraging with the painting side of things, helping out with tips and techniques to get those models looking good as soon as possible. They have to maintain a balance between encouraging what is good for the hobby and avoiding gatekeeping for youngsters new into the hobby.
Grizzled veterans turning up with grey plastic because they can't be bothered painting their new tournament army until they know it will smash face (and even then only because the tournament makes them do it) are a different thing. They may be a bit of a cash cow for the store owner if they turn over new armies on a regular basis but they are rarely any sort of good advert for the hobby when it comes to enticing in new players. Again the store owner needs to balance this, if the store becomes dominated by this sort of player it can be profitable in the short term but is probably doomed in the longer term due to the lack of fresh players coming through. If that same tournament player gets most of their stuff on eBay or cheap online retail then they are pretty much just a drag on the store and a liability to its sustainability should they come to dominate the local scene.
I would argue that the most enticing thing is not painted models but people having fun playing the game. Monopoly has sold a insane number of companies over the years without me ever seeing a painted house/hotel. If people enjoy the game they play it. If people see people enjoying the game they want in on the fun. The painted models can look cool and be a boost too. But grey plastic is not a reversal on that. It's never a detriment to have 2 people with unpainted models having a great time.
In fact, 2 people with beautifully painted models looming over their table stern and determined and taking the game deathly seriously is more of a detriment to new players being enticed then 2 people with grey plastic laughing and smiling and having singular great time playing.
The tourny player you described is often in those stern and determined camp. They are not there for fun. They are there to win. And that... determination often comes with an attitude that effects the way the game looks in a way that is not enticing to new players.
I hope im allowed to enter back in to this conversation temporarily after saying i will withdraw, but i still think i have some worthwhile things to add to this topic after reading some new posts.
You can't compare apples and oranges ( referring to you comparing wargaming to the famous "board game" monopoly.) .
Look, its not just "painting", it is also what determines what legion or side your army is on, it also helps with knowing what weapons / gear your opponent is equipping with out having to get a telescope out or put your face right up to the grey miniature, and it also most importantly looks great and encourages and re enforces the concept of what this is about, so that way we don't get a influx of grey noobs.
42209
Post by: Giantwalkingchair
For me, painting is icing on a very expensive cake. Its what makes the game look pretty. It feels good to have some painted models on the table and having two painted armies on the table look so great.
But theres this thing called Life. Not everyone has time to properly paint a model. I know it takes me an hour minimum just to paint up a troop model but i consider myself to paint to a respectable standard. That is a significant time investment that i frankly dont have. Between family and 3 jobs, my downtime is far too rare and precious to waste on something that i only enjoy when in the mood. If im not in the mood to paint, im not going to paint.
In 13 years of the hobby, ive never met anyone that has turned down a game because of unpainted models. Honestly, if i had encountered this sort of attitude when i first started out in the hobby (a thing done for fun and recreation), it would have turned me off straight away. Fortunately, it was my friends that got me into it and it was my friends that I played with.
They organised modeling and painting sessions together, it was that friendly social atmosphere during painting that made the experience better.
Its easy to tear down grey models and players who have them maybe because life just gets in the way.
I think a change in mindset is needed from condemning grey models, to creating an environment where people are buolt up and encouraged to paint.
How many of us show up to a club day with only a handful of models just to paint? How many set up a painting table and a bowl of chips and sit down and invite people over to chill and paint? How many of us are willing to put down out own models and help someone paint their grey plastics and give tips?
I know ive been much more willing to paint in a friendly and social atmosphere wuth chips and drink and friendly faces sharing a beloved hobby.
If someone had simply said to me "painted or gtfo", I would have gotten nothing done.
Anyone can point a finger. Not as many will step up and be part of a solution.
This. Is. A. Hobby.
93221
Post by: Lance845
Stormatious wrote: I hope im allowed to enter back in to this conversation temporarily after saying i will withdraw, but i still think i have some worthwhile things to add to this topic after reading some new posts.
Nobody told you you had to leave. You can't compare apples and oranges ( referring to you comparing wargaming to the famous "board game" monopoly.) .
I absolutely can. They are both games played with pieces on a board. Look, its not just "painting", it is also what determines what legion or side your army is on,
The game not only allows but encourages you to make up your own "legions" and paint them however you want. While some armies (Tyranids for example) have no legions and according to the fluff the hive fleets will change coloring depending on planetary conditions. While the Tau will change their armor because they are not dumb enough to ignore camouflage. So you are not making a very strong argument here. The paint job is not equivalent to the rules so it doesn't matter how or if they are painted. it also helps with knowing what weapons / gear your opponent is equipping with out having to get a telescope out or put your face right up to the grey miniature,
It CAN help. But it's also not required to have models be WYSIWYG. Especially because WYSIWYG is sometimes impossible. No bits have ever been made to represent ANY of the tyranid relics for example. How do I show my Tyrant with the Maw Claw? Or how about just regular rending claws? There is no bit for them in tyrant scale. So while the THOUGHT of paint making it easy to identify bits is nice, it's also just a moot point because the bits don't actually matter. and it also most importantly looks great and encourages and re enforces the concept of what this is about, so that way we don't get a influx of grey noobs.
So you think the POINT is to avoid an influx of grey noobs? Well see, I WANT a influx of grey noobs. The more people playing the better.
71077
Post by: Eldarsif
So you think the POINT is to avoid an influx of grey noobs?
Well see, I WANT a influx of grey noobs. The more people playing the better.
Without the grey noobs there wouldn't be a hobby. I am personally grateful to every grey noob who has joined the game. Hell, I was a grey noob when I joined and now I have spent too much money on this hobby.
120215
Post by: StormX
 Eldarsif wrote:So you think the POINT is to avoid an influx of grey noobs?
Well see, I WANT a influx of grey noobs. The more people playing the better.
Without the grey noobs there wouldn't be a hobby. I am personally grateful to every grey noob who has joined the game. Hell, I was a grey noob when I joined and now I have spent too much money on this hobby.
I don't mean new people who are just learning and thats why they have greys, i mean grey noobs that think its acceptable long term and with out aiming for a painted army thus spreading what you may call a disease if you want, but you get my point.
There are noobs with greys because there noob, and grey noobs that think they can be grey all the time and that's why they started.
93221
Post by: Lance845
It is acceptable. I think the disease is the attitude of elitist gate keeping and shaming that you are promoting. I would love to hear some actual arguments for why playing a game with unpainted models is a disease.
120227
Post by: Karol
I understand painting models to high standard or at all, if your in to painting. I understand doing the same, if you go to tournaments. I undestand that someone may want their army too look cool, specially if they like it.
I even understand someone not wanting to play against unpainted or bad painted army. I have stuff like that too, would never play against an army that looks like nazis.
But if you don't like your army painting it seems like burning money on something you don't like. What is worse, being non GD tier painted, means you actually lowering the cost of the army, if you try to resell it.
107480
Post by: Sleep Spell
I personally enjoy the social aspect of the hobby, getting together to chat while doing something we all enjoy whether its painting or playing. I've had the privilege to meet different communities across the world and would say from personal experience painted models look better but that's about all there is too it. Some of the most knowledgeable and enjoyable players I've met have wielded the dreaded gray plastic in their armies while I've met a fair share of TFG's with pro painted forces. Being a poor painter does not make you a poor player just like being a pro player does not make you a pro painter...
Still voted for equal since painting is just as much part of the hobby as playing and spending an afternoon hanging out and painting is just as fun as playing most days. Besides who are we kidding, the majority of people probably end up spending more time with the brush in hand than the dice, it just seems to pan out that way
Lance845 wrote:I would argue that the most enticing thing is not painted models but people having fun playing the game.
This is certainly true in my case! People tend to be impressed by the models but they buy that first box of mini's because they want to enjoy the hobby.
120215
Post by: StormX
I don't mean new people who are just entered the hobby and still learning and thats why they have greys, i mean grey noobs that think its acceptable long term and with out aiming for a painted army thus spreading what you may call a disease if you want, but you get my point.
There are noobs with greys because there noob, and grey noobs that think they can be grey all the time and that's why they started.
gak i posted this twice.
80782
Post by: Big Mac
I set this policy for myself, I'll play anyone at least once, no matter what they bring as a acceptable army, be that a proxy/grey assembled/badly painted etc. For us to have a 2nd game outside of a tourney, my opponent must be working toward a painted force whether by themselves or have it commissioned, its part of the hobby. Table top visuals are what captures this hobby and gather spectators around to entice them to join.
93221
Post by: Lance845
I get what you are saying. Someone who has had their army for 2 years and doesn't paint is a "grey noob" to you and a "disease".
Again, your elitist, gatekeeping, toxic, shaming attitude is a disease.
Please. Provide some arguments to support your stance.
120215
Post by: StormX
Lance845 wrote:I get what you are saying. Someone who has had their army for 2 years and doesn't paint is a "grey noob" to you and a "disease".
Again, your elitist, gatekeeping, toxic, shaming attitude is a disease.
Please. Provide some arguments to support your stance.
I have provided arugments all day, but ill repeat.
1.Tradition
2.Discouraging people coming in to the hobby just because they think its generally accepted that you dont need to paint, and thus watering down the wargamings solid core values.
Those 2 are enough for now.
71077
Post by: Eldarsif
I think we should be stricter about gatekeeping.
If you haven't gone to Forgeworld and kissed the Rhino you are not allowed to play anyone until you do.
This way we will know that only the worthy are playing and that they mean business.
122753
Post by: DeathKorp_Rider
I've been playing for about 3 years, and aside from some models I got off EBay I have no painted models. I don't have fun painting because I don't have the time or patience and am prone to get over critical of my own work. That said I will have my models painted one day, but that is far down the road. Point is I am having fun and doing it without paint.
84689
Post by: ingtaer
Lance845 wrote:It is acceptable. I think the disease is the attitude of elitist gate keeping and shaming that you are promoting. I would love to hear some actual arguments for why playing a game with unpainted models is a disease.
I would like that too. I have been collecting and playing since '90, the vast majority of my models are unpainted and I have never once had anyone complain about in person. I have played in GW stores, FLGs, tournaments, leagues and campaigns and in all that I have maybe a dozen people joke that I might get around to finishing my army in the next couple of decades. Most people though prefer to comment on all the 3d party models and bits and conversions that I generally have in an army.
I don't like to paint, I have bad eye sight, cant sit for very long and am not very good at it so I prefer not to do it. You don't want to play against my grey horde (generally coloured base coat horde) well don't, I am sure neither of us would have enjoyed the game in the first place. You want to try and shame me out of the hobby because I don't like to paint? Well good luck with that. Its a game I play for fun and its not fun when other people try to tell me that I am enjoying myself the wrong way, it is quite frankly none of your business what I do with my toys.
93221
Post by: Lance845
Stormatious wrote: Lance845 wrote:I get what you are saying. Someone who has had their army for 2 years and doesn't paint is a "grey noob" to you and a "disease".
Again, your elitist, gatekeeping, toxic, shaming attitude is a disease.
Please. Provide some arguments to support your stance.
I have provided arugments all day, but ill repeat.
1.Tradition
2.Discouraging people coming in to the hobby just because they think its generally accepted that you dont need to paint, and thus watering down the wargamings solid core values.
Those 2 are enough for now.
Cool. I feel safe saying that I think you are representative of the absolute worst elements in the entire miniature war gaming community. When I talk to people about getting into it it always comes with the warning that you exist and they need to just avoid you at all costs.
You are welcome to your opinions. But toxic is the correct adjective.
120215
Post by: StormX
Lance845 wrote: Stormatious wrote: Lance845 wrote:I get what you are saying. Someone who has had their army for 2 years and doesn't paint is a "grey noob" to you and a "disease".
Again, your elitist, gatekeeping, toxic, shaming attitude is a disease.
Please. Provide some arguments to support your stance.
I have provided arugments all day, but ill repeat.
1.Tradition
2.Discouraging people coming in to the hobby just because they think its generally accepted that you dont need to paint, and thus watering down the wargamings solid core values.
Those 2 are enough for now.
Cool. I feel safe saying that I think you are representative of the absolute worst elements in the entire miniature war gaming community. When I talk to people about getting into it it always comes with the warning that you exist and they need to just avoid you at all costs.
You are welcome to your opinions. But toxic is the correct adjective.
Don't know why you think im being toxic, im not saying any thing extreme. And im not saying you shouldn't be allowed to play with greys whats so ever, im really trying to explain why its important to encourage people to pain using a stronger tone, and i'm trying to say it in a way that makes it more compelling to understanding my thoughts by drawing some what of a line.... Don't get you at all.
I wish you all the best. Automatically Appended Next Post: Discouraging doesn't mean i dont want you to be around, it means not encouraging you to think greys are some thing that people in general would like to see on the miniture battlefield.
101510
Post by: happy_inquisitor
Lance845 wrote:
I would argue that the most enticing thing is not painted models but people having fun playing the game. Monopoly has sold a insane number of companies over the years without me ever seeing a painted house/hotel. If people enjoy the game they play it. If people see people enjoying the game they want in on the fun. The painted models can look cool and be a boost too. But grey plastic is not a reversal on that. It's never a detriment to have 2 people with unpainted models having a great time.
In fact, 2 people with beautifully painted models looming over their table stern and determined and taking the game deathly seriously is more of a detriment to new players being enticed then 2 people with grey plastic laughing and smiling and having singular great time playing.
The tourny player you described is often in those stern and determined camp. They are not there for fun. They are there to win. And that... determination often comes with an attitude that effects the way the game looks in a way that is not enticing to new players.
I will agree that two people having a really good laugh with their game is never a bad thing but that is unrelated to the grey plastic debate. As you note the super-stern and un-fun types are more likely to be the once smashing face with their next tournament army. Worst case situation for our future young hobbyist entering a store for the first time is the competitive player with grey minis looking like they are having zero fun because its all such a serious business to them. We all know that in terms of growing the hobby that is the least enticing thing, some players just prefer not to care.
When it comes to that fun game with lots of backchat I will however point out that whenever I see a potential new little Timmy/Tammy in the store it is almost invariably with a mother - and the mother may or may not think positive thoughts about the banter between two guys on the table but will almost always see the positive in nice looking painted minis on the table. "Ooh, it would be nice if Timmy/Tammy could paint like that" sells to the mother, who is after all the one with the credit card at this point in a potential hobbyists life.
So I hear what you are saying but will stick to my position, in a store situation well painted minis are good for the store and for the hobby. Those of us in the hobby for a while should give a little thought to the health of the hobby and the store and try to present our hobby in a decent way when outside our garage Those who are new to the hobby or with particular difficulties on the hobby side we continue to welcome in rather than try to be self-appointed gatekeepers.
71077
Post by: Eldarsif
1.Tradition
2.Discouraging people coming in to the hobby just because they think its generally accepted that you dont need to paint, and thus watering down the wargamings solid core values.
To be fair the argument of tradition is used to enforce a lot of cruelty and downright disgusting habits in this world so I would never accept that as a good argument to enforce anything. Core Values are also a very subjective thing. Me - and a lot of people I play with - view the core values as camaraderie, openness, and helpfulness. It is fine that you view painting as a core value, but at the same time you must acknowledge that these are subjective values to each and every person and have no bearing on actual reality except how you behave towards it.
On an unrelated note I just suggest these posts be locked immediately. They are as productive as a charged political post.
120215
Post by: StormX
Eldarsif wrote:
1.Tradition
2.Discouraging people coming in to the hobby just because they think its generally accepted that you dont need to paint, and thus watering down the wargamings solid core values.
To be fair the argument of tradition is used to enforce a lot of cruelty and downright disgusting habits(for example genital mutilation) in this world so I would never accept that as a good argument to enforce anything. Core Values are also a very subjective thing. Me - and a lot of people I play with - view the core values as camaraderie, openness, and helpfulness. It is fine that you view painting as a core value, but at the same time you must acknowledge that these are subjective values to each and every person and have no bearing on actual reality except how you behave towards it.
Lol, earlier i compared Saudi Arabia cutting off heads as a bad tradition to this topic related to war gaming tradition ( replied to some body saying tradition doesn't make some thing good.), then i withdraw-ed that comment and apologized because i realized that was such a dumb thing to say.
93221
Post by: Lance845
Discouraging means people won't be around. Discouraging people about something that is none of your business is bad.
Lets equate your attitude to another thing...
"I don't think gays should be able to get married. I think it's important that we draw a line, that we enforce that line, and that we as a community stand up and make sure that they know that we don't think it's okay.
That doesn't mean I want gay people to leave the country btw. I just want them to get on my page and do things my way. After all, it's not tradition."
Bit of an extreme example there. But do you see how if you swap around a few words how toxic the attitude is?
If your argument is in spirit the exact same argument people use for gak like that then your argument is equally toxic in attitude.
You can be inclusive or you can be exclusive. You re exclusive.
71077
Post by: Eldarsif
Lol, earlier i compared Saudi Arabia cutting off heads as a bad tradition to war gaming, then i withdraw-ed that comment and apologized because i realized that was such a dumb thing to say.
Difference is that I wasn't comparing, but noting that tradition is a non-argument in this sense. Traditions are more often than not just peer pressure and have no objective relevance to anything.
120215
Post by: StormX
Lance845 wrote:Discouraging means people won't be around. Discouraging people about something that is none of your business is bad.
Lets equate your attitude to another thing...
"I don't think gays should be able to get married. I think it's important that we draw a line, that we enforce that line, and that we as a community stand up and make sure that they know that we don't think it's okay.
That doesn't mean I want gay people to leave the country btw. I just want them to get on my page and do things my way."
Bit of an extreme example there. But do you see how if you swap around a few words how toxic the attitude is?
If your argument is in spirit the exact same argument people use for gak like that then your argument is equally toxic in attitude.
You can be inclusive or you can be exclusive. You re exclusive.
No, discouraging means not encouraging or letting the idea of grey miniatures becoming a "thing". As in not encouraging people to join based on the fact they think they dont have to paint, and there fore flooding tables every where with grey minis, thus watering down the "core values" of this hobby.
Any way yes your example is extreme and unrelated, so refer to the post i posted above this as it applies to you also.
99
Post by: insaniak
This is why we can't have nice things.
I think we're done here.
|
|
