Switch Theme:

Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit  [RSS] 

Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 14:16:05


Post by: Crafter91


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay?

I say NAY.

I totally get why it would be a thing in big tournaments to try and encourage entrants to have fully painted lists. Especially if organisers were wanting to post pictures online / in White Dwarf etc etc

but for casual games at the FLGS or gaming clubs - it's a ridiculous rule in my opinion.

I have a full time job and a 2 year old daughter - i probably get 2 hours painting time a day (and no, i don't paint every single day)

I probably spend around 3-4 hours per miniature. 6-8 if it's one I really want to do well such as HQs etc.

Why should I start a game at a 10 POINT disadvantage because my OP has more free time than me? Or bought a pre-painted army? or paid a commissioner to do it for them?

All this rule does in my opinion is force people to rush their paintjobs while putting new gamers at a disadvantage.

Being completely honest - if i lost a close game but my army was painted and my OPs wasn't, I would not want to steal that victory if the 10 points changed the result.

It's a painting hobby AND a wargame. The two should not be mutually exclusive.

What are people's thoughts on this?


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 14:37:11


Post by: Rihgu


It's a painting hobby AND a wargame. The two should not be mutually exclusive.

Isn't that what house ruling the 10 points for having a painted army away does? Makes them mutually exclusive?

Why should I start a game at a 10 POINT disadvantage because my OP has more free time than me? Or bought a pre-painted army? or paid a commissioner to do it for them?

Because those are the rules, I guess. As long as your opponent is fine with it you can use whatever house rules you want.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 14:54:51


Post by: ingtaer


Moved this to 40K general as YMDC is for seeking clarity around rules not whether they should exist or be followed.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 14:54:58


Post by: doctortom


Talk to the people at the FLGS; they're the ones with the Painted Bonus House rule in the first place.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 14:56:47


Post by: The_Real_Chris


I say yay. Even a coat of spray and picking out the weapons in black is an improvement on grey plastic. And if you only have time to paint a bit, play a smaller game. they are often more fun anyway!


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 14:57:37


Post by: DarkHound


Just talk to your opponent before you play. The painting bonus is literally just to put a rule in the book for tournament play.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 15:05:43


Post by: Spoletta


If it's just a pick up game, where's the issue? There is nothing to win. You can consider or not the bonus points as you see fit.

If you are in a tournament? Before this rule you would not even be able to play without a painted army. This rule actually helps new players. They are put at a disadvantage, sure, but they are allowed in the events.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 15:06:53


Post by: Juxtimon


In my experience allowing unpainted minis leads to allowing incompletely assembled minis. I've fought against whole armies of just torsos and legs on bases because the owner wanted to paint the arms and heads separately. That's a valid reason but it significantly changes the silhouette of the minis and offers an advantage of sorts to that army over a completely assembled one. The same for turrets and sponsons not on tanks because the mini isn't finished yet.

The game is also a LOT more enjoyable for me when there is an element of spectacle about it that comes from painted armies and scenery. Anything that encourages this is good in my books.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 15:09:14


Post by: Stormonu


There’s been a whole old thread about the argument.

I say nay; it’s a hobby snob rule. Might as well have a point rule for whether my army is fluffy or flavor-of-the-month.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 15:10:25


Post by: Yarium


I'll say what I said before;

If it's for tournament games, then these are the rules, and 10 points are 10 points. You want 'em? Earn 'em.

If it's casual, then you have a brain. If you have a big enough brain to calculate that you would've won if not for those 10 points, you have a big enough brain to realize that you out-played your opponent, and that all you need to do to win the same game at a tournament is play at least as well, and finish painting your dudes.

So... yay. Always yay on this.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 15:22:44


Post by: Octopoid


The last thing we need is another gatekeeping rule for the hobby. It's snobbish, it disadvantages people with less time/money, and it provides nothing concrete to the hobby. Hard nay.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 15:23:20


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


 Stormonu wrote:
There’s been a whole old thread about the argument.

I say nay; it’s a hobby snob rule. Might as well have a point rule for whether my army is fluffy or flavor-of-the-month.

The white Knights that defend this rule would probably suggest this to GW, best be careful.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 15:28:02


Post by: Stormonu


Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 Stormonu wrote:
There’s been a whole old thread about the argument.

I say nay; it’s a hobby snob rule. Might as well have a point rule for whether my army is fluffy or flavor-of-the-month.

The white Knights that defend this rule would probably suggest this to GW, best be careful.


If they did, it’s no skin off my nose. I can do “you will not be missed” as well as GW.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 15:28:38


Post by: VonGerrow


If it were a judged point allocation that introduced subjective bias, it might be a problem.

But it's literally just: "Are they painted"

Prime them, drybrush the metal real quick, and throw one thin coat on the armour. You're at three colours, and you can go back and improve them as you have time.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 15:35:14


Post by: Inquisitor Lord Katherine


I think its a good rule.

I almost never get it, because my army isn't based and there's always one or two odd models out in the mix, but im happy to score it to my opponent when their army is fully painted and based.

It encourages people to actually paint their armies, which is something that definitely should happen. I've played against a lot of unpainted armies over the years.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 15:36:22


Post by: Twilight Pathways


Nay, terrible rule. I've said it elsewhere; when the exponents of a rule have to defend it by saying things that eventually amount to "it's just a rule, you can house-rule it away, just ignore it if you like... I mean what are rules anyway? What is winning? We are adrift in a vast uncaring universe and we'll all die soon..." ...yeah, I think you can safely say you've got the mother of all godawful rules on your hands. I just always award the points because everyone else does.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 15:38:43


Post by: mrFickle


I think a minimum standard of painting is required, it’s part of your army building process and it would spoil the hobby, in my opinion, if you could just go out a grab a load of kits and glue them together.

Otherwise why don’t we just write the name of models on bits of paper and use them as counters instead of having models.

I don’t think there should be a bonus for painting I think tournaments should just state that they will Or won’t accept un painted models.

I accept that some models are hard to paint and take ages but a spray on coloured primer isn’t that hard to achieve. And a bit of wash. Then maybe a quick dry brush.

And I do sympathise that some people just want to play the game and aren’t interested in painting which I why I recently posted a thread asking if people would buy some kind of pre painted model.

I just think that turning up to a tournament and being presented with a see of grey plastic sounds miserable.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 15:38:54


Post by: Kanluwen


 Octopoid wrote:
The last thing we need is another gatekeeping rule for the hobby. It's snobbish, it disadvantages people with less time/money, and it provides nothing concrete to the hobby. Hard nay.

I'm someone who doesn't paint a lot of his stuff. Not because I don't have time or money--I don't like my work and I tend to bounce around a lot on color scheme ideas.

I think this rule is fine. Because outside of a tournament environment, who the hell cares?


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 15:41:08


Post by: footfoe


Yeah I dont get you OP.

You're so much of perfectionist that you spend 3 hours in each model. But not so much of a perfectionist, that you're perfectly fine with showing up to a game with mostly grey models? I think your slow pace is an exaggeration, or your priorities are totally incoherent.

Your limited time excuses are invalid, as you clearly have time to play games. Use that time. You can keep up the social contact by bringing your brushes to the FLGS.

Then after that... its just 10 points. Rarely will that be the deciding factor. And if is.. then your opponent earned it by putting in effort that you didn't put in.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 15:41:15


Post by: Catulle


Yay, my lazy arse needs every incentive it can get to get the damn colouring-in done.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 15:42:41


Post by: vict0988


The old thread was early in the edition. https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/790821.page

When I'm looking up tournament results I don't want to hear anything about "maybe the Drukhari players were all expert painters and got a better paint score than their opponents". I think hobby scores have gone the way of the dodo if I'm not mistaken, which was my greatest hope for the rule so I am actually pretty happy with it.

Painted miniatures is an okay requirement for tournaments, although if someone wanted to enforce the nitty-gritty of the rules (no clear bases, etc.) they would be a tool IMO. If anybody has heard of a 9th ed tournament with best overall awards I would like to hear about it.

I think it's a bit cheap to win through paint score in a casual game. I haven't played with the rule yet, despite sometimes using miniatures that were not painted to a coherent theme, I don't even know if that's a requirement, but then I'll just fall back on my pirate loot fluff to explain it.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 15:52:38


Post by: Karol


I don't think it would be a problem, if the bonus was something like 1-3VP or army wins in case of draw. Being painted and getting 10 VP vs an unpainted army is a huge adventage. If opponent goes second it is practicaly not worth to play the game from a statistical point of view, because they are not going to be able to make up the point difference. Mostly a new player problem though, so not many people care, because most people don't stay long enough in the game anyway.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 16:01:53


Post by: Insectum7


Painting an army is a big undertaking, so it's reasonable that people who put in the effort get rewarded for it. Yay for me.

 Stormonu wrote:
There’s been a whole old thread about the argument.

I say nay; it’s a hobby snob rule. Might as well have a point rule for whether my army is fluffy or flavor-of-the-month.
That's basically the purpose of the FOC.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 16:04:42


Post by: Karol


When were powerful builds or factions ever limited by the organisation chart? It has to have been prior 8th ed.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 16:09:39


Post by: Sarigar


This has been a non issue wherever I played.

Outside of tourneys, I personally have not encountered this to even be discussed (I only play with painted minis). In the tourneys I've attended, if allowing for non painted models, the organizers state up front that player will not receive the 10 points. This ensured a common expectation prior to registering.





Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 16:15:21


Post by: Gert


I mean it's 10pts, hardly game-winning when you can get like 35 or something from your primaries or secondaries. Plus "painted" is the GW battle-ready standard i.e. 3 colours and based.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 16:20:23


Post by: vict0988


 Gert wrote:
I mean it's 10pts, hardly game-winning when you can get like 35 or something from your primaries or secondaries. Plus "painted" is the GW battle-ready standard i.e. 3 colours and based.

You don't know how many points you can score in a game, how do you know how many points are "game-winning"?


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 16:21:52


Post by: Azuza001


I say nay, but I get where GW is coming from.

Look at it like this- they want people to paint their models as it is more of an investment into said models. And the more you invest the less likely you will be inclined to not play. And if your playing then your more likely to buy more stuff.

Also it appears to be a way to reward players that paint their models. Gw wants pictures out there of beautifully painted models battling it out.

BUT even saying that this was a bad way to do it. You get new players who are not used to playing let alone modeling or painting who want to see what this is all about. The last thing we as a community should be doing is making things more difficult for these new players. As such my flgs has removed that rule from all play. We want to expand player numbers not put up arbitrary walls that make them feel like they have to do even more stuff to play on a balanced level (which they already are not doing since they are new. Thats enough of a disadvantage in my book).

So I get it, but I don't play with it.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 16:25:35


Post by: Gert


 vict0988 wrote:
 Gert wrote:
I mean it's 10pts, hardly game-winning when you can get like 35 or something from your primaries or secondaries. Plus "painted" is the GW battle-ready standard i.e. 3 colours and based.

You don't know how many points you can score in a game, how do you know how many points are "game-winning"?

Cos the last time I played a game of 9th those 10pts were eclipsed in one turn by my opponent and I never recovered. If you've got a super close game then sure maybe they are but counting on them to win you the game is a bad strategy. Plus, again, 3 colours and based. For Blood Angels, that's Red main, Gunmetal for metal and another colour for Eye lenses or Bolter Casing. Heck, for Orks it's Green, Brown and Gunmetal. It's that easy.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 16:32:10


Post by: catbarf


If you're playing in a tournament, they usually require painted minis, so the 10VP is irrelevant. If a tournament will let you play with unpainted models at a mere 10VP penalty, consider yourself lucky.

If you're playing casually, there are no stakes to your game, so whether you won or lost on a 10VP technicality is utterly meaningless.

If you're playing a no-stakes casual game, your opponent declares victory because their 10VP bonus gets them just ahead of you, and this really matters to you for some reason, think long and hard on how seriously you're taking your plastic toy soldier dice game.

I see this 'but I spend so much time painting my models' argument all the time and it feels disingenuous. Yeah, I put effort into painting too, and that means I'm sometimes not fielding a fully painted army. I don't then freak out over a rulebook awarding my casual opponents ten whole imaginary meaningless board game winner points. We know who the winner was at the end of the game and a painting bonus doesn't change that- and sacrificing my painting quality just so I can say that I really won would be ridiculous.

If someone prioritizes technically winning pick-up games over their painting quality, it sounds to me like they don't much care about the painting to begin with. And if 10VP is the extrinsic motivation it takes to get competitive gamers to engage with the hobby aspect, all the better.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 16:33:23


Post by: Crafter91


 footfoe wrote:
Yeah I dont get you OP.

You're so much of perfectionist that you spend 3 hours in each model. But not so much of a perfectionist, that you're perfectly fine with showing up to a game with mostly grey models? I think your slow pace is an exaggeration, or your priorities are totally incoherent.

Your limited time excuses are invalid, as you clearly have time to play games. Use that time. You can keep up the social contact by bringing your brushes to the FLGS.

Then after that... its just 10 points. Rarely will that be the deciding factor. And if is.. then your opponent earned it by putting in effort that you didn't put in.


I don't like to play unpainted units, but I have a few. None of which are grey - most of which are 'in progress'. Of the three games I have played this year, i'd say around 60-70% of what was on my side of the table was painted, the rest at the very least zenithally undercoated if not in base coat stages.

Didn't realise I had to fully explain myself but hopefully that adequately puts your condescending comments to bed.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 16:45:38


Post by: John Prins


I say yea.

If you lose the game because of that score, you can console yourself that you 'won' on skill/list building. You can still play other people with unpainted/half painted armies at no penalty.

It's a painting hobby AND a wargame. The two should not be mutually exclusive.


Note that 'wargame' (or to be specific, 'tabletop miniatures wargame') in a lot of people's minds, includes painted minis. There are plenty of people who just paint - they might well be the majority. But tabletop miniatures wargaming is about spectacle. Someone rolling up to the table with unpainted minis is taking away from the experience.

Why should I start a game at a 10 POINT disadvantage because my OP has more free time than me? Or bought a pre-painted army? or paid a commissioner to do it for them?


The question you should be asking is why someone should be playing your half-painted army. That 10 points is an incentive for him more than a punishment for you. Painted minis is the standard. Standard expectations are NOT gatekeeping. As a social hobby, both players have some responsibility for the enjoyment of the hobby. You bringing a fully painted army makes the experience better for your opponent.

Ultimately you taking 4-5 hours per mini is a decision you made and you should be OK with the consequences of that. I've done much the same, and finally I broke down and speedpainted an army just for tournament play rather than taking 2-3 years to get to that level with my regular army.





Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 16:52:14


Post by: Crafter91


Just so we’re all clear I totally respect everybody’s opinion on the rule, this was just a debate I got into within my own hobby circle and thought it was an interesting topic of discussion as we couldn’t agree on it either haha

Rereading my original post I undershot it might come across a bit aggressive


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 16:54:04


Post by: ccs


Outside a GW store or tourney?
As far as winning the game? I vote nay.
Paint, or don't, as pleases you.

Tournament wise? I dont give a crap what you do there.

In our AoS map based conquest campaign we do have a painted unit bonus though.
We implemented a scars system similar to the Crusade one. You can spend pts buy off scars.
If your unit is painted (any quality beyond primer) you can roll a dice. 5+ it heals a scar for free.



Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 16:57:08


Post by: mrFickle


I feel that if I made an effort to go to a tournament I would put a lot of effort into the presentation of my army and seeing the paint schemes and stylings of other peoples armies would be at least 50% of the fun of attending such an event. For me.

So it should be down to the tournament rules what paint standards required to enter

But having a tournament that gives points for painting or deductions for not painting seems like a terrible idea as it’s not a reflection of the competition. It’s like giving a goal to the football team that the ref thinks has the nicest kit


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 17:02:44


Post by: LunarSol


I think its fine, I guess. On some level I like that it slows down the desire to chase the meta. Personally I just don't care. Success and failure is kind of a personal matter and if I "won" by 6 points only to "lose" when painting is added in... probably really enjoyed the game regardless and not going to feel to bad losing with the handicap. I'm likely going to feel "beat" when I "win" by the same margin.

It makes some people feel better about the funbucks they earned and other people take their funbucks far too seriously. I'm not going to get upset about it either way.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 17:12:06


Post by: Xenomancers


For those who are anti painting.

Once you start playing with fully painted models. You wont want to play with anything else. Paint your damn models. Learn to dry brush. It is very easy.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 17:15:10


Post by: Quasistellar


oh, it's this dumb thread again.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 17:18:00


Post by: Amishprn86


Friendly pick up games should never count.

Not everyone is a painter or even likes painting, i know some that loves building, and others just wants to collect, or even just play. Also newer players shouldn't be told they are at a disadvantage just b.c they want to play and learn a new game, they already have a hard enough time as it is, don't make it worst.



Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 17:21:01


Post by: Octopoid


 Xenomancers wrote:
For those who are anti painting.

Once you start playing with fully painted models. You wont want to play with anything else. Paint your damn models. Learn to dry brush. It is very easy.


Tell you what, when you buy my minis for me, when you paint them for me, when you have the time and money to put in for me, THEN you get to tell me how to play.

Damn, makes me want to stop painting just to spite you. I've played with both, and I'm happy with either.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 17:26:51


Post by: ccs


 Xenomancers wrote:
For those who are anti painting.

Once you start playing with fully painted models. You wont want to play with anything else. Paint your damn models. Learn to dry brush. It is very easy.


Been doing this for near on 35 years now and I can tell you your claim is not true for me.

Sure, I love fully painted stuff. And I've got plenty of it....
But MY hobby is playing.
Painting it all is just something I do at my own leisure.
Play 1st, everything else 2nd.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 17:36:32


Post by: Karol


 John Prins wrote:


The question you should be asking is why someone should be playing your half-painted army. That 10 points is an incentive for him more than a punishment for you. Painted minis is the standard. Standard expectations are NOT gatekeeping. As a social hobby, both players have some responsibility for the enjoyment of the hobby. You bringing a fully painted army makes the experience better for your opponent.

Ultimately you taking 4-5 hours per mini is a decision you made and you should be OK with the consequences of that. I've done much the same, and finally I broke down and speedpainted an army just for tournament play rather than taking 2-3 years to get to that level with my regular army.




But painted minis are not the standard. They come unpainted. They can be a standard to people who like painted models, or to people who like painting. To someone who is only interested in gaming they are not something standard. And it very much is gate keeping. If you inform someone that probably will play one edition that, he will not only have to wait for a few months to have his army, but then have to spend even more money and time painting them. And then people with painted armies may just claim bs 10pts, because they didn't do edge high lights on this one stone on the base or because they decided to colour code their bases, but this suddenly makes the whole army unpainted, because only scenic bases count as fully painted. You are very much gate keeping people, specialy in a hobby which is already expansive enough to not come with add extre costs. Ah and as enjoyment of the hobby being the responsibility of both players, good luck with that, because as soon as people don't play against a friend, they will no longer care.

The rule is as much as incentive to paint, as not speaking and learning polish, or being catholic was in XIXth century here.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 17:43:06


Post by: Rihgu


It's as much gate keeping as any other rule in the book.

Tell you what, when you buy my minis for me, when you paint them for me, when you have the time and money to put in for me, THEN you get to tell me how to play.

Okay, so since I bought and painted my minis I get to claim they have 2+ BS and their guns are Assault 4, S10, Ap -3, D2?
You can tell me how to play when you buy my minis for me, I guess.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 17:44:33


Post by: Octopoid


Rihgu wrote:
It's as much gate keeping as any other rule in the book.

Tell you what, when you buy my minis for me, when you paint them for me, when you have the time and money to put in for me, THEN you get to tell me how to play.

Okay, so since I bought and painted my minis I get to claim they have 2+ BS and their guns are Assault 4, S10, Ap -3, D2?
You can tell me how to play when you buy my minis for me, I guess.


As long as I'm not forced to play a game with you, that's fine by me.

Let's not drag the social construct of "agreeing on a ruleset" into this. We're discussing aspects of the hobby, and whether or not they're mandatory. If you don't want to engage with that point, no point in me engaging with you at all.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 17:45:55


Post by: Rihgu


 Octopoid wrote:
Rihgu wrote:
It's as much gate keeping as any other rule in the book.

Tell you what, when you buy my minis for me, when you paint them for me, when you have the time and money to put in for me, THEN you get to tell me how to play.

Okay, so since I bought and painted my minis I get to claim they have 2+ BS and their guns are Assault 4, S10, Ap -3, D2?
You can tell me how to play when you buy my minis for me, I guess.


As long as I'm not forced to play a game with you, that's fine by me.

Let's not drag the social construct of "agreeing on a ruleset" into this. We're discussing aspects of the hobby, and whether or not they're mandatory. If you don't want to engage with that point, no point in me engaging with you at all.


We are quite literally talking about agreeing on a ruleset here. The rules says a painted army gets 10 points. Anything else is a houserule. It is mandatory to get 10 points for having a painted army.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 17:46:34


Post by: mrhappyface


I don't understand why people don't get there are 3 distinct hobbies in this "hobby": building models, painting models and wargaming.

Some people love the building and painting part of the hobby but hate the actual game, should they be forced to play the game because it's a "part of the hobby"?

Some people love playing the wargames but have never been one for building and painting, why should they be forced to do that? Years ago, back in school, we used to play paper-hammer during lunch breaks because we wanted to try out stuff we didn't have and also didn't wanna have to drag what we did have into school, we all had fun and everyone was fine with it.

If you love all aspects of the hobby, good, that's fine, but maybe open your eyes to the fact that your way isn't the only way to enjoy the hobby.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 17:47:42


Post by: Gert


How is 3 colours and based a hard concept for people to grasp as "painted". Nobody is demanding you edge highlight a model's purity seal or have a scenic base on them all. There are 129 videos on the Warhammer YouTube page SPECIFICALLY dedicated to Battle Ready painting. Loads of companies produce coloured spray to skip the basecoat stage and there's even contrast to rip the time it takes to paint a model in half. It's so easy to get around the "10pts for a painted army" rule it's a joke people are actually up in arms about it. For sake Necrons is as easy as, spray metal, wash, do eyes and pewpew bits, slap some mud on the base and hey presto, you're done.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 17:50:11


Post by: Octopoid


 Gert wrote:
How is 3 colours and based a hard concept for people to grasp as "painted". Nobody is demanding you edge highlight a model's purity seal or have a scenic base on them all. There are 129 videos on the Warhammer YouTube page SPECIFICALLY dedicated to Battle Ready painting. Loads of companies produce coloured spray to skip the basecoat stage and there's even contrast to rip the time it takes to paint a model in half. It's so easy to get around the "10pts for a painted army" rule it's a joke people are actually up in arms about it.


Let me put it clearly: No one gets to demand that I paint my miniatures and have me take them seriously. If I want to show up with the "grey knights," that's my prerogative. I should not be punished for it, because painting is only a part of the hobby.

Again, when it's your time and money spent, you get to tell me how to play my miniatures. Until then, I'll happily just not play, if that's my option.

I don't know if it's been quoted in this thread or not, but can someone quote (or at least tell the page number) of the rule in question?

EDIT: Just to put this out there - it doesn't matter how easy or difficult, how cheap or expensive, how fast or how slow YOU find a part of the hobby to be, others will find it to be different than you do, and that doesn't make them wrong or mean they should be penalized for it.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 17:51:22


Post by: mrhappyface


 Gert wrote:
How is 3 colours and based a hard concept for people to grasp as "painted". Nobody is demanding you edge highlight a model's purity seal or have a scenic base on them all. There are 129 videos on the Warhammer YouTube page SPECIFICALLY dedicated to Battle Ready painting. Loads of companies produce coloured spray to skip the basecoat stage and there's even contrast to rip the time it takes to paint a model in half. It's so easy to get around the "10pts for a painted army" rule it's a joke people are actually up in arms about it.

You act like people aren't already paying for the privilege to play this game. Why can't people understand the concept that you shouldn't be able to tell people "you can't play with the models you have payed for" because you don't think they look nice.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 17:52:57


Post by: Rihgu


 Octopoid wrote:
 Gert wrote:
How is 3 colours and based a hard concept for people to grasp as "painted". Nobody is demanding you edge highlight a model's purity seal or have a scenic base on them all. There are 129 videos on the Warhammer YouTube page SPECIFICALLY dedicated to Battle Ready painting. Loads of companies produce coloured spray to skip the basecoat stage and there's even contrast to rip the time it takes to paint a model in half. It's so easy to get around the "10pts for a painted army" rule it's a joke people are actually up in arms about it.


Let me put it clearly: No one gets to demand that I paint my miniatures and have me take them seriously. If I want to show up with the "grey knights," that's my prerogative. I should not be punished for it, because painting is only a part of the hobby.

Again, when it's your time and money spent, you get to tell me how to play my miniatures. Until then, I'll happily just not play, if that's my option.

I don't know if it's been quoted in this thread or not, but can someone quote (or at least tell the page number) of the rule in question?


Nobody is demanding that you paint your miniatures. If you're playing without house rules, you just don't receive 10 points. That's not much of a punishment. Of course, you can always agree to house rules, but keep in mind that your opponent doesn't have to play by them, and can refuse a game as much as you can refuse to game without them.

Why can't people understand the concept that you shouldn't be able to tell people "you can't play with the models you have payed for" because you don't think they look nice.

Who has said you can't play? Not getting 10 points != unable to play.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 17:54:57


Post by: Gert


When did I say you can't play because they aren't painted? Oh, right I didn't and neither did GW.
You don't get 10pts in the game, oh no. Pick easy objectives (which BTW there are so many) so you don't have to worry about being 10pts down if you're playing against a painted army.
This narrative that people who don't paint their armies are some kind of folk hero fighting against the evil GW is utter nonsense.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 17:55:10


Post by: catbarf


 mrhappyface wrote:
I don't understand why people don't get there are 3 distinct hobbies in this "hobby": building models, painting models and wargaming.

Some people love the building and painting part of the hobby but hate the actual game, should they be forced to play the game because it's a "part of the hobby"?

Some people love playing the wargames but have never been one for building and painting, why should they be forced to do that? Years ago, back in school, we used to play paper-hammer during lunch breaks because we wanted to try out stuff we didn't have and also didn't wanna have to drag what we did have into school, we all had fun and everyone was fine with it.

If you love all aspects of the hobby, good, that's fine, but maybe open your eyes to the fact that your way isn't the only way to enjoy the hobby.


If you consider it to be three distinct hobbies, what about the people who love the 'wargaming' but hate the 'building models' part of the hobby? Are we obligated to accommodate them by allowing piles of bits on bases to be used as models?

I think if you can reasonably expect someone to build the models, it is equally reasonable to expect them to be painted to the very, very, very low standard required by the rules. And if that's too much, then they can still play- albeit with an extremely mild handicap that in most games won't matter, and only matters at the end, after the winner or loser by the game itself has already been determined.

I'm honestly completely fine with people not enjoying the painting aspect of the hobby, or trying things out before they're fully painted, or wanting to proxy an army they don't have. But you don't see people demanding to play with cardboard cutouts or fully proxied armies, and railing against even the most pillow-fisted of meaningless handicaps, like you do with unpainted models.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 17:59:37


Post by: Octopoid


Why should there be a handicap at all, even (or perhaps especially) a meaningless one? Why does anyone get to tell me that my game should be penalized because I didn't choose to paint my miniatures?

This is a stupid rule that encourages elitist gatekeeping. No one has said I can't play, true, but it's pretty clear that my unpainted minis aren't welcome, so I'll take my wargaming time, money, and effort elsewhere.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 18:03:05


Post by: Gert


*GW makes 40k to sell minis*
*GW puts rule in 40k to promote painting said miniatures*
Internet people: This is unbelievable, how could GW do this


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 18:03:17


Post by: mrhappyface


 catbarf wrote:
If you consider it to be three distinct hobbies, what about the people who love the 'wargaming' but hate the 'building models' part of the hobby? Are we obligated to accommodate them by allowing piles of bits on bases to be used as models?

I think if you can reasonably expect someone to build the models, it is equally reasonable to expect them to be painted to the very, very, very low standard required by the rules. And if that's too much, then they can still play- albeit with an extremely mild handicap that in most games won't matter, and only matters at the end, after the winner or loser by the game itself has already been determined.

I'm honestly completely fine with people not enjoying the painting aspect of the hobby, or trying things out before they're fully painted, or wanting to proxy an army they don't have. But you don't see people demanding to play with cardboard cutouts or fully proxied armies, and railing against even the most pillow-fisted of meaningless handicaps, like you do with unpainted models.

I mean, I literally said I was fine with paper hammer if that's what people wanna do and the opponent is fine with it.

Don't get me wrong, if you wanna refuse a game with someone because you don't like their army because it's: unpainted, proxied, literally paper, etc. that's fine, you're entitled to play the game how you want and with who you want. But that same player should be fine to refuse a game that enforces the 10pts bonus for a painted army and I for one would never enforce the 10pt bonus rule if my opponent wanted to play with whatever.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 18:03:47


Post by: JNAProductions


If GW made a rule that said “You cannot paint a model until it wounds an enemy model or scores any Victory Points,” how would you feel about that?

That’s how I feel about “You have to paint your models to earn something in-game.”


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 18:04:38


Post by: Rihgu


Why does anyone get to tell me that my game should be penalized because I didn't choose to paint my miniatures?

Because they literally made the game. They made ALL of the rules! They tell you exactly how to play!
You can play with your miniatures by any rules you want, including rules you make up. If you're agreeing to a game of 40k, without house rules, you need to play by the rules that they set.

You can't play a game, lose by 9 points and then say, "oh, this entire time we've been playing under my house rule where there are no 10 points for painted models, so I actually win by 1"

just be up front. Ask your opponent, "hey, do you mind playing by a house rule where neither of us gets 10 points for having a painted army? I feel that it is unfair to me"


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 18:05:02


Post by: Octopoid


 Gert wrote:
*GW makes 40k to sell minis*
*GW puts rule in 40k to promote painting said miniatures*
Internet people: This is unbelievable, how could GW do this


If their intent is to promote painting the miniatures, they missed. What they've done is punish NOT painting the miniatures.

What if I have a hand tremor? What if I'm colorblind? What if I'm broke? What if I work two jobs? What if I don't like my painting style? What if I just don't want to paint my minis?

GW makes the minis and the rules, so they're perfectly within their rights to put this rule in. "Within their rights" doesn't mean "correct to do so."


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 18:05:58


Post by: Gert


Spoiler:
If GW made a rule that said “You cannot paint a model until it wounds an enemy model or scores any Victory Points,” how would you feel about that?

That’s how I feel about “You have to paint your models to earn something in-game.”

I mean those are utterly different concepts with wildly different outcomes. Like not even close to the same thing. You've pointed at an apple and called it a whale.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 18:06:55


Post by: Deadnight


Always play it painted.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 18:07:25


Post by: mrhappyface


 Gert wrote:
*GW makes 40k to sell minis*
*GW puts rule in 40k to promote painting said miniatures*
Internet people: This is unbelievable, how could GW do this

And we wouldn't want to disappoint the great GW by playing the game how we want


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 18:07:50


Post by: JNAProductions


 Gert wrote:
Spoiler:
If GW made a rule that said “You cannot paint a model until it wounds an enemy model or scores any Victory Points,” how would you feel about that?

That’s how I feel about “You have to paint your models to earn something in-game.”

I mean those are utterly different concepts with wildly different outcomes. Like not even close to the same thing. You've pointed at an apple and called it a whale.
Why?

In one, it’s painting to gain an advantage in game. In the other, it’s in-game to affect your painting.

Why is “Paint to play” okay, but “play to paint” bad?


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 18:10:07


Post by: NinthMusketeer


As someone infamous in my local community for not having painted minis, I like such a rule. It makes me feel better about my opponent putting up with my unpainted army.

And honestly speaking; I don't think the problem is in GW letting players win games thanks to having painted models when their opponents don't, I think the problem is people CARING so much that they might lose a game to not being painted. Seriously, it. Is. A. Game. Grow up and get the hell over it.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 18:10:34


Post by: Gert


Spoiler:
 Octopoid wrote:
 Gert wrote:
*GW makes 40k to sell minis*
*GW puts rule in 40k to promote painting said miniatures*
Internet people: This is unbelievable, how could GW do this


If their intent is to promote painting the miniatures, they missed. What they've done is punish NOT painting the miniatures.

What if I have a hand tremor? What if I'm colorblind? What if I'm broke? What if I work two jobs? What if I don't like my painting style? What if I just don't want to paint my minis?

GW makes the minis and the rules, so they're perfectly within their rights to put this rule in. "Within their rights" doesn't mean "correct to do so."

If someone plays a game with me and says "Hey I can't paint my army due to a disability, can we scrap the 10pts for painted rule", I'm gonna say yes. I think the biggest point you STILL seem to be missing on purpose is you can house rule literally anything you don't like. GW literally encourages you to do so.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Spoiler:
 mrhappyface wrote:
 Gert wrote:
*GW makes 40k to sell minis*
*GW puts rule in 40k to promote painting said miniatures*
Internet people: This is unbelievable, how could GW do this

And we wouldn't want to disappoint the great GW by playing the game how we want

Lmao I keep forgetting you can't ever express an opinion that isn't "GW BAD ".


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 18:11:41


Post by: JNAProductions


“This rule is good because you can ignore it” is not a strong argument.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 18:12:20


Post by: mrhappyface


 NinthMusketeer wrote:
As someone infamous in my local community for not having painted minis, I like such a rule. It makes me feel better about my opponent putting up with my unpainted army.

And honestly speaking; I don't think the problem is in GW letting players win games thanks to having painted models when their opponents don't, I think the problem is people CARING so much that they might lose a game to not being painted. Seriously, it. Is. A. Game. Grow up and get the hell over it.

And in the same vein: they are toy models, why do people CARE so much about them being painted. Grow up and get the hell over it.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 18:13:21


Post by: Octopoid


 Gert wrote:
Spoiler:
 Octopoid wrote:
 Gert wrote:
*GW makes 40k to sell minis*
*GW puts rule in 40k to promote painting said miniatures*
Internet people: This is unbelievable, how could GW do this


If their intent is to promote painting the miniatures, they missed. What they've done is punish NOT painting the miniatures.

What if I have a hand tremor? What if I'm colorblind? What if I'm broke? What if I work two jobs? What if I don't like my painting style? What if I just don't want to paint my minis?

GW makes the minis and the rules, so they're perfectly within their rights to put this rule in. "Within their rights" doesn't mean "correct to do so."

If someone plays a game with me and says "Hey I can't paint my army due to a disability, can we scrap the 10pts for painted rule", I'm gonna say yes. I think the biggest point you STILL seem to be missing on purpose is you can house rule literally anything you don't like. GW literally encourages you to do so.


I'm not forgetting it. I'm saying this rule is elitist and bad. I'm GOING to house rule it, by God. I'm not going to play with anyone who doesn't. I'm well aware that the rules are mutable, and I plan to utilize that fact to its fullest advantage.

This rule is still stupid, and the people defending it are still acting like elitist snobs. The fact that I and mine can choose to ignore it doesn't change that.

EDIT: I'm still not finding this rule in the book, so I must be missing something. Maybe there's something about the way it's written that makes it less elitist?


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 18:14:32


Post by: Eldarain


I'm fine with it. If it wouldn't cause a revolt and lower sales I'd be fine with it being a higher VP total. A ton of us could use the incentive to restrict purchases to hobby progress.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 18:17:09


Post by: mrhappyface


 Gert wrote:
[spoiler]Lmao I keep forgetting you can't ever express an opinion that isn't "GW BAD ".

Oh yes of course, suggesting that we don't have to follow the exact way GW has stated is the ideal way to play is the same as saying "GW BAD ".

You said it yourself, they make 40k to make money and they encourage you to paint so that you can buy all their paints that are perfect for the job. Again, not saying this is a bad thing, it's perfectly reasonable. Doesn't mean you have to follow their way of hobbying though.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 18:18:05


Post by: Gert


Fully done with this nonsense. Getting called elitist because I paint my models for a miniatures-based tabletop game is literally impossible to argue against. Not because it's a good argument but because anyone making it is clearly not having the discussion in good faith or even intends to take another viewpoint into consideration.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 18:19:16


Post by: Octopoid


 Gert wrote:
Fully done with this nonsense. Getting called elitist because I paint my models for a miniatures-based tabletop game is literally impossible to argue against. Not because it's a good argument but because anyone making it is clearly not having the discussion in good faith or even intends to take another viewpoint into consideration.


I'm not calling you elitist for painting your models. That's a straw man argument, making YOU the one not having the discussion in good faith. I'm calling people elitist for punishing others for NOT painting their models.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 18:19:29


Post by: NinthMusketeer


 mrhappyface wrote:
 NinthMusketeer wrote:
As someone infamous in my local community for not having painted minis, I like such a rule. It makes me feel better about my opponent putting up with my unpainted army.

And honestly speaking; I don't think the problem is in GW letting players win games thanks to having painted models when their opponents don't, I think the problem is people CARING so much that they might lose a game to not being painted. Seriously, it. Is. A. Game. Grow up and get the hell over it.

And in the same vein: they are toy models, why do people CARE so much about them being painted. Grow up and get the hell over it.
Nice try, but that is not analogous. If a movie came out with half the scenes being arbitrarily in black & white, people would have a problem with it. Because the visuals are a core piece of the experience.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 18:19:48


Post by: mrhappyface


 Gert wrote:
Fully done with this nonsense. Getting called elitist because I paint my models for a miniatures-based tabletop game is literally impossible to argue against. Not because it's a good argument but because anyone making it is clearly not having the discussion in good faith or even intends to take another viewpoint into consideration.

Well looky what we've got here:


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 18:20:44


Post by: JNAProductions


 Gert wrote:
Fully done with this nonsense. Getting called elitist because I paint my models for a miniatures-based tabletop game is literally impossible to argue against. Not because it's a good argument but because anyone making it is clearly not having the discussion in good faith or even intends to take another viewpoint into consideration.
You aren’t acting elitist because you like painting.

You’re acting elitist because you say everyone else has to like painting too.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 18:21:24


Post by: mrhappyface


 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Nice try, but that is not analogous. If a movie came out with half the scenes being arbitrarily in black & white, people would have a problem with it. Because the visuals are a core piece of the experience.

Perhaps for you and I, but not for everyone.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 18:21:30


Post by: NinthMusketeer


 Octopoid wrote:
 Gert wrote:
Fully done with this nonsense. Getting called elitist because I paint my models for a miniatures-based tabletop game is literally impossible to argue against. Not because it's a good argument but because anyone making it is clearly not having the discussion in good faith or even intends to take another viewpoint into consideration.


I'm not calling you elitist for painting your models. That's a straw man argument, making YOU the one not having the discussion in good faith. I'm calling people elitist for punishing others for NOT painting their models.
Any reward to painted models will by extension be a punishment to non-painted models and you phrasing it that way creates a negative connotation via wording that does not exist in practice. That's bad faith.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 18:21:55


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


 Gert wrote:
Spoiler:
If GW made a rule that said “You cannot paint a model until it wounds an enemy model or scores any Victory Points,” how would you feel about that?

That’s how I feel about “You have to paint your models to earn something in-game.”

I mean those are utterly different concepts with wildly different outcomes. Like not even close to the same thing. You've pointed at an apple and called it a whale.

What's the different concept here?


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 18:22:14


Post by: KingGarland


I go out of my way to get my minis painted, though it can take a month and a half just ro get one squad done, but I have played with unpainted models to try them out so I have to say yes in offical tournaments, no/ask your opponent in casual games.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 18:22:50


Post by: NinthMusketeer


 mrhappyface wrote:
 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Nice try, but that is not analogous. If a movie came out with half the scenes being arbitrarily in black & white, people would have a problem with it. Because the visuals are a core piece of the experience.

Perhaps for you and I, but not for everyone.
And that is good for you, but the game is not advertised as a fight between unpainted miniatures. That is not the experience being presented as what Warhammer is.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 18:23:19


Post by: Rihgu


"You're elitist for following the rules of the game"
But... Gert has said he WOULD play without the rule? If asked? So how is he being elitist when GW wrote the rule?


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 18:23:55


Post by: JNAProductions


 NinthMusketeer wrote:
 mrhappyface wrote:
 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Nice try, but that is not analogous. If a movie came out with half the scenes being arbitrarily in black & white, people would have a problem with it. Because the visuals are a core piece of the experience.

Perhaps for you and I, but not for everyone.
And that is good for you, but the game is not advertised as a fight between unpainted miniatures. That is not the experience being presented as what Warhammer is.
Neither are proxies or conversions. Or using homemade terrain. Or using non-GW paints.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 18:24:18


Post by: Octopoid


 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Any reward to painted models will by extension be a punishment to non-painted models and you phrasing it that way creates a negative connotation via wording that does not exist in practice. That's bad faith.


That's the rule as it stands. That's why it's a bad rule. You said it yourself, any reward will by extension be a punishment, so why is me calling it that such a bad thing?


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 18:24:47


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


Rihgu wrote:
"You're elitist for following the rules of the game"
But... Gert has said he WOULD play without the rule? If asked? So how is he being elitist when GW wrote the rule?

If you have to go out of your way to get rid of a rule with houseruling on more than an occasion, there was actually a problem with that core rule to begin with. Yes or no?


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 18:25:00


Post by: Rihgu


 JNAProductions wrote:
 NinthMusketeer wrote:
 mrhappyface wrote:
 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Nice try, but that is not analogous. If a movie came out with half the scenes being arbitrarily in black & white, people would have a problem with it. Because the visuals are a core piece of the experience.

Perhaps for you and I, but not for everyone.
And that is good for you, but the game is not advertised as a fight between unpainted miniatures. That is not the experience being presented as what Warhammer is.
Neither are proxies or conversions. Or using homemade terrain. Or using non-GW paints.


Actually, a lot of GW marketing shows conversions, some show proxies, and much of it shows homemade terrain. I can't tell, but I assume that last point is correct - GW probably uses GW paints in all of their material.

Example of conversions and proxies in official GW material: https://www.warhammer-community.com/2018/06/08/8th-june-alex-youngs-freebooter-orksgw-homepage-post-4/


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 18:26:14


Post by: mrhappyface


 KingGarland wrote:
I go out of my way to get my minis painted, though it can take a month and a half just ro get one squad done, but I have played with unpainted models to try them out so I have to say yes in offical tournaments, no/ask your opponent in casual games.

This is my personal way of doing it, keep it painted only in tournaments but in casual just do whatever. If you're wanting a really cool narrative based game then sure, insist on a painted army but if you're just wanting a game for the sake of a game then I see no problem with stuff not being painted.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 18:27:00


Post by: NinthMusketeer


 Octopoid wrote:
 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Any reward to painted models will by extension be a punishment to non-painted models and you phrasing it that way creates a negative connotation via wording that does not exist in practice. That's bad faith.


That's the rule as it stands. That's why it's a bad rule. You said it yourself, any reward will by extension be a punishment, so why is me calling it that such a bad thing?
Because it is using specific words to imply a negative consequence being imposed when that is not actually the case; one side is being rewarded and by extension that penalizes the other party. That distinction is unimportant in many contexts but is somewhat critical here.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Rihgu wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
 NinthMusketeer wrote:
 mrhappyface wrote:
 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Nice try, but that is not analogous. If a movie came out with half the scenes being arbitrarily in black & white, people would have a problem with it. Because the visuals are a core piece of the experience.

Perhaps for you and I, but not for everyone.
And that is good for you, but the game is not advertised as a fight between unpainted miniatures. That is not the experience being presented as what Warhammer is.
Neither are proxies or conversions. Or using homemade terrain. Or using non-GW paints.


Actually, a lot of GW marketing shows conversions, some show proxies, and much of it shows homemade terrain. I can't tell, but I assume that last point is correct - GW probably uses GW paints in all of their material.

Example of conversions and proxies in official GW material: https://www.warhammer-community.com/2018/06/08/8th-june-alex-youngs-freebooter-orksgw-homepage-post-4/
'Eavy Metal painters do actually supplement their painting with other products (ever noticed how certain effects look different when using only the recommended colours?) but one can understand why they wouldn't advertise that.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 18:30:03


Post by: Insectum7


 Octopoid wrote:
 Gert wrote:
*GW makes 40k to sell minis*
*GW puts rule in 40k to promote painting said miniatures*
Internet people: This is unbelievable, how could GW do this

If their intent is to promote painting the miniatures, they missed. What they've done is punish NOT painting the miniatures.
Is a sports team punished for losing a game? Or are they simply rewarded for winning?

 Octopoid wrote:

What if I have a hand tremor? What if I'm colorblind? What if I'm broke? What if I work two jobs? What if I don't like my painting style? What if I just don't want to paint my minis?

GW makes the minis and the rules, so they're perfectly within their rights to put this rule in. "Within their rights" doesn't mean "correct to do so."
Where there's a will there's a way. If there isn't a will, you miss out on 10 points. . . Unless you play with people that don't care, in which case the rule doesn't matter by choice.

What would really be "elitist" is if only the person with the better painted army got the points, but that's not the case.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 18:31:21


Post by: tauist


If that really motivates you to field a fully painted army, why the heck not! I've played too many games with unfinished armies (that's not going to change any time soon), and fully painted armies on a fully painted board with nice terrain is what we all aspire to. It wont matter to me personally however, as I'd rather play with unfinished minis than rush the painting stage and ruin expensive pieces of plastic & resin.. If I lose by those VP's in my mind it was a draw, but am big enough to let you win "officially".



Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 18:32:29


Post by: Octopoid


 Insectum7 wrote:
 Octopoid wrote:
 Gert wrote:
*GW makes 40k to sell minis*
*GW puts rule in 40k to promote painting said miniatures*
Internet people: This is unbelievable, how could GW do this

If their intent is to promote painting the miniatures, they missed. What they've done is punish NOT painting the miniatures.
Is a sports team punished for losing a game? Or are they simply rewarded for winning?

 Octopoid wrote:

What if I have a hand tremor? What if I'm colorblind? What if I'm broke? What if I work two jobs? What if I don't like my painting style? What if I just don't want to paint my minis?

GW makes the minis and the rules, so they're perfectly within their rights to put this rule in. "Within their rights" doesn't mean "correct to do so."
Where there's a will there's a way. If there isn't a will, you miss out on 10 points. . . Unless you play with people that don't care, in which case the rule doesn't matter by choice.

What would really be "elitist" is if only the person with the better painted army got the points, but that's not the case.


Disingenuous argument. Sports teams are not punished for losing, but imagine if they were docked points (or their opponents were granted extra points, however you want to look at it) for being dressed differently. As has been brought up above.

Also, yes, that would be really elitist; that doesn't make this NOT elitist.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 18:33:44


Post by: Rihgu


 Octopoid wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
 Octopoid wrote:
 Gert wrote:
*GW makes 40k to sell minis*
*GW puts rule in 40k to promote painting said miniatures*
Internet people: This is unbelievable, how could GW do this

If their intent is to promote painting the miniatures, they missed. What they've done is punish NOT painting the miniatures.
Is a sports team punished for losing a game? Or are they simply rewarded for winning?

 Octopoid wrote:

What if I have a hand tremor? What if I'm colorblind? What if I'm broke? What if I work two jobs? What if I don't like my painting style? What if I just don't want to paint my minis?

GW makes the minis and the rules, so they're perfectly within their rights to put this rule in. "Within their rights" doesn't mean "correct to do so."
Where there's a will there's a way. If there isn't a will, you miss out on 10 points. . . Unless you play with people that don't care, in which case the rule doesn't matter by choice.

What would really be "elitist" is if only the person with the better painted army got the points, but that's not the case.


Disingenuous argument. Sports teams are not punished for losing, but imagine if they were docked points (or their opponents were granted extra points, however you want to look at it) for being dressed differently. As has been brought up above.

Also, yes, that would be really elitist; that doesn't make this NOT elitist.


https://websites.sportstg.com/assoc_page.cgi?c=0-1010-0-0-0&sID=407211

Oh no! That horrible thing! It happens already!


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 18:34:35


Post by: dogboy311


Just WOW!!!! Triggered a little bit their Octopoid? I’m just amazed with the reaction people have on this. It’s little BonHommes that we paint or don’t paint. Take a step back and re read the comments people, it’s toxic. Like why get so mad over something so silly.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 18:36:01


Post by: Insectum7


So any incentive is bad because it inherently punishes those who don't achieve it? So like inventives can't exist? That seems to be the argument.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 18:36:06


Post by: NinthMusketeer


Well I get mad that other people get mad so the silliness cancels out and I get to be taken seriously!!


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 18:38:01


Post by: mrFickle


This thread is getting spicy, maybe some refreshing milk?

Can someone explain where this rule came from? I thought OP was saying. It’s a tournament rule. If it’s a GW then this is BS because they just say that to try and sell paints.

Surely you can play the game however you want as long as your opponent agrees to it, if you can’t agree then don’t play with each other.

If tournaments want to make a rule about minimum painting standards then they are right because some people just want to play the game, some people just want to paint and some just want to read the books. And to some people the hobby is all of those things.

Choose your opponents wisely and you will have more fun.

However just as a suggestion to those that are not into painting... please don’t bite.... on YouTube Marco Frisoni shows how you can paint up space marines pretty quick, to a good standard of base colour with some shade and highlights, using about 4 cans of spray paint. Which might be fun. Up to you.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 18:40:45


Post by: Twilight Pathways


mrFickle wrote:


Can someone explain where this rule came from? I thought OP was saying. It’s a tournament rule. If it’s a GW then this is BS because they just say that to try and sell paints.


It's in the core rule book in the matched play bit, and yes it's a BS rule


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 18:41:09


Post by: mrhappyface


dogboy311 wrote:
Just WOW!!!! Triggered a little bit their Octopoid? I’m just amazed with the reaction people have on this. It’s little BonHommes that we paint or don’t paint. Take a step back and re read the comments people, it’s toxic. Like why get so mad over something so silly.

Arguing over things that don't matter is in someways cathartic, nice little break from work to have a little back and forth with strangers on the internet. I don't imagine anyone here is actually mad or takes anything said here particularly seriously, we're all gonna come away from this playing the game exactly the same way we had been doing before.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 18:43:31


Post by: tauist


Dude, if you take playing with toy soldiers so seriously that you consider it to being equal to professional sports, then you need to get those models to battlefield standard level of painting ASAP. Consider it just another aspect of being a "professional warhammerer"

If you cant be arsed to paint, get your coach/manager to sort it out for you.. or wait, you don't have any of those do you? BUT I THOUGHT U WAS A PROFESSIONAL BRAH



Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 18:53:04


Post by: Pointer5


Late to the talk. If playing in a major tournament then absolutely have your models painted. That said it doesn't have to be heavy metal standards. Do the best you can. A local tournament I don't care if my opponent has paint on their army. If I play them again in the future hopefully they will progress on the painting side of the hobby. The ten points is just to get people to make an effort. It would be like going to a tournament and having someone proxie half their army. It just takes away from the spirit of the game.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 18:57:37


Post by: mrFickle


Twilight Pathways wrote:
mrFickle wrote:


Can someone explain where this rule came from? I thought OP was saying. It’s a tournament rule. If it’s a GW then this is BS because they just say that to try and sell paints.


It's in the core rule book in the matched play bit, and yes it's a BS rule


How did I not know that. Tbf I’m more into the painting.

I suppose from their point of view the game/hobby they have always made is designed to be part modelling part playing. I understand then not wanting to cater to a market that isn’t interested in the painting part but I still thank that rule is Gak.

If they did want to cater for that market I suppose they would offer a pre-painted service. Oh wow it would be expensive to have GW paint your models for you.

If I were running GW, and I’m not, I would license a 3rd party somewhere to make fixed pose figures, pre painted to a factory standard, and give players that option if they really don’t want to paint.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 19:00:36


Post by: Kanluwen


 Octopoid wrote:
 Gert wrote:
Fully done with this nonsense. Getting called elitist because I paint my models for a miniatures-based tabletop game is literally impossible to argue against. Not because it's a good argument but because anyone making it is clearly not having the discussion in good faith or even intends to take another viewpoint into consideration.


I'm not calling you elitist for painting your models. That's a straw man argument, making YOU the one not having the discussion in good faith. I'm calling people elitist for punishing others for NOT painting their models.

How many people do you know are actively using this rule as a gatekeeping mechanism?

Cause I can tell you how many I know. That number is "zero".


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 19:01:42


Post by: Octopoid


 Kanluwen wrote:
 Octopoid wrote:
 Gert wrote:
Fully done with this nonsense. Getting called elitist because I paint my models for a miniatures-based tabletop game is literally impossible to argue against. Not because it's a good argument but because anyone making it is clearly not having the discussion in good faith or even intends to take another viewpoint into consideration.


I'm not calling you elitist for painting your models. That's a straw man argument, making YOU the one not having the discussion in good faith. I'm calling people elitist for punishing others for NOT painting their models.

How many people do you know are actively using this rule as a gatekeeping mechanism?

Cause I can tell you how many I know. That number is "zero".


Considering I didn't even KNOW about this rule until today... (and considering I've managed a single whopping game of 9th due to freakin' COVID)... none. And I expect it will stay that way.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 19:01:52


Post by: tauist


mrFickle wrote:
Twilight Pathways wrote:
mrFickle wrote:


Can someone explain where this rule came from? I thought OP was saying. It’s a tournament rule. If it’s a GW then this is BS because they just say that to try and sell paints.


It's in the core rule book in the matched play bit, and yes it's a BS rule


How did I not know that. Tbf I’m more into the painting.

I suppose from their point of view the game/hobby they have always made is designed to be part modelling part playing. I understand then not wanting to cater to a market that isn’t interested in the painting part but I still thank that rule is Gak.

If they did want to cater for that market I suppose they would offer a pre-painted service. Oh wow it would be expensive to have GW paint your models for you.

If I were running GW, and I’m not, I would license a 3rd party somewhere to make fixed pose figures, pre painted to a factory standard, and give players that option if they really don’t want to paint.


The www is filled with commission builders & painters. Why would GW do that work themselves? And even if they did, they'd probably charge more than the freelance comission workers.



Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 19:01:56


Post by: General Kroll


We don’t bother with the rule in our gaming group.

However, I honestly can’t remember the last time I used an unpainted model. It just doesn’t appeal to me.

It’s also very rare for any of our group to use unpainted models either, wouldn’t be an issue if they did though.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 19:03:33


Post by: Dysartes


 Octopoid wrote:
EDIT: I'm still not finding this rule in the book, so I must be missing something. Maybe there's something about the way it's written that makes it less elitist?


I don't have my mini-rulebook to hand, for some reason, but it crops up late in the sequence for Matched Play games - it might show up for Crusade as well, but I can't remember off-hand.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 19:04:39


Post by: Octopoid


 Dysartes wrote:
 Octopoid wrote:
EDIT: I'm still not finding this rule in the book, so I must be missing something. Maybe there's something about the way it's written that makes it less elitist?


I don't have my mini-rulebook to hand, for some reason, but it crops up late in the sequence for Matched Play games - it might show up for Crusade as well, but I can't remember off-hand.


Thank you!


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 19:05:24


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


 tauist wrote:
Dude, if you take playing with toy soldiers so seriously that you consider it to being equal to professional sports, then you need to get those models to battlefield standard level of painting ASAP. Consider it just another aspect of being a "professional warhammerer"

If you cant be arsed to paint, get your coach/manager to sort it out for you.. or wait, you don't have any of those do you? BUT I THOUGHT U WAS A PROFESSIONAL BRAH


So if it's just you soldiers you agree that things like this are silly (they're just toy soldiers after all, and gatekeeping is bad last I checked), which means it shouldn't have been a rule to begin with.

Thanks for playing.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 19:09:43


Post by: Kanluwen


 Dysartes wrote:
 Octopoid wrote:
EDIT: I'm still not finding this rule in the book, so I must be missing something. Maybe there's something about the way it's written that makes it less elitist?


I don't have my mini-rulebook to hand, for some reason, but it crops up late in the sequence for Matched Play games - it might show up for Crusade as well, but I can't remember off-hand.

p283 in the Indomitus BRB. It shows up under "Determine Victor"
At the end of the battle, the player with the most victory points is the winner. If players are tied, the battle is a draw.

Each player can score a maximum of 45 victory points from primary objectives and a maximum of 45 victory points from secondary objectives (from a maximum of 15 victory points from each of the 3 secondary objectives you have selected), for a total of 90 possible victory points from mission objectives (any excess victory points awarded are discounted). If every model in a player's army was painted to a Battle Ready standard, that player is awarded a bonus 10 victory points. This gives the player a maximum total score out of 100 victory points.


It's literally just an additional 10 points out of the potential 90. If you don't meet the criteria of Battle Ready(based+3 color minimum)? You wouldn't get that 100 point cap and would be going out of 90 instead of 100.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

So if it's just you soldiers you agree that things like this are silly (they're just toy soldiers after all, and gatekeeping is bad last I checked), which means it shouldn't have been a rule to begin with.

Thanks for playing.

It ain't a rule. It's a bonus when determining victory points.

It's effectively extra credit.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 19:12:01


Post by: Octopoid


 Kanluwen wrote:

At the end of the battle, the player with the most victory points is the winner. If players are tied, the battle is a draw.

Each player can score a maximum of 45 victory points from primary objectives and a maximum of 45 victory points from secondary objectives (from a maximum of 15 victory points from each of the 3 secondary objectives you have selected), for a total of 90 possible victory points from mission objectives (any excess victory points awarded are discounted). If every model in a player's army was painted to a Battle Ready standard, that player is awarded a bonus 10 victory points. This gives the player a maximum total score out of 100 victory points.


Thank you for quoting the rule! Yup, that's a BS rule that rewards those who have more time, effort, money, and/or investment in the game, and punishes the casual, poor, or busy player. I'll be ignoring that firmly for the rest of my gaming time, and will shout from the rooftops that it's a bad rule until the day I die.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 19:20:34


Post by: catbarf


 Octopoid wrote:
Thank you for quoting the rule! Yup, that's a BS rule that rewards those who have more time, effort, money, and/or investment in the game, and punishes the casual, poor, or busy player. I'll be ignoring that firmly for the rest of my gaming time, and will shout from the rooftops that it's a bad rule until the day I die.


Casual players don't get bent out of shape if the rulebook says that they 'actually' lost a closely-fought no-stakes non-competitive pick-up game.

Poor players aren't buying armies at GW prices. The cost of paint to get to a battle-ready standard is negligible in comparison.

Busy players aren't playing the game. You can paint a Marine army to the three-color standard in the time it takes to play a 2K game.

The players this affects are those who take their winning and losing a bit too seriously and resent the social expectation that models be painted now codified as a (extremely mild) rule. And then using these casual, poor, and busy players as a shield.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 19:21:46


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


If GW released "pre-painted" model sets, that were monopose, and had the requisite colors to meet the requirement, but were priced way higher than normal, would that be "pay to win"?


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 19:23:25


Post by: NinthMusketeer


 Octopoid wrote:
 Kanluwen wrote:

At the end of the battle, the player with the most victory points is the winner. If players are tied, the battle is a draw.

Each player can score a maximum of 45 victory points from primary objectives and a maximum of 45 victory points from secondary objectives (from a maximum of 15 victory points from each of the 3 secondary objectives you have selected), for a total of 90 possible victory points from mission objectives (any excess victory points awarded are discounted). If every model in a player's army was painted to a Battle Ready standard, that player is awarded a bonus 10 victory points. This gives the player a maximum total score out of 100 victory points.


Thank you for quoting the rule! Yup, that's a BS rule that rewards those who have more time, effort, money, and/or investment in the game, and punishes the casual, poor, or busy player. I'll be ignoring that firmly for the rest of my gaming time, and will shout from the rooftops that it's a bad rule until the day I die.
Yeah but no... the paint needed to make an entire army battle-ready costs less than a single codex or box of miniatures. The time to do that is no more significant than the time to assemble or to actually play. Someone that can afford to play can by extension afford to play painted.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 19:23:37


Post by: mrFickle


 tauist wrote:
mrFickle wrote:
Twilight Pathways wrote:
mrFickle wrote:


Can someone explain where this rule came from? I thought OP was saying. It’s a tournament rule. If it’s a GW then this is BS because they just say that to try and sell paints.


It's in the core rule book in the matched play bit, and yes it's a BS rule


How did I not know that. Tbf I’m more into the painting.

I suppose from their point of view the game/hobby they have always made is designed to be part modelling part playing. I understand then not wanting to cater to a market that isn’t interested in the painting part but I still thank that rule is Gak.

If they did want to cater for that market I suppose they would offer a pre-painted service. Oh wow it would be expensive to have GW paint your models for you.

If I were running GW, and I’m not, I would license a 3rd party somewhere to make fixed pose figures, pre painted to a factory standard, and give players that option if they really don’t want to paint.


The www is filled with commission builders & painters. Why would GW do that work themselves? And even if they did, they'd probably charge more than the freelance comission workers.



Why would they want to do it? To make money. If it’s feasible. The internet used to be full of people making 3rd party models and bits for 40K and there aren't anymore. I bet there are some countries where you create an end user agreement that prevented the resale of GW minis this making the commission market disappear.

But licensed 3rd party production, if there is a market for it that won’t affect the current market, I.e if it only replaced the sales of this who don’t paint their models and attracted new players that are put off by painting is a great way to create new revenue.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 19:24:21


Post by: NinthMusketeer


 catbarf wrote:
 Octopoid wrote:
Thank you for quoting the rule! Yup, that's a BS rule that rewards those who have more time, effort, money, and/or investment in the game, and punishes the casual, poor, or busy player. I'll be ignoring that firmly for the rest of my gaming time, and will shout from the rooftops that it's a bad rule until the day I die.


Casual players don't get bent out of shape if the rulebook says that they 'actually' lost a closely-fought no-stakes non-competitive pick-up game.

Poor players aren't buying armies at GW prices. The cost of paint to get to a battle-ready standard is negligible in comparison.

Busy players aren't playing the game. You can paint a Marine army to the three-color standard in the time it takes to play a 2K game.

The players this affects are those who take their winning and losing a bit too seriously and resent the social expectation that models be painted now codified as a (extremely mild) rule. And then using these casual, poor, and busy players as a shield.
Yeah, exactly this.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 19:24:30


Post by: Kanluwen


 catbarf wrote:
 Octopoid wrote:
Thank you for quoting the rule! Yup, that's a BS rule that rewards those who have more time, effort, money, and/or investment in the game, and punishes the casual, poor, or busy player. I'll be ignoring that firmly for the rest of my gaming time, and will shout from the rooftops that it's a bad rule until the day I die.


Casual players don't get bent out of shape if the rulebook says that they 'actually' lost a closely-fought no-stakes non-competitive pick-up game.

Poor players aren't buying armies at GW prices. The cost of paint to get to a battle-ready standard is negligible in comparison.

Busy players aren't playing the game. You can paint a Marine army to the three-color standard in the time it takes to play a 2K game.

The players this affects are those who take their winning and losing a bit too seriously and resent the social expectation that models be painted now codified as a (extremely mild) rule. And then using these casual, poor, and busy players as a shield.

Quoting for truth.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 19:29:48


Post by: Sledgehammer


Part of the reason people play miniature war games is for the visual aspect of seeing painted miniatures on the table top. To a degree when you're just plopping grey models down on the table, you're detracting from the overall experience. Now it's definitely better to play than never play at all due to this, but small bonuses can go a long way to incentivize painting to at least a basic level.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 19:31:53


Post by: Insectum7


 catbarf wrote:
 Octopoid wrote:
Thank you for quoting the rule! Yup, that's a BS rule that rewards those who have more time, effort, money, and/or investment in the game, and punishes the casual, poor, or busy player. I'll be ignoring that firmly for the rest of my gaming time, and will shout from the rooftops that it's a bad rule until the day I die.


Casual players don't get bent out of shape if the rulebook says that they 'actually' lost a closely-fought no-stakes non-competitive pick-up game.

Poor players aren't buying armies at GW prices. The cost of paint to get to a battle-ready standard is negligible in comparison.

Busy players aren't playing the game. You can paint a Marine army to the three-color standard in the time it takes to play a 2K game.

The players this affects are those who take their winning and losing a bit too seriously and resent the social expectation that models be painted now codified as a (extremely mild) rule. And then using these casual, poor, and busy players as a shield.
Thirded +1


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 19:42:36


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


 Kanluwen wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

So if it's just you soldiers you agree that things like this are silly (they're just toy soldiers after all, and gatekeeping is bad last I checked), which means it shouldn't have been a rule to begin with.

Thanks for playing.

It ain't a rule. It's a bonus when determining victory points.

It's effectively extra credit.

No it isn't, because extra credit doesn't cause other students to fail if they didn't complete it.

Got a better analogy?


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 19:45:38


Post by: Mastiff


 catbarf wrote:
 Octopoid wrote:
Thank you for quoting the rule! Yup, that's a BS rule that rewards those who have more time, effort, money, and/or investment in the game, and punishes the casual, poor, or busy player. I'll be ignoring that firmly for the rest of my gaming time, and will shout from the rooftops that it's a bad rule until the day I die.


Casual players don't get bent out of shape if the rulebook says that they 'actually' lost a closely-fought no-stakes non-competitive pick-up game.

Poor players aren't buying armies at GW prices. The cost of paint to get to a battle-ready standard is negligible in comparison.

Busy players aren't playing the game. You can paint a Marine army to the three-color standard in the time it takes to play a 2K game.

The players this affects are those who take their winning and losing a bit too seriously and resent the social expectation that models be painted now codified as a (extremely mild) rule. And then using these casual, poor, and busy players as a shield.


Fourthed.

The bonus is only enforced in tournaments, not casual games. If someone is paying to be in a tourney they know up front what the rules are, and whether it’s worth their time, effort and money to get the bonus 10 pts. Hockey tournaments, softball tournaments, tennis... all have weird little rules that not everyone agrees with, but they aren’t popped up at the last minute as a surprise. Evaluate the cost, and skip it if it doesn’t work for you.

Because the counter argument is that every other rule is specifically written for people who focus solely on the playing aspect. One single rule is written for the hobbyists who enjoy the painting aspect. Should we dump scoring altogether to make the painters happy? Or can non-painters concede that one single bonus isn’t game breaking?

People are arguing that it’s unfair that if they don’t have the time, ability or money to achieve a perfect score, no one else should be able rewarded for their extra effort either. Let’s drag the game down to suit the lowest effort.

Now that I think of it, I don’t have time to practice. Why should people who do have practice time get higher scores?

I can’t afford a titan. Is it fair that people who have more money get an advantage?


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 19:49:42


Post by: Kanluwen


Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 Kanluwen wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

So if it's just you soldiers you agree that things like this are silly (they're just toy soldiers after all, and gatekeeping is bad last I checked), which means it shouldn't have been a rule to begin with.

Thanks for playing.

It ain't a rule. It's a bonus when determining victory points.

It's effectively extra credit.

No it isn't, because extra credit doesn't cause other students to fail if they didn't complete it.

Got a better analogy?

 Kanluwen wrote:

At the end of the battle, the player with the most victory points is the winner. If players are tied, the battle is a draw.

Each player can score a maximum of 45 victory points from primary objectives and a maximum of 45 victory points from secondary objectives (from a maximum of 15 victory points from each of the 3 secondary objectives you have selected), for a total of 90 possible victory points from mission objectives (any excess victory points awarded are discounted). If every model in a player's army was painted to a Battle Ready standard, that player is awarded a bonus 10 victory points. This gives the player a maximum total score out of 100 victory points.

I posted the exact wording of the rule.

My analogy works just fine. If a student(player) chooses not to do the extra credit(meet the Battle Ready standard), they can only score a maximum of 90 points.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 19:56:21


Post by: Insectum7


Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 Kanluwen wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

So if it's just you soldiers you agree that things like this are silly (they're just toy soldiers after all, and gatekeeping is bad last I checked), which means it shouldn't have been a rule to begin with.

Thanks for playing.

It ain't a rule. It's a bonus when determining victory points.

It's effectively extra credit.

No it isn't, because extra credit doesn't cause other students to fail if they didn't complete it.
The "non-painted student" can still win.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 20:00:26


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


 Insectum7 wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 Kanluwen wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

So if it's just you soldiers you agree that things like this are silly (they're just toy soldiers after all, and gatekeeping is bad last I checked), which means it shouldn't have been a rule to begin with.

Thanks for playing.

It ain't a rule. It's a bonus when determining victory points.

It's effectively extra credit.

No it isn't, because extra credit doesn't cause other students to fail if they didn't complete it.
The "non-painted student" can still win.

But is there a chance for the non painting student to fail if another student does their extra credit?


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 20:07:31


Post by: Insectum7


Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

But is there a chance for the non painting student to fail if another student does their extra credit?
Are there zero sum classrooms out there somewhere? Maybe.

Either way the painted points are only 10% of the total, so the majority of the outcome isn't determined by paint.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 20:09:19


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


 Insectum7 wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

But is there a chance for the non painting student to fail if another student does their extra credit?
Are there zero sum classrooms out there somewhere? Maybe.

Either way the painted points are only 10% of the total, so the majority of the outcome isn't determined by paint.

But the outcome of the game IS partially determined by that. The game is PvP and you either win or lose. Doing a test is nothing like that, hence why saying "but it's extra credit" is REALLY incorrect.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 20:10:39


Post by: Insectum7


^If you want to be at the top of your class you should paint your models.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 20:11:30


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


 Insectum7 wrote:
^If you want to be at the top of your class you should paint your models.

And does being at the top of the class mean the other students fail?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
You're ignoring the point on purpose.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 20:17:03


Post by: Mastiff


Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
^If you want to be at the top of your class you should paint your models.

And does being at the top of the class mean the other students fail?



No. It means they come in second, or third. Are those fails?


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 20:24:23


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


 Mastiff wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
^If you want to be at the top of your class you should paint your models.

And does being at the top of the class mean the other students fail?



No. It means they come in second, or third. Are those fails?

When it's a game with a designated winner and loses, absolutely.

When you're playing a game of 40k you don't "come in second", you just lose LOL


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 20:24:37


Post by: JNAProductions


What is wrong with enjoying the game but not painting?


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 20:26:29


Post by: Insectum7


Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
^If you want to be at the top of your class you should paint your models.

And does being at the top of the class mean the other students fail?
It means the other students aren't the top of the class. They still put in the effort and learn from the class. . . which is the point of a class.

In 40K you can still play and have a good time even if you don't win. . . which is the point of the game.

If, for you, the point of the game is to win in a meta that uses this rule. .. painting your models will help you get there. But it still isn't even required.



Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 20:26:42


Post by: DarkHound


Well, in a college class graded on a curve students will fail because others performed better. My organic chem was brutal, the median score was something like 30% but the average was closer to 40 due to a couple star students. That bumps a lot of students at the bottom into non-passing grades. So tangential to the conversation but, yes, those bottom students failed because some other students did better.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 20:26:54


Post by: Xenomancers


 JNAProductions wrote:
 Gert wrote:
Fully done with this nonsense. Getting called elitist because I paint my models for a miniatures-based tabletop game is literally impossible to argue against. Not because it's a good argument but because anyone making it is clearly not having the discussion in good faith or even intends to take another viewpoint into consideration.
You aren’t acting elitist because you like painting.

You’re acting elitist because you say everyone else has to like painting too.

The models come unpainted because they are intended to be painted. I get some people just want to play the game but the game actually sucks...the rules are terrible. You are ruining the best part of the hobby by not painting you stuff...


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 20:28:44


Post by: JNAProductions


 Xenomancers wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
 Gert wrote:
Fully done with this nonsense. Getting called elitist because I paint my models for a miniatures-based tabletop game is literally impossible to argue against. Not because it's a good argument but because anyone making it is clearly not having the discussion in good faith or even intends to take another viewpoint into consideration.
You aren’t acting elitist because you like painting.

You’re acting elitist because you say everyone else has to like painting too.

The models come unpainted because they are intended to be painted. I get some people just want to play the game but the game actually sucks...the rules are terrible. You are ruining the best part of the hobby by not painting you stuff...
That is your opinion. It’s fine that you have it, but it is not universal.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 20:29:08


Post by: Insectum7


 JNAProductions wrote:
What is wrong with enjoying the game but not painting?
My elitist eyballs will be burned from my snob-skull at the sight of so much grey plastic!

Actually nothing. Nothing is wrong with enjoying the game and not enjoying painting.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 20:30:01


Post by: Xenomancers


 JNAProductions wrote:
What is wrong with enjoying the game but not painting?

Nothing...
Nothing wrong with drinking Natty light ether...but if you are drinking Natty light and most everyone around you is drinking fine wine...maybe you should just...move on to better things?


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 20:30:29


Post by: Insectum7


 Xenomancers wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
What is wrong with enjoying the game but not painting?

Nothing...
Nothing wrong with drinking Natty light ether...but if you are drinking Natty light and most everyone around you is drinking fine wine...maybe you should just...move on to better things?
Nah, Feth fine wine.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 20:31:19


Post by: Mastiff


Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 Mastiff wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
^If you want to be at the top of your class you should paint your models.

And does being at the top of the class mean the other students fail?



No. It means they come in second, or third. Are those fails?

When it's a game with a designated winner and loses, absolutely.

When you're playing a game of 40k you don't "come in second", you just lose LOL


So your argument is that it’s unfair for someone to beat you because they took more time to prepare for the game/test/competition.

I hate to break it to you, but that’s life. If winning is that important to you, then put the extra effort in. Otherwise, play for fun. It’s a viable option too.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 20:33:12


Post by: JNAProductions


 Mastiff wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 Mastiff wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
^If you want to be at the top of your class you should paint your models.

And does being at the top of the class mean the other students fail?



No. It means they come in second, or third. Are those fails?

When it's a game with a designated winner and loses, absolutely.

When you're playing a game of 40k you don't "come in second", you just lose LOL


So your argument is that it’s unfair for someone to beat you because they took more time to prepare for the game/test/competition.

I hate to break it to you, but that’s life.
They spent more time doing something only tangentially related to the game, it sure feels bad.

It’d be like tying in a chess match, and then the other guy being declared the winner because he’s dressed nicer.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 20:35:31


Post by: NinthMusketeer


Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 Kanluwen wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

So if it's just you soldiers you agree that things like this are silly (they're just toy soldiers after all, and gatekeeping is bad last I checked), which means it shouldn't have been a rule to begin with.

Thanks for playing.

It ain't a rule. It's a bonus when determining victory points.

It's effectively extra credit.

No it isn't, because extra credit doesn't cause other students to fail if they didn't complete it.

Got a better analogy?
It is. Because the player with the unpainted army doesn't fail. They may lose the game, but that is immaterial. Failing is failing to have fun yourself and/or obstructing the fun of your opponent. One can win every game and still be a complete failure at Warhammer, just as one can do nothing but lose them and still be extremely successful.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 20:37:45


Post by: mrFickle


.




Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 20:37:51


Post by: NinthMusketeer


 JNAProductions wrote:
It’d be like tying in a chess match, and then the other guy being declared the winner because he’s dressed nicer.
The analogy would be a chess match where each player brings their own pieces, and one of them brought flat counters.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 20:38:26


Post by: Xenomancers


 Insectum7 wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
What is wrong with enjoying the game but not painting?

Nothing...
Nothing wrong with drinking Natty light ether...but if you are drinking Natty light and most everyone around you is drinking fine wine...maybe you should just...move on to better things?
Nah, Feth fine wine.
Perhaps you'd prefer a fine glass on scotch?


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 20:41:41


Post by: Insectum7


 JNAProductions wrote:
Spoiler:
 Mastiff wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 Mastiff wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
^If you want to be at the top of your class you should paint your models.

And does being at the top of the class mean the other students fail?



No. It means they come in second, or third. Are those fails?

When it's a game with a designated winner and loses, absolutely.

When you're playing a game of 40k you don't "come in second", you just lose LOL


So your argument is that it’s unfair for someone to beat you because they took more time to prepare for the game/test/competition.

I hate to break it to you, but that’s life.
They spent more time doing something only tangentially related to the game, it sure feels bad.

It’d be like tying in a chess match, and then the other guy being declared the winner because he’s dressed nicer.
No shoes, no shirt, no service.

A chess tournament might have a dress code to even enter, which is arguably more "elitist" or whatever, since you don't even get to play in the first place.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 20:45:03


Post by: Xenomancers


I think GW understands that 99% of players don't really care who wins in a casual game. Heck...in most casual games I completely ignore the objectives and try to table my opponent.

So the idea behind the rule is to get people painting their armies because it ends up making them more money in the long run. At the same time - it's great for the community because painted armies look better. So - a good rule IMO. It is a rule that is not actually intended to be followed though. It is a rule to encourge people to paint.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 21:06:32


Post by: Mastiff




It’d be like tying in a chess match, and then the other guy being declared the winner because he’s dressed nicer.


Not “nicer”, no. The rules said you take a penalty if you don’t wear a tie.. You decided the risk was worth taking, and didn’t wear a tie.

If winning is important, wear a tie.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 21:08:21


Post by: jeff white


Yay.
It is a hobby with many facets, not a CCG ... scores should or at least could attaché to any of these. Painting and modelling should be one of these imho...


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 21:16:11


Post by: yukishiro1


 Yarium wrote:
I'll say what I said before;

If it's for tournament games, then these are the rules, and 10 points are 10 points. You want 'em? Earn 'em.

If it's casual, then you have a brain. If you have a big enough brain to calculate that you would've won if not for those 10 points, you have a big enough brain to realize that you out-played your opponent, and that all you need to do to win the same game at a tournament is play at least as well, and finish painting your dudes.


This is exactly right. It's a testament to how much people like to argue that we continue to see these threads when the answer is so obvious. It it's an event, the TO makes the rules. If it's not, it doesn't matter - you can each play with your own version of the rule, and if that means you think you won and your opponent thinks they won because one of you is applying the rule and the other one isn't, that's just fine - you both won according to your own criteria.

It's a rule that quite literally does not matter unless you let it matter to you. This arguably makes it a bad rule, but it's completely unimportant whether it's a bad rule or not unless you let it bother you.



Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 21:19:23


Post by: ERJAK


This again...


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 21:20:37


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


 NinthMusketeer wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
It’d be like tying in a chess match, and then the other guy being declared the winner because he’s dressed nicer.
The analogy would be a chess match where each player brings their own pieces, and one of them brought flat counters.

And what's wrong with the flat counters? You have any idea how expensive some chess sets get?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Mastiff wrote:


It’d be like tying in a chess match, and then the other guy being declared the winner because he’s dressed nicer.


Not “nicer”, no. The rules said you take a penalty if you don’t wear a tie.. You decided the risk was worth taking, and didn’t wear a tie.

If winning is important, wear a tie.

And you wouldn't argue it's a stupid rule?


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 21:28:55


Post by: Catulle


 JNAProductions wrote:
What is wrong with enjoying the game but not painting?


I don't believe a number of people in this thread actually enjoy the game, so...


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 21:46:09


Post by: Blndmage


It also means that the people who have the money to pay for someone else to paint their models get the points by buying them.



Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 21:50:36


Post by: NinthMusketeer


 Blndmage wrote:
It also means that the people who have the money to pay for someone else to paint their models get the points by buying them.

For me, if they want to win that badly they can have it.

Of course exactly zero people have commissioned painted armies for that reason, but reality wandered off on page 1.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 22:21:29


Post by: Mastiff


It also means that the people who have the money to pay for someone else to paint their models get the points by buying them.



$20 for a rattle can, $10 for contrast paint and a few hours.

Let’s stop pretending the “three colour” rule is only open to the rich elites who can pay others. They’re not asking for Golden Demon quality work, and Bezos and Musk aren’t cruising tournaments eating your lunch, roaring off in self-driving dogecoin-fueled Teslas as they high-five each other for sticking it to another peasant.

Take an evening, spray your minis, and you too can achieve the near-impossible goal of gaining a ten pt. cushion in your games.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 22:25:03


Post by: General Kroll


Painting is literally the cheapest part of the hobby.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 22:26:47


Post by: iGuy91


Painting bonus to me is a simple tiebreaker. If two players go head to head, and get a firm tie on the objectives to win. The player who has a painted army gets a tongue-in-cheek win, without and bad feels.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 22:37:53


Post by: Blndmage


 Mastiff wrote:
It also means that the people who have the money to pay for someone else to paint their models get the points by buying them.



$20 for a rattle can, $10 for contrast paint and a few hours.

Let’s stop pretending the “three colour” rule is only open to the rich elites who can pay others. They’re not asking for Golden Demon quality work, and Bezos and Musk aren’t cruising tournaments eating your lunch, roaring off in self-driving dogecoin-fueled Teslas as they high-five each other for sticking it to another peasant.

Take an evening, spray your minis, and you too can achieve the near-impossible goal of gaining a ten pt. cushion in your games.


Disabled gamers say hi.

It's not as easy as it sounds when you can't stand, or bend your legs, or see well, or have motor control issues (shakes).

For many of us, simply getting our models assembled is a HUGE task.

There's a surprisingly large number of us.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 22:46:03


Post by: Amishprn86


Yeah, I am painting my friends 3k army right now b.c he literally can't paint (nerve damage, has trimmers in his hands).

But I guess he should be force to play 10VP down b.c of that.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 22:53:18


Post by: Mastiff


Which is a different argument than “it’s unfair that some people pay others to paint their minis”, wouldn’t you say?


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 23:05:38


Post by: generalchaos34


 General Kroll wrote:
Painting is literally the cheapest part of the hobby.


Precisely! I'd argue for some people it may be even harder than the build OR the playing part as well.

I believe that a rule like this is perfectly acceptable in a tournament, but not necessarily a casual game. Since the beginning of gaming time when two foes casually face off across the table of battle one would say "do you fancy X rule?" and the other would reply "its really not that important, lets skip it" and the world continued to move on. Since it was casual if you lost by the painting rules then you could even be a rebellious lad and declare that YOU were instead the winner and that the shiftless drones that made the book were to blame. Its casual....you can literally do WHATEVER YOU WANT. It will go on the long list of rules that have been ignored by casual players since 1st edition (im looking at you target priority).

As for tournaments I think its a great rule. Sports aren't just defined by the wins and losses, its also how you play the game. We are at the mercy of dice rolls so its nice to know that you, the player, can have a little bit of input against fate. So if it came to a tie between paints and grays I think that the painted army should take the win. The player put a lot of effort into making their army look nice and is clearly the playing equal to the gray army player. This is just a little bit of a nudge and a reward for engaging in ALL of the hobby. Plus its a convenient way for Tournaments to avoid complete ties.

Really in my opinion there isn't 3 hobbies (painting, building, and playing) there are instead 3 sides of a tripod. You can function with only one or two legs but it really works great when we have all three working in concert. We didn't get into the hobby because we saw unassembled sprues or gray models in a magazine. We saw epic fights in glorious 'eavy Metal paint jobs fighting it out in White Dwarf. Should we shame those who have unpainted? No, but we should reward someone who did all the hard work. I get it, some people are busy, or they have other barriers, but its something that you can do if you really put your mind to it. Im a busy professional so my time is limited and I still manage to get some paint time in here and there. Its even paid off. Ive won best painted army and model before in tournaments despite being dead last. My painting ability, as you can tell by my score, did not influence my being last. Me being a terrible player did. (I believe the youth often say "get good noob")

And on gatekeeping you guys really need to work on the term. Gatekeeping is saying you need X and Y to participate. Its saying that you aren't able to play because you're not playing X army, because its more competitive. Financially speaking the game is already under gatekeeping, as only more affluent players have easy access to the "right" amount of units compared to someone who only has a handful of things. Gatekeeping can be defined as making the game unfriendly for people who are different (something I have had plenty of). Gatekeeping is that you are not fitting the perceived mold of what a player should be and therefore is denied access. This rule instead rewards those who went the extra mile. No one is sitting there sneering at the gray army, saying that their peasant army isn't allowed to participate in the grand tourney. Its merely a reward for the person who put in the effort to paint their army. At no point is the GW black helicopter going to swoop in and smash your models because they aren't painted. You may just fall behind in the case of a tie.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 23:18:40


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


 Amishprn86 wrote:
Yeah, I am painting my friends 3k army right now b.c he literally can't paint (nerve damage, has trimmers in his hands).

But I guess he should be force to play 10VP down b.c of that.

Yes, it's only extra credit and not at all a game decider despite being worth 10% of the game. Forge the narrative! That's what the snobs here would say.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 23:30:44


Post by: Ordana


 Crafter91 wrote:
Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay?

I say NAY.

I totally get why it would be a thing in big tournaments to try and encourage entrants to have fully painted lists. Especially if organisers were wanting to post pictures online / in White Dwarf etc etc

but for casual games at the FLGS or gaming clubs - it's a ridiculous rule in my opinion.

I have a full time job and a 2 year old daughter - i probably get 2 hours painting time a day (and no, i don't paint every single day)

I probably spend around 3-4 hours per miniature. 6-8 if it's one I really want to do well such as HQs etc.

Why should I start a game at a 10 POINT disadvantage because my OP has more free time than me? Or bought a pre-painted army? or paid a commissioner to do it for them?

All this rule does in my opinion is force people to rush their paintjobs while putting new gamers at a disadvantage.

Being completely honest - if i lost a close game but my army was painted and my OPs wasn't, I would not want to steal that victory if the 10 points changed the result.

It's a painting hobby AND a wargame. The two should not be mutually exclusive.

What are people's thoughts on this?
Simply put, outside of a tournament (Where you say this rules is fine) why on earth does it matter?
Winning or losing a game at your FLGS or club because of the painting points does not matter, its a friendly game of warhammer. It doesn't matter if you win or lose it.
And you can always look at a game you lose 5 points because of painting points and happily tell yourself that its a minor victory.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 23:34:02


Post by: catbarf


 Blndmage wrote:
Disabled gamers say hi.

It's not as easy as it sounds when you can't stand, or bend your legs, or see well, or have motor control issues (shakes).

For many of us, simply getting our models assembled is a HUGE task.

There's a surprisingly large number of us.


This is a completely legitimate point.

And yet I haven't seen people seriously argue that it's unreasonable or unfair that the rules expect people to have to assemble their models to play. You don't just take a 10VP hit, you outright can't play if you don't put your models together, since the physical models are used for line of sight. GW could change this, but they don't.

So either:
A. It is a reasonable expectation for models to be assembled, and players who have legitimate physical handicaps that make it difficult can be accommodated on a case-by-case basis, or
B. The game is elitist/gatekeeping/ableist/etc for requiring models to be assembled and outright not letting you play if you don't participate in that aspect of the hobby.

Doesn't seem to me like most players really, genuinely feel (B), even though the consequences of not assembling your models- being unable to play- are far greater than the consequences of not painting them.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 23:42:14


Post by: yukishiro1


I do think the disagreement here is less about the rule per se and more about about whether painting is a core part of the hobby or not. For people who don't think painting is a core part of the game, they will say that assembling your miniatures is totally different from painting them. For people who do see painting as a core part of the hobby, the comparison works.

GW has always taken the position that painting is a core part of the hobby, right from day 1; the fact that it hasn't put a VP value on it in the past doesn't mean that it hasn't always been considered an integral part of the hobby.

Nevertheless, there is a large segment of GW's player base who doesn't like painting and prefers to play with unpainted plastic. And that's totally fine, and they should be free to do so - just find other like-minded people, and you're golden!

The problematic element of this rule is that ironically by trying to bridge the gap between the two camps, GW has just ended up angering proponents of the grey tide, without making people who like painted models any happier, because believe me, a 10VP bonus doesn't make me enjoy a game against the grey tide any more than I did before.

Accommodations for those who cannot paint is a really different issue than the base question of whether painting should be expected from those who can.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/18 23:49:48


Post by: Amishprn86


Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 Amishprn86 wrote:
Yeah, I am painting my friends 3k army right now b.c he literally can't paint (nerve damage, has trimmers in his hands).

But I guess he should be force to play 10VP down b.c of that.

Yes, it's only extra credit and not at all a game decider despite being worth 10% of the game. Forge the narrative! That's what the snobs here would say.


I don't play with it, my comment was to Mastiff bc its not easy for everyone.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 00:01:48


Post by: Mastiff


Blndmage said it was unfair for a player to pay someone else to paint their army.

I pointed out that it’s not just rich people getting the ten points, so it’s a silly argument. Case in point:

Your friend can’t paint, so you’re helping him out. I’m assuming that’s not because your friend is rich?


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 00:06:58


Post by: Apple fox


 catbarf wrote:
 Blndmage wrote:
Disabled gamers say hi.

It's not as easy as it sounds when you can't stand, or bend your legs, or see well, or have motor control issues (shakes).

For many of us, simply getting our models assembled is a HUGE task.

There's a surprisingly large number of us.


This is a completely legitimate point.

And yet I haven't seen people seriously argue that it's unreasonable or unfair that the rules expect people to have to assemble their models to play. You don't just take a 10VP hit, you outright can't play if you don't put your models together, since the physical models are used for line of sight. GW could change this, but they don't.

So either:
A. It is a reasonable expectation for models to be assembled, and players who have legitimate physical handicaps that make it difficult can be accommodated on a case-by-case basis, or
B. The game is elitist/gatekeeping/ableist/etc for requiring models to be assembled and outright not letting you play if you don't participate in that aspect of the hobby.

Doesn't seem to me like most players really, genuinely feel (B), even though the consequences of not assembling your models- being unable to play- are far greater than the consequences of not painting them.

Painting a building are different in that building minis that are in a lot of cases push to fit, or only go together in ways that make sense. Getting help to build as long as all the helpers are competent and care enough should be done to a fair standard. With painting the standard will be far different.

This rule is trying to rule a social issue, and it doesn’t care about player satisfaction for those it effects. It’s in many cases going against the hobby it promotes. As painting and gaming can mean lots of things for different people.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 00:18:43


Post by: posermcbogus


Oh boy, this thread again!

[Thumb - 4y2ok4.jpg]


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 00:19:29


Post by: dewd11


Love the rule simply because it keeps meta chasers from running whatever flavor of the month they want, and playing with boring grey plastic isn't as fun. Doesn't take long to paint a mini to tabletop ready, probably less than 30 minutes per mini and I'm not even the best painter (and that's for a character, not batch painted troops where you can do 10 in the same time frame). Of course I'll play without it at a casual game if it'll cause the game to be unfair. Not sure how it's snobbish to enjoy the hobby part of the hobby?


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 00:20:55


Post by: NinthMusketeer


 Blndmage wrote:
 Mastiff wrote:
It also means that the people who have the money to pay for someone else to paint their models get the points by buying them.



$20 for a rattle can, $10 for contrast paint and a few hours.

Let’s stop pretending the “three colour” rule is only open to the rich elites who can pay others. They’re not asking for Golden Demon quality work, and Bezos and Musk aren’t cruising tournaments eating your lunch, roaring off in self-driving dogecoin-fueled Teslas as they high-five each other for sticking it to another peasant.

Take an evening, spray your minis, and you too can achieve the near-impossible goal of gaining a ten pt. cushion in your games.


Disabled gamers say hi.

It's not as easy as it sounds when you can't stand, or bend your legs, or see well, or have motor control issues (shakes).

For many of us, simply getting our models assembled is a HUGE task.

There's a surprisingly large number of us.
The rules are rigged against dyslexic people because they are written down, and punish people who are bad at math because of how useful averages are during gameplay. They discriminate against people with bad eyesight who won't be as able to determine line of sight in game. People with back problems are punished by the size of the board they must lean over, and don't get me started on the blind...

I mean god forbid you ask that the result of a casual game with literally nothing on the line remain a tie instead of going to your opponent, due to the unique difficulty you have in painting. Now, you must go through the tremendous suffering of an occasional tiebreaker in matches that, again, have nothing riding on victory or defeat. How horrid the world is. /s


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 00:27:43


Post by: Apple fox


 NinthMusketeer wrote:
 Blndmage wrote:
 Mastiff wrote:
It also means that the people who have the money to pay for someone else to paint their models get the points by buying them.



$20 for a rattle can, $10 for contrast paint and a few hours.

Let’s stop pretending the “three colour” rule is only open to the rich elites who can pay others. They’re not asking for Golden Demon quality work, and Bezos and Musk aren’t cruising tournaments eating your lunch, roaring off in self-driving dogecoin-fueled Teslas as they high-five each other for sticking it to another peasant.

Take an evening, spray your minis, and you too can achieve the near-impossible goal of gaining a ten pt. cushion in your games.


Disabled gamers say hi.

It's not as easy as it sounds when you can't stand, or bend your legs, or see well, or have motor control issues (shakes).

For many of us, simply getting our models assembled is a HUGE task.

There's a surprisingly large number of us.
The rules are rigged against dyslexic people because they are written down, and punish people who are bad at math because of how useful averages are during gameplay. They discriminate against people with bad eyesight who won't be as able to determine line of sight in game. People with back problems are punished by the size of the board they must lean over, and don't get me started on the blind...

I mean god forbid you ask that the result of a casual game with literally nothing on the line remain a tie instead of going to your opponent, due to the unique difficulty you have in painting. Now, you must go through the tremendous suffering of an occasional tiebreaker in matches that, again, have nothing riding on victory or defeat. How horrid the world is.


I have serious back issues and find it very difficult and tiring to play the game, but that is very different from a rule that effect painting like this.
You are using other disability’s to gatekeep against disabled people, you may be specifically the reason this rule is so awful to deal with.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 00:50:35


Post by: yukishiro1


I actually don't think it does take any longer to paint a miniature to the minimal standard they require than it takes to assemble a lot of kits.

Everything the rule requires can be accomplished with a spray can, then roughly blocking in two additional colors, plus slapping some texture paint onto the base. There's no requirement in the rules that it be pretty, and you don't lose the 10 points if your painting is sloppy and goes over the lines.

I think the resistance in most cases is less about ability to comply with the requirements of the rule, and more about not being happy with results at that level and preferring to keep models unpainted rather than reveal the basic nature of one's painting skills. As long as the models stay grey, people can always say "well I could paint, I just don't want to / don't have the time / whatever." It's less threatening that way.

That said, obviously you have to both assemble and paint, so painting does add time required - whether the person is doing it themselves or having someone do it for them. So there is a greater barrier to entry if you have to spend an hour assembling AND an hour painting, instead of just an hour assembling. The question is what level of barrier to entry is acceptable.

Talking about "gatekeeping" in a hobby that involves spending many hundreds of dollars for the average army and putting together thousands of pieces is not particularly useful in the abstract, we need to be specific about what's expected and what isn't. This is a hobby that will always have huge barriers to entry by its very nature. The hobby is therefore already very "gated" by its fundamental nature.

Hence the fact that the disagreement is really more about whether painting is a fundamental part of the hobby or not. We're fine "gatekeeping" things we consider fundamental - see how everyone seems to agree it's ok to require miniatures to be assembled.



Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 01:18:22


Post by: NinthMusketeer


Apple fox wrote:
 NinthMusketeer wrote:
 Blndmage wrote:
 Mastiff wrote:
It also means that the people who have the money to pay for someone else to paint their models get the points by buying them.



$20 for a rattle can, $10 for contrast paint and a few hours.

Let’s stop pretending the “three colour” rule is only open to the rich elites who can pay others. They’re not asking for Golden Demon quality work, and Bezos and Musk aren’t cruising tournaments eating your lunch, roaring off in self-driving dogecoin-fueled Teslas as they high-five each other for sticking it to another peasant.

Take an evening, spray your minis, and you too can achieve the near-impossible goal of gaining a ten pt. cushion in your games.


Disabled gamers say hi.

It's not as easy as it sounds when you can't stand, or bend your legs, or see well, or have motor control issues (shakes).

For many of us, simply getting our models assembled is a HUGE task.

There's a surprisingly large number of us.
The rules are rigged against dyslexic people because they are written down, and punish people who are bad at math because of how useful averages are during gameplay. They discriminate against people with bad eyesight who won't be as able to determine line of sight in game. People with back problems are punished by the size of the board they must lean over, and don't get me started on the blind...

I mean god forbid you ask that the result of a casual game with literally nothing on the line remain a tie instead of going to your opponent, due to the unique difficulty you have in painting. Now, you must go through the tremendous suffering of an occasional tiebreaker in matches that, again, have nothing riding on victory or defeat. How horrid the world is.


I have serious back issues and find it very difficult and tiring to play the game, but that is very different from a rule that effect painting like this.
You are using other disability’s to gatekeep against disabled people, you may be specifically the reason this rule is so awful to deal with.
HAH! You have no idea what I've had to deal with in my life. And you know what? Toxicity towards the disabled is a grot next to the warboss of toxic attitude generated by people who care so much about winning that they can't handle a paint-score tiebreaker. Believe it or not, the only reason this rule is awful to deal with is the people who oppose it. People who light themselves on fire then complain that it's their clothes' fault for being flammable. The win means literally nothing beyond what you personally assign to it. Any and all negative feelings from losing due to a paint rule have one source: yourself.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 01:29:21


Post by: Apple fox


 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Apple fox wrote:
 NinthMusketeer wrote:
 Blndmage wrote:
 Mastiff wrote:
It also means that the people who have the money to pay for someone else to paint their models get the points by buying them.



$20 for a rattle can, $10 for contrast paint and a few hours.

Let’s stop pretending the “three colour” rule is only open to the rich elites who can pay others. They’re not asking for Golden Demon quality work, and Bezos and Musk aren’t cruising tournaments eating your lunch, roaring off in self-driving dogecoin-fueled Teslas as they high-five each other for sticking it to another peasant.

Take an evening, spray your minis, and you too can achieve the near-impossible goal of gaining a ten pt. cushion in your games.


Disabled gamers say hi.

It's not as easy as it sounds when you can't stand, or bend your legs, or see well, or have motor control issues (shakes).

For many of us, simply getting our models assembled is a HUGE task.

There's a surprisingly large number of us.
The rules are rigged against dyslexic people because they are written down, and punish people who are bad at math because of how useful averages are during gameplay. They discriminate against people with bad eyesight who won't be as able to determine line of sight in game. People with back problems are punished by the size of the board they must lean over, and don't get me started on the blind...

I mean god forbid you ask that the result of a casual game with literally nothing on the line remain a tie instead of going to your opponent, due to the unique difficulty you have in painting. Now, you must go through the tremendous suffering of an occasional tiebreaker in matches that, again, have nothing riding on victory or defeat. How horrid the world is.


I have serious back issues and find it very difficult and tiring to play the game, but that is very different from a rule that effect painting like this.
You are using other disability’s to gatekeep against disabled people, you may be specifically the reason this rule is so awful to deal with.
HAH! You have no idea what I've had to deal with in my life. And you know what? Toxicity towards the disabled is a grot next to the warboss of toxic attitude generated by people who care so much about winning that they can't handle a paint-score tiebreaker. Believe it or not, the only reason this rule is awful to deal with is the people who oppose it. People who light themselves on fire then complain that it's their clothes' fault for being flammable. The win means literally nothing beyond what you personally assign to it. Any and all negative feelings from losing due to a paint rule have one source: yourself.


No one does, but that doesn’t mean you can use that to target people. This is the toxicity this rule has bring out, a issue before made worse.

You should never get to decide what people find important in the game, people play it for different reasons. And the win means what they consider it to mean.
This rule has done nothing, tournaments already had guidelines and rules, groups had social agreements and understanding.
GW made a issue and a rule to push more toxicity and it’s done great at that.
If you don’t want to play against people who don’t paint, you have the ability to do that without a horrible rule.

Also the toxicity towards disabled people goes far further than the game, and is far more reaching than any Player toxicity the game has. What are you even talking about.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 01:38:40


Post by: Blndmage


 NinthMusketeer wrote:
 Blndmage wrote:
 Mastiff wrote:
It also means that the people who have the money to pay for someone else to paint their models get the points by buying them.



$20 for a rattle can, $10 for contrast paint and a few hours.

Let’s stop pretending the “three colour” rule is only open to the rich elites who can pay others. They’re not asking for Golden Demon quality work, and Bezos and Musk aren’t cruising tournaments eating your lunch, roaring off in self-driving dogecoin-fueled Teslas as they high-five each other for sticking it to another peasant.

Take an evening, spray your minis, and you too can achieve the near-impossible goal of gaining a ten pt. cushion in your games.


Disabled gamers say hi.

It's not as easy as it sounds when you can't stand, or bend your legs, or see well, or have motor control issues (shakes).

For many of us, simply getting our models assembled is a HUGE task.

There's a surprisingly large number of us.
The rules are rigged against dyslexic people because they are written down, and punish people who are bad at math because of how useful averages are during gameplay. They discriminate against people with bad eyesight who won't be as able to determine line of sight in game. People with back problems are punished by the size of the board they must lean over, and don't get me started on the blind...

I mean god forbid you ask that the result of a casual game with literally nothing on the line remain a tie instead of going to your opponent, due to the unique difficulty you have in painting. Now, you must go through the tremendous suffering of an occasional tiebreaker in matches that, again, have nothing riding on victory or defeat. How horrid the world is. /s


I
Am
Blind

Feth you!


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 01:53:25


Post by: Karol


 NinthMusketeer wrote:
 Blndmage wrote:
It also means that the people who have the money to pay for someone else to paint their models get the points by buying them.

For me, if they want to win that badly they can have it.

Of course exactly zero people have commissioned painted armies for that reason, but reality wandered off on page 1.


A ton of people have comissioned tournament armies. The majority of paint studios in Poland paint armies that very much look like tournament ones and not some random collections.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 NinthMusketeer wrote:
HAH! You have no idea what I've had to deal with in my life. And you know what? Toxicity towards the disabled is a grot next to the warboss of toxic attitude generated by people who care so much about winning that they can't handle a paint-score tiebreaker. Believe it or not, the only reason this rule is awful to deal with is the people who oppose it. People who light themselves on fire then complain that it's their clothes' fault for being flammable. The win means literally nothing beyond what you personally assign to it. Any and all negative feelings from losing due to a paint rule have one source: yourself.


It is 10VP, that is not a tier breaker, in a game where a difference of 20VP at the end of turn 2 generaly means the difference is too big to catch up, if the opponent went first. Meaning if the armies are similar power and the army going first is the painted one, the person with the unpainted army may as well not play.

Also making people do things they do not want to do, and then blaming it on them is stupid. For 8 editions there was no paint score in regular games, and armies did not have to be painted, and people act as if they very much always had to be painted and that somehow painting always was part of non tournament games.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Insectum7 wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

But is there a chance for the non painting student to fail if another student does their extra credit?
Are there zero sum classrooms out there somewhere? Maybe.

Either way the painted points are only 10% of the total, so the majority of the outcome isn't determined by paint.


Only that is not how it works. having a 10VP adventage no matter if you go first or second is a very big thing. Going first is around a 15-20pts VP. It is huge, specially when the games are not between an army with a 30% and 70% win rates. Although being steam rolled even harder with no chance to win, unless the opponent has to leave the game before the time runs out, is probably not fun either.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 02:10:23


Post by: TangoTwoBravo


How much does this come up in the wild? Tourneys are tourneys. In my little meta the 10vp have been a big nothing-burger. Do people keep score in pickup games?


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 02:11:23


Post by: JNAProductions


TangoTwoBravo wrote:
How much does this come up in the wild? Tourneys are tourneys. In my little meta the 10vp have been a big nothing-burger. Do people keep score in pickup games?
So then why have the rule in the first place?

If it's so unimportant in casual settings that it can be safely ignored, and tournaments impose their own stricter requirements, who does the rule benefit?


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 02:15:05


Post by: Karol


People who think painting is important and who paint their armies anyway. If I could somehow make wrestling an obligatory exam to pass to enter any collage I would totally do it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
TangoTwoBravo wrote:
How much does this come up in the wild? Tourneys are tourneys. In my little meta the 10vp have been a big nothing-burger. Do people keep score in pickup games?

yes, people keep score in games that have a scoring system and a clear loser and a victor.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 02:20:36


Post by: TangoTwoBravo


 JNAProductions wrote:
TangoTwoBravo wrote:
How much does this come up in the wild? Tourneys are tourneys. In my little meta the 10vp have been a big nothing-burger. Do people keep score in pickup games?
So then why have the rule in the first place?

If it's so unimportant in casual settings that it can be safely ignored, and tournaments impose their own stricter requirements, who does the rule benefit?


People who really want those 10 VP in a pickup game?

Has anyone actually had an opponent lord over them from the 10VP?


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 02:32:49


Post by: Apple fox


TangoTwoBravo wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
TangoTwoBravo wrote:
How much does this come up in the wild? Tourneys are tourneys. In my little meta the 10vp have been a big nothing-burger. Do people keep score in pickup games?
So then why have the rule in the first place?

If it's so unimportant in casual settings that it can be safely ignored, and tournaments impose their own stricter requirements, who does the rule benefit?


People who really want those 10 VP in a pickup game?

Has anyone actually had an opponent lord over them from the 10VP?


People keep saying the rule is irrelevant in its defence, or that if you care about the game enough to let it effect you, you are doing something wrong.
Even the point about who it effects seems to be that it shouldn’t be a issue and if it is, maybe you are the problem.

Meta gamers and WAAC are the group of players people always push for the rule, and they are often also the ones who will do the minimum effort to get an army playable.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 02:43:34


Post by: TangoTwoBravo


Apple fox wrote:
TangoTwoBravo wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
TangoTwoBravo wrote:
How much does this come up in the wild? Tourneys are tourneys. In my little meta the 10vp have been a big nothing-burger. Do people keep score in pickup games?
So then why have the rule in the first place?

If it's so unimportant in casual settings that it can be safely ignored, and tournaments impose their own stricter requirements, who does the rule benefit?


People who really want those 10 VP in a pickup game?

Has anyone actually had an opponent lord over them from the 10VP?


People keep saying the rule is irrelevant in its defence, or that if you care about the game enough to let it effect you, you are doing something wrong.
Even the point about who it effects seems to be that it shouldn’t be a issue and if it is, maybe you are the problem.

Meta gamers and WAAC are the group of players people always push for the rule, and they are often also the ones who will do the minimum effort to get an army playable.


Ok. So I am guessing it has not come up. I think it’s a theoretical flash point. Fun to argue about, but that’s it.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 02:46:34


Post by: Cheex


Personally, I play with a painted army 90% of the time. I do not enforce the 10VP bonus, though I might jokingly bring it up if the scores are close.

In my mind, the point of a casual/pickup game is to see what works in your army, whether it's unit choices or battle tactics, and to try things out. Getting a 10VP leg-up doesn't help with this, so has little point in such a game.

I think GW should have kept that rule for the GT missions only and left it out of the EW missions.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 02:54:06


Post by: Apple fox


TangoTwoBravo wrote:
Apple fox wrote:
TangoTwoBravo wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
TangoTwoBravo wrote:
How much does this come up in the wild? Tourneys are tourneys. In my little meta the 10vp have been a big nothing-burger. Do people keep score in pickup games?
So then why have the rule in the first place?

If it's so unimportant in casual settings that it can be safely ignored, and tournaments impose their own stricter requirements, who does the rule benefit?


People who really want those 10 VP in a pickup game?

Has anyone actually had an opponent lord over them from the 10VP?


People keep saying the rule is irrelevant in its defence, or that if you care about the game enough to let it effect you, you are doing something wrong.
Even the point about who it effects seems to be that it shouldn’t be a issue and if it is, maybe you are the problem.

Meta gamers and WAAC are the group of players people always push for the rule, and they are often also the ones who will do the minimum effort to get an army playable.


Ok. So I am guessing it has not come up. I think it’s a theoretical flash point. Fun to argue about, but that’s it.


So.. if it doesn’t come up, why does the rule exist ? Why is it so easy to dismiss other people with this rule as not a issue.
It has effect me, and it’s this dismissive attitude that makes it so toxic a rule. No one it doesn’t effect seems to have to care.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 02:54:49


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


 NinthMusketeer wrote:
And you know what? Toxicity towards the disabled is a grot next to the warboss of toxic attitude generated by people who care so much about winning that they can't handle a paint-score tiebreaker.

Did you post this ironically or legit mean it? As someone working Healthcare, you're proving quite the opposite of what you typed.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 03:16:29


Post by: TangoTwoBravo


Apple fox wrote:
TangoTwoBravo wrote:
Apple fox wrote:
TangoTwoBravo wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
TangoTwoBravo wrote:
How much does this come up in the wild? Tourneys are tourneys. In my little meta the 10vp have been a big nothing-burger. Do people keep score in pickup games?
So then why have the rule in the first place?

If it's so unimportant in casual settings that it can be safely ignored, and tournaments impose their own stricter requirements, who does the rule benefit?


People who really want those 10 VP in a pickup game?

Has anyone actually had an opponent lord over them from the 10VP?


People keep saying the rule is irrelevant in its defence, or that if you care about the game enough to let it effect you, you are doing something wrong.
Even the point about who it effects seems to be that it shouldn’t be a issue and if it is, maybe you are the problem.

Meta gamers and WAAC are the group of players people always push for the rule, and they are often also the ones who will do the minimum effort to get an army playable.


Ok. So I am guessing it has not come up. I think it’s a theoretical flash point. Fun to argue about, but that’s it.


So.. if it doesn’t come up, why does the rule exist ? Why is it so easy to dismiss other people with this rule as not a issue.
It has effect me, and it’s this dismissive attitude that makes it so toxic a rule. No one it doesn’t effect seems to have to care.


Someone claimed the 10VP over you for the win?



Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 03:24:56


Post by: Apple fox


TangoTwoBravo wrote:
Apple fox wrote:
TangoTwoBravo wrote:
Apple fox wrote:
TangoTwoBravo wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
TangoTwoBravo wrote:
How much does this come up in the wild? Tourneys are tourneys. In my little meta the 10vp have been a big nothing-burger. Do people keep score in pickup games?
So then why have the rule in the first place?

If it's so unimportant in casual settings that it can be safely ignored, and tournaments impose their own stricter requirements, who does the rule benefit?


People who really want those 10 VP in a pickup game?

Has anyone actually had an opponent lord over them from the 10VP?


People keep saying the rule is irrelevant in its defence, or that if you care about the game enough to let it effect you, you are doing something wrong.
Even the point about who it effects seems to be that it shouldn’t be a issue and if it is, maybe you are the problem.

Meta gamers and WAAC are the group of players people always push for the rule, and they are often also the ones who will do the minimum effort to get an army playable.


Ok. So I am guessing it has not come up. I think it’s a theoretical flash point. Fun to argue about, but that’s it.


So.. if it doesn’t come up, why does the rule exist ? Why is it so easy to dismiss other people with this rule as not a issue.
It has effect me, and it’s this dismissive attitude that makes it so toxic a rule. No one it doesn’t effect seems to have to care.


Someone claimed the 10VP over you for the win?



I am disabled in a way that effects my ability to paint, I don’t want to have to negotiate how points are calculated over that. Before or after and I don’t need the game to remind me right at the start or end about it.

If the rule means nothing, why does it exist.

Fixed.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 03:34:32


Post by: yukishiro1


But you didn't seem equally sympathetic to the person who's disabled in a way that makes it impossible to assemble models. Unless I'm mixing you up with someone else, I think you said that assembly was different and it was ok to require people to assemble their models?

I think the point being made is that the reason you think it's different is because you don't think painting is an important part of the hobby, so to you it's "gatekeeping" to give any advantage for a painted army, whereas assembly is an important part of the hobby to you, so that isn't "gatekeeping." Which gets to the fundamental issue: it really isn't gate-keeping in any meaningful sense of the word, it's just a disagreement about what playing the game entails.

GW seems to think that the hobby involves painting. As someone who isn't able to paint, I appreciate that that must suck for you. But it sucks in the same way that it sucks for someone who can't assemble models, or who doesn't have the fine motion control necessary to measure out distances on the table and move models precisely, etc.

To me, all these issues are things where accommodation comes in. I appreciate you don't want to have to ask for an accomodation, and I can understand how it's frustrating to have to do so. But isn't that frustration mostly coming because you consider it a stupid rule anyway? Should we change the rules so that models don't need to be assembled, so that people who can't assemble them don't have to ask for an accomodation?


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 03:44:23


Post by: Apple fox


yukishiro1 wrote:
But you didn't seem equally sympathetic to the person who's disabled in a way that makes it impossible to assemble models. Unless I'm mixing you up with someone else, I think you said that assembly was different and it was ok to require people to assemble their models?

I think the point being made is that the reason you think it's different is because you don't think painting is an important part of the hobby, so to you it's "gatekeeping" to give any advantage for a painted army, whereas assembly is an important part of the hobby to you, so that isn't "gatekeeping." Which gets to the fundamental issue: it really isn't gate-keeping in any meaningful sense of the word, it's just a disagreement about what playing the game entails.

GW seems to think that the hobby involves painting. As someone who isn't able to paint, I appreciate that that must suck for you. But it sucks in the same way that it sucks for someone who can't assemble models, or who doesn't have the fine motion control necessary to measure out distances on the table and move models precisely, etc.

To me, all these issues are things where accommodation comes in. I appreciate you don't want to have to ask for an accomodation, and I can understand how it's frustrating to have to do so. But isn't that frustration mostly coming because you consider it a stupid rule anyway? Should we change the rules so that models don't need to be assembled, so that people who can't assemble them don't have to ask for an accomodation?


I have difficulty building models, different people will have various difficulty and understanding.
If GW where to put a points for built models in I would say the same thing, a stupid rule that doesn’t do anything but breed toxicity.
I also lay out a issue with getting assistance for painting, over building that I very much have used.

It is a social issue that didn’t need a rule to fix in the first place, tournaments already had rules in place. And other play types allready had ways to deal with it.

Had to do it twice since I am having to post from bed.
I love painting, I am very slow and have no ability to consistency paint.

But the reason I see, is allmost every time this comes up it’s a ever escalating need to defend our position from people who can. Just dismiss the issue away.

If you care about 10 points, or care about wining, or care at all seems to be a easy response. Why care, so why have it as a rule at all.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 04:13:53


Post by: jeff white


Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 Amishprn86 wrote:
Yeah, I am painting my friends 3k army right now b.c he literally can't paint (nerve damage, has trimmers in his hands).

But I guess he should be force to play 10VP down b.c of that.

Yes, it's only extra credit and not at all a game decider despite being worth 10% of the game. Forge the narrative! That's what the snobs here would say.


You say snob. I recall a time when this hobby brought people together from all walks of life, model kit hobbyist meets chess enthusiast meets RPG gamer meets video game fanatic. Together they shared experiences, learn from each other, and the hobby becomes multidimensional and engaging, challenging people to develop new skills... learn how to paint, think past this turn, ... that was gen x. Now, i guess it is snobbish to expect that some things are big enough that one must grow into them before winning tournaments with unpainted netlists.

Maybe I am old, but I still think that OG hobby mode is better ... CCG mode is less dimensional, less challenging, and the only thing that people seem to want to worry about growing into is a bigger budget and the only self development that people are interested in is self confirmation.

Yeah, painting is an important part of the hobby.

Edit. IFF someone were physically unable to paint, I have the feeling that everyone in this hobby in my experience would help. I have painted models for fellows for lesser reasons. Again, this helps to bring people together. If there is so called toxicity introduced, it does not come from a painting requirement, it comes from bad people.

Now if someone wants to start a thread about bad people in this hobby, I expect it to rage for a bit and then die off, because again in my experience people in this hobby seem mostly better than the norm at least in so far as they care and support fellows in the hobby.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 04:32:08


Post by: Dysartes


 Kanluwen wrote:
 Dysartes wrote:
 Octopoid wrote:
EDIT: I'm still not finding this rule in the book, so I must be missing something. Maybe there's something about the way it's written that makes it less elitist?


I don't have my mini-rulebook to hand, for some reason, but it crops up late in the sequence for Matched Play games - it might show up for Crusade as well, but I can't remember off-hand.

p283 in the Indomitus BRB. It shows up under "Determine Victor"


Thanks Kan - if there's one positive coming out of this thread, it's that it made me get up and find which "safe place" I'd put my Command Edition rulebook in...

I think the only problem I have with the rule itself is where it sits within the timing sequence. Coming in during step 15 - Determine Victor - feels like it could be a bit of a gotcha moment. I tend to think it should sit in either stage 7 (Select Secondary Objectives) or stage 11 (Deploy Armies) at the very latest, so people know how the stage is set before the game begins. I also think that if you're going to define the term Battle Ready as part of the rules, you really should spend a couple of pages explaining what the Battle Ready requirements are within the rulebook.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 Amishprn86 wrote:
Yeah, I am painting my friends 3k army right now b.c he literally can't paint (nerve damage, has trimmers in his hands).

But I guess he should be force to play 10VP down b.c of that.

Yes, it's only extra credit and not at all a game decider despite being worth 10% of the game.


Stats question, especially for those who like getting nose-deep into the tournament scene's data - what proportion of games reported during 9th are landing within a 10 point spread, where the painting points would have an impact? Would be better if we could narrow it down to events where a painted army isn't required, but that might be tricky.



Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 04:33:36


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


Except you shouldn't have to go out of your way to paint someone else's model just for the sake of them getting those missed 10VP. You're missing the forest through the trees.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 04:44:31


Post by: JakeSiren


I don't understand why there is such a vigorous discussion about this. Either you play by the rules or you house rule them away. If you are going to a tournament then the rules and conditions are generally laid out before hand, at which point you can choose to play or not.

If you care that strongly about the 10 points then speak to your opponent before the game if you want to deviate from what is in the rule book.

Ultimately the reason that GW made this rule choice is 100% irrelevant and it's no more gate keeping than requiring models to be assembled.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 05:40:44


Post by: AnomanderRake


JakeSiren wrote:
...If you care that strongly about the 10 points then speak to your opponent before the game if you want to deviate from what is in the rule book...


Some people play in communities where they're comfortable having rules arguments before every game. Some people find that an awkward imposition. Giving people who already find having to argue about which bits of the rulebook to keep an awkward imposition already one more thing to argue about isn't going to go over well.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 05:46:17


Post by: tneva82


Rihgu wrote:

Because those are the rules, I guess. As long as your opponent is fine with it you can use whatever house rules you want.


Does make balancing game harder though as these will affect game results. Hello to game imbalance.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 05:48:56


Post by: JakeSiren


 AnomanderRake wrote:
JakeSiren wrote:
...If you care that strongly about the 10 points then speak to your opponent before the game if you want to deviate from what is in the rule book...


Some people play in communities where they're comfortable having rules arguments before every game. Some people find that an awkward imposition. Giving people who already find having to argue about which bits of the rulebook to keep an awkward imposition already one more thing to argue about isn't going to go over well.

Is it even a rules argument? If you don't want to play with the rule, you ask your opponent "Do you mind if we ignore the 10 points for painting rule?". If they say that you can ignore it, then great. If they say no, you either go into the game knowing that you might be 10 points behind, or you chose not to play that person. If you can't manage that much human interaction then I can't imagine how much enjoyment you would derive from playing the game with that opponent.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 05:51:50


Post by: Eonfuzz


No way hose.

Imagine being snarky enough to say "Heeeehehehe your iron fists aren't painted YELLOW but my dark eldar drukari are painted black! AHAHAH I get to activate my secret objective card and claim 10 points!"

It's toxic lmao.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 05:54:00


Post by: posermcbogus


JakeSiren wrote:
I don't understand why there is such a vigorous discussion about this. Either you play by the rules or you house rule them away. If you are going to a tournament then the rules and conditions are generally laid out before hand, at which point you can choose to play or not.

If you care that strongly about the 10 points then speak to your opponent before the game if you want to deviate from what is in the rule book.

Ultimately the reason that GW made this rule choice is 100% irrelevant and it's no more gate keeping than requiring models to be assembled.


We have this thread every few months a a few people get very upset because they are unable to grasp that their particular way of having fun might not be universal, so we get like 12 pages of screeching past each other before about 2-3 people start making really off-colour posts, and then the thread gets locked.

Let's all just look at the last thread, please, and let this poor, sad topic die a death until GW either forgets to copy/paste it into 10th ed/ remembers to copy/paste it into 10th ed.
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/796210.page
If it makes you upset, pick a random page, find a post you really hate and imagine you reply, and it's really cool and well written and all the dakkadakkettes think you're really smart but also manly and tough, and the other poster admits that you were right all along and you totally changed their minds.
It's a bad rule. But it's still in the rulebook. But it's still a bad rule.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 06:02:26


Post by: JakeSiren


 posermcbogus wrote:
JakeSiren wrote:
I don't understand why there is such a vigorous discussion about this. Either you play by the rules or you house rule them away. If you are going to a tournament then the rules and conditions are generally laid out before hand, at which point you can choose to play or not.

If you care that strongly about the 10 points then speak to your opponent before the game if you want to deviate from what is in the rule book.

Ultimately the reason that GW made this rule choice is 100% irrelevant and it's no more gate keeping than requiring models to be assembled.


We have this thread every few months a a few people get very upset because they are unable to grasp that their particular way of having fun might not be universal, so we get like 12 pages of screeching past each other before about 2-3 people start making really off-colour posts, and then the thread gets locked.

Let's all just look at the last thread, please, and let this poor, sad topic die a death until GW either forgets to copy/paste it into 10th ed/ remembers to copy/paste it into 10th ed.
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/796210.page
If it makes you upset, pick a random page, find a post you really hate and imagine you reply, and it's really cool and well written and all the dakkadakkettes think you're really smart but also manly and tough, and the other poster admits that you were right all along and you totally changed their minds.
It's a bad rule. But it's still in the rulebook. But it's still a bad rule.

*shock* Being reasonable? On the *Internet*? On *this* forum? </sarcasm>

I don't disagree that it's a bad rule, but players need to take agency in their enjoyment of the game. If a bad rule bothers somebody so much then they should discuss making the game more enjoyable with the other human they are playing with.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 06:04:55


Post by: AnomanderRake


JakeSiren wrote:
 AnomanderRake wrote:
JakeSiren wrote:
...If you care that strongly about the 10 points then speak to your opponent before the game if you want to deviate from what is in the rule book...


Some people play in communities where they're comfortable having rules arguments before every game. Some people find that an awkward imposition. Giving people who already find having to argue about which bits of the rulebook to keep an awkward imposition already one more thing to argue about isn't going to go over well.

Is it even a rules argument? If you don't want to play with the rule, you ask your opponent "Do you mind if we ignore the 10 points for painting rule?". If they say that you can ignore it, then great. If they say no, you either go into the game knowing that you might be 10 points behind, or you chose not to play that person. If you can't manage that much human interaction then I can't imagine how much enjoyment you would derive from playing the game with that opponent.


You've given an already small community another reason to have to say "No, I don't want to play with you, we disagree on which version of the rules we're playing." The "just refuse to play" answer isn't the great panacea you seem to think it is. Some people like to play Warhammer and don't want to be told "suck it up, you have to play a version of the rules you don't like or you can't play, deal with it."


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 06:05:40


Post by: Eonfuzz


JakeSiren wrote:
 posermcbogus wrote:
JakeSiren wrote:
I don't understand why there is such a vigorous discussion about this. Either you play by the rules or you house rule them away. If you are going to a tournament then the rules and conditions are generally laid out before hand, at which point you can choose to play or not.

If you care that strongly about the 10 points then speak to your opponent before the game if you want to deviate from what is in the rule book.

Ultimately the reason that GW made this rule choice is 100% irrelevant and it's no more gate keeping than requiring models to be assembled.


We have this thread every few months a a few people get very upset because they are unable to grasp that their particular way of having fun might not be universal, so we get like 12 pages of screeching past each other before about 2-3 people start making really off-colour posts, and then the thread gets locked.

Let's all just look at the last thread, please, and let this poor, sad topic die a death until GW either forgets to copy/paste it into 10th ed/ remembers to copy/paste it into 10th ed.
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/796210.page
If it makes you upset, pick a random page, find a post you really hate and imagine you reply, and it's really cool and well written and all the dakkadakkettes think you're really smart but also manly and tough, and the other poster admits that you were right all along and you totally changed their minds.
It's a bad rule. But it's still in the rulebook. But it's still a bad rule.

*shock* Being reasonable? On the *Internet*? On *this* forum? </sarcasm>

I don't disagree that it's a bad rule, but players need to take agency in their enjoyment of the game. If a bad rule bothers somebody so much then they should discuss making the game more enjoyable with the other human they are playing with.


Exactly, if someone would snipe a game with that rule I'd refuse to play the dude.
He's clearly there just to win, and not let *both* players have fun.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 AnomanderRake wrote:
JakeSiren wrote:
 AnomanderRake wrote:
JakeSiren wrote:
...If you care that strongly about the 10 points then speak to your opponent before the game if you want to deviate from what is in the rule book...


Some people play in communities where they're comfortable having rules arguments before every game. Some people find that an awkward imposition. Giving people who already find having to argue about which bits of the rulebook to keep an awkward imposition already one more thing to argue about isn't going to go over well.

Is it even a rules argument? If you don't want to play with the rule, you ask your opponent "Do you mind if we ignore the 10 points for painting rule?". If they say that you can ignore it, then great. If they say no, you either go into the game knowing that you might be 10 points behind, or you chose not to play that person. If you can't manage that much human interaction then I can't imagine how much enjoyment you would derive from playing the game with that opponent.


You've given an already small community another reason to have to say "No, I don't want to play with you, we disagree on which version of the rules we're playing." The "just refuse to play" answer isn't the great panacea you seem to think it is. Some people like to play Warhammer and don't want to be told "suck it up, you have to play a version of the rules you don't like or you can't play, deal with it."


No reasonable dude would snipe you with that gakky rule though.
The game is basically like a contract, and the two dudes playing have to meet half way.

I once played a game against this SoB player who had scanned copies of forgeworld rules on his phone and he was constantly referencing that. Didn't care. Still fun to play against him


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 06:09:37


Post by: JakeSiren


 AnomanderRake wrote:
JakeSiren wrote:
 AnomanderRake wrote:
JakeSiren wrote:
...If you care that strongly about the 10 points then speak to your opponent before the game if you want to deviate from what is in the rule book...


Some people play in communities where they're comfortable having rules arguments before every game. Some people find that an awkward imposition. Giving people who already find having to argue about which bits of the rulebook to keep an awkward imposition already one more thing to argue about isn't going to go over well.

Is it even a rules argument? If you don't want to play with the rule, you ask your opponent "Do you mind if we ignore the 10 points for painting rule?". If they say that you can ignore it, then great. If they say no, you either go into the game knowing that you might be 10 points behind, or you chose not to play that person. If you can't manage that much human interaction then I can't imagine how much enjoyment you would derive from playing the game with that opponent.


You've given an already small community another reason to have to say "No, I don't want to play with you, we disagree on which version of the rules we're playing." The "just refuse to play" answer isn't the great panacea you seem to think it is. Some people like to play Warhammer and don't want to be told "suck it up, you have to play a version of the rules you don't like or you can't play, deal with it."

If you don't agree on the rules then you aren't playing the same game, it's like trying to play checkers during a game of chess - neither player is going to have fun. Either find someone with the same mindset, change your mindset, or don't play. There's no alternative. You have to chose which option is best for you.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 06:16:17


Post by: AnomanderRake


JakeSiren wrote:
...If you don't agree on the rules then you aren't playing the same game, it's like trying to play checkers during a game of chess - neither player is going to have fun. Either find someone with the same mindset, change your mindset, or don't play. There's no alternative. You have to chose which option is best for you.


Exactly. By adding the painted rule GW is saying "No no no, we're not just making one game anymore, we're making two different games, one for people who care about painting and a different one for people who just want to have a good time," (or one for controlling twits who gatekeep the game by their painting standards and a different one for lazy donkey-caves who can't be bothered, if you want to be less charitable), "so now even fewer people play the game you like."


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 06:21:49


Post by: posermcbogus


JakeSiren wrote:
players need to take agency in their enjoyment of the game. If a bad rule bothers somebody so much then they should discuss making the game more enjoyable with the other human they are playing with.


/thread


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 06:24:28


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


JakeSiren wrote:
 AnomanderRake wrote:
JakeSiren wrote:
 AnomanderRake wrote:
JakeSiren wrote:
...If you care that strongly about the 10 points then speak to your opponent before the game if you want to deviate from what is in the rule book...


Some people play in communities where they're comfortable having rules arguments before every game. Some people find that an awkward imposition. Giving people who already find having to argue about which bits of the rulebook to keep an awkward imposition already one more thing to argue about isn't going to go over well.

Is it even a rules argument? If you don't want to play with the rule, you ask your opponent "Do you mind if we ignore the 10 points for painting rule?". If they say that you can ignore it, then great. If they say no, you either go into the game knowing that you might be 10 points behind, or you chose not to play that person. If you can't manage that much human interaction then I can't imagine how much enjoyment you would derive from playing the game with that opponent.


You've given an already small community another reason to have to say "No, I don't want to play with you, we disagree on which version of the rules we're playing." The "just refuse to play" answer isn't the great panacea you seem to think it is. Some people like to play Warhammer and don't want to be told "suck it up, you have to play a version of the rules you don't like or you can't play, deal with it."

If you don't agree on the rules then you aren't playing the same game, it's like trying to play checkers during a game of chess - neither player is going to have fun. Either find someone with the same mindset, change your mindset, or don't play. There's no alternative. You have to chose which option is best for you.

Completely wrong analogy with the checkers/chess thing, as you have two separate games there. 40k is ONE game.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 posermcbogus wrote:
JakeSiren wrote:
players need to take agency in their enjoyment of the game. If a bad rule bothers somebody so much then they should discuss making the game more enjoyable with the other human they are playing with.


/thread

OR realize you're giving money to a company where you have to adjust the rules you paid for, and also realize if you constantly have to houserule something there's a core problem.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 06:28:04


Post by: Insectum7


 AnomanderRake wrote:
JakeSiren wrote:
...If you don't agree on the rules then you aren't playing the same game, it's like trying to play checkers during a game of chess - neither player is going to have fun. Either find someone with the same mindset, change your mindset, or don't play. There's no alternative. You have to chose which option is best for you.


Exactly. By adding the painted rule GW is saying "No no no, we're not just making one game anymore, we're making two different games, one for people who care about painting and a different one for people who just want to have a good time," (or one for controlling twits who gatekeep the game by their painting standards and a different one for lazy donkey-caves who can't be bothered, if you want to be less charitable), "so now even fewer people play the game you like."

"Two different games"? Really?

Absurd.

Karol wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

But is there a chance for the non painting student to fail if another student does their extra credit?
Are there zero sum classrooms out there somewhere? Maybe.

Either way the painted points are only 10% of the total, so the majority of the outcome isn't determined by paint.


Only that is not how it works. having a 10VP adventage no matter if you go first or second is a very big thing. Going first is around a 15-20pts VP. It is huge, specially when the games are not between an army with a 30% and 70% win rates. Although being steam rolled even harder with no chance to win, unless the opponent has to leave the game before the time runs out, is probably not fun either.
By your own metric the painting bonus is worth less than going first or second. Iirc win rates from going second are still upwards of 40% (?). So 10 points, being less than the 15-20 VPs you cite for going first, should be easily surmountable if people who aren't getting that "first turn bonus" are still able to win 40% of the time.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 06:35:08


Post by: AnomanderRake


 Insectum7 wrote:
 AnomanderRake wrote:
JakeSiren wrote:
...If you don't agree on the rules then you aren't playing the same game, it's like trying to play checkers during a game of chess - neither player is going to have fun. Either find someone with the same mindset, change your mindset, or don't play. There's no alternative. You have to chose which option is best for you.


Exactly. By adding the painted rule GW is saying "No no no, we're not just making one game anymore, we're making two different games, one for people who care about painting and a different one for people who just want to have a good time," (or one for controlling twits who gatekeep the game by their painting standards and a different one for lazy donkey-caves who can't be bothered, if you want to be less charitable), "so now even fewer people play the game you like."

"Two different games"? Really?

Absurd...


We're both being hyperbolic here. Jake seems to think that the difference between playing with/without the painted rule is comparable to the difference between wanting to play chess and wanting to play checkers, but doesn't seem to understand why some of the players of the formerly-unified-8x8-two-tone-grid-game might be irritated that they now have to refuse to play against half the people who they used to play against (again, hyperbole) because they want to play different versions of what used to be one game.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 06:35:27


Post by: JakeSiren


 AnomanderRake wrote:
JakeSiren wrote:
...If you don't agree on the rules then you aren't playing the same game, it's like trying to play checkers during a game of chess - neither player is going to have fun. Either find someone with the same mindset, change your mindset, or don't play. There's no alternative. You have to chose which option is best for you.


Exactly. By adding the painted rule GW is saying "No no no, we're not just making one game anymore, we're making two different games, one for people who care about painting and a different one for people who just want to have a good time," (or one for controlling twits who gatekeep the game by their painting standards and a different one for lazy donkey-caves who can't be bothered, if you want to be less charitable), "so now even fewer people play the game you like."

Your argument boils down to terrible players being terrible. That would still be the case regardless of if GW had the painting rule or not. If playing the game against a specific player is not enjoyable, and you can't or won't make concessions to make it enjoyable, then don't play them. Stop acting like people have no agency in making this choice.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 06:39:02


Post by: AnomanderRake


JakeSiren wrote:
 AnomanderRake wrote:
JakeSiren wrote:
...If you don't agree on the rules then you aren't playing the same game, it's like trying to play checkers during a game of chess - neither player is going to have fun. Either find someone with the same mindset, change your mindset, or don't play. There's no alternative. You have to chose which option is best for you.


Exactly. By adding the painted rule GW is saying "No no no, we're not just making one game anymore, we're making two different games, one for people who care about painting and a different one for people who just want to have a good time," (or one for controlling twits who gatekeep the game by their painting standards and a different one for lazy donkey-caves who can't be bothered, if you want to be less charitable), "so now even fewer people play the game you like."

Your argument boils down to terrible players being terrible. That would still be the case regardless of if GW had the painting rule or not. If playing the game against a specific player is not enjoyable, and you can't or won't make concessions to make it enjoyable, then don't play them. Stop acting like people have no agency in making this choice.


If I were to make an outrageous troll post right now of the sort that starts vicious arguments and then ran away would I be in any way responsible for the argument that followed, or would it be entirely down to other terrible forum posters being terrible?


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 06:39:23


Post by: posermcbogus


Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

OR realize you're giving money to a company where you have to adjust the rules you paid for, and also realize if you constantly have to houserule something there's a core problem.


You're picking a fight with the wrong man, Slayer. I have said across multiple threads that I don't like that this rule is a rule. I don't think there's any defense for it existing beyond "well the designers included it, so..."
Also like, check the sig, boyo. Haven't spent a penny on 40k rules since like, the 8th indexes? Think I might have bought a digital copy of the 1.0 space marine 'dex? Don't remember, might've bailed on rulebooks earlier than that tbh.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 06:42:50


Post by: JakeSiren


 AnomanderRake wrote:
JakeSiren wrote:
 AnomanderRake wrote:
JakeSiren wrote:
...If you don't agree on the rules then you aren't playing the same game, it's like trying to play checkers during a game of chess - neither player is going to have fun. Either find someone with the same mindset, change your mindset, or don't play. There's no alternative. You have to chose which option is best for you.


Exactly. By adding the painted rule GW is saying "No no no, we're not just making one game anymore, we're making two different games, one for people who care about painting and a different one for people who just want to have a good time," (or one for controlling twits who gatekeep the game by their painting standards and a different one for lazy donkey-caves who can't be bothered, if you want to be less charitable), "so now even fewer people play the game you like."

Your argument boils down to terrible players being terrible. That would still be the case regardless of if GW had the painting rule or not. If playing the game against a specific player is not enjoyable, and you can't or won't make concessions to make it enjoyable, then don't play them. Stop acting like people have no agency in making this choice.


If I were to make an outrageous troll post right now of the sort that starts vicious arguments and then ran away would I be in any way responsible for the argument that followed, or would it be entirely down to other terrible forum posters being terrible?
Would you enjoy it though? I know that I am currently deriving enjoyment from this discussion, otherwise I would have abandoned it long ago

*Edit*
To answer your question, each poster would be responsible for their own participation. Weather or not they are "terrible" is a relative morality thing.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 07:09:55


Post by: yukishiro1


Apple fox wrote:
If you care about 10 points, or care about wining, or care at all seems to be a easy response. Why care, so why have it as a rule at all.


I mean, I don't disagree. There's no particularly good reason for the rule. It doesn't make anybody happy. I've never met someone who was like "ugh, I hate playing against the grey tide, but give me 10VP AND I'M TOTALLY IN!!!11" It's not a rule that really makes any group of people happy.

But by the same token, it's really not a rule that actually matters at all. So getting upset about it seems just as futile if not more futile than the rule itself.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 07:12:52


Post by: DarkHound


 Dysartes wrote:
Stats question, especially for those who like getting nose-deep into the tournament scene's data - what proportion of games reported during 9th are landing within a 10 point spread, where the painting points would have an impact? Would be better if we could narrow it down to events where a painted army isn't required, but that might be tricky.
Goonhammer's done the math with the available data from tournaments and reports. Turns out the winner/loser difference is 25-30 points. In the vast majority of games between competent players, an early advantage almost necessarily snowballs. Once you've crippled an enemy early, you can control objectives better and score your secondaries in peace. What's funny though, of course, is that bad players will only score sub 50 points, while a skilled player losing will still typically score 60-70. A match between two bad players will be much tighter and the extra is worth proportionately two or three times as much. So if you're single-mindedly serious about playing competitively that you don't engage in other aspects of the hobby, then just play well and the 10VP will rarely matter. Otherwise if you're playing poorly and don't engage with any other hobby parts, what are you doing?

Nobody is gatekeeping beginners with this rule who isn't already a jerk. This rule is not discriminating against the disabled any more than the very nature of assembling plastic models. I initially thought the rule was bunk, but all it does in practice is let casual players dip their toes into tournaments and encourage a 3 color paint job expectation generally. New players with no expectation of getting to top tables can experience a tournament run. More games will be played with more painted models, which will just look nicer and be a better experience. I think those two things improve the over-all experience of the hobby.

With regards to the argument "it's a bad rule if its defense is that you can just ignore it", in casual games none of the scoring matters. The defense is not "you can just ignore this part of the rule you don't like" (which, of course, you can do too), but that scoring doesn't matter and you should evaluate a casual one-off game on different metrics. Metrics like: did I have fun? Did I learn anything, and what could I have done differently?

The score is not the game. If you're really not having fun because the numbers don't add up at the end to your liking, what are you doing with those 3 hours?


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 07:19:10


Post by: Sgt. Cortez


We had a thread like this one at the start of 9th and I realize I forgot the rule even exists because we usually play with painted models and even if some aren't painted nobody so far mentioned the rule outside of making fun of it...


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 07:21:21


Post by: posermcbogus


Sgt. Cortez wrote:
We had a thread like this one at the start of 9th and I realize I forgot the rule even exists because we usually play with painted models and even if some aren't painted nobody so far mentioned the rule outside of making fun of it...


This is I think at least the third time we've had this fething thread since 9th dropped.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 07:25:41


Post by: Sgt. Cortez


 posermcbogus wrote:
Sgt. Cortez wrote:
We had a thread like this one at the start of 9th and I realize I forgot the rule even exists because we usually play with painted models and even if some aren't painted nobody so far mentioned the rule outside of making fun of it...


This is I think at least the third time we've had this fething thread since 9th dropped.


I thought at first someone had necroed the old one because it had so many pages already, but skimming through them I realized people just brought up the same arguments again


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 07:44:15


Post by: ccs


 posermcbogus wrote:
Sgt. Cortez wrote:
We had a thread like this one at the start of 9th and I realize I forgot the rule even exists because we usually play with painted models and even if some aren't painted nobody so far mentioned the rule outside of making fun of it...


This is I think at least the third time we've had this fething thread since 9th dropped.


Don't worry, in a few days the usual screaming about how OP the newest codex is will resume. Shortly after that'll come the wailing & gnashing of teeth concerning tournament stats using said codex.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 08:05:14


Post by: Dysartes


tneva82 wrote:
Rihgu wrote:

Because those are the rules, I guess. As long as your opponent is fine with it you can use whatever house rules you want.


Does make balancing game harder though as these will affect game results. Hello to game imbalance.

If the game is close enough that the 10 points sway the result, then it sounds fairly balanced, if I'm honest.

Might mean you're not playing 40k if something is that balanced, though

 posermcbogus wrote:
Let's all just look at the last thread, please, and let this poor, sad topic die a death until GW either forgets to copy/paste it into 10th ed/ remembers to copy/paste it into 10th ed.


AOS3 in a couple of months may well make for an interesting bellweather in this regard...

 DarkHound wrote:
 Dysartes wrote:
Stats question, especially for those who like getting nose-deep into the tournament scene's data - what proportion of games reported during 9th are landing within a 10 point spread, where the painting points would have an impact? Would be better if we could narrow it down to events where a painted army isn't required, but that might be tricky.
Goonhammer's done the math with the available data from tournaments and reports. Turns out the winner/loser difference is 25-30 points. In the vast majority of games between competent players, an early advantage almost necessarily snowballs. Once you've crippled an enemy early, you can control objectives better and score your secondaries in peace. What's funny though, of course, is that bad players will only score sub 50 points, while a skilled player losing will still typically score 60-70. A match between two bad players will be much tighter and the extra is worth proportionately two or three times as much. So if you're single-mindedly serious about playing competitively that you don't engage in other aspects of the hobby, then just play well and the 10VP will rarely matter. Otherwise if you're playing poorly and don't engage with any other hobby parts, what are you doing?


Thanks for that, DarkHound - I don't tend to delve into the tournament data, but in terms of a large pool of games with, in theory, accurate VP counts it is pretty handy.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 08:52:51


Post by: mrFickle


 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Apple fox wrote:
 NinthMusketeer wrote:
 Blndmage wrote:
 Mastiff wrote:
It also means that the people who have the money to pay for someone else to paint their models get the points by buying them.



$20 for a rattle can, $10 for contrast paint and a few hours.

Let’s stop pretending the “three colour” rule is only open to the rich elites who can pay others. They’re not asking for Golden Demon quality work, and Bezos and Musk aren’t cruising tournaments eating your lunch, roaring off in self-driving dogecoin-fueled Teslas as they high-five each other for sticking it to another peasant.

Take an evening, spray your minis, and you too can achieve the near-impossible goal of gaining a ten pt. cushion in your games.


Disabled gamers say hi.

It's not as easy as it sounds when you can't stand, or bend your legs, or see well, or have motor control issues (shakes).

For many of us, simply getting our models assembled is a HUGE task.

There's a surprisingly large number of us.
The rules are rigged against dyslexic people because they are written down, and punish people who are bad at math because of how useful averages are during gameplay. They discriminate against people with bad eyesight who won't be as able to determine line of sight in game. People with back problems are punished by the size of the board they must lean over, and don't get me started on the blind...

I mean god forbid you ask that the result of a casual game with literally nothing on the line remain a tie instead of going to your opponent, due to the unique difficulty you have in painting. Now, you must go through the tremendous suffering of an occasional tiebreaker in matches that, again, have nothing riding on victory or defeat. How horrid the world is.


I have serious back issues and find it very difficult and tiring to play the game, but that is very different from a rule that effect painting like this.
You are using other disability’s to gatekeep against disabled people, you may be specifically the reason this rule is so awful to deal with.
HAH! You have no idea what I've had to deal with in my life. And you know what? Toxicity towards the disabled is a grot next to the warboss of toxic attitude generated by people who care so much about winning that they can't handle a paint-score tiebreaker. Believe it or not, the only reason this rule is awful to deal with is the people who oppose it. People who light themselves on fire then complain that it's their clothes' fault for being flammable. The win means literally nothing beyond what you personally assign to it. Any and all negative feelings from losing due to a paint rule have one source: yourself.


Sorry? The bad attitude of people who are overly competitive are worse than negative attitudes towards disabled people??

The point that the rule has not taken into consideration customers who aren’t physically able to paint their models proves 2 things A) the general lack of empathy and consideration towards disabled people in society B) this rule is BS

It’s as simple as that, it’s just another example of how GW don’t think about their customers but this is a worse example than any other I have seen.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 10:09:16


Post by: Crafter91


I'm afraid this topic has become somewhat toxic and that was never my intention.

Perhaps unintentionally, this thread has become more about the player than the rule and I don't particularly like that.

In my original post I did express that the rule was somewhat discriminative against hobbyists with less spare time on their hands and i stand by that.

I have seen a few people suggest speed painting etc and have even had a jab taken at me for being a perfectionist for spending 3 hours on one mini. I'm certainly not a perfectionist, i'm just a slow painter, and I prefer not to use contrast methods for entire models. That's just me. I didn't buy the models to rush them to get them on the table, but I would like to be able to play them on the table in the meantime without being put to a disadvantage. Is that such a crime?

Of course, it doesn't matter who wins and loses. I can get just as much enjoyment out of a game that I lose.

As it goes - the BEST games i have had (in this edition and previous versions) have been very close, and that is where this rule causes the most issues - potentially giving the best games a rather bitter ending.

We're also only talking about being on the losing end of the rule. Frankly, if my OP beat me fair and square but I won on points because my army was painted, i would not want to 'steal' it. I would rather shake my opponent's hand and say well done. Painting an army is a cool achievement yes, but it shouldn't reward anybody with some sense of entitlement.

P.s. apologies to all the people who have replied with "this again". I did run a search within the "40k You Make Da Rules" section where this thread was originally posted for 'Painted Bonus' and it returned no results.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 10:29:47


Post by: mrFickle


3 hours per mini is nothing. Especially if we’re talking something other than astartes with lists of small details, like plague marines.

And if your trying to be more expressive than following a GW colour scheme


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 10:49:27


Post by: Twilight Pathways


 Crafter91 wrote:

Perhaps unintentionally, this thread has become more about the player than the rule and I don't particularly like that.


I think that's inevitable, because the rule insidiously makes it about the player. Essentially, if you say you think it's a bad rule you are liable to get hit with flying goalposts in the form of "it's just a game, why you so upset about rules in a game LOL!". Conversely, it's then brought up as some kind of character judgement in the form of 'anyone insisting on enforcing this rule is just being a tool and you shouldn't play them'. Not divisive at all /s


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 11:38:22


Post by: Karol


 Crafter91 wrote:



As it goes - the BEST games i have had (in this edition and previous versions) have been very close, and that is where this rule causes the most issues - potentially giving the best games a rather bitter ending.

We're also only talking about being on the losing end of the rule. Frankly, if my OP beat me fair and square but I won on points because my army was painted, i would not want to 'steal' it. I would rather shake my opponent's hand and say well done. Painting an army is a cool achievement yes, but it shouldn't reward anybody with some sense of entitlement.

P.s. apologies to all the people who have replied with "this again". I did run a search within the "40k You Make Da Rules" section where this thread was originally posted for 'Painted Bonus' and it returned no results.


But this is not a case of sometimes lose. A 10VP difference on start of the game is very big,and that is when two armies of similar power are playing. If someone plays are lower win rate army, with lets say more model to paint in the form of GSC, the player specially if they are new are deeply discouraged to play at all. their faction is not only on the backfoot rules wise, but now their opponent get to dunk on them even harder, just because they started their army two or more editions ago, and their armies are mostly painted.


The speed painting thing also irks me. For my army it works. GK are mono metalic with few other metalic bits and even fewer leather or parchment stuff. But if someone decides to play a non power armoured army, or even something like DG or 1ksons, the army will just look very bad. But somehow having a bad painted army, you spend your time and money on, is better , because people with painted armies feel better about themselfs. Great, makes as much sense as if in sports, the team with the official Nike sponsored geat got a big boost score wise.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 11:45:46


Post by: JakeSiren


 Crafter91 wrote:
Perhaps unintentionally, this thread has become more about the player than the rule and I don't particularly like that.

Ultimately the rule is about the player and the effort they are willing to put in, which is why the thread devolved into a conversation about the player.

You are in charge of your enjoyment of the hobby in all of it's forms (building, painting, gameplay, lore, etc). If you don't like an aspect of the hobby then do something about it! If you want to play the game outside of the established rules, then find other people who agree with you and are willing to house rule in the same way - you evidently care about the 10 points from (not) painting and place stock in the number calculated at the end of a game. Don't limit your enjoyment because someone put words on a page, speak with the other human you are playing against and come to a consensus on what you both want before the game starts.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 12:04:52


Post by: Templarted


Firstly, this again.

Secondly, it’s very idiotic to put this as a rule. Anyone who enforces this rule in casual play isn’t someone you’d really want to be against in casual play. They’re the type to use any excuse to win, it just adds to the toxicity. Tournaments on the other hand, fair enough, they have enough reasons to try and limit meta chasing, plus it’s not a good look for the tournament to have grey plastic in the winners pictures.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 12:48:07


Post by: JNAProductions


To those who say "What about disabled players who can't assemble their models?" I say "I'm totally fine playing against chits or bases or similar to accommodate someone who can't assemble models."

For me, I do prefer to play against actual models, not blank bases or poker chips or anything like that, but if someone wants to enjoy the game but can't assemble models... I ain't gonna be the guy who denies them their good time.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 13:00:54


Post by: Rihgu


 JNAProductions wrote:
To those who say "What about disabled players who can't assemble their models?" I say "I'm totally fine playing against chits or bases or similar to accommodate someone who can't assemble models."

For me, I do prefer to play against actual models, not blank bases or poker chips or anything like that, but if someone wants to enjoy the game but can't assemble models... I ain't gonna be the guy who denies them their good time.


Just because you would play against it, doesn't mean that the rule isn't elitist gatekeeping. Why does it even exist if people are going to willfully ignore it/say it doesn't matter?


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 13:08:18


Post by: JNAProductions


Rihgu wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
To those who say "What about disabled players who can't assemble their models?" I say "I'm totally fine playing against chits or bases or similar to accommodate someone who can't assemble models."

For me, I do prefer to play against actual models, not blank bases or poker chips or anything like that, but if someone wants to enjoy the game but can't assemble models... I ain't gonna be the guy who denies them their good time.


Just because you would play against it, doesn't mean that the rule isn't elitist gatekeeping. Why does it even exist if people are going to willfully ignore it/say it doesn't matter?
There is no rule (to my knowledge) you actually have to have models. The game needs SOMETHING to represent your army, but models aren’t in the rules, if I recall correctly.

It’s just what the large majority of people expect, and enjoy doing.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 13:09:06


Post by: catbarf


JNAProductions wrote:To those who say "What about disabled players who can't assemble their models?" I say "I'm totally fine playing against chits or bases or similar to accommodate someone who can't assemble models."

For me, I do prefer to play against actual models, not blank bases or poker chips or anything like that, but if someone wants to enjoy the game but can't assemble models... I ain't gonna be the guy who denies them their good time.


I think most people would be reasonable about accommodating players with disabilities. For that matter, I think most players are fine about accommodating unpainted minis, or waiving the 10VP rule (which, in practice, just means in the one out of one hundred games where it's relevant, not saying 'ackshually you lost!!!' during the final VP tally).

The point is more that the rules require you to assemble your models to play (since line of sight is explicitly based on the physical models), and yet you don't see people say stuff like this about that requirement:

mrFickle wrote:The point that the rule has not taken into consideration customers who aren’t physically able to paint their models proves 2 things A) the general lack of empathy and consideration towards disabled people in society B) this rule is BS

It’s as simple as that, it’s just another example of how GW don’t think about their customers but this is a worse example than any other I have seen.


For some reason requiring you to assemble your minis is fine and people with disabilities that make it difficult can be helped out, but mildly encouraging you to paint your models is an assault on the disabled. Which makes me think the argument isn't particularly sincere.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 13:11:29


Post by: Eldarsif


For casual games we don't use painted points except to point out how close a game can be if one had been painted or not. In tourneys the painted points count.

I just don't get how people are still arguing this point still.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 13:12:21


Post by: Rihgu


 JNAProductions wrote:
Rihgu wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
To those who say "What about disabled players who can't assemble their models?" I say "I'm totally fine playing against chits or bases or similar to accommodate someone who can't assemble models."

For me, I do prefer to play against actual models, not blank bases or poker chips or anything like that, but if someone wants to enjoy the game but can't assemble models... I ain't gonna be the guy who denies them their good time.


Just because you would play against it, doesn't mean that the rule isn't elitist gatekeeping. Why does it even exist if people are going to willfully ignore it/say it doesn't matter?
There is no rule (to my knowledge) you actually have to have models. The game needs SOMETHING to represent your army, but models aren’t in the rules, if I recall correctly.

It’s just what the large majority of people expect, and enjoy doing.


It's actually on the first page of the rules, under Army.
Each player in a game of Warhammer 40,000 commands an army of Citadel miniatures, hereafter referred to as 'models'



Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 13:36:43


Post by: Seabass


I *REALLY* hate it when people use disabled people to defend a position like this, doubly so in a game where it's literally moving toy soldiers around.

If someone is truly disabled to the point where they cannot assemble/paint models, there are services or friends out there. I've helped friends who have had surgeries that can't get their army done before, I'm sure many of you too.

In those cases, exceptions can be made. If asked for, I would offer that an exception likely should be made.

That said, this is not a commonplace issue, it's just not. I have worked with people with intellectual, physical, or neurological (whether genetic or inflicted later) disabilities my entire life. They are aware of their limitations, and the honus are on them to ask for assistance if they need it. They know this. In fact, it has been my experience (and the training handed out by the APA as well as the AMA) that the proactive offer of help can be seen as discriminatory and derogatory towards their conditions or situations.

People with a disability don't want to be treated differently than anyone else.

I'm sure the concerns brought up by so many here are founded in a good heart, or at least, I am going to assume so, but saying things like its gatekeeping, or that it is a barrier to entry, sounds like your just using that specific situation, and person, to make a point about a game that honestly, given real-life, doesnt matter.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 16:17:01


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


Dude we literally have disabled people here who said they don't like the rule. What hiding are you talking about?


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 16:30:06


Post by: Insectum7


Rihgu wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
Rihgu wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
To those who say "What about disabled players who can't assemble their models?" I say "I'm totally fine playing against chits or bases or similar to accommodate someone who can't assemble models."

For me, I do prefer to play against actual models, not blank bases or poker chips or anything like that, but if someone wants to enjoy the game but can't assemble models... I ain't gonna be the guy who denies them their good time.


Just because you would play against it, doesn't mean that the rule isn't elitist gatekeeping. Why does it even exist if people are going to willfully ignore it/say it doesn't matter?
There is no rule (to my knowledge) you actually have to have models. The game needs SOMETHING to represent your army, but models aren’t in the rules, if I recall correctly.

It’s just what the large majority of people expect, and enjoy doing.


It's actually on the first page of the rules, under Army.
Each player in a game of Warhammer 40,000 commands an army of Citadel miniatures, hereafter referred to as 'models'

So, by the rules, a requirement to have assembled, Citadel miniatures is not "elitist gatekeeping" but painting somehow is. . . Even though you can explicitly still play the game without painted models?


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 16:42:33


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


 Insectum7 wrote:
Rihgu wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
Rihgu wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
To those who say "What about disabled players who can't assemble their models?" I say "I'm totally fine playing against chits or bases or similar to accommodate someone who can't assemble models."

For me, I do prefer to play against actual models, not blank bases or poker chips or anything like that, but if someone wants to enjoy the game but can't assemble models... I ain't gonna be the guy who denies them their good time.


Just because you would play against it, doesn't mean that the rule isn't elitist gatekeeping. Why does it even exist if people are going to willfully ignore it/say it doesn't matter?
There is no rule (to my knowledge) you actually have to have models. The game needs SOMETHING to represent your army, but models aren’t in the rules, if I recall correctly.

It’s just what the large majority of people expect, and enjoy doing.


It's actually on the first page of the rules, under Army.
Each player in a game of Warhammer 40,000 commands an army of Citadel miniatures, hereafter referred to as 'models'

So, by the rules, a requirement to have assembled, Citadel miniatures is not "elitist gatekeeping" but painting somehow is. . . Even though you can explicitly still play the game without painted models?

By definition the gatekeeping here is using the official Citadel models, which goes hand in hand with the turds that enforce WYSIWYG, which definitely applies to the crowd in favor of the painting rule.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 16:45:46


Post by: Rihgu


There is no WYSIWYG rule, so people enforcing a made up house rule are probably not the same camp as people enforcing an actual real rule.

But who could really know!


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 17:53:55


Post by: Insectum7


Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

By definition the gatekeeping here is using the official Citadel models, which goes hand in hand with the turds that enforce WYSIWYG, which definitely applies to the crowd in favor of the painting rule.
Mmm, yeah. . . I sure look forward to games vs. 3rd party, non-WYSIWYG, unpainted models. Yeah that shows the game off real nice and is so easy on the eyes to read and see what's what.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 18:09:25


Post by: Tycho


When this thread popped up at the beginning of 9th I said it was a well-intentioned, but silly rule. Most tournaments will already have their own painting standards that over-rule this, and for casual play it literally doesn't matter. I have painted models. You don't? Guess what? That's fine by me. lol I don't need 10 points because we enjoy the hobby differently, or because you just got your models or whatever.

I still feel this way. Nothing's really happened to make me feel otherwise.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 18:27:19


Post by: jhnbrg


 Insectum7 wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

By definition the gatekeeping here is using the official Citadel models, which goes hand in hand with the turds that enforce WYSIWYG, which definitely applies to the crowd in favor of the painting rule.
Mmm, yeah. . . I sure look forward to games vs. 3rd party, non-WYSIWYG, unpainted models. Yeah that shows the game off real nice and is so easy on the eyes to read and see what's what.


So this is what 40k has become?

Unpainted proxies, otherwise you are an gatekeeping elitist turd...



Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 18:33:50


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


 jhnbrg wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

By definition the gatekeeping here is using the official Citadel models, which goes hand in hand with the turds that enforce WYSIWYG, which definitely applies to the crowd in favor of the painting rule.
Mmm, yeah. . . I sure look forward to games vs. 3rd party, non-WYSIWYG, unpainted models. Yeah that shows the game off real nice and is so easy on the eyes to read and see what's what.


So this is what 40k has become?

Unpainted proxies, otherwise you are an gatekeeping elitist turd...


Yeah heaven forbid people either don't have time or they want to extensively playtest before buying expensive models.

So yes, you are a gatekeeping elitist.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 18:34:42


Post by: Yarium


 jhnbrg wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

By definition the gatekeeping here is using the official Citadel models, which goes hand in hand with the turds that enforce WYSIWYG, which definitely applies to the crowd in favor of the painting rule.
Mmm, yeah. . . I sure look forward to games vs. 3rd party, non-WYSIWYG, unpainted models. Yeah that shows the game off real nice and is so easy on the eyes to read and see what's what.


So this is what 40k has become?

Unpainted proxies, otherwise you are an gatekeeping elitist turd...



It's the way of the internet. Two people with light but opposing views push the philosophy of the opposing view into more and more extreme versions of those views in an effort to paint the opposing view as wholly "wrong". All it does is make people more and more extreme. It's sort of an antagonistic version of the "no true scotsman".


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 18:35:29


Post by: Rihgu


Do people engaging in "extensive playtesting" care about the 10 points for painted/unpainted?


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 18:39:49


Post by: Insectum7


Rihgu wrote:
Do people engaging in "extensive playtesting" care about the 10 points for painted/unpainted?
They shouldn't.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 18:40:33


Post by: jhnbrg


Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 jhnbrg wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

By definition the gatekeeping here is using the official Citadel models, which goes hand in hand with the turds that enforce WYSIWYG, which definitely applies to the crowd in favor of the painting rule.
Mmm, yeah. . . I sure look forward to games vs. 3rd party, non-WYSIWYG, unpainted models. Yeah that shows the game off real nice and is so easy on the eyes to read and see what's what.


So this is what 40k has become?

Unpainted proxies, otherwise you are an gatekeeping elitist turd...


Yeah heaven forbid people either don't have time or they want to extensively playtest before buying expensive models.

So yes, you are a gatekeeping elitist.


I am not gatekeeping anyone, i am just fed up with people pretending this is a serious sport.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Rihgu wrote:
Do people engaging in "extensive playtesting" care about the 10 points for painted/unpainted?


If people see 10 points as more important than a good looking game, maybe tabletop gaming is not a good choice?


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 18:49:34


Post by: Catulle


 jhnbrg wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 jhnbrg wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

By definition the gatekeeping here is using the official Citadel models, which goes hand in hand with the turds that enforce WYSIWYG, which definitely applies to the crowd in favor of the painting rule.
Mmm, yeah. . . I sure look forward to games vs. 3rd party, non-WYSIWYG, unpainted models. Yeah that shows the game off real nice and is so easy on the eyes to read and see what's what.


So this is what 40k has become?

Unpainted proxies, otherwise you are an gatekeeping elitist turd...


Yeah heaven forbid people either don't have time or they want to extensively playtest before buying expensive models.

So yes, you are a gatekeeping elitist.


I am not gatekeeping anyone, i am just fed up with people pretending this is a serious sport.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Rihgu wrote:
Do people engaging in "extensive playtesting" care about the 10 points for painted/unpainted?


If people see 10 points as more important than a good looking game, maybe tabletop gaming is not a good choice?


Look, man, the dude's a habitual hateposter - hashing the buzz is what he does. If that's an issue, just ignore and and move on


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 18:58:26


Post by: jhnbrg


Catulle wrote:


Look, man, the dude's a habitual hateposter - hashing the buzz is what he does. If that's an issue, just ignore and and move on


Ok, i just got angry. I have ignored him now.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 19:12:53


Post by: Catulle


 jhnbrg wrote:
Catulle wrote:


Look, man, the dude's a habitual hateposter - hashing the buzz is what he does. If that's an issue, just ignore and and move on


Ok, i just got angry. I have ignored him now.


*fistbump*

Your fun, your way.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 19:17:28


Post by: Unit1126PLL


I think the rule is silly and have never once given it a second thought until I see threads about it on the interwebs.

That said, I would rather prefer playing against painted models than unpainted models if I had my 'druthers, because for me personally the spectacle and narrative experiences are both improved by two painted armies rather than one or zero.

But that's my $0.02.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 19:23:45


Post by: Dai


 Unit1126PLL wrote:
I think the rule is silly and have never once given it a second thought until I see threads about it on the interwebs.

That said, I would rather prefer playing against painted models than unpainted models if I had my 'druthers, because for me personally the spectacle and narrative experiences are both improved by two painted armies rather than one or zero.

But that's my $0.02.


It's about as sensible opinion as one can have on it to be honest.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 19:27:04


Post by: ingtaer


Thanks for getting this thread back on track. Please refrain from being rude in the future if your opinion differs to other people, this includes referring to them as turds... If you see such a post please hit the yellow triangle of friendship and then not reply to that post.
Thanks,
ingtær.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 19:46:12


Post by: General Kroll


 jhnbrg wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

By definition the gatekeeping here is using the official Citadel models, which goes hand in hand with the turds that enforce WYSIWYG, which definitely applies to the crowd in favor of the painting rule.
Mmm, yeah. . . I sure look forward to games vs. 3rd party, non-WYSIWYG, unpainted models. Yeah that shows the game off real nice and is so easy on the eyes to read and see what's what.


So this is what 40k has become?

Unpainted proxies, otherwise you are an gatekeeping elitist turd...



Yeah, it’s a really bizarre argument. The game is Warhammer 40k, it’s not really gatekeeping or elitism to expect people to use models that actually represent what they’re meant to. I don’t want to play games against poker chip armies, coke bottle wraith knights or Lego mini figure Hormagants.



Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 20:51:45


Post by: jeff white


I think that the 10 points is not appropriate.
Instead, unpainted models are lost to the winner at game’s end.

So, no problem, toss in those few grey grots to fill out that unit. But lose the game, and those grots are now mine.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 20:55:29


Post by: Unit1126PLL


I am planning to give painted models in my 30k campaign Preferred Enemy (Unpainted Models)


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 21:17:05


Post by: ccs


 jeff white wrote:
I think that the 10 points is not appropriate.
Instead, unpainted models are lost to the winner at game’s end.

So, no problem, toss in those few grey grots to fill out that unit. But lose the game, and those grots are now mine.


How about I just paint those grots really badly & make you wish you were looking at unpainted minis?

I mean, 3 colors & some grit on the base does not necessarily improve a model. But if that's what you'd prefer...


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 22:03:11


Post by: Racerguy180


I'd argue that Grey plastic is an affront to the senses.

Glad we don't play with victory points, it is a stupid matched play rule anyway.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 22:18:10


Post by: Seabass


Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Dude we literally have disabled people here who said they don't like the rule. What hiding are you talking about?


As of right now, there are almost 15,000 users online on dakka.
According to the CDC, there are about 10% of people in the population of the US suffer from some form of the six main forms of disability. now take from that ten percent of the population, and figure out how many people are interested in tabletop gaming. Then, figure out how many people have disabilities that would prevent them from assembling, painting, or otherwise enjoy the hobby.

The point is this, out of the 15,000 users online right now, there are what, 2 or maybe 3 that have openly expressed that their disability would interfere with their enjoyment of hte hobby? So assuming more people would not want to discuss that and we have what, ten people, out of 15,000? Even if I grant you a factor of 100, and there are 200 to 300 out of what, 15000+ people (using this site alone as some kind of random proxy of a test population) and its STILL very clear, that the times where this is relevant are so incredibly rare that exceptions could be made on a case by case basis, but for everyone else, it is what it is.

When people hold up a disabled person as the poster child as to why a policy is bad or good, it's disgusting.

I lost 2 patients in the clinic last week. one to a genetic disorder, one to disease. I worked with their families through the grief as a grief coordinator, and neither of them would want anyone to use them as a poster child for anything, let alone something they "couldn't" do. I appreciate the concern, and I have no doubt that it comes from a good place, but this isn't the way to do it.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 22:43:24


Post by: NinthMusketeer


Dai wrote:
 Unit1126PLL wrote:
I think the rule is silly and have never once given it a second thought until I see threads about it on the interwebs.

That said, I would rather prefer playing against painted models than unpainted models if I had my 'druthers, because for me personally the spectacle and narrative experiences are both improved by two painted armies rather than one or zero.

But that's my $0.02.


It's about as sensible opinion as one can have on it to be honest.
Most definitely. While I do not find it a silly rule myself I cannot disagree with his approach; it is entirely friendly and well-reasoned.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Seabass wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Dude we literally have disabled people here who said they don't like the rule. What hiding are you talking about?


As of right now, there are almost 15,000 users online on dakka.
According to the CDC, there are about 10% of people in the population of the US suffer from some form of the six main forms of disability. now take from that ten percent of the population, and figure out how many people are interested in tabletop gaming. Then, figure out how many people have disabilities that would prevent them from assembling, painting, or otherwise enjoy the hobby.

The point is this, out of the 15,000 users online right now, there are what, 2 or maybe 3 that have openly expressed that their disability would interfere with their enjoyment of hte hobby? So assuming more people would not want to discuss that and we have what, ten people, out of 15,000? Even if I grant you a factor of 100, and there are 200 to 300 out of what, 15000+ people (using this site alone as some kind of random proxy of a test population) and its STILL very clear, that the times where this is relevant are so incredibly rare that exceptions could be made on a case by case basis, but for everyone else, it is what it is.

When people hold up a disabled person as the poster child as to why a policy is bad or good, it's disgusting.

I lost 2 patients in the clinic last week. one to a genetic disorder, one to disease. I worked with their families through the grief as a grief coordinator, and neither of them would want anyone to use them as a poster child for anything, let alone something they "couldn't" do. I appreciate the concern, and I have no doubt that it comes from a good place, but this isn't the way to do it.
As someone who deals with disability, I do not want the other 90% of players having rules adjusted to suit what is difficult for me.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 22:54:28


Post by: Mmmpi


 Kanluwen wrote:
 Dysartes wrote:
 Octopoid wrote:
EDIT: I'm still not finding this rule in the book, so I must be missing something. Maybe there's something about the way it's written that makes it less elitist?


I don't have my mini-rulebook to hand, for some reason, but it crops up late in the sequence for Matched Play games - it might show up for Crusade as well, but I can't remember off-hand.

p283 in the Indomitus BRB. It shows up under "Determine Victor"
At the end of the battle, the player with the most victory points is the winner. If players are tied, the battle is a draw.

Each player can score a maximum of 45 victory points from primary objectives and a maximum of 45 victory points from secondary objectives (from a maximum of 15 victory points from each of the 3 secondary objectives you have selected), for a total of 90 possible victory points from mission objectives (any excess victory points awarded are discounted). If every model in a player's army was painted to a Battle Ready standard, that player is awarded a bonus 10 victory points. This gives the player a maximum total score out of 100 victory points.


It's literally just an additional 10 points out of the potential 90. If you don't meet the criteria of Battle Ready(based+3 color minimum)? You wouldn't get that 100 point cap and would be going out of 90 instead of 100.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

So if it's just you soldiers you agree that things like this are silly (they're just toy soldiers after all, and gatekeeping is bad last I checked), which means it shouldn't have been a rule to begin with.

Thanks for playing.

It ain't a rule. It's a bonus when determining victory points.

It's effectively extra credit.


It's a rule. It's literally in the rule book under scoring points. You even quoted it.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 22:55:41


Post by: Unit1126PLL


Imagine the people with social anxiety, being gatekept out of 40k by the rules simply assuming an opponent. A travesty.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 22:55:42


Post by: Mmmpi


Spoiler:
 catbarf wrote:
 Octopoid wrote:
Thank you for quoting the rule! Yup, that's a BS rule that rewards those who have more time, effort, money, and/or investment in the game, and punishes the casual, poor, or busy player. I'll be ignoring that firmly for the rest of my gaming time, and will shout from the rooftops that it's a bad rule until the day I die.


Casual players don't get bent out of shape if the rulebook says that they 'actually' lost a closely-fought no-stakes non-competitive pick-up game.

Poor players aren't buying armies at GW prices. The cost of paint to get to a battle-ready standard is negligible in comparison.

Busy players aren't playing the game. You can paint a Marine army to the three-color standard in the time it takes to play a 2K game.

The players this affects are those who take their winning and losing a bit too seriously and resent the social expectation that models be painted now codified as a (extremely mild) rule. And then using these casual, poor, and busy players as a shield.


I know plenty that do get unhappy when the game they won is a loss because they didn't "drybrush enough".


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 22:56:49


Post by: Unit1126PLL


 Mmmpi wrote:
Spoiler:
 catbarf wrote:
 Octopoid wrote:
Thank you for quoting the rule! Yup, that's a BS rule that rewards those who have more time, effort, money, and/or investment in the game, and punishes the casual, poor, or busy player. I'll be ignoring that firmly for the rest of my gaming time, and will shout from the rooftops that it's a bad rule until the day I die.


Casual players don't get bent out of shape if the rulebook says that they 'actually' lost a closely-fought no-stakes non-competitive pick-up game.

Poor players aren't buying armies at GW prices. The cost of paint to get to a battle-ready standard is negligible in comparison.

Busy players aren't playing the game. You can paint a Marine army to the three-color standard in the time it takes to play a 2K game.

The players this affects are those who take their winning and losing a bit too seriously and resent the social expectation that models be painted now codified as a (extremely mild) rule. And then using these casual, poor, and busy players as a shield.


I know plenty that do get unhappy when the game they won is a loss because they didn't "drybrush enough".


Well someone's houserule about drybrushing fortunately has nothing to do with the rule GW wrote.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 22:59:53


Post by: Mmmpi


 Sledgehammer wrote:
To a degree when you're just plopping grey models down on the table, you're detracting from the overall experience.


Your opinion.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Unit1126PLL wrote:
 Mmmpi wrote:
Spoiler:
 catbarf wrote:
 Octopoid wrote:
Thank you for quoting the rule! Yup, that's a BS rule that rewards those who have more time, effort, money, and/or investment in the game, and punishes the casual, poor, or busy player. I'll be ignoring that firmly for the rest of my gaming time, and will shout from the rooftops that it's a bad rule until the day I die.


Casual players don't get bent out of shape if the rulebook says that they 'actually' lost a closely-fought no-stakes non-competitive pick-up game.

Poor players aren't buying armies at GW prices. The cost of paint to get to a battle-ready standard is negligible in comparison.

Busy players aren't playing the game. You can paint a Marine army to the three-color standard in the time it takes to play a 2K game.

The players this affects are those who take their winning and losing a bit too seriously and resent the social expectation that models be painted now codified as a (extremely mild) rule. And then using these casual, poor, and busy players as a shield.


I know plenty that do get unhappy when the game they won is a loss because they didn't "drybrush enough".


Well someone's houserule about drybrushing fortunately has nothing to do with the rule GW wrote.


Despite that being quoted from the rules several pages back?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Mastiff wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
^If you want to be at the top of your class you should paint your models.

And does being at the top of the class mean the other students fail?



No. It means they come in second, or third. Are those fails?


In this context, yes. If you didn't win a two player game, you lost it.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 23:08:05


Post by: Unit1126PLL


 Mmmpi wrote:


Despite that being quoted from the rules several pages back?

Does the rule mandate drybrushing?

I don't use that technique that much so I guess I give up 10 pts too. Rip.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 23:13:21


Post by: Mmmpi


 Unit1126PLL wrote:
 Mmmpi wrote:


Despite that being quoted from the rules several pages back?

Does the rule mandate drybrushing?

I don't use that technique that much so I guess I give up 10 pts too. Rip.


It mandates painting, and it mandates 'tabletop quality'. So my sarcastic reference to not drybrushing enough would be covered by this abortion of a rule.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 23:32:03


Post by: Kanluwen


 Mmmpi wrote:

I know plenty that do get unhappy when the game they won is a loss because they didn't "drybrush enough".

I'm going to call this a lie.

This is the standard:



They did a whooooooole article on it. When the scoring modifier was introduced in the rulebook? They had to frigging answer questions from people trying to claim that if you did "Parade Ready"(which is literally just picking out details a bit more!), you wouldn't get the +10 points to your VP total.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/19 23:48:30


Post by: Ghaz


The Warhammer Community article predates 9th edition by over a year (the article is dated May 2019 and 9th edition was released in July 2020).

Misread the above post.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/20 00:01:42


Post by: ccs


 Kanluwen wrote:
 Mmmpi wrote:

I know plenty that do get unhappy when the game they won is a loss because they didn't "drybrush enough".

I'm going to call this a lie.

This is the standard:



They did a whooooooole article on it. When the scoring modifier was introduced in the rulebook? They had to frigging answer questions from people trying to claim that if you did "Parade Ready"(which is literally just picking out details a bit more!), you wouldn't get the +10 points to your VP total.


Ah, the add to sell Technical paint....



Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/20 00:06:37


Post by: Mmmpi


 Kanluwen wrote:
 Mmmpi wrote:

I know plenty that do get unhappy when the game they won is a loss because they didn't "drybrush enough".

I'm going to call this a lie.

This is the standard:



They did a whooooooole article on it. When the scoring modifier was introduced in the rulebook? They had to frigging answer questions from people trying to claim that if you did "Parade Ready"(which is literally just picking out details a bit more!), you wouldn't get the +10 points to your VP total.


you calling it a lie doesn't make it a lie.

nice try though. if you're scraching at this over a sarcastic comment you might as well just log off now.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/20 00:07:53


Post by: Ghaz


ccs wrote:
Spoiler:
 Kanluwen wrote:
 Mmmpi wrote:

I know plenty that do get unhappy when the game they won is a loss because they didn't "drybrush enough".

I'm going to call this a lie.

This is the standard:



They did a whooooooole article on it. When the scoring modifier was introduced in the rulebook? They had to frigging answer questions from people trying to claim that if you did "Parade Ready"(which is literally just picking out details a bit more!), you wouldn't get the +10 points to your VP total.


Ah, the add to sell Technical paint....


Someone whose looking to meet the minimum Battle Ready requirement isn't really going to want to glue sand on their bases and then paint the bases. The Technical paint gives them a one and done method for them.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/20 00:09:07


Post by: Mmmpi


 Ghaz wrote:
ccs wrote:
Spoiler:
 Kanluwen wrote:
 Mmmpi wrote:

I know plenty that do get unhappy when the game they won is a loss because they didn't "drybrush enough".

I'm going to call this a lie.

This is the standard:



They did a whooooooole article on it. When the scoring modifier was introduced in the rulebook? They had to frigging answer questions from people trying to claim that if you did "Parade Ready"(which is literally just picking out details a bit more!), you wouldn't get the +10 points to your VP total.


Ah, the add to sell Technical paint....


Someone whose looking to meet the minimum Battle Ready requirement isn't really going to want to glue sand on their bases and then paint the bases. The Technical paint gives them a one and done method for them.


that doesn't mean it's not a bare faced attempt to sell overpriced paint.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/20 00:15:42


Post by: Racerguy180


Well that is the goal of any product based sales enterprise


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/20 00:17:09


Post by: Mmmpi


Racerguy180 wrote:
Well that is the goal of any product based sales enterprise


Doesn't mean it's good to enshrine it in the rules.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/20 00:19:50


Post by: Ghaz


 Mmmpi wrote:
Spoiler:
 Kanluwen wrote:
 Mmmpi wrote:

I know plenty that do get unhappy when the game they won is a loss because they didn't "drybrush enough".

I'm going to call this a lie.

This is the standard:



They did a whooooooole article on it. When the scoring modifier was introduced in the rulebook? They had to frigging answer questions from people trying to claim that if you did "Parade Ready"(which is literally just picking out details a bit more!), you wouldn't get the +10 points to your VP total.


you calling it a lie doesn't make it a lie.

nice try though. if you're scraching at this over a sarcastic comment you might as well just log off now.

And HERE is where the same argument was presented before, and not as a 'sarcastic comment'.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/20 00:22:15


Post by: Mmmpi


 Ghaz wrote:
 Mmmpi wrote:
Spoiler:
 Kanluwen wrote:
 Mmmpi wrote:

I know plenty that do get unhappy when the game they won is a loss because they didn't "drybrush enough".

I'm going to call this a lie.

This is the standard:



They did a whooooooole article on it. When the scoring modifier was introduced in the rulebook? They had to frigging answer questions from people trying to claim that if you did "Parade Ready"(which is literally just picking out details a bit more!), you wouldn't get the +10 points to your VP total.


you calling it a lie doesn't make it a lie.

nice try though. if you're scraching at this over a sarcastic comment you might as well just log off now.

And HERE is where the same argument was presented before, and not as a 'sarcastic comment'.


Immaterial. My comment about an arbitrary and unnecessary painting standard still stands.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/20 00:23:55


Post by: Racerguy180


Mmmpi wrote:
Racerguy180 wrote:
Well that is the goal of any product based sales enterprise


Doesn't mean it's good to enshrine it in the rules.



Easy fix, DONT PLAY MATCHED PLAY RULES....

If you're that against it join us over here where we don't care.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/20 00:26:07


Post by: Mmmpi


Racerguy180 wrote:
Mmmpi wrote:
Racerguy180 wrote:
Well that is the goal of any product based sales enterprise


Doesn't mean it's good to enshrine it in the rules.



Easy fix, DONT PLAY MATCHED PLAY RULES....

If you're that against it join us over here where we don't care.


Easier said then done.

And I'm not sure you're the kind of person I want to play. I mean, will I have trouble if I do something else that doesn't meet your standard, like use home made fluff for my rules legal army?


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/20 00:26:24


Post by: Eonfuzz


The irony in this thread is delicious, casual players who don't follow the rules are arguing for the rules, and competitive players who follow the rules are arguing to ignore the rules.



Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/20 00:35:48


Post by: Racerguy180


 Mmmpi wrote:
Racerguy180 wrote:
Mmmpi wrote:
Racerguy180 wrote:
Well that is the goal of any product based sales enterprise


Doesn't mean it's good to enshrine it in the rules.



Easy fix, DONT PLAY MATCHED PLAY RULES....

If you're that against it join us over here where we don't care.


Easier said then done.

And I'm not sure you're the kind of person I want to play. I mean, will I have trouble if I do something else that doesn't meet your standard, like use home made fluff for my rules legal army?


I'm not quite sure what you mean?
Pretty confident we can have a 5min conversation before we play to establish what's up. I have yet to turn down a game, problem solved.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/20 00:38:48


Post by: Mmmpi


Racerguy180 wrote:
 Mmmpi wrote:
Racerguy180 wrote:
Mmmpi wrote:
Racerguy180 wrote:
Well that is the goal of any product based sales enterprise


Doesn't mean it's good to enshrine it in the rules.



Easy fix, DONT PLAY MATCHED PLAY RULES....

If you're that against it join us over here where we don't care.


Easier said then done.

And I'm not sure you're the kind of person I want to play. I mean, will I have trouble if I do something else that doesn't meet your standard, like use home made fluff for my rules legal army?


I'm not quite sure what you mean?
Pretty confident we can have a 5min conversation before we play to establish what's up. I have yet to turn down a game, problem solved.


Ok.

The discussion is about the trash rule existing and the toxic players who push for it.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/20 00:58:54


Post by: Racerguy180


Where have I pushed for it? I straight up said it's a stupid rule.

If it's in a ruleset and you don't like it, it's pretty easy to not use it. But if you want to Matched Play, it's a part of every tournament I've heard of even before 9th. So now that it's a GW rule FOR MATCHED PLAY, if you want to play MATCHED PLAY(i.e. tournament style) gotta do it.

Narrative or any other form of the game doesn't have this requirement.

This thread further illustrates playing with like-minded people makes these type of rules a moot point.


If you really really need to have those 10 points, or getting worked up over how someone else enjoys 40k, maybe you should take a break for a Lil while and reevaluate.

I hate playing with unpainted stuff myself, but have zero issue playing with someone who hasn't. Actually more than half my games are against unpainted/just primed minis, and you know how many times this rule has come up? I'll give you a hint, it begins with Z and ends with ERO.

Anyone who wants to judge someone else's enjoyment of the game based upon their own is a fool.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/20 01:01:29


Post by: yukishiro1


It's hard to take someone too seriously when they enter a thread and immediately start throwing around words like "abortion" and "trash," only to then, apparently completely without irony, start talking about "toxic players."

Those sorts of emotive terms really don't further the discussion.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/20 01:05:17


Post by: Mmmpi


Racerguy180 wrote:
Where have I pushed for it? I straight up said it's a stupid rule.

If it's in a ruleset and you don't like it, it's pretty easy to not use it. But if you want to Matched Play, it's a part of every tournament I've heard of even before 9th. So now that it's a GW rule FOR MATCHED PLAY, if you want to play MATCHED PLAY(i.e. tournament style) gotta do it.

Narrative or any other form of the game doesn't have this requirement.

This thread further illustrates playing with like-minded people makes these type of rules a moot point.


If you really really need to have those 10 points, or getting worked up over how someone else enjoys 40k, maybe you should take a break for a Lil while and reevaluate.

I hate playing with unpainted stuff myself, but have zero issue playing with someone who hasn't. Actually more than half my games are against unpainted/just primed minis, and you know how many times this rule has come up? I'll give you a hint, it begins with Z and ends with ERO.

Anyone who wants to judge someone else's enjoyment of the game based upon their own is a fool.


Most casual players still used matched rules, or did. That might be changing now.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
yukishiro1 wrote:
It's hard to take someone too seriously when they enter a thread and immediately start throwing around words like "abortion" and "trash," only to then, apparently completely without irony, start talking about "toxic players."

Those sorts of emotive terms really don't further the discussion.


Yeah, and it's hard to take people seriously when they don't realize that issues under discussion are actual issues.

That sort of blindness doesn't really further the discussion.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/20 01:12:01


Post by: yukishiro1


Even if that were true, calling them names and talking about "abortions" is unlikely to help them see the error of their ways. But I won't belabor the point, if you don't want to take my advice you certainly don't have to.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/20 01:32:00


Post by: posermcbogus


 Crafter91 wrote:

P.s. apologies to all the people who have replied with "this again". I did run a search within the "40k You Make Da Rules" section where this thread was originally posted for 'Painted Bonus' and it returned no results.


Hey man, as a pretty common "this again " poster in this thread, I just wanna say, this isn't your fault. The last few threads on this topic are pretty well-buried, and locked, and you are new. It's totally not a point against you, and I really do think that there is potential in the topic for an actual constructive bit of dialogue. There could actually be meaningful discussion here about inclusion, sportsmanship, recognition of what we as individuals want from our gaming experiences, and the nuances of sharing those experiences as well as possible, while also accommodating fellow hobbyists who maybe have some slightly different feelings from our own here, and how to make our local gaming scenes or clubs, and the wider warhammer/wargaming communities a much healthier, friendlier macrocosm, despite our personal differences, and it's sad that that almost always gets buried by actually rather nasty bickering very quickly. Maybe one day...

The real oh god not this gak again bit is that the same posters from the last few threads are unburying the hatchet for an excuse to get at the same people from the last time we danced this sorry dance, who in turn are trotting out the same tired, lukewarm, gak takes.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/20 01:47:42


Post by: Blndmage


Racerguy180 wrote:
Where have I pushed for it? I straight up said it's a stupid rule.

If it's in a ruleset and you don't like it, it's pretty easy to not use it. But if you want to Matched Play, it's a part of every tournament I've heard of even before 9th. So now that it's a GW rule FOR MATCHED PLAY, if you want to play MATCHED PLAY(i.e. tournament style) gotta do it.

Narrative or any other form of the game doesn't have this requirement.

This thread further illustrates playing with like-minded people makes these type of rules a moot point.


If you really really need to have those 10 points, or getting worked up over how someone else enjoys 40k, maybe you should take a break for a Lil while and reevaluate.

I hate playing with unpainted stuff myself, but have zero issue playing with someone who hasn't. Actually more than half my games are against unpainted/just primed minis, and you know how many times this rule has come up? I'll give you a hint, it begins with Z and ends with ERO.

Anyone who wants to judge someone else's enjoyment of the game based upon their own is a fool.


Crusade has the same rule.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/20 01:57:45


Post by: Racerguy180


I didn't say crusade, I said narrative.

Big difference.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/20 02:02:55


Post by: Blndmage


Racerguy180 wrote:
I didn't say crusade, I said narrative.

Big difference.


When reading the book, Narrative Play and Crusade Play appear synonymous for the purposes of discussion.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/20 02:40:55


Post by: Racerguy180


Every game of 9th I've played hasn't been crusade or matched play, so no they are not the same thing.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/20 03:33:13


Post by: Insectum7


 Mmmpi wrote:

Ok.

The discussion is about the trash rule existing and the toxic players who push for it.
So much griping for a rule that neither prevents you from playing, nor forces you to act on or even play with.



Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/20 04:48:42


Post by: Unit1126PLL


 Blndmage wrote:
Racerguy180 wrote:
I didn't say crusade, I said narrative.

Big difference.


When reading the book, Narrative Play and Crusade Play appear synonymous for the purposes of discussion.


And if there is one thing certain about narrative play: BY THE BOOK OR ELSE!

wait no


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/20 07:40:59


Post by: NinthMusketeer


I have gotten a bit lost on this discussion. Can the people against this rule articulate exactly why it is bad?

To clarify certain things beforehand:

-Obviously at a tourney whatever they say goes, and major tourneys already require paint anyways.

-People who have difficulty due to a disability are both a tiny fraction and would easily be able to get it house ruled out (save perhaps against TFG but then the experience is already ruined).

-This is casual play, there is no material benefit to victory or consequence to loss.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/20 08:03:33


Post by: ccs


 NinthMusketeer wrote:
I have gotten a bit lost on this discussion. Can the people against this rule articulate exactly why it is bad?

To clarify certain things beforehand:

-Obviously at a tourney whatever they say goes, and major tourneys already require paint anyways.

-People who have difficulty due to a disability are both a tiny fraction and would easily be able to get it house ruled out (save perhaps against TFG but then the experience is already ruined).

-This is casual play, there is no material benefit to victory or consequence to loss.


Because even though wins/losses don't mean anything in the overall, and the end goal is fun, we still (generally) play to win. And winning, or losing, based upon something not at all related to actual game play is annoying. Maybe even offensive. As such it interferes with the fun.
It's also a barrier to getting others involved. That's often a steep enough hill as is.....
So keep this PoS rule in the tourney environment, and nowhere near casual.

Getting painted stuff on the table should be encouraged & applauded. It should not be a another path to victory/defeat.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/20 08:06:55


Post by: Karol


Imagine if there was a 10VP bonus to the person who is considered more friendly, in a setting where you play at stores in another town or at an event in another city.

I am sure it wouldn't be a problem either, as people are suppose to be friendly in general right.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 NinthMusketeer wrote:

-This is casual play, there is no material benefit to victory or consequence to loss.


Imagine you started playing, you play your first few games and you lose them. You try to get better, and maybe you do maybe you don't. All the time you are investing your money and time in to the army. At some point you still keep losing, but you notice that the loses often come at a 15-20pts margin of points. 10 of which are paint points. Lose enough of times, and you will soon discover that playing the game stops being very fun. There is a reason why parents let their kids win or draw while doing sports, because if you got destroyed by an adult male 100% of time, at some point you just wouldn't want to play the game at all. Same with sports at school, if your team is always the last one in regionals, has been last for decades and nothing seems to be changing it, you kind of don't want to put 100% effort in to training and playing, when the end result is a lost game anyway.

Table top games are the same. But they come with a bonus of rules changes, some armies being more and some being less fun to play because of imbalances, which in sports is probably comperable to sudden injury. Having a good and fun army to play with, may entice someone to paint it. If it is a bad and unfun army to play with, why would anyone want to invest even more time and money in to painting it? specially if they consider painting a chore and not something they really like to do.

The view point seems to be from the perspective of people who like to paint, to whom the question why not paint seems to be a strange one, because they would paint the models, even if they were not playing. The perspective of someone who wants to play the game, but isn't much interested in painting is different. And they can even be competent at painting, but it changes little in the fact that , if they don't play they are not going to paint stuff just to paint .


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Racerguy180 798409 11128411 wrote:


Easy fix, DONT PLAY MATCHED PLAY RULES....

If you're that against it join us over here where we don't care.

considering it is the majority of games played, you may as well be telling people to not play the game if they don't like to requierment of a fully painted and based army.



Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/20 08:38:26


Post by: jhnbrg


Karol wrote:
Imagine if there was a 10VP bonus to the person who is considered more friendly, in a setting where you play at stores in another town or at an event in another city.

I am sure it wouldn't be a problem either, as people are suppose to be friendly in general right.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 NinthMusketeer wrote:

-This is casual play, there is no material benefit to victory or consequence to loss.


Imagine you started playing, you play your first few games and you lose them. You try to get better, and maybe you do maybe you don't. All the time you are investing your money and time in to the army. At some point you still keep losing, but you notice that the loses often come at a 15-20pts margin of points. 10 of which are paint points. Lose enough of times, and you will soon discover that playing the game stops being very fun. There is a reason why parents let their kids win or draw while doing sports, because if you got destroyed by an adult male 100% of time, at some point you just wouldn't want to play the game at all. Same with sports at school, if your team is always the last one in regionals, has been last for decades and nothing seems to be changing it, you kind of don't want to put 100% effort in to training and playing, when the end result is a lost game anyway.

Table top games are the same. But they come with a bonus of rules changes, some armies being more and some being less fun to play because of imbalances, which in sports is probably comperable to sudden injury. Having a good and fun army to play with, may entice someone to paint it. If it is a bad and unfun army to play with, why would anyone want to invest even more time and money in to painting it? specially if they consider painting a chore and not something they really like to do.

The view point seems to be from the perspective of people who like to paint, to whom the question why not paint seems to be a strange one, because they would paint the models, even if they were not playing. The perspective of someone who wants to play the game, but isn't much interested in painting is different. And they can even be competent at painting, but it changes little in the fact that , if they don't play they are not going to paint stuff just to paint .


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Racerguy180 798409 11128411 wrote:


Easy fix, DONT PLAY MATCHED PLAY RULES....

If you're that against it join us over here where we don't care.

considering it is the majority of games played, you may as well be telling people to not play the game if they don't like to requierment of a fully painted and based army.



Imagine not being able to keep up with all the new codex releases and the huge amount of different books with special rules. That will be a much rougher handicap than being 10 points behind from unpainted models.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/20 09:15:03


Post by: JakeSiren


Karol wrote:
Imagine you started playing, you play your first few games and you lose them. You try to get better, and maybe you do maybe you don't. All the time you are investing your money and time in to the army. At some point you still keep losing, but you notice that the loses often come at a 15-20pts margin of points. 10 of which are paint points. Lose enough of times, and you will soon discover that playing the game stops being very fun.

Wait, what sort of hypothetical player are we talking about? It seems like a brand new player who plays only pickup games and doesn't have or make friends that are interested in the game. I would suspect that someone like that would eventually lose interest regardless. If they integrated themselves into a friendly community then people would help them in ways to keep them engaged. If you can't find a friendly community then you are unlikely to stick around regardless of if you are winning games or not.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/20 11:24:41


Post by: harlokin


I agree that the rule is pretty pointless and, as many have said, tournaments have their own stipulations for such things, and outside of competition would you really want to play with someone who would insist on enforcing it. That said, if you are reliant on pick-up games, and you havent painted your army, you may struggle to find opponents irrespective of the rule.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/20 11:36:17


Post by: Not Online!!!


Honest question?
What stops the local community from just, i dunno, help out?
Like someone can't really build the models because of chitters, i like building, i happen to love it, let me keep some bits that are left over and i will build you your army no strings attached.
Someone surely will love to paint, why not hand it to them and give them instructions for a sheme?


Assuming you go to a FLG with a decent to great community preferable, why not?


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/20 12:45:22


Post by: Sarigar


I think there is a lot of hyperbole in the thread to support one's opinion for the sake of arguement/debate.

I'm yet to see this topic be an issue in the past year. I've attended several one and two day events, play weekly as well as play in a local league. Tourneys are the only venue I experienced that specify whether painted/not painted is required and whether the 10 points for painting will be in effect or not; everyone is aware prior to registering for the event.

If folks are really experiencing some of the issues posted, recommend they find other like minded players to spend their time with.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/20 13:18:39


Post by: Karol


Not Online!!! wrote:
Honest question?
What stops the local community from just, i dunno, help out?
Like someone can't really build the models because of chitters, i like building, i happen to love it, let me keep some bits that are left over and i will build you your army no strings attached.
Someone surely will love to paint, why not hand it to them and give them instructions for a sheme?


Assuming you go to a FLG with a decent to great community preferable, why not?


Why would someone who is in their mid 20s or early 30s invest in to the army of some teen, who has high chance of not playing in 2 years time? Specially when their armies are painted and there is enough of them to play against each other. And the only people liking to paint I have seen are those that paint comissions, and they do it all the time. You can of course have them paint your stuff. At the same rates as people that pay comissions do, minus the postal charge. But it still comes out at crazy end cost, practicaly can buy half or more of another army, if you do that.

If folks are really experiencing some of the issues posted, recommend they find other like minded players to spend their time with.

And how do you do that when a lot of the stores went bankrupt post covid? But even before that people were lucky, if they had one store in range to go play to. Although I do understand this can be different in places like UK that has more stores, then the number of stores combined from multiple countries around here.


Wait, what sort of hypothetical player are we talking about? It seems like a brand new player who plays only pickup games and doesn't have or make friends that are interested in the game. I would suspect that someone like that would eventually lose interest regardless. If they integrated themselves into a friendly community then people would help them in ways to keep them engaged. If you can't find a friendly community then you are unlikely to stick around regardless of if you are winning games or not.

Yes and that is why most people don't play for longer then one edition. But even if this is true, why should their expirance be made even worse then it already is?


Imagine not being able to keep up with all the new codex releases and the huge amount of different books with special rules. That will be a much rougher handicap than being 10 points behind from unpainted models.

So it is okey to add more, things that will drive away people ?


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/20 13:24:37


Post by: Not Online!!!


Karol wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
Honest question?
What stops the local community from just, i dunno, help out?
Like someone can't really build the models because of chitters, i like building, i happen to love it, let me keep some bits that are left over and i will build you your army no strings attached.
Someone surely will love to paint, why not hand it to them and give them instructions for a sheme?


Assuming you go to a FLG with a decent to great community preferable, why not?


Why would someone who is in their mid 20s or early 30s invest in to the army of some teen, who has high chance of not playing in 2 years time? Specially when their armies are painted and there is enough of them to play against each other. And the only people liking to paint I have seen are those that paint comissions, and they do it all the time. You can of course have them paint your stuff. At the same rates as people that pay comissions do, minus the postal charge. But it still comes out at crazy end cost, practicaly can buy half or more of another army, if you do that.

Invest? As in invest time?
Why not? You stated you don't like painting / building all that much, i do , well building anyhow. And in general i feel like armies should be painted, even though i am really laissez-faire with that. But especially they should be built. And if i can / could help someone out and do them favour and get some bits for my bits box out of it?
Sure. I'd do it. And did it. So erm i don't see the problem? Painting i'd not do since i am not comfortable with that but i am sure there are some people out there that hate to build and like to paint especially if you hand them some material?


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/20 13:27:50


Post by: the_scotsman


If you're paying someone to commission paint your army, you should expect to generally pay about as much if not more than the model cost you.

You're paying for skilled labor that also costs the craftsman in materials that are not the cheapest things in the world.

If you figure it takes a commission painter roughly 1 hour per figure to paint an infantry fig and 3 hours for a vehicle (which is generally my estimate, and I paint fairly quickly) and roughly 2 hours to assemble a box of infantry or a vehicle, then you're going to be paying more than the cost of the kit if you're not forcing the person to work for less than reasonable wage in most places.

Commission building, priming and painting a box of 10 space marine sized models is unlikely to be less than 12 hours of labor plus materials.


Painted Bonus - Yay or Nay? @ 2021/05/20 13:34:01


Post by: Karol


This is a not a me problem. My army is painted, unless I play against some donkey-cave, who claims that a base done in all yellow, red and blue makes the model unpainted somehow.

And again there is a problem of cost here. Maybe when people earn 5-6times as much as here, they have no problems with painting or giving up stuff for free.

Again people look at this from, or at least I think so, a 30+ year olds point of view. Can paint, can order commision. Now go tell someone who has a 20-30$ monthly hobby budget that they are suppose to spend 8$+ per model on comissions. Or teach them how to explain to your parents at 14-15 why you need money to buy 200$ of paints, a compressor and a paint brush, and use it every day for the next few months for your 70-80 model army to be finished, before GW decides to nerf it in to the ground and make you quit the game.

In 8th there were no such rules. People who wanted to paint their armies, could play their armies. If they didn't want to play vs unpainted armies, they could do just that. There was no additional cost or forcing anyone to do stuff, they do not want to do. The 10VP difference is forcing people who don't want to paint to do stuff, they do not want to do. And I think this is not okey or fun.

The same way playing marines in 8th wasn't fun, because you had to start it with buying of the codex IG and 32 IG models.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 the_scotsman wrote:

Commission building, priming and painting a box of 10 space marine sized models is unlikely to be less than 12 hours of labor plus materials.


yes only, as you may notice, the salary in places like Poland is 4-5 times lower then the salary in western countries, but because the market for comissions is international, the cost of a painting of models here is not based around the 1 hour work of people here, I can tell you that.