40k is a game that involves models. These models can be painted. When you play a game of 40k, what level of painting do you require for your enjoyment?
Fully painted, no exceptions. If it is not painted to at least basic tabletop standard it does not get used in a game. And if your army is not fully painted to that standard I will not play a game against you.
CadianSgtBob wrote: Fully painted, no exceptions. If it is not painted to at least basic tabletop standard it does not get used in a game. And if your army is not fully painted to that standard I will not play a game against you.
Yeah, that's fair.
I don't feel the same way, but you don't have to game with people who aren't painted. Your standards are your own.
I don’t paint my army so I don’t expect anyone else to. If someone wants to get uptight about it better they find someone who shares their extraordinary standards.
I usually only play with fully painted Battle Ready models, but I will occasionally play with models that are works in progress. I make no demands on my opponent about painting, but I suppose I prefer playing against painted models. All else being equal of course.
Threads about having to paint models, though, tends to get heated for some reason. Worse than politics!
9 for me, if my choice is between playing vs an army that's unpainted vs a painted one, it's an easy choice for me. Painted, at least even a Lil bit is preferable to boring bare plastic.
When I play 30/40k/AT/AI/EPIC its for the spectacle of it and using my well painted miniatures for something other than JUST looking at. Bare plastic, while the miniatures themselves are sculpted well, look bland when unpainted.
DeathKorp_Rider wrote: I don’t paint my army so I don’t expect anyone else to. If someone wants to get uptight about it better they find someone who shares their extraordinary standards.
Boo. You could at least try, even slow progress is better than nothing.
Edit: oh, you're that guy from reddit posting thousands of dollars of rare DKoK stuff and bragging about how much money you can spend without ever bothering to paint any of it. It's called a pile of shame for a reason, you know.
DeathKorp_Rider wrote: I don’t paint my army so I don’t expect anyone else to. If someone wants to get uptight about it better they find someone who shares their extraordinary standards.
Boo. You could at least try, even slow progress is better than nothing.
It’s not part of the hobby I enjoy. You can’t force someone to participate in something they don’t want to. It’d be like forcing someone who only builds the models to play the game.
DeathKorp_Rider wrote: I don’t paint my army so I don’t expect anyone else to. If someone wants to get uptight about it better they find someone who shares their extraordinary standards.
Boo. You could at least try, even slow progress is better than nothing.
Edit: oh, you're that guy from reddit posting thousands of dollars of rare DKoK stuff and bragging about how much money you can spend without ever bothering to paint any of it. It's called a pile of shame for a reason, you know.
DeathKorp_Rider wrote: It’s not part of the hobby I enjoy. You can’t force someone to participate in something they don’t want to. It’d be like forcing someone who only builds the models to play the game.
I can't force you, but I can certainly judge you for it. And I can judge you for posting "look at the size of my wallet" and bragging about how you don't bother to paint models a lot of us would kill to have.
DeathKorp_Rider wrote: It’s not part of the hobby I enjoy. You can’t force someone to participate in something they don’t want to. It’d be like forcing someone who only builds the models to play the game.
I can't force you, but I can certainly judge you for it. And I can judge you for posting "look at the size of my wallet" and bragging about how you don't bother to paint models a lot of us would kill to have.
I don't mind playing with/against bare plastic while trying out a game or if it's newly released minis and they haven't been painted yet. But generally i'd prefer at least some base colors and a shade thrown over the mini. I wouldn't ever bother telling someone what to do with their minis, but I can sure refuse to play.
Also when it comes to stuff like Frostgrave where you're fielding like 10 models, if you can't even be bothered to paint 10, to me that just seems low effort.
JNAProductions wrote: 40k is a game that involves models. These models can be painted. When you play a game of 40k, what level of painting do you require for your enjoyment?
For me? Fully painted, table top standard (looks great from 3 feet - I almost paint exclusively with Contrast style paints now, they're that good). I consider myself to be a good painter. My figures look nice, but they will never win any painting awards.
For my opponent? No opinion. It's nice when they bring a fully painted army, but if they haven't had the time or inclination, I might gently rib them about it, but I'm just glad to be getting a game in.
(Full disclosure: I play only with friends, typically at our homes, frequently with a drink in hand, and we never play 40K)
DeathKorp_Rider wrote: I don’t paint my army so I don’t expect anyone else to. If someone wants to get uptight about it better they find someone who shares their extraordinary standards.
Boo. You could at least try, even slow progress is better than nothing.
It’s not part of the hobby I enjoy. You can’t force someone to participate in something they don’t want to. It’d be like forcing someone who only builds the models to play the game.
DeathKorp_Rider wrote: I don’t paint my army so I don’t expect anyone else to. If someone wants to get uptight about it better they find someone who shares their extraordinary standards.
Boo. You could at least try, even slow progress is better than nothing.
Edit: oh, you're that guy from reddit posting thousands of dollars of rare DKoK stuff and bragging about how much money you can spend without ever bothering to paint any of it. It's called a pile of shame for a reason, you know.
Screw you buddy.
lol. I would get all excited about your rare models, get crushed by you in whatever non-40K sci fi game we opt to play, and then offer to paint 'em up for you. DKOK models are dang cool.
Insectum7 wrote: Poll is tricky. I hold myself to a "painted only" standard 99% of the time. But I'll happily play against unpainted models.
I'm exactly the same. I refuse to play with my unpainted models. My opponent on the other hand? I prefer painted models, but understand that it's something that takes time and effort. If they don't want to or can't, I'm not going to hold it against them and I'm still happy to play against their toys.
Greyicus Plasticus is the tribe of my people. I'm not expecting the new nid player to have all 150 of his extremely samey models all painted, nor would I care if he did. I'm just there to throw click clacks and make pew pew noises as I move my little men around.
For myself I always try to have a fully painted army, though I have used a unit or two that is either partially or unpainted to try them out on the battlefield.
Though I do like it when my opponent has a painted army I know not everyone has either the interest, time or money to get it fully painted so I no real issue for what my opponent brings.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: Greyicus Plasticus is the tribe of my people. I'm not expecting the new nid player to have all 150 of his extremely samey models all painted, nor would I care if he did. I'm just there to throw click clacks and make pew pew noises as I move my little men around.
So why not play a better game, if the models are nothing but game tokens to be treated with contempt? Why buy GW models at all when you can use cardboard boxes and poker chips for everything?
CadianSgtBob wrote: Fully painted, no exceptions. If it is not painted to at least basic tabletop standard it does not get used in a game. And if your army is not fully painted to that standard I will not play a game against you.
Wild. Seems pretty unreasonable. Everyone I know is cool with playing with people while they get their army painted.
Hecaton wrote: Wild. Seems pretty unreasonable. Everyone I know is cool with playing with people while they get their army painted.
If you are a genuine newbie painting your first army and you are clearly making progress on it maybe we can make an exception temporarily. And I'll be happy to play a 500 point game (or even a kill team game with a single squad!) with fully painted armies if someone can't manage a full 2000 point standard game yet. But TBH that's not the case the vast majority of the time, it's people who have been in the game for years and refuse to ever paint anything. Those people are not welcome in my games.
I have zero "requirements" from my opponent in regards to their army other than it being assembled and not just using bases or something.
I paint slow and my painting abilities are pretty mediocre. There are times I feel like I'm actively ruining the model with my paint jobs. lol. But I am trying to get them painted up before I play my EC army.
But if my opponent is playing strictly unpainted it literally does nothing to my enjoyment. I want to play games. It serves me no purpose to cast judgement on a person for their army being unpainted. It's their models, not mine. They can do with them as they want. Unpainted models play just the same as painted ones so why should I give even a single care?
Just deploy and let's get to rolling dice and scooting soldiers.
Lord Blackscale wrote: Yeah, only about 20 replies and 5 are just people taking snarky shots at each other. Mostly just 2 people.
All it takes is one painting absolutist to scream about people having fun the wrong way, and the thread goes off the rails.
This thread made it to Reply #1 for that to happen.
Eh, much as I dislike CSB, that response is fine. He wasn't dictating what other people should or shouldn't enjoy-only what he'd require to play against him.
There's nothing wrong with your standards being "Be painted or don't play me." The issue only arises if someone insists their way is required for everyone, regardless of what that way is.
I won't field an army until it is basically Battleready save putting a shade/wash on. Note: I can't remember is shade/washes is a Battleready thing. In fact, I just so happen to have my Chaos Knight army very close, but not quite ready enough to be used on the table.
Spoiler:
And the requirement becomes more stringent for myself once I have a fully painted army. Any additions also have to be fully painted to be fielded. Which helps prevent a growing pile of unpainted stuff. Additionally, fully painted factions take priority over partly painted factions when it comes to which I choose to play.
As for my opponent, they don't have to have painted stuff vs. me, but it's always a bonus. I like to take pictures during my games (a good 75% of why I play miniatures war games is just to take pictures of them during games). If my opponent has an unpainted army, I actively try not to include their models in my pictures. That's about as harsh as I get.
H.B.M.C. wrote: PS: Don't expect of require people to engage in parts of the hobby they don't enjoy.
Why are you so incapable of accepting that I will not play a game against people like you? Why do you have to come in here and complain about the mere fact that I dared to post an opinion about how I enjoy the game in a way that you don't like?
I answered 1. My game experience is not diminished by gray plastic, but a nice paint job is always a bonus.
Not an attack: I wonder if people who are bothered by gray plastic might lean towards aphantasia or at least less vivid imaginations? If my opponent sticks gray marines in front of me and says they're salamanders, I'm suddenly seeing them in green armor, red eyes, and a volcanic background wherever they go. Having actual paint on the models is nice, but it rarely beats the images and sound effects I'm mentally overlaying on top of their minis.
I like painting, but it's more of a bonus after the lore and gameplay. You don't need paint on models to play the game or tell a story. So when people insist on painted models, it kind of rubs me the wrong way. Like, did you just want to look at paint jobs, my friend? Go google some. They'll almost certainly look better than any paint job I'm capable of.
Wyldhunt wrote: I answered 1. My game experience is not diminished by gray plastic, but a nice paint job is always a bonus.
Not an attack: I wonder if people who are bothered by gray plastic might lean towards aphantasia or at least less vivid imaginations? If my opponent sticks gray marines in front of me and says they're salamanders, I'm suddenly seeing them in green armor, red eyes, and a volcanic background wherever they go. Having actual paint on the models is nice, but it rarely beats the images and sound effects I'm mentally overlaying on top of their minis.
I like painting, but it's more of a bonus after the lore and gameplay. You don't need paint on models to play the game or tell a story. So when people insist on painted models, it kind of rubs me the wrong way. Like, did you just want to look at paint jobs, my friend? Go google some. They'll almost certainly look better than any paint job I'm capable of.
But at that point why use models at all? If your imagination is better than the models why not save a bunch of money and play the game with blank bases and cardboard boxes for vehicles?
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: Greyicus Plasticus is the tribe of my people. I'm not expecting the new nid player to have all 150 of his extremely samey models all painted, nor would I care if he did. I'm just there to throw click clacks and make pew pew noises as I move my little men around.
So why not play a better game, if the models are nothing but game tokens to be treated with contempt? Why buy GW models at all when you can use cardboard boxes and poker chips for everything?
Why don't you play a different game if all you do is tell everyone else how to play and get seriously butt sore at the way they play?
And I play maybe one game a month, if that. I'm hardly a model for great gamer. But if someone has the models and needs an opponent, I'll be happy to throw math rocks and drink beer with a new possible friend.
Wyldhunt wrote: I answered 1. My game experience is not diminished by gray plastic, but a nice paint job is always a bonus.
Not an attack: I wonder if people who are bothered by gray plastic might lean towards aphantasia or at least less vivid imaginations? If my opponent sticks gray marines in front of me and says they're salamanders, I'm suddenly seeing them in green armor, red eyes, and a volcanic background wherever they go. Having actual paint on the models is nice, but it rarely beats the images and sound effects I'm mentally overlaying on top of their minis.
I like painting, but it's more of a bonus after the lore and gameplay. You don't need paint on models to play the game or tell a story. So when people insist on painted models, it kind of rubs me the wrong way. Like, did you just want to look at paint jobs, my friend? Go google some. They'll almost certainly look better than any paint job I'm capable of.
But at that point why use models at all? If your imagination is better than the models why not save a bunch of money and play the game with blank bases and cardboard boxes for vehicles?
When I first got into GW games, I was playing their LoTR skirmish game with poker chips for goblins. Other armies in my friend group included playing cards as Rohirim cavalry, a shoe for a dragon, and small decorative pumpkins as trolls. I really don't mind playing the game with affordable stand-ins at all so long as it's clear what represents what. I buy and paint the models because while they aren't essential to the gaming or lore aspects of the hobby, they look cool and I enjoy painting them (poorly). It's just that my ability to enjoy the game side of the hobby doesn't hinge on a paint job. Plus, it's easier to find pickup games at the FLGS when I don't have to explain to my opponent which poker chips are fire dragons.
Wyldhunt wrote: I answered 1. My game experience is not diminished by gray plastic, but a nice paint job is always a bonus.
Not an attack: I wonder if people who are bothered by gray plastic might lean towards aphantasia or at least less vivid imaginations? If my opponent sticks gray marines in front of me and says they're salamanders, I'm suddenly seeing them in green armor, red eyes, and a volcanic background wherever they go. Having actual paint on the models is nice, but it rarely beats the images and sound effects I'm mentally overlaying on top of their minis.
I like painting, but it's more of a bonus after the lore and gameplay. You don't need paint on models to play the game or tell a story. So when people insist on painted models, it kind of rubs me the wrong way. Like, did you just want to look at paint jobs, my friend? Go google some. They'll almost certainly look better than any paint job I'm capable of.
But at that point why use models at all? If your imagination is better than the models why not save a bunch of money and play the game with blank bases and cardboard boxes for vehicles?
By that logic, art is pointless, so why bother with it? Same with storytelling, or anything else we do.
DeathKorp_Rider wrote: I don’t paint my army so I don’t expect anyone else to. If someone wants to get uptight about it better they find someone who shares their extraordinary standards.
Boo. You could at least try, even slow progress is better than nothing.
Edit: oh, you're that guy from reddit posting thousands of dollars of rare DKoK stuff and bragging about how much money you can spend without ever bothering to paint any of it. It's called a pile of shame for a reason, you know.
holy gak dude.... can you like, get the feth out of this forum with your nonstop toxicity in every single thread you take part of?
OT: i try to at least be constantly making progress on my armies and i'll at the very least have my armies quickly basecoated
H.B.M.C. wrote: PS: Don't expect of require people to engage in parts of the hobby they don't enjoy.
Why are you so incapable of accepting that I will not play a game against people like you? Why do you have to come in here and complain about the mere fact that I dared to post an opinion about how I enjoy the game in a way that you don't like?
Haha. I would happily not play against you for merely your posting style.
My ideal match up is fully painted on both sides. However, I myself have missed deadlines before game night and had that one model that I was salivating to run, so in comes stealth primed X.
Since starting up our classichammer groups I've been more reticent with only running painted stuff. I have a game tomorrow with my Dark Elves vs. my brother's Dwarfs and I'll be shocked if he manages to show up with unpainted anything.
In b4 the inevitable lock, with everyone busy sniping at each other about being paint snobs and all that.
I used to play with unpainted models because that was what I had; I just hadn't gotten around to painting all my gak yet. Nowadays it's definitely to the point that I'll only use unpainted stuff if it's something I'm desperate to try out for a game and just can't possibly have it painted in time.
As for what my opponent brings, I'm down for whatever. I just want to play games and have a good time, and fully understand if some people don't like to paint or haven't found time for it (it can take a while depending on the army). So I voted 0 on the poll.
If this makes me a gray plastic apologist or white knight or whatever, make the most of it I guess. Like I said, I expect this thread to die a fiery death by the fury of the mods soon enough anyways.
Blndmage wrote: By that logic, art is pointless, so why bother with it? Same with storytelling, or anything else we do.
Um, what? You have that "logic" completely backwards. I'm arguing that if you're dismissive of the value of art you might as well save money and not have art at all. If you, like me, appreciate the value of art then of course it isn't pointless.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Wyldhunt wrote: When I first got into GW games, I was playing their LoTR skirmish game with poker chips for goblins. Other armies in my friend group included playing cards as Rohirim cavalry, a shoe for a dragon, and small decorative pumpkins as trolls. I really don't mind playing the game with affordable stand-ins at all so long as it's clear what represents what. I buy and paint the models because while they aren't essential to the gaming or lore aspects of the hobby, they look cool and I enjoy painting them (poorly). It's just that my ability to enjoy the game side of the hobby doesn't hinge on a paint job. Plus, it's easier to find pickup games at the FLGS when I don't have to explain to my opponent which poker chips are fire dragons.
Fair! I don't see the appeal, but I admit you're at least consistent if you're fine with playing with poker chips and playing cards.
The way I see it, two lovingly painted armies makes the game more fun, but I've had gakky games against beautiful painted armies and amazingly friendly games against grey plastic, so I have zero preference.
Wyldhunt wrote: I answered 1. My game experience is not diminished by gray plastic, but a nice paint job is always a bonus.
Not an attack: I wonder if people who are bothered by gray plastic might lean towards aphantasia or at least less vivid imaginations? If my opponent sticks gray marines in front of me and says they're salamanders, I'm suddenly seeing them in green armor, red eyes, and a volcanic background wherever they go. Having actual paint on the models is nice, but it rarely beats the images and sound effects I'm mentally overlaying on top of their minis.
I like painting, but it's more of a bonus after the lore and gameplay. You don't need paint on models to play the game or tell a story. So when people insist on painted models, it kind of rubs me the wrong way. Like, did you just want to look at paint jobs, my friend? Go google some. They'll almost certainly look better than any paint job I'm capable of.
But at that point why use models at all? If your imagination is better than the models why not save a bunch of money and play the game with blank bases and cardboard boxes for vehicles?
Well I personally would do that but alas, the game uses real LOS so chips are not an acceptable substitute for models. I personally selected 0 because I heavily dislike painting my models, it's just not something I enjoy doing. I also get into something I call, for lack of a better term, "gaming mindset" whenever the game starts at which point I no longer notice how well models are painted, if at all, for as long as the game lasts. Since all I'm focused on is winning the game. I long ago stopped buying/appreciating "skins" in video games for the same reason. I do appreciate the care and love others put into making their models look nice, but once the game starts all that goes out of the window and I barely notice it compared to my own gray horde. Seeing as I prefer the gaming and lore aspect of the hobby the most, painting my own models is not something I care about, nor do i care much for the painted or not status of my opponents army.
Hecaton wrote: Wild. Seems pretty unreasonable. Everyone I know is cool with playing with people while they get their army painted.
If you are a genuine newbie painting your first army and you are clearly making progress on it maybe we can make an exception temporarily. And I'll be happy to play a 500 point game (or even a kill team game with a single squad!) with fully painted armies if someone can't manage a full 2000 point standard game yet. But TBH that's not the case the vast majority of the time, it's people who have been in the game for years and refuse to ever paint anything. Those people are not welcome in my games.
Eh, that seems so unnecessarily judgmental. As long as someone's making gradual progress I appreciate it.
H.B.M.C. wrote: PS: Don't expect of require people to engage in parts of the hobby they don't enjoy.
Why are you so incapable of accepting that I will not play a game against people like you? Why do you have to come in here and complain about the mere fact that I dared to post an opinion about how I enjoy the game in a way that you don't like?
Well I'm guessing it's mostly that some of your other opinions have little relation to reality.
While I enjoy building and painting the models rather than playing I don't mind playing against the grey masses, I understand not everyone has the time or patience to paint up whole armies of toy soldiers. People that won't play a game because of a single grey mini need to relax and enjoy the game for what it is, a hobby not life and death.
Rolsheen wrote: People that won't play a game because of a single grey mini need to relax and enjoy the game for what it is, a hobby not life and death.
Why should I play a game I don't enjoy? I don't owe you a game, if you don't want to paint your models you can play with someone else.
I voted 5. My own models have to be painted for me to bring them (though I'm a little lazy on basing them), but I usually don't expect the same from my opponent. If it's a narrative mission or a campaign game or a small game it's nice to have, but if it's just the usual 2000 points game or a tournament it's not that important how the models of my opponent look. And sometimes my own models will run around with base colors I put on the evening before .
The game is immersive for many and I think the look of an army is part of that immersion.
I wouldn’t like to regularly play against someone who flat out doesn’t paint anything but I’d someone adds some WIP models to a painted army that’s cool.
I think there are so many companies doing speed paints, like contrast, that it’s not hard to prime some models and coat them in a single colour. Even that’s better than nothing.
But I’m way more into the painting than the playing
Rolsheen wrote: People that won't play a game because of a single grey mini need to relax and enjoy the game for what it is, a hobby not life and death.
Why should I play a game I don't enjoy? I don't owe you a game, if you don't want to paint your models you can play with someone else.
You don't enjoy the game? Why are you playing then? Why are you so bent out of shape about other people enjoying the game.
Rolsheen wrote: You don't enjoy the game? Why are you playing then? Why are you so bent out of shape about other people enjoying the game.
I don't enjoy games with unpainted models. But apparently I need to relax and give people the games they're entitled to have, regardless of my own enjoyment.
Um, what? You have that "logic" completely backwards. I'm arguing that if you're dismissive of the value of art you might as well save money and not have art at all. If you, like me, appreciate the value of art then of course it isn't pointless.
You appear to be labouring under something close to a child's definition of "art" (ie. "whatever we did today during art class, mum!").
Models painted under duress, out of a grudging sense of duty or social obligation, do not constitute art. Performing the physical action of painting a miniature does not ensure the production of art, any more than painting a fence would.
It is also entirely possible and reasonable to appreciate an unpainted sculpture as an art object.
Since you have an inexhaustible well of grievance with the ways other people want to play the game and maintain their miniature collections don't you think you'd be better off finding another game or hobby? Miniature wargaming has a social element and benefits from a certain baseline capacity for bonhomie, which doesn't fit your needs or desires, so I think you might find more enjoyment focusing your time and money on other types of enrichment.
Altruizine wrote: Models painted under duress, out of a grudging sense of duty or social obligation, do not constitute art.
And? That has nothing to do with my response or the original comment about valuing art/storytelling/etc.
Since you have an inexhaustible well of grievance with the ways other people want to play the game and maintain their miniature collections don't you think you'd be better off finding another game or hobby? Miniature wargaming has a social element and benefits from a certain baseline capacity for bonhomie, which doesn't fit your needs or desires, so I think you might find more enjoyment focusing your time and money on other types of enrichment.
Why would I find another hobby when I have lots of fun playing games with fully painted armies on both sides? Are you so unable to cope with the possibility that I would refuse to play a game with you that the only resolution you can imagine is convincing me to quit the hobby entirely? Why does it bother you so much that some of us have higher standards?
Rolsheen wrote: You don't enjoy the game? Why are you playing then? Why are you so bent out of shape about other people enjoying the game.
I don't enjoy games with unpainted models. But apparently I need to relax and give people the games they're entitled to have, regardless of my own enjoyment.
It’s not really about entitlement, but in my experience, if you relax a bit then you find your general enjoyment of life increasing.
Flinty wrote: It’s not really about entitlement, but in my experience, if you relax a bit then you find your general enjoyment of life increasing.
Why do you think my games aren't relaxed or enjoyable? I don't have to lower my standards and accept unpainted models to have fun. And nothing of value would be added by playing against them.
Wyldhunt wrote: I answered 1. My game experience is not diminished by gray plastic, but a nice paint job is always a bonus.
Same. If I get a new army I don't want to wait an year to play it, and for the same reason I wouldn't refuse games from opponents who don't have their army battle ready. Painting and playing are different parts of the hobby, for someone even two separate hobbies, and I definitely encourage people not to rush their paint jobs. Take your time to paint the models, in the meanwhile enjoy playing.
I don't enjoy games with unpainted models. But apparently I need to relax and give people the games they're entitled to have, regardless of my own enjoyment.
No, you're actually right. If you don't like games with unpainted models you are definitely entitled to refuse such games. We play for having fun, and what's fun for people is entirely subjective.
mrFickle wrote: The game is immersive for many and I think the look of an army is part of that immersion.
I wouldn’t like to regularly play against someone who flat out doesn’t paint anything but I’d someone adds some WIP models to a painted army that’s cool.
I think there are so many companies doing speed paints, like contrast, that it’s not hard to prime some models and coat them in a single colour. Even that’s better than nothing.
But I’m way more into the painting than the playing
Priming is the hardest part for me when working on models, and I dislike playing with models being painted as often that’s when damage can occur to the paint.
All in all, I don’t care much for 40k. And more get excited for good paint at skirmish games, where we can see the individual more. But I don’t even remember specifically any games I play against painted army’s over none painted.
Most of my group play with fully painted armies there are a few members who haven't made any real progression and it is starting to grind on us a little bit especially because those of us that don't play with partiality finished models don't use a unit if it isn't fnished, we get not liking painting, I don't yet I play with a fully painted army, it was a massive slap in the face when said group members had done nothing after we took a month off to get stuff painted for warhammer world
I'm lucky in that I play in a like-minded group. None of us would conceive of taking unpainted models onto the tabletop, so the point is kind of moot.
Playing with and against painted models is definitely my preference - now more than when i was younger. I think it shows pride in ones hobby as well as a bit of reapinsibility and dedication. imo it doesn't need to be 'eavy metal standard - As much as I'll pick out all the belt buckles etc, not everyone does and i wouldnt expect it; my standard for painting is 'does it look decent enough* from 3 or 4 feet away?
The hobby contains elements of painting, modelling, converting and gaming. Being into one or some and not the others is totally fine; imo though it means missing out/losing out on things and in the long term I feel on some levels why do 'it' if you're only into half of what 'its' about - but that can be said about anything really, and ultimately while things like contrast make it so that it literally never been easier to paint quickly and decently, and while i will encourage embracing it, and getting to grios with it, its still 'your' hobby too and no one can 'make' you do things.
That said, despite my preferences, im not an absolutist. Some people are disabled/older/etc and can't paint or at best, struggle to paint. Some people are parents of young kids and literally have 5 minutes to themselves in a month. That said, while 'having no time' can be legitimate, if you spend 4 hours a day watching netflix or xboxing - you have the time.
It goes without saying my preferences don't always take priority for me - imo the person opposite me takes priority. Generally. So long as they're reasonable.
*Some people want to get that new unit on the board asap. Some units are WIPs and are half undercoated when theyre put on the board. Models get handled and get chipped and tiny bits of paint fleck off, especially on the pointy edges. Sometimes the paintbrush doesn't reach all areas or into all the recesses and there's a streak of unpainted grey in an otherwise painted figure. Not all the intricacies will be painted. All of these are fairly reasonable caveats imo.
overlord inspiron wrote: Most of my group play with fully painted armies there are a few members who haven't made any real progression and it is starting to grind on us a little bit especially because those of us that don't play with partiality finished models don't use a unit if it isn't fnished, we get not liking painting, I don't yet I play with a fully painted army, it was a massive slap in the face when said group members had done nothing after we took a month off to get stuff painted for warhammer world
I can appreciate your honesty, but this is nevertheless an extremely toxic attitude. "I suffered, so now you should too." It's crazy enough when people wear that attitude in the classic boomer way ("i walked 600 miles to school because we didn't have a bus, so you should too") but it's an order of magnitude crazier when it's about something that you had complete choice over.
I mean, shouldn't you actually admire them for having more backbone than you? They didn't like painting, so they stopped. You didn't like painting, but you yielded to whatever pressures were placed on you, and now you're never getting that time back
I legit respect your honesty about it, though. You've revealed the core issue for many people -- some nasty emotional cocktail of resentment, jealousy and regret -- instead of pretending it's a moral failing on behalf of the people who don't want to paint.
Altruizine wrote: You've revealed the core issue for many people -- some nasty emotional cocktail of resentment, jealousy and regret -- instead of pretending it's a moral failing on behalf of the people who don't want to paint.
And you've revealed the core issue for many people -- some nasty emotional cocktail of insecurity, entitlement, and shame -- instead of pretending it's a moral failing on behalf of the people who don't want to play against unpainted armies.
None.
My hobby is playing games. Miniatures games in particular.
Wether or not you paint your minis or to what standard is none of my concern.
(Well, ok, that's not entirely true. My least favorite thing to see is a foes army primed Black. That's because the lighting in many shops isn't the best & anymore without my glasses all I see when I look across the table are a bunch of little black lumps devoid of detail)
As to my own stuff? Sure, fully painted forces are the end goal. I'm just not worried about how long it takes me to achieve that. And your opinions about my stuff/painting speed aren't important to me.
So, about how I paint;
Normally? Slowly & sporadically (though decently) is the best description. But for me to pick up a paint brush the stars have to align correctly & I have to be in the right mood. When that happens I'll paint up a few more minis. And they won't necessarily be for 40k/whatever I'm playing atm.
Otherwise? I tend to make the most progress when under extreme stress &/or depressed. (2020 was a hella productive year minis-painting wise - hopefully we won't see that repeated....) So if I'm not making much or any progress? Life is OK.
In answer to Bobs question as to why I use models at all if the paints not important? Simple, I like the physical models.
I can appreciate your honesty, but this is nevertheless an extremely toxic attitude. "I suffered, so now you should too." It's crazy enough when people wear that attitude in the classic boomer way ("i walked 600 miles to school because we didn't have a bus, so you should too") but it's an order of magnitude crazier when it's about something that you had complete choice over.
I mean, shouldn't you actually admire them for having more backbone than you? They didn't like painting, so they stopped. You didn't like painting, but you yielded to whatever pressures were placed on you, and now you're never getting that time back
I legit respect your honesty about it, though. You've revealed the core issue for many people -- some nasty emotional cocktail of resentment, jealousy and regret -- instead of pretending it's a moral failing on behalf of the people who don't want to paint.
Respectfully - calling out a poster for being a coward (no backbone) and mischaracterising it as 'resentment, jealousy and regret' is just as toxic.
Not painting stuff is not being brave or sticking it to the man.
We all have to do stuff we don't like or don't want to from time to time. Part of life, really.
overlord inspiron wrote: Most of my group play with fully painted armies there are a few members who haven't made any real progression and it is starting to grind on us a little bit especially because those of us that don't play with partiality finished models don't use a unit if it isn't fnished, we get not liking painting, I don't yet I play with a fully painted army, it was a massive slap in the face when said group members had done nothing after we took a month off to get stuff painted for warhammer world
I can appreciate your honesty, but this is nevertheless an extremely toxic attitude. "I suffered, so now you should too." It's crazy enough when people wear that attitude in the classic boomer way ("i walked 600 miles to school because we didn't have a bus, so you should too") but it's an order of magnitude crazier when it's about something that you had complete choice over.
I mean, shouldn't you actually admire them for having more backbone than you? They didn't like painting, so they stopped. You didn't like painting, but you yielded to whatever pressures were placed on you, and now you're never getting that time back
I legit respect your honesty about it, though. You've revealed the core issue for many people -- some nasty emotional cocktail of resentment, jealousy and regret -- instead of pretending it's a moral failing on behalf of the people who don't want to paint.
Calling it suffering is melodramatic, I also wouldn't say they have a backbone it's laziness in my opinion, there are other avenues they could've gone down, the rest of us have offered to help and found ways to speed up the process but it all falls on deaf ears, we don't care if it isn't painted very well as long as it is painted, which is odd for 30k players. It isn't jealousy either, no one placed any expectations on me, I see it as a form of respect and also pride and that is more true now than before with contrast paint and other similar products being a thing, even if my painting is just average I can show how much I enjoy the whole hobby even the parts I don't like, picking and choosing what parts you do with the exception of gaming can lead to some silly scenarios such as a person playing with a base because "they don't like building".
As the poll had the word "require", I voted 0 - literally don't care. Just try to bring the right model(s).
I prefer to play with fully painted models, and I prefer to play against fully painted models - but I also know that not only do some people not enjoy painting (or are very good at it, even if they've been trying for 10+ years), it's also very time-consuming and for adults with full-time jobs and families, they might very well not have the time to fully paint all their armies, nor are they willing to spend what little spare time they have on doing something they don't really enjoy.
Can't help but think that this poll would've benefited from...
a, splitting "you" and "your opponent" into distinct scores
b, some form of guidance as to what a 5 represents.
I used to think non-painted models were kind of lame, but strangely as I become better at painting, and become more of a paint-snob, I'd almost rather play with and against grey plastic/base coated minis, than something which is scarcely tabletop standard (if you turn the lights down and stand 3 feet away...).
The problem with painting things to a higher standard is that its time consuming. I used to be able to chuck 3 colours on a mini and be happy with it, 30 minutes to an hour a squad. Now its an hour+ a mini. And that adds up if you want to build a new army. And you want to play with it now, not circa 3 years time when it will finally be all painted (maybe).
My armied fielded on the battlefield are always fully painted - no exceptions.
I remember at Hamburg GW I, unpainted models were removed from play by GW employees.
I have requirements for myself - characters/centrepiece models should be fully painted, and everything else should at least have the basics completed. They're not absolute, though. If I didn't have enough time to finish off a unit before a scheduled game I'll play the unit as-is and keep working on it when I next have time for hobbying.
I have no requirements for opponents beyond 'your models are identifiable'. I'm not really about that.
Dysartes wrote: Can't help but think that this poll would've benefited from...
a, splitting "you" and "your opponent" into distinct scores
b, some form of guidance as to what a 5 represents.
Nah. This thread was on its way to an early grave from the first reply onwards. I doubt a difference in poll wording would have made any difference.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Nah. This thread was on its way to an early grave from the first reply onwards. I doubt a difference in poll wording would have made any difference.
Yes, because obviously someone expressing the opinion that they aren't interested in playing against unpainted models is immediate doom. How can such an unreasonable position possibly exist in a polite society?
If it gets models on the table I don't care how much time you put in to other parts of the hobby. As has been stated above a well painted army adds to the game but as someone who's not crazy about painting even seeing someone make an attempt at it is always praiseworthy.
Yes, because obviously someone expressing the opinion that they aren't interested in playing against unpainted models is immediate doom. How can such an unreasonable position possibly exist in a polite society?
Dysartes wrote: Can't help but think that this poll would've benefited from...
a, splitting "you" and "your opponent" into distinct scores
b, some form of guidance as to what a 5 represents.
Nah. This thread was on its way to an early grave from the first reply onwards. I doubt a difference in poll wording would have made any difference.
You might want to read that first reply again. There's nothing problematic about it. It simply states a requirement for an opponent to have fully painted models. The problems actually started about 5 or 6 replies later, admittedly instigated by the person who posted that first reply.
The poll seems to lack detail for me. From my side, I won't play with anything other than fully painted. I don't require the same of my opponents. I do like to see progress being made and if given the choice between playing two similar games, with one being against unpainted and one against painted models I'd prefer the latter. That's not the case where new players are involved, or someone's building a new army. I find using fully painted armies tends to have a knock-on effect on the other gamers at my club. If everyone's using unpainted stuff, that becomes the norm and accepted. Likewise, using fully painted armies can often be a good source of encouragement for others to paint their own models.
Slipspace wrote: You might want to read that first reply again. There's nothing problematic about it. It simply states a requirement for an opponent to have fully painted models. The problems actually started about 5 or 6 replies later, admittedly instigated by the person who posted that first reply.
And if you couldn't tell that was going to happen from that first reply then you really weren't paying attention.
Or you just haven't been here long, where we've had this discussion before, and it always - always always always - ends up with some painting absolutist fighting everyone because of their intractable stubborn position on how everything must be painted and anyone else who says otherwise is having fun the wrong way.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Nah. This thread was on its way to an early grave from the first reply onwards. I doubt a difference in poll wording would have made any difference.
Yes, because obviously someone expressing the opinion that they aren't interested in playing against unpainted models is immediate doom. How can such an unreasonable position possibly exist in a polite society?
/s
Nobody gives a gak if you don't want to play against unpainted models. People give a gak when you tell them to paint their models when they clearly said they dislike that part of the hobby. Stop playing the victim here.
And for the record, most of my armies are painted.
I have a problem with what constitutes what levels? Is aesthetics involved in the answer? For instance if someone paints, details, shades, highlights and, gives their figures diorama like bases is that a 10? If so, what happens when they do all that and their figures are disgusting or just a plain eyesore due to the color choices? I'll be honest I'd rather play against a grey army then something that I can't stand looking at. I don't want to spend a couple hours sitting across the table from an army that has organs falling out of the figures and other "realism" type painting. I don't go to slasher flicks for the same reason. Likewise I don't want to play against an army that is painted in eyewatering neon colors or painted like SS troops (both legitimate painting schemes). I play for my, and hopefully my opponents, enjoyment. I'm an adult I don't have to eat my vegetables if I don't want to do so.
This is a game. Everyone has the right to demand that their figures be held to their own standards. No one has the right to demand that someone else meet those standards. Not to mention the fact that one person's beauty can be someone else's "ugh". You have the right to refuse to play a game for any reason that you can come up with but you don't have the right to force someone else to conform to your views.
Leo_the_Rat wrote: I have a problem with what constitutes what levels? Is aesthetics involved in the answer? For instance if someone paints, details, shades, highlights and, gives their figures diorama like bases is that a 10? If so, what happens when they do all that and their figures are disgusting or just a plain eyesore due to the color choices? I'll be honest I'd rather play against a grey army then something that I can't stand looking at. I don't want to spend a couple hours sitting across the table from an army that has organs falling out of the figures and other "realism" type painting. I don't go to slasher flicks for the same reason. Likewise I don't want to play against an army that is painted in eyewatering neon colors or painted like SS troops (both legitimate painting schemes). I play for my, and hopefully my opponents, enjoyment. I'm an adult I don't have to eat my vegetables if I don't want to do so.
This is a game. Everyone has the right to demand that their figures be held to their own standards. No one has the right to demand that someone else meet those standards. Not to mention the fact that one person's beauty can be someone else's "ugh". You have the right to refuse to play a game for any reason that you can come up with but you don't have the right to force someone else to conform to your views.
for me its the end effect, i've seen some paintjobs that had no shading and edge highlight yet looked better than some with double edge highlights.
The only thing more annoying than unpainted models is the ridiculous efforts people go through to avoid admitting they just can't be bothered. Maybe 20 years ago, when mini painting was somewhat arcane (and more models were one piece metals), it was different, but now we have colored primers, contrasts, high pigment layers, vivid washes, and a plethora of painting videos for every level of skill. I don't understand why you'd spend an hour or more building a single 100 plus part squad, and then not spend at least the same amount of time to throw a coat of primer, some base paint, and a wash.
"I want to do my hobby, but I want to do it half assed" is such a strange hill for grown men to die on.
Is a friend starting a new army they wanna get in a game as fast as they can? who cares if it's painted
Is it a narrative campaign where everyone is expected to show up with fully painted armies? you better be 100% painted
At the end of the day ive found the most enjoyable games against people who care about their army and put the time into painting it. I find you get way less WAAC players so i tend to avoid people with grey tides unless they are new or starting something new
Polonius wrote: The only thing more annoying than unpainted models is the ridiculous efforts people go through to avoid admitting they just can't be bothered. Maybe 20 years ago, when mini painting was somewhat arcane (and more models were one piece metals), it was different, but now we have colored primers, contrasts, high pigment layers, vivid washes, and a plethora of painting videos for every level of skill. I don't understand why you'd spend an hour or more building a single 100 plus part squad, and then not spend at least the same amount of time to throw a coat of primer, some base paint, and a wash.
"I want to do my hobby, but I want to do it half assed" is such a strange hill for grown men to die on.
The hobby has multiple different parts that not everyone enjoys
Building
Painting
Playing
Lore
you don't need to fully immerse yourself in all 4 of these to be a part of the hobby. Sure, contrast paints lets you paint up an army in record time, but not everyone enjoys the few hours you still need to spend painting.
If you prefer painted minis, thats perfectly fine, but don't go around shaming people that don't paint theirs.
VladimirHerzog wrote: you don't need to fully immerse yourself in all 4 of these to be a part of the hobby. Sure, contrast paints lets you paint up an army in record time, but not everyone enjoys the few hours you still need to spend painting.
If you prefer painted minis, thats perfectly fine, but don't go around shaming people that don't paint theirs.
I'm not shaming them, they're shaming themselves. Virtually everybody agrees that painted armies make the game better, so refusing to even try to paint is just burdening the hobby with an eyesore of grey plastic.
And you don't need to "fully immerse" yourself in painting. You literally need to do the bare minimum, which simply does not take long. Somehow people see no problem with spending hundreds of dollars to buy the models, hours and hours to build the models, but somehow spraying some primer and picking our a few details is this enormous burden? Get over yourself.
VladimirHerzog wrote: you don't need to fully immerse yourself in all 4 of these to be a part of the hobby. Sure, contrast paints lets you paint up an army in record time, but not everyone enjoys the few hours you still need to spend painting.
If you prefer painted minis, thats perfectly fine, but don't go around shaming people that don't paint theirs.
I'm not shaming them, they're shaming themselves. Virtually everybody agrees that painted armies make the game better, so refusing to even try to paint is just burdening the hobby with an eyesore of grey plastic.
And you don't need to "fully immerse" yourself in painting. You literally need to do the bare minimum, which simply does not take long. Somehow people see no problem with spending hundreds of dollars to buy the models, hours and hours to build the models, but somehow spraying some primer and picking our a few details is this enormous burden? Get over yourself.
building a model takes less time than painting it. i don't get how people thing its shameful not to paint their minis but hey, thats what all these threads always come down to anyway.
VladimirHerzog wrote: you don't need to fully immerse yourself in all 4 of these to be a part of the hobby. Sure, contrast paints lets you paint up an army in record time, but not everyone enjoys the few hours you still need to spend painting.
If you prefer painted minis, thats perfectly fine, but don't go around shaming people that don't paint theirs.
I'm not shaming them, they're shaming themselves. Virtually everybody agrees that painted armies make the game better, so refusing to even try to paint is just burdening the hobby with an eyesore of grey plastic.
And you don't need to "fully immerse" yourself in painting. You literally need to do the bare minimum, which simply does not take long. Somehow people see no problem with spending hundreds of dollars to buy the models, hours and hours to build the models, but somehow spraying some primer and picking our a few details is this enormous burden? Get over yourself.
I going to be honest, when I read this “just do the bare minimum” and things like it, I don’t really get positive vibes from the hobby, and shows to me how little care there is for it.
There is so many reasons that doesn’t work for people, also that they may not like the look that produces and to be told to ruin there models can be a huge turn off.
Being told to badly do something does not lead positively in the hobby I feel, especially if that’s not at all why so many army’s are left grey.
overlord inspiron wrote: Most of my group play with fully painted armies there are a few members who haven't made any real progression and it is starting to grind on us a little bit especially because those of us that don't play with partiality finished models don't use a unit if it isn't fnished, we get not liking painting, I don't yet I play with a fully painted army, it was a massive slap in the face when said group members had done nothing after we took a month off to get stuff painted for warhammer world
I can appreciate your honesty, but this is nevertheless an extremely toxic attitude. "I suffered, so now you should too." It's crazy enough when people wear that attitude in the classic boomer way ("i walked 600 miles to school because we didn't have a bus, so you should too") but it's an order of magnitude crazier when it's about something that you had complete choice over.
I mean, shouldn't you actually admire them for having more backbone than you? They didn't like painting, so they stopped. You didn't like painting, but you yielded to whatever pressures were placed on you, and now you're never getting that time back
I legit respect your honesty about it, though. You've revealed the core issue for many people -- some nasty emotional cocktail of resentment, jealousy and regret -- instead of pretending it's a moral failing on behalf of the people who don't want to paint.
Isn't it kind of toxic to expect someone to want to play with you though? Like i have zero issue if someone wants to buy every army in the game and never paint a single thing... But wouldnt it be equilly if not more childish to expect someone to want to play with you?
A lot of this thread is really funny because its made to sound like those that want to play against another painted army are being "snobs"... But isnt demanding someone play against you and enjoy your unpainted army the definition of entitlment?
Fully painted to a battle ready standard. I don't know about zero exceptions.
I personally try not to put anything on the table that isn't to a battle ready standard, but there have been times where it was sort of unavoidable. In these rare situations I do ask if my opponent is cool with it because I would appreciate the same in return.
There have also been times where some of my friends have gotten really excited to throw dice and I didn't want to crush their enthusiasm. In these instances I try to build on that excitement and steer them to putting that energy into painting.
I won't field unpainted models of my own (generally, unless I just bought it yesterday and am so excited to use it but haven't had time to paint it yet...). I prefer my opponent does the same, but won't have a problem if they don't - not everyone has the time, or inclination, to participate in that aspect of the hobby; I understand. If their army is all grey I'll still play.
VladimirHerzog wrote: building a model takes less time than painting it. i don't get how people thing its shameful not to paint their minis but hey, thats what all these threads always come down to anyway.
Depending on the complexity of the kit, and the level of paintjob you're going for, they're closer than they used to be. Yeah, comparing doing layering and free hand to building one or two piece models is a huge gulf, but comparing building a modern, multi part kit to a quick battle ready standard? Not that far off. Look at a kit like Firewarriors: easily a dozen parts per model, lots of stuff to clip, trim, and file, and even if you just rip the parts off and bash them together, that's an evenings work. Priming takes a long time when you account for drying, but really only a few minutes for each coat. After that it's paint the armor, the undersuit, pick out a few details, wash, and scrape some texture paint on the base. Here's the thing: if you don't care how they look, then you can paint kind of sloppily! that's the beauty of it!
You can literally just prime your models, and they immediately look better, more so with a colored primer. That's literally a few minutes of work to turn grey plastic into at least color coded plastic.
And it's not shameful in a dramatic sense. It's not a grave sin to kin and countrymen... but it's a little bit, right?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Apple fox wrote: I going to be honest, when I read this “just do the bare minimum” and things like it, I don’t really get positive vibes from the hobby, and shows to me how little care there is for it.
There is so many reasons that doesn’t work for people, also that they may not like the look that produces and to be told to ruin there models can be a huge turn off.
Being told to badly do something does not lead positively in the hobby I feel, especially if that’s not at all why so many army’s are left grey.
This is the weirdest type of pretzel logic. You're trying to argue that getting people to do the hobby is bad for the hobby? My response to do the bare minimum are to people that are saying they don't want to paint at all. that's not my pitch to a new hobbyist, but to the guy who is showing up with the same grey plastic every week for years.
Personally, I think that for people with decent hand eye coordination and broadly normal motor skills battle ready is perfectly attainable. But... a color primer, picking out a few details, and a wash still looks better! I don't see why this is controversial.
While painted models are nice I love to have and want to see other people have, in my experience the people who get touchy about their opponents models are by FAR the least pleasant people to play with/talk to/be around in general. Rods so far up their ass you can see it poking against the top of their skull.
So you know, my painting requirement is more like 'if you have one I'm going to avoid you like the plague'. I'm here for a good game the end.
Edit: this actually applies to WYSIWYG and the like as well. I build my stuff WYSIWYG generally because I attend a lot of events, but in my experience people who are touchy about it in pick up/casual/friendly games aren't good opponents.
I pretty much only play with my own models painted- it's one of the reasons I'm stuck in small game mode; I am a slow painter and (I have 8 different Crusade forces on the go, so that doesn't help).
As for standards: I'm not the greatest painter, but I have really tried to step up my game this year- both in terms of quantity AND quality. I'm using more, thinner layers; I'm paying more attention to shading and highlighting, and Crusade has really made me think more about basing/ model evolution.
I like to add a skull to each base for every battle honour, and I try to keep the skulls of the species I was fighting when the Honour was earned. Some models I will magnetize their special bits so that they can be added as earned- the Dialogus kit was great for this- she'll get her scripture backpack once she's blooded and her hover lectern when she's heroic.
I'm using 5 separate models to represent my GSC Patriarch at his various stages of growth (I'm fortunate/ long in the tooth enough to have both classic metal Patriarchs).
I tend to go over the top designing terrain... Things like breakaway buildings to expose interiors or represent battle damage. In practice though? Once the army(s) are ready, I'll use whatever terrain is available to make a game happen.
I prefer my opponents to have their armies painted as well, but I won't turn down a game against an unpainted foe... Unless I'm specifically aiming to use the game for a batrep or stop motion video.
(Stop motion videos are fun, but it's a whole different experience, as you basically only get through one turn a day- you need to be able to have the table set up for a week)
Asmodios wrote: A lot of this thread is really funny because its made to sound like those that want to play against another painted army are being "snobs"... But isnt demanding someone play against you and enjoy your unpainted army the definition of entitlment?
My time to actually play the game is pretty limited, so I really would rather play a game that looks good, against another painted army. It's possible my experiences with unpainted armies color my views, but it's not people with demanding jobs and homelives who don't paint their stuff. It's overwhelmingly people with part time jobs and no kids and I'm like... how is your time at that much of a premium?
mrFickle wrote: The game is immersive for many and I think the look of an army is part of that immersion.
I wouldn’t like to regularly play against someone who flat out doesn’t paint anything but I’d someone adds some WIP models to a painted army that’s cool.
I think there are so many companies doing speed paints, like contrast, that it’s not hard to prime some models and coat them in a single colour. Even that’s better than nothing.
But I’m way more into the painting than the playing
Priming is the hardest part for me when working on models, and I dislike playing with models being painted as often that’s when damage can occur to the paint.
All in all, I don’t care much for 40k. And more get excited for good paint at skirmish games, where we can see the individual more. But I don’t even remember specifically any games I play against painted army’s over none painted.
mrFickle wrote: The game is immersive for many and I think the look of an army is part of that immersion.
I wouldn’t like to regularly play against someone who flat out doesn’t paint anything but I’d someone adds some WIP models to a painted army that’s cool.
I think there are so many companies doing speed paints, like contrast, that it’s not hard to prime some models and coat them in a single colour. Even that’s better than nothing.
But I’m way more into the painting than the playing
Priming is the hardest part for me when working on models, and I dislike playing with models being painted as often that’s when damage can occur to the paint.
All in all, I don’t care much for 40k. And more get excited for good paint at skirmish games, where we can see the individual more. But I don’t even remember specifically any games I play against painted army’s over none painted.
What do you find difficult about priming?
when priming with a can :
overspraying
non ideal conditions that cause bubbling/dusting
mrFickle wrote: The game is immersive for many and I think the look of an army is part of that immersion.
I wouldn’t like to regularly play against someone who flat out doesn’t paint anything but I’d someone adds some WIP models to a painted army that’s cool.
I think there are so many companies doing speed paints, like contrast, that it’s not hard to prime some models and coat them in a single colour. Even that’s better than nothing.
But I’m way more into the painting than the playing
Priming is the hardest part for me when working on models, and I dislike playing with models being painted as often that’s when damage can occur to the paint.
All in all, I don’t care much for 40k. And more get excited for good paint at skirmish games, where we can see the individual more. But I don’t even remember specifically any games I play against painted army’s over none painted.
What do you find difficult about priming?
I am disabled with limited use of my hands, and breathing issues. I am in bed for a lot of time, so doing any type of spray priming is a lot of effort, and takes a lot of planing, and help from others in the house.
Any dust from paint, or fumes is also very much a issue.
I also can’t always push in the nozzle on spray cans, and even opening a pop top on a tight paint pot has left me with injury that can last weeks or months.
To above, I actually take a lot of effort painting, it’s part of the hobby I like. Being told to just do the bare minimum doesn’t make me feel good, it doesn’t make it seem like they care at all about how my army looks.
So putting minimum effort for anyone like that seems like a waste of time, as I will dislike the result.
But pretzel logic for doing the hobby my way!
mrFickle wrote: The game is immersive for many and I think the look of an army is part of that immersion.
I wouldn’t like to regularly play against someone who flat out doesn’t paint anything but I’d someone adds some WIP models to a painted army that’s cool.
I think there are so many companies doing speed paints, like contrast, that it’s not hard to prime some models and coat them in a single colour. Even that’s better than nothing.
But I’m way more into the painting than the playing
Priming is the hardest part for me when working on models, and I dislike playing with models being painted as often that’s when damage can occur to the paint.
All in all, I don’t care much for 40k. And more get excited for good paint at skirmish games, where we can see the individual more. But I don’t even remember specifically any games I play against painted army’s over none painted.
What do you find difficult about priming?
Priming's one of those things that is stupidly easy once you've got some practice and the right space to do it in. But I remember my first attempts at spray priming were terrible. Too much paint, then spraying from too far, or spraying in a dusty environment, or in the freezing cold, and so on...
Until you get it figured out priming can be quite annoying, and mistakes at that stage are by far the hardest to fix.
Apple fox wrote: I am disabled with limited use of my hands, and breathing issues. I am in bed for a lot of time, so doing any type of spray priming is a lot of effort, and takes a lot of planing, and help from others in the house.
Any dust from paint, or fumes is also very much a issue.
I also can’t always push in the nozzle on spray cans, and even opening a pop top on a tight paint pot has left me with injury that can last weeks or months.
There are really good brush on primers now. I recommend the Vallejo ones, as they make a nice range of colors and has nice ocverage, especially on plastic. Spray primers are tough for a lot of people, either due to apartment living, or living in areas of really high (or low) humidity, or cold winters. As GW models become more dynamically posed, hand priming is more and more necassary as a touch up anyway.
To above, I actually take a lot of effort painting, it’s part of the hobby I like. Being told to just do the bare minimum doesn’t make me feel good, it doesn’t make it seem like they care at all about how my army looks.
So putting minimum effort for anyone like that seems like a waste of time, as I will dislike the result.
But pretzel logic for doing the hobby my way!
I'm sorry if my comments offended you, that wasn't my goal. I'm saying that even doing the bare minimum makes the army look better. I can't say that all painting effort leads to looking better, but it's a strong correlation. I'm trying to encourage people to at least try. If you're trying already, than great! I'm supportive and I'll cheer you on.
I'm not busting balls when people are trying, and obviously you have to account for people's physical and mental capabilities. What grinds my gears are people with normal motor skills, plenty of free time, and just choose not to paint at all.
Apple fox wrote: I am disabled with limited use of my hands, and breathing issues. I am in bed for a lot of time, so doing any type of spray priming is a lot of effort, and takes a lot of planing, and help from others in the house.
Any dust from paint, or fumes is also very much a issue.
I also can’t always push in the nozzle on spray cans, and even opening a pop top on a tight paint pot has left me with injury that can last weeks or months.
There are really good brush on primers now. I recommend the Vallejo ones, as they make a nice range of colors and has nice ocverage, especially on plastic. Spray primers are tough for a lot of people, either due to apartment living, or living in areas of really high (or low) humidity, or cold winters. As GW models become more dynamically posed, hand priming is more and more necassary as a touch up anyway.
To above, I actually take a lot of effort painting, it’s part of the hobby I like. Being told to just do the bare minimum doesn’t make me feel good, it doesn’t make it seem like they care at all about how my army looks.
So putting minimum effort for anyone like that seems like a waste of time, as I will dislike the result.
But pretzel logic for doing the hobby my way!
I'm sorry if my comments offended you, that wasn't my goal. I'm saying that even doing the bare minimum makes the army look better. I can't say that all painting effort leads to looking better, but it's a strong correlation. I'm trying to encourage people to at least try. If you're trying already, than great! I'm supportive and I'll cheer you on.
I'm not busting balls when people are trying, and obviously you have to account for people's physical and mental capabilities. What grinds my gears are people with normal motor skills, plenty of free time, and just choose not to paint at all.
Again, some people don’t like to paint. You can’t force people to do something they don’t like. Unless you are offering to do it yourself or pay for someone to paint it, there is really nothing you can do. If you don’t want to play against it that’s fine, but when you start shaming other people and telling them they are doing the hobby wrong because they don’t want to, then it becomes a point of contention.
Apple fox wrote: I am disabled with limited use of my hands, and breathing issues. I am in bed for a lot of time, so doing any type of spray priming is a lot of effort, and takes a lot of planing, and help from others in the house.
Any dust from paint, or fumes is also very much a issue.
I also can’t always push in the nozzle on spray cans, and even opening a pop top on a tight paint pot has left me with injury that can last weeks or months.
There are really good brush on primers now. I recommend the Vallejo ones, as they make a nice range of colors and has nice ocverage, especially on plastic. Spray primers are tough for a lot of people, either due to apartment living, or living in areas of really high (or low) humidity, or cold winters. As GW models become more dynamically posed, hand priming is more and more necassary as a touch up anyway.
To above, I actually take a lot of effort painting, it’s part of the hobby I like. Being told to just do the bare minimum doesn’t make me feel good, it doesn’t make it seem like they care at all about how my army looks.
So putting minimum effort for anyone like that seems like a waste of time, as I will dislike the result.
But pretzel logic for doing the hobby my way!
I'm sorry if my comments offended you, that wasn't my goal. I'm saying that even doing the bare minimum makes the army look better. I can't say that all painting effort leads to looking better, but it's a strong correlation. I'm trying to encourage people to at least try. If you're trying already, than great! I'm supportive and I'll cheer you on.
I'm not busting balls when people are trying, and obviously you have to account for people's physical and mental capabilities. What grinds my gears are people with normal motor skills, plenty of free time, and just choose not to paint at all.
I do actually prefer spray, and when I can I use airbrush but that’s like a full day planing.
And that was a I wish my English was better to give a better response, as I don’t actually think was directed at me. But often when people bring this sorta discussion off the internet it often ends up right there.
Why I think it’s great there are options to easy do a army when considering more traditional hobby, I don’t think it’s actually all that useful in discussions like this.
I have had a army effectively made invalid by GW, my last fully painted army. Not just in need of rework, but completely changed to something that won’t enjoy playing.
And I think with GW being so hopeless at this, it’s not just me that can feel upended in this hobby.
And I feel it’s lead indirectly to the way a lot of people feel about there factions and the models they have.
Again, some people don’t like to paint. You can’t force people to do something they don’t like. Unless you are offering to do it yourself or pay for someone to paint it, there is really nothing you can do. If you don’t want to play against it that’s fine, but when you start shaming other people and telling them they are doing the hobby wrong because they don’t want to, then it becomes a point of contention.
I'm not forcing anybody to do anything. And being judgmental about people not painting isn't gatekeeping, it's just recognizing that some people are more complete hobbyists that others. Like, I have no problem with a person wearing an old t-shirt and gym shorts and not showering for a few days. that's they're god given right, and one I've indulged in a few times. But when I'm at a fine dining restaurant, I'm sitting next to Stinky McGee wearing a tattered "Big Johnson" t-shirt while I'm having a date with my wife, it kind of sucks, right? I'm not going to walk past two guys playing with unpainted armies and make fun of them, because that's weird and rude and bad.
But... and hear me out on this... the way I enjoy the hobby is by playing other painted armies, and I'm going to prioritize doing that. When I need to get in a game, I'll roll against unpainted plastic. Once at a tournament a kid had only glued the legs of his necrons to the bases, and I still played. Whatever. OTOH, a group of local guys organized an apoc game, pretty big. We asked for painted only, because, you know, narrative fluff bunny stuff. Dude showed up with a bunch of second hand, mismatched, and mostly unpainted stuff. How am I the jerk for thinking he's a shmuck because he ignored our request for how to play? Three dudes show up with crisply painted armies, and homeboy dumps a box of eBay rejects on the table.
So, do you. Play how you want to play. But know that there are simply going to be some games you can't play because you won't paint.
"I want to do my hobby, but I want to do it half assed" is such a strange hill for grown men to die on.
You're confusing [/i]your[i] hobby with mine.
MY hobby is playing games.
I'm very good at my hobby regardless of the amount of paint on any given model.
Asmodios wrote: A lot of this thread is really funny because its made to sound like those that want to play against another painted army are being "snobs"... But isnt demanding someone play against you and enjoy your unpainted army the definition of entitlment?
My time to actually play the game is pretty limited, so I really would rather play a game that looks good, against another painted army. It's possible my experiences with unpainted armies color my views, but it's not people with demanding jobs and homelives who don't paint their stuff. It's overwhelmingly people with part time jobs and no kids and I'm like... how is your time at that much of a premium?
Yeah, i get it 100%... I guess it's just weird because I never feel anyone is obligated to play me for any reason. Don't like playing against my specific list or faction? My paint job isn't up to your standard? Do you just think I look like a Dbag? That's all good because nobody has to play me for any reason whatsoever. So what's the big deal if i want to be able to take pictures of the game I'm playing and don't really want them to be immersion-breaking because the other force is grey?
Polonius wrote: The only thing more annoying than unpainted models is the ridiculous efforts people go through to avoid admitting they just can't be bothered. Maybe 20 years ago, when mini painting was somewhat arcane (and more models were one piece metals), it was different, but now we have colored primers, contrasts, high pigment layers, vivid washes, and a plethora of painting videos for every level of skill. I don't understand why you'd spend an hour or more building a single 100 plus part squad, and then not spend at least the same amount of time to throw a coat of primer, some base paint, and a wash.
"I want to do my hobby, but I want to do it half assed" is such a strange hill for grown men to die on.
Personally while I prefer painted models, I have no problem playing against someone in the process of painting their army or who just bought a new one and hasn't gotten to painting it yet. That said, I do mind constant excuses about why they can't paint. I hear people say they can't afford paint (but they can afford a 2K army), or they don't have the skill (there are so, so many products designed explicitly to make painting easy), or they don't have the time (but they do have time to build a 2K army and play with it every week).
If you don't want to paint, just own it instead of making excuses. Some people consider painted armies part of the experience and if you don't feel the same, it's better to be up-front about that than to pretend you want to paint but just can't.
(And to be clear, I am not talking about anyone with a disability that hinders painting, I mean the people who clearly have the time, money, and ability but actively choose not to)
"I want to do my hobby, but I want to do it half assed" is such a strange hill for grown men to die on.
You're confusing [/i]your[i] hobby with mine.
MY hobby is playing games.
I'm very good at my hobby regardless of the amount of paint on any given model.
I mean, there's sort of limit to how good you can be at playing 40k now that most events have paint requirements, but that's fine. Again, you do you.
But I'm not confusing anything. I'm enjoying my hobby, and to the extent that who your hobby and mine intersect, I'm judging that. And yes, one of the things I factor in is if you've got a painted army, or are at least making progress on that.
If you're upset because I silently judge you, or prefer to play others, that's not because of my actions. My actions are pretty minimal, and basically saying, "oh, one of those guys." No, you're upset because deep down, you agree with me. If you really didn't see any social value in painting, than you simply wouldn't care. But you have to defend your ego against being reminded that you aren't living up to your own standards.
It's not me that's hurting you with judgment. It's yourself.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
catbarf wrote: If you don't want to paint, just own it instead of making excuses. Some people consider painted armies part of the experience and if you don't feel the same, it's better to be up-front about that than to pretend you want to paint but just can't.
Hard agree. Somebody that just says "yup, I hate painting, I don't want to do it" is at least being honest with themselves, and by extension, me. I'd still really prefer they at least try, but in my mind trying to justify not painting is worse than just refusing to do it.
(And to be clear, I am not talking about anyone with a disability that hinders painting, I mean the people who clearly have the time, money, and ability but actively choose not to)
I'm not forcing anybody to do anything. And being judgmental about people not painting isn't gatekeeping, it's just recognizing that some people are more complete hobbyists that others. Like, I have no problem with a person wearing an old t-shirt and gym shorts and not showering for a few days. that's they're god given right, and one I've indulged in a few times. But when I'm at a fine dining restaurant, I'm sitting next to Stinky McGee wearing a tattered "Big Johnson" t-shirt while I'm having a date with my wife, it kind of sucks, right? I'm not going to walk past two guys playing with unpainted armies and make fun of them, because that's weird and rude and bad.
There difference is that stuff like being clean, showering etc is stuff you have to do to be a normal human. Painting is not required to play the game. Saying that someone with an unpainted army is like someone who doesn't shower is a huge stretch.
also the painting requirement is a gate keeper. 10VP difference is huge, specialy when you are starting to play. It means that if you have an unpainted army you will always lose your games. It also adds cost to the game. even 4-5 basic colours, 2 brushes and a basecoat can sets someone back by 1-2 boxes. And when you are on a budget this means you are pushed back in getting a 2k army by 1-2 months. Not everyone is happy about the fact, that in order for other people to enjoy the game they have to spend their own money and wait to get a full army longer.
catbarf wrote: or they don't have the time (but they do have time to build a 2K army and play with it every week).
maybe the only hobby time they have is that one game per week. So they can either use it to paint (which isnt what theyre looking for in the hobby) or to play (which is what theyre looking for in the hobby)
i'll paint my models because i enjoy doing it (as long as its not hordes of highly detailed models like cultists, which i will usually leave airbrushed for a while) and i think its fine if everyone has different standards.
The problem i have is that some people judge others because they dislike painting. If you don't want to play against unpainted stuff, thats perfectly fine, just don't start the narrative of "if you really were a part of the hobby you'd have fully painted armies"
Polonius wrote: The only thing more annoying than unpainted models is the ridiculous efforts people go through to avoid admitting they just can't be bothered. Maybe 20 years ago, when mini painting was somewhat arcane (and more models were one piece metals), it was different, but now we have colored primers, contrasts, high pigment layers, vivid washes, and a plethora of painting videos for every level of skill. I don't understand why you'd spend an hour or more building a single 100 plus part squad, and then not spend at least the same amount of time to throw a coat of primer, some base paint, and a wash.
"I want to do my hobby, but I want to do it half assed" is such a strange hill for grown men to die on.
Personally while I prefer painted models, I have no problem playing against someone in the process of painting their army or who just bought a new one and hasn't gotten to painting it yet. That said, I do mind constant excuses about why they can't paint. I hear people say they can't afford paint (but they can afford a 2K army), or they don't have the skill (there are so, so many products designed explicitly to make painting easy), or they don't have the time (but they do have time to build a 2K army and play with it every week).
If you don't want to paint, just own it instead of making excuses. Some people consider painted armies part of the experience and if you don't feel the same, it's better to be up-front about that than to pretend you want to paint but just can't.
(And to be clear, I am not talking about anyone with a disability that hinders painting, I mean the people who clearly have the time, money, and ability but actively choose not to)
Personally I much prefer players saying they want all painted game if that’s what they really want, rather than something like points above.
40k just isn’t that for me at this point, and for tournaments I would do bare minimum tournament army. But, I can’t even sit that long so it isn’t so much a worry.
I do want the mental stimulation that table top games can have, and I find that very important. So that is a big part of the hobby.
Events and things I do find reasonable as well to put more restrictions in, the same way I think tournaments can be more strict on rule enforcement.
Karol wrote: my army is fully painted. I don't care what the opponent state of painting is, but if it is not fully painted I am taking the 10VP.
Hardcore RAW guys: "unless GW says it, it's not a real rule"
Guy with Painted army: "Okay, so we start the game 10-0"
RAW guys: "Not like that"
Oh trust me, people painted their armies really fast. For most people it didn't even matter, those that played events had already painted army. Then there is people like me, who had painted armies because they bought second hand ones. Only people that had problems with it was new people. The store owner at the store I play loved the ruled.
The the flip side of things my AoSLL are based with grey, with one horse 2/3 painted in brown. And considering I have been playing the game for over a year, I do not doubt, I will not paint them ever.
Maybe the only hobby time they have is that one game per week. So they can either use it to paint (which isnt what theyre looking for in the hobby) or to play (which is what theyre looking for in the hobby)
This. If someone can either spend 2 hours going to the store, then playing 1-2 games, and then go back home for 2 hours, on the weekend, there isn't much time left to paint. Unless someone stops playing and starts painting every weekend. But then why play w40k at all. Pick infinity or kill team, there is no I will be able to play the game in 9 months, because my army consists of 4 NDKs and 50 infantry models.
I'm not forcing anybody to do anything. And being judgmental about people not painting isn't gatekeeping, it's just recognizing that some people are more complete hobbyists that others. Like, I have no problem with a person wearing an old t-shirt and gym shorts and not showering for a few days. that's they're god given right, and one I've indulged in a few times. But when I'm at a fine dining restaurant, I'm sitting next to Stinky McGee wearing a tattered "Big Johnson" t-shirt while I'm having a date with my wife, it kind of sucks, right? I'm not going to walk past two guys playing with unpainted armies and make fun of them, because that's weird and rude and bad.
There difference is that stuff like being clean, showering etc is stuff you have to do to be a normal human. Painting is not required to play the game. Saying that someone with an unpainted army is like someone who doesn't shower is a huge stretch.
also the painting requirement is a gate keeper. 10VP difference is huge, specialy when you are starting to play. It means that if you have an unpainted army you will always lose your games. It also adds cost to the game. even 4-5 basic colours, 2 brushes and a basecoat can sets someone back by 1-2 boxes. And when you are on a budget this means you are pushed back in getting a 2k army by 1-2 months. Not everyone is happy about the fact, that in order for other people to enjoy the game they have to spend their own money and wait to get a full army longer.
So, for starters, I've been to enough Walmarts here in the deep south to know that grooming isn't exactly a requirement. Ditto gaming stores. You literally can walk into a most places in dirty clothes smelling like BO, and nobody is gonnna stop you. The fact that there are places with dress codes and the like is somewhat uncommon. But when youre in such a place, maybe try to fit in?
Gatekeeping is preventing people from enjoying the hobby. I want people to enjoy the hobby. It's an expensive, time consuming hobby, so maybe i don't feel bad somebody that just spend a cool grand on plastic has to buy a spray can and a few cans of paint.
AS for the time aspect, that's why I'm all a bout making progress. My beef isn't with new guys, it's with people that just don't bother.
VladimirHerzog wrote:
catbarf wrote: or they don't have the time (but they do have time to build a 2K army and play with it every week).
maybe the only hobby time they have is that one game per week. So they can either use it to paint (which isnt what theyre looking for in the hobby) or to play (which is what theyre looking for in the hobby)
I think if there is a case where a person reliable has free time during store hours to play a game a week, but literally zero other free time, I will allow it. Why? Because that will never happen.
i'll paint my models because i enjoy doing it (as long as its not hordes of highly detailed models like cultists, which i will usually leave airbrushed for a while) and i think its fine if everyone has different standards.
The problem i have is that some people judge others because they dislike painting. If you don't want to play against unpainted stuff, thats perfectly fine, just don't start the narrative of "if you really were a part of the hobby you'd have fully painted armies"
Oh, it's big hobby. the people that played Dawn of War and read some lore articles are part of the hobby, so I'm not here to "no true scotsman" you.
But of course I can judge. Why can't I? If you don't paint your models, and I sniff and go, "that guy? he doesn't paint his army" where's the lie? I'm not calling you history's greatest monster, just a person that chooses not to paint your models. Again, if YOU felt 100% comfortable with not painting, your reaction to my judgment would be a shrug. But you don't like when people remind you that your isn't painted, because, again, YOU attach a moral weight to it.
I'm not forcing anybody to do anything. And being judgmental about people not painting isn't gatekeeping, it's just recognizing that some people are more complete hobbyists that others. Like, I have no problem with a person wearing an old t-shirt and gym shorts and not showering for a few days. that's they're god given right, and one I've indulged in a few times. But when I'm at a fine dining restaurant, I'm sitting next to Stinky McGee wearing a tattered "Big Johnson" t-shirt while I'm having a date with my wife, it kind of sucks, right? I'm not going to walk past two guys playing with unpainted armies and make fun of them, because that's weird and rude and bad.
There difference is that stuff like being clean, showering etc is stuff you have to do to be a normal human. Painting is not required to play the game. Saying that someone with an unpainted army is like someone who doesn't shower is a huge stretch.
also the painting requirement is a gate keeper. 10VP difference is huge, specialy when you are starting to play. It means that if you have an unpainted army you will always lose your games. It also adds cost to the game. even 4-5 basic colours, 2 brushes and a basecoat can sets someone back by 1-2 boxes. And when you are on a budget this means you are pushed back in getting a 2k army by 1-2 months. Not everyone is happy about the fact, that in order for other people to enjoy the game they have to spend their own money and wait to get a full army longer.
Dont all your rules apply to the shower guys as well?
1. You are gatekeeping what it means to be a normal human
2. You are adding a cost barrier to being a normal human that will set someone back
3. Not everyone is happy about the fact that in order for other people to enjoy their company they have spend money to shower and take longer to get ready
Yeah, allegations of gatekeeping are a bigger deal in fandoms, where basically it doesn't matter if you've seen one star wars movie or read every scrap of lore, anybody can be a star wars fan. If you like it, you like.
Actually doing a hobby though, there are simply levels. I'm not a great painter or highly skilled player or dedicated loremaster, and that's okay. I respect the people that have the skills or dedication that I don't. Likewise, at least my stuff is painted, and I feel a little bit better than those without it. the human compulsion to seek our categories and hierarchies isn't our most noble trait, but it's hard to shake.
If said I was a snowboarding fan, and people gave me crap about now knowing enough about snowboarding to say I like it, that's gatekeeping. OTOH, since I"m a fat, out of shape middle aged man who lives in the deep south who has never actually, you know, snowboarded, it's not exactly gatekeeping to be skeptical of claims that I'm just as much a snowboarder as Olympic athletes
But of course I can judge. Why can't I? If you don't paint your models, and I sniff and go, "that guy? he doesn't paint his army" where's the lie? I'm not calling you history's greatest monster, just a person that chooses not to paint your models. Again, if YOU felt 100% comfortable with not painting, your reaction to my judgment would be a shrug. But you don't like when people remind you that your isn't painted, because, again, YOU attach a moral weight to it.
ok i didnt explain myself properly. You can judge me, just silently, be respectful about it is what i mean.
I judge everyone's paintjobs internally because i'm a painter first so that comes naturally. But i'm not gonna start telling people that they paintjobs are bad (even if i think they are). It's all about being polite.
But of course I can judge. Why can't I? If you don't paint your models, and I sniff and go, "that guy? he doesn't paint his army" where's the lie? I'm not calling you history's greatest monster, just a person that chooses not to paint your models. Again, if YOU felt 100% comfortable with not painting, your reaction to my judgment would be a shrug. But you don't like when people remind you that your isn't painted, because, again, YOU attach a moral weight to it.
ok i didnt explain myself properly. You can judge me, just silently, be respectful about it is what i mean.
I judge everyone's paintjobs internally because i'm a painter first so that comes naturally. But i'm not gonna start telling people that they paintjobs are bad (even if i think they are). It's all about being polite.
Of course. And aside from some knee jerk reactions to really poor paint schemes or technique, I really do try to be positive about other people's paint schemes. for me, painting isn't about quality, it's about making the effort. Because again, even a poorly painted army is better to play against than an unpainted army.
I try to paint my minis if I have time, but being a dad and a student with a full time job, I don't get the luxury every time. My Custodes are fully painted, my IG are, but my new BA primaris force is grey. And I will honestly question the priorities of anyone who tells me I can't play with grey plastic.
I like to have fully painted models on the table. I prefer skirmish games, and I'm sure part of it is because I don't have the willpower to paint a full unit of 30 Clanrats in an afternoon or two. It would take me weeks to paint them, even with a simple scheme, because I lose attention pretty fast. But, for skirmish games, namely Infinity, painting 15 models, in which a lot of models different, is a lot easier for me. I'll eventually have a Skaven army painted, probably a few years into The Old World. But, until then, my Combined Army are my only fully painted force.
For my opponents, I've played with people who had their models held together by poster putty, and for the wrong game. I've lent fully painted Skitarii for an Infinity game once, and hoped he remembered what was what. I'm not particularly worried about paint jobs, or even correct models, as long as I get a fun game out of it. I just like my own models to be painted.
Polonius wrote: Yeah, allegations of gatekeeping are a bigger deal in fandoms, where basically it doesn't matter if you've seen one star wars movie or read every scrap of lore, anybody can be a star wars fan. If you like it, you like.
Actually doing a hobby though, there are simply levels. I'm not a great painter or highly skilled player or dedicated loremaster, and that's okay. I respect the people that have the skills or dedication that I don't. Likewise, at least my stuff is painted, and I feel a little bit better than those without it. the human compulsion to seek our categories and hierarchies isn't our most noble trait, but it's hard to shake.
If said I was a snowboarding fan, and people gave me crap about now knowing enough about snowboarding to say I like it, that's gatekeeping. OTOH, since I"m a fat, out of shape middle aged man who lives in the deep south who has never actually, you know, snowboarded, it's not exactly gatekeeping to be skeptical of claims that I'm just as much a snowboarder as Olympic athletes
Couple issues here. First, your analogy is kind of disingenuous. Someone who enjoys one or more aspects of the hobby but not painting is still participating in the hobby. They're just not engaging in one of the aspects that you personally enjoy. Someone who likes playing the game and building models isn't analogous to a snowboarder who has never snowboarded; they're more analogous to a snowboarder that doesn't enjoy certain slopes or doing certain kinds of tricks or putting decals on his gear. So in this analogy, you're a fellow snowboarder accusing someone of being lazy because they didn't spend time and money to put custom decals on their board.
And that brings us to the second issue: your behavior towards your fellow 40k fans. It's fine if you don't enjoy playing games against unpainted armies. If that's genuinely a critical part of the hobby for you that prevents you from enjoying what would otherwise be a pleasant gaming experience, fine. But the way you've written your posts in this thread, it comes across as you going a step further and being insulting to those who don't share your personal preferences. You've called your fellow 40k fans lazy and compared playing with unpainted minis to being unhygienic.
"You enjoy camping, but you don't like fishing while you camp? Wow. You must be lazy. If I see you not fishing while we camp in the same general area, it's basically like you're forcing me to sniff your unwashed armpit."
^See how that sounds?
"I want to do my hobby, but I want to do it half assed" is such a strange hill for grown men to die on.
You're confusing [/i]your hobby with mine.
MY hobby is playing games.
I'm very good at my hobby regardless of the amount of paint on any given model.
I mean, there's sort of limit to how good you can be at playing 40k now that most events have paint requirements, but that's fine.
There isn't. That extra 10pts you get for paint has nothing to do with your skill at [i]playing the game.
Polonius wrote: But I'm not confusing anything. I'm enjoying my hobby, and to the extent that who your hobby and mine intersect, I'm judging that. And yes, one of the things I factor in is if you've got a painted army, or are at least making progress on that.
You are confusing it. YOUR hobby includes the painting aspect. And although painting is something that I do, MINE really does not. Like I said, MY hobby is playing games. 40k is but one of many games....
Our hobbies only intersect at the point of playing. So if you're judging beyond that it's a you thing.
And if bother to scroll back a page or so? You'll see my reply where I state that while the goal is a fully painted stuff, I paint slowly & sporadically and am not worried about how long it may take me to reach that goal.
Polonius wrote: If you're upset because I silently judge you, or prefer to play others, that's not because of my actions. My actions are pretty minimal, and basically saying, "oh, one of those guys." No, you're upset because deep down, you agree with me. If you really didn't see any social value in painting, than you simply wouldn't care. But you have to defend your ego against being reminded that you aren't living up to your own standards.
I'm not upset. I've merely pointed out that our hobbies are not the same. And no, I do not agree with you, deep down or otherwise. And I don't care (I said that back a page or so as well).
Polonius wrote: It's not me that's hurting you with judgment. It's yourself.
How cute, you're quoting the aspirational plague on your wall.
Polonius wrote: ... some people are more complete hobbyists that others...
Oh no! Someone is hobbying the wrong way!
Who are you to say what's "complete" and what's not?
If you don't apply scented oils to your models, you're not a complete hobbyist. You don't have to brush body odor onto your models' armpits, but at least spritz your army with the smell of gunpowder and blood. Some scent is better than no scent. I refuse to play against anyone whose army smells like paint and gray plastic. That's just how I enjoy my hobby. It's way easier to make your army smell properly than in the old days. How hard is it to spray your army with battlefield cologne compared to the old days when you had to make your own scents at home? Anyone who doesn't do this is lazy and not a real hobbyist and probably steals money from senior citizens.
"I want to do my hobby, but I want to do it half assed" is such a strange hill for grown men to die on.
You're confusing [/i]your hobby with mine.
MY hobby is playing games.
I'm very good at my hobby regardless of the amount of paint on any given model.
I mean, there's sort of limit to how good you can be at playing 40k now that most events have paint requirements, but that's fine.
There isn't. That extra 10pts you get for paint has nothing to do with your skill at [i]playing the game.
Not that I play with VP(or care), but if the 10pts are part of the game and you don't get them, then are you as skilled at the game as you say??? Or are you so damn good that those 10pts are a freebie to your opponent so they have a chance, since you're sooooo good?
Polonius wrote: ... some people are more complete hobbyists that others...
Oh no! Someone is hobbying the wrong way!
Who are you to say what's "complete" and what's not?
If you don't apply scented oils to your models, you're not a complete hobbyist. You don't have to brush body odor onto your models' armpits, but at least spritz your army with the smell of gunpowder and blood. Some scent is better than no scent. I refuse to play against anyone whose army smells like paint and gray plastic. That's just how I enjoy my hobby. It's way easier to make your army smell properly than in the old days. How hard is it to spray your army with battlefield cologne compared to the old days when you had to make your own scents at home? Anyone who doesn't do this is lazy and not a real hobbyist and probably steals money from senior citizens.
I prefer “Heresy” by Kalvin Klein myself. Gives that feeling of chaos but with a hint of class.
Polonius wrote: ... some people are more complete hobbyists that others...
Oh no! Someone is hobbying the wrong way!
Who are you to say what's "complete" and what's not?
If you don't apply scented oils to your models, you're not a complete hobbyist. You don't have to brush body odor onto your models' armpits, but at least spritz your army with the smell of gunpowder and blood. Some scent is better than no scent. I refuse to play against anyone whose army smells like paint and gray plastic. That's just how I enjoy my hobby. It's way easier to make your army smell properly than in the old days. How hard is it to spray your army with battlefield cologne compared to the old days when you had to make your own scents at home? Anyone who doesn't do this is lazy and not a real hobbyist and probably steals money from senior citizens.
I prefer “Heresy” by Kalvin Klein myself. Gives that feeling of chaos but with a hint of class.
That's the one that starts by smelling a lot like Imperial Spice but then changes to a more sour smell after a while, right?
Wyldhunt wrote:Couple issues here. First, your analogy is kind of disingenuous. Someone who enjoys one or more aspects of the hobby but not painting is still participating in the hobby. They're just not engaging in one of the aspects that you personally enjoy. Someone who likes playing the game and building models isn't analogous to a snowboarder who has never snowboarded; they're more analogous to a snowboarder that doesn't enjoy certain slopes or doing certain kinds of tricks or putting decals on his gear. So in this analogy, you're a fellow snowboarder accusing someone of being lazy because they didn't spend time and money to put custom decals on their board.
I still think that it's not really gatekeeping to accurately notice what a person is doing. A person that does harder slopes might not want to spend the day with a person who only does the bunny hill. I don't think it's judgmental for the former to say "yeah, i'm only interested in doing the harder courses."
And that brings us to the second issue: your behavior towards your fellow 40k fans. It's fine if you don't enjoy playing games against unpainted armies. If that's genuinely a critical part of the hobby for you that prevents you from enjoying what would otherwise be a pleasant gaming experience, fine. But the way you've written your posts in this thread, it comes across as you going a step further and being insulting to those who don't share your personal preferences. You've called your fellow 40k fans lazy and compared playing with unpainted minis to being unhygienic.
Well, to be fair, a lot of 40k fans are lazy. I sure am!
And the hygiene thing was about how different standards apply in different situations. I explicitly said that I often wear a t-shirt and shorts and don't shower, so if I'm painting anybody with a broad brush, that includes me. What I said was that while being super casual is fine some places, it's rude in others. If a restaurant wants collared shirts, and you show up in a tank top, the restaurant isn't being judgey. Likewise, if the expectation for a game or event is painted, and you don't paint, that's just tough.
"You enjoy camping, but you don't like fishing while you camp? Wow. You must be lazy. If I see you not fishing while we camp in the same general area, it's basically like you're forcing me to sniff your unwashed armpit."
^See how that sounds?
Like an almost intentional misreading of my posts?
ccs wrote:There isn't. That extra 10pts you get for paint has nothing to do with your skill at playing the game.
i was saying that if you don't pain, you can't show off that skill at the best events, because they require painting.
You are confusing it. YOUR hobby includes the painting aspect. And although painting is something that I do, MINE really does not. Like I said, MY hobby is playing games. 40k is but one of many games....
Our hobbies only intersect at the point of playing. So if you're judging beyond that it's a you thing.
And if bother to scroll back a page or so? You'll see my reply where I state that while the goal is a fully painted stuff, I paint slowly & sporadically and am not worried about how long it may take me to reach that goal. [/quote[
and you read all of my posts, you'll see that I support people that are making progress. I've repeatedly said that I'm most annoyed by people who both make zero progress, and make excuses for not making any progress.
How cute, you're quoting the aspirational plague on your wall.
Hey, sometimes it turns out the best thing to do is to Live, Laugh, and Love. And then paint your army.
Polonius wrote: ... some people are more complete hobbyists that others...
Oh no! Someone is hobbying the wrong way!
Who are you to say what's "complete" and what's not?
That fake-ass assessment falls apart sooo fast, too.
Player A: hates painting and has stopped, but has GD-level paintjobs in their past
Player B: hates painting but dutifully does it to average tabletop standard for all armies
Player C: loves painting and paints all armies, but is not a good painter
Wyldhunt wrote: If you don't apply scented oils to your models, you're not a complete hobbyist. You don't have to brush body odor onto your models' armpits, but at least spritz your army with the smell of gunpowder and blood. Some scent is better than no scent. I refuse to play against anyone whose army smells like paint and gray plastic. That's just how I enjoy my hobby. It's way easier to make your army smell properly than in the old days. How hard is it to spray your army with battlefield cologne compared to the old days when you had to make your own scents at home? Anyone who doesn't do this is lazy and not a real hobbyist and probably steals money from senior citizens.
Polonius wrote: ... some people are more complete hobbyists that others...
Oh no! Someone is hobbying the wrong way!
Who are you to say what's "complete" and what's not?
This, uh, isn't a trick question. You can call it well rounded or whatever, but probably the person who engages in the most aspects of the hobby.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Altruizine wrote: That fake-ass assessment falls apart sooo fast, too.
Player A: hates painting and has stopped, but has GD-level paintjobs in their past
Player B: hates painting but dutifully does it to average tabletop standard for all armies
Player C: loves painting and paints all armies, but is not a good painter
Who's the most complete hobbyist here?
There's this bizarre preoccupation with insisting that my snobbery that people try is actually snobbery that people excel.
If you paint, you paint. Now, if we talk about techniques and such, rather than levels of quality, sure. I'm a less complete hobbyist than somebody who airbrushes, because there are simply techniques I can't apply. Likewise 3d printing, which is something I have negative interest in.
But to my mind, a person who uses a wide variety of techniques and materials, even somewhat clumsily, is a more complete hobbyist than somebody who as learned a few tricks with an airbrush but can't do much beyond a simple fade or OSL.
I only play fully painted these days. I have no expectation that my opponent does the same. Well painted opponents certainly improves the experience for me, but I'll play against whatever you've got.
CadianSgtBob wrote: Fully painted, no exceptions. If it is not painted to at least basic tabletop standard it does not get used in a game. And if your army is not fully painted to that standard I will not play a game against you.
Dang, I just tuned in to this, but this post is just so on brand for you it's almost comical.
Regarding the original question: I try to set a high standard for my paintjobs and try to paint everything I bring to the table, but I could't care less if my opponent has painted models or not. If they are, awsome! If they are not, it's not a problem as long as both parties are having a good time playing the game.
Polonius wrote: ... some people are more complete hobbyists that others...
Oh no! Someone is hobbying the wrong way!
Who are you to say what's "complete" and what's not?
If you don't apply scented oils to your models, you're not a complete hobbyist. You don't have to brush body odor onto your models' armpits, but at least spritz your army with the smell of gunpowder and blood. Some scent is better than no scent. I refuse to play against anyone whose army smells like paint and gray plastic. That's just how I enjoy my hobby. It's way easier to make your army smell properly than in the old days. How hard is it to spray your army with battlefield cologne compared to the old days when you had to make your own scents at home? Anyone who doesn't do this is lazy and not a real hobbyist and probably steals money from senior citizens.
I mean you guys are literally leaving out all of the context of the point he was making. Even in this clearly over-the-top example, I'm pretty sure he would say "cool that you go over the top to make your models smell a certain way and it's 100% your choice if you wanna not play me because I don't do it"
Why do people get so mad if someone doesn't want to play against a sea of grey miniatures? why should I get mad if someone doesn't want to play against my non "perfumed" army? Why would someone with a grey army want to play against someone who really wants 2 painted armies on the table?
There's this bizarre preoccupation with insisting that my snobbery that people try is actually snobbery that people excel.
If you paint, you paint. Now, if we talk about techniques and such, rather than levels of quality, sure. I'm a less complete hobbyist than somebody who airbrushes, because there are simply techniques I can't apply. Likewise 3d printing, which is something I have negative interest in.
I would submit that that is actually people giving you the benefit of the doubt, because "I want my games to look good" is kind of a sympathetic position, but "I want people to suffer through doing something they don't enjoy to produce a token end result that may or may not look good" is sheer sadistic idiocy.
Wyldhunt wrote:Couple issues here. First, your analogy is kind of disingenuous. Someone who enjoys one or more aspects of the hobby but not painting is still participating in the hobby. They're just not engaging in one of the aspects that you personally enjoy. Someone who likes playing the game and building models isn't analogous to a snowboarder who has never snowboarded; they're more analogous to a snowboarder that doesn't enjoy certain slopes or doing certain kinds of tricks or putting decals on his gear. So in this analogy, you're a fellow snowboarder accusing someone of being lazy because they didn't spend time and money to put custom decals on their board.
I still think that it's not really gatekeeping to accurately notice what a person is doing. A person that does harder slopes might not want to spend the day with a person who only does the bunny hill. I don't think it's judgmental for the former to say "yeah, i'm only interested in doing the harder courses."
Passively noticing someone is on the bunny hill is harmless. Going up to them to tell them that you don't like the bunny hill because it's not cool enough for you comes across as rude. Similarly, it's fine if you don't approach people with gray armies for pickup games at your FLGS; just don't go out of your way to tell those people you plan to avoid them.
And that brings us to the second issue: your behavior towards your fellow 40k fans. It's fine if you don't enjoy playing games against unpainted armies. If that's genuinely a critical part of the hobby for you that prevents you from enjoying what would otherwise be a pleasant gaming experience, fine. But the way you've written your posts in this thread, it comes across as you going a step further and being insulting to those who don't share your personal preferences. You've called your fellow 40k fans lazy and compared playing with unpainted minis to being unhygienic.
Well, to be fair, a lot of 40k fans are lazy. I sure am!
And the hygiene thing was about how different standards apply in different situations. I explicitly said that I often wear a t-shirt and shorts and don't shower, so if I'm painting anybody with a broad brush, that includes me. What I said was that while being super casual is fine some places, it's rude in others. If a restaurant wants collared shirts, and you show up in a tank top, the restaurant isn't being judgey. Likewise, if the expectation for a game or event is painted, and you don't paint, that's just tough.
Restaurants with dress codes generally post those dress codes somewhere, and 40k events that expect paint jobs say as much. Unless your FLGS has a sign up saying they don't like gray plastic, then people shouldn't be expected to show up with a paint job. Did I miss the post where we established that you were referring to events with an explicit paint expectation?
"You enjoy camping, but you don't like fishing while you camp? Wow. You must be lazy. If I see you not fishing while we camp in the same general area, it's basically like you're forcing me to sniff your unwashed armpit."
^See how that sounds?
Like an almost intentional misreading of my posts?
Sincerely, I don't see how so. Maybe I missed your post where more context was established, but everything from you that I've read in this thread comes across as rudely taking jabs at people for not meeting your personal standards. Which is where the rudeness comes in. It's fine if you prefer games with painted armies, but it's less fine to imply people who don't mind gray plastic are lazy or enjoying the hobby incorrectly.
There's this bizarre preoccupation with insisting that my snobbery that people try is actually snobbery that people excel.
If you paint, you paint. Now, if we talk about techniques and such, rather than levels of quality, sure. I'm a less complete hobbyist than somebody who airbrushes, because there are simply techniques I can't apply. Likewise 3d printing, which is something I have negative interest in.
I would submit that that is actually people giving you the benefit of the doubt, because "I want my games to look good" is kind of a sympathetic position, but "I want people to suffer through doing something they don't enjoy to produce a token end result that may or may not look good" is sheer sadistic idiocy.
Because even a "token end result that may or may not look good" still looks better than bare plastic.
As I've said repeatedly, even just freaking spraying your models with a colored primer helps!
What I'm saying is that I do want my games to look good. I don't care if a person paints, buys painted models, has his models painted, whatever. It's not realistic to expect a certain level of quality, so when a person is at least trying, I cut them a lot more slack. I wouldn't exclude a poorly but fully painted army from a narrative event or apocalypse game, because to me that seems harsh.
Also.. are we really tossing around words like "suffering" and "sadism" about painting miniatures? I get that it's not everybody's cup of tea, but it's at worse an unpleasant task.
I mean you guys are literally leaving out all of the context of the point he was making. Even in this clearly over-the-top example, I'm pretty sure he would say "cool that you go over the top to make your models smell a certain way and it's 100% your choice if you wanna not play me because I don't do it"
The point I was trying to illustrate is that it's not okay for me to start taking shots at people (accusing them of theft for instance) just because they don't engage in an aspect of the hobby I enjoy. With scented oils being used as an example of a behavior that doesn't impact most folks' lore/model building/gaming experience. Most people don't much care how an army smells, so my hope was that this would serve as a useful tool for explaining the position of those who don't care about paintjobs. Like scent, a lack of paint jobs doesn't detract from the gaming or model building parts of the hobby. It would be weird of me to call you lazy for not not spritzing your army with interesting smells just because I enjoy the hobby more when the armies are smelly.
Wyldhunt wrote: Maybe I missed your post where more context was established, but everything from you that I've read in this thread comes across as rudely taking jabs at people for not meeting your personal standards. Which is where the rudeness comes in. It's fine if you prefer games with painted armies, but it's less fine to imply people who don't mind gray plastic are lazy or enjoying the hobby incorrectly.
Okay... but aren't they at least a little bit lazy? I suppose you can argue that some people genuinely prefer bare plastic to painted, but I have a feeling most people think painted armies look better, but don't want to put in the work. I guess I don't see how that isn't laziness.
I'm sorry if me thinking a person who won't paint is a bit lazy. I understand this makes me the worst person alive.
Also.. are we really tossing around words like "suffering" and "sadism" about painting miniatures? I get that it's not everybody's cup of tea, but it's at worse an unpleasant task.
an unpleasant task that takes a lot of your hobby time... And for people that don't paint much, it takes them even longer (yes, even when painting with contrast)
Because even a "token end result that may or may not look good" still looks better than bare plastic.
yeah, no.
i'd rather play agaisnt grey plastic than an army of these dudes
Here's the thing... macro lenses are a harsh mistress. That's an ugly model, but you put ten together in a squad and put them four feet away, and they'll look... maybe not fine, but at least not nearly as embarrassing as you think.
Gaming miniatures aren't just works of art. They are also gaming pieces which are intended to convey information. Say what you want about that model, but you can see it's a Dark Angel, you can tell it's the sergeant, and you can see it's weapons and gear. Even if a model doesn't look very good aesthetically, it can stil do a much stronger job of communicating weapons and other signifiers than bare plastic.
outside of almost deliberatly trying to ruin a model, actually playing the game against even crudely and poorly painted models is superior. It's just really hard to argue.
Also.. are we really tossing around words like "suffering" and "sadism" about painting miniatures? I get that it's not everybody's cup of tea, but it's at worse an unpleasant task.
an unpleasant task that takes a lot of your hobby time... And for people that don't paint much, it takes them even longer (yes, even when painting with contrast)
Oh, it's unpleasant and it takes time! I see we're back to the mythical gamer who literally has exactly enough hobby time to play 40k, but zero hobby time to paint. What a strange schedule that person must have!
Okay... but aren't they at least a little bit lazy?
no, its not being lazy, its called "not enjoying that aspect of the hobby".
Reminder : a hobby is something you do because you enjoy it.
If I don't enjoy replacing divots on the fairway, it's fine for me to leave them, right? And if I don't enjoy wearing headphones on the bus, it's fine to listen to my music at a high volume, right?
40k is a social game. Painting your models improves the experience for your opponent, both aesthetically and by making it easier to differentiate units and weapons. Choosing not to do so is making the game slightly harder for your opponent and limiting their enjoyment. But, I guess it's okay because you really don't want to.
Oh, it's unpleasant and it takes time! I see we're back to the mythical gamer who literally has exactly enough hobby time to play 40k, but zero hobby time to paint. What a strange schedule that person must have!
Its not a mythical gamer lol. Whether someone has 2 hours of 50 hours per week of hobby time doesnt change the fact that they shouldn't feel pressured to spend it doing something they don't enjoy.
Wyldhunt wrote: Maybe I missed your post where more context was established, but everything from you that I've read in this thread comes across as rudely taking jabs at people for not meeting your personal standards. Which is where the rudeness comes in. It's fine if you prefer games with painted armies, but it's less fine to imply people who don't mind gray plastic are lazy or enjoying the hobby incorrectly.
Okay... but aren't they at least a little bit lazy? I suppose you can argue that some people genuinely prefer bare plastic to painted, but I have a feeling most people think painted armies look better, but don't want to put in the work. I guess I don't see how that isn't laziness.
I'm sorry if me thinking a person who won't paint is a bit lazy. I understand this makes me the worst person alive.
I absolutely think a solid grey plastic model (that is well assembled, eg. without glue overflow, without mold lines, barrels drilled) looks better than a poorly painted model. But I also think that a solid colour/single spray coat model looks better than a mixed medium unpainted model (ie. metal with plastic parts glued on, or plastic with a lot of gap-filling). The point is that "what looks good" is a highly-personal sentiment, so your desire that other people perform <X> minimum amount of painting coverage/techniques to their models could very well require them to make their models look worse to them.
Nobody has called you the worst person alive. The thread has largely focused on 1) telling paint supremacists to keep their opinions to themselves (in the context of actual play spaces and gaming communities) and 2) challenging their priorities, when they prize the colour of a piece of a plastic above the potential for a fun opponent/fun game.
I'm actually mostly fine with your ultimate position, because on a previous page you said you would still play against unpainted figs. I have no problem with someone who, faced with two possible opponent armies, one painted, one unpainted, would rather play the painted. You're capable of showing some capacity for compromise and fellowship while still pursuing your preferences. My deepest derision is reserved for someone who would refuse to play against unpainted models -- ie. they walk into a store looking for a game, there's one opponent with an unpainted army, and they turn around and leave instead of playing. Because their priorities are truly f-ed up at that point. They're the lost and damned.
And if I don't enjoy wearing headphones on the bus, it's fine to listen to my music at a high volume, right?
no, because then you're forcing your hobby (listening to music) onto other people. Much like you are by wanting everyone to paint their minis. Oh, and theres a thing known as social contract which means you shouldnt listen to music without headphones in public
Also.. are we really tossing around words like "suffering" and "sadism" about painting miniatures? I get that it's not everybody's cup of tea, but it's at worse an unpleasant task.
an unpleasant task that takes a lot of your hobby time... And for people that don't paint much, it takes them even longer (yes, even when painting with contrast)
Oh, it's unpleasant and it takes time! I see we're back to the mythical gamer who literally has exactly enough hobby time to play 40k, but zero hobby time to paint. What a strange schedule that person must have!
... what?
high school, college, jobs, most everyone I've known can manage one night a week (or every two weeks) to indulge a hobby.
Consistently having hours every evening to devote to painting? Not so much. And that's before getting into the mood/mindset to paint. And after the hours devoted to model assembly.
That's a perfectly normal schedule for everyone I've ever gamed with.
JNAProductions wrote: Eh-I don’t share the priorities, but if you only enjoy painted games, then you shouldn’t be forced to play an unpainted army.
Their enjoyment is as valid as anyone else’s.
What do you mean, "forced"?
Would you say the same thing about someone who only wants to play people of X ethnicity, body type, gender, etc.?
Nobody is suggesting that commandos rush the store and compel the paint supremacist to play a game or lose their life. We're saying that their approach is hostile and unethical.
I mean you guys are literally leaving out all of the context of the point he was making. Even in this clearly over-the-top example, I'm pretty sure he would say "cool that you go over the top to make your models smell a certain way and it's 100% your choice if you wanna not play me because I don't do it"
The point I was trying to illustrate is that it's not okay for me to start taking shots at people (accusing them of theft for instance) just because they don't engage in an aspect of the hobby I enjoy. With scented oils being used as an example of a behavior that doesn't impact most folks' lore/model building/gaming experience. Most people don't much care how an army smells, so my hope was that this would serve as a useful tool for explaining the position of those who don't care about paintjobs. Like scent, a lack of paint jobs doesn't detract from the gaming or model building parts of the hobby. It would be weird of me to call you lazy for not not spritzing your army with interesting smells just because I enjoy the hobby more when the armies are smelly.
But say you did care about model scent and it was really important to you… why should you be obligated to play against me? Or let me into your scent only tournament or event? Why should I be able to dictate how you enjoy your hobby?
VladimirHerzog wrote: Oh, and theres a thing known as social contract which means you shouldnt listen to music without headphones in public
yeah, and the social contract also puts a premium on playing with painted models, so....
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Voss wrote: ... what?
high school, college, jobs, most everyone I've known can manage one night a week (or every two weeks) to indulge a hobby.
Consistently having hours every evening to devote to painting? Not so much. And that's before getting into the mood/mindset to paint. And after the hours devoted to model assembly.
That's a perfectly normal schedule for everyone I've ever gamed with.
I stand corrected. apparently there are lot of people with the time to schedule a game, drive to the store, set up, play, tear down, and drive home, and that utilizes literally all of their leisure time for a week. For the rest of the week they are just booked solid. Couldn't possible find the time to set up some models and prime them, or pick a few weapons out in a contrasting color, or slap some texture paint on a base. Nope, it's sleep, work, one game of 40k, repeat.
Would you say the same thing about someone who only wants to play people of X ethnicity, body type, gender, etc.?
Nobody is suggesting that commandos rush the store and compel the paint supremacist to play a game or lose their life. We're saying that their approach is hostile and unethical.
I see we've moved passed "asking people to paint is sadism" to "only painted against painted armies is basically racism."
Automatically Appended Next Post:
JNAProductions wrote: Eh-I don’t share the priorities, but if you only enjoy painted games, then you shouldn’t be forced to play an unpainted army.
Their enjoyment is as valid as anyone else’s.
I get the rhetorical point you're making, and well played.
I still stand by the argument that picking out weapons makes it easier to tell squads apart, but maybe I'm on an island.
VladimirHerzog wrote: Oh, and theres a thing known as social contract which means you shouldnt listen to music without headphones in public
yeah, and the social contract also puts a premium on playing with painted models, so....
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Voss wrote: ... what?
high school, college, jobs, most everyone I've known can manage one night a week (or every two weeks) to indulge a hobby.
Consistently having hours every evening to devote to painting? Not so much. And that's before getting into the mood/mindset to paint. And after the hours devoted to model assembly.
That's a perfectly normal schedule for everyone I've ever gamed with.
I stand corrected. apparently there are lot of people with the time to schedule a game, drive to the store, set up, play, tear down, and drive home, and that utilizes literally all of their leisure time for a week. For the rest of the week they are just booked solid. Couldn't possible find the time to set up some models and prime them, or pick a few weapons out in a contrasting color, or slap some texture paint on a base. Nope, it's sleep, work, one game of 40k, repeat.
Yeah, nevermind. You aren't even pretending to be reasonable.
Voss wrote: ... what?
high school, college, jobs, most everyone I've known can manage one night a week (or every two weeks) to indulge a hobby.
Consistently having hours every evening to devote to painting? Not so much. And that's before getting into the mood/mindset to paint. And after the hours devoted to model assembly.
That's a perfectly normal schedule for everyone I've ever gamed with.
One issue for me personally is that I don't have any space to leave my painting stuff or half-painted models lying around. Setting up stuff to get ready to paint is ~10 minutes of work, as is packing everything away.
If I find random 30 minutes to spend on painting, 20 of those will not be spent on getting paint on models, and it requires some time for me to stop my hands from shaking if I want to do detail work.
Building models though? Pop box open, get plies and glue and start cracking. If you get interrupted, you can just drop everything in the box, put it on a shelf and continue later.
The only way I get stuff painted at all is by literally blocking 3 hours a week which are dedicated to nothing but painting. And even then I often only manage to get that time every other week.
Despite spending much more time on painting (which I hate) than on gaming (which is what I enjoy most in this hobby), I'm not even close to having my entire collection painted.
JNAProductions wrote: Eh-I don’t share the priorities, but if you only enjoy painted games, then you shouldn’t be forced to play an unpainted army.
Their enjoyment is as valid as anyone else’s.
yeah, which is totally fine by me, my issue is when they start slinging insults at people that don't paint (calling them lazy)
Vlad gets it. The problem here isn't that some people prefer games with fully painted armies; the problems are:
A.) Some of those people are insulting those who don't share their preference.
B.) People shouldn't be insulted for refusing to spend their free time in an unenjoyable fashion. We live in a world with limited free time. You don't get to tell me how to spend mine. Valuing my own free time is healthy. Insulting someone because they don't spend their free time the way you want is toxic. So no. Gray models don't make a person lazy, and anyone who says otherwise should probably take a moment to ask themselves why they feel that way.
Asmodios wrote:But say you did care about model scent and it was really important to you… why should you be obligated to play against me?
...
Why should I be able to dictate how you enjoy your hobby?
We aren't obligated to play each other, but I AMobligated to refrain from insulting you over your lack of scented models.
Or let me into your scent only tournament or event?
If the tournament/event posts something saying that fully painted (or scented or whatever) armies are expected and thus part of the social contract, then you should show up with a painted army. That's what is agreed to as part of the event. But if the tournament/event DOESN'T set that expectation, then insulting someone for showing up with gray plastic just makes me a dick. But as far as I saw, we weren't talking about tournaments/events with painting expectations specifically. That seems to have been a shift of goal posts introduced later on.
Polonius wrote: I stand corrected. apparently there are lot of people with the time to schedule a game, drive to the store, set up, play, tear down, and drive home, and that utilizes literally all of their leisure time for a week. For the rest of the week they are just booked solid. Couldn't possible find the time to set up some models and prime them, or pick a few weapons out in a contrasting color, or slap some texture paint on a base. Nope, it's sleep, work, one game of 40k, repeat.
Yeah, nevermind. You aren't even pretending to be reasonable.
If restating your own argument makes me seem unreasonable, than what does that say about your argument?
If I've learned anything in life, it's that the phrase "I didn't have the time" is hardly, if ever true. Usually, you have the time, but you prioritize other things. And that's fine!
the reason you're cranky about this is because you know that of course people have a bit more leisure time than one block that they use for gaming. Now, it might not be conducive to painting, or they'd rather spend it on something else. But then own the choice. And then, you know, live with mild disapproval.
If I've learned anything in life, it's that the phrase "I didn't have the time" is hardly, if ever true. Usually, you have the time, but you prioritize other things. And that's fine!
the reason you're cranky about this is because you know that of course people have a bit more leisure time than one block that they use for gaming. Now, it might not be conducive to painting, or they'd rather spend it on something else. But then own the choice. And then, you know, live with mild disapproval.
The thing is, you've been insulting people for making that choice. Which is where I take issue.
One issue for me personally is that I don't have any space to leave my painting stuff or half-painted models lying around. Setting up stuff to get ready to paint is ~10 minutes of work, as is packing everything away.
If I find random 30 minutes to spend on painting, 20 of those will not be spent on getting paint on models, and it requires some time for me to stop my hands from shaking if I want to do detail work.
Building models though? Pop box open, get plies and glue and start cracking. If you get interrupted, you can just drop everything in the box, put it on a shelf and continue later.
The only way I get stuff painted at all is by literally blocking 3 hours a week which are dedicated to nothing but painting. And even then I often only manage to get that time every other week.
Despite spending much more time on painting (which I hate) than on gaming (which is what I enjoy most in this hobby), I'm not even close to having my entire collection painted.
Oh man, I paint quickly and I'm not where close to finishing my collection. That's an unattainable goal.
Good job plugging away! Progress can be slow, you know? But it's still progress.
If I've learned anything in life, it's that the phrase "I didn't have the time" is hardly, if ever true. Usually, you have the time, but you prioritize other things. And that's fine!
the reason you're cranky about this is because you know that of course people have a bit more leisure time than one block that they use for gaming. Now, it might not be conducive to painting, or they'd rather spend it on something else. But then own the choice. And then, you know, live with mild disapproval.
The thing is, you've been insulting people for making that choice. Which is where I take issue.
I've been judging them. Not sure how insulting that is. And that's in the hypothetical. I'm not gonna be a jerk in public.
I guess... yeah, I think better of people that make more of an effort, you know? Call me crazy.
The thing is, you've been insulting people for making that choice. Which is where I take issue.
To be fair that goes both ways.
For example, i find the use of the term 'supremacists' used above with regard to people who prefer painted as particularly vile. It's a particularly vulgar misappropriation of a term most typically associated with the word 'white' and used in the context of nazis.
Abs to be fair that's also hardly the only insult or slur ('gatekeeping', 'snobs', mischaracterising doing something youd rather not do as 'sadism' -and so on) that's been levelled at polonius and other 'pro-painters' . Imo far worse than 'lazy'. Lazy can be apt.
If I've learned anything in life, it's that the phrase "I didn't have the time" is hardly, if ever true. Usually, you have the time, but you prioritize other things. And that's fine!
the reason you're cranky about this is because you know that of course people have a bit more leisure time than one block that they use for gaming. Now, it might not be conducive to painting, or they'd rather spend it on something else. But then own the choice. And then, you know, live with mild disapproval.
The thing is, you've been insulting people for making that choice. Which is where I take issue.
I've been judging them. Not sure how insulting that is.
Well, you've been calling them lazy. Which, if "insulting" isn't technically accurate, I think "being rude," is still a fair description.
And that's in the hypothetical. I'm not gonna be a jerk in public.
Tbf, this might be an internet vs real-life moment. I don't much mind you being silently judgemental in your head. I just don't want you ruining little Timmy's day over it, you know?
I guess... yeah, I think better of people that make more of an effort, you know? Call me crazy.
But you do see the difference between appreciating someone putting in the extra effort vs being a dick to someone for not putting in the extra effort, right?
Wyldhunt wrote: Well, you've been calling them lazy. Which, if "insulting" isn't technically accurate, I think "being rude," is still a fair description.
Sure. And to your point, I shouldn't call the person lazy, but the action. A person might be very hard working, and not want to paint minis. I think it's a little bit lazy, because as I've stated, I think any level of painting makes the game easier and more enjoyable for your opponent, but it is unfair to assess a person's overall character on their hobby.
Tbf, this might be an internet vs real-life moment. I don't much mind you being silently judgemental in your head. I just don't want you ruining little Timmy's day over it, you know?
Right, that's obviously out of bounds.. but also pretty clearly not what I've been talking about? I've framed my points about adults, not kids. And beginners gotta get in reps.
But you do see the difference between appreciating someone putting in the extra effort vs being a dick to someone for not putting in the extra effort, right?
the way I appreciate somebody in the hobby is by making an effort to seek them out for games. Which is exactly what I've described. I don't think putting somebody at the bottom of my list to get a game is the biggest dick move.
Dysartes wrote: Can't help but think that this poll would've benefited from...
a, splitting "you" and "your opponent" into distinct scores
b, some form of guidance as to what a 5 represents.
Yeah I didn't answer the post itself because it was too vague.
Wyldhunt wrote: Well, you've been calling them lazy. Which, if "insulting" isn't technically accurate, I think "being rude," is still a fair description.
Sure. And to your point, I shouldn't call the person lazy, but the action. A person might be very hard working, and not want to paint minis. I think it's a little bit lazy, because as I've stated, I think any level of painting makes the game easier and more enjoyable for your opponent, but it is unfair to assess a person's overall character on their hobby.
Tbf, this might be an internet vs real-life moment. I don't much mind you being silently judgemental in your head. I just don't want you ruining little Timmy's day over it, you know?
Right, that's obviously out of bounds.. but also pretty clearly not what I've been talking about? I've framed my points about adults, not kids. And beginners gotta get in reps.
But you do see the difference between appreciating someone putting in the extra effort vs being a dick to someone for not putting in the extra effort, right?
the way I appreciate somebody in the hobby is by making an effort to seek them out for games. Which is exactly what I've described. I don't think putting somebody at the bottom of my list to get a game is the biggest dick move.
They way you keep framing it makes it sounds like your contemptuous of anyone who doesn’t feel the need to paint their army, despite the fact it isn’t a required portion of the hobby.
DeathKorp_Rider wrote: They way you keep framing it makes it sounds like your contemptuous of anyone who doesn’t feel the need to paint their army, despite the fact it isn’t a required portion of the hobby.
[img]
You think me thinking it's a bit lazy to not paint is contemptuous?
Earlier in the thread, I made a few comments about how I can't make you feel bad about not painting, only you can do that? This is what I mean. I have a reason that painting is useful (several, in fact), and when people don't I kind of think they're a bit lazy about their hobby and don't seek out as many games against them. Based on this, you feel like I'm "contemptuous." I really don't think there's anything in my posts that should make you feel like I have contempt for anybody in this hobby. Which means, unfortunately, that you're not mad because I'm saying mean things, I'm saying catty things that make you feel bad because you kind of agree with them.
I can't help you feel better about not painting. that's not in my power. I don't like making people bad, which is why I don't give them a hard time about not painting, but guess what... most people that don't paint have the time and money to do so, they just don't. And I get it! There are plenty of things I don't do that I feel like I should, and when people comment on it, I get mad and defensive. But it's not about them, it's about me.
My advice is, either just make the effort to start getting some painting done, or try to make your peace with being unpainted. It's not worth it to be upset because soembody on the internet is mildly disapproving.
If I've learned anything in life, it's that the phrase "I didn't have the time" is hardly, if ever true. Usually, you have the time, but you prioritize other things. And that's fine!
the reason you're cranky about this is because you know that of course people have a bit more leisure time than one block that they use for gaming. Now, it might not be conducive to painting, or they'd rather spend it on something else. But then own the choice. And then, you know, live with mild disapproval.
The thing is, you've been insulting people for making that choice. Which is where I take issue.
I've been judging them. Not sure how insulting that is.
Well, you've been calling them lazy. Which, if "insulting" isn't technically accurate, I think "being rude," is still a fair description.
And that's in the hypothetical. I'm not gonna be a jerk in public.
Tbf, this might be an internet vs real-life moment. I don't much mind you being silently judgemental in your head. I just don't want you ruining little Timmy's day over it, you know?
I guess... yeah, I think better of people that make more of an effort, you know? Call me crazy.
But you do see the difference between appreciating someone putting in the extra effort vs being a dick to someone for not putting in the extra effort, right?
Unless I've missed some posts (i admit i haven't read everyone in the thread). Is anyone advocating pulling a Nelson and laughing in the face of people with unpainted models for no reason? almost every post I've read has been something like "i personally don't play against unpainted armies". Also just like it wouldn't bother me in someone made fun of me for a nonscented model, why would it even bother someone who doesn't care about unpainted models if someone laughed about it? Even though this made-up Nelson doesn't exist I just don't see the issue even with the hypothetical of them "haha your models and unpainted/unscented"..." cool i don't care about paint/scent"
Also 100% any tournament or event should post exactly what you need to show up with. I've never seen an event that didn't let you know that your models have to be painted before.
You know that sometimes people can only get away from real life for 3 or 4 hours a week. There's things like work, and taking care of your family (taking Timmy to his after school activities), taking care of things around the house, sleeping. You know things that let you survive in the real world. You may have a lot of free time but some people don't. They just want to get away from it all for a couple of hours and play.
Leo_the_Rat wrote: You know that sometimes people can only get away from real life for 3 or 4 hours a week. There's things like work, and taking care of your family (taking Timmy to his after school activities), taking care of things around the house, sleeping. You know things that let you survive in the real world. You may have a lot of free time but some people don't. They just want to get away from it all for a couple of hours and play.
I'm pushing back on the notion that a person would regularly have one evening free to play 40k, but LITERALLY zero other free time. I've repeatedly said that even priming nad picking out weapons is a positive step.
I'm sorry, but if you have the time to build an army, and play regularly, there is almost certainly some time in your life to do some painting. Maybe not every week, but at least to make some progress. (after all, if you're so time strapped, you aren't building new units constantly, right?)
But that's not the guy I'm talking about. Honestly, the guy scheduled to his gills with work and school and kids? He's almost always doing a bit of painting anyway. It's the people with far less responsibilities that often have eternally grey armies.
Also.. are we really tossing around words like "suffering" and "sadism" about painting miniatures? I get that it's not everybody's cup of tea, but it's at worse an unpleasant task.
an unpleasant task that takes a lot of your hobby time... And for people that don't paint much, it takes them even longer (yes, even when painting with contrast)
Oh, it's unpleasant and it takes time! I see we're back to the mythical gamer who literally has exactly enough hobby time to play 40k, but zero hobby time to paint. What a strange schedule that person must have!
... what?
high school, college, jobs, most everyone I've known can manage one night a week (or every two weeks) to indulge a hobby.
Consistently having hours every evening to devote to painting? Not so much. And that's before getting into the mood/mindset to paint. And after the hours devoted to model assembly.
That's a perfectly normal schedule for everyone I've ever gamed with.
I have painted 5 complete 3,000 point WFB armies over the last 2-3 years painting solely on my breaks and lunches at work. Yes it takes a little bit of discipline and drive, but I'm willing to bet the people who "can't find time to paint" make time for other things like video games, TV, and other activities.
I have painted 5 complete 3,000 point WFB armies over the last 2-3 years painting solely on my breaks and lunches at work. Yes it takes a little bit of discipline and drive, but I'm willing to bet the people who "can't find time to paint" make time for other things like video games, TV, and other activities.
yeah, because they enjoy these things more than painting
How about instead of "TV, video games, and other activities" we say "Being a dad, raising a kid, being a supportive partner in a relationship, and making time for self improvement".
See it's not hard to rationalize when the well isn't poisoned.
I enjoy being a good father more than having a kick butt Shadow Keepers 2k list.
Deadnight wrote: For example, i find the use of the term 'supremacists' used above with regard to people who prefer painted as particularly vile. It's a particularly vulgar misappropriation of a term most typically associated with the word 'white' and used in the context of nazis.
That's why I chose the word "absolutist". It's certainly more fitting for their behaviour here.
DeathKorp_Rider wrote: They way you keep framing it makes it sounds like your contemptuous of anyone who doesn’t feel the need to paint their army, despite the fact it isn’t a required portion of the hobby.
[img]
You think me thinking it's a bit lazy to not paint is contemptuous?
Earlier in the thread, I made a few comments about how I can't make you feel bad about not painting, only you can do that? This is what I mean. I have a reason that painting is useful (several, in fact), and when people don't I kind of think they're a bit lazy about their hobby and don't seek out as many games against them. Based on this, you feel like I'm "contemptuous." I really don't think there's anything in my posts that should make you feel like I have contempt for anybody in this hobby. Which means, unfortunately, that you're not mad because I'm saying mean things, I'm saying catty things that make you feel bad because you kind of agree with them.
I can't help you feel better about not painting. that's not in my power. I don't like making people bad, which is why I don't give them a hard time about not painting, but guess what... most people that don't paint have the time and money to do so, they just don't. And I get it! There are plenty of things I don't do that I feel like I should, and when people comment on it, I get mad and defensive. But it's not about them, it's about me.
My advice is, either just make the effort to start getting some painting done, or try to make your peace with being unpainted. It's not worth it to be upset because soembody on the internet is mildly disapproving.
This is called gaslighting and I think this is why people are taking issue with what you are trying to say.
I will try to make this simple for you.
I LIKE playing the game.
I don't mind building the models.
I loathe painting.
So, I could trade a game time to paint models. But that is trading something I enjoy for something I don't. I work a job where we are at a point that they are mandating 52 hour weeks, while trying to raise my daughter, spend time with my wife and do everything else that life requires. After working a 13 hour day I guess you could say I have time to paint, but I don't have the energy and would rather spend that time doing something I enjoy which relaxes me. I can sneak in one game a week usually on one of my days off and while I could spend that time painting, why would I? I don't enjoy it. It brings me no enjoyment and no peace. If it makes my opponent happier than yeah, I will give it some mind and do my best but I am not about to prioritize the desires of an opponent who makes those kind of demands.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: How about instead of "TV, video games, and other activities" we say "Being a dad, raising a kid, being a supportive partner in a relationship, and making time for self improvement".
See it's not hard to rationalize when the well isn't poisoned.
I enjoy being a good father more than having a kick butt Shadow Keepers 2k list.
"Choose to spend the time elsewhere" is significantly different than "don't have time". I question the misnomer.
I also will point out that as a 3rd shifter I sacrifice sleep to fit my wife and kids into my life. I'm stuck at work on my breaks anyway, might as well paint there.
wuestenfux wrote: My armied fielded on the battlefield are always fully painted - no exceptions.
I remember at Hamburg GW I, unpainted models were removed from play by GW employees.
Lol if they touch people's minis without permission that wouldn't go down well here.
Slipspace wrote: You might want to read that first reply again. There's nothing problematic about it. It simply states a requirement for an opponent to have fully painted models. The problems actually started about 5 or 6 replies later, admittedly instigated by the person who posted that first reply.
And if you couldn't tell that was going to happen from that first reply then you really weren't paying attention.
Or you just haven't been here long, where we've had this discussion before, and it always - always always always - ends up with some painting absolutist fighting everyone because of their intractable stubborn position on how everything must be painted and anyone else who says otherwise is having fun the wrong way.
wuestenfux wrote: My armied fielded on the battlefield are always fully painted - no exceptions.
I remember at Hamburg GW I, unpainted models were removed from play by GW employees.
Lol if they touch people's minis without permission that wouldn't go down well here.
Yeah, that's a good way to lose a couple fingers...
If I've learned anything in life, it's that the phrase "I didn't have the time" is hardly, if ever true. Usually, you have the time, but you prioritize other things. And that's fine!
Exactly this, but you make it look like it isn't fine.
Most people just don't work, sleep, eat, play one game of 40k then repeat. There's a lot of other stuff that comes in life, including spending quality free time with friends, pets and family, not to mention other hobbies. "I didn't have the time" is definitely true because other things, which those people might considered more important, took priority. It's not false because they prioritized other things.
Lol if they touch people's minis without permission that wouldn't go down well here.
Here as well .
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Just Tony wrote: ...but I'm willing to bet the people who "can't find time to paint" make time for other things like video games, TV, and other activities.
And who said that those activities shouldn't have priority? I love painting models but if someone struggles to spare free time and has to choose between painting or reading a book, going for a walk, cooking good stuff, playing sports or going to the gym, even watching a really valubale movie/tv show, etc... I'd suggest any of those activities over painting miniatures. In fact I'd actually suggest to prioritize ALL this stuff before finding time to paint any models or playing miniature games.
I only play with finished miniatures but don't hold others to my own standards (it's just simpler that way).
I come from the camp of never painting but one day around the start of the pandemic I just sat down and started doing it. Model by model was finished and eventually I had enough to field fully painted army lists and from there I never looked back. The strongest painting motivator I ever get is when there's an upcoming game and I want to try out something new.
I still don't really enjoy painting in itself but the sight of having things done makes it endlessly worthwhile. It's a bit of work for years of enjoyment afterwards. Others have also been inspired to get painting when they see my completed armies on the field and I've been hosting painting days in place of gaming. Company while painting can do wonders for productivity and could be just the thing to break the barrier.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: How about instead of "TV, video games, and other activities" we say "Being a dad, raising a kid, being a supportive partner in a relationship, and making time for self improvement".
See it's not hard to rationalize when the well isn't poisoned.
I enjoy being a good father more than having a kick butt Shadow Keepers 2k list.
"Choose to spend the time elsewhere" is significantly different than "don't have time". I question the misnomer.
I also will point out that as a 3rd shifter I sacrifice sleep to fit my wife and kids into my life. I'm stuck at work on my breaks anyway, might as well paint there.
You claim understanding, and yet continue to make incredible assumptions regarding other people's lives. I am choosing to spend time elsewhere, but at the same time I don't impose strict rules on others to have the "privilege" to play with my army. I didn't search all of your posts, but I presume you are in the "Players must paint their models" camp of this thread? All I am saying, boiled down, is that in order to enjoy this game with me, I will give you the choice to put as much or as little work into the "hobby" part of it as you like. Show up with black based models or flat grey, we can have just as much fun as if you showed up with a Duncan Rhodes level paint job. Just as long as you don't paint any detestable symbols or iconography on your models.
Cebalrai wrote: I only play with finished miniatures but don't hold others to my own standards (it's just simpler that way).
I come from the camp of never painting but one day around the start of the pandemic I just sat down and started doing it. Model by model was finished and eventually I had enough to field fully painted army lists and from there I never looked back. The strongest painting motivator I ever get is when there's an upcoming game and I want to try out something new.
I still don't really enjoy painting in itself but the sight of having things done makes it endlessly worthwhile. It's a bit of work for years of enjoyment afterwards. Others have also been inspired to get painting when they see my completed armies on the field and I've been hosting painting days in place of gaming. Company while painting can do wonders for productivity and could be just the thing to break the barrier.
I am the same way. Once I finally got a whole army painted (Tau), it was just so much more enjoyable to play with that I will only put fully-painted armies on the board. And then when I did my second army (Sisters), I was better at painting, so now I am going back to my Tau to fix them up, since they are no longer up to snuff for my standards for myself.
Also concur that painting socially can be a great help. Especially when you are learning. Getting tips from people I was painting with also really helped me with techniques that make painting much more enjoyable. For example, I had a friend tell me about drybrushing, and now it is my favorite thing to do on my models. So easy! So amazing to look at! Yet not something I would have ever thought of myself.
I do not consider myself a good painter by any means. While I would not say I am terrible I am probably at least below average. I paint my models at this point only because of the "10 points for battle ready" rule that GW forced on the community because I want to play as fairly as I possibly can and do not want to be gaining 10 points in a matched play game when I shouldn't be. I primarily "paint to play" and don't "play to paint."
While I do not enjoy painting at all and do not really want to do it, I am fine playing others who do not have painted or only primed models. I also usually give them the battle ready points if their army is at least all primed. I just like getting games in even if the army on the other side is all gray plastic or black or whatever other mono-color. I am glad to play a beautifully painted army, but while I hold myself to a standard of at least having my stuff painted to "tabletop standard" (still just a three color rule to me most of the time) I do not hold others to that same standard.
I actually prefer building in this hobby much more than painting. But playing is why I am here pretty much!
i get annoyed if i'm playing against an army that's unpainted, or only primed.
it breaks any sense of immersion i can get out of the game, it makes recognizing wargear more difficult from across the table, etc.
i'm don't expect great fancy paint jobs, but a main uniform color, skin tone, and an accent color, that cover all of the easily visible model is all i need to appreciate someone's effort.
if one or two units in a 2000pt guard army aren't fully painted for example it's whatever, but two units in a 2000pt custodes army is going to be a significant portion of the army.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Cebalrai wrote: I only play with finished miniatures but don't hold others to my own standards (it's just simpler that way).
I come from the camp of never painting but one day around the start of the pandemic I just sat down and started doing it. Model by model was finished and eventually I had enough to field fully painted army lists and from there I never looked back. The strongest painting motivator I ever get is when there's an upcoming game and I want to try out something new.
I still don't really enjoy painting in itself but the sight of having things done makes it endlessly worthwhile. It's a bit of work for years of enjoyment afterwards. Others have also been inspired to get painting when they see my completed armies on the field and I've been hosting painting days in place of gaming. Company while painting can do wonders for productivity and could be just the thing to break the barrier.
i am much the same, but different at the same time lol.
my BA successors have white helmets and shoulder pads, i dread painting the white, but it looks so good! i hate painting the white.
same time, guard require so many models, that painting them gets very tedious very fast, especially since i had a lot of white on them, until changing over to a camo paint scheme lol.
but in the end it looks so much better to have a fully painted army on the table, and when both armies are painted decently it helps me get immersed in the story of the battle as it unfolds...also my gf gets mad if i buy new kits, when i have unpainted and unassembled models ever since she watched a pile of shame video with me one time.
Also.. are we really tossing around words like "suffering" and "sadism" about painting miniatures? I get that it's not everybody's cup of tea, but it's at worse an unpleasant task.
an unpleasant task that takes a lot of your hobby time... And for people that don't paint much, it takes them even longer (yes, even when painting with contrast)
Oh, it's unpleasant and it takes time! I see we're back to the mythical gamer who literally has exactly enough hobby time to play 40k, but zero hobby time to paint. What a strange schedule that person must have!
... what?
high school, college, jobs, most everyone I've known can manage one night a week (or every two weeks) to indulge a hobby.
Consistently having hours every evening to devote to painting? Not so much. And that's before getting into the mood/mindset to paint. And after the hours devoted to model assembly.
That's a perfectly normal schedule for everyone I've ever gamed with.
sorry, but i disagree. it doesn't have to take hours of painting to have a painting session.
often when my gf has an online work meeting, they last roughly an hour, and i'll sit at my hobby table behind her out of the camera sight and spend the last 10-20 minutes of her meeting painting, and listening to the fancy science talk they do.
i am cleaning up a house to be sold, renovating my current house, running my own business, maintaining my romantic, and familial relationship, a full time college student, a parent to two very needy damn near codependent fur babies, and have to find time to exercise as well for my business, but i can still find time to paint at for a little bit, at least once a week.
PaddyMick wrote: Yay! over half of people in the poll don't care. That's cool.
Yes but I’m sure those at 10 will double-down
Not only that, but in a few pages, they'll start tossing around terms like WAAC and CAAC, or Elitist!
In 30 pages it will naturally evolve into it's ultimate form: Accusations of Fascist Politics and Liberalism. At which point the mods MIGHT old yeller it.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: How about instead of "TV, video games, and other activities" we say "Being a dad, raising a kid, being a supportive partner in a relationship, and making time for self improvement".
See it's not hard to rationalize when the well isn't poisoned.
I enjoy being a good father more than having a kick butt Shadow Keepers 2k list.
"Choose to spend the time elsewhere" is significantly different than "don't have time". I question the misnomer.
I also will point out that as a 3rd shifter I sacrifice sleep to fit my wife and kids into my life. I'm stuck at work on my breaks anyway, might as well paint there.
You claim understanding, and yet continue to make incredible assumptions regarding other people's lives.
How so? I assume there's mutability in schedule, and that's rarely NOT the case. In fact, you haven't refuted that notion.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: I am choosing to spend time elsewhere, but at the same time I don't impose strict rules on others to have the "privilege" to play with my army.
Where did I EVER say that? Don't confuse me with CadianSgtBob...
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: I didn't search all of your posts, but I presume you are in the "Players must paint their models" camp of this thread?
Ohhhhhhhhhhh, you didn't bother to check before making assumptions. Funny, since you just LECTURED ME about making assumptions.
But just to clarify, and take special note: My issue isn't people CHOOSING not to paint their miniatures per se, but more that the goalpost was moved pretty much immediately as it started as "BuT i HaVe No TiMe To PaInT mY mInIs!!!!@!1!" and is a misnomer at best.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: All I am saying, boiled down, is that in order to enjoy this game with me, I will give you the choice to put as much or as little work into the "hobby" part of it as you like.
For the most part I agree, unless you have someone who is abusing the subfaction rules by never committing to any indicator on their force. THAT gets old and I can understand apprehensions to playing against someone like that.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: Show up with black based models or flat grey, we can have just as much fun as if you showed up with a Duncan Rhodes level paint job.
Mostly agree, up until the point that the scrum in the middle involves multiple units and suddenly you can't tell who is from where. Never underestimate the capacity for reasonable people to fudge lines when presented with the opportunity. THAT one just dawned on me, as I remembered previous experience with "stealth forces".
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: Just as long as you don't paint any detestable symbols or iconography on your models.
Like the Ultramarines symbol? jk, if that wasn't obvious...
10. I’ve no interest in playing with, or against, unpainted minis. Plus I find the self-imposed rule of “I can’t play with it til it’s painted” is a good way of a) focusing my hobby projects a bit and b) dissuading me from buying ludicrous amounts of stuff. Requiring the same of opponents also seems to reduce the likelihood of playing against someone using the latest meta-chasing/net listed flavour of the month, which isn’t something that really interests me from a gaming perspective.
If people want to play with unpainted minis, part-painted minis, or even just little cardboard tokens or whatever, then all power to them; people have every right to approach their hobby and play their games in whatever way they enjoy. It’s just not, personally, something I want to spend my limited hobbying time on.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Despite my above reply, I have every sympathy with anyone who doesn’t feel inclined to paint their models, from having other priorities with limited hobby time, to simply not wanting to. It’s *your* hobby; approach it however *you* want. And I hope you have a very nice time playing games with people whose enjoyment of the game *isn’t* tied to any sort of painting requirement. I just happen to have a differing view of this stuff and that’s absolutely fine because it’s just a silly, fun spacemen game.
Nazrak wrote: 10. I’ve no interest in playing with, or against, unpainted minis. Plus I find the self-imposed rule of “I can’t play with it til it’s painted” is a good way of a) focusing my hobby projects a bit and b) dissuading me from buying ludicrous amounts of stuff. Requiring the same of opponents also seems to reduce the likelihood of playing against someone using the latest meta-chasing/net listed flavour of the month, which isn’t something that really interests me from a gaming perspective.
If people want to play with unpainted minis, part-painted minis, or even just little cardboard tokens or whatever, then all power to them; people have every right to approach their hobby and play their games in whatever way they enjoy. It’s just not, personally, something I want to spend my limited hobbying time on.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Despite my above reply, I have every sympathy with anyone who doesn’t feel inclined to paint their models, from having other priorities with limited hobby time, to simply not wanting to. It’s *your* hobby; approach it however *you* want. And I hope you have a very nice time playing games with people whose enjoyment of the game *isn’t* tied to any sort of painting requirement. I just happen to have a differing view of this stuff and that’s absolutely fine because it’s just a silly, fun spacemen game.
This is literally the only rational argument to the "must paint" side.
Essentially, painting makes me happy, and if you don't, that's your choice.
And in reference to the detestable iconography, I wasn't referring to the UM, but Mr. Reece painting a Totenkopf on his Knight, and then verbally attacking anyone who stated that it's a nazi symbol.
Nazrak wrote: 10. I’ve no interest in playing with, or against, unpainted minis. Plus I find the self-imposed rule of “I can’t play with it til it’s painted” is a good way of a) focusing my hobby projects a bit and b) dissuading me from buying ludicrous amounts of stuff. Requiring the same of opponents also seems to reduce the likelihood of playing against someone using the latest meta-chasing/net listed flavour of the month, which isn’t something that really interests me from a gaming perspective.
If people want to play with unpainted minis, part-painted minis, or even just little cardboard tokens or whatever, then all power to them; people have every right to approach their hobby and play their games in whatever way they enjoy. It’s just not, personally, something I want to spend my limited hobbying time on.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Despite my above reply, I have every sympathy with anyone who doesn’t feel inclined to paint their models, from having other priorities with limited hobby time, to simply not wanting to. It’s *your* hobby; approach it however *you* want. And I hope you have a very nice time playing games with people whose enjoyment of the game *isn’t* tied to any sort of painting requirement. I just happen to have a differing view of this stuff and that’s absolutely fine because it’s just a silly, fun spacemen game.
This is a reasonable response. Again the only issue is with people who deride anyone who can’t or won’t paint.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
And in reference to the detestable iconography, I wasn't referring to the UM, but Mr. Reece painting a Totenkopf on his Knight, and then verbally attacking anyone who stated that it's a nazi symbol.
That’s a whole can of worms we should probably leave closed.
DeathKorp_Rider wrote: It’s not part of the hobby I enjoy. You can’t force someone to participate in something they don’t want to. It’d be like forcing someone who only builds the models to play the game.
I can't force you, but I can certainly judge you for it. And I can judge you for posting "look at the size of my wallet" and bragging about how you don't bother to paint models a lot of us would kill to have.
Screw you buddy.
Looking forward to your inevitable ban, thanks.
I am oddly with Bob on this one. Enjoy another ignore. You want to play a card game with chits? Not my hobby. If I met you in a hobby shop, I wouldn't speak with you twice. As in real life then... go your chitty way.
PaddyMick wrote: Yay! over half of people in the poll don't care. That's cool.
Yes but I’m sure those at 10 will double-down
Yeah I voted 8. There is a place for trying new things, testing wargear before modeling to be permanent. But jeez, fine. This is not a CCG. For me, it is an interactive model trainset and should look and feel like a realistic sci fantasy battlefield. Grey plastic chits? Why bother with terrain, then? I suppose this is all cardboard taped to empty beer cans? Yeah, no. Not at all the experience that I am after, and anyone who is satisfied with such is simply not doing what i want to do. Offending that I wont spend my time with you? Yeah, well, deal with it. I have no respect for your activity. You waste my time. You disrespect my hobby by expecting that I should respect you enough to waste my time with you. Nah... you are the ones "doubling down" on laziness and lack of talent. Wont develop new skills cuz dont like to paint? Fine. Play MtG with grey plastic chits with someone else. Offended? I could not care less, as if a leech didnt like the taste of my blood. Lates!
DeathKorp_Rider wrote: It’s not part of the hobby I enjoy. You can’t force someone to participate in something they don’t want to. It’d be like forcing someone who only builds the models to play the game.
I can't force you, but I can certainly judge you for it. And I can judge you for posting "look at the size of my wallet" and bragging about how you don't bother to paint models a lot of us would kill to have.
Screw you buddy.
Looking forward to your inevitable ban, thanks.
I am oddly with Bob on this one. Enjoy another ignore. You want to play a card game with chits? Not my hobby. If I met you in a hobby shop, I wouldn't speak with you twice. As in real life then... go your chitty way.
PaddyMick wrote: Yay! over half of people in the poll don't care. That's cool.
Yes but I’m sure those at 10 will double-down
Yeah I voted 8. There is a place for trying new things, testing wargear before modeling to be permanent. But jeez, fine. This is not a CCG. For me, it is an interactive model trainset and should look and feel like a realistic sci fantasy battlefield. Grey plastic chits? Why bother with terrain, then? I suppose this is all cardboard taped to empty beer cans? Yeah, no. Not at all the experience that I am after, and anyone who is satisfied with such is simply not doing what i want to do. Offending that I wont spend my time with you? Yeah, well, deal with it. I have no respect for your activity. You waste my time. You disrespect my hobby by expecting that I should respect you enough to waste my time with you. Nah... you are the ones "doubling down" on laziness and lack of talent. Wont develop new skills cuz dont like to paint? Fine. Play MtG with grey plastic chits with someone else. Offended? I could not care less, as if a leech didnt like the taste of my blood. Lates!
EviscerationPlague wrote: Sorry none of you have a point with immersion. "Why bother with terrain" yeah WHY bother when the terrain rules suck?
You? Maybe.
Other people will think differently.
I can work around dodgy rules with my group, I can't work around dodgy looking terrain.
Dodgy rules break immersion more than a Grey model. Or do you think forge the narrative works when the players are taking turns choosing a unit to fight in melee LOL
DeathKorp_Rider wrote: It’s not part of the hobby I enjoy. You can’t force someone to participate in something they don’t want to. It’d be like forcing someone who only builds the models to play the game.
I can't force you, but I can certainly judge you for it. And I can judge you for posting "look at the size of my wallet" and bragging about how you don't bother to paint models a lot of us would kill to have.
Screw you buddy.
Looking forward to your inevitable ban, thanks.
I am oddly with Bob on this one. Enjoy another ignore. You want to play a card game with chits? Not my hobby. If I met you in a hobby shop, I wouldn't speak with you twice. As in real life then... go your chitty way.
Imagine being so mentally unstable and weak you have to block people that play with unpainted models.
DeathKorp_Rider wrote: It’s not part of the hobby I enjoy. You can’t force someone to participate in something they don’t want to. It’d be like forcing someone who only builds the models to play the game.
I can't force you, but I can certainly judge you for it. And I can judge you for posting "look at the size of my wallet" and bragging about how you don't bother to paint models a lot of us would kill to have.
Screw you buddy.
Looking forward to your inevitable ban, thanks.
I am oddly with Bob on this one. Enjoy another ignore. You want to play a card game with chits? Not my hobby. If I met you in a hobby shop, I wouldn't speak with you twice. As in real life then... go your chitty way.
PaddyMick wrote: Yay! over half of people in the poll don't care. That's cool.
Yes but I’m sure those at 10 will double-down
Yeah I voted 8. There is a place for trying new things, testing wargear before modeling to be permanent. But jeez, fine. This is not a CCG. For me, it is an interactive model trainset and should look and feel like a realistic sci fantasy battlefield. Grey plastic chits? Why bother with terrain, then? I suppose this is all cardboard taped to empty beer cans? Yeah, no. Not at all the experience that I am after, and anyone who is satisfied with such is simply not doing what i want to do. Offending that I wont spend my time with you? Yeah, well, deal with it. I have no respect for your activity. You waste my time. You disrespect my hobby by expecting that I should respect you enough to waste my time with you. Nah... you are the ones "doubling down" on laziness and lack of talent. Wont develop new skills cuz dont like to paint? Fine. Play MtG with grey plastic chits with someone else. Offended? I could not care less, as if a leech didnt like the taste of my blood. Lates!
maybe you're just a little fired up because one or two people have been douchey, but it seems a little douchey not to respect people who don't paint. i want my opponents to have painted armies as well, and play on a table with decent looking terrain, i'm on that same level with you, but i can still respect people who just don't want to paint their models. doesn't mean i will play with them though.
Or do you think forge the narrative works when the players are taking turns choosing a unit to fight in melee LOL
Sure, it's called 'abstraction'. I mean, ttgs are limited systems - there's only so much they can do. I happily cut some slack. At least nicely painted models are something else to discuss while rolling our eyes at silly rules.
Nazrak wrote: 10. I’ve no interest in playing with, or against, unpainted minis. Plus I find the self-imposed rule of “I can’t play with it til it’s painted” is a good way of a) focusing my hobby projects a bit and b) dissuading me from buying ludicrous amounts of stuff. Requiring the same of opponents also seems to reduce the likelihood of playing against someone using the latest meta-chasing/net listed flavour of the month, which isn’t something that really interests me from a gaming perspective.
If people want to play with unpainted minis, part-painted minis, or even just little cardboard tokens or whatever, then all power to them; people have every right to approach their hobby and play their games in whatever way they enjoy. It’s just not, personally, something I want to spend my limited hobbying time on.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Despite my above reply, I have every sympathy with anyone who doesn’t feel inclined to paint their models, from having other priorities with limited hobby time, to simply not wanting to. It’s *your* hobby; approach it however *you* want. And I hope you have a very nice time playing games with people whose enjoyment of the game *isn’t* tied to any sort of painting requirement. I just happen to have a differing view of this stuff and that’s absolutely fine because it’s just a silly, fun spacemen game.
This is literally the only rational argument to the "must paint" side.
Essentially, painting makes me happy, and if you don't, that's your choice.
And in reference to the detestable iconography, I wasn't referring to the UM, but Mr. Reece painting a Totenkopf on his Knight, and then verbally attacking anyone who stated that it's a nazi symbol.
We all knew what you meant. Now, look up context in the dictionary and j/k on whatever resource covers internet/text shorthand...
I seriously doubt most players are "immersed" in their games. "Immersion" means that you see yourself on the battle field and that you are acting out your fantasy on the gaming table. I somehow doubt that people are really doing that while at the same time firing their tanks turret weapon at someone when the only part of their tank that can "see" that target is the last millimeter of their front left tread. Likewise I fail so see how they can, and do, fire their left hull mounted sponson at a target that is only visible to the vehicle's right side. But that's OK it doesn't interfere with their immersion. It's just the horror of seeing unpainted/underpainted model across from them that destroys their fantasy in their toy soldier games.
I have no problem with you wanting to use the finest paint jobs you can get on your figures. If you don't want to play against a grey army then that's fine. It's a hobby and everyone has different levels of enjoyment. But at least man up and admit that in this game of toy soldiers you're acting like a child and that's all there is to it. Don't try to hide behind a flimsy excuse like "Your unpainted minis totally destroy my immersion in the game".
Just for transparency- I started playing at a store that allowed you to use your models unpainted for 3 weeks. After that it was expected that they would at least meet the 3 color level of painting. I still abide by that standard even though I no longer go to that store and that was 20 years ago. I don't have so much of my ego invested in my toys that I would turn down playing someone due to the paint status of their models.
Or do you think forge the narrative works when the players are taking turns choosing a unit to fight in melee LOL
Sure, it's called 'abstraction'. I mean, ttgs are limited systems - there's only so much they can do. I happily cut some slack. At least nicely painted models are something else to discuss while rolling our eyes at silly rules.
Imagine being so mentally unstable and weak you have to block people that play with unpainted models.
'Mentally unstable and weak'? Seriously, not cool. Dial down the insults and slurs relating to peoples mental health and throwing them at people, eh?
You can't abstract Marines in Grey armor but you can abstract units taking turns when to fight? LOL okay.
Also yeah, if they're gonna block someone because they aren't painting their models, that's mentally weak. That's beyond even just blocking someone with a different opinion.
Leo_the_Rat wrote: I seriously doubt most players are "immersed" in their games. "Immersion" means that you see yourself on the battle field and that you are acting out your fantasy on the gaming table. I somehow doubt that people are really doing that while at the same time firing their tanks turret weapon at someone when the only part of their tank that can "see" that target is the last millimeter of their front left tread. Likewise I fail so see how they can, and do, fire their left hull mounted sponson at a target that is only visible to the vehicle's right side. But that's OK it doesn't interfere with their immersion. It's just the horror of seeing unpainted/underpainted model across from them that destroys their fantasy in their toy soldier games.
I have no problem with you wanting to use the finest paint jobs you can get on your figures. If you don't want to play against a grey army then that's fine. It's a hobby and everyone has different levels of enjoyment. But at least man up and admit that in this game of toy soldiers you're acting like a child and that's all there is to it. Don't try to hide behind a flimsy excuse like "Your unpainted minis totally destroy my immersion in the game".
Just for transparency- I started playing at a store that allowed you to use your models unpainted for 3 weeks. After that it was expected that they would at least meet the 3 color level of painting. I still abide by that standard even though I no longer go to that store and that was 20 years ago. I don't have so much of my ego invested in my toys that I would turn down playing someone due to the paint status of their models.
the sponson question is pretty simple, the tank pivots 180 degrees...
how did that store really enforce that rule.
employee "oh those marines havent been painted for 3 weeks, can't use them."
customer "this is a whole new squad you see, and this is the first time i've used them."
employee "...nuh-uh."
i love how people try to come off as understanding and then jump to ad hominem attacks...good job.
Do people actually refuse pick-up games at their FLGS because their prospective opponent has unpainted models? I have certainly gamed at stores (mostly GW) where the game room policy was only painted models allowed. Heck, the GW near me circa 2003 required that the model's eyes must be painted or no play. Tournies, as well, often have a painting policy. That is different - in these cases the venue is putting a rule in place. I just can't see turning down a pickup game due to models being unpainted. Outrageous proxies? Different story. Lack of paint? Nope - lets roll some dice!
I do very much prefer to play with painted miniatures - this is a miniatures game after all. Part of my gaming experience is indeed the visual spectacle. Rules abstractions do not detract from that. The Age of Sigmar code of conduct goes so far as to state that we should ask our opponent's permission to use unpainted models. But to point-blank refuse a game over lack of paint when the venue has no such policy?
If it's not fully painted and the bases are not decorated with at least something plain like sand, you just don't get 10vp in all of our local regular games. If you just spray the minis and make 'eye dots', it won't do. You got to make your efforts noticeable. But it's not really much. Like when you get a basing coat, some 3+ different colors here and there and lighting or at least deybrush. It's gonna suffice.
There are also tourneys where unpainted models are not allowed and they have some a bit higher up standards like drilled barrels, a couple layers minimum above the base layer, something else...
But it's mostly just the first case. Put some effort in your army and get those 10 VP. If I'd not fully painted, just play without them. No big deal.
TangoTwoBravo wrote: Do people actually refuse pick-up games at their FLGS because their prospective opponent has unpainted models? I have certainly gamed at stores (mostly GW) where the game room policy was only painted models allowed. Heck, the GW near me circa 2003 required that the model's eyes must be painted or no play. Tournies, as well, often have a painting policy. That is different - in these cases the venue is putting a rule in place. I just can't see turning down a pickup game due to models being unpainted. Outrageous proxies? Different story. Lack of paint? Nope - lets roll some dice!
I do very much prefer to play with painted miniatures - this is a miniatures game after all. Part of my gaming experience is indeed the visual spectacle. Rules abstractions do not detract from that. The Age of Sigmar code of conduct goes so far as to state that we should ask our opponent's permission to use unpainted models. But to point-blank refuse a game over lack of paint when the venue has no such policy?
Sometimes..... I have the option to play whoever I like. Why would I pick to play some unpainted army when there's tons of people with beautiful armies wanting games.
Some posters have pointed out the "50% of people don't care if they are painted". While missing that 50% care about at least some level of painting. All you have done by not painting an army is limit the amount of potential people who are willing to play you. People also take it wrong, I don't look down on people who walk in with unpainted armies id just rather play a game against a painted one. Id say a large portion of the community feels this way and is why most tournaments have moved to have 3 color minimum painting requirements. The game is just more enjoyable sitting across from another painted army
Leo_the_Rat wrote: I seriously doubt most players are "immersed" in their games. "Immersion" means that you see yourself on the battle field and that you are acting out your fantasy on the gaming table. I somehow doubt that people are really doing that while at the same time firing their tanks turret weapon at someone when the only part of their tank that can "see" that target is the last millimeter of their front left tread. Likewise I fail so see how they can, and do, fire their left hull mounted sponson at a target that is only visible to the vehicle's right side. But that's OK it doesn't interfere with their immersion. It's just the horror of seeing unpainted/underpainted model across from them that destroys their fantasy in their toy soldier games.
I have no problem with you wanting to use the finest paint jobs you can get on your figures. If you don't want to play against a grey army then that's fine. It's a hobby and everyone has different levels of enjoyment. But at least man up and admit that in this game of toy soldiers you're acting like a child and that's all there is to it. Don't try to hide behind a flimsy excuse like "Your unpainted minis totally destroy my immersion in the game".
Just for transparency- I started playing at a store that allowed you to use your models unpainted for 3 weeks. After that it was expected that they would at least meet the 3 color level of painting. I still abide by that standard even though I no longer go to that store and that was 20 years ago. I don't have so much of my ego invested in my toys that I would turn down playing someone due to the paint status of their models.
the sponson question is pretty simple, the tank pivots 180 degrees...
how did that store really enforce that rule.
employee "oh those marines havent been painted for 3 weeks, can't use them."
customer "this is a whole new squad you see, and this is the first time i've used them."
employee "...nuh-uh."
i love how people try to come off as understanding and then jump to ad hominem attacks...good job.
As to the store, yeah, the owner would come over and ask why you hadn't painted your figures yet. If you didn't have a real excuse then he asked you to take the figures off of the table. If you said no then he asked you to leave. His philosophy was that painted figures catch people's attention and from there you get more sales. So to him it was a matter of advertising. Everyone in the store knew it and accepted it as the price of playing in his store.
And your reading is a little slipshod. If the model isn't moving then how does your "immersion" cover that a stationary figure pivots? If you can imagine that and still maintain your immersion then you should have no problem picturing your opponents army wearing an appropriate outfit/color pattern. Hypocrisy much?
And, for the record, I wasn't attacking anyone. I was stating my belief just like the people above me were stating their beliefs.
I am betting dollars to donuts most of the "Must paint" crowd are never called for games at the Friendly Local, because they forget to bring the friendly.
Leo_the_Rat wrote: I seriously doubt most players are "immersed" in their games. "Immersion" means that you see yourself on the battle field and that you are acting out your fantasy on the gaming table. I somehow doubt that people are really doing that while at the same time firing their tanks turret weapon at someone when the only part of their tank that can "see" that target is the last millimeter of their front left tread. Likewise I fail so see how they can, and do, fire their left hull mounted sponson at a target that is only visible to the vehicle's right side. But that's OK it doesn't interfere with their immersion. It's just the horror of seeing unpainted/underpainted model across from them that destroys their fantasy in their toy soldier games.
I have no problem with you wanting to use the finest paint jobs you can get on your figures. If you don't want to play against a grey army then that's fine. It's a hobby and everyone has different levels of enjoyment. But at least man up and admit that in this game of toy soldiers you're acting like a child and that's all there is to it. Don't try to hide behind a flimsy excuse like "Your unpainted minis totally destroy my immersion in the game".
Just for transparency- I started playing at a store that allowed you to use your models unpainted for 3 weeks. After that it was expected that they would at least meet the 3 color level of painting. I still abide by that standard even though I no longer go to that store and that was 20 years ago. I don't have so much of my ego invested in my toys that I would turn down playing someone due to the paint status of their models.
the sponson question is pretty simple, the tank pivots 180 degrees...
how did that store really enforce that rule.
employee "oh those marines havent been painted for 3 weeks, can't use them."
customer "this is a whole new squad you see, and this is the first time i've used them."
employee "...nuh-uh."
i love how people try to come off as understanding and then jump to ad hominem attacks...good job.
As to the store, yeah, the owner would come over and ask why you hadn't painted your figures yet. If you didn't have a real excuse then he asked you to take the figures off of the table. If you said no then he asked you to leave. His philosophy was that painted figures catch people's attention and from there you get more sales. So to him it was a matter of advertising. Everyone in the store knew it and accepted it as the price of playing in his store.
And your reading is a little slipshod. If the model isn't moving then how does your "immersion" cover that a stationary figure pivots? If you can imagine that and still maintain your immersion then you should have no problem picturing your opponents army wearing an appropriate outfit/color pattern. Hypocrisy much?
And, for the record, I wasn't attacking anyone. I was stating my belief just like the people above me were stating their beliefs.
imagining 1 tank pivoting, vs, imagining a whole ass color scheme on an entire army, yep, that's totally the same thing.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: I am betting dollars to donuts most of the "Must paint" crowd are never called for games at the Friendly Local, because they forget to bring the friendly.
One side of this discussion is being crass and at times downright rude. That side just accused the other side of being unfriendly. Also the same side that gets threads locked by spoofing them any time they see something they don't want to read...
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: I am betting dollars to donuts most of the "Must paint" crowd are never called for games at the Friendly Local, because they forget to bring the friendly.
johnpjones1775 wrote: imagining 1 tank pivoting, vs, imagining a whole ass color scheme on an entire army, yep, that's totally the same thing.
It's not just one tank. It's one tank this turn, a squad of troops that turn, a character another turn. So, yeah, to me it's pretty much the same thing. Unless your imagination is limited in scope/scale then I can see your problem. Besides that in your immersion all you'd be looking at would be 1 troop, 1 tank or, 1 character at a time. I guess you can't watch black and white movies/TV shows either. The lack of color must drive you nuts when you're trying to immerse yourself in the story.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: I am betting dollars to donuts most of the "Must paint" crowd are never called for games at the Friendly Local, because they forget to bring the friendly.
I'll take that bet, and your money.
Seriously, not cool.
LOL okay then. Based on your earlier post I'm gathering you'd lose money.
I dont have requirements for any other players bc not everyone enjoys it, has time for it, or even capable to do it and it is not my place to tell them how to spend their time. Paint literally has no meaning or purpose to the game, so why would I care?
I like my armies painted and I try to paint them, I personally have something like 10k points painted but I dont always play with painted models.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: I am betting dollars to donuts most of the "Must paint" crowd are never called for games at the Friendly Local, because they forget to bring the friendly.
That's surprising.... i find that every person that has a fully painted army tends to be a blast to play against and it typically playing something they really enjoy and not just the FOTM sitting there across from you. Where i live its the people that show up week in and week out with no progress and grey miniatures in a shoebox that people tend to avoid.
The really comical part about these posts is all the people upset that someone wouldn't want to play against you, are the ones thinking other people are jerks. Imagine thinking someone should be forced to play you in a boardgame are the "nice ones". Honestly, it just comes off as throwing a tantrum because some people like a cinematic nice looking game. For all the people saying "i dont have time to paint an army" you re 100% right.... time is very limited. Why would i take that valuable time and play a dull game against a sea of grey when i can match up with someone who clearly enjoys parts of the hobby i enjoy?
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: I am betting dollars to donuts most of the "Must paint" crowd are never called for games at the Friendly Local, because they forget to bring the friendly.
That's surprising.... i find that every person that has a fully painted army tends to be a blast to play against and it typically playing something they really enjoy and not just the FOTM sitting there across from you. Where i live its the people that show up week in and week out with no progress and grey miniatures in a shoebox that people tend to avoid.
The really comical part about these posts is all the people upset that someone wouldn't want to play against you, are the ones thinking other people are jerks. Imagine thinking someone should be forced to play you in a boardgame are the "nice ones". Honestly, it just comes off as throwing a tantrum because some people like a cinematic nice looking game. For all the people saying "i dont have time to paint an army" you re 100% right.... time is very limited. Why would i take that valuable time and play a dull game against a sea of grey when i can match up with someone who clearly enjoys parts of the hobby i enjoy?
The issue is with the people labeling people who don’t want to paint as lazy and not dedicated enough to something meant to be fun.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: I am betting dollars to donuts most of the "Must paint" crowd are never called for games at the Friendly Local, because they forget to bring the friendly.
That's surprising.... i find that every person that has a fully painted army tends to be a blast to play against and it typically playing something they really enjoy and not just the FOTM sitting there across from you. Where i live its the people that show up week in and week out with no progress and grey miniatures in a shoebox that people tend to avoid.
The really comical part about these posts is all the people upset that someone wouldn't want to play against you, are the ones thinking other people are jerks. Imagine thinking someone should be forced to play you in a boardgame are the "nice ones". Honestly, it just comes off as throwing a tantrum because some people like a cinematic nice looking game. For all the people saying "i dont have time to paint an army" you re 100% right.... time is very limited. Why would i take that valuable time and play a dull game against a sea of grey when i can match up with someone who clearly enjoys parts of the hobby i enjoy?
The issue is with the people labeling people who don’t want to paint as lazy and not dedicated enough to something meant to be fun.
Ahhhh yes its the people who should be forced to play that are doing the labeling..... "I am betting dollars to donuts most of the "Must paint" crowd are never called for games at the Friendly Local, because they forget to bring the friendly."
Well, this thread has lasted longer than I thought it would. Guess I'll throw my two cents in. While I personally prefer to have my own stuff fully painted before putting it on the table, I don't really care if my opponent has all (or any) of their own stuff painted. That doesn't really affect whether I have any fun or not, personally.
I paint each and every single one of my models to my highest standard possible, but I don't require my opponent to do the same. They could be playing with unpainted models all they want. I do find the games to be more enjoyable when everything is painted well, but it's not a requirement.
EviscerationPlague wrote:
LOL okay then. Based on your earlier post I'm gathering you'd lose money.
Nah I'm good. Plenty friendly - irish after all and its basically written into our dna. +2CHR bonus and loads of extra perks in chat, banter, anecdotes and pint-downing.
I just don't appreciate prople throwing around mental health slurs like 'unstable' at folks. If that makes me 'unfriendly', *shrug*
DeathKorp_Rider wrote:
The issue is with the people labeling people who don’t want to paint as lazy and not dedicated enough to something meant to be fun.
I mean, fair. But I also remember the poster in question referring to themselves as also lazy.
And for what ita worth, 'the issue' is more than pro-painting using the word 'lazy'.
For example, i find the use of the term 'supremacists' used in previous pages with regard to people who prefer painted as particularly vile. Its a dog whistle. It's a particularly vulgar misappropriation of a term most typically associated with the word 'white' and used in the context of nazis. 'Absolutists' is another doozy. That's like, appropriate for maybe one poster, and everyone else is being tarred by proxy.
Abs to be fair that's also hardly the only insult or slur thrown about - we've seen things from. Individual posters claiming 'gatekeeping', 'snobs', 'hostile', 'unethical', posts mischaracterising and sneering at encoragement of painting as 'sadism' and willing suffering on people, claiming those who value painting do so only out of 'resentment, jealousy and regret' against those who dont who are showing backbone for refusing (another dog whistle implying those who paint are cowards). then theres terms like 'unstable' and 'weak' that's been banded about at polonius and other pro-painting posters.
I mean, youre not wrong about lazy but maybe consider if it's worth saying that the other stuff said also needs to be called out?
'Lazy' can be a thing, perfectly fair to call it out if real (lets face it we've all been on a team where the lazy person dragged everythind down), it's also perfectly fair to be annoyed about it if its misplaced. As per my first post here, plenty legit reasons why people can't paint (disability, age, other priorities like kids etc), it's still not wrong for folks to find it devalues their experience too, or to see it/value it or encourage it as something aspirational.
mrFickle wrote: To the people who don't want to paint the minis:
do you also hate assembly and would you rather buy ready to go minis?
So if a 3rd party made GW compatible models that have a bit of colour on them and were monopole would you buy them?
Tbf with how little customisation GW is enouraging with newer kits and rules, pre-assembled monopose models would probably make a lot more sense.
Just look at the new cultist kit
mrFickle wrote: To the people who don't want to paint the minis:
do you also hate assembly and would you rather buy ready to go minis?
So if a 3rd party made GW compatible models that have a bit of colour on them and were monopole would you buy them?
Tbf with how little customisation GW is enouraging with newer kits and rules, pre-assembled monopose models would probably make a lot more sense.
Just look at the new cultist kit
that's a fair point. I just think there is a market out there for ready made models so let em ask another question:
If I bought the mini's, assembled them, primed them and dipped/contrast them and did a basic amount of details and setup an Etsy shop to sell them would the non painters be willing to pay some level of markup for these minis assuming the paint job was respectable. I am in no way good enough to sell painted minis like the people who sell a full painting service but then of course they charge a lot of money. but a presentable 3 colours isn't difficult
would it be worth an extra £15 per unit to have some colour on them, would that be preferable to playing with grey plastic?
mrFickle wrote: To the people who don't want to paint the minis:
do you also hate assembly and would you rather buy ready to go minis?
So if a 3rd party made GW compatible models that have a bit of colour on them and were monopole would you buy them?
Maybe, depends.
I really like assembling models and even magnetizing and converting them, so I wouldn't buy models like vehicles and characters from them.
Basic infantry though? It'd totally buy ready to go boyz, lootas, plague marines, intercessors or poxwalkers.
Heck, it's not even a fictional thing - I did buy a friend's collection for the sole reason of gaining 150 fully painted boyz and sold ~60 unpainted boyz of mine immediately afterwards. I guess the biggest issue is paying a markup on the already super-expensive models.
Pre-painted sprues would be perfect for me. I'd even gladly fix the damage to the paint job done by glue and pliers, as long as I don't have to paint the entire box.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: I am betting dollars to donuts most of the "Must paint" crowd are never called for games at the Friendly Local, because they forget to bring the friendly.
I'll take that bet, and your money.
Seriously, not cool.
LOL okay then. Based on your earlier post I'm gathering you'd lose money.
And if your personality IRL is anything like how you come across posting on here, I'd be very surprised to find that you get any games outside of tournaments, and taking hostages at gunpoint.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: I have yet to see a FLGS or even a WH store actually enforce the painted points rule
The biggest effect of the painted points rule is that you keep getting "wElL, aKsHuAlLy..." 'ed after a close game, which I have started to understand as an invitation to completely curb-stomp that player next game with as much grey plastic as I can muster to ensure that the player is getting as much enjoyment from gaming as I get from painting.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: I have yet to see a FLGS or even a WH store actually enforce the painted points rule
The biggest effect of the painted points rule is that you keep getting "wElL, aKsHuAlLy..." 'ed after a close game, which I have started to understand as an invitation to completely curb-stomp that player next game with as much grey plastic as I can muster to ensure that the player is getting as much enjoyment from gaming as I get from painting.
...and we're sure it's the people in the pro-painting camp that are the unpleasant ones?
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: I have yet to see a FLGS or even a WH store actually enforce the painted points rule
The biggest effect of the painted points rule is that you keep getting "wElL, aKsHuAlLy..." 'ed after a close game, which I have started to understand as an invitation to completely curb-stomp that player next game with as much grey plastic as I can muster to ensure that the player is getting as much enjoyment from gaming as I get from painting.
Sounds more like the person is tallying up their points and your getting mad that they painted their army and thus benefit from additional points. They should have just known not to be such an absolute jerk following the rules. I hope you teach them a valuable lesson… when you are done with them they will know better then to take points they have earned (I bet after that smashing they will be beyond excited for the next guy with a grey army that wants a game)… I’m sure instances like this have nothing to do with why some people avoid unpainted armies
Sounds more like the person is tallying up their points and your getting mad that they painted their army and thus benefit from additional points. They should have just known not to be such an absolute jerk following the rules. I hope you teach them a valuable lesson… when you are done with them they will know better then to take points they have earned (I bet after that smashing they will be beyond excited for the next guy with a grey army that wants a game… I’m sure instances like this have nothing to do with why some people avoid unpainted armies
paintjob should have zero impact of the points in a game. The game should be purely determined from the skill of the players as generals.
If you want your paintjob to give you points, join the "best painted" part of the tournament with it
Sounds more like the person is tallying up their points and your getting mad that they painted their army and thus benefit from additional points. They should have just known not to be such an absolute jerk following the rules. I hope you teach them a valuable lesson… when you are done with them they will know better then to take points they have earned (I bet after that smashing they will be beyond excited for the next guy with a grey army that wants a game… I’m sure instances like this have nothing to do with why some people avoid unpainted armies
paintjob should have zero impact of the points in a game. The game should be purely determined from the skill of the players as generals.
If you want your paintjob to give you points, join the "best painted" part of the tournament with it
"should" and "does" are not the same thing - you agreed to play a game, that VP structure of which currently "does" include painting as a tertiary objective.
Not the opponent's fault that Jid didn't choose to play to that objective, and it seems a bit off to then be vengeful when as a result of the game doesn't go his way.
Sounds more like the person is tallying up their points and your getting mad that they painted their army and thus benefit from additional points. They should have just known not to be such an absolute jerk following the rules. I hope you teach them a valuable lesson… when you are done with them they will know better then to take points they have earned (I bet after that smashing they will be beyond excited for the next guy with a grey army that wants a game… I’m sure instances like this have nothing to do with why some people avoid unpainted armies
paintjob should have zero impact of the points in a game. The game should be purely determined from the skill of the players as generals.
If you want your paintjob to give you points, join the "best painted" part of the tournament with it
Yup me and this other guy should have known we were just being unreasonable using the rule book. Could you let me know any other unofficial things I should know going into a game against a stranger? Any secondary’s or missions you don’t like your highness
Sounds more like the person is tallying up their points and your getting mad that they painted their army and thus benefit from additional points. They should have just known not to be such an absolute jerk following the rules. I hope you teach them a valuable lesson… when you are done with them they will know better then to take points they have earned (I bet after that smashing they will be beyond excited for the next guy with a grey army that wants a game… I’m sure instances like this have nothing to do with why some people avoid unpainted armies
paintjob should have zero impact of the points in a game. The game should be purely determined from the skill of the players as generals.
If you want your paintjob to give you points, join the "best painted" part of the tournament with it
Well rather wallet as 40k isn't skill game. Painting requires more skill than game.
But you win by rules. 10 pts for painted is part of rules. Valid to win by that. If it annoys to lose by that git gud if you can't paint your models accept you are giving up 10 pts. Why you shouldn't be punished while others is punished for not having cash to follow gw's marketing strategy for what's op? Skill? Wallet isn's skill so complaining painting points makes no sense due to lack of "skill" is moot. Neither is wallet. Painting is way more skill than gaming which adds up to wallet
"should" and "does" are not the same thing - you agreed to play a game, that VP structure of which currently "does" include painting as a tertiary objective.
Not the opponent's fault that Jid didn't choose to play to that objective, and it seems a bit off to then be vengeful when as a result of the game doesn't go his way.
IDK about you but i personally would never claim the 10pts if it was what would win me the game. That would be such an unsatisfying victory lol
"should" and "does" are not the same thing - you agreed to play a game, that VP structure of which currently "does" include painting as a tertiary objective.
Not the opponent's fault that Jid didn't choose to play to that objective, and it seems a bit off to then be vengeful when as a result of the game doesn't go his way.
IDK about you but i personally would never claim the 10pts if it was what would win me the game. That would be such an unsatisfying victory lol
Then you are cheater.
And having bigger wallet is even less satisfying win and 99% 40k game "skill" is bigger wallet.
"should" and "does" are not the same thing - you agreed to play a game, that VP structure of which currently "does" include painting as a tertiary objective.
Not the opponent's fault that Jid didn't choose to play to that objective, and it seems a bit off to then be vengeful when as a result of the game doesn't go his way.
IDK about you but i personally would never claim the 10pts if it was what would win me the game. That would be such an unsatisfying victory lol
Then you are cheater.
And having bigger wallet is even less satisfying win and 99% 40k game "skill" is bigger wallet.
cheater because i give myself less points?
and stop with your bigger wallet gak, you can win against expensive armies with cheap ones (guard vs custodes). Having more money isnt automatically a win
While the paint job doesn't affect the battle it is in the rules. So you were forewarned that you are getting/spotting points for painting your models. It's your decision to play and your agreement to use the rules, as they are, that are given by GW.
Just like you don't want people to complain about your lack of paint you can't complain about the benefit that they got and you waived.
Leo_the_Rat wrote: While the paint job doesn't affect the battle it is in the rules. So you were forewarned that you are getting/spotting points for painting your models. It's your decision to play and your agreement to use the rules, as they are, that are given by GW.
Just like you don't want people to complain about your lack of paint you can't complain about the benefit that they got and you waived.
all my armies are painted, so it doesnt affect me. Played at least one game every weekend since the start of 9th and i never ever used this rule (and neither has anyone at my LGS )
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Stevefamine wrote: Full painted; no exceptions. Low levels of terrain (London GT style) is also a big letdown.
This was one of the core reasons why I didn't like Warmachine. Check out these two games
Spoiler:
vs.
while that 40k table looks cool as heck, is that really a problem with the game more than with the players not building intricate tables?
I know nothing of Warmachine, could you play with nicer terrain or do the rules prohibit it somehow?
Yes WAAC=counting points you have earned. I make sure to tell this to everyone who raises banner or collects data or takes Titian hunter. If you count any of those points throughout the game and it causes me to not win you are a WAAC player
Or you know people could simply keep score by the rules and have a fun game. Funny how all these people who “don’t care/ can’t be bothered” about paint get really upset about and care a lot about the points attached to that paint. Wanting painting points you haven’t earned is no different then wanting the primary points for a round even though you were pushed off an objective
Rules prohibit nice terrain in Warmachine. The game is played in an event style and it's rare that folks have casual or narrative games. The game wants to be 2D and flat in terms of mechanics.
players not building intricate tables?
For 40k I put the example forward because you'll have a far greater time in a game with a terrain table painted even a bit. This is a table I worked on as a teenager at my local GW:
It's the bare minimum for a painting requirement. The armies that play on that should be painted at least.
Grey tide army on a good table? not bad - could work
Grey tide army on a unpainted and boring table of books and cups?
Painted army on a boring kitchen table setup?
Some painting is required for the game we're playing. If you play Warmachine - no need at all to paint anything.
The primary defense against painting miniatures isnt lack of skill it's just a time commitment. Hey the hobby isnt that important for many folks that are involved. It is painting little toy soldiers to roll dice with. I lean on the artistic side of the hobby and thats what I enjoy. Time commitment is a combination of laziness, real life issues, work balance, and so on. Far easier to play a video game or watch a game and simply play an unpainted army against your friends. The art portion of the hobby is my thing.
Is it a question of time commitment to the hobby? and being snobby if someone didn't paint their army? Sure you can view it that way. I personally don't view it as gatekeeping.. but then all tournaments and events would be gatekeepers against the "grey tides" folks.
The 10 VPs rule I do not agree with. There should of course be a painting score at events
while that 40k table looks cool as heck, is that really a problem with the game more than with the players not building intricate tables?
I know nothing of Warmachine, could you play with nicer terrain or do the rules prohibit it somehow?
Fair question vlad.
You absolutely can play wmh on nice boards with painted armies- all of my stuff for example is painted. However its true that Most people don't paint or value 3d terrain. 'The game' and how 'the community approached the game' were largely synonymous.
the community itself got fixated on unpainted and 2d terrain to 'help' ease of play and ease of measurement for competitive events - you can argue with the shape/design of pp models, 3d terrain risks them tipping over etc, and if you are anyway at all familiar with wmh, you'll know there were no other kinds of events other than ultra-competitive ones - this was basically decided by the community itself and to a large part represented a large contributing effect in the decline of the game since casual players and pro-painting players were largely driven out. But that's another conversation.
Dysartes wrote: ...and we're sure it's the people in the pro-painting camp that are the unpleasant ones?
Nah, just I'm just making up nonsense that is just as extreme as their views and see who flips their gak because of it.
Yes turning down a game is such an “extreme” view. I hope non of these “extremists” are roaming the streets looking for painted armies to play. Actually now that I think about it almost every major tournament is now an “extremist” event. God only knows how such an extreme view as wanting to play Warhammer against other painted armies became so widespread. The world will for sure be a worse place having to gaze at so many fully painted armies
My local 40k group actually split over this argument. The All-Painted-requirement crowd stuck to their Whatsapp group, and from what I can see through lurking, it's just 3-4 people still. The No-Paint-Requirement group shifted over to a Discord server, and has been steadily growing, drawing in more people, etc etc. Pretty active in all of it's channels for art sharing, discussions, etcs. Roughly 3-4x more active members playing games.
People are welcome to play however they want, obviously, and against whoever they want, but it's pretty evident from the thread that all-paint-requirement is in the minority, and for sure matches up with my local experience.
I strive to fully paint my armies, and Contrast has made that far easier these days. But Excluding people from participating in a part of the hobby, that I just can't agree with. I wouldn't want to, and in fact don't play in groups where All-Painted is a requirement. Even though I could make that requirement, because it's exclusionary. That sort of attitude could very easily push out new players who want to ease in to the hobby without that pressure being put on to them. Encourage people, but don't pressure. Not to say that's what particular posters here do, just my own anecdotal experience of how All-Painted groups are.
I understand both sides of the argument and think about it as players generally being in one of two camps.
Camp No.1 = The experience is priority.
Camp No.2 = The game is priority.
For those in camp no.1, they want all aspect of W40K to be observed and appreciated.
For those in camp no.2, they want victory/defeat to be based solely on game play.
Each is valid. I'd even say there's a fair amount of people who have a foot in both camps.
The issue is when someone in either camp is too extreme and upholds their preference to the exclusion of all else. The common example being, when camp no.2 does not paint their models because to them W40K is nothing more than a game and the models are nothing more than game pieces. This cheapens the experience for those in camp no.1.
I understand both sides of the argument and think about it as players generally being in one of two camps.
Camp No.1 = The experience is priority.
Camp No.2 = The game is priority.
For those in camp no.1, they want all aspect of W40K to be observed and appreciated.
For those in camp no.2, they want victory/defeat to be based solely on game play.
Each is valid. I'd even say there's a fair amount of people who have a foot in both camps.
The issue is when someone in either camp is too extreme and upholds their preference to the exclusion of all else. The common example being, when camp no.2 does not paint their models because to them W40K is nothing more than a game and the models are nothing more than game pieces. This cheapens the experience for those in camp no.1.
well according to the poll (which to be fair has a very small sample size) most players do not care on only expect a minimum amount of paint
I actually think the ten points is dumb. I'd rather events simply either require paint or not, and then we all roll dice. Especially in smaller events, it's probably more important to be inclusive to bring in more people, and having a handicap for unpainted seems odd.
Interesting thread this one so far. Both camps have made reasonable requests and then it's turned into a bun fight by the more unreasonable players in each. There is nothing inherently wrong with any of the options here as long as everyone is polite.
Some are saying 'all painted or no game', due to how they enjoy the game. How is this any different from those who only want to play narrative as that's how they enjoy it or any of the other options when setting up a game? As long as you are polite about it then it is not 'gatekeeping' or 'supremacy'. I'd be quite happy for someone to check with me before a game and as long as they were polite and just said 'Sorry mate I'd rather wait until your whole army is painted', there would be no issue. I don't want to force them to waste their time having a game they wouldn't enjoy. However it would be a problem if they told me I was wrong or lazy for not having everything painted yet, and in that instance they should rightfully be called out for being a jerk.
Equally those who just want to get models on the table top or hate painting, there should be no pressure to do so. I'd again quite happily play against anyone in this camp but a pre-game heads up would be appreciated. If only because I tend to find grey plastic armies hard to parse what is what and I'd take a look at the units in the relevant codex before hand to help recognise shapes. But you can't have a go at someone who wants fully painted politely say no, and then say 'I don't enjoy painting you can't make me do it' and then force them to play you in a game they have said they won't enjoy, that is hypocrisy.
As for the poll I'm in the middle. I prefer as much as possible painted on my own side but certainly don't insist on it from other, I've happily fielded the odd unpainted unit, especially when starting out. To be honest for me it is more about identification. Someone earlier in the thread said once they were in a game the 'look' of the game largely fades as they try and focus on remembering rules and working out what to do. This is very much the same for me, so in reality if someone turned up and each unit was a just sprayed a different colour that would do.
VladimirHerzog wrote:paintjob should have zero impact of the points in a game. The game should be purely determined from the skill of the players as generals.
If you want your paintjob to give you points, join the "best painted" part of the tournament with it
In my experience, the sort of player who will get upset about winning a close battle but 'actually' losing due to not getting that 10VP- in casual pick-up games, because tournaments have their own painting/scoring rules- is exactly the sort of player who needs a rule incentive to get their stuff painted. I don't really care whether it's there or not because it's such a complete non-issue in practice; the rule is more symbolic than anything else.
Personally I'm less concerned with immersion than I am with being able to play WYSIWYG and still identify units and wargear. Grey tide- or worse, black primer- is just a pain to keep track of.
I understand both sides of the argument and think about it as players generally being in one of two camps.
Camp No.1 = The experience is priority.
Camp No.2 = The game is priority.
For those in camp no.1, they want all aspect of W40K to be observed and appreciated.
For those in camp no.2, they want victory/defeat to be based solely on game play.
Each is valid. I'd even say there's a fair amount of people who have a foot in both camps.
The issue is when someone in either camp is too extreme and upholds their preference to the exclusion of all else. The common example being, when camp no.2 does not paint their models because to them W40K is nothing more than a game and the models are nothing more than game pieces. This cheapens the experience for those in camp no.1.
well according to the poll (which to be fair has a very small sample size) most players do not care on only expect a minimum amount of paint
I didn't post this in response to the poll. It was a general response to the last few posts alluding to the merits of receiving victory points.
What would happen if the top ranked 40k player in the world, say, the Rinaldo of 40k, tried to walk into a GW event with a grey army, that he painted, based, and primed and high lighted in full grey paint? Would GW ask them to leave?
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: What would happen if the top ranked 40k player in the world, say, the Rinaldo of 40k, tried to walk into a GW event with a grey army, that he painted, based, and primed and high lighted in full grey paint? Would GW ask them to leave?
yes because most tournaments require a painted army
mrFickle wrote: To the people who don't want to paint the minis:
do you also hate assembly and would you rather buy ready to go minis?
So if a 3rd party made GW compatible models that have a bit of colour on them and were monopole would you buy them?
I like assembly. A lot. It's like a collector Lego set or a Gunpla for me.
I legit can't paint though since it strains my tendonitis and carpal far worse than assembly, though the latter does still happen on occasion.
I DID paint stuff a long time ago, though not to good standard. For my current stuff though? I'll eventually hire someone to do it.
No they don't. You're cherrypicking examples and making stuff up. The tournament scene uses 2D terrain because its easier to measure stuff in a game where a mm matters. Casual players use 3D terrain like normal people.
mrFickle wrote: To the people who don't want to paint the minis:
do you also hate assembly and would you rather buy ready to go minis?
So if a 3rd party made GW compatible models that have a bit of colour on them and were monopole would you buy them?
Yes, its why I own several hundred $$$ of pre-painted D&D minis. And I have bought assembled & painted minis off E-bay and used them as-is.
Assembly & painting are, for me, necessary evils at best. I can put together a model fairly well, I can paint to a decent tabletop standard. But why should I have to? I've only learned to do it because of costs, but now I'd rather pay the extra to have someone do it for me at a skill level that often exceeds my own. That frees up my time to do things I enjoy more, like write on stories, play actual games and the like.
I really don't mind playing against grey armies or half-painted ones. Hell, when I am testing out new stuff I will play with it grey and see if it works before committing hours and hours painting it.
I also really don't mind if people have exceptionally high standards and want everything painted. They tend to be the minority so if they don't want to play me when my army is 80-90% painted I can easily find someone else to play with. It's really no skin off my back. If anything they just tend to exclude themselves from the larger pool of prospective players so all in all it is their loss, but loss that they are free to take and we must respect that.
My experience after playing for the past 25 years is that most do not care if your stuff is painted or not as most of the fun comes with rolling dices and seeing what happens while playing the game. Being painted tends to just be the cherry on top.
However, I do like the 10 point rule that tournaments have adopted. It's a nice carrot for people to want to finish their armies without being an all or nothing in the grand scheme of things.
"should" and "does" are not the same thing - you agreed to play a game, that VP structure of which currently "does" include painting as a tertiary objective.
Not the opponent's fault that Jid didn't choose to play to that objective, and it seems a bit off to then be vengeful when as a result of the game doesn't go his way.
IDK about you but i personally would never claim the 10pts if it was what would win me the game. That would be such an unsatisfying victory lol
"should" and "does" are not the same thing - you agreed to play a game, that VP structure of which currently "does" include painting as a tertiary objective.
Not the opponent's fault that Jid didn't choose to play to that objective, and it seems a bit off to then be vengeful when as a result of the game doesn't go his way.
IDK about you but i personally would never claim the 10pts if it was what would win me the game. That would be such an unsatisfying victory lol
Or join the cool kids and not use VP at all...
effectively what my games have devolved into lol. We vaguely follow the score then forget on one turn and end up just slapping each other
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: What would happen if the top ranked 40k player in the world, say, the Rinaldo of 40k, tried to walk into a GW event with a grey army, that he painted, based, and primed and high lighted in full grey paint? Would GW ask them to leave?
yes because most tournaments require a painted army
But it is painted, it's just painted grey. If they're still doing the 3-colors-minimum it could be an issue.
Sad to see how internet brings to the extreme things that should be handle with common sense.
The better the painting and the terrain, the better the game experience (all other thinks being equal), but in real life sometimes you have to make some transactions with unpainted minis and ugly tables.
Is anybody againat this sinple statement? , if not, why all the fuss?
Vatsetis wrote: I see quite a lot of toxic post in thia topic.
Sad to see how internet brings to the extreme things that should be handle with common sense.
The better the painting and the terrain, the better the game experience (all other thinks being equal), but in real life sometimes you have to make some transactions with unpainted minis and ugly tables.
Is anybody againat this sinple statement? , if not, why all the fuss?
Great point
My D&D group doesnt use minituratures even though a few of our members are painters and terrain builders. We just grid and paper it. You can still game with poker tokens as models and soda cans as drop pods. Far easier. Would D&D be more fun? yes but it would make the prep work 10+ hours extra per session
It seems the thread has a few members that agree on the VPs being a bit dumb. I don't like this either
Yeah, I honestly wonder who the 10 VP for painted models rule is FOR.
For people who don't want to paint, it's punitive. For people who want their opponents to have painted armies, it's an allowance to have unpainted models, just at a VP disadvantage. And for people who like to paint, they don't need the encouragement.
Vatsetis wrote: I see quite a lot of toxic post in thia topic.
Sad to see how internet brings to the extreme things that should be handle with common sense.
The better the painting and the terrain, the better the game experience (all other thinks being equal), but in real life sometimes you have to make some transactions with unpainted minis and ugly tables.
Is anybody againat this sinple statement? , if not, why all the fuss?
100% agree, and i don't think theres many people that won't agree. The reason this thread got so toxic is that some people insulted people with a different POV than them
JNAProductions wrote: Yeah, I honestly wonder who the 10 VP for painted models rule is FOR.
For people who don't want to paint, it's punitive. For people who want their opponents to have painted armies, it's an allowance to have unpainted models, just at a VP disadvantage. And for people who like to paint, they don't need the encouragement.
Its for GW who'd released Contrast Paints a year prior under a massive campaign explaining how easy it made army painting.
JNAProductions wrote: Yeah, I honestly wonder who the 10 VP for painted models rule is FOR.
As a reward for people engaging in the hobby how GW think they are supposed to. Or are we all forgetting the big "BUILD. PAINT. PLAY." tagline that GW uses quite frequently in a lot of its social media? Or like in the very first page of this document which is meant for school clubs etc.
GW wants you to paint your models. Both of their core games tell you it is an intrinsic part of the hobby. AoS says in their rulebook you have to ask permission, 40k encourages you so you can get maximum VP. If you see it as a "punishment" for not engaging in the hobby how the company that makes the product wants you to then that is on you, not anyone else.
JNAProductions wrote: Yeah, I honestly wonder who the 10 VP for painted models rule is FOR.
As a reward for people engaging in the hobby how GW think they are supposed to. Or are we all forgetting the big "BUILD. PAINT. PLAY." tagline that GW uses quite frequently in a lot of its social media? Or like in the very first page of this document which is meant for school clubs etc.
GW wants you to paint your models. Both of their core games tell you it is an intrinsic part of the hobby. AoS says in their rulebook you have to ask permission, 40k encourages you so you can get maximum VP. If you see it as a "punishment" for not engaging in the hobby how the company that makes the product wants you to then that is on you, not anyone else.
That... That just sounds off.
If you buy a children's toy, intended for youngsters to play with, and convert it into a 40k model, you're not using it as intended by the company. But I hardly think anyone would consider that wrong.
I guess my point is that, does the rule actually make the game BETTER for anyone?
If you like to paint-the rule is unneeded.
If you don't like to paint-the rule is punitive by either forcing you to play at a VP disadvantage, or forcing you to spend time on something you don't enjoy.
It also doesn't encourage GOOD paint jobs, it encourages FAST paint jobs. An army that has all but one squad painted to Golden Daemon levels, but one squad that's just primed and being worked on, earns 0 VP. An army that's horribly painted, but technically meets battle ready on all models, earns 10 VP.
For tournaments, most of them have painting requirements anyway, so it won't affect them. For casual play, the score is kinda meaningless, so it can easily come off as a jerk move to say "I won because I painted and you didn't." It's just a baffling inclusion-like no one at GW thought it through.
Okay. GW also wants you to buy thousands of dollars worth of Citadel minis, and paint them with Citadel paints, build them with Citadel clippers and knives and mould removers…
Do you only use stuff you can buy at a GW to bulls your minis?
Whatever point you are trying to make is irrelevant. GW in their games want you to paint your models. End of story. That is what that rule is for.
You can paint your minis with Vallejo, P3, Army Painter or whatever. Do you really think GW in their publications will tell you to paint with anything other than GW paints like you're trying some kind of "gotcha" moment there? But GW want you to paint your models. Nothing is going to change that fact.
Gordon Shumway wrote: Do you really think GW “wants” people to paint their minis, or do you think GW wants you to buy their paint?
Yes.
You seem unfamiliar with the culture of GW. Painting is ingrained in the hobby to them, and if you buy their paints to do that, then that's just gravy for them.
Vatsetis wrote: I see quite a lot of toxic post in thia topic.
Sad to see how internet brings to the extreme things that should be handle with common sense.
The better the painting and the terrain, the better the game experience (all other thinks being equal), but in real life sometimes you have to make some transactions with unpainted minis and ugly tables.
Is anybody againat this sinple statement? , if not, why all the fuss?
Great point
My D&D group doesnt use minituratures even though a few of our members are painters and terrain builders. We just grid and paper it. You can still game with poker tokens as models and soda cans as drop pods. Far easier. Would D&D be more fun? yes but it would make the prep work 10+ hours extra per session
It seems the thread has a few members that agree on the VPs being a bit dumb. I don't like this either
With D&D I've found using tokens rather than minis reduce the temptation to "fiddle" and speed up combat, but that may be group-specific.
Curse you GW and your nefarious plot to sell an easy-to-use type of paint that produces good-looking models with lower effort and time when compared to the traditional style of acyrlic paints!
I'm a sucker for Contrast, I think it's a great product.
And yes, GW does want you to paint your models. Playing at a GW store, or an FLGS that might not be strictly 40k, where random people wander in to check out whats up? Your models, painted or otherwise are an advertisement for the game at that point. Whether you want them to be or not.
Gordon Shumway wrote: Do you really think GW “wants” people to paint their minis, or do you think GW wants you to buy their paint?
Well, GW is like most group of people is not a hivemind. So, certainly there is going to be varying degrees of people in their company ranging from, "yes, GW wants you to paint their miniatures" to "don't give a rat's behind if you throw boxes of models in the trash the moment your money has changed hands."
If I had to speculate, which I do to answer your question, I would hazard to say the GW employees that we are likely to see and/or interact with are genuine that they want to see everyone playing with painted miniatures. Because more often than not, they are fans/superfans of much of the same stuff. Not because maybe you'll buy more Citadel products.
At the same time, those GW employees we don't see probably range from literally not caring to want you to buy more GW product/do advertising of their product for them. Because let's face it, GW probably makes more money from new customers seeing painted models in action than they do with customers buying paint for their models.
Armies of gray on jank looking terrain is going to have the 'normies' likely giving a wide berth around the wargaming tables just in case they have the stereotypical 'nerd stank'. Even if those players are the nicest smelling in the store and a delightful bunch. But well painted armies on nice looking tables are attractive. To the point, many of the places I play have their tables upfront by the windows where foot traffic passes by, and complete randos that might have heard of D&D walk in to check out this world they never fathomed could exist.
The most cynical of GW probably know that. They want you and your painted models working for them, advertising and selling their product. However, I think they are the minority. I truly believe that store runners, video personalities and even many of the authors just like seeing how others paint their models.
That's the POS they send out of FLGSs. See the big banner at the top? It's a core value of what they want the GW Hobby (tm) to be.
You're not wrong, but also I don't like that the Paint part of that banner arbitrarily impacts my VP in the Play part of the banner. It would be annoying if there was also a rule where 10VP depended on you having collected at least $X worth of models, right? Or 10VP if one of the pieces of terrain on the table were from a GW terrain set that you built yourself. I happen to enjoy collecting, building, painting, and playing, but it's annoying to me that people who don't happen to enjoy painting are at a disadvantage when engaging in the playing part of the hobby.
As JNA points out, the game isn't improved by the 10VP for painting rule. It comes across as either a gross money making rule that we should collectively reject out of principle. Or, giving GW the benefit of the doubt, it's a cute way of trying to encourage people to engage with the hobby in a way that they don't want to. Which (slightly) diminishes some peoples' enjoyment of the hobby while arguably not adding to anyone's enjoyment. People understand that the game company wants them to paint their models, but that doesn't mean we're obligated to do so. So let's collectively agree to pretend that the 10VP for painting rule just doesn't exist.
Wyldhunt wrote: As JNA points out, the game isn't improved by the 10VP for painting rule. It comes across as either a gross money making rule that we should collectively reject out of principle.
Funny, I have always thought of it as the rule designers built a point scoring system that pays off in 15pt maximum chunks to a total of 90pts, but a 100pts is a much nicer, more impressive total score to possibly have. So what can they make 10pts to make up the difference? It won't match the rest of the 15pts chunks, so it might have to be something arbitrary, and would be nice to be something that ensures a player doesn't ever have a score of zero. Tying it to a painting score, seems perfectly inline with everything I think I know about GW.
Wyldhunt wrote: As JNA points out, the game isn't improved by the 10VP for painting rule. It comes across as either a gross money making rule that we should collectively reject out of principle.
Funny, I have always thought of it as the rule designers built a point scoring system that pays off in 15pt maximum chunks to a total of 90pts, but a 100pts is a much nicer, more impressive total score to possibly have. So what can they make 10pts to make up the difference? It won't match the rest of the 15pts chunks, so it might have to be something arbitrary, and would be nice to be something that ensures a player doesn't ever have a score of zero. Tying it to a painting score, seems perfectly inline with everything I think I know about GW.
Could have just been, "10VP - Tell your opponent 'Good game.'"
Stevefamine - any chance you could put that image of the table you worked on in spoiler tags, dude? It's massively distorting the page on mobile due to its size.
Gordon Shumway wrote: Do you really think GW “wants” people to paint their minis, or do you think GW wants you to buy their paint?
Well, GW is like most group of people is not a hivemind. So, certainly there is going to be varying degrees of people in their company ranging from, "yes, GW wants you to paint their miniatures" to "don't give a rat's behind if you throw boxes of models in the trash the moment your money has changed hands."
If I had to speculate, which I do to answer your question, I would hazard to say the GW employees that we are likely to see and/or interact with are genuine that they want to see everyone playing with painted miniatures. Because more often than not, they are fans/superfans of much of the same stuff. Not because maybe you'll buy more Citadel products.
At the same time, those GW employees we don't see probably range from literally not caring to want you to buy more GW product/do advertising of their product for them. Because let's face it, GW probably makes more money from new customers seeing painted models in action than they do with customers buying paint for their models.
Armies of gray on jank looking terrain is going to have the 'normies' likely giving a wide berth around the wargaming tables just in case they have the stereotypical 'nerd stank'. Even if those players are the nicest smelling in the store and a delightful bunch. But well painted armies on nice looking tables are attractive. To the point, many of the places I play have their tables upfront by the windows where foot traffic passes by, and complete randos that might have heard of D&D walk in to check out this world they never fathomed could exist.
The most cynical of GW probably know that. They want you and your painted models working for them, advertising and selling their product. However, I think they are the minority. I truly believe that store runners, video personalities and even many of the authors just like seeing how others paint their models.
I agree with this, but when I think of GW, I don’t think of store owners, video personalities or authors (who do probably just really like the IP and want to see cool minis). I think of the board members, CEOs, CFOs, and CPOs—the ones who ultimately okay what the product will be and how it will be promoted. Their goal is to make money—full stop. If painted models in stores help them do that, good they will push that.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: What would happen if the top ranked 40k player in the world, say, the Rinaldo of 40k, tried to walk into a GW event with a grey army, that he painted, based, and primed and high lighted in full grey paint? Would GW ask them to leave?
yes because most tournaments require a painted army
But it is painted, it's just painted grey. If they're still doing the 3-colors-minimum it could be an issue.
Hilariously, while experimenting with spray-coloring terrain I've found a combination of chaos black, army painter metal spray and a no-name dark grey spray that looks almost exactly like GW's plastic color, especially when taking pictures in a well lit room.
Not good enough for my standards, but I guess for some people's immersion that faux plastic look will do wonders since it's three colors.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: What would happen if the top ranked 40k player in the world, say, the Rinaldo of 40k, tried to walk into a GW event with a grey army, that he painted, based, and primed and high lighted in full grey paint? Would GW ask them to leave?
yes because most tournaments require a painted army
But it is painted, it's just painted grey. If they're still doing the 3-colors-minimum it could be an issue.
Hilariously, while experimenting with spray-coloring terrain I've found a combination of chaos black, army painter metal spray and a no-name dark grey spray that looks almost exactly like GW's plastic color, especially when taking pictures in a well lit room.
Not good enough for my standards, but I guess for some people's immersion that faux plastic look will do wonders since it's three colors.
You should post the combo ratios etc + pics.
I've long joked about fielding an army done in grey-scale. Like a B&W movie put onto the table.
I would prefer to play with and against a fully painted army. The higher the quality, the better.
That being said, I do not care one bit if an army is painted or not. I realise that people have other priorities, painting miniatures probably is not at the top of that list. I also really don't care if you use the right miniatures, use your 40k minis in infinity, your WFB orcs in KOW, your star wars minis in 40k, its all the same to me.
That's the POS they send out of FLGSs. See the big banner at the top? It's a core value of what they want the GW Hobby (tm) to be.
You're not wrong, but also I don't like that the Paint part of that banner arbitrarily impacts my VP in the Play part of the banner. It would be annoying if there was also a rule where 10VP depended on you having collected at least $X worth of models, right?
I've got bad news for you but if you play a 1000/1500/2000 point game.... Your point level your using to gain those victory points is a " rule where 10VP depended on you having collected at least $X worth of models".
That's the POS they send out of FLGSs. See the big banner at the top? It's a core value of what they want the GW Hobby (tm) to be.
You're not wrong, but also I don't like that the Paint part of that banner arbitrarily impacts my VP in the Play part of the banner. It would be annoying if there was also a rule where 10VP depended on you having collected at least $X worth of models, right?
I've got bad news for you but if you play a 1000/1500/2000 point game.... Your point level your using to gain those victory points is a " rule where 10VP depended on you having collected at least $X worth of models".
Fine. Collecting at least $X worth of models not being used in your current game then. You know. VP as a reward for being willing to sacrifice enough extra time and money on parts of the game you may or may not actually enjoy that also aren't actually necessary to play the game. Just like paint.
That's the POS they send out of FLGSs. See the big banner at the top? It's a core value of what they want the GW Hobby (tm) to be.
You're not wrong, but also I don't like that the Paint part of that banner arbitrarily impacts my VP in the Play part of the banner. It would be annoying if there was also a rule where 10VP depended on you having collected at least $X worth of models, right?
I've got bad news for you but if you play a 1000/1500/2000 point game.... Your point level your using to gain those victory points is a " rule where 10VP depended on you having collected at least $X worth of models".
Fine. Collecting at least $X worth of models not being used in your current game then. You know. VP as a reward for being willing to sacrifice enough extra time and money on parts of the game you may or may not actually enjoy that also aren't actually necessary to play the game. Just like paint.
But the models are necessary per the rules to score points just like the paint is necessary for those 10 points. The paint "not being necessary" is just as disingenuous as saying the "models are not necessary". You can show up to the LGS with marshmallows stuck to bases and "play a game" but just like not having your models painted you are increasing the likelihood that someone wont want to play with you.
Then we get back to square one of personal choice. Should you be forced to play against marshmallow army guy? According to some posters you would be a model supremacist/gatekeeper/WAAC player. Should someone be forced to play the guy who shows up with a grey army? I think the answer is no because people enjoy different parts of the hobby and if someone is looking for a game against another painted army there isn't anything wrong with that. There also isn't anything wrong with GW encouraging painting just like they encourage the purchase of their miniatures
This is one of those things that seems complicated, but is actually pretty clear. Unless you are prepared to argue that painting your army has no value to others, it's pretty much a given that painting your army is a good thing. It enriches the play experience, it can excite new players to try the hobby, etc. it's a good thing! It's not a big thing, in that the moral value of the act is pretty small compared to the time spent on the act.
However, that doesn't change the fact that not painting your minis has a moral component. If you acknowledge that painting minis is good for the hobby and your opponents, and you don't do so, you are choosing not to do something that could benefit others.
And we all (or nearly all) get it! Painting is a huge commitment of time and resources, and most people (myself included) will happily play you.
but... and this is the rub.. your opponents showing grace and kindness doesn't change that you're not doing what you can do to give them the best games. Look at the responses, and how many are boiled down to "I paint my stuff, and I prefer my opponents do the same, but I'm not that picky." Do not confuse people saying they are okay with you not painting with not painting being okay.
It's funny how many 'literally don't care' but then say they prefer painted armies. Personally, I have never fielded an unpainted model; to me it means the unit is not yet equipped for combat. Yes, that is part of the game's immersion.
I'll play a small game against a friend's unpainted force if it's not quite done or if they want to try something out, but to me such encounters feel more like an experiment than an actual game.
amanita wrote: It's funny how many 'literally don't care' but then say they prefer painted armies. Personally, I have never fielded an unpainted model; to me it means the unit is not yet equipped for combat. Yes, that is part of the game's immersion.
I'll play a small game against a friend's unpainted force if it's not quite done or if they want to try something out, but to me such encounters feel more like an experiment than an actual game.
amanita wrote: It's funny how many 'literally don't care' but then say they prefer painted armies. Personally, I have never fielded an unpainted model; to me it means the unit is not yet equipped for combat. Yes, that is part of the game's immersion.
I'll play a small game against a friend's unpainted force if it's not quite done or if they want to try something out, but to me such encounters feel more like an experiment than an actual game.
"I don't care"
and
"Painted armies look better"
aren't mutually exclusive statements
Yep. Going by the wording of this thread and it's poll, there is a leap between "I require fully painted armies, no exceptions" and the arguement being made by those voters that it goes both ways, and saying "I don't care if mine or my opponents army is fully painted, but it does look better."
amanita wrote: It's funny how many 'literally don't care' but then say they prefer painted armies. Personally, I have never fielded an unpainted model; to me it means the unit is not yet equipped for combat. Yes, that is part of the game's immersion.
I'll play a small game against a friend's unpainted force if it's not quite done or if they want to try something out, but to me such encounters feel more like an experiment than an actual game.
.
Well, this thread has lasted longer than I thought it would. Guess I'll throw my two cents in. While I personally prefer to have my own stuff fully painted before putting it on the table, I don't really care if my opponent has all (or any) of their own stuff painted. That doesn't really affect whether I have any fun or not, personally.
if you can't paint your models accept you are giving up 10 pts. Why you shouldn't be punished while others is punished for not having cash to follow 
