Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

VanHammer wrote:If you have time to play, you have time to paint.

I also have time to bash my head against the wall but you don't see me doing it!

People make time for what they enjoy, yes. If they don't make time to paint, they obviously enjoy doing other things more.

VanHammer wrote:If you have time to play, you have time to paint.

If you have time to post on the internet, you have time to paint.

If you have time to watch a movie, you have time to paint.

If you have time to do anything you enjoy that isn't painting, you have time to paint.

Just because you have the time to do one thing doesn't mean you have or want to use it for something you don't.

Kronk made a valid point about this descending into a flame war/trolling and that is the last thing I want. On the same note, It was never my intention to insult people with disabilities. If you've got no hands for example, and you can't paint, fair enough.

On the other hand, I'll state my case again. People are complaining about having no skill to paint, fair enough, but with the army painter example, are people really saying that they could not paint a skeleton a base coat, and then dip it into quick shade? I'm not saying that everybody should go TK or VC, but even the above example could be done by a nine year old.

I'll make exception in teenage players or players just getting into the hobby. I'll respect people who give it a go even if they are no good at painting. I went to a tournament 2 years ago and played an unpainted army. I went to the same tournament last year and the same army was still unpainted. And it was only 1500 points...of chaos warriors. Not exactly 300 skaven slaves.

So you've got a job? Guess what, I work full-time as well

I feel like the drill sergeant in Full metal jacket. All I'm asking for is 1 pull up, Private Pile, or five models a month!

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
I feel like the drill sergeant in Full metal jacket. All I'm asking for is 1 pull up, Private Pile, or five models a month!

DINLK(and many others), I think you're missing the point others are trying to make: If sitting down and painting is the equivalent to getting kicked in their respective genitalia or having to sit through[insert least favorite stage production/film/music here], why would they voluntarily choose to use their precious and/or rare free time to do it just to please your needy ass?

Why should anyone do something they hate if they don't have to?

infinite_array wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

J'santai Khan wrote:I have to wonder how many of the 'I don't paint for whatever reason' people would join a football/baseball/soccer league because they 'liked to play', and would then never show up for practice. It seems kinda the same to me. I sign up, buy my equipment/uniform, show up for practice and then get the enjoyment of playing against people who have done the same. They sign up, buy thier equipment/uniforms, never show up for practice and sit on the bench because they suck, but still like to brag when they're on the winning team.

Practicing makes you better at the game - the reason you joined the team.
Painting does not make you better at the game - the reason some people play 40k.

See the difference and why your analogy is dumb?

His analogy is fine. You, on the other hand, missed the point of his analogy entirely. Painting doesn't make you better at the game. Painting makes you better at painting.

Yeah no..... his analogy makes no sense.

Primestick wrote:So you have to work to buy the $1,500.00 army that takes at least 2 weeks to build. So you get off at five by the time you finish the "death race" home it’s around 6 if some fether dint slam his car into the wall. You eat dinner and then listen to the wife bitch for an hour after about some meaningless chore she wants you to do. Take a shower now because your all sweaty it’s close to 8:30 9:00, gak! You have to get up at 6:00am for work and start this gakky meaningless life over again, well feth painting tonight. Saturday rolls around option #1) take care of gak that broke/grew/fell/collected around the house. #2) play that army you spent $1,500.00 on #3) Go buy hundreds of $ in paint then spent all day painting.

I'll just play the game after I mow the lawn since my friends that have no job live with mom and have painted armies dont get up till noon!

I painted the army in my signature below with a full-time job, a newborn in the house, and while trying to fix up said house. You put your painting stuff in a place you can access quickly, and paint when you can, even if it's 30 minutes here or 45 minutes there.

"Don't have the time" isn't a realistic excuse for 99% of the players out there. The time is there if you want it, especially if you're talking about a SM army you can just basecoat and wash. "Don't want to make the time" is an honest answer, and I respect that a lot more than the previous answer.

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:I feel like the drill sergeant in Full metal jacket. All I'm asking for is 1 pull up, Private Pile, or five models a month!

All I'm asking is that every time I paint 5 models I get to kick you in the junk as hard as I can.
We will have an approximately equal amount of fun. You can make time for it - if you have time to complain about my painting, you have time to get kicked in the junk.
It costs you nothing to get kicked in the junk.
It doesn't take any skill to get kicked in the junk (well... unless standing there spread legged is a skill)
I don't understand why you are objecting to this.

I'm not saying that painting is arduous and horrible for everyone - I get that some people enjoy it more than actually playing the game.
I don't. There are some days I so don't enjoy it that I would actually rather get kicked in the junk.

People like the painting fanatics posting in this thread are why I only own two armies.

The simple thought of having to paint another army is so unpleasant to me that I'm just not going to do it.

I, personally, have no problem with playing against unpainted armies, as long as the opponent is fun to play against. I'd much rather play an unpainted army being played by a great guy than play a Golden Daemon quality painted army being run by an asshat.

A buddy and I got into the hobby together around 99 or so. When we started, we agreed to only field painted minis. In order to make this happen we spent many late nights assembling and painting our miniatures together. This allowed us to both grow into the hobby together, and strengthened our friendship at the same time. I highly recommend this method to younger players, but also to the older crowd. I have just moved into a new area, and am preparing a Necromunda campaign for the local gaming club. I am doing this to enjoy the excellent game that is Necromunda, and also because I want to make friends.

My early minis were god awful, and all of them have since been sold off. I have not one lick of artistic talent. What I do have is the desire to improve on anything I do. Without constantly seeking improvement it is really easy to grow stagnant. This applies to life in general, and not just to this hobby. My current painting goal is to make it past the first level of a painting competition. It's a small goal, but I like to keep things manageable and realistic. Setting unrealistic goals is one of the easiest ways to get off track.

I have maintained the attitude over the years that I will only field painted minis. I also look for people with a similar attitude about the hobby. The players that take the time to paint (or commission) their armies tend to stick with the hobby much longer, and contribute much more over time (IMO). If left with the choice to play a painted army or an unpainted army I would always choose the painted army, even if it was a much stronger list. That isn't always cut and dry, as I will always play with someone new who is slowly getting their army up and running. If the only option was to play against an unpainted army 9 times out of 10 I will decline, as I would rather spend that time doing one of the other aspects of the hobby. This doesn't make me a snob or an elitist. It just means that I also want to use my free time to the best of my advantage.

rigeld2 wrote:
It's not about skill (I can make them look decent), it's not about time (I can make time)... I just hate doing it.

This sums up my position in its totality. I really, truly, honestly despise miniature painting. I find it to be boring, tedious, physically uncomfortable, and a waste of time that I could use to do any number of other things I would much rather be doing.

This thread-subject comes up every few months, and it always plays out the same way. Some people out their are so narcissistic that they cannot accept that other people do not derive enjoyment from the same aspects of these games as they, themselves, do.

As a law student studying for the bar and working full time, I sympathize with people who don't have time to paint.

As an incompetent hobbyist, I also sympathize with people who don't like the way their painting looks.

However, nothing nothing nothing(!) is as ugly as a field of unpainted, unprimed, models. Looking at them for the span of a game is offensive to the eyes. It also implies to me that, deep down, you don't care about your army.

It's more fun to play against and even lose to an unpainted army. It also says something about your opponent that they'd be willing to spend hours and hours and hours of time painting their army.

Nobody needs to paint their models, but I hold people that don't in a different light than people that do.

GW didn't invent painting your miniatures.

Okay, and this is relavent how?

Miniatures wargaming has always included it. For many decades this had been part of the culture of historical miniatures wargaming.

I could give a rat's ass about historical wargaming. Again, what does this have to do with this discussion?

Even today many wargamers hold it as a basic assumption that they will never put an unpainted model on the table for a game.

Good for them. /clap

Primestick wrote:So you have to work to buy the $1,500.00 army that takes at least 2 weeks to build. So you get off at five by the time you finish the "death race" home it’s around 6 if some fether dint slam his car into the wall. You eat dinner and then listen to the wife bitch for an hour after about some meaningless chore she wants you to do. Take a shower now because your all sweaty it’s close to 8:30 9:00, gak! You have to get up at 6:00am for work and start this gakky meaningless life over again, well feth painting tonight. Saturday rolls around option #1) take care of gak that broke/grew/fell/collected around the house. #2) play that army you spent $1,500.00 on #3) Go buy hundreds of $ in paint then spent all day painting.

I'll just play the game after I mow the lawn since my friends that have no job live with mom and have painted armies dont get up till noon!

If this is your real argument against painting, then it's a weak one. I know a whole crew of guys, myself included who are married, have professions, have kids, houses, and even other hobbies, and every_single_one of them has a fully painted army up to 2k. I have 2k in Orks painted, and my good friends has 2k in IG. So, no, it's not something that can't be done with other responsibilities. Also, Hundreds in paints is hyperbole. I painted my whole Ork army for about 30 bucks in paint, and that was fairly extravagant.

Once again, I don't really care if someone else doesn't paint their army, but at least admit it's a lack of enjoyment and investment in that particular activity, or that it's pure laziness. Either way, making time isn't a real issue for any normal human being.

Slipstream wrote:It may not seem fun at first but I guarentee you that once you learn how to paint a model in a tidy manner you'll get a huge boost and you'll want to paint more. Also it is a great feeling to see your projects really take shape, why just stop at the modelling/conversion part when paint will bring your creations to life?

I have met people that insist on painted armies and yet they regularly play on tables that look like total ass.

Where do you draw the line with painting/visual elements?

A bad table destroys the visual element just as much as an unpainted army supposedly does imho, yet we see far ylees hue and cry over bad terrain/tables (or lack thereof).

Take the average tournament gamer/event: You better have a painted army but yet half the tables look like total garbage...

I have had people refuse to let me use an unpainted unit/model yet they then go ahead and play on a table of mismatched terrain that is chipped, falling apart and of various quality and scales.


Every gamer should be required to make a detailed/themed/ and varied table and terrain set as wel. Otherwise they are "making no attempt" to support the asthetics of tabletop wargaming that I have decided need to be one of everyone's priority...

[/sarcasm]

matphat wrote:

Primestick wrote:So you have to work to buy the $1,500.00 army that takes at least 2 weeks to build. So you get off at five by the time you finish the "death race" home it’s around 6 if some fether dint slam his car into the wall. You eat dinner and then listen to the wife bitch for an hour after about some meaningless chore she wants you to do. Take a shower now because your all sweaty it’s close to 8:30 9:00, gak! You have to get up at 6:00am for work and start this gakky meaningless life over again, well feth painting tonight. Saturday rolls around option #1) take care of gak that broke/grew/fell/collected around the house. #2) play that army you spent $1,500.00 on #3) Go buy hundreds of $ in paint then spent all day painting.

I'll just play the game after I mow the lawn since my friends that have no job live with mom and have painted armies dont get up till noon!

If this is your real argument against painting, then it's a weak one. I know a whole crew of guys, myself included who are married, have professions, have kids, houses, and even other hobbies, and every_single_one of them has a fully painted army up to 2k. I have 2k in Orks painted, and my good friends has 2k in IG. So, no, it's not something that can't be done with other responsibilities. Also, Hundreds in paints is hyperbole. I painted my whole Ork army for about 30 bucks in paint, and that was fairly extravagant.

That's nice. I can provide anecdotal evidence about my married friends that don't have their armies painted because they work full time.

Anecdotal evidence is worthless is these discussions.

Also, I'm glad you can paint your army in only 10 colors, but for those of us with multiple armies, paint is far from an insignificant amount of money. I know I have at least 120 different pots in my box.

I'm not expecting everybody or anybody to paint to golden demon standard, far from it. Normally, I'm a laid back, casual kind of person, but if there is one thing that gets my goat about the hobby is WAAC players with unpainted armies lecturing me on rules, or handing out a beat down.

Now, there are WAAC with great looking armies, and obviously, I don't mind losing games of warhammer or whatever, i'm used to it, believe you me but in my experience, unpainted armies and obnoxious players, or players who add little to the hobby and gaming experience, go hand in hand. That's not meant as an insult, I'm just going by my past experience.

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:I'm not expecting everybody or anybody to paint to golden demon standard, far from it. Normally, I'm a laid back, casual kind of person, but if there is one thing that gets my goat about the hobby is WAAC players with unpainted armies lecturing me on rules, or handing out a beat down.

Now, there are WAAC with great looking armies, and obviously, I don't mind losing games of warhammer or whatever, i'm used to it, believe you me but in my experience, unpainted armies and obnoxious players, or players who add little to the hobby and gaming experience, go hand in hand. That's not meant as an insult, I'm just going by my past experience.

Your experience isn't global. I'm used to the opposite, actually, since the painters tend to be even more invested than the non-painters.

Platuan4th wrote:
That's nice. I can provide anecdotal evidence about my married friends that don't have their armies painted because they work full time.

Anecdotal evidence is worthless is these discussions.

Also, I'm glad you can paint your army in only 10 colors, but for those of us with multiple armies, paint is far from an insignificant amount of money. I know I have at least 120 different pots in my box.

This whole thread is nothing but anecdotal evidence. Doesn't change the fact that any normal 1st worlder can make the time for hobbies. What I am saying is it's about priorities.
No one just eats, sleeps, works, and toils. If you have time to buy, build, and play and army, you have time to paint it. You just choose NOT to. People saying that they don't paint because it's out of their control (time, skill, etc...) are making excuses.

Also, not everyone pays $3 a pot for paint.

matphat wrote:

Platuan4th wrote:
That's nice. I can provide anecdotal evidence about my married friends that don't have their armies painted because they work full time.

Anecdotal evidence is worthless is these discussions.

Also, I'm glad you can paint your army in only 10 colors, but for those of us with multiple armies, paint is far from an insignificant amount of money. I know I have at least 120 different pots in my box.

This whole thread is nothing but anecdotal evidence. Doesn't change the fact that any normal 1st worlder can make the time for hobbies. What I am saying is it's about priorities.
No one just eats, sleeps, works, and toils. If you have time to buy, build, and play and army, you have time to paint it. You just choose NOT to.

Actually, I choose TO, I can just see the arguments for not painting.

What is a "normal first worlder"? I have a friend whose army isn't painted because she's all but married to her job. Seriously, she often literally works herself sick because they have her convinced there's nothing more important than work. She forgets to eat, they call her in at weird hours to deal with Airmen, she probably only sleeps 3-4 hours a night all because of her job. She's actully taking Voluntary Severance for her physical and mental health.

Everyone's situation is different, which is why anecdotal evidence doesn't work.

Alright, I'll say it even more plainly. I'm seriously not trying to argue here. I'm just trying to point out one simple bit of logic.

"If you have time to buy, build, and play and army, you have time to paint it. You just choose NOT to."

Saldiven wrote:This thread-subject comes up every few months, and it always plays out the same way. Some people out their are so narcissistic that they cannot accept that other people do not derive enjoyment from the same aspects of these games as they, themselves, do.

To be fair, that goes for other parts of the hobby as well... For evey painter who can't understand why people play the game with unpainted minis, there's another player who can't understand why people play the game with less than optimal army lists.

People enjoy the different aspects of the hobby in different ways. While I much prefer playing against painted armies, I'm not going to expect a potential opponent to share that preference.

I think 40k is an expensive hobby if you don't enjoy the painting aspect.

Granted some people don't convert models.. some people suck at playing.. they're all just different aspects.

I enjoy playing against painted armies more, but not by a lot. After all if I'm playing then I'm playing... not admiring paint jobs.

matphat wrote:Alright, I'll say it even more plainly. I'm seriously not trying to argue here. I'm just trying to point out one simple bit of logic.

"If you have time to buy, build, and play and army, you have time to paint it. You just choose NOT to."

And yet, you willfully ignore the opposite of that logic:

If you can only chose ONE due to time, why does it have to be paint if you'd rather do the other option?

This street goes both ways, you "must paint" proponents simply refuse to accept that.

Chowderhead wrote:
Will I ever turn down an opponent who spray painted his BA red and left it at that? Hell no! Will I ever insult a grey army? No! If I see a nicely painted army, do I want to play it with my painted army more than a grey one? Yes, because it looks damn cool.

I agree completely.

I will however say that while the model count for the GW core games has never been higher, at the same time it has never been easier to batch paint. Painting Blood Angels? Can of Army Painter red spray, dip or dab on their light shade and jobs a good 'un. I would argue that even a deranged baboon, confined to a cave within the amazon, blind and deaf and with no conception of the outside world, could still make a decent enough job using those simple techniques.

I would take this a hundred times over the unpainted, unassembled BA army that turns up week after week. Personally I would be ashamed to do that and to place it on the table, but then I guess it comes down to if you believe in that whole 'social contract' thing and care at all about the kind of experience that your opponent will have.

I get more enjoyment out of my painted armies than I do unpainted ones. That is my cup o' tea. I do appreciate those folks who want to take the time to paint for hours on end but I also feel those that do not want to paint , should not feel obligated. You can choose who you play against but do not be surprised if people resent you for not playing against a non painted army. just my two cents.

I try to paint everything I have before I get new stuff. Including basing. As it is I have the entirety of my Everblight to paint and my LOTR to base. And a Unit of Uruk-Hai to paint.

It really pays off to paint. I'm proud of my Beastmen army, and I won a tourney even though I lost nearly half the games I played, but because my army was the only one fully painted. I got a score that toppled everyone else by a hair.

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:I'm not expecting everybody or anybody to paint to golden demon standard, far from it. Normally, I'm a laid back, casual kind of person, but if there is one thing that gets my goat about the hobby is WAAC players with unpainted armies lecturing me on rules, or handing out a beat down.

Now, there are WAAC with great looking armies, and obviously, I don't mind losing games of warhammer or whatever, i'm used to it, believe you me but in my experience, unpainted armies and obnoxious players, or players who add little to the hobby and gaming experience, go hand in hand. That's not meant as an insult, I'm just going by my past experience.

So you down with me kicking you in the junk? It'll get my 5 models per month painted.

Your preference is to exclude nice people who just can't stand painting. Are you okay with that? And you're including lazy people who pay for someone else to convert and paint minis.
Remember, I'm not talking about lazy or people who make excuses about time...
I'm talking about just hating the actual act of painting.

However much you try to say it isn't, painting/modeling is separate from actually playing the game.

Multi-tasking can always help. You think I'm sitting here at a laptop just posting on this forum? No chance. I'm getting some painting done as I type, plus I'm ordering some shopping from a major UK supermarket. I feel smug

Seriously, though, at the end of the day, it's just plastic minis, and it's not worth getting argumentative with other people. Each to their own, it's just that my personal preference is painted armies. Thank you and good night.

Kirasu wrote:I think 40k is an expensive hobby if you don't enjoy the painting aspect.

This won't be agreed upon by everybody, but it is a very good point. I don't mind the cost because of the hours spent assembling & painting, plus the endless hours of playing once it's done. I feel like it is an overall solid investment of entertainment dollars when you have all those aspects.

Platuan4th wrote:

matphat wrote:Alright, I'll say it even more plainly. I'm seriously not trying to argue here. I'm just trying to point out one simple bit of logic.

"If you have time to buy, build, and play and army, you have time to paint it. You just choose NOT to."

And yet, you willfully ignore the opposite of that logic:

If you can only chose ONE due to time, why does it have to be paint if you'd rather do the other option?

This street goes both ways, you "must paint" proponents simply refuse to accept that.

No. Not ignoring it. I'm simply stating that if you choose not to paint, it's your choice, and you should be able to admit that you choose not to paint, as opposed to saying "I WOULD have a painted army, if I had the TIME." You DO have the time you just prioritize it elsewhere.

I'm starting to think you are trying to make an argument where there is none. I'm not trying to argue that someone SHOULD paint their army instead of playing, I just think they should ADMIT to prioritizing playing over painting instead of out right B.S.ing and saying they are victims of a time limitation. It isn't time limiting you, it's you.

That's the last thing I'll say on it, because I think you genuinely don't understand my intent, and I'm not going continue to try and coax the understanding out of you.