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.

 jreilly89 wrote:

 kingbobbito wrote:

 Polonius wrote:
Not to fall down a rabbit hole, but most color blind people see colors, they just have difficulty discerning certain shades from each other, most commonly red from green. I can only imagine that color blindness would make painting more difficult, but certainly not impossible. I mean, the colors are written right on the pots...

This. And it's not like you can't tell what is and isn't painted. No, you might not be able to do edge highlighting or any of the more complicated stuff. But you can base coat your models in a color, paint their gun a different color, and do details like metal. It will look significantly different than if you left it plastic. Saying that being color blind means you can't paint is an insult to everyone out there that's color blind and still paint perfectly good models.

Yeah, it's not like there's varying degrees of color-blindness. Now we're calling color blind people lazy? Good job, Dakka.

The only one clearly blind here is you, based on your inability to read what I said. First off, at no point did I insult color blind people. If anything, I insulted lazy people that use the excuse that they're color blind to say "it's impossible to paint!".

I assume that most people going on about color blindness don't actually know what it is. To your average color blind person, you're missing a single cone... you might mix up reds with greens, or blues and pinks.... but you see color. Other variants simply diminish the vividness of color, making violet look more blue for example. You can still tell that a model is painted, you can still tell the difference between colors. If you're particularly deficient in a certain range, paint your army with the colors that you can see better and might be more appealing to you.

Even if you're completely color blind (which statistically won't be anywhere near as many of you as claim to not see colors), you still see varying shades, not just a single flat color for everything. An unpainted model will still look worse than a fully painted one. My father, who has achromatopsia, used to paint models himself when he was younger. He didn't particularly enjoy painting, but model cars that he built look nicer painted. Yeah, some of them look a bit garish, but you can't argue that it's impossible to paint because you can't see color. It most certainly doesn't prevent you from doing a base coat of a single color, which is apparently impossible if you're color blind according to this thread.

Examples of easy color combinations for the color impaired:
Marines-any primary color, black weapons, metal pieces.
Eldar-any primary color, white, metal for weapons
Nids-any primary color and tan
orks- green, black clothes, metal and any color for armor and guns
chaos- any primary color, black, and metal
daemons-single color that matches your theme, plus metal
tau-armor color of your choice, black, and metal
DE-white, black, and a color of your choosing
Necrons- metal and green, although red/blue/etc. works

Yeah, if you genuinely struggle seeing highlights that's fine. But it's no reason not to do base coating and a wash.

 jreilly89 wrote:


How so? It's already been established by several posters that any reasons boil down to either 1) laziness or 2) I don't want to. Several have claimed they don't due to color blindness, which the posters above have argued that is not an acceptable reason but an excuse. Since color blindness doesn't fall into 2), it obviously falls into 1). Do you have deductive reasoning issues?

Look at killer here!

I think that color blindness falls into a don't want to category, but only because I"m not a big believer in the concept of laziness. There are people that enjoy task completion as it's own rewards, and some people that simply don't want to be bothered with anything. For everybody else, and everybody at least some of the time, it's all about balancing effort with payout. A person might decide that they won't get a good enough looking army to justify the effort it would take. That's a fine decision, and I've got no beefs with it. But it's based on choosing to spend time and effort elsewhere.

Even for people with relatively minor obstacles, I think its rare that they'd totally be painting their armies if they didn't have the problem. I think most of the time, they just don't see painting an army as worth the effort, but they use whatever obstaacle they have as an excuse.

So, it's not that they dont' want to, it's just that while they want a painted army, they don't want to exert the effort necessary to achieve it. I don't believe that's always laziness, but It's definitely a case of not wanting to.

So read the paint pots and then....? What colors are you supposed to do? Do you paint them only to GW standards? I don't see how being able to read paint pots helps when they would still have difficulty telling what color is what. What enjoyment do they get out of reading paint pots and painting minis that are less appealing to them than to others?

Do you actually understand how color blindness works? It's not like watching Black and White TV.

 jreilly89 wrote:

How so? It's already been established by several posters that any reasons boil down to either 1) laziness or 2) I don't want to. Several have claimed they don't due to color blindness, which the posters above have argued that is not an acceptable reason but an excuse. Since color blindness doesn't fall into 2), it obviously falls into 1). Do you have deductive reasoning issues?

Read the three posts before yours about colour blindness. Nowhere was it stated they were lazy, or even implied it was. That is entirely constructed by you.

And when was it stated that being colour blind couldn't mean a reason not to paint is simply because they don't want to?

 Polonius wrote:
Not to fall down a rabbit hole, but most color blind people see colors, they just have difficulty discerning certain shades from each other, most commonly red from green. I can only imagine that color blindness would make painting more difficult, but certainly not impossible. I mean, the colors are written right on the pots...

Wouldn't wearing glasses with a green filter on one lens and a red filter on the other result in each eye receiving a different picture which would create a proxy for normal red/green colour vision?

nareik wrote:
Wouldn't wearing glasses with a green filter on one lens and a red filter on the other result in each eye receiving a different picture which would create a proxy for normal red/green colour vision?

If you're red/green colourblind, that set up would result in both eyes receiving the same picture.

 insaniak wrote:

nareik wrote:
Wouldn't wearing glasses with a green filter on one lens and a red filter on the other result in each eye receiving a different picture which would create a proxy for normal red/green colour vision?

If you're red/green colourblind, that set up would result in both eyes receiving the same picture.

Wouldn't the eye with the red filter not see red and the green filter not see green? it's late and I had beer so forgive me if I have confusion. Edit: just curious in to how red/green colour blind people do/don't see. Am trying to understand it.

Would color blind people be upset about people with no vision disorder saying they were blind to try and avoid painting, I know i get mad when people say they're lazy and they wake up before noon.

And to the Op's original question yes it is fairly common and it's completely fine to wait till one without the requirement comes by. As for myself and probably most others, I'll support both.

I haven't read all 9 pages of responses, and I am not even going to get involved in this whole colourblind argument going on.

I enjoy painting, probably the aspect of the hobby I like the most (over modelling or playing). AS such I have well over 2k points of my main army painted, as well as 1500 points of another.

In a tournament setting at your local shop I think it's a bit silly to possibly change the outcome of a game due to models not being painted/not being painted to a high enough standard. Tournaments I have been in have had a painted category which contributed to your overall tournament score instead...

While it is nice to see a battlefield full of pretty models, some people just like to play and have very limited time to slap paint on models. For example my mate who I play most of my games against hasn't got loads of free time for the hobby (travelling interstate for work most weeks) so he likes to spend a lot of his available hobby time playing rather than painting... as Such he he started buying painted armies for the cheap on eBay...

IMO if the models are stuck together so you can see what they are there should not be in-game penalties for them not being painted.

Once again, I am color blind. We can paint fine, shades and all that. And no, the blue green lens glasses do not work that way. If someone's excuse is being color blind, it is just that, an excuse.

Another note though. Even being color blind, I find it also makes it easier to pick out wargear on painted models. Searching the contrast of different grey masses across the table makes it easier to miss that hidden powerfist or where that melta gun is for example.

Yes you can search around and find it. My point being that it still makes it easier to determine WYSIWYG at a glance.

 pwntallica wrote:
Once again, I am color blind. We can paint fine, shades and all that. And no, the blue green lens glasses do not work that way. If someone's excuse is being color blind, it is just that, an excuse.

Another note though. Even being color blind, I find it also makes it easier to pick out wargear on painted models. Searching the contrast of different grey masses across the table makes it easier to miss that hidden powerfist or where that melta gun is for example.

Yes you can search around and find it. My point being that it still makes it easier to determine WYSIWYG at a glance.

Color blind myself although not to the same degree as some people it seems.

Anyways, how can somebody possibly find enjoyment in "modeling" but not painting? I'm terrible at painting but I love every second of it. Its kind of like meditation, the idea of using an unpainted army (for more then like 1 game or having just bought a model on a sunday or something.) is like why waste everyones time? Its not a big deal to play without a painted army because of circumstances but the idea of just being like WHATEVER I DONT HAVE TO PAINT BECAUSE I'M LAZY is just crazy lol.

 CShaffer wrote:
Anyways, how can somebody possibly find enjoyment in "modeling" but not painting?

Actually this is exactly what has caused me to build seven different large armies and have probably a quarter of any of it painted. I see new kits that come out and impulsively buy them because I either

1) Know of some left over bitz that would look good added on/can think of a cool way to convert them OR

2) Want the bitz. For example, I am considering buying the new skullreapers because I see a lot of potential for a gladiator style Khorne Berzerker unit.

The problem is, after I convert them and paint one or two guys, I get bored and move on to another conversion project. This leaves me with only a partially done army, so I have to go out and buy more. It's actually happening now with Chaos Daemons and Grey Knights.

Then again, I did buy the new Bloodthirster just to paint it...

Back on topic, I do maintain my Imperial Guard army as painted so I can bring that to tournaments and to the store to play with.

Oh dear, what was I thinking last night that coloured 3d glasses might help colour blindness! Maybe one less beer next time .

I did google search this morning and apparently you can get special lenses that increasing colour contrast for people, even those with colour blindness. sorry for linking to daily mail but they had good pictures

When I was a kid I really didn't enjoy painting. I think a part of it was I was so clueless as to what I was doing that it was very hard to get a result I was satisfied with (or even be able to understand how to improve). Although I wasn't lucky enough to experience any, I think a bit of one on one tuition really helps people to understand the basics of painting better and turn it from a burden/chore to something that can be enjoyed and improved upon.

 insaniak wrote:

Makumba wrote:
Yeah, because it costing too much, making the army harder to resell or plain just don't having the space to paint are just "excuses".

Pretty much, yes.

The cost of paint is minuscule compared to the cost of the miniatures you're using it on.

If you have a dinner table or a desk, you have room to paint.

And if your main concern when building an army is how much you're going to be able to sell it for, I can't help but think you're not really that excited about actually playing the game anyway...

I don't . I share the deck with my sister and the dinner table is for eating, my mother would never let anyone do anything else on it. And the cost is not miniscule. Painting is not required to play the game. It doesnt change the game rules and it is not in any codex or the big rule book, no idea about FW though. This means every $ spend on painting is a wasted one, unless someone wants to paint.

And if your main concern when building an army is how much you're going to be able to sell it for, I can't help but think you're not really that excited about actually playing the game anyway...

I bought the army in 5th. It was very fun to play it in 5th and 6th. And you are right that now when it is borderline unplayable it is a lot less fun.

 CShaffer wrote:
Anyways, how can somebody possibly find enjoyment in "modeling" but not painting?

Quite easily. Before I started wargaming I collected model aircraft and I primarily just enjoyed building the. Very few of them ever got painted because I just wasn't that interested in painting.

Over the years of being in wargaming I've gotten sick of the tedium of assembling armies. I still enjoy assembling a nice Panzer or Spitfire from time to time, but assembling half a dozen Leman Russes makes me cringe.

but the idea of just being like WHATEVER I DONT HAVE TO PAINT BECAUSE I'M LAZY is just crazy lol.

I think we need to drop this idea of "lazy". It's not laziness, it's lack of desire. Asking someone to put painting above all the other things in their life so they can spend 100's of hours painting an army they don't even enjoy painting is slightly different to saying "you're just lazy".

 Alex Kolodotschko wrote:
Not true at all.
I've just started up an escalation campaign with some mates and finally after many years the unpainted Blood Angels player has finally sprayed his models the appropriate colours.
It's now possible to discern Death Company, Tac Squads, Priests, Sang Guard etc at a glance in their appropriate black, red, white and gold.
Unpainted it was pretty hard to tell what was going on and added time to the game searching or asking to see where characters were within squads or what the squads were.
By the time I've asked a few questions it seems ridiculous and slows the game significantly to start asking about specific wargear. That's before we've even started having a 'real' rules discussion.
It'll become even clearer as heavy/special/power weapons etc are blocked out in their appropriate colours and clearer still as helmets, shoulder pads etc are picked out and bases are a different colour to enhance the silhouette of the models.
Anecdotal and very apparent with this army, sure but I'm sure there are plenty of other examples.
It could be argued that there is such a 'tactic' as, 'Not painting for advantage'.

I'll give you partial on your blood angels example because there really is nothing forcing anyone to paint death company any differently than the rest of their army so you could face a fully painted blood angels army and STILL not be able tell the death company from the other marines. Color is at the whim of the painter meanwhile a special weapon marine with a plasma gun looks like a special weapon marine with a plasma gun regardless of the color or lack there of no the model.

Skriker

As usual I'm late to the party and didn't read all 9 pages..

 kingbobbito wrote:
One of the rules of our store is that if you wish to compete in any of our organized events, all models need to be painted. At the end of a game, any models that aren't painted count as casualties, AKA won't count as controlling objectives and unpainted warlord will result in "slay the warlord".

Is this all that uncommon of a rule, or is it reasonable? ..

…but as I have very strong feelings about this I'll participate.

It's an excellent rule. Most tournaments used to be that way. It promotes involvement in the entire hobby and it ensures that folks coming to the tourney from elsewhere will know that they're going to get a minimum level of visual spectacle every time they come to a tournament.

It may discourage some folks from entering, but if the owner is canny enough to create a gaming community that values painting he should have no problems.

Of coruse every store and gaming community will have their own idea of what gaming standards should be but I strongly applaud those who do not neglect the visual "spectacle" aspect of wargaming.

 insaniak wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Why do people who don't like to paint play 40k?

It's like people who hate loud noises joining a riflery competition.

More like saying 'why does someone who doesn't like cooking like eating cake?'

As much as it may be expected that you will paint your armies, it's not actually required to play the game.

I've used a different analogy. It's like being part of a classic car club.
When you get your car, it might be covered in bondo, missign parts, etc. You can bring it to the club, but the community expectation is that over time you will get it fixed and painted. If you keep bringing the same unpainted car back with no improvements, folks are going to look askance at you. Further, when it comes time for a car show, you likely aren't going to see any unpainted junkers.

If all you're after is playing a game, than paint isn't required, but it's entirely reasonable for a community to adopt standards that embrace the entirety of elements that make up the wargaming hobby.

Last time the club met at a FLGS we looked around and it was clear that other clubs don't have the same standards we do. The 40k club that was there not only had some folks with almost no paint, they had folks with multiple units that were just legs glued to a base. I'm sure there are alot of clubs like that, but it's not a club that I want to belong to.

 pwntallica wrote:
People keep mentioning that expecting someone to paint their army is "elitist" and somehow negatively impacts the community.

Desiring others to paint their minis is not elisits. *Expecting* them to paint their minis and insulting them or treating them poorly when they don't is elitist. That is the difference. It is the negative behavior and attitude that impacts the community, not the fact that they prefer opponents to have a painted army. I have friends who would never EVER put an unpainted mini on the table. They just can't do it. I have others who prefer to play against opponents with painted armies as well. Not a one of them insults or treats others poorly because they have unpainted minis. These people don't know why someone hasn't painted their minis. They just *assume* that the other person is lazy and can't be bothered to put in the effort. Dismissing someone like that is insulting. THAT is what leads to the label "elitist".

Funniest thing I ever read in one of these threads was the guy who was so full of himself that he expected people to set aside their own prefered army and use one of his fully painted armies for the "privilege" of playing a game against him. Guy was completely oblivious to how much of a conceited jackhole he was being. It was hilarious.

Skriker

 Skriker wrote:

Funniest thing I ever read in one of these threads was the guy who was so full of himself that he expected people to set aside their own prefered army and use one of his fully painted armies for the "privilege" of playing a game against him. Guy was completely oblivious to how much of a conceited jackhole he was being. It was hilarious.

Probably wasn't, but that could almost have been me.

Our club has a no-unpainted rule and we're very upfront about it. We're very welcoming of newcomers and guests, don't judge someone's paintjobs (some of our members are VERY new to painting and it shows), and we're fine with pre-painted figs, but nothing hits our table that isn't painted. If someone doesn't have painted figs, we've got more than enough figs to share with them until they get their figures painted. You can come to the club owning no minis at all and be just as welcome as someone with a legion of painted figures.

Most of us don't play 40k anymore (though we do have a 40k fanatic or two), and we usually stick to smaller skirmish games so we don't have the problem of someone investing hundreds of dollars in a wall of grey plastic only to be told they can't use it. Also, this only applies to club meetings. None of us are going to the FLGS gaming nights and demanding that others use our minis.

This has never been the source of tension or hurt feelings, quite the opposite in fact. Folks coming to the club are glad to know that they are going to get nothing but painted armies, great looking terrain and alot of friendly faces eager to welcome them into the hobby.

 Polonius wrote:
Not to fall down a rabbit hole, but most color blind people see colors, they just have difficulty discerning certain shades from each other, most commonly red from green. I can only imagine that color blindness would make painting more difficult, but certainly not impossible. I mean, the colors are written right on the pots...

And you clearly have no experience there. I have a fully painted khorne army, well mostly now, but at the time it was fully painted. A friend who is color blind asked me when I was going to paint it because to his red/green color blind problems the models all looked the same shade of gray all over just about. Doesn't matter what the bottle says if you can't actually discern a difference in the colors. He could paint the models just going by the "color on the bottles" and it would look fine to him, but like hell to others because he can't tell where the colors cover or bleed into each other. There are many different types of color blindness, but I suggest you get a book on the subject and take a look at images that show exactly how drastically different the perspective of color blind people really can be depending on the type before saying things like "the colors are written right on the pots". Some folks have less severe types, or have adapted very well to them and can still paint. My friend can paint, you'll just not find any red or green on his models, ever.

Skriker


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nareik wrote:

 insaniak wrote:
If you're red/green colourblind, that set up would result in both eyes receiving the same picture.

Wouldn't the eye with the red filter not see red and the green filter not see green? it's late and I had beer so forgive me if I have confusion. Edit: just curious in to how red/green colour blind people do/don't see. Am trying to understand it.

When red and green look the same it doesn't matter if you take out the red or the green, they still both look the same.

Skriker


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Eilif wrote:
Our club has a no-unpainted rule and we're very upfront about it. We're very welcoming of newcomers and guests, don't judge someone's paintjobs (some of our members are VERY new to painting and it shows), and we're fine with pre-painted figs, but nothing hits our table that isn't painted. If someone doesn't have painted figs, we've got more than enough figs to share with them until they get their figures painted. You can come to the club owning no minis at all and be just as welcome as someone with a legion of painted figures.

Most of us don't play 40k anymore (though we do have a 40k fanatic or two), and we usually stick to smaller skirmish games so we don't have the problem of someone investing hundreds of dollars in a wall of grey plastic only to be told they can't use it. Also, this only applies to club meetings. None of us are going to the FLGS gaming nights and demanding that others use our minis.

This has never been the source of tension or hurt feelings, quite the opposite in fact. Folks coming to the club are glad to know that they are going to get nothing but painted armies, great looking terrain and alot of friendly faces eager to welcome them into the hobby.

See this is different. A club set up by like minded players is fine as that is how I prefer to play these days too. If your club is clear on their requirements then more power to you. Got no problems with that. The hubris in my example was this was a sole player in a local store environment that didn't require painted minis to play on its tables or its leagues, but this person felt self important enough to expect people to completely bow to his preferences and use his minis instead of theirs to play him. Unsurprisingly he didn't see many games and eventually stopped coming around, which is a shame. He had all those minis, but rarely played a game because he was so conceited and rude to people.

Only way to really enjoy the hobby anymore is to do so with a smaller group of like minded enthusiasts who look at the game(s) you play the same way. This is really important for 40k anymore with the "anything goes" mentality coming back to that game from the early days that I found to be so annoying. Local metas are so different from group to group and store to store. Only way to control it the way you prefer is to make your own group and meta.

Skriker

 Skriker wrote:

 Alex Kolodotschko wrote:

Blood Angels player has finally sprayed his models the appropriate colours.
Death Company, Tac Squads, Priests, Sang Guard etc...........black, red, white and gold........ Now speeds the game significantly.
It could be argued that there is such a 'tactic' as, 'Not painting for advantage'.

I'll give you partial on your blood angels example because there really is nothing forcing anyone to paint death company any differently than the rest of their army so you could face a fully painted blood angels army and STILL not be able tell the death company from the other marines. Color is at the whim of the painter meanwhile a special weapon marine with a plasma gun looks like a special weapon marine with a plasma gun regardless of the color or lack there of no the model.
Skriker

Cool, i'll take my 'partial' as a 3-Draw and hope to make up the points on my painting score. :ducks:

 Alex Kolodotschko wrote:
Cool, i'll take my 'partial' as a 3-Draw and hope to make up the points on my painting score. :ducks:

Skriker

:handshake:

 insaniak wrote:


And if your main concern when building an army is how much you're going to be able to sell it for, I can't help but think you're not really that excited about actually playing the game anyway...

Not necessarily. What if you have troubles deciding what army to play but can't really afford 3-5 armies? Keeping your resale value high for when you unavoidably change your mind again is a smart choice in this case, and unpainted models sell way better than painted ones unless you're an outstanding painter.

I have a RL friend just like this: awesome guy to game with but just can't settle for a single choice: he keeps changing RPG characters, RTS factions, builds etc.

LordBlades wrote:

 insaniak wrote:


And if your main concern when building an army is how much you're going to be able to sell it for, I can't help but think you're not really that excited about actually playing the game anyway...

Not necessarily. What if you have troubles deciding what army to play but can't really afford 3-5 armies? Keeping your resale value high for when you unavoidably change your mind again is a smart choice in this case, and unpainted models sell way better than painted ones unless you're an outstanding painter.

I have a RL friend just like this: awesome guy to game with but just can't settle for a single choice: he keeps changing RPG characters, RTS factions, builds etc.

So the idea is to establish potential wargaming standards (assuming folks have any desire to have standards) on the basis of what will accommodate indecision and resale-ability?
No Thanks.

If I'm seeing the same wall of grey week after week and when I ask why the answer is "I might want to sell it" my answer will be "Excuse me, I might want to find a new opponent".
This is actually not a dig on the personality of the other gamer. Rather it's clear that we want such radically different things out of the game that we're essentially doing completely different hobbies. In such a situation I'd likely have a much better time finding someone else to play against.

My 4 and 5 year old niece and nephew got into a fight the other day because one was claiming that the other "was not playing right" with the play dough.

I want every person who claims that models need to be painted to keep that in mind. You are creating reasons for why people who don't paint "are not playing right" with their bits of plastic despite NO RULES anywhere in the RULE BOOK that says it needs to be done.

Congratz. Unless you can find a line inside of the rule book that says models need to be painted you are acting like a toddler throwing a fit for because.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

sm3g wrote:
I haven't read all 9 pages of responses, and I am not even going to get involved in this whole colourblind argument going on.

I enjoy painting, probably the aspect of the hobby I like the most (over modelling or playing). AS such I have well over 2k points of my main army painted, as well as 1500 points of another.

In a tournament setting at your local shop I think it's a bit silly to possibly change the outcome of a game due to models not being painted/not being painted to a high enough standard. Tournaments I have been in have had a painted category which contributed to your overall tournament score instead...

While it is nice to see a battlefield full of pretty models, some people just like to play and have very limited time to slap paint on models. For example my mate who I play most of my games against hasn't got loads of free time for the hobby (travelling interstate for work most weeks) so he likes to spend a lot of his available hobby time playing rather than painting... as Such he he started buying painted armies for the cheap on eBay...

IMO if the models are stuck together so you can see what they are there should not be in-game penalties for them not being painted.

THIS!

Lance845 wrote:
My 4 and 5 year old niece and nephew got into a fight the other day because one was claiming that the other "was not playing right" with the play dough.

I want every person who claims that models need to be painted to keep that in mind. You are creating reasons for why people who don't paint "are not playing right" with their bits of plastic despite NO RULES anywhere in the RULE BOOK that says it needs to be done.

Congratz. Unless you can find a line inside of the rule book that says models need to be painted you are acting like a toddler throwing a fit for because.

The rulebook doesn't say I have to wear clothes to the game either, but I usually do.

Just pointing out that your analogy is a bit less than solid. There's lots of things that are done or not-done (usually based on local gaming community traditions, mores, standards, etc) regardless of whether or not a rulebook tells us too.

 CShaffer wrote:
how can somebody possibly find enjoyment in "modeling" but not painting?

Because people are different and like different things? What an insane question.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Eilif wrote:

Lance845 wrote:
My 4 and 5 year old niece and nephew got into a fight the other day because one was claiming that the other "was not playing right" with the play dough.

I want every person who claims that models need to be painted to keep that in mind. You are creating reasons for why people who don't paint "are not playing right" with their bits of plastic despite NO RULES anywhere in the RULE BOOK that says it needs to be done.

Congratz. Unless you can find a line inside of the rule book that says models need to be painted you are acting like a toddler throwing a fit for because.

The rulebook doesn't say I have to wear clothes to the game either, but I do.

Just pointing out that your analogy is a bit less than solid. There's lots of things that are done (usually based on local gaming community traditions, mores, standards, etc) regardless of whether or not a rulebook tells us too.

No you don't. Set up a table in your living room and go play butt ass naked. The game will not be influenced at all by your nudity. THE LAW says you cannot go outside naked. Are you trying to compare something that gives you jail time and fines to not painting your models?

Lance845 wrote:

The rulebook doesn't say I have to wear clothes to the game either, but I do.

Just pointing out that your analogy is a bit less than solid. There's lots of things that are done (usually based on local gaming community traditions, mores, standards, etc) regardless of whether or not a rulebook tells us too.

No you don't. Set up a table in your living room and go play butt ass naked. The game will not be influenced at all by your nudity. THE LAW says you cannot go outside naked. Are you trying to compare something that gives you jail time and fines to not painting your models?

I game at home with friends. Despite your desire to miss it, the point is that clothes are not required by the rulebook, but it (like many things) is a convention that we as a community of gamers have come to agree to.

I could further argue that the preponderance of pictures of painted models in rulebooks is evidence that the game is designed to be played with painted models, but that would likely have little impact on someone who wants written

RULES…RULEBOOKS (and)…. THE LAW

to tell them exactly what to do and not do.

 Eilif wrote:


I game at home with friends. Despite your desire to miss it, the point is that clothes are not required by the rulebook, but it's a convention that we as a community of gamers have come to agree to. You don't have to agree to it, but my point stands.

LOL Moving along. Please come up with something better. Literally ANY other analogy would be better. I could argue agaisnt this in so many ways but it would become a insane derailment like the colorblind thing. I am not falling into that. HAHAHAHA

The houserule in our little gaming club is "better than base-coat".

That said, we will try and help people paint up there minis, if they want the help and some of us have time to help.