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.

crazykiwi wrote:put the knives away guys sheesh

LOL--you must be new here

this thread is making me sick to my stomach. I have to agree that this "no paint no play" thing is really just a myth. I have never encountered it, and I will never push that rule on someone. Its got to just be a myth that people throw out there, as a hypothetical, just get people fired up in an online forum that means absolutely nothing when it comes to what actually happens in an actual game, or an actual game store.

Not really. I've personally refused to play against a guy who changed his army's codex(without ever changing models or even bothering with WYSIWYG) to whatever would make him "better" against his opponent every match and claimed that it was allowable because he had no paint on the models.

Bear in mind, he also *refused* to paint them on the grounds that they were 'Alpha Legion who utilized an advanced chamelonic suit of armor'.

@Kanluwen: First of all, LOL. Secondly, that's hardly refusing to play simply because the models weren't painted.

Kanluwen wrote:Not really. I've personally refused to play against a guy who changed his army's codex(without ever changing models or even bothering with WYSIWYG) to whatever would make him "better" against his opponent every match and claimed that it was allowable because he had no paint on the models.

Bear in mind, he also *refused* to paint them on the grounds that they were 'Alpha Legion who utilized an advanced chamelonic suit of armor'.

this is the most ridiculous thing i have ever heard of in gaming, whether its true or not, its strait ridiculous.

Manchu wrote:

crazykiwi wrote:put the knives away guys sheesh

LOL--you must be new here

long time watcher short term poster

crazykiwi wrote:long time watcher short term poster

Yeah, this is one of the typical brawling thread topics. Hope you brought a weapon. ::ducks as bottle whizzes past and smashes against wall::

So what would you recommend to somebody who likes modelling, and likes gaming but hates painting? If you are defining the hobby of 40k you make a decision about whether or not to include these people. If you exclude them, than you should only do so with the understanding that they have somewhere else to go. But they really don't.

I would also remind you that I will still stipulate that some competent tabletop quality painting job should still be a goal, just not an immediate requirement.

@nintendoeats: First of all, no one kicks non-painters out of 40k. They can't participate in some tournaments, sure, but I don't think that's what you're talking about. The question is not "should they be allowed to live? ( ::knife-sharpening noises:: )" but rather "are they as committed to the game as people who reliably painter their armies?" As a person who has very little of my army painted, I'd say no. I'm not as committed to this game as Redbeard. I'm not as good a hobbyist as he is. That's pretty simple to admit.

my profile pic has the answer but make ME a hypocrite lol

Manchu wrote:@Kanluwen: First of all, LOL. Secondly, that's hardly refusing to play simply because the models weren't painted.

That's kinda the point though.

Noone in their right mind would refuse a game simply because the models "weren't painted". There's circumstances involved, just like any other decision ever made.

If it's a major tournament and the person refused to paint their models? Well...refuse the game, mark their crap down and move on.
If it's someone who's just trying to be a pennypincher and alter their list everytime the internets says something new is "omgz the winnar!"? Feel free to refuse it, people like that aren't worth playing anyways. At least put some effort into it, do some conversions. Don't just use bare plastic Marines(hurr!) as your one size fits all.

Ok... What are we talking about here? lets go back to OP:

beard102479 wrote:I don't like playing people who haven't taken time to paint their army. Anyone can glue some "Nids" together and show up. Is it wrong that if I am not in a tournament that I refuse to play someone with an unpainted army? 1 or 2 models I can handle but an entire army with not one drop of paint on in? Come on people get your act together and take some pride in the hobby!!! Opinions welcome, please explain why you haven't painted your army or why you agree that it is very annoying to go up against a grey plastic Leman Russ?

We agree that people who do really good paintjobs are more dedicated. We agree that competently painted armies are more fun to play and play against. And we also agree...that people who are less dedicated still basicly have the right to take part, but they won't win the awards and they probably won't enjoy the full range of pleasures that Warhammer provides. Their loss, and one which they are probably comfortable with,

Did anybody disagree with these things coming in? No, we just thought about them in different terms, which led to a terrible defenition of what this argument was about. Which in the end is nothing, since we all seem to pretty well agree.

Now, unless somebody has something constructive to say I'm getting out of here before I get hurt (also because its 1 in the morning).

Buh-bye!

People who refuse to play against unpainted stuff are very, very rare. Atleast in GW and Privateer Press's gaming circles. Among the historical crowd, it's far more prevalent. As well as among gamers over 35 who have established social networks, host games and are otherwise uninvolved in the scene at a local store. Do i have studies to back this up? Polling of different demographics? Nope. It's just a summary of what I've observed during my last couple decades as a miniature gamer.

So, to the original poster: Yes, it's okay to refuse to play people. For any reason. It's your hobby and whatever reasons you come up with to do what you do and not do what you don't do are yours. Also expect to come across people who are insulted by your decision. People are very bad at being rejected.

To anyone who's insulted at the *idea* of someone refusing to play them because their stuff isn't paint: Get over yourselves. It's your hobby and whatever reasons you have don't apply to other people and vice versa. If someone won't play you, move along and find someone who does and stop judging yourself. A mindset of victimhood never helps in the long run

Kanluwen wrote:

Bear in mind, he also *refused* to paint them on the grounds that they were 'Alpha Legion who utilized an advanced chamelonic suit of armor'.

He could of at least paint the eyes and the bolters.

Some interesting things for consideration:

Just because a topic has been discussed many times before , it doesnt mean its by the same people ,
it just means its a popular topic that everyone have wondered about.
If it isnt by the same people , then the new ones joining in have their absolute right to voice their opinion.
If anyone find it repetitive and boring , they are never in any circumstances required to read / participate the thread.

Also , when people dont want to play against an unpainted army , they seldom say it to their face directly
like " No i wont play you , your army isnt even painted "
They'll usually give some excuse and find someone else to play. Well , its been polite i guess right?

I guess I should first say that I do paint my armies. I also have played with unpainted armies before I was able to take the time to paint them. I have no problems with using a grey unit or two until it gets painted. I don't think that playing against an unpainted opponent's army ruins my fun. (paint does not effect the rules or flow of the game guys)

I guess the bottom line is, if you do not want to play somebody with an unpainted army, you don't have too. I'm sure the people with unpainted armies will be happy enough playing against people who are not as uptight as you are.

LunaHound wrote:Just because a topic has been discussed many times before , it doesnt mean its by the same people

That is an interesting point, considering that no matter who is involved the discussion seems to go the same way every time (see Polonius's post early on in this thread).

LunaHound wrote:Also, when people dont want to play against an unpainted army, they seldom say it to their face directly

Rather than trying to prove that people turn down games for lack of painted opposition with evidence, you are trying to prove it with a lack of evidence. This is simply a weak argument, especially when considered in the context of this thread. There is no need to be polite about one's views toward non-painted armies in this thread (clearly) but no one here claims they actually turn down games for this reason. Even redbeard says he prefers playing against painted armies but will, when there are no painted armies around, play against an unpainted one.

Manchu wrote:Rather than trying to prove that people turn down games for lack of painted opposition with evidence, you are trying to prove it with a lack of evidence. This is simply a weak argument, especially when considered in the context of this thread. There is no need to be polite about one's views toward non-painted armies in this thread (clearly) but no one here claims they actually turn down games for this reason. Even redbeard says he prefers playing against painted armies but will, when there are no painted armies around, play against an unpainted one.

Evidence? weak? Its from my personal experience in my LFG , and my local battle bunker.
Manchu you need to know im not here to "argue or debate" Im telling you what i have seen numerous times , why on earth do i need to prove anything or lie about my personal experience
in my LFGS and bunker?
Im sure Redbeard is right when he said when there are no painted armies around he'll rather play vs unpainted instead of no games.

For example , i told you that my LFGS dont paint , they just play , and im the only one there that paints.
On warhammer weekends i wasnt playing yet , was gluing some mini , and guy A asked guy B for a game
then B said he wasnt planning on playing . 5 mins later when im done gluing and went to take out my army , guy B
came over and ask for a game. I asked what happend since i over heard him rejecting player A , then he said he want to play against me instead.

Well i do understand painted armies are more fun , but my point is , if people wont always openly decline a game with direct excuse given or
"i dont want to play against you because they arnt painted "

You can choose to believe it or not Manchu , it doesnt really benefit me in any way to make anything up.

The tone of your response is exaggerated as at no point have I accused you of lying or even making something up. I have simply pointed out that your observation (since your refuse to acknowledge that it is an argument) is based on speculation. There are other explanations for the event you described.

Manchu wrote:The tone of your response is exaggerated as at no point have I accused you of lying or even making something up. I have simply pointed out that your observation (since your refuse to acknowledge that it is an argument) is based on speculation. There are other explanations for the event you described.

Perhaps im confused then , because im not too sure what evidence you need or are you looking for.
Or am i supposed to provide when the example = 100% what i experienced myself.

Or what exactly is there argument of?

I think we can probably agree that the amount of people who will only play against painted armies but won't tell anyone is probably pretty small.

Even in LunaHound's account, the reason isn't given at all.

frozenwastes wrote:I think we can probably agree that the amount of people who will only play against painted armies but won't tell anyone is probably pretty small.

Even in LunaHound's account, the reason isn't given at all.

Or , another reason that i have raised earlier ,
its all in the "type" of group you play with.

Here is example.

Say you are in a gaming group that everyone has pretty good standard of painted army,
where having painted armies = respectable and important. Thus when an unpainted army show up ,
its easily viewed as a negative aspect. Thus a direct reply of "hmm , i dont want to play against unpainted army"
is normal , and easily accepted.

Then example 2 , a gaming group that can care less about whether army is painted or not.
Then someone declines a game and say " no thank you i dont play with unpainted armies"
then by all means GOOD LUCK playing there EVER again.
And lets apply that group to what i was talking about earlier , say there is wow 1 person that does paint
and he wants to play against that instead , do you find it rare or impossible to believe that he'll lie / give excuse
to avoid playing unpainted person just to play me?

frozenwastes wrote:So again, I ask:

Has anyone actually encountered another person who refused to play because models were unpainted?

I'm talking in real life here. I real encounter with someone where they said "no thanks, I only play against unpainted models." Not some guy on the internet, but around a gaming table.

Anyone?

No. Though I do think it's a factor behind the reason some gamers at our club consistently avoid playing others.



@Luna: Other than a tourney or a very close group of some sort, I don't think the first example is all that applicable. ou just simply won't get entire clubs that refuse to allow people with unpainted armies to enter.

@LunaHound: I hope that I can straighten out this misunderstanding.

The main point of contention in this thread seems to be that people who paint their own armies and expect others to do so as well are being accused of elitism by people who both/either do not paint their own armies and/or do not expect others to do so. The people who are doing the accusing have especially claimed that it is elitist, outside of a particular tournament or club setting, to refuse an opponent a game because their army is unpainted. The question that frozenwastes asked, and to which I assumed (perhaps incorrectly) that you were either directly or indirectly replying, was whether there was any evidence that people actually exhibit this attitude.

For our purposes, the best evidence that someone would refuse or has been refused a game on account of their would-be opponent's lack of painting is (1) a person saying in this thread that they would refuse a game for this reason or (2) a person saying in this thread that someone had explicitly refused them a game for this reason. Neither form of evidence has yet been presented.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
EF's last post is another good example of mere speculation rather than explicit evidence.

My last post =bad...? EF do bad?

TBH, I think I answered frozenwastes question. (At least on the behalf of our club).

No one there refuses to play another simply becuase it is not painted. (However, I have cringed at the poor painting skills of some people there)

Emperors Faithful wrote:@Luna: Other than a tourney or a very close group of some sort, I don't think the first example is all that applicable. ou just simply won't get entire clubs that refuse to allow people with unpainted armies to enter.

Its should be applicable, my battle bunker ( not a tourney or a private group )
Its the sole reason why i stopped gaming after my LFGS closed down.

What's the definition of a 'Battle Bunker'?

Emperors Faithful wrote:What's the definition of a 'Battle Bunker'?

Games Workshop wrote:Battle Bunkers

Battle Bunkers are like regular Hobby Centers but much bigger. Battle Bunkers include dozens of gaming tables, large areas for painting and modeling and an expanded selection of products including Specialist Games, Black Library and Forge World.

Each Battle Bunker features dozens of gaming tables complete with scenery, all at your disposal for open gaming. All Bunkers also have large painting and modeling bars where you can sit and work on your army.

Each battle bunker has a busy schedule of tournaments, campaigns, leagues and contests designed to help you get the most out of your hobby. These activities range in scale from small gatherings to huge regional events. Battle Bunkers also tend to be hang-outs for local gaming clubs. Whether you are looking to expand your hobby skills, meet new opponents or just get in a pick-up game, Games Workshop Battle Bunkers are an excellent spot for you and your friends. See the links to the Events Calendars below for more information about upcoming events.

Emperors Faithful wrote:What's the definition of a 'Battle Bunker'?

Its what i called the local Games Workshop 's game room.
Apart from the shop they have a separate room split by glass doors.
And inside have fancy walls with GW art works.