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.

 -Loki- wrote:

Dolgan wrote:
Still have not seen any proof that requiring paint minimums increases a store's sales. We actually have anecdotal evidence that the majority of LGS do not subscribe to that theory in this polling thread: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/420990.page

Currently it shows that 78% of the stores have 75% or less armies that are painted/finished. If fielding only painted armies actually increased business we would not be seeing only 8% of the stores with 75%-100% fully painted models....the numbers should be reversed if truly is the case that demanding fully painted models increases business in a store.

Out of a sampling of 1400 Dakka posters who saw the poll and bothered to respond. You're right, that's very anecdotal. Anecdotal evidence isn't evidence.

What's the margin of error on said poll? Did you also state it's not a scientific poll? Sheesh!

Personally, I got into 40k because of the painted minis I saw. That drew me to the game. It wasn't game mechanics or anything else. I was big into Magic: The Gathering and the painted models, especially the Eldar striking scorpions and swooping hawks. Those models sold me on the game to begin with. The shop let me play a couple of games with their Dark Angels and I read up on who they were and was hooked. Sold my cards to play Dark Angels. Then I started playing Hordes because the shop had a bunch of painted up titans. That sold me on that game too. You can say what you want about painted versus non painted but there are a lot of people who get into the game because of the painted models. I did. I know the shops I frequent don't have a painted army rule but they frown on you for not trying. You have 1 month from when you buy a model to when they bust your chops about priming and base coating your models. You also get to participate in their events for a couple bucks less ($1 or a free drink or something small like that) because they said it helps them attract more players. More players means more diversity, more diversity means more fun.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 lucasbuffalo wrote:

 Auxellion wrote:

 lucasbuffalo wrote:

 Auxellion wrote:

Then again Super - I don't play against players with unpainted armies. If you want to use a FLGS/GW store's tables outside of your den, paint your army

I believe that "a" should be a "my" or a "certain" in this sentence, as I've never played at any FLGS that required players to have painted armies to use their tables. If I had been told that, I'd simply stop going to that store and go to one which let me play the game I was spending money on as I wished.

I've basically only been to stores with that rule (fairly unspoken) - which is a rule I enjoy.

IMHO - thats another full thread discussion that I've seen numerous times. Stop going to the nearby FLGS? Enjoy your drive/travel/trip somewhere else. Support your local FLGS and follow their rules when playing with toys on their playmats. Fairly basic.

Or support one of the stores that allows you to play the game the way you want to. I'm certainly not entitled to playing the game I want in a store that doesn't want me to, but they're also not entitled to my business if they aren't meeting my needs as a customer.

Oh I hear you. As a customer, I have high standards. If they don't treat me the way I expect to be treated, I will never shop there again. I'm lucky in that we have 5 or 6 shops within a thirty minute drive. I can't believe this one shop let some jerk play an unprinted marine army in one of our local tournaments. I mean they had bolsters and chainswords and when they got to my line I found out they weren't assault squads but in fact grey knights. Heck, I found the army was a crimson fist army with grey knights as allies. Nothing was painted and most didn't have arms either. Heck some were just legs on a base. I was pissed because the shop didn't want to tell the guy to pound sand. This wasn't a new player, he wasn't using a new army and has in fact owned the army for more than a year. He was just too lazy to build it all. He admitted it and stood by the shops policy that the models don't have to be painted and complained loudly. My policy is that I only play with minis that are painted or at worst, base coated with a wash and some initial high lighting... Then again the hobby aspect is just as important to me. I won't play at shops that don't push the hobby aspect too. I will help you paint your models, show you how to get decent results quickly, how to dip models, base them, etc. if you can't buy a can of army builder primer, put some basic colors on the model, and then dip it - you're just lazy. I'm married, work full time (about 45 hours a week), am studying 20 hours a week for licensure exams, volunteer time at habitat for humanity on my Saturday mornings, church on Sundays, and can still manage to get a couple of games in every month and paint 4-6 units a quarter (an army every 6 - 12 months). You just have to prioritize, decide what you want to do, and set goals. Everyone can paint an army, it takes time and dedication.

 Kanluwen wrote:
If you have so many unpainted units that a rule which by its wording applies to single units that this becomes "unfair", I'd suggest you stop pretending that it is the shop at fault.

I like the word "fault" and how well it is used to show that your opinion of fun is better than mine, rather than just being different.

Again, army of unpainted minis. The rule makes the game unfair. You can chock up "fault" or blame anywhere you'd like, it doesn't change the fact that the rule gives an advantage to one person over another based on the color of their models, which is all I said and stated that I wouldn't play there. But again, the point is: Painted vs Unpainted = an unfair game at this store. You can not deny that fact.

 lucasbuffalo wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
If you have so many unpainted units that a rule which by its wording applies to single units that this becomes "unfair", I'd suggest you stop pretending that it is the shop at fault.

I like the word "fault" and how well it is used to show that your opinion of fun is better than mine, rather than just being different.

Again, army of unpainted minis. The rule makes the game unfair. You can chock up "fault" or blame anywhere you'd like, it doesn't change the fact that the rule gives an advantage to one person over another based on the color of their models, which is all I said and stated that I wouldn't play there. But again, the point is: Painted vs Unpainted = an unfair game at this store. You can not deny that fact.

The rule gives a motivation for people to quit with the excuses and make some time to actually paint some models.

You'll notice how it does not say "Army must be painted to a Golden Daemon standard". If you cannot pull off a 3 color minimum with the prevalence of colored primers and other things which make a 3 color minimum a joke--I do not know what to tell you.

It is worth noting as well that commonly when you see rules like this, it is targeted at a single player who is a toolbag to others and continually brings in unpainted FOTM armies without ever spending a dime in the shop.

 lucasbuffalo wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
If you have so many unpainted units that a rule which by its wording applies to single units that this becomes "unfair", I'd suggest you stop pretending that it is the shop at fault.

I like the word "fault" and how well it is used to show that your opinion of fun is better than mine, rather than just being different.

Again, army of unpainted minis. The rule makes the game unfair. You can chock up "fault" or blame anywhere you'd like, it doesn't change the fact that the rule gives an advantage to one person over another based on the color of their models, which is all I said and stated that I wouldn't play there. But again, the point is: Painted vs Unpainted = an unfair game at this store. You can not deny that fact.

The point is to make the game unfair, to encourage people to paint their models. Would you prefer a straight ban on unpainted models?

 Kanluwen wrote:

 lucasbuffalo wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
If you have so many unpainted units that a rule which by its wording applies to single units that this becomes "unfair", I'd suggest you stop pretending that it is the shop at fault.

I like the word "fault" and how well it is used to show that your opinion of fun is better than mine, rather than just being different.

Again, army of unpainted minis. The rule makes the game unfair. You can chock up "fault" or blame anywhere you'd like, it doesn't change the fact that the rule gives an advantage to one person over another based on the color of their models, which is all I said and stated that I wouldn't play there. But again, the point is: Painted vs Unpainted = an unfair game at this store. You can not deny that fact.

The rule gives a motivation for people to quit with the excuses and make some time to actually paint some models.

You'll notice how it does not say "Army must be painted to a Golden Daemon standard". If you cannot pull off a 3 color minimum with the prevalence of colored primers and other things which make a 3 color minimum a joke--I do not know what to tell you.

It is worth noting as well that commonly when you see rules like this, it is targeted at a single player who is a toolbag to others and continually brings in unpainted FOTM armies without ever spending a dime in the shop.

There is a difference between "can" and "want to".

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 lucasbuffalo wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
If you have so many unpainted units that a rule which by its wording applies to single units that this becomes "unfair", I'd suggest you stop pretending that it is the shop at fault.

I like the word "fault" and how well it is used to show that your opinion of fun is better than mine, rather than just being different.

Again, army of unpainted minis. The rule makes the game unfair. You can chock up "fault" or blame anywhere you'd like, it doesn't change the fact that the rule gives an advantage to one person over another based on the color of their models, which is all I said and stated that I wouldn't play there. But again, the point is: Painted vs Unpainted = an unfair game at this store. You can not deny that fact.

The point is to make the game unfair, to encourage people to paint their models. Would you prefer a straight ban on unpainted models?

I'd prefer that once a person spends their money to play a game, they get to play the game.
I play a lot of different games and I never see this sort of "play my way or you're wrong attitude" and it's just crazy to me. I've never see a store tell magic players to ship out for not using sleeves, or playing the wrong formats with older cards in casual games, etc. I've never seen board gamers asked to leave or be somehow penalized for not painting the unpainted pieces in their board game or asked to leave for a house rule. I don't understand why, in this specific Hobby/Game/Religion to some, that if a person buys the game they're wrong/bad/to blame/should be penalized for wanting to play that game in the way that they see fit.
I mean, it's pretty simple, if you hate unpainted armies then don't play against people who have them. Why is that difficult? Either you're A. Ok with unpainted, or B. Aren't. Why is there a C. "I'm not ok with it, but this gives me an unfair advantage so now it's cool."

It probably has something to do with the rampant obnoxious entitlement attitude that many of the "unpainted player" crowd has when it comes to organized play.

 Kanluwen wrote:
It probably has something to do with the rampant obnoxious entitlement attitude that many of the "unpainted player" crowd has when it comes to organized play.

Entitlements like what? I'm curious.

 lucasbuffalo wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
It probably has something to do with the rampant obnoxious entitlement attitude that many of the "unpainted player" crowd has when it comes to organized play.

Entitlements like what? I'm curious.

One of the common arguments is that there should be no painting score as part of a tournament because it is "unfair"

 lucasbuffalo wrote:
the rule gives an advantage to one person over another based on the color of their models

Grey rights!

lucasbuffalo wrote:
I'd prefer that once a person spends their money to play a game, they get to play the game.
I play a lot of different games and I never see this sort of "play my way or you're wrong attitude" and it's just crazy to me. I've never see a store tell magic players to ship out for not using sleeves, or playing the wrong formats with older cards in casual games, etc. I've never seen board gamers asked to leave or be somehow penalized for not painting the unpainted pieces in their board game or asked to leave for a house rule. I don't understand why, in this specific Hobby/Game/Religion to some, that if a person buys the game they're wrong/bad/to blame/should be penalized for wanting to play that game in the way that they see fit.
I mean, it's pretty simple, if you hate unpainted armies then don't play against people who have them. Why is that difficult? Either you're A. Ok with unpainted, or B. Aren't. Why is there a C. "I'm not ok with it, but this gives me an unfair advantage so now it's cool."

Let us also remember, that a Games Workshop Store is just that...a store. Their ultimate goal is to sell stuff to people. They feel that the best way to do that is to encourage painted armies to be used in their store. The reason GW allows people to play in their stores is to get people interested enough to come in and find out what is going on around these tables with these brightly colored toy soldiers.

Ultimately, if you don't like the policy, you have three choices; 1. Suck it up and play at the disadvantage, 2. Get off your tail and paint your models or find someone to do it for you, 3. Play at home.

 d-usa wrote:

 Some_Call_Me_Tim? wrote:
No reason the players at the store can't just quietly ignore that rule...

~Tim?

I don't know if the GW guy will be breathing over your shoulder and "reminding" you about that rule everytime you play. I figured if I'm the guy with the painted army I would remind the unpainted guy about it since it benefits me .

What about the kids who cant paint ... we were all there at some point.

 lucasbuffalo wrote:

I'd prefer that once a person spends their money to play a game, they get to play the game.

That. That right there is the sense of entitlement. "I paid for my minis so I am entitled to play." The thing is, noone is saying you should not play, just that it would be preferable that you paint your minis. It's always the unpainted Croydon who get there knickers in a twist over being told they should paint. The painted crowd almost always say "we would rather you paint".

I play a lot of different games and I never see this sort of "play my way or you're wrong attitude" and it's just crazy to me. I've never see a store tell magic players to ship out for not using sleeves, or playing the wrong formats with older cards in casual games, etc. I've never seen board gamers asked to leave or be somehow penalized for not painting the unpainted pieces in their board game or asked to leave for a house rule. I don't understand why, in this specific Hobby/Game/Religion to some, that if a person buys the game they're wrong/bad/to blame/should be penalized for wanting to play that game in the way that they see fit.

Those are completely non equivalent and not part of the relevant games. No one is going to stop someone playing 40k using old minis, but you can't use a non current dex. Painting pieces is not part of board games. I have never seen someone turn up to an MTG tournament and get upset because some cards are banned. Older cards are still MTG cars. Protective sleeves are not in any way equivalent to painting.

There are plenty of places you will get this treatment. Turn up to an archery club on a record day without whites/greens and you will be told you can't shoot. Historical war gaming? You had better make sure not only are your minis painted, but that they are painted the correct colours. Want to play golf? You had better dress appropriately for that club. There are many many more rules of etiquette, both written and unwritten, across many games and sports.

I mean, it's pretty simple, if you hate unpainted armies then don't play against people who have them. Why is that difficult? Either you're A. Ok with unpainted, or B. Aren't. Why is there a C. "I'm not ok with it, but this gives me an unfair advantage so now it's cool."

It's pretty simple here too. Painted minis are part of the game. If you don't like the rules one place has brought in because they are in camp A then you don't have to play there. Play somewhere else. Don't want to play people who have painted armys and enforce this rule? don't play against them. Play against other people without unpainted armys. It's not about being ok because you have an advantage. Its a little thing to encourage people to bring painted forces. I think everyone who is pro painted forces would rather play against a fully painted force than have a little advantage. You (and the others with the same attitude) are expecting the same as you are accusing others of. To play your way. To accept unpainted minis. People who are against them are just trying to encourage painting without an outright ban, trying to meet in the middle.

 infinite_array wrote:

NickOnwezen wrote:

Note how women HATE GREY. I am looking at all you guys with unpainted armies. Its your fault they don't come in and talk to us. Or play warhammer with us. >:/

Wow! It just occurred to me now!

No wonder why all these women have been approaching me after I finished painting my British for FoW.

AND choosing Gandalf the GREY as your profile picture. You obviously like to hobble yourself.

 lucasbuffalo wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
If you have so many unpainted units that a rule which by its wording applies to single units that this becomes "unfair", I'd suggest you stop pretending that it is the shop at fault.

I like the word "fault" and how well it is used to show that your opinion of fun is better than mine, rather than just being different.

...the rule gives an advantage to one person over another based on the color of their models.... You can not deny that fact.

Untrue.

Firstly, simply acknowledge that painted models are better. All the models we're discussing are designed to be painted.

That sense of entitlement, "my unpainted army is as good as your painted one" is inappropriate, because your unpainted army is simply not as good as a painted one.

It's not as good, because you haven't put in the effort. It's nothing to do with discrimination, as you imply, because discrimination is preference based on criteria humans can't control, ie their race or colour. In this context, we're talking about preferring people who make an effort, over those who don't make an effort.

The GW store manager is doing this, not to penalise those who don't make an effort, but to encourage them - because this makes for a more immersive experience, which will be more fun for everybody. It's a pretty good example of a nudging, which is seen as an effective way of encouraging behavour which benefits individuals, and groups.

 Miss Dee wrote:

 d-usa wrote:

 Some_Call_Me_Tim? wrote:
No reason the players at the store can't just quietly ignore that rule...

~Tim?

I don't know if the GW guy will be breathing over your shoulder and "reminding" you about that rule everytime you play. I figured if I'm the guy with the painted army I would remind the unpainted guy about it since it benefits me .

What about the kids who cant paint ... we were all there at some point.

The kids should be learning how to paint, they won't get better giving up.

Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:

 lucasbuffalo wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
If you have so many unpainted units that a rule which by its wording applies to single units that this becomes "unfair", I'd suggest you stop pretending that it is the shop at fault.

I like the word "fault" and how well it is used to show that your opinion of fun is better than mine, rather than just being different.

...the rule gives an advantage to one person over another based on the color of their models.... You can not deny that fact.

Untrue.

Firstly, simply acknowledge that painted models are better. All the models we're discussing are designed to be painted.

That sense of entitlement, "my unpainted army is as good as your painted one" is inappropriate, because your unpainted army is simply not as good as a painted one.

It's not as good, because you haven't put in the effort. It's nothing to do with discrimination, as you imply, because discrimination is preference based on criteria humans can't control, ie their race or colour. In this context, we're talking about preferring people who make an effort, over those who don't make an effort.

The GW store manager is doing this, not to penalise those who don't make an effort, but to encourage them - because this makes for a more immersive experience, which will be more fun for everybody. It's a pretty good example of a nudging, which is seen as an effective way of encouraging behavour which benefits individuals, and groups.

people should really stop using entitlement it doesn't help the discussion at all and shows a lot of belittlement.

But by what yo have said it is discrimination as it simply assumes that the reason is
Lack of effort, when there can be many reasons, and even in some cases be the opposite.
For a store to take this rule it shows little thought or a joke at some custermers expense in my eyes, and it's not at all a good example of nudging.
Not a fun and encouraging environment for a lot of people it seems.

Apple fox wrote:
people should really stop using entitlement it doesn't help the discussion at all and shows a lot of belittlement.

People should stop feeling entitled as it doesn't help the discussion and shows a lot of beligerance

But by what yo have said it is discrimination as it simply assumes that the reason is Lack of effort, when there can be many reasons, and even in some cases be the opposite.

Erm... no. How can it ever be more effort not to paint than to paint (unless you have some kind of painting addiction but terrorists have taken your family hostage and will kill them if you pick up a paint brush, obviously )?

For a store to take this rule it shows little thought or a joke at some custermers expense in my eyes, and it's not at all a good example of nudging.

It is an excellent example of nudging. Nowhere does it say that you will be forced to play this rule. Most people who have commented on it here would probably let it slide unless you have demonstrated some kind of "I'm never going to paint these models so screw you" kind of attitude.

Not a fun and encouraging environment for a lot of people it seems.

And again we come back to a sense of entitlement, ignoring what is a fun and encouraging environment for a lot of other people.

Apple fox wrote:
............ people should really stop using entitlement it doesn't help the discussion at all and shows a lot of belittlement.

But by what yo have said it is discrimination as it simply assumes that the reason is
Lack of effort, when there can be many reasons, and even in some cases be the opposite.
For a store to take this rule it shows little thought or a joke at some custermers expense in my eyes, and it's not at all a good example of nudging.
Not a fun and encouraging environment for a lot of people it seems.

The flip side of that is the Elitism tag which people will use to excuse their own behaviours while denigrating others.

Of course its discrimination, we discriminate when we choose red jelly over yellow jelly (why you would is beyond be, yellow jelly rocks my world!). That's not to say we should get upset about it just because there are types of discrimination that society sees as unacceptable.

The simple fact is that if you choose to enter an environment where painting is preferred, we shouldn't be surprised (much less insulted) when it is encouraged.

Anecdotally I've seen people complain that clubs are cliquey because no one talked to them, ignoring that they have to bring something to the table and make themselves known to get acknowledged and not be the proverbial wall flower.

I prefer painted armies and it makes for wargaming small talk topic #1 - nice army dood, is that Yellow? Yellow is impossible to paint, how did you do that?




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Miss Dee wrote:
what gw put is bulling

If you mean bullying then no it isn't, don't be silly.

 SilverMK2 wrote:

Apple fox wrote:
people should really stop using entitlement it doesn't help the discussion at all and shows a lot of belittlement.

People should stop feeling entitled as it doesn't help the discussion and shows a lot of beligerance

But by what yo have said it is discrimination as it simply assumes that the reason is Lack of effort, when there can be many reasons, and even in some cases be the opposite.

Erm... no. How can it ever be more effort not to paint than to paint (unless you have some kind of painting addiction but terrorists have taken your family hostage and will kill them if you pick up a paint brush, obviously )?

For a store to take this rule it shows little thought or a joke at some custermers expense in my eyes, and it's not at all a good example of nudging.

It is an excellent example of nudging. Nowhere does it say that you will be forced to play this rule. Most people who have commented on it here would probably let it slide unless you have demonstrated some kind of "I'm never going to paint these models so screw you" kind of attitude.

Not a fun and encouraging environment for a lot of people it seems.

And again we come back to a sense of entitlement, ignoring what is a fun and encouraging environment for a lot of other people.

I think you missed my point from my first line, but that's ok.
Secondly I put a lot of effort into painting, as others do around me. Not having stuff done is not from lack of effort from anyone at my club or store as far as I could tell.
It isn't a excellent example of nudging, it's borderline insulting for a store to put this up.
Also again entailment is used, People can feel free to play who they please, but a store should be far more thoughtful in how it handles this situation.

Of corse what allways happens is that as the thread gets longer it gets harder to keep up discussion:(

Apple fox wrote:
I think you missed my point from my first line, but that's ok.

No, I got your point, I was being facetious.

Secondly I put a lot of effort into painting, as others do around me. Not having stuff done is not from lack of effort from anyone at my club or store as far as I could tell.

I don't dispute that, however that is not what you said in the post that I was responding to. I don't think anyone has any problem with someone slowly getting stuff painted up. I'm a slow painter myself so I know that it can take a long time to get something painted.

However, the attitude of "well, I'd rather game than paint" doesn't always cut it - it is always easier to find 10, 20, 30, etc minutes to get a bit of paint on some models than it is to find 2, 3, 4, etc hours to play a game or two.

It isn't a excellent example of nudging, it's borderline insulting for a store to put this up.

Sure, in the same way that it is "insulting" if the council put up a "clean up after your dog" sign in the park rather than banning dogs entirely. How very dare they say that I should have to clean up after my dog if I want to use their land to walk him?!?! Are they saying that people do do clean up after their dogs are somehow better than me?!?! Well, I'm never going to go to that park again! I'm going to go to one where you can't even see the grass due to the dog crap!

Seriously, get some perspective and stop looking for ways to be insulted.

Also again entailment is used, People can feel free to play who they please, but a store should be far more thoughtful in how it handles this situation.

Yeah, they should just ban them... oh, wait! That would hurt their fragile little feelings too! Perhaps if the store provides paints, painting space, brushes, classes, dedicated painting time, people to help paint for free... oh, wait, how insulting saying you are too poor to afford paints! And how can you possibly find time to get into the store and paint? Why have they covered over some of the gaming tables so people can paint? Don't they know you want to play a game?

 notprop wrote:

Apple fox wrote:
............ people should really stop using entitlement it doesn't help the discussion at all and shows a lot of belittlement.

But by what yo have said it is discrimination as it simply assumes that the reason is
Lack of effort, when there can be many reasons, and even in some cases be the opposite.
For a store to take this rule it shows little thought or a joke at some custermers expense in my eyes, and it's not at all a good example of nudging.
Not a fun and encouraging environment for a lot of people it seems.

The flip side of that is the Elitism tag which people will use to excuse their own behaviours while denigrating others.

Of course its discrimination, we discriminate when we choose red jelly over yellow jelly (why you would is beyond be, yellow jelly rocks my world!). That's not to say we should get upset about it just because there are types of discrimination that society sees as unacceptable.

The simple fact is that if you choose to enter an environment where painting is preferred, we shouldn't be surprised (much less insulted) when it is encouraged.

Anecdotally I've seen people complain that clubs are cliquey because no one talked to them, ignoring that they have to bring something to the table and make themselves known to get acknowledged and not be the proverbial wall flower.

I prefer painted armies and it makes for wargaming small talk topic #1 - nice army dood, is that Yellow? Yellow is impossible to paint, how did you do that?




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Miss Dee wrote:
what gw put is bulling

If you mean bullying then no it isn't, don't be silly.

sadly both tags get said a lot :( and it realy makes it tough I find to discuss some topics.
I find a lot of people in the community are painted preferred, I would love to if possible. It's just not possible and I have experience people first hand being rather nasty in some environments within the community for the painting issue.(I think some people in this thread show that)
The rule as it is written I just can't see as positive in the end, it maybe push painting more. But I will always wonder at what cost.

I do realy want to have my army done, and I love seeing all the painted miniatures but shouldn't that not be the reward, not a rule advantage in a game. Joke or not, there is more than one little issue I take with it.

 Steve steveson wrote:
[qu
. No one is going to stop someone playing 40k using old minis, but you can't use a non current dex...
... I have never seen someone turn up to an MTG tournament and get upset because some cards are banned...

...There are plenty of places you will get this treatment. Turn up to an archery club on a record day without whites/greens and you will be told you can't shoot. Historical war gaming? You had better make sure not only are your minis painted, but that they are painted the correct colours. Want to play golf? You had better dress appropriately for that club. There are many many more rules of etiquette, both written and unwritten, across many games and sports.

Excellent examples. Nearly every hobby has it's standards by which the majority of the community abides. What we have here in 40k is a case of shifting demographics representing groups of players who don't agree with previously established standards. It is true that standards to change over time, but only if the community agrees and allows it to happen.

Maybe it's a loosing battle (a melodramatic term, but there it is) and maybe the standards have already changed. However, I will still stand on the side of folks who would prefer to keep painting as a part of wargaming.

Arguments like "I'm a busy guy", "I don't have time", "I bought them and should be allowed to play" and the ever popular "I enjoy the hobby in my own way" or "Don't tell me how to play" will get you exactly zero sympathy in the examples above, so why should it be any different in this particular subset of popular level sci-fi and fantasy wargames?

 Miss Dee wrote:

 d-usa wrote:

 Some_Call_Me_Tim? wrote:
No reason the players at the store can't just quietly ignore that rule...

~Tim?

I don't know if the GW guy will be breathing over your shoulder and "reminding" you about that rule everytime you play. I figured if I'm the guy with the painted army I would remind the unpainted guy about it since it benefits me .

What about the kids who cant paint ... we were all there at some point.

Then their models are painted, but don't look particularly good. Yes, we were all there at one point.

Personally, I just did a little painting on my Tervigon. It's the biggest model I've ever tackled, and I'm nowhere near finished. I also paint to tabletop standard - my Tyranids are red, with a wash, then layering to bring the red back up. No highlighting. The carapace is black, with a 2-3 colour feathered highlight. It's not going to win awards, but as an army on the table looks a far sight more interesting than if it was grey plastic, and I know my opponents appreciate not facing a sea of grey. In fact, my friends and I's armies tend to be the least finished armies in the store on average. There's the odd only primed army, which tends to be because it's a new army, or there's fully painted armies. We have a tendency to paint slowly, and game with the army as it gets painted.

Personally I dont know why anyone would play with unpainted figures.

May as well use lumps of grey plastic... Oh wait...

Thankfully, playing Historicals (apart from those dubious FOW types) you dont have to deal with it as playing with unpainted models never seems to happen. Its an unwritten rule you dont bring it if it aint painted.

So, if its Elitist to only play with painted models on good looking terrain and have a great time, then Im proud to be Elitist.

Of course the flip side with our club is we have so many armies done, from so many members, that new players can play with other stuff till their stuff is completed or add in units as they are ready.

Not having stuff by no means excludes them from gaming at all.

Thats the point of a good, close-knit club. We all help and support each other.

 Eilif wrote:

 Steve steveson wrote:
[qu
. No one is going to stop someone playing 40k using old minis, but you can't use a non current dex...
... I have never seen someone turn up to an MTG tournament and get upset because some cards are banned...

...There are plenty of places you will get this treatment. Turn up to an archery club on a record day without whites/greens and you will be told you can't shoot. Historical war gaming? You had better make sure not only are your minis painted, but that they are painted the correct colours. Want to play golf? You had better dress appropriately for that club. There are many many more rules of etiquette, both written and unwritten, across many games and sports.

Excellent examples. Nearly every hobby has it's standards by which the majority of the community abides. What we have here in 40k is a case of shifting demographics representing groups of players who don't agree with previously established standards. It is true that standards to change over time, but only if the community agrees and allows it to happen.

Maybe it's a loosing battle (a melodramatic term, but there it is) and maybe the standards have already changed. However, I will still stand on the side of folks who would prefer to keep painting as a part of wargaming.

Arguments like "I'm a busy guy", "I don't have time", "I bought them and should be allowed to play" and the ever popular "I enjoy the hobby in my own way" or "Don't tell me how to play" will get you exactly zero sympathy in the examples above, so why should it be any different in this particular subset of popular level sci-fi and fantasy wargames?

Both good posts.

I appreciate this is not what was meant by Eilif but reading his post and ruminating on the issue (and thanks to apple fox for a differing PoV in PM) there is some need to alter terminology I think. The use of 'standards' here is perhaps misleading or divisive (I've done this also in this thread I think). I don't think I or anyone has an issue with any particular standard of painting, just that the effort is made (and therefore the convention is followed).

True there are kids/TFGs that are want to mock peoples efforts so you might not feel you want to open yourself to that ridicule, however the vast majority of gamers are appreciative of a painted army whether is Golden Demon quality, tabletop quality or my own rushed efforts and encouraging other to follow this is to be encourage I think.

As I say I think this sign is an attempt that this through gameplay, one that I welcome.

That. That right there is the sense of entitlement. "I paid for my minis so I am entitled to play." The thing is, noone is saying you should not play, just that it would be preferable that you paint your minis. It's always the unpainted Croydon who get there knickers in a twist over being told they should paint. The painted crowd almost always say "we would rather you paint".

There are people straight up in this thread that is telling people they should not play at all if they don't paint, and that stores should outright ban them otherwise.

 Miss Dee wrote:

 d-usa wrote:

 Some_Call_Me_Tim? wrote:
No reason the players at the store can't just quietly ignore that rule...

~Tim?

I don't know if the GW guy will be breathing over your shoulder and "reminding" you about that rule everytime you play. I figured if I'm the guy with the painted army I would remind the unpainted guy about it since it benefits me .

What about the kids who cant paint ... we were all there at some point.

Yes, that's true - but isn't it all the more reason to start painting? It may be a platitude, but practice does make perfect - and the kids who can't paint can't expect to level up to Master Painter if they only wait long enough.


It might be tricky for FLGS pickup games, but when my friends and I started we didn't simply buy an entire army in one go - even in the early nineties a full 1500+ point army meant dropping quite a lot of cash on... well, not much material.
In our first couple of games we used little more than one squad and a character model (which admittedly worked better in RT oder 2nd ed), and it was pretty satisfactory to be able to slowly add another unit to your army.

OTOH, it is *really* unsatisfactory to have that pretty newly-painted unit you were waiting to put on the table shot to pieces in turn 1, but them's the breaks.

It is completely fine if you don't like it paint your army. like my friend threatened to do his Prime black,1 red stripe 1 blue stripe. on each and every model.

As to people who can't paint you only learn through trying.

Does anyone think it funny that people are glossing over the fact that this sign its a RELAXATION of the rules according to quite a few people. As I understand it, It used to be no paint no game at GW. So they ALREADY turned down the paint rules. So to the people saying you would stop going to stores that implement these rules, Wouldn't you already not BE at this store to begin with?

 Steve steveson wrote:

That. That right there is the sense of entitlement. "I paid for my minis so I am entitled to play." The thing is, noone is saying you should not play, just that it would be preferable that you paint your minis. It's always the unpainted Croydon who get there knickers in a twist over being told they should paint. The painted crowd almost always say "we would rather you paint".

"You paid for that food, now you want to eat it? God, you're soooo entitled."
If you pay with your money for something, you should get to use that something as you choose. This store has the right to post this rule, as do I and any other player who doesn't take their hobby too seriously too play somewhere else.

 Todosi wrote:

Ultimately, if you don't like the policy, you have three choices; 1. Suck it up and play at the disadvantage, 2. Get off your tail and paint your models or find someone to do it for you, 3. Play at home.[/color]

4. Play at a store where I can actually play the game as a I choose.
I've already stated that A. I have a number of painted armies, and B. That I play at a variety of FLGS where there is no "paint or leave" motto. But hey, thanks for restating my own statements "at" me with an attempt to lecture.