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.

When you upload a pic of your miniatures to the gallery, you get rated. What is the minimum rating level you can play with AKA tabletop quality?

'Tabletop quality' is such a wooly term, and there is no grading system as to what constitutes such. The coolness ratings on the gallery are merely for if people like your models/paintjobs and shouldn't be used as a a measure for your models.

My grading system is:

Am I happy with my model? Y/N

Y = Tabletop quality
N = continue painting until I can answer Y

Tabletop quality, pro painted etc... they're impossible to grade as they're aesthetics.

On a 10 point system, a 5 is ok/good tabletop quality, 4 being ok tabletop quality. At least that is how I score it.

However, photography skills also come into play on ratings here. I know for a fact that my models look a hell of a lot better in person than they do in my pictures (mostly because I rarely ever attempt to set up good lighting etc).

The_Happy_Pig wrote:'Tabletop quality' is such a wooly term, and there is no grading system as to what constitutes such. The coolness ratings on the gallery are merely for if people like your models/paintjobs and shouldn't be used as a a measure for your models.

My grading system is:

Am I happy with my model? Y/N

Y = Tabletop quality
N = continue painting until I can answer Y

Tabletop quality, pro painted etc... they're impossible to grade as they're aesthetics.

Exactly this, I consider all my minis to be ~tabletop quality, possibly just beneath it. Others might consider it slightly better or worse, it's all subjective.

Well most stores and clubs insist on the 3 colour rule....that means as long as its based {even just painted goblin green} and has 3 other colours on it{dosnt have to be highlighted or shaded} then its ok to use .
this isnt just about getting you to paint its also for your opponent {would you want to play against unpainted figs ?}

i for one with over 20yrs of playing would rather see clean/tidy base coated figs rather than ones that have had dozens of colours chucked on them.

like most have said many clubs think different ways. Some people say 3 colors some say more or less. This all depends on how strict people are.

But in order to play in GW sponsored game (tournaments) you must have flocked bases (basic flock) and a minimum of 3 colors on the mini its self.

What about 2 coloured, well highlighted and based models?

I start with "can I tell what it is at 3' ?" then go to "can I tell what it is at arm's length?".

We don't play at closer than that, and I don't do dioramas any more, so making it look fantastic at 10cm is irrelevant to me.

When it comes to voting...
If I like the model.
If I like the paint scheme.

If neither of those apply, I don't vote.
There are a large number of models from ALL makers that I don't care for (not just GW - I even dislike many Infinity models).

My stuff generally hovers around the 6.5-7 range, but I wouldn't really take it as any indication of anything. There's people on this site who will downvote your stuff if they just don't agree with what you're saying. I've had a guy get mad at me and zerobomb/leave negative comments with no constructive criticism on a few of my pictures.

sluggaslugga wrote:What about 2 coloured, well highlighted and based models?

Well if it is highlighted then you are using more than 2 colours.


For example, I could do a model in black and red (2 colours) and have the shading and highlighting go along the same lines as the 3rd bar on this pic:



If I lighten or darken the red it is a different colour, which is essentially what you would be doing if you are highlighting your models. If GW thinks otherwise, then someone needs to take Drawing I again.

If it doesn't look bad at about 3 feet it's passable for me. Lately I'll play with anything as the rules are not too my liking and I haven't figured out an army build I like.

Black tau with light blue eyes and armour recesses (highlighted).

Can I use it?

Tabletop to me is a bit fuzzy.

My definition of tabletop is probably a lot higher than most though.

My Tabletop Quality:

Fully painted and based. Paint job to have at least highlight and shade, also any weathering I intend to do. Eyes are painted, along with all small details. Something similar to Tabletop quality+ painting services offer.

It's not that I'm anal, I just have the time and patience to paint. At the moment, there are games on tap for me at least once a week at my local GW, and I found 3 groups within 5 minutes walk from where I live. Because I can have a take it or leave it attitude toward playing, I don't have to worry about getting them painted in time for what could be my only game in a certain period.

Other people don't have that luxury. They may only get one game a week. Naturally those people want to have thier units ready for it, so it's better suited for them to have just a basic scheme - more important to just have them playable.

Just because my definition of tabletop is higher than others, doesn't mean I'll refuse to play a 1 colour, or even unpainted army.

You've got to appreciate that some people just don't have the time to paint, or even worse in some cases, they're terrified of unveiling thie refforts only to recieve derision. There's always one idiot who decides to put people down.

I like my boys to look as good as I can get them, and I've got a fairly good speed painting technique to get there.

I take pride in my men, and it shows a level of workmanship that people like to see when they meet me on the field.

Some people don't have the time, and neither do I, but I make that time. I goto work 8 hours a day, sometimes even on weekends. I visit the gym and pray to the iron gods 6 days a week offering my blood and sweat. My daughter is 10 months old, and I'm married... You have to make time, and that's what it takes to get table top quality in my opinion. Table top to me is the pride you have in your craftsmanship, and your dedication.

If some kid spends all weekend painting, and getting the model to his standard, that's all that matters to me (even if it does look like crap). But if some spanker basecoats them and calls them table top, and they're more to the standard of "playable"... Gtfo my battlefield.

Needless to say, it's all a matter of opinion. If you feel like your mini's are good enough, that's fine by me. But if you know they don't look good, and you don't care... then you don't care about your troops and they'll probably fail every morale test they take... which in fact is random... and doesn't make any sense.

I like them painted to the best of my ability. I consider my work above average, but my rating wouldnt reflect that. That might be attributed to the fact that I havent finished one single character in its entirety for my BA's. My standard would be 7 for me personally, but if you ask Dakka, it looks like my ratings average about a 5-6.

Net ratings don't count for much. For every fair vote, there's 2 vindictive S.O.Bs.

There's some great minis with crappy ratings.

I was at a Hobby Store which had the rule .. All models must have at least colours. Pretty easy. Paint the model blue, ink it, paint base brown. You have an Ultramarine.

1 kid had literally dipped his models into paint so that:

a) they were made up of just 3 stripes
b) they had lost ALL detail

He deemed those to be of table top quality.

Obviously, he was in it for the game, not the painting/modelling. My point, it's entirely up to you what you deem table top quality.

Conandoodle wrote:1 kid had literally dipped his models into paint so that:

a) they were made up of just 3 stripes
b) they had lost ALL detail

I wouldnt even play the game if I did this to my models. Why would you waist so much money on figures/vehicles to destroy the presentation of the models like that? I know its a personal choice and its esoteric, but I would give up the game if I was playing with blobs of red paint.

Ratings in the gallery are fairly meaningless, except for the small number of models which clearly are absolutely top rank.

The 6mm Russians I own, pro-painted by Reinforcements By Post, are brilliantly done examples of 6mm models.

One set has got a rating of 2.14P, 3.14C. Another set has got a rating of 5.7P, 5.8C. In other words, it is about twice as good.

The thing is both sets are the exact same unit, seen from different angles.

Element206 wrote:

Conandoodle wrote:1 kid had literally dipped his models into paint so that:

a) they were made up of just 3 stripes
b) they had lost ALL detail

I wouldnt even play the game if I did this to my models. Why would you waist so much money on figures/vehicles to destroy the presentation of the models like that? I know its a personal choice and its esoteric, but I would give up the game if I was playing with blobs of red paint.

I was blown away .. This kid LOVES the game .. couldn't give a damn about the painting/modelling. Me .. I'm the exact opposite. I can count the amount of games I've played on my left hand .. yet I have over 5000pts worth of 40k models and half that in Fantasy. I'm sure that kid would look upon me as horrified as I was when I looked upon him.

Each to their own I guess. So to respond to the OP's original question. Table Top quality is whatever YOU deem it to be. But I would argue, solely for respect to your opponent who may care about painting/modelling .. at least make the miniatures look like miniatures.

If I can hold it at arm's length and it looks good, then it's tabletop quality for me.

In response to the dipping in paint comment... yeeech. Totally agree with Element on that one. Why spend so much on the super-detailed miniatures to then butcher them?