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.

TLR - 13 pages of back and forth boils down to "You can't tell me what to do or what not to do with toys I purchased using my own money." vs "I like to play with people who invest time into painting their models just like I do, but I'm not saying you HAVE to paint your models - just strongly insisting you should because it's fun to paint."

IMO, there's nothing wrong with not wanting to paint your model, just as much as there's nothing wrong with people not wanting to play against you because you have unpainted models.

You guys talk like it's a god given right to be able to play with unpainted models.

I defiantly prefer to play with and against painted armies. While I do not like 9th edition I do like that GW has at least set forward minimum painting standards. (The only part of 9th edition I actually like. The rest is basically garbage.) I don't expect my opponent to have a painted army but I will be more inclined to play against them again if they are working on painting their army. I don't enjoy playing against grey plastic. There's noting epic about playing with or against unpainted armies.

 skchsan wrote:

You guys talk like it's a god given right to be able to play with unpainted models.

But it is their right isn't it? They don't have to paint if they don't want to. I think the friction comes from them wanting to a) not be judged for that and b) not to be discriminated against.

 Arschbombe wrote:

 skchsan wrote:

You guys talk like it's a god given right to be able to play with unpainted models.

But it is their right isn't it? They don't have to paint if they don't want to. I think the friction comes from them wanting to a) not be judged for that and b) not to be discriminated against.

Yep. Pretty much this. I know a lot of my (admittedly over the top) responses in this thread are the result of me interpreting insults and snobbery from some of the other posters. It's great if you've painted up your models. I hope you enjoyed doing it, and I hope your opponent enjoys seeing your work. Just don't act like people who don't want to spend their time painting minis are somehow doing something wrong.

Some people enjoy black olives on their pizza. Good for them. They can enjoy a flavor profile that wouldn't be available without those olives. Just don't act like other people are eating pizza wrong for not ordering olives.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Gordy2000 wrote:
Well I’m a 10 and so is the small group of friends I play exclusively with.

But that’s just our bag and people should play the way that they’re happy with - no judgment here.

See this? This is perfectly okay. More power to you, Gordy.

 Arschbombe wrote:

 skchsan wrote:

You guys talk like it's a god given right to be able to play with unpainted models.

But it is their right isn't it? They don't have to paint if they don't want to. I think the friction comes from them wanting to a) not be judged for that and b) not to be discriminated against.

What does "rights" have to do with playing a Wargame, is the State or the broader political community involved in your 40K games?

The word you are looking for is "desire"... If your desire and the one of your fellow gamer(s) are equal or nearby you play a game if not you dont, simple.

Cant understand how adults who you would assume have some civic education can confuse such different terms.

Vatsetis wrote:


What does "rights" have to do with playing a Wargame, is the State or the broader political community involved in your 40K games?

The word you are looking for is "desire"... If your desire and the one of your fellow gamer(s) are equal or nearby you play a game if not you dont, simple.

Cant understand how adults who you would assume have some civic education can confuse such different terms.

OK, professor, I'll grant you that no nation's constitution or basic law enumerates a right that allows citizens to not paint miniatures. However, those citizens are still FREE not to paint any miniatures they own and no one can COMPEL them to paint said miniatures. Is that better?

8/10 I guess? I really prefer to play with only fully painted armies on both sides (and on fully painted high quality terrain) but everyone has to start somewhere. I'll play a game with someone who is working on painting but patience is going to wear out quickly if they keep bringing the same pile of unpainted and broken models that are tossed carelessly into a box between games.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, I'd be really curious to see the results of this poll in a forum with a primary focus on historical miniatures. I bet it would be overwhelmingly "painted only, period" with a few "painted greatly preferred" responses and very few people defending unpainted armies.

Vatsetis wrote:

 Arschbombe wrote:

 skchsan wrote:

You guys talk like it's a god given right to be able to play with unpainted models.

But it is their right isn't it? They don't have to paint if they don't want to. I think the friction comes from them wanting to a) not be judged for that and b) not to be discriminated against.

What does "rights" have to do with playing a Wargame, is the State or the broader political community involved in your 40K games?

The word you are looking for is "desire"... If your desire and the one of your fellow gamer(s) are equal or nearby you play a game if not you dont, simple.

Cant understand how adults who you would assume have some civic education can confuse such different terms.

You’re coming across as kind of a dick here… just an FYI

Vatsetis wrote:

 Arschbombe wrote:

 skchsan wrote:

You guys talk like it's a god given right to be able to play with unpainted models.

But it is their right isn't it? They don't have to paint if they don't want to. I think the friction comes from them wanting to a) not be judged for that and b) not to be discriminated against.

What does "rights" have to do with playing a Wargame, is the State or the broader political community involved in your 40K games?

The word you are looking for is "desire"... If your desire and the one of your fellow gamer(s) are equal or nearby you play a game if not you dont, simple.

Cant understand how adults who you would assume have some civic education can confuse such different terms.

fething exalted.

DeathKorp_Rider wrote:

Vatsetis wrote:

 Arschbombe wrote:

 skchsan wrote:

You guys talk like it's a god given right to be able to play with unpainted models.

But it is their right isn't it? They don't have to paint if they don't want to. I think the friction comes from them wanting to a) not be judged for that and b) not to be discriminated against.

What does "rights" have to do with playing a Wargame, is the State or the broader political community involved in your 40K games?

The word you are looking for is "desire"... If your desire and the one of your fellow gamer(s) are equal or nearby you play a game if not you dont, simple.

Cant understand how adults who you would assume have some civic education can confuse such different terms.

You’re coming across as kind of a dick here… just an FYI

Accuracy and truth have a way of coming across like that. Maybe people should be less entitled about their luxury product?

I guess the right to pursue happiness doesn't count for this?

 TheBestBucketHead wrote:
I guess the right to pursue happiness doesn't count for this?

What does that have to do with anything? Is there an oppressive painting police death squad rounding up anyone who puts an unpainted model on the table and taking them for helicopter rides? Or are you just confusing mild criticism on an internet forum and maybe not getting to play a game with someone with genuine loss of rights?

I certainly have very little tolerance for those that believe their whims entitle them... And therefore can demand protection for their subjective desires against perceived (but non existent) attacks.

I will put this bluntly... Defending your desire to play with unpainted miniatures is like defending your desire for intercourse without a condom... If the other part dosent feel comfortable with your desire you have the "right" to stop the interaction, but certainly not the "right" to demand your desires are fullfill against the other person will.

And the reasoning dosent work the other way... if for some weird reason you are disturbed for playing with painted armies perhaps you have chosen the wrong hobby.

 Shas'O Ky'husa wrote:

 TheBestBucketHead wrote:
I guess the right to pursue happiness doesn't count for this?

What does that have to do with anything? Is there an oppressive painting police death squad rounding up anyone who puts an unpainted model on the table and taking them for helicopter rides? Or are you just confusing mild criticism on an internet forum and maybe not getting to play a game with someone with genuine loss of rights?

I'm assuming you missed

You guys talk like it's a god given right to be able to play with unpainted models.

from an earlier poster.

 TheBestBucketHead wrote:

 Shas'O Ky'husa wrote:

 TheBestBucketHead wrote:
I guess the right to pursue happiness doesn't count for this?

What does that have to do with anything? Is there an oppressive painting police death squad rounding up anyone who puts an unpainted model on the table and taking them for helicopter rides? Or are you just confusing mild criticism on an internet forum and maybe not getting to play a game with someone with genuine loss of rights?

I'm assuming you missed

You guys talk like it's a god given right to be able to play with unpainted models.

from an earlier poster.

What about it? The obvious context is people with unpainted models feeling entitled to have people be willing to play against them and getting mad about the possibility that everyone might say "no thanks". Nothing I have ever seen, here or elsewhere, has ever involved taking away the right to play a game under whatever terms the players involved feel like using. Nobody has to agree to play against unpainted models and stores/clubs/events don't have to allow them, but no rights are being threatened here.

Vatsetis wrote:
I certainly have very little tolerance for those that believe their whims entitle them... And therefore can demand protection for their subjective desires against perceived (but non existent) attacks.

I will put this bluntly... Defending your desire to play with unpainted miniatures is like defending your desire for intercourse without a condom... If the other part dosent feel comfortable with your desire you have the "right" to stop the interaction, but certainly not the "right" to demand your desires are fullfill against the other person will.

And the reasoning dosent work the other way... if for some weird reason you are disturbed for playing with painted armies perhaps you have chosen the wrong hobby.

Most people who bring up the desire to play with unpainted models, or simply the lack of desire to paint, are not demanding to have an opponent who doesn't want to play with them, play with them. They're requesting not being judged as less moral, or more lazy than the person who paints. I play with fully painted minis and I'd refuse to play with half the people on the fully painted minis side if they said what they think out loud.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Shas'O Ky'husa wrote:

 TheBestBucketHead wrote:

 Shas'O Ky'husa wrote:

 TheBestBucketHead wrote:
I guess the right to pursue happiness doesn't count for this?

What does that have to do with anything? Is there an oppressive painting police death squad rounding up anyone who puts an unpainted model on the table and taking them for helicopter rides? Or are you just confusing mild criticism on an internet forum and maybe not getting to play a game with someone with genuine loss of rights?

I'm assuming you missed

You guys talk like it's a god given right to be able to play with unpainted models.

from an earlier poster.

What about it? The obvious context is people with unpainted models feeling entitled to have people be willing to play against them and getting mad about the possibility that everyone might say "no thanks". Nothing I have ever seen, here or elsewhere, has ever involved taking away the right to play a game under whatever terms the players involved feel like using. Nobody has to agree to play against unpainted models and stores/clubs/events don't have to allow them, but no rights are being threatened here.

I've seen maybe one person say that you're an donkey-cave for not playing with people who don't paint, and almost only people saying that you're an donkey-cave if you consider someone less moral or lazy if you don't paint.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I really want to know how to see curse words. I'm tired of seeing donkey-cave.

 TheBestBucketHead wrote:
I've seen maybe one person say that you're an donkey-cave for not playing with people who don't paint, and almost only people saying that you're an donkey-cave if you consider someone less moral or lazy if you don't paint.

But again, what does that have to do with rights? Calling someone lazy is rude but that is not a loss of rights.

 Shas'O Ky'husa wrote:

 TheBestBucketHead wrote:
I've seen maybe one person say that you're an donkey-cave for not playing with people who don't paint, and almost only people saying that you're an donkey-cave if you consider someone less moral or lazy if you don't paint.

But again, what does that have to do with rights? Calling someone lazy is rude but that is not a loss of rights.

I am not the first person to bring up rights, and my "right to pursue happiness" was tongue-in-cheek. I know no rights are being lost, challenged, or otherwise.

 TheBestBucketHead wrote:

 Shas'O Ky'husa wrote:

 TheBestBucketHead wrote:
I've seen maybe one person say that you're an donkey-cave for not playing with people who don't paint, and almost only people saying that you're an donkey-cave if you consider someone less moral or lazy if you don't paint.

But again, what does that have to do with rights? Calling someone lazy is rude but that is not a loss of rights.

I am not the first person to bring up rights, and my "right to pursue happiness" was tongue-in-cheek. I know no rights are being lost, challenged, or otherwise.

Gotcha. The other discussion sure seemed serious.

Well, it is unpleasant to be judged in rude terms.

But, if you break a social convention (like entering barefoot into a supermarket, not ussing the fork at the table or you know playing a minis wargame with unpainted minis) be prepare to suffer some sort of judjement for doing so... Surely if you have a reasonable explanation for your social "transgression" sensible people will accept it without further debate.

Vatsetis wrote:
Well, it is unpleasant to be judged in rude terms.

But, if you break a social convention (like entering barefoot into a supermarket, not ussing the fork at the table or you know playing a minis wargame with unpainted minis) be prepare to suffer some sort of judjement for doing so... Surely if you have a reasonable explanation for your social "transgression" sensible people will accept it without further debate.

Playing with unpainted minis is a social transgression that deserves to be negatively judged? At least your post makes it sound like that.
Again, nobody can tell you that you have to play with someone who has unpainted minis, but negatively judging them just for the fact is really, really stupid. And I would argue it's nothing like going into a supermarket bare footed, it's someone's personal property and they can damn well do with it whatever they like unless they start throwing their models at people. A better and more honest comparison would have been if you said that someone should be negatively judged if they don't wear a certain band specific clothing for a metal festival, which is equally as stupid an argument.

I mean , on the other hand with this hostility towards someone 'negatively judging' stuff, sometimes it comes across as a weird thought-controlthing where its kind of implied I can't think in my own head 'man, that grey legion would look do much better painted; its a crying shame they've not bothered/ havent done or been able to do anything with it in the 8 years I've known them'.... People are allowed their opinions.

Someone goes out to smoke a cigarette- that's their choice and I'll never call you a slur over it or not speak to you normally or treat you less-than-respectably, but I can absolutely think it's a disgusting habit to have and to 'enjoy', especially if its 'in my face'. I'm not a bad guy for thinking that.

Thinking something would look better painted is drastically different from calling people who don't like painting lazy or immoral. No one is saying that you can't think it either, just that it's an donkey-cave move to tell people that they're lazy for it. And, yes, it counts if it's online, too.
In your smoking example, it's as if a person walked outside to smoke, made sure he was in a designated smoking area, and then you talked about how his addiction is disgusting behind his back, or told him that he stinks when he walks back in.

Tiberias wrote:

Vatsetis wrote:
Well, it is unpleasant to be judged in rude terms.

But, if you break a social convention (like entering barefoot into a supermarket, not ussing the fork at the table or you know playing a minis wargame with unpainted minis) be prepare to suffer some sort of judjement for doing so... Surely if you have a reasonable explanation for your social "transgression" sensible people will accept it without further debate.

Playing with unpainted minis is a social transgression that deserves to be negatively judged? At least your post makes it sound like that.
Again, nobody can tell you that you have to play with someone who has unpainted minis, but negatively judging them just for the fact is really, really stupid. And I would argue it's nothing like going into a supermarket bare footed, it's someone's personal property and they can damn well do with it whatever they like unless they start throwing their models at people. A better and more honest comparison would have been if you said that someone should be negatively judged if they don't wear a certain band specific clothing for a metal festival, which is equally as stupid an argument.

By going barefoot into a supermarket do you damage anyone (apart from yourselve, perhaps)? Why do I have to please the aesthetic and social conventions of other people? Ussing shoes is so elitist and snob!!

It might look that Im making a reduction at absurdum but Im not... Many people expect you to paint your minis when playing and expect you to have shoes when entering a supermarket... Perhaps you live/play in a community that allows such attitudes, but dont be surprise if others outside your circle findthem disturbing or inconvinient for some reason.

Living in the broader society is optional... But has its advantajes (and therefore its taxes)... An important part of adulthood is accepting that.

Tiberias wrote:
Playing with unpainted minis is a social transgression that deserves to be negatively judged?

TBH it kind of is a social transgression. Not the worst transgression, obviously, but that's not the same as not being an issue at all. Look at this thread, even most of the people who are willing to play against unpainted armies acknowledge that painted armies look better and provide a better experience. They're just willing to accept a less-desirable game because getting to play at all is the most important thing. So if you continue to show up with an unpainted army and make no effort to paint it you're saying that you know most of the people you're playing with will prefer painted over gray plastic but you're fine with their diminished enjoyment because your own desire to never paint anything is more important. Why shouldn't we judge that choice, compared to someone who makes a good-faith effort to improve the experience of the community as a whole by painting their models?

And yes, I know that communities and their expectations may vary. But if you look at the roots of 40k in historical wargames painting was (and, largely, still is) mandatory and you wouldn't get to play at all without a painted army. It's only in this little niche of GW games (and their third-party copycats) that unpainted miniatures are an option at all, driven largely by the attitude that 40k is an e-sport and painting requirements are bad because painting hurts the ebay value of the models when you're trading them for the next meta army. For the miniatures hobby as a whole the expectation remains very much in place.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 TheBestBucketHead wrote:
In your smoking example, it's as if a person walked outside to smoke, made sure he was in a designated smoking area, and then you talked about how his addiction is disgusting behind his back, or told him that he stinks when he walks back in.

So we're expected to remain silent when the smoker comes back in and tries to make all of the non-smokers vomit? I mean, this isn't my analogy comparing unpainted models to smoking, but let's not have any illusions about the fact that smoking is a repulsive habit with clear negative effects on normal people and coming back into a crowded indoor event after smoking should not be tolerated. If you genuinely believe that unpainted armies are as bad as smoking then you've pretty decisively undermined your own argument that criticism of them is wrong.

 TheBestBucketHead wrote:
Thinking something would look better painted is drastically different from calling people who don't like painting lazy or immoral. No one is saying that you can't think it either, just that it's an donkey-cave move to tell people that they're lazy for it. And, yes, it counts if it's online, too.
In your smoking example, it's as if a person walked outside to smoke, made sure he was in a designated smoking area, and then you talked about how his addiction is disgusting behind his back, or told him that he stinks when he walks back in.

Disagree somewhat. I've often seen 'judging someone' and 'having a negative opinion/less than positive opinion of a thing a person does' conflated as the same thing - epecially online where tone, nuance and humour can't be accurately conveyee.

I mean there's a difference between 'calling them out for it' in a hostile manner and doing it 'impersonally' or stating it in the course of a friendly or polite conversation - i have family members and friends who smoke - its always been respectful both ways and its never been a problem to declare one's dislike of the habit. 'I hate how cigarettes make my clothes/house stink, especially after a night out' or 'probably wouldn't date a smoker' never mind the health/£££ cost associated with the habit shouldnt be considered 'no-go' statements. I can absolutely judge the habit negatively and I'm sorry but you're [generic 'you', not you specifically]
coming across aa a bit thin-skinned if you feel it is never appropriate to say as much out loud. There's ways and means of doing it and saying things and yes, some contexts and approachrs are absolutely more appropriate than others - fine. But it's not a case of 'you are a badwrong person for holding this opinion or telling someone how you really think'.

On topic, as I've said before 'lazy' can be appropriate, but I fully understand why people would get worked up if it isn't- plenty legit reasons why someone can't or won't paint after all.

Tiberias wrote:

Vatsetis wrote:
Well, it is unpleasant to be judged in rude terms.

But, if you break a social convention (like entering barefoot into a supermarket, not ussing the fork at the table or you know playing a minis wargame with unpainted minis) be prepare to suffer some sort of judjement for doing so... Surely if you have a reasonable explanation for your social "transgression" sensible people will accept it without further debate.

Playing with unpainted minis is a social transgression that deserves to be negatively judged? At least your post makes it sound like that.

I think there's a lot of nuance that's being lost in the increasingly bizarre analogies being thrown around (we've had everything from supermarket dress codes, to unprotected sex just in the last page).

If someone always buys the newest, most powerful army and always uses unpainted minis so they can play that army as quickly as possible, I may well judge them differently to someone who buys 2000 points of stuff all at once and gradually paints them, even if the stage I'm playing them at is when nothing is painted. But in that case it's more the incompatibility of our approach to gaming that would cause the negative judgement of the first player, rather than just the lack of paint. In fact, I think in every case where my opinion of someone might be negatively impacted the lack of painting isn't the thing that would cause the negative judgement. It's just more likely to be a symptom of the problem, rather than the problem itself.

Maybe the phrasing of it is what's causing a disconnect between the parties with good faith?

It seems like it's less that unpainted minis in general are a transgression, and more that ignoring the preferences of your opponents, and continuing to fight with unpainted minis is?

For example, the first few times you fight someone, they're trying to see if they enjoy it, and most of their army is grey. It becomes an issue if they keep bringing grey minis, making no progress, for every game?

I still think calling them lazy is rude, but judging them for not at least providing some level of flexibility and painting some models occasionally would be justified. It is a social hobby, and if only one player isn't willing to do something to make it more enjoyable for the other, they are the one being rude, even if only in a minor way.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, yeah, analogies are muddying the water. There's not really much to compare this to for a good comparison.

Deadnight wrote:
On topic, as I've said before 'lazy' can be appropriate, but I fully understand why people would get worked up if it isn't- plenty legit reasons why someone can't or won't paint after all.

This.

And let me be clear: my comments about social transgressions is about people who choose not to paint. Someone who is unable to paint because of a disability or lack of painting space is not guilty of the same transgression, nor is someone who is new to the game and playing with some unpainted models while making a good-faith effort to finish painting them. I'm certainly not expecting a standard that you're a TFG if you don't have a fully painted 2000 point army regardless of the circumstances.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 TheBestBucketHead wrote:
For example, the first few times you fight someone, they're trying to see if they enjoy it, and most of their army is grey. It becomes an issue if they keep bringing grey minis, making no progress, for every game?

Exactly. I don't think anyone here is suggesting there's a problem with someone wanting to play the game immediately instead of waiting months/years to be allowed to play and temporarily using unpainted models while making a good-faith effort to progress towards a fully painted army. The issue is with the people, IMO a much greater number, who have the same unpainted army for years and never even make an attempt to fix the problem.

Though, and I'm sorry for posting so many times back to back, I don't think declaring that you outright refuse to play with anyone who has an unpainted army is a good way to get people to paint. From my experience, it seems to drive people away from the hobby entirely. The same issue applies with the 10 victory points for having a painted army.
I think a more leveled approach, like talking about how painting is fun and calming, after the first attempt or two, is a better way to get people into painting. I eventually just started watching shows while I paint, and while I'm a slow painter, it's still enjoyable.
But, I completely understand the dislike for playing against unpainted armies. I hate the look of unpainted Infinity models, and probably wouldn't play with someone who had their force entirely unpainted. Just saying what I think would help with people on the fence for painting.

Totally agree with the last two posters.