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.

First of all, this is not going to be one of the perennial painted vs. not painted threads. If you want to comment on the merits of deciding to play with or against painted or not painted miniatures, DO NOT DO THAT HERE! I also ask for moderator support on this.

This thread is about is how to go about expressing to other hobbyists that I've decided to transition to only playing with all the miniatures on the table (as well as all the terrain) being fully painted, based and complete. I hope to keep at least some as opponents, but I am willing to accept a smaller quantity of both opponents and games played.

As I'm transitioning into this being the case, I was thinking of telling my various opponents (mostly Warmachine/Hordes, Warpath, Bolt Action, etc.,) that in the near future I'll only be playing with or against completed miniatures, completed including at least a little flock or texture on the bases as well.

I was also planning on expressing how I'm totally fine with playing smaller games and building back up to larger games as our collection of painted miniatures grow. For example, in Warmachine/Hordes, I'm fine with returning to battlebox sized games, then proceeding to 15, 20, 25, 35, 50, etc.,. points as things get painted.

I was also planning on telling anyone who expresses that fully painted armies aren't in the cards for them (real life commitments causing a lack of time, painting speed too slow, not liking painting, etc.,) that I'm okay with that and that I'm sure we'll have to play a board game or something together some time. I'm also planning on spending more and more club time painting miniatures as a group activity and to invite them and anyone else interested to learn some simple and fast painting techniques.

To summarize my plan is to:

1) Talk about it as something I'm transitioning to over the remainder of 2012 rather than springing it on opponents.
2) Talk about it in terms of us painting our armies. I have unpainted stuff as well.
3) Showing enthusiasm for smaller model count games as our collections of painted miniatures grows
4) Accept the barriers that other people have to painting, and accept that if we want to play a game together, we'll have to do something other than miniatures
5) Increase the number of public miniature painting events with a concentration on simple techniques to get things done

REMEMBER! This thread is not about the merits of my decision or the topic of unpainted vs painted. I'm looking for feedback on how to go about communicating this with people. The discussion can indeed branch out from there, but if it starts to show signs of becoming one of those painted vs. unpainted threads that pop up every now and again, I will do my best to get moderator assistance to lock the thread (unless I can just lock it).

Have you ever tried to communicate with your fellow hobbyists about going painted only? What happened? How did you go about doing it? What was the result?

Has someone ever expressed a desire not to play with you because of your unpainted models? Or asked you to increase your rate of painting or to only field painted models? What would have made the request more reasonable or respectful? Or if it was, what about it was respectful and reasonable?

A lot of it is going to come down to just who you're talking about.

If you're gaming with a small group of people who you know well, then discussing it with them as a way to steer the group is certainly do-able. We did something similar in the group I've played with over the years, although it was more of an organic growth as we got more stuff together rather than somethign that was ever specifically laid out as law.


If you're talking about pick up games at a local club or store... it's really, reallly hard to explain to someone you don't know well that you're only interested in playing against them if their minis are painted without sounding like a bit of a knob, and frankly I think you're nailing jelly to a tree.

Step 1: only play with your own painted models. Be 'that guy' who shows up with the fully painted army every week. I find that alone gets people to 'line up' wanting to be my opponent for a pick up game.

Step 2: Help others paint their stuff. This means sacrificing playing time for 'group painting' events and sometimes showing those people who feel it is 'hopeless' awesome techniques to paint easily and make it look good. When someone can show how to do a unit to a great standard with no effort or skill, people get motivated. Also group events like 'dip day' where everyone shows up or paints basic colors and then you dip models in a large group helps people do techniques which may be over their head.

Step 3: Supplement your gaming with 'events' which require painting. If you want to play against painted models, then going to events with all painted is a good way to start. Taking friends with you to tourneys can get them inspired too. When 5-6 people are all planning to attend a GT you would be surprised how motivating it is to paint for that event.

Promote painting via your actions and showing others how it can be a good experience... and after a while, just simply decline games if you don't wish to play unpainted armies. Personally I have reached a point where I would rather play no one and belly up to the paint table opposed to play against an unpainted army so I get to have a great experience regardless what I do that day.

So, the important question here: are you a necessary part of the community, or will your former opponents go on happily playing games against each other with unpainted armies while you sit around bored with nobody to play against? If it's the latter case, then you might want to reconsider whether an ultimatum is going to be effective or not.

I'm trying to avoid any impression of an ultimatum. I'm going more for a "hey, this is the direction I'm heading in with my hobby, want to come along?" sort of a thing.

As for the local community, painting levels are increasing. The largest annual tournament for both 40k and Warmachine went painted only for both events this year (previously the Warmachine one allowed unpainted). Of my 6 most regular opponents, all of them have at least one fully painted army of some sort or another.

Usually the unpainted stuff will be a unit or two that the person hasn't gotten around to. The other time I see a lot of unpainted stuff is when someone starts a new project. They'll be all excited about it and get it assembled and maybe primed and play with it while the painting slowly happens. It's a shame that their fully painted stuff stays on the shelf and that the completion of the new project in terms of painting means its shelving is imminent as it will be replaced with a new unpainted project.

One weekly gaming night at a store just switched to gaming every second week and painting the other. They're also adding a painting element to a grow league they're hosting for Warmachine.

The local scene seems to be moving towards more painting and I think it might be time to be able to transition into fully painted only. I remember that being the standard approach back when i started miniature gaming 15 years ago.

Take some time to formulate a clear, friendly, firm explanation of your opinion. Maybe 2-3 sentences that will explain to your buddy WHY you only want to play against a painted army.

Try practicing on us! I'll go first.

"Hey, Frozen! I found a sale and I picked up 50 pts of Menoth. I just assembled them today and I'd love to get a game in. Wanna play?"

I think if you get your thoughts down on (virtual) paper, you'll be able to explain it in a way that will not only sound reasonable, but perhaps encourage players to see it your way.

insaniak wrote:If you're gaming with a small group of people who you know well, then discussing it with them as a way to steer the group is certainly do-able. We did something similar in the group I've played with over the years, although it was more of an organic growth as we got more stuff together rather than something that was ever specifically laid out as law.

I'm definitely trying to avoid a "laying it out as law" situation. I think what I'm going to try to explain is that over the last 15 years of being into miniature wargaming, I've figured out what I enjoy-- and a big part of that is fully painted miniatures on nice terrain. And then invite anyone interested in joining in to do so.

If you're talking about pick up games at a local club or store... it's really, reallly hard to explain to someone you don't know well that you're only interested in playing against them if their minis are painted without sounding like a bit of a knob, and frankly I think you're nailing jelly to a tree.

Yeah. This thread is largely about avoiding sounding like a bit of a knob. It'd probably be more of a back and forth where I ask about what they have painted and if they wouldn't mind a smaller game using that.

nkelsch wrote:Step 1: only play with your own painted models. Be 'that guy' who shows up with the fully painted army every week. I find that alone gets people to 'line up' wanting to be my opponent for a pick up game.

That's a really good idea. I almost always do painted only myself, but this transition means that the odd single model here that still needs to get the last layer of highlighting, basing and varnish can stay at home until its done.

Step 2: Help others paint their stuff. This means sacrificing playing time for 'group painting' events and sometimes showing those people who feel it is 'hopeless' awesome techniques to paint easily and make it look good. When someone can show how to do a unit to a great standard with no effort or skill, people get motivated.

I've been doing this quite a bit already. People often don't believe me that the best way to paint miniatures is to cheat with simple techniques. Though when I show them, they usually like them.

Also group events like 'dip day' where everyone shows up or paints basic colors and then you dip models in a large group helps people do techniques which may be over their head.

I've been mixing up bottles of washes based on Les' Awesomepaintjob.com recipes and giving them to people. I'm finding a weaker black and sepia wash works great as a dip substitute and is still water based. I've also hooked some people up with washes using pledge/future and black and sepia ink.

Perhaps I'll talk to the local store who runs that twice a month painting day and talk about having a half hour clinic on speed painting techniques each time.

Promote painting via your actions and showing others how it can be a good experience... and after a while, just simply decline games if you don't wish to play unpainted armies. Personally I have reached a point where I would rather play no one and belly up to the paint table opposed to play against an unpainted army so I get to have a great experience regardless what I do that day.

That's how I'm starting to feel as well. I find myself throwing a little portable painting kit into my gaming bag along with some partially complete stuff whenever I go to a gaming event at a store or a club.

I think you are more invested in the game than most, therefore your expectations are equally high.

If it's a group that plays every week then chances are most of the players are of a simular devotion to the game and by extenstion the hobby elements,

However most casual gamers aren't going to put that time and effort into it and it'd be unrealistic to expect that level of inetrest from the infrequent gamer who is there solely for a pick up game or odd tourney.

Myself for example I only war game a few times a year at most, I don't have the tiem or desire to spend huge amounts of time to paint a full army to play a game every six months. My local groups are very heavy into WM and 40K and most have painted armies which are great and I respect the time that they've put in, but I know that when it comes to my own gaming level it'll never be anything close to that as I'm just not that into the games.

My templars army for instance I've had for the better part of 9 years and while it has a lot of awesome conversion models it's still largely untouched when it comes to paint. (and it's my primary army)

If somebody refused to play against me at the local store due to my army being unpainted I'd just shrug and find somebody else, likely thinking they were being a snob. But if "all painted" is the standard ground rules for a tourney event (like adepticon) then I wouldn't be there in the first place as I know what the expectation is. I've attended Adepticon for the last 4 years but never played a game because of having a largely unpainted army.

(which is fine by me as I attend for the dealers hall, and other events)

SchnauzerFace wrote:
Take some time to formulate a clear, friendly, firm explanation of your opinion. Maybe 2-3 sentences that will explain to your buddy WHY you only want to play against a painted army.

Try practicing on us! I'll go first.

"Hey, Frozen! I found a sale and I picked up 50 pts of Menoth. I just assembled them today and I'd love to get a game in. Wanna play?"

I think if you get your thoughts down on (virtual) paper, you'll be able to explain it in a way that will not only sound reasonable, but perhaps encourage players to see it your way.

Awesome post. Here I go:

Option 1: Invitation to paint instead of play:

"Lately I've been noticing that I enjoy gaming the most when its two painted armies on some nice terrain. Instead of getting a game in, do you want to head over to the table by the window and do some painting together? I brought my cygnar jacks and want to get them base coated. Maybe some of the paints I brought will work for your colour scheme. I also have some extra brushes if you want to borrow them."

It doesn't really explain why other than it's about what I enjoy most in gaming, but it is a lead in for an invitation to paint. And if the response is that they'd rather play and not paint, I'll be like "Cool, I think Peregrine is looking for a game." and then get painting.

Option 2: Decline in favour of waiting for an opponent whose stuff is painted.

"Lately I've been noticing that I enjoy gaming the most when its two painted armies on some nice terrain. I was kind of hoping today I could get in a game where everything on both sides is painted. What do you think about a 15 point game at the next gaming night? Think you'd have time to get that much painted for then? Today I'm going to try to get that all painted game in, and if that doesn't happen, I'll probably spend the time working on models."

What my suggestion would be, set up a paint and play league that way everyone has an expectation that they will need to put in painting time and it becomes part of the league challange.

Start with a low point value so people can pick up their battle box, then each week (or whatever time period) you ramp the points up slightly for the next session so they can bring in more models. Make sure you set it at a level where everyone can acheive, like one squad per two weeks. (or once a month etc)

If you really want to go the extra mile you could pool for some sort of weekly prize to encourage people to keep painting. Just make sure it gets spread around so it doesn't become "fund this guy's painted army" also make sure that even the the guy with the lacking paint skills still feels welcome.

 paulson games wrote:
If it's a group that plays every week then chances are most of the players are of a simular devotion to the game and by extenstion the hobby elements,

However most casual gamers aren't going to put that time and effort into it and it'd be unrealistic to expect that level of inetrest from the infrequent gamer who is there solely for a pick up game or odd tourney.

It definitely will be different for different people. I get that people might not have the time or the interest. I'm okay with the fact that there are people who do not want to accept an invitation to paint instead of play. Or that there are people that really dig the game play, the rules, tactics, etc., in the same way I dig the aesthetics. It's okay that some people looking for different things don't end up playing each other.

The main contexts for these discussion to come are as follows:

1) Monthly miniature gaming club. I started one up and we have 6 regulars. We rent a multi purpose room in one of the member's condo buildings. Everyone but one guy has at least one fully painted 50 pt Warmachine or Hordes army, but they also have lots of unpainted new projects or stuff they never got around to.

2) Local game store night. Mixed bag, but a bit more than half the stuff is painted. Usually everyone's army will have at least one unpainted or partially painted model, with the majority painted to some degree or another.

3) Local tournaments and cons -- the only tournament each year is painted only, but the other various con events are generally not (be they open gaming or some sort of organized non-tournament event). I sometimes run participation game events at a few cons a year, supplying both sides, the terrain, etc., all painted.

4) A gaming club at a guy's house. They are adamantly painted only, so no issue there. Playing a few games there so far has caused a "Why can't it all look like this?" question to start floating around my head, eventually leading to this thread.

If somebody refused to play against me at the local store due to my army being unpainted I'd just shrug and find somebody else, likely thinking they were being a snob. But if "all painted" is the standard ground rules for a tourney event (like adepticon) then I wouldn't be there in the first place as I know what the expectation is. I've attended Adepticon for the last 4 years but never played a game because of having a largely unpainted army. (which is fine by me as I attend for the dealers hall, and other events)

I'm okay with people thinking I'm a snob. I can't control what other people think. I just want to make this transition as kindly and politely as possible. If I explain it without actually being rude or snobbish and they still assume that I am a snob, I can't control that. But I'd have done my part in terms of being polite and extending an invitation to those interested.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 paulson games wrote:
What my suggestion would be, set up a paint and play league that way everyone has an expectation that they will need to put in painting time and it becomes part of the league challange.

At this point, league play has a lot of organizers relative to the number of participants locally. It's a bit of a mess and I don't want to add yet another event. People seem more interested in scheduled individual games and showing up on club day or a gaming night at a local store. Maybe when the people running leagues that start and fizzle go through another round of petering out, I'll start something and try to get some of them to be participants rather than organizers. There actually are quite a few players of various games (more than enough for healthy league play for a variety of games) but there are just too many cooks in the kitchen for league or campaign play to work right now.

I think I'd probably have better luck with inviting a few other people to participate in a "Tale of Four Gamers" type blog series instead.

There's probably no way to say it without coming across as a bit of a knob, tbh. The trick is to do it with a smile (and mean it).

I will only field a painted army for whatever game I play.
I prefer to play against other painted armies - but if I restricted myself to ONLY playing against painted armies, I'd never get a game in around here.

I just jokingly refer to losses v unpainted armies as "moral victories" or "it doesn't count, your army wasn't painted, so the history books won't record a victor as they don't know whom I fought".

 frozenwastes wrote:
I'm trying to avoid any impression of an ultimatum. I'm going more for a "hey, this is the direction I'm heading in with my hobby, want to come along?" sort of a thing.

However you phrase it, it's still an ultimatum: either paint your armies or don't play against me. That might be effective if you're a vital part of the community and your opponents would rather paint than lose you, but it doesn't matter how politely you state your decision if they're perfectly willing to shrug and go off to play each other with their unpainted armies and maybe say occasionally how sad it is that frozenwastes doesn't play anymore. All you'll be doing is removing yourself from the group and giving up your hobby.

And this seems especially true since people do have painted armies, and what you're really telling them is "stop making new projects" and complaining about their painting schedule rather than the fact that they don't paint at all.

 frozenwastes wrote:
"Lately I've been noticing that I enjoy gaming the most when its two painted armies on some nice terrain. Instead of getting a game in, do you want to head over to the table by the window and do some painting together? I brought my cygnar jacks and want to get them base coated. Maybe some of the paints I brought will work for your colour scheme. I also have some extra brushes if you want to borrow them."

Yeah, good luck with that, I have no idea why anyone would ever want to go paint in a store. I spend a huge amount of time painting, but all of it is done at home, and if all a store has to offer is painting space then I'm just not going to bother going there anymore.

I actually did the thing you talked about a while ago. In our gaming group, we were playing 40k and then switched to Warmachine. I stated from the beginning that I'm only interested in playing Warmachine full-painted. I'm much more loose with 40k, because there's larger armies, lots of unit options, so it's objectively harder to collect a painted wysiwyg army. In Warmachine I see no real problem with that.

So far it's going well. Some guys say my decision is actually motivating for them, because they now have an extra goal for painting, even if it's specifically for playing me. There are some guys who don't paint, but none of them are complaining about this situation, they just commission their stuff to someone and enjoy good-looking minis in the end.

There is an opinion this position is somehow bad. I don't see it that way. I'm not telling other people what they should do. I'm just saying I myself will not play opponent's unpainted minis. If you are not okay with that, don't play me. What's wrong with that? Oh, and also I never complain about opponent's paint job - no matter how ugly it looks for me, that's his effort to make his army look better and learn the skill, he should be respected for that.

One more reason to only play painted is to avoid games with "proxy jackasses". The guys who would constantly test new builds, don't have that much money to buy new army every month, and don't care. They would proxy necrons with space marines, play with partially assembled minis, etc - you know the kind. This is no fun for me at all, especially because this way they have a strategic advantage. Imagine playing MTG with a guy who instead of real cards plays with pieces of paper with names of cards hastily written with a pen, and naturally these pieces of paper represent all rare cards.

I agree that it's somewhat odd to find myself painting in a store and it'd be turned down in most cases. The reason being that unless the gamer is in a routine habit of painting in store they likely wouldn't have their paint and brushes with. When I go to the store I'm typically there to game (or buy stuff) so I don't have my paints with and I really dislike using other peoples stuff.

Another concern is time, if I only have 4-5 hours per a given week (or month) to put in at the local store why would I want to spend that time painting there? I can paint at home at any time but my available store time is usually a lot more limited. Going to the store provides acess to other gamers to play against, which doesn't happen at my house. It's not something I'd want to spend painting.

Not saying I wouldn't appreciate the invite but it wouldn't seem like a practical use of time to me.

 Peregrine wrote:

However you phrase it, it's still an ultimatum: either paint your armies or don't play against me.

I'm far more concerned with whether or not local players express that it comes across as an ultimatum than if you see it that way. How people formulate the narratives in their heads about things they interact with has a lot to do with how things are presented to them. They can end the interaction with me about this thinking whatever they like, but it won't be because I presented my preferences as an "or else." Those, like yourself, who are inclined to read an ultimatum into it will do so, those who are not so inclined will not.

That might be effective if you're a vital part of the community and your opponents would rather paint than lose you, but it doesn't matter how politely you state your decision if they're perfectly willing to shrug and go off to play each other with their unpainted armies and maybe say occasionally how sad it is that frozenwastes doesn't play anymore. All you'll be doing is removing yourself from the group and giving up your hobby.

I think you're underestimating the appeal of aesthetics and an aspirational approach to the hobby.

As for being "a vital part of the community" I think it's entirely possible that nkelsch was correct when he wrote "Be 'that guy' who shows up with the fully painted army every week. I find that alone gets people to 'line up' wanting to be my opponent for a pick up game." Having all painted miniatures on nice terrain will likely add vitality to the community and make oneself a source of it. But we're straying into off topic land here, as per my original post.

And this seems especially true since people do have painted armies, and what you're really telling them is "stop making new projects" and complaining about their painting schedule rather than the fact that they don't paint at all.

Stop making new projects-- that's hilarious. I've just noticed a trend that people start new armies, play them while they are painting them and then stop playing them once they are done-- their attention captured by the next project. I don't think it's unreasonable for me to ask someone to bring out a completed project because they look cool and I would love to play against them.

Yeah, good luck with that, I have no idea why anyone would ever want to go paint in a store. I spend a huge amount of time painting, but all of it is done at home, and if all a store has to offer is painting space then I'm just not going to bother going there anymore.

The local store I frequent has a lounge area with both good overhead lighting and a great huge window with natural light pouring in. It's a fabulous spot to paint. And getting together with five or six other people to paint together is fun.

And why in the world does the presence of that space mean it is "all they have to offer"? Why jump to such an baseless conclusion? The store also has six gaming tables, three of which are set up at all times and three more which get set up for various event nights.

Peregrine, I do want to thank you for your posts so far though. You've reminded me that no matter how polite I am in explaining my hobby preferences there will always be those who interpret everything in the most negative possible light. Anyone who, in the face of me talking about my preferences for my hobby time, interprets it as me subjecting them to an ultimatum is likely not a compatible co-hobbyist anyway.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 paulson games wrote:
Another concern is time, if I only have 4-5 hours per a given week (or month) to put in at the local store why would I want to spend that time painting there? I can paint at home at any time but my available store time is usually a lot more limited. Going to the store provides acess to other gamers to play against, which doesn't happen at my house. It's not something I'd want to spend painting.

You've already said you don't really paint your stuff. So why would you expect to enjoy a social painting time at a local store? If you don't like knitting, why would you expect to value a knitting circle at the local yarn shop?

Can we assume for the sake of discussion, that there are those who enjoy painting in public spaces as part of their hobby? Just like there are those who do not enjoy such things?

Back to the back-and-forth. If I respond to someone asking if I want to play by telling them I don't play with unpainted models and then invite them to paint and they decline, then that's that. I'll probably end with something like, "Let me know if you get a small force painted up," smile, and work on miniatures until another opportunity for a game presents itself that night.

I've already stated a few times that I get that there are people who don't paint and I'm okay with that. I guess what I'm trying to figure out in this thread is how to go about asking them to get that there are people who don't play in some instances and to be okay with that.

Gnawer wrote:
There is an opinion this position is somehow bad. I don't see it that way. I'm not saying everyone should play painted. I'm just saying I myself will not play opponent's unpainted minis. If you are not okay with that, don't play me. What's wrong with that?

There's nothing wrong with that, but you need to accept that one possible outcome is that everyone just ignores you and plays against each other with unpainted armies, and you have to choose between accepting the lack of painting or finding a new hobby.

Imagine playing MTG with a guy who instead of real cards plays with pieces of paper with names of cards hastily written with a pen, and naturally these pieces of paper represent all rare cards.

Sure. Can we play for cash?

(A deck with nothing but rare cards is almost guaranteed to lose.)


=====================

 frozenwastes wrote:
I think you're underestimating the appeal of aesthetics and an aspirational approach to the hobby.

I don't know why you'd say that. I only play with fully painted armies, I've spent an obscene amount of time and money (I play DKoK IG) on my primary army, and I prefer to play against painted armies on nice tables. However, I'm realistic enough to accept that having a "painted only" policy just means I'm not going to ever play 40k again.

Stop making new projects-- that's hilarious. I've just noticed a trend that people start new armies, play them while they are painting them and then stop playing them once they are done-- their attention captured by the next project. I don't think it's unreasonable for me to ask someone to bring out a completed project because they look cool and I would love to play against them.

But "stop making new projects" is exactly what you're saying. If people start new projects that aren't painted and want to play with their new toys then saying "painted only" pretty much means that they can't start any new projects because as soon as they do they won't be able to play anymore. Sure they can wait until everything is fully painted before using the new army, but not everyone wants to do that.

And why in the world does the presence of that space mean it is "all they have to offer"? Why jump to such an baseless conclusion? The store also has six gaming tables, three of which are set up at all times and three more which get set up for various event nights.

My point is that if someone says "let's paint together instead of playing", my response is going to be to find another opponent and if I can't then I'm just going to leave. I don't bring painting projects to a store, I don't use someone else's painting stuff, and painting in a store makes no sense to me when I can paint at home instead. Painting time is when I work and get stuff done without distraction, turning it into a social activity has exactly zero appeal to me.

Gnawer wrote:
I actually did the thing you talked about a while ago. In our gaming group, we were playing 40k and then switched to Warmachine. I stated from the beginning that I'm only interested in playing Warmachine full-painted. I'm much more loose with 40k, because there's larger armies, lots of unit options, so it's objectively harder to collect a painted wysiwyg army. In Warmachine I see no real problem with that.

So far it's going well. Some guys say my decision is actually motivating for them, because they now have an extra goal for painting, even if it's specifically for playing me. There are some guys who don't paint, but none of them are complaining about this situation, they just commission their stuff to someone and enjoy good-looking minis in the end.

Very interesting. When we started WM/H back in 2009, we started with a grow league with bonus points for painted, but I see know that we probably should have started with painted only.

I also think your words are helpful. "I'm only interested in..." I think it's important that when I start expressing these sentiments to people over the next month or so that I talk about my interests and not talking about what people "should" do. We should on one another enough without doing it in our hobby.

There is an opinion this position is somehow bad. I don't see it that way. I'm not saying everyone should play painted. I'm just saying I myself will not play opponent's unpainted minis. If you are not okay with that, don't play me. What's wrong with that?

I can't really explain why some people might hold the position that there is something wrong with that without getting into territory I decided is off topic for this thread. I need to follow the guidelines for the thread too.

Oh, and also I never complain about opponent's paint job - no matter how ugly it looks for me, that's his effort to make his army look better and learn the skill, he should be respected for that.

Great point.

One more reason to only play painted is to avoid games with "proxy jackasses". The guys who would constantly test new builds, don't have that much money to buy new army every month, and don't care. They would proxy necrons with space marines, play with partially assembled minis, etc - you know the kind. This is no fun for me at all, especially because this way they have a strategic advantage. Imagine playing MTG with a guy who instead of real cards plays with pieces of paper with names of cards hastily written with a pen, and naturally these pieces of paper represent all rare cards.

While this is something I agree with, it's off topic for this thread. This thread could easily start down the path of becoming a 20 page monstrosity where people fight over the advantages and disadvantages of painted miniatures vs unpainted miniatures and I've been clear from the original post that I don't want that for this thread.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Peregrine wrote:

There's nothing wrong with that, but you need to accept that one possible outcome is that everyone just ignores you and plays against each other with unpainted armies, and you have to choose between accepting the lack of painting or finding a new hobby.

I definitely disagree with that. As I pointed out, I think nkelsch was right that people are attracted to painted armies.

I don't know why you'd say that.

I said that because you seem to be saying that if someone only wants to play with painted miniatures on both sides and they're not some sort of vital part of their community, that they'll have to abandon their hobby for lack of opponents. I'm not some crazy person who's the only one expressing a preference for painted miniatures. I most certainly will not have to quit the hobby because I won't be able to find opponents with painted armies.

As for the aspirational part, people aspire to things they see from others with similar interests. People see a painted army and may then aspire to do likewise. Just as they might see a tactically powerful army and aspire to a similar build. People actually like excellence when they see it.
So if I only accept games with opponents with painted armies and we play on a table of good looking terrain, people who are miniature gamers who might see that at the club or store gaming night may begin to aspire to the same level of aesthetics.

I really don't accept the notion that someone can't stay in the hobby while only playing against painted armies unless they have some special social clout. That's why I said that-- it had nothing to do with your own well developed sense of aesthetics, but your expression of "give in or quit."

I only play with fully painted armies, I've spent an obscene amount of time and money (I play DKoK IG) on my primary army, and I prefer to play against painted armies on nice tables. However, I'm realistic enough to accept that having a "painted only" policy just means I'm not going to ever play 40k again.

Ever? Really? Why don't you test that with an experiment? Schedule a game with someone and ask them how much they have painted. Then play a game of that points value and ask them to only use their painted stuff. Then after the game schedule another game for a few more points than that and ask if your opponent can get the extra points painted by then. If not, play again at the lower amount and ask again after that. Do this with the variety of people in your local gaming area. I bet you can falsify that claim of never playing 40k again pretty quickly with such an experiment.

But "stop making new projects" is exactly what you're saying. If people start new projects that aren't painted and want to play with their new toys then saying "painted only" pretty much means that they can't start any new projects because as soon as they do they won't be able to play anymore. Sure they can wait until everything is fully painted before using the new army, but not everyone wants to do that.

I think the disconnect here is that you think that someone expressing their preferences for their hobby time forces them on other people. You see the whole situation in terms of rigid ultimatums and "either-or" when it's actually a fluid social situation. If I ask you to face your awesome painted IG rather than your new unpainted army X that you just started working on, I am in no way saying that you shouldn't work on army X. I'm expressing a preference and making a request. How would you respond? Would you really say no to someone's enthusiastic request to see some of your painted models on the table for a game?

My point is that if someone says "let's paint together instead of playing", my response is going to be to find another opponent and if I can't then I'm just going to leave.

And that's okay. In fact, it's a mirror of someone's response to unpainted miniatures being "to find another opponent and if I can't then I'm just going to paint."

Painting time is when I work and get stuff done without distraction, turning it into a social activity has exactly zero appeal to me.

Cool. Now can you accept that it might be appealing to other people who are not you?

 frozenwastes wrote:
I said that because you seem to think that if someone only wants to play with painted miniatures on both sides and they're not some sort of vital part of their community, that they'll have to abandon their hobby.

But that's exactly what's going to happen. If the other people you play with don't have painted armies and don't want to have painted armies then you can either be willing to play against unpainted armies or you can give up playing at all. Unless you're such a vital part of the community that "I'm not playing against painted armies" will compel even unwilling painters to start painting then you aren't going to be able to get people to paint if they don't want to.

Ever? Really? Why don't you test that with an experiment? Schedule a game with someone and ask them how much they have painted. Then play a game of that points value and ask them to only use their painted stuff. Then after the game schedule another game for a few more points than that and ask if your opponent can get the extra points painted by then. If not, play again at the lower amount and ask again after that. Do this with the variety of people in your local gaming area.

In which case I'll be lucky to get a 500 point game (which isn't large enough to use any of the tanks I've spent $100+ and 30+ hours of painting time on), and probably only if I accept black primer armies as "painted". Usually when I go to a store for 40k night the only people there have very few, if any, painted models.

If I ask you to face your awesome painted IG rather than your new unpainted army X that you just started working on, I am in no way saying that you shouldn't work on army X.

But that's exactly what you would be saying, if you get your way and everyone plays with painted armies only. The people in your area clearly want to start using their new toys as soon as they get them, not after months of painting, and you want to add a new policy that they can't do it that way.

Cool. Now can you accept that it might be appealing to other people who are not you?

Sure. Just don't expect that "hey, let's go paint instead of playing" is going to be a very appealing offer to your potential opponents.

When we started WM/H back in 2009, we started with a grow league with bonus points for painted, but I see know that we probably should have started with painted only.

If that's your goal, then definitely, yes. Bonus points are something people will weigh against time or money spent on painted army.

Generally speaking, as soon as you allow "some" unpainted non-wysiwyg, you are opening a door for someone to bend that rule and bring "all" unpainted non-wysiwyg with a couple of painted models just to fit into the requirement. It's just so happens that people who might want to do that often have the right mindset to exploit every possible loophole.

This also means that as long as you have "all-painted" rule, you should not make too many exceptions. People will immediately start asking "what's up with that guy's one unpainted model and how come you don't play my two unpainted units" (been there). My favorite counter is "I consider you more advanced hobbyist than that guy, so my expectations for you are also higher"

but you need to accept that one possible outcome is that everyone just ignores you and plays against each other with unpainted armies, and you have to choose between accepting the lack of painting or finding a new hobby.

Correct. I understand that, and if that would not be actually working in our gaming group, I would likely not have this rule. However since it works, I feel that in the end it makes the overall experience better for everyone.

 Peregrine wrote:
But that's exactly what's going to happen. If the other people you play with don't have painted armies and don't want to have painted armies then you can either be willing to play against unpainted armies or you can give up playing at all. Unless you're such a vital part of the community that "I'm not playing against painted armies" will compel even unwilling painters to start painting then you aren't going to be able to get people to paint if they don't want to.

Assumption that might not be true: "the other people you play with don't have painted armies"

Or at the very least the desire to do so. So this whole line of reasoning about having to give up the hobby for lack of opponents is based on the assumption that local people are opposed to painting.

What if that's not the case?

In which case I'll be lucky to get a 500 point game (which isn't large enough to use any of the tanks I've spent $100+ and 30+ hours of painting time on), and probably only if I accept black primer armies as "painted". Usually when I go to a store for 40k night the only people there have very few, if any, painted models.

So what if you luck out and get that 500 point game? Then you schedule another game with that person for six weeks later for 750, all painted. After that, six weeks later for 1000 and so on. In a years time, you'll have at least one opponent who has over 2500 points painted. Now make similar overtures simultaneously to multiple gamers and see what happens.

I'm not saying that it *will* work. Just that your belief that if you went painted only you'd have to give up your hobby might not be as absolute as you might think.

But that's exactly what you would be saying, if you get your way and everyone plays with painted armies only.

I see another disconnect here. "your way" and "everyone." This isn't about everyone adhering to my way. This is about the best way for me to communicate to others that I want to spend my hobby time playing with only painted models on the table. Not that other people should do so. Just what I'm willing to spend my hobby time on. I don't know why you keep interpreting an individual's expression of preferences for universal demands on others.

The people in your area clearly want to start using their new toys as soon as they get them, not after months of painting, and you want to add a new policy that they can't do it that way.

More disconnect: "policy" "they can't"

I'm not looking to tell anyone "they can't" do anything. And at this point, I'm certainly not looking to set some sort of group policy.

Jeff: "Hey, I just got my new General Ossrum built. Interested in a game?"
Me: "I'm actually interested only in gaming with painted miniatures. Did you get him painted?"
Jeff: "No. Not yet."
Me: "We should schedule a game for when you get him done. I'd love to play then. As for today, I think Mark is looking for an opponent."

Is there something about your local group making you think that the next line by Jeff is always going to be "Ha! I'll never paint him! And to hell with you for placing your unfair ultimatums on me!"? Have you gotten that reaction by people local to you a lot or something? Is it your local gaming community that is making you think it is impossible for me to get an email later in the week letting me know General Ossrum is painted and that we should play on Saturday?

As for the disconnect, since this thread is me asking for help communicating this idea to others, I'll even take responsibility for the disconnect and correct it with this:

I am only talking about me and what I am doing with my hobby time. I don't care what other people do. I don't have any issues finding opponents with painted armies and believe that I will still have lots of gaming opportunities if I ask people to use those rather than their unpainted stuff for just when they play me. Lots of games will go on with lots of different people. The ones with me will have all painted miniatures. I do not live in your black primer expanse where the only possible result of such a decision is to never play again.

Understand me now?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
===========

Gnawer wrote:This also means that as long as you have "all-painted" rule, you should not make too many exceptions. People will immediately start asking "what's up with that guy's one unpainted model and how come you don't play my two unpainted units" (been there). My favorite counter is "I consider you more advanced hobbyist than that guy, so my expectations for you are also higher"

I'm going to be very, very consistent.

I don't ever want to even have to say something like that counter. I think I'll avoid any situation like that through consistency.

It's funny how things have changed though. 15 years ago the default assumption for miniature wargaming was that you painted the things. GW stores had a painted only policy. White Dwarf spent a lot of time on painting guides. Unpainted miniatures among historical gamers were unthinkable. Now someone asking for painted miniatures in the games they play has to tip toe around and is accused of trying to tell people what to do with their hobby time and of issuing ultimatums and banning new projects through policy making.

I don't know if it is sad or funny.

.

 frozenwastes wrote:
Assumption that might not be true: "the other people you play with don't have painted armies"

Or at the very least the desire to do so. So this whole line of reasoning about having to give up the hobby for lack of opponents is based on the assumption that local people are opposed to painting.

What if that's not the case?

If it's not the case then why did you make this thread? If people aren't opposed to painting then you don't need to convince them, you just show up and play and they bring their fully painted armies.

So what if you luck out and get that 500 point game? Then you schedule another game with that person for six weeks later for 750, all painted. After that, six weeks later for 1000 and so on. In a years time, you'll have at least one opponent who has over 2500 points painted. Now make similar overtures simultaneously to multiple gamers and see what happens.

Why would I only play a game every six weeks?

And that plan is also based on the assumption that people progress at a remotely decent rate, instead of having a painted model or two that they bought already painted off ebay, or a few leftovers from before they decided they hated painting and stopped doing it.

I don't know why you keep interpreting an individual's expression of preferences for universal demands on others.

It's a demand on others because you want people to change their behavior and do things your way. Their preference is clearly not to have fully painted armies, and you are trying to convince them to change that with a threat of never getting to play against you unless they do.

Jeff: "Hey, I just got my new General Ossrum built. Interested in a game?"
Me: "I'm actually interested only in gaming with painted miniatures. Did you get him painted?"
Jeff: "No. Not yet."
Me: "We should schedule a game for when you get him done. I'd love to play then. As for today, I think Mark is looking for an opponent."

And then because Jeff consistently buys new stuff but can't get a game with it Jeff gets frustrated with it and gives up on buying new stuff because you won't play against it except under your own terms. Or he just stops asking to play against you.

I am only talking about me and what I am doing with my hobby time. I don't care what other people do. I don't have any issues finding opponents with painted armies and believe that I will still have lots of gaming opportunities if I ask people to use those rather than their unpainted stuff.

If you don't have problems finding painted armies then what is the point of this thread? I don't really see how this can simultaneously be not a problem at all and enough of a problem that you need to make a long post asking how to deal with it.

 Peregrine wrote:

 frozenwastes wrote:
I'm trying to avoid any impression of an ultimatum. I'm going more for a "hey, this is the direction I'm heading in with my hobby, want to come along?" sort of a thing.

However you phrase it, it's still an ultimatum: either paint your armies or don't play against me. That might be effective if you're a vital part of the community and your opponents would rather paint than lose you, but it doesn't matter how politely you state your decision if they're perfectly willing to shrug and go off to play each other with their unpainted armies and maybe say occasionally how sad it is that frozenwastes doesn't play anymore. All you'll be doing is removing yourself from the group and giving up your hobby.

Technicaly its not an ultimatum, to be so would require it to have a deadline and a repercussion. Had he said "I will stop playing you guys if you don't get your armies painted by december" then it would be.

All I can suggest is communicating your desire to play painted only and trying to play as many games without primer armour as possible. If you are lucky you can start a culture where painted is the standard without bending anyones nose out of shape.

 dragqueeninspace wrote:
Technicaly its not an ultimatum, to be so would require it to have a deadline and a repercussion. Had he said "I will stop playing you guys if you don't get your armies painted by december" then it would be.

That's exactly what he said.

 frozenwastes wrote:
I think you're underestimating the appeal of aesthetics and an aspirational approach to the hobby.

I think you're underestimating the rest of the appeal of the hobby: The gaming and social aspects.

If I'm playing pick-up or store games I'll have at least primed (in the appropriate base colour, so the units will be identifiable as Dark Angels, etc) my figures and started to paint them, because the GW stores tend to have an "at least primed" house rule.

I tried to take a 1000pt army to Warhammer World in the summer, but life got in the way and I went with a 50/25/25 mix of fully painted / partially painted / primed figures.

TBH whilst I'd rather play against painted armies (it does look better), and even if I had enough of a painted army, I'd decline to play with someone who only wants to play painted, it's not an attitude I think I'd get on with. Any offer to paint instead would be declined. I'd never even consider declining a game on the basis that X or Y isn't painted (and based!), as long as I can tell what it is.

Bear in mind that to get a decent usable army needed for most pick-up games you'd need many weeks of painting time, and a lot of people including the most dedicated fans just can't devote that much time to hobbies.


Do you dislike playing against unpainted armies completely? What if the only available player that day only has an unpainted army? Will you do without or make allowances?

Do you have a decent amount of painted armies in the system(s) you play ?

If so you could always tell folk that you have decided to only play against painted armies, but you realise that may not be possible for some of your opponants (either because they don't paint, or are starting new projects)

so they could borrow painted figures from you to supplement their own

This would let them see how good playing a painted force is (it MIGHT encourage them to do thier own) and would mean you were not cutting out players who just don't enjoy painting

This will be my last post on anything to do with ultimatums, threats, making demands on others, etc.,. Because I've realized something:

I think what we have going on here is a classic case of geek social fallacies.

http://www.plausiblydeniable.com/opinion/gsf.html

People are not entitled to participation with everyone else. The idea that they are is a classic example of #5 on that list.

People don't have to do everything together. It's okay to say no to other people participating in a given activity. It's okay for subsets of groups to do things with some people and not others. It's okay to have criteria for participation/inclusion. I'm not exerting some horrible ostracizing pressure on people by only playing with painted miniatures-- and even if I was, that's not necessarily a bad thing either.

Contrast the two:

Normal people:

Bicycle Enthusiast: Hey, we're going on a bike ride tomorrow, you interested?
Offroader: Oh yeah, what you got planned?
Bicycle Enthusiast: We're going to ride from the south end of town to the park over on 10th.
Offroader: Oh, I'm only really into mountain biking on trails. Sorry, but I'm out. Let me know if you ever do trail riding though.
Bicycle Enthusiast: Okay, no problem. I'll send you a text if we ever do something like that.
Offraoder: Cool. You guys have fun.

One person functioning under geek social fallacies:

Bicycle Enthusiast: Hey, we're going on a bike ride tomorrow, you interested?
Offroader: Oh yeah, what you got planned?
Bicycle Enthusiast: We're going to ride from the south end of town to the park over on 10th.
Offroader: Oh, I'm only really into mountain biking on trails. Sorry, but I'm out. Let me know if you ever do trail riding though.
Bicycle Enthusiast: Don't you think you're being unfair, giving an ultimatum that if we don't bike the way *you* want to then we can't bike together at all? We should all do things together.
Offroader: Umm. I just like trails. We don't all have to bike together. It's okay if we do different things.
Bicycle Enthusiast: Stop trying to influence everyone to do what you prefer! They won't do it and you'll end up with no one to cycle with and have to quit the hobby!
Offroader: Nah. I'll just find the people with similar preferences and we'll do our thing.
Bicycle Enthusiast: You're making demands on how everyone does their hobby by making threats that if they don't do what you want they'll never get to cycle with you!
Offroader: I'm not making demands on anyone. And I'm certainly not making threats. I just like trails and want to cycle on them with other people who like trails.
Peregine: "It's a demand on others because you want people to change their behavior and do things your way."

I'm definitely glad I got into this online with someone functioning under those sort of ideas rather than in person. Now I know not to bother engaging with these arguments based on fallacies about ultimatums, threats, entitlement of others to my hobby time, etc.,. Instead, I'll say, "Sorry, but I'm not actually obligated to play a game with anyone and it's always my choice when I do something, how I do it and who I do it with" and just not engage with the whole crazy ultimatum issue at all.

Which by the way, means that our conversation has come to an end, Peregrine. If the above contrasting examples doesn't help explain things to you, nothing I say can at this point.

Herzlos wrote:
Do you dislike playing against unpainted armies completely? What if the only available player that day only has an unpainted army? Will you do without or make allowances?

I think I'd do without. I enjoy painting as much as gaming and certainly more than gaming with unpainted miniatures. Even if it was a brand new person who got some sort of starter and glue and just assembled them right then and there, I'd still decline, but instead offer to let them borrow a small force of my own if they want to try the game for the first time. Or offer to start teaching them how to paint instead. If they weren't interested in either of those, I'd point them to someone else.

I think this thread has also convinced me to move up my time line. I think the very next time I go to a gaming night at a local store, I'm going to start asking if stuff is painted before I play. I'll report back later.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote:
Do you have a decent amount of painted armies in the system(s) you play ?

Yes. I have at least two painted armies for each game system I play.

If so you could always tell folk that you have decided to only play against painted armies, but you realise that may not be possible for some of your opponants (either because they don't paint, or are starting new projects)

so they could borrow painted figures from you to supplement their own

This would let them see how good playing a painted force is (it MIGHT encourage them to do thier own) and would mean you were not cutting out players who just don't enjoy painting

Cool idea. When I run participation games at local cons I supply both sides and I get tons of people who play but remark they don't think they could paint the miniatures or that they might not enjoy painting the miniatures but enjoyed the game nonetheless. I assure them that painting is easy and they may actually enjoy it, but accept their preference and happily supply the miniatures for those still interested in a game.

I think from now on I'll toss in a 15 point opposing force whenever I bring my Warmachine/Hordes stuff to a local store, convention, club meeting, etc.,.

 Peregrine wrote:

 dragqueeninspace wrote:
Technicaly its not an ultimatum, to be so would require it to have a deadline and a repercussion. Had he said "I will stop playing you guys if you don't get your armies painted by december" then it would be.

That's exactly what he said.

It is close to what he said but "near future" is not really a deadline and saying he does't want to play anymore unpainted games is not nessesarly a threat or repercussion, it could also be considered a well meaning attempt to improve standards and a pledge to hold themselves to said standard.

By not putting a fixed period of time he gives flexibility and implys a posibility for negotiation uncharacteristic of an ultimatum.

While his intent could easily be delivered as an ultimatum I belive it is misleading to portray his post as one.

edit> If you don't tell your opponent you want to painted minatures how will they know? They may be able to swap out a unpainted minautre for painted ones without issue if they know.

I don't think it is an example of the geek social fallacy at all; you're presumably at a gaming venue to play a game of <whatever> against other people, and other people are at the same gaming venue to play games of <whatever> against other people too.

A closer analogy biking analogy would be: You run into someone else running the same trail as you, they ask you to join them and you decline riding with them because you want to go at a different pace.

Not that you have to play any game that is offered though; you're perfectly entitled to decline any game for any reason, even if you are there to game.

I was told this long ago by a store owner and have talked to other owners since and had similar things said.

"On days where an event that requires painting happens in the store they sell way more product than open play with unpainted models. If using the gaming space doesn't sell models, then war gamers will lose out to mtg and yogioh cards."

Unpainted models increased, weekend open play decreased and was banished to weeknights where there is no street traffic to influence.

Painted models help sell the hobby, help store owners pay their rent and help secure good gaming time of the owners tables and grow the player base. Maybe you should talk to the store owner how he feels? If he has an opinion or views trends in his sales in relation to the quality of games visually on his tables, then a case can be made about being good Stewards of the store and not be the gaming equivalent of wearing sweatpants in public? If they felt they could help the owner or get more premium game time by painting there can be some ownership of the decision.

I won't game with unpainted models because it is rude to owners and hurts sales. Enough owners feel that way where it is something I am considerate about.