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.

MagickalMemories wrote:

plastictrees wrote:<SNIP> I don't care if it's not what you got into gaming for, it's part of the hobby, deal with it or go play the (billions) of games that don't ask you to paint anything under any circumstances. I know gamers with 4 kids that still get stuff painted (slowly) so yes, if you never paint any of your models I'll label you lazy. You can either be content with the fact that some random guy thinks you're lazy or you can paint your models. If you don't care, actually don't care, don't run around demanding that I respect your decision to not do things.

Yes, I have noticed that there are games that don't require you to paint anything. That proves that no-one should ever have to paint anything?

Small correction.
It's part of YOUR hobby. You cannot accurately represent MY hobby. If MY hobby does not include painting, I am still into wargames. Wargaming is still my hobby.
When you grow up, you'll understand the difference between "lazy" and disinterested. I paint. I paint quite well, in fact. I used to accept commissions in a different life time. What I would not do THEN, and rarely do NOW is paint armies or even large units. I do not enjoy it. I don't like painting hordes of models in the same color scheme. I like painting characters and -sometimes begrudgingly- small 3 to 5 man units.
You see, for me, the hobby is about having fun in a social atmosphere with people who are fun to be with while playing a wargame.

What seems to be the difference between you (and many who agree that armies should be painted) and those of us who don't care is that WE are not actually running around demanding that you "respect our decision." We simply ask that you leave us the heck alone about it. You "hobby" your way and let us "hobby" our way, without having to deal with your open scorn and derision. That isn't asking you to respect our decision. That is asking you to respect us as human beings.

CT GAMER wrote:

plastictrees wrote:three hours, some spray paint and some dip.

TBH I'd often rather play against a clean unpainted army then one submited to what you describe above...

Agreed.
Also, I'd rather play against the unpainted gray horde than someone who's going to talk crap about me because I choose not to paint.

plastictrees wrote:

CT GAMER wrote:
TBH I'd often rather play against a clean unpainted army then one submited to what you describe above...

Hyperbole. Obviously they'd get a finishing coat of glitter before I'd consider them truly painted.

See, I don't care who you are. That's funny, right there.


Eric

Yes it was...

I read active arguments between painted and unpainted supporters. It confuses me.
If anyone has read a thread in which I've posted they know that I am acerbic and confrontational as a common disposition. But when it comes to painted or unpainted armies; I couldn't care less. I spend inordinate amounts of time messing with my plastic or preferable metal toy soldiers to make them WYSIWYG, unique, and maybe even sort of painted. I left the hobby literally days before 5th was released and returned last April, the first tournament I played in June my army was about 60% new. I laid down a fully painted, if not based, force. And while I was a little disappointed that the two other BA at the store were playing unpainted armies I was excited: more people were playing an army I enjoy, and if all they have is a FoTM primer army I can probably double my forces during one of the codex releases later on this or next year. BONANZA.
The truth is I'd rather see people keeping the hobby alive than hiding in thier caves painting, even if that's what I would rather do.

MagickalMemories wrote:
Small correction.
It's part of YOUR hobby. You cannot accurately represent MY hobby. If MY hobby does not include painting, I am still into wargames. Wargaming is still my hobby.
When you grow up, you'll understand the difference between "lazy" and disinterested. I paint. I paint quite well, in fact. I used to accept commissions in a different life time. What I would not do THEN, and rarely do NOW is paint armies or even large units. I do not enjoy it. I don't like painting hordes of models in the same color scheme. I like painting characters and -sometimes begrudgingly- small 3 to 5 man units.
You see, for me, the hobby is about having fun in a social atmosphere with people who are fun to be with while playing a wargame.

What seems to be the difference between you (and many who agree that armies should be painted) and those of us who don't care is that WE are not actually running around demanding that you "respect our decision." We simply ask that you leave us the heck alone about it. You "hobby" your way and let us "hobby" our way, without having to deal with your open scorn and derision. That isn't asking you to respect our decision. That is asking you to respect us as human beings.

Mostly the difference between me, and in this case, you, is that I'm expressing an extremely exaggerated version of my opinion in response to people that appear to be belligerently opposed to fielding painted armies, whereas you are describing actual reality.

The reality is that I have buckets of unpainted models, 40k, Fantasy, Warmachine, Confrontation, Malifaux etc. I think there's even some Chronopia still in there somewhere. I try to paint when I can but I'm working two jobs and have a new baby to deal with so progress is slow. I'm mainly playing Warmachine at the moment and I'm barely keeping pace with one jack painted per month. My goal is fully painted armies and my ideal is to play against fully painted opponents, but I never expect either and still manage to enjoy gaming.

That sort of reasoned description of circumstances has no place on the internet.

plastictrees wrote:

Well, for a start the person that only paints doesn't show up to a game store, put his models opposite me on the table and then actively refuse to play me for an hour and a half, but I am expected to happily face someone's grey horde week after week because they can't find three hours, some spray paint and some dip.

Hahaha, no.

Modellers and painters don't detract from my experience of the game by doing their thing, people that never paint do. I'm perfectly happy to be completely unreasonable about this. I don't care if it's not what you got into gaming for, it's part of the hobby, deal with it or go play the (billions) of games that don't ask you to paint anything under any circumstances. I know gamers with 4 kids that still get stuff painted (slowly) so yes, if you never paint any of your models I'll label you lazy.

Well, from what you're saying, your experience isn't enjoyable because someone didn't paint their models? Wow, aren't we just picky? Kid, I'll put it nicely, get over it.

You can either be content with the fact that some random guy thinks you're lazy or you can paint your models.

Why should I care what someone else thinks?

If you don't care, actually don't care, don't run around demanding that I respect your decision to not do things.

If you don't like it, then you can play another game, like yugioh, where it won't be a problem.

augustus5 wrote:For as long as there have been people who enjoyed wargaming but didn't enjoy painting, there have been unpainted armies. I started playing miniature wargames in 1991, and have seen others play with unpainted armies and have played with some unpainted armies myself. Many people really like the game, but don't really care for the modeling/painting side of the hobby.

Yeah, this. I started just a couple of years before you. Though I have to say that perpetually half-or-part-painted armies have been very common for a very long time. THis is not counting when we used to play at the tables in the local FLGS and buy units to use immediately, which also happened a lot.

remilia_scarlet wrote:

Well, from what you're saying, your experience isn't enjoyable because someone didn't paint their models? Wow, aren't we just picky? Kid, I'll put it nicely, get over it.

It's less enjoyable to me, yes. In the same way that watching a movie on a tiny, fuzzy screen is less enjoyable than watching it in glorious technicolour on a big screen. If discerning between varying degrees of enjoyment is picky then yes, I'm picky. Also, are you implying that I'm younger than you or a baby goat? It's so hard to determine tone on the internet.

remilia_scarlet wrote:

You can either be content with the fact that some random guy thinks you're lazy or you can paint your models.

Why should I care what someone else thinks?

You shouldn't, necessarily, that's pretty much part of the sentence you quoted.

remilia_scarlet wrote:

If you don't care, actually don't care, don't run around demanding that I respect your decision to not do things.

If you don't like it, then you can play another game, like yugioh, where it won't be a problem.

But then I wouldn't get to paint models...which I enjoy doing. Maybe you're condescendingly demanding that the wrong people change games?

plastictrees wrote:
But then I wouldn't get to paint models...which I enjoy doing. Maybe you're condescendingly demanding that the wrong people change games?

I suggested a game where you don't have to worry about who does and doesn't paint their models, since it's an issue with you. If I don't want to paint my models, it's my prerogative, you didn't buy the kits, if it's an issue, and you /love/ painting models, start a painting service, otherwise, deal with it. it's not the end of the world because someone doesn't paint their models, especially if you're not going to use it.

remilia_scarlet wrote:

plastictrees wrote:
But then I wouldn't get to paint models...which I enjoy doing. Maybe you're condescendingly demanding that the wrong people change games?

I suggested a game where you don't have to worry about who does and doesn't paint their models, since it's an issue with you. If I don't want to paint my models, it's my prerogative, you didn't buy the kits, if it's an issue, and you /love/ painting models, start a painting service, otherwise, deal with it. it's not the end of the world because someone doesn't paint their models, especially if you're not going to use it.

I am dealing with it, by gaming for twenty years. I never said it's the end of the world. My preference is to play against painted models, I find it more enjoyable than playing against unpainted models. At no point am stapling a paintbrush to your hand and locking you in a room with your unpainted army. Maybe you need to work out why someone not thoroughly enjoying other peoples decisions is bothering you so much.
Also, maybe I shouldn't get into arguments with shrieking nose-less demons.

It's anime, all noses are tiny. Back OT, did you read the part about the painting service? It seems nobody ever does it, it would solve the problem, and put extra money in your pocket, since you love painting, I do it, I'm not professional, but, I'll make them look decent for a fair price. It's a problem because it makes gaming unpleasant when someone is being an asshat over painting, I don't care, I'll play against empty bases, as long as the game is enjoyable, and everyone else is chill.

remilia_scarlet wrote:It's anime, all noses are tiny. Back OT, did you read the part about the painting service? It seems nobody ever does it, it would solve the problem, and put extra money in your pocket, since you love painting, I do it, I'm not professional, but, I'll make them look decent for a fair price. It's a problem because it makes gaming unpleasant when someone is being an asshat over painting, I don't care, I'll play against empty bases, as long as the game is enjoyable, and everyone else is chill.

I'm being an "asshat" in a thread about painted models. I don't actually harass people about painting their models while we're playing.
Did the painting service thing, back when I could sort of afford to do terrible paying jobs, to varying degrees of success and disaster. Again, I'm not demanding that people paint their models, or even expecting them to, I'm expressing a preference.

I'm pretty sure this thread hasn't been OT for about a page and a half.

mikhaila wrote:As soon as there was an enviorment that allowed unpainted models, you saw armies of them popping up.

But what created that environment?

Was it conventions?

Was it venues?

Was it the games?

Was it the miniatures?

Was it the players themselves?

And Malfred with the save!

Are we talking about TTGs since Chainmail or so (lets call that Wargaming) or are we including historical TTGs in there as well?

I think the biggest factor is just that as Wargaming has become bigger it's encompassed people that don't care all that much about painting.
Lets also distinguish between people that play with unpainted models but are slowly painting them, and people that only ever play with unpainted models and will never paint them. The latter I don't think I've ever really seen until recently, but that's mostly through only playing with friends and at GTs I would imagine.

I do not mind playing against unpainted armies too much, but the fact of the matter is this, if 6 months later I come up against the same army and its all still grey, i wont really want to play you. Simple as it is, I am a busy man, i have played with unpainted armies with the premise that they will be painted or are a work in progress, never ever ever ever ever ever ever have i played an army with no intent to never paint them to completion. The nice part about this hobby is the constant work in progress you can do, whether its the building phase, conversion phase, painting phase, making a display board phase, and starting the process again with a new army or reworking the one you have, the premise behind it should be that its going to be worked on and eventually finished and i understand if you have just started an army, i have been there. I understand if you don't have time and will afford you a break on that, but I want to see potential progress with your army the next time i see it, PAINTING IS PART OF THE GAME! I currently am playing with a half finished army, BUT I AM ACTUALLY WORKING ON FINISHING IT!

Dave-c wrote:I do not mind playing against unpainted armies too much, but the fact of the matter is this, if 6 months later I come up against the same army and its all still grey, i wont really want to play you. Simple as it is, I am a busy man, i have played with unpainted armies with the premise that they will be painted or are a work in progress, never ever ever ever ever ever ever have i played an army with no intent to never paint them to completion. The nice part about this hobby is the constant work in progress you can do, whether its the building phase, conversion phase, painting phase, making a display board phase, and starting the process again with a new army or reworking the one you have, the premise behind it should be that its going to be worked on and eventually finished and i understand if you have just started an army, i have been there. I understand if you don't have time and will afford you a break on that, but I want to see potential progress with your army the next time i see it, PAINTING IS PART OF THE GAME! I currently am playing with a half finished army, BUT I AM ACTUALLY WORKING ON FINISHING IT!

I don't think our preferences are part of this topic. The question is what lead to
the fielding of unpainted armies. plastictrees posits that the growth of wargaming
has lead to the inclusion of different types of wargamers.

plastictrees wrote:I'm being an "asshat" in a thread about painted models. I don't actually harass people about painting their models while we're playing.
Did the painting service thing, back when I could sort of afford to do terrible paying jobs, to varying degrees of success and disaster. Again, I'm not demanding that people paint their models, or even expecting them to, I'm expressing a preference.

I never said YOU were an asshat, unless you harass people and be an asshat. Trust me, if you came to my LGS, you'll be able to tell right away, they gather like vultures to scrutinize your paint jobs, and look for a fault to harass you on. If you're cool about it, I don't mind paint enthusiasts, I don't mind grey armies, and I apologize if you thought I was calling you an asshat, just prefer your preference, and don't get all up in arms when you play against an unpainted army.

All in all, I don't mind paint nazis(within reason), I don't mind the people who don't paint, I don't mind proxies within reason, as long as there's a chill environment, I don't care if you went andy warhol on your minis, and just splashed paint randomly on them.

Also, if you refer to my sig, you'll see I don't hate anyone on dakka.

MagickalMemories wrote:
What seems to be the difference between you (and many who agree that armies should be painted) and those of us who don't care is that WE are not actually running around demanding that you "respect our decision." We simply ask that you leave us the heck alone about it. You "hobby" your way and let us "hobby" our way, without having to deal with your open scorn and derision. That isn't asking you to respect our decision. That is asking you to respect us as human beings...

Despite the way things are expressed on internet boards, I think that this is pretty much the way most of us (there are some asshats on boths sides) function in the real world and the way they should. Painters and not, are going to meet at Gaming Clubs and FLGS's, chat, be civil, maybe even be friends, and when it comes time to play, those for whom painted armies are a prime part of their experience should just try and avoid the unpainted folks.

Slightly back on track, the "Hobby our way" is something we all seem to at least understand (if not always pleased with), and I wonder if that's a more recent (within the last 20-30 years) thing. It's certainly a concept that doesn't apply to all activities, though it has taken root strongly in GW/PP players. It's basically a rejection of the idea that certain activities require the meeting, or pursuit of, of certain standards. Whatever stigma unpainted armies may have once had, it's rapidly fading. It has probably meant that more non-painters have joined the hobby and more $ has entred the wargaming industry and a larger industry is definitley a good thing.

However, more "gamers" and a larger wargaming industry is not going to erase the feeling of many of us that when you walk into a FLGS and almost all the armies are grey, something beautiful about the hobby has been (or is being) lost.

malfred wrote:

mikhaila wrote:As soon as there was an enviorment that allowed unpainted models, you saw armies of them popping up.

But what created that environment?
Was it conventions?
Was it venues?
Was it the games?
Was it the miniatures?
Was it the players themselves?

Despite all the tangents goind on, this is what I'd really like to know.

Maybe the change came when a large portion of the game
became more about a game in a fictional universe than
re-creating or simulating an existing time period. If your goal
is simulation and immersion, then paint would be essential. If
it's only about the gameplay, then game rules would be more
essential.

Just think about all the people who turn down the detailing on
their graphic cards in order to have a more playable video
game experience.

I'd rather most of the (bad) tournament players not try and paint their armies. It's less hassle for me when they sell me their stuff for a song after they got the Warhams kicked out of them and flocked to the next flavor of the month.

It's bad enough that I usually have to rebuild a quarter of their stuff or more because they don't know how to assemble a model either.

In hindsight, I probably should've posting my opinion earlier ... oh well here we go!

Ok, for me (gaming since 1995) as the point limits have grown and the number of models have increased, I have seen more unpainted figures. I am lucky though as the position of 'paint your stuff to win more shiny bitz' keeps a lot of us painting. I don't paint like I used to, more because I lack the space to paint ... and da 'big boss' demands what little time we have together with our work schedules so my painting time is really minimal right now... but I full intend to finish off my deathwing ... 'cause i like shiny bitz.

malfred wrote:

mikhaila wrote:As soon as there was an enviorment that allowed unpainted models, you saw armies of them popping up.

But what created that environment?

It was people who actually wanted to play the game.

DarknessEternal wrote:

malfred wrote:

mikhaila wrote:As soon as there was an enviorment that allowed unpainted models, you saw armies of them popping up.

But what created that environment?

It was people who actually wanted to play the game.

I think it is also something to note... The metagame was broken and unplayable as a game system up until 4-5th edition. This idea of bringing 'ard' lists didn't exist because you could make the game unplayable with 'ard lists. I could have an Ork HQ unit with 60models and almost 80+ wounds. (infact, I have it... Whenever some guy claimed he was 'the bexztorz at fourty kay and comp was for losers, he could lose to an unassaultable, un shootable, 60 model mess of ork HQ) This was also during the time of horrible VDR rules and such. Because of this, there was less focus on 'the game' because 'the game' was a joke.

It wasn't until 'the game' became playable and had a tighter ruleset that this focus on the meta game really increased. I feel like people who were expelled from previous editions and gaming stores and groups because they wanted to show up with 180 chaos cultists on 60MM bases for 3 points each and win the game by default due to unrefined LOS rules and other issues. Now they can show up with a SPAM metalist and not be seen as a total unreasonable person. The game actually has begun to have integrity where the previous editions and codexes did not. It was very hard to claim to be a disciple of 'the game' and only want to play 'the game' when 'the game' was an unbalanced steaming pile.

As the game gains integrity, the idea of playing 40k as a 'metagame' grows. As long as well run events require painting, I will be happy. 'Ard boyz is such a poor quality of gaming and so poorly run, I am not afraid that it will overtake the current tourney format. ('ard boyz issues have nothing to do with appearance either.)

My bloodbowl teams and Necromunda gangs are completely painted my vast hordes of bugs and eldar have been bare metal/whatever ever since I started playing (end of rogue trader era).

I have been a gamer since 1984, i would love to have the time to paint an army. I am working on the last of my magnet swaps on the bugs, then I will get enough foam cases for all of them, then I will begin airbrushing them. Then rinse repeat with the eldar. See my sig for an accurate points count of shiny paint free figs.

I personally would rather see unpainted vs about %85 of the gak that gets fielded in my area.

warboss wrote:

MagickalMemories wrote:<SNIP>

Eric

You're just saying that because you're an Clinton appointee who moderatorshipness at an internet trading site is dependent on the continuing selling/trading of those grey/silver hordes! If people refused to play with or against unpainted models, you'd be out of an (unpaid) job and have alot more free time on your hands... I declare bias!

Gah! I'm caught!
Actually, I'm a Linrandir appointee, though. lol

plastictrees wrote:
Mostly the difference between me, and in this case, you, is that I'm expressing an extremely exaggerated version of my opinion in response to people that appear to be belligerently opposed to fielding painted armies, whereas you are describing actual reality.

The reality is that I have buckets of unpainted models, 40k, Fantasy, Warmachine, Confrontation, Malifaux etc. I think there's even some Chronopia still in there somewhere. I try to paint when I can but I'm working two jobs and have a new baby to deal with so progress is slow. I'm mainly playing Warmachine at the moment and I'm barely keeping pace with one jack painted per month. My goal is fully painted armies and my ideal is to play against fully painted opponents, but I never expect either and still manage to enjoy gaming.

That sort of reasoned description of circumstances has no place on the internet.

Fair enough, re: "expressing an extremely exaggerated version." Keeping in mind the kind of responses that evokes (i.e. much o fthis thread lol), I'm not sure that expressing anything but how you genuinely feel is the best approach in any conversation... especially online.

I presumed you had unpainted models. Most gamers do. I was addressing the topic of gaming with unpainted armies/units.

malfred wrote:Maybe the change came when a large portion of the game
became more about a game in a fictional universe than
re-creating or simulating an existing time period. If your goal
is simulation and immersion, then paint would be essential. If
it's only about the gameplay, then game rules would be more
essential.

Just think about all the people who turn down the detailing on
their graphic cards in order to have a more playable video
game experience.

You've got a really interesting point here, Malf.
If what you're saying is true, then I'd say POST Chainmail (which, as I recall, was initially tactical medieval battle rules & not "fantasy") would probably be the right time period.
I've seen tons of Napoleonics and other historical games played and I don't think I've ever seen an unpainted army... or probably even a model on the field.
"Make believe" wargames and RPG's that use models have ALWAYS had unpainted models in my expereince.

Eric

For the most part, gaming stores in Orlando have a 40K tournament each weekend at one of the 5 local stores. When the Ard Boyz requirements stated unpainted models were fine, that somehow became the gold standard. Then in order to boost attendance, each store relaxed their painting requirements and removed a painting award. I think painted armies are re-surfacing but I'm not going to hold my breath.

plastictrees wrote:
I'm being an "asshat" in a thread about painted models. I don't actually harass people about painting their models while we're playing.
Did the painting service thing, back when I could sort of afford to do terrible paying jobs, to varying degrees of success and disaster. Again, I'm not demanding that people paint their models, or even expecting them to, I'm expressing a preference.

I'm pretty sure this thread hasn't been OT for about a page and a half.

I'm a painter more than a gamer, and though I play with half-painted models when I have to, I prefer to at least get basecoats down on newer models before I play them. I have to say that while your initial, exaggerated posts made you appear like a giant douche who I'd never want to actually play against (and that's to me - a painter!), your more recent ones make you seem like much more of a reasonable guy. I prefer the latter posts.

nkelsch wrote:GW required 100% painted minis in GW stores and battle bunkers within a 50 mile radius of GW US HQ up intil around 2005-2006. This is also when RTTs were in full force and GW GTs were around. All required painting.

When the GW GT died, GW began letting unpainted models towards the launch of 4th edition in my experience. When GW began allowing unpainted in GW stores... the genie was out of the bottle.

Up until then, all GW stores required painting and most FLGS near me required at least PRIMED to distinguish from people opening stuff and assembling in store and possibly 'stealing' things. Requiring primed was a theft deterrent as it is harder to steal a 40$ model and assemble it in a corner and play it and claim it is yours if it has to have a coat of primer on it.

This is it exactly. It used to be that GW's required painted (or at least partially painted) miniatures for you to be able to play. As a teenager I remember the manager of a store preventing a youngster from fielding his marines because they had literally just had a couple of blobs of paint on them. I know that some stores were quite strict in that regard. Once that environment disappeared, the impetus to paint your army went with it. In my view, that's a shame - although I would never not play someone on the grounds that there army is unpainted, the experience is usually that much more enjoyable if they are - gives you some extra conversation with the person, chance to check out each others stuff etc. and although it is a favorite line of WD and GW going back to time immemorial, it is one I agree with: The site of two, well painted and modelled armies on well made terrain just feels right

Also, as someone else said earlier in the thread, I think an important issue is the amount of models needed to field a full force. It's now something of an uphill battle, especially for the likes of WSB or horde armies where you are looking at potentially 50 very similar troops. Motivation is a key point here. I'm actually really enjoying Infinity at the moment, because I know with each model I will not have to paint that same sculpt again, and I can lavish extra care and attention on them rather than 'production line' painting which I find to be a chore. In fact, I think that anyone who can paint a 2000-2500 pt army these days, and do so within 24 months and to a reasonable standard, deserves some kind of certificate from GW!

Another point, and while I have said I don't mind specifically playing against unpainted armies, I find that people who have spend time painting and constructing them properly tend to look after them a bit more on the tabletop. Memories of a one-armed, unpainted Ghazkull tumbling down a hill and crushing a combat squad of my poor tactical marines beneath ("sorry mate", as ghazkull got thrown in the box later on with the WFB movement trays used to represent war bikes). It probably would have happened in the combat anyway, but that is beside the point

I remember seeing it start cropping up from third edition 40k onwards. When GW halved all points costs over night people suddenly had to add the same amount to there army they already had painted to stay at the same points.

Also as time went by GW kept slowly decreasing points while expanding army sizes so a lot of people never caught up and lots just gave up trying.

New people to the hobby then saw these part painted/unpainted armies and thought it was the norm.

In first and second edition 40k I can never remember fielding or facing an unpainted army.

Also as people become more competitive over time in the hobby the WAAC douche bags now have started the bandwagon codex merry go round. As soon as a new codex comes out, they go on the Internet to find a "broken list of doom" build it quick as possible without painting it just to get some cheap wins over people who haven't read the codex yet, or learnt to beat it yet, then move swiftly onto the next "broken" codex. All in the name of try to prop up there pitiful self esteem and fill a nagging void in there lives, sad isn't it.

It's a shame those people are around, we have a strong bunch of WFB tournament players locally, very competitive but fair and have fully painted, and in some case exceptionally well painted armies.

Thats the way it should be done, friendly, fair, competitive gamers who take pride in making the game enjoyable by presenting good looking armies to the table.

MagickalMemories wrote:I've been in gaming since 1981. I didn't get into minis until about 1985, but I was occasionally around them at the FLGS. As far back as I can remember seeing people use minis in RPG's and in wargames, I can remember unpainted models.

IMO, a better question would be to ask when the view that models/armies had to be painted come into common usage.

Eric

I have to agree totally with this. I first started gaming in 1978 when my brothers brought home the original boxed set for Dungeons and Dragons. I started wargaming about 1987 with Warhammer Fantasy, and started playing Rogue Trader when it was first available here in Georgia (still have that book I bought around 1988).

There have always been people who played with unpainted miniatures. I have to agree with MM that the dramatic increase in the number and quality of painted armies happened when Rogue Trader tournaments started up and had the requirement that the armies had to be painted. I want to say that was sometime in the early 1990's?

I think that recently we've started to see fewer painted armies because of the backlash against "soft-scores" for determining the winner at tournaments. More tournaments today are either leaving out scoring for painting entirely or having the painting scoring be totally separate from the overall winner. Consequently, there's less incentive for the player who loathes painting to finish painting the army.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

plastictrees wrote:Are we talking about TTGs since Chainmail or so (lets call that Wargaming) or are we including historical TTGs in there as well?

OMG, I still have my Chainmail book My brothers bought it in around 1983 when we visited Washington DC to visit family. We used to play that a lot as kids. I had totally forgotten about that, and didn't even think to include that as "wargaming."

Oh, and BTW, we never played with painted figures back then.

I've been gaming for about 10 years, 40k for about eight, and I've seen largely unpainted armies for most of the time I've been playing.

Most of the time I see largely unpainted armies, they're owned by younger gamers (younger than 21) who may still have a "toy" mentality or want to play the game moreso than take the time to paint their models. Older players, I find, have a better appreciation for the hobby as a whole and not just the gaming aspects, thus get more satisfaction out of seeing a fully painted army.

UNCLEBADTOUCH wrote:Also as people become more competitive over time in the hobby the WAAC douche bags now have started the bandwagon codex merry go round. As soon as a new codex comes out, they go on the Internet to find a "broken list of doom" build it quick as possible without painting it just to get some cheap wins over people who haven't read the codex yet, or learnt to beat it yet, then move swiftly onto the next "broken" codex. All in the name of try to prop up there pitiful self esteem and fill a nagging void in there lives, sad isn't it.

What's wrong? Did you get tabled one too many times? These people aren't so bad, because if you're wise, you'll wait for the next codex to come out, and get their minis off them for a reasonable price, because they want the new ones. I just got 30 GK terminators for a competitive list for $30 because of the sisters codex in white dwarf.