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.

Tabletop standard to me is when you have a model which looks "complete" - ie every part has been painted and washed (at least) and is based. There don't have to be any details added on, but that would certainly be a good thing.

I'd consider something akin to my Imperial Guard to be a reasonable tabletop quality - they have all the parts painted and washed, squad markings so you can tell what unit they belong to and they are based.



Similarly, my CSM are, I would say, painted to a pretty good tabletop standard - everything painted and washed, a few details added, based, etc:

Silver MK2
Your CSM are very nice and a good deal better than tabletop standard. You've got tons of color, drybrushing, washes (or shading?), and extensive basing.

To the wider topic at hand...
I'm an only-play-painted guy, but these kind of threads annoy me just a bit because they seem to slowly nudge the bar for "tabletop " a bit higher and higher....

Better painted figs are great, but IMHO, tabletop should mean what it always has among wargamers of all types (not just the GW crowd):
Basecoat, 3 colors and based, period.

It's a very simple standard to which everyone can reach, and most can surpass, but most importantly, it sets a low, attainable bar for beginners and those for whom painting seems a bit daunting.

It does beginners and the wider gamer community no good to make "tabletop" standard a moving target.

Here, here!

This is my rough idea of TT standard.
Really its just base colours, washes and the odd highlight.
Base is essential though.

Eilif wrote:
Silver MK2
Your CSM are very nice and a good deal better than tabletop standard. You've got tons of color, drybrushing, washes (or shading?), and extensive basing.

To the wider topic at hand...
I'm an only-play-painted guy, but these kind of threads annoy me just a bit because they seem to slowly nudge the bar for "tabletop " a bit higher and higher....

Better painted figs are great, but IMHO, tabletop should mean what it always has among wargamers of all types (not just the GW crowd):
Basecoat, 3 colors and based, period.

It's a very simple standard to which everyone can reach, and most can surpass, but most importantly, it sets a low, attainable bar for beginners and those for whom painting seems a bit daunting.

It does beginners and the wider gamer community no good to make "tabletop" standard a moving target.

I honestly think that these days, including a Wash and maybe a Drybrush isn't exactly a daunting or hard to reach standard.
For the most part it's simply using materials that weren't really available, or wasn't as simple to get right.

Basecoat, 3 Colours, Wash, (Possibly drybrush,) with the Base painted a solid colour (such as concrete grey), or simply based (flock or sand, etc and painted). is easy to achieve, and simply 1 step greater than it was before.

This is roughly what I consider tabletop standard.



The main colour (red) has been washed and relayered, the secondary colour (black) has been highlighted, either twice for the armour plates (shadow grey and hawk turqoise) or once for the weapon (codex grey). Some spot detailing is done (the eye on the weapon, and the teeth), but more difficult spot detailing is ignored (eyes) because it won't be seen on the table. It's been simply based (sand, devlan mud wash, drybrush jack bone, will add static flock when it's been sealed).

Under close scrutiny it's not an impressive paintjob, but once on the table with its buddies it looks fine.

Ok so I got a question pertaining to all of this. I am a Dark Angle player and everything is at least base coated black if I have not had time to work on it quite yet. Would it be considered "cheating" If I threw color in for the eyes only and said "They don't need to be painted. They are "pre-heresy""?

If you do the weapons and gear in silver or something (pick out detail basically), and maybe do the shoulder pads? you could probably get away with it

If it was all black, then you have more time for edge highlighting. So that'd be black, grey edges + eye colour = 3 colours - sorted!

Even the most hardened TFG can argue with that logic. (he will though )

 -Loki- wrote:
This is roughly what I consider tabletop standard.



The main colour (red) has been washed and relayered, the secondary colour (black) has been highlighted, either twice for the armour plates (shadow grey and hawk turqoise) or once for the weapon (codex grey). Some spot detailing is done (the eye on the weapon, and the teeth), but more difficult spot detailing is ignored (eyes) because it won't be seen on the table. It's been simply based (sand, devlan mud wash, drybrush jack bone, will add static flock when it's been sealed).

Under close scrutiny it's not an impressive paintjob, but once on the table with its buddies it looks fine.

You hit the target, as far as I'm concerned. My good friend with tyranids uses the same scheme with the same process. He has, on the table, on of the best looking armies in the area. It's an effort-efficient way of producing a great looking army.

These are my tabletop Necrons, I found them in a box last year and decided to get them sorted in an afternoon between other projects. I usually spend a lot more time on all my figures (see my gallery) but these turned out very well for minimal effort.



That's not even the three colour minimum (unless you count the brown base), they are just silver and black, the scarabs have green eyes.

 ArbitorIan wrote:
I agree it's very much about the effort - but I'd say that you need.

- All the model painted neatly, with the right colours on the right bits
- Based. This is really important - unbased models are not up to tabletop standard

Shading and washed would be ok, but just neatly an clearly painted is good enough.

Part of the whole 'tabletop standard' is to help your opponent recognise what is what. Have you ever tried to look across the table at a black-undercoated unit and figure out what guns they're carrying from 4 feet away? Even worse, a unit that's half painted in various different schemes, with a few unpainted and black undercoated models mixed in.

I totally agree with what you're saying.

 d-usa wrote:
There are 50 shades of gray after all...

XD ROFL well done sir

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
These are my tabletop Necrons, I found them in a box last year and decided to get them sorted in an afternoon between other projects. I usually spend a lot more time on all my figures (see my gallery) but these turned out very well for minimal effort.



That's not even the three colour minimum (unless you count the brown base), they are just silver and black, the scarabs have green eyes.

These look very nice. Necrons in general seem to have a different 'standard' if it comes to TT standards.

But I think AboritIan sums it up very well.