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.

 nurgle5 wrote:

 Mmmpi wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

 nurgle5 wrote:
We're getting into a weird space if we're gonna use the rules of the game as the sole basis of what standard of experience people might want out of 40k because, to use a previous post to illustrate the point, iirc nothing in the rules requires a player to not behave like a jerk.

True, but if someone acts like a jerk, I'm not required to play them. I can just say no and go on with life. Same with paint. If I don't want to play someone who doesn't paint their stuff, I don't have to. But I have no right to tell them they can't play other people.

You might be better off arguing that someone telling other people what they can use on the tabletop (unpainted minis, etc) against a consenting opponent is behaving like a jerk, rather than arguing that painting miniatures isn't an intended part of the hobby IMHO.

Remember, just because painting is an intended part of the hobby, doesn't mean it's necessarily mandatory, particularly for two consenting people playing the game.

I have argued that. It's been discussed.

As I've said, nothing about painting is an intended part of the hobby. Most people who participate paint, either because they like the results, or because they like to paint (or are the rare few who get brow beaten into it), but it's not intended.

As was pointed out earlier, no one is beating down the doors of people who only paint, or only read the books, but avoid the game aspect. So why the hypocrisy over paint?

You did change the topic, making it about perceived attitude, thus moving the goalpost. A clear indicator of an argument lost.

You literally made a statement asking for proof that painting your army is an intended part of the hobby. It was one of the most ridiculous statements on this forum I've seen in a while lol

 Ishagu wrote:
To follow the core rules and not act like a jerk is the absolute minimum one has to do.

This discussion is not about behaviour anyway, it was the statement made by Mmmpi that apparently GW don't intend for hobbyists to paint their armies. That's clearly not the case.
Unpainted armies don't have to be accepted by anyone.

They're pretty big minimums though.

Myself and about nine other people.

If it's not the case prove it.

Link my post where I said you have to accept another person's army for a game. I've literally been saying the opposite for 23 pages.
I'll wait.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ishagu wrote:
You did change the topic, making it about perceived attitude, thus moving the goalpost. A clear indicator of an argument lost.

Nope. Nice try moving the goal posts though. Do you really not see yourself doing it?

 Ishagu wrote:


You literally made a statement asking for proof that painting your army is an intended part of the hobby. It was one of the most ridiculous statements on this forum I've seen in a while lol

 Ishagu wrote:

 Ishagu wrote:


You literally made a statement asking for proof that painting your army is an intended part of the hobby. It was one of the most ridiculous statements on this forum I've seen in a while lol

I did! Because you're acting like it's a fact. Which means you can prove it.

Now if you said that it was your opinion, I probably wouldn't even have replied to you.

It's hard to be as wrong as you are.

If I had said GW enforces painting of armies, I would be wrong. I said GW intends for people to paint their armies.

 Ishagu wrote:
It's hard to be as wrong as you are.

If I had said GW enforces painting of armies, I would be wrong. I said GW intends for people to paint their armies.

Of course it's hard to be wrong when I'm right.

Since you're claiming that it's a fact about GW and paint, you can provide proof right? Maybe a rule, or a mission statement from GW? Something from their corporate office talking about it?

I mean, you can just say it's your opinion.

Prove to me that Games Workshop don't want you to paint your army.

Your argument is one of a child.

 Mmmpi wrote:

I have argued that. It's been discussed.

As I've said, nothing about painting is an intended part of the hobby. Most people who participate paint, either because they like the results, or because they like to paint (or are the rare few who get brow beaten into it), but it's not intended.

As was pointed out earlier, no one is beating down the doors of people who only paint, or only read the books, but avoid the game aspect. So why the hypocrisy over paint?

I suppose it's because the game is where one person's preferences in terms of things like visual spectacle or amiability will immediately impact the enjoyment of the other player. Someone who only reads the books won't find themselves in that situation.

If you look at GW's introductory article to the hobby, the four things listed are: collecting miniatures, building miniatures, painting miniatures and playing the game. Painting is absolutely an intended part of the hobby. As I've said, it's not always a mandatory part of the hobby. You can argue that the rules of the game don't require painted miniatures, but I've already pointed out how that approach has its problems.

 Ishagu wrote:
It's hard to be as wrong as you are.

If I had said GW enforces painting of armies, I would be wrong. I said GW intends for people to paint their armies.

While I do think GW wants you to paint, I don’t know if it’s the intent of the game. Also you’re coming across fairly rude in this thread man, dial it back a little bit.

 Mmmpi wrote:

 Ishagu wrote:
Prove to me that Games Workshop don't want you to paint your army.

Your argument is one of a child.

Prove to me that they do require it.

I'm not the one pushing opinion as fact.

Come on Cupcake, you can do it.

You are pushing opinion as fact right now. You are stating that GW, a miniature painting and hobby company, do not intend for anyone who purchases their models to actually paint them.

Why are you using insults? Did you get triggered?

I think it depends what you mean by 'intend' here

GW expects that most people will paint (or at least want to paint) their models, strongly encourages them to do so, and provides all the necessary guidance and tools needed to do so.

There certainly isn't the expectation from GW that every model they sell will be painted, just as there isn't the expectation from them that every model they sell will be gamed with, despite that being part of the 'intention' of the hobby.

 nurgle5 wrote:

 Mmmpi wrote:

I have argued that. It's been discussed.

As I've said, nothing about painting is an intended part of the hobby. Most people who participate paint, either because they like the results, or because they like to paint (or are the rare few who get brow beaten into it), but it's not intended.

As was pointed out earlier, no one is beating down the doors of people who only paint, or only read the books, but avoid the game aspect. So why the hypocrisy over paint?

I suppose it's because the game is where one person's preferences in terms of things like visual spectacle or amiability will immediately impact the enjoyment of the other player. Someone who only reads the books won't find themselves in that situation.

If you look at GW's introductory article to the hobby, the four things listed are: collecting miniatures, building miniatures, painting miniatures and playing the game. Painting is absolutely an intended part of the hobby. As I've said, it's not always a mandatory part of the hobby. You can argue that the rules of the game don't require painted miniatures, but I've already pointed out how that approach has its problems.

And if that visual specticle is important to you, good. No one is making you play other people. And I'm not saying you're a jerk for not doing it like another person suggested. But then, if the game is only good when both armies are painted, perhaps that person should find another game. One that does require paint. Or if they can't find enough people with painted armies, then find new opponents. If something is happening that you don't like, and it's not illegal, then it's up to you to change/move, not the other person.

It's part of the hobby, no one is denying that. But it's not part of the game. If that were the case, anyone who got their miniatures commission painted would be cheating.

You think the game is only good when both armies are painted. I and many other people could care less what state of paint is on our opponents army. You're the one who has the issue, not the other person. If you don't want to play that person, don't. Just don't treat it as anything more than your own personal preference, because brother, they've done nothing wrong. (Rhetorical you btw)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ishagu wrote:

 Mmmpi wrote:

 Ishagu wrote:
Prove to me that Games Workshop don't want you to paint your army.

Your argument is one of a child.

Prove to me that they do require it.

I'm not the one pushing opinion as fact.

Come on Cupcake, you can do it.

You are pushing opinion as fact right now. You are stating that GW, a miniature painting and hobby company, do not intend for anyone who purchases their models to actually paint them.

Why are you using insults? Did you get triggered?

Nope, I'm asking you to prove that your claim is true. I've provided evidence that backs up why your claim is false.

I'm stating that GW, a miniature, hobby tool, and paint company doesn't care what anyone does with the stuff they sell, just as long as they buy it, and don't kill anyone with it.

You've been insulting me in every post you've made. So maybe you should point that finger back at yourself, Princess.

Never said that you can only buy models if you intend to paint them.

I said that GW, a painting and modelling company, intend for the people who purchase their models to also paint their models.
I was careful to use the word "Intend"

Defintion: a thing intended; an aim or plan.

Apparently GW don't want people to buy models and paints, and to paint those models. This is why this discussion is ridiculous, with comical statements from people like Mmmpi. If GW didn't intend for people to paint their armies, they wouldn't be selling paints and marketing panted armies lol. There is a section on their website called "Painting and Modelling" This is the most basic common sense lol


@Mmmpi You asked for proof that GW want people to paint their models. It's a really, really silly thing to ask for lol. And next time stop trowing insults around, if you get triggered take a step back, relax and come back later.

 Ishagu wrote:
Never said that you can only buy models if you intend to paint them.

I said that GW, a painting and modelling company, intend for the people who purchase their models, to also paint their models.
I was careful to use the word "Intend"

Defintion: a thing intended; an aim or plan.

Apparently GW don't want people to buy models and paints, and to paint those models. This is why this discussion is ridiculous, with comical statements from people like Mmmpi.


@Mmmpi You asked for proof that GW want people to paint their models. It's a really, really silly thing to ask for lol. And next time stop trowing insults around, if you get triggered take a step back, relax and come back later.

You said that if people didn't want to paint, they should find a different hobby. So yes, you did say that. Just not word for word.

You did say intend a lot. But you also have been treating it like it's a fact.

Oh good you can google definitions of things.

You do realize I flat out said the opposite right? I mean, you do read my posts?

I still ask for proof that GW wants everyone to paint their models. If you think it's a silly thing to ask for, remember, I think it's a silly thing to take as fact.
If you don't want to be insulted, stop throwing out insults. I can go and quote the ones you left me if you really want to see.
As for triggered, you should find a safe space. You really need it.

At least I never asked for something as stupid as proof that GW want you to paint your army lol

Comedy gold. I hope everyone enjoyed it. Time to move on I think.

 Ishagu wrote:
At least I never asked for something as stupid as proof that GW want you to paint your army lol

Comedy gold. I hope everyone enjoyed it. Time to move on I think.

No, you haven't provided proof.

Don't let reality hit you on the way out.

Oh my Goodness. Are you still going on?

The proof is the giant tab on the official GW website that says "Painting and Modelling" lol

You haven't provided proof that GW want us to keep our armies as grey plastic and not paint them lol
Move on dude, you made a silly statement. I forgive you.

 Ishagu wrote:
Oh my Goodness. Are you still going on?

The proof is the giant tab on the official GW website that says "Painting and Modelling" lol

You haven't provided proof that GW want us to keeo our armies as grey plastic and not paint them lol
Move on dude, you made a silly statement. I forgive you.

I thought you were leaving.

https://www.games-workshop.com/en-JP/Painting-Modelling

It's hobby supplies and paint that they sell. So what?

I'm not trying to prove they want everything grey and unpainted. I'm claiming they don't care. Is there a reason you're trying to build a strawman? Because that just tells me that somehow I managed to win a 'conversation'.

So, do you have that proof?

Lol

Do you?

 Ishagu wrote:
Lol

Do you?

Proof that GW doesn't care if you paint your models? No. I have however provided evidence that supports that opinion.

Which is more than you have done in proving your 'facts'.

 Mmmpi wrote:

 Ishagu wrote:
Lol

Do you?

Proof that GW doesn't care if you paint your models? No. I have however provided evidence that supports that opinion.

Which is more than you have done in proving your 'facts'.

Are you two bored with this yet? Because I'm pretty sure most of the rest of us are.

Lol they want you to paint so they make more money, as one reason. That's stronger evidence.

Mmmpi wrote:If you don't want to play that person, don't.

This should probably be the key take away from this thread imho.

 Mmmpi wrote:


Proof that GW doesn't care if you paint your models? No. I have however provided evidence that supports that opinion.

To be fair, the fact that they sell paints, hire staff to teach people how to paint, provide painting guides through articles and videos, display painted miniatures at the stores, display miniatures painted by the community on their website, hold an annual event about fully painted armies and advertise the game through pics of painted miniatures are probably all evidence that supports the opinion that GW cares if you paint your miniatures.

 Ishagu wrote:
Lol they want you to paint so they make more money, as one reason. That's stronger evidence.

They want you to buy paint. They don't care what you do with it.

Just like McDonalds wants you to buy burgers, but don't care if you just lob them in the trash right after paying.

GW sells paint because they know enough of their customer base likes/wants to paint to turn a profit. Seeing as GW likes money, they provide to that group.

It's rather strange that I have to explain basic economics in a 'paint' thread.

Just gonna throw this out there:
1. GW recommends for its Warhammer World events that armies are painted to battlefield ready standard. (They don’t state that unpainted Armies are disqualified or not allowed.)

2. GW has invested hundreds of thousands of dollars to assist people in learning how to paint. (Painting App, YouTube, on their website when you pick the model you want to buy, on the box)

3. GW has a massive stock of paints, brushes, and other accessories to ensure that anyone who wants to collect their models doesn’t have to go elsewhere to buy the supplies they need to build and paint them.

How can an argument be made that GW doesn’t want their models to be painted?

 nurgle5 wrote:

Mmmpi wrote:If you don't want to play that person, don't.

This should probably be the key take away from this thread imho.

 Mmmpi wrote:


Proof that GW doesn't care if you paint your models? No. I have however provided evidence that supports that opinion.

To be fair, the fact that they sell paints, hire staff to teach people how to paint, provide painting guides through articles and videos, display painted miniatures at the stores, display miniatures painted by the community on their website, hold an annual event about fully painted armies and advertise the game through pics of painted miniatures are probably all evidence that supports the opinion that GW cares if you paint your miniatures.

Yeah, that's been the general consensus as of like page 18. The only people not agreeing with that are the odd holdouts like Crimson and Ishagu.

I maintain that they provide those because they know a profitable amount of their customer are willing to buy it. Everything sells better when it's shown at it's best, and I can't deny that most of their customers like at least seeing painted models, even if a sizable chunk of those don't care enough to actually finish painting a whole army themselves.

So for GW, paint is just another thing they can sell. If people in large enough numbers didn't buy their paints, but still bought their models, I'm willing to bet we'd see those paints disappear from the website. Again, GW doesn't care what you do, but wants to make money off of those that do want to paint.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jjohnso11 wrote:
Just gonna throw this out there:
1. GW recommends for its Warhammer World events that armies are painted to battlefield ready standard. (They don’t state that unpainted Armies are disqualified or not allowed.)

2. GW has invested hundreds of thousands of dollars to assist people in learning how to paint. (Painting App, YouTube, on their website when you pick the model you want to buy, on the box)

3. GW has a massive stock of paints, brushes, and other accessories to ensure that anyone who wants to collect their models doesn’t have to go elsewhere to buy the supplies they need to build and paint them.

How can an argument be made that GW doesn’t want their models to be painted?

As I've said above, they don't care. But they can make money profiting off of those who do want to. Those people who want their own stuff painted are the majority, even if they don't actually finish painting everything...or anything. If enough people didn't want to, GW would stop selling paint/providing things that advertise paints/tools. Those how to paint videos are just as much ads as they are hobby tips. GW makes them because it makes them money.

If you want to participate in the AoS Grand Tournament or the 40k Grand Tournament both hosted by Games Workshop the downloadable event pamphlet stipulates that your armies must be painted.

https://warhammerworld.warhammer-community.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/15/2019/11/40K8_Grand_Tournament_Season_2020_V2-1-1.pdf

I have never participated in an event at Warhammer World but I vaguely remember discussion that you earn points for a tiebreaker if your army is well painted.

I’m pretty sure this is proof that Games Workshop wants your armies painted.

 Jjohnso11 wrote:
If you want to participate in the AoS Grand Tournament or the 40k Grand Tournament both hosted by Games Workshop the downloadable event pamphlet stipulates that your armies must be painted.

https://warhammerworld.warhammer-community.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/15/2019/11/40K8_Grand_Tournament_Season_2020_V2-1-1.pdf

I have never participated in an event at Warhammer World but I vaguely remember discussion that you earn points for a tiebreaker if your army is well painted.

I’m pretty sure this is proof that Games Workshop wants your armies painted.

It's proof that they want them painted at their events at least.

Prove they don't want you to paint them. Go on