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.

Tangent from another thread-the 40k Armageddon Rumours one.

To make my stance clear, here in the first post:

-I don't like painting. Painted minis are cool, but I personally do not like painting them.
-I value 40k as a game (even if the rules can be kinda naff) and, as part of that, have no objections to grey plastic on the tabletop.
-If you feel different, that's 100% okay. If someone turns a game down because their opponent's minis aren't painted, that's totally fine. But you shouldn't impose your wants on others who don't feel the same.

Pretty much agree. I like painted minis, they looks cool and even more-so on the battle field. While I do enjoy painting, I do tend to lose patience with it. When I could see, I didn't know many of the techniques. Now I know a few, but can't see the detail real good anymore to paint at a good quality.

I also understand it takes skill and time, not everyone has those, so it's ok if your minis aren't painted, most of mine aren't yet.

I greatly prefer playing with/against a painted army, but would/have never turned down a game because an army is unpainted.

This tangent came about due to the preview (probably ahead of schedule) of the prepainted terrain, which led to the discussion of prepaints vs. painting your own, and eventually landed on people complaining about the 10VP rule - did I miss anything?

Did anyone ask about that rule in the Q&A GW did yesterday and they ignored it, or was it not raised at all? If the latter, it would seem to be not as big a deal as some posters were making it out to be.

I play not only with unpainted, but blu-tacked models most times. The miniatures are so horribly expensive once you include all the kitbashing etc, the last thing I want to do with my minis is hastly slap some paint on and "ruin" them forever. If someone has a problem with that, its OK, I dont have to play them.

In our small gaming group it has evolved into an unwritten rule to bring armies that are about 90% painted. There's the occasional "character I recently bought and want to try out" that's grey, or some WIP'S that got their primary colours the night before the game, but overall armies are painted.
Bases are a totally different thing though, and I'm personally very bad/ slow at basing stuff. They get the classic bestial brown treatment and usually about 10 years later (not an exaggeration) I have a phase where I base a lot of stuff.

I wouldn't see much sense in playing miniature wargames without the spectacle of painted models on painted terrain.

When it comes to gameplay there's an entire universe of so-much-better designed cutting-edge games (like modern board games) that just put the sad, obsolete, tedious, imbalanced and clunky miniature wargames designs to shame. Wargames commonly have shallow gamestates/decisions created with inelegant complicated rules (caveats and exceptions galore that somehow still have plenty of loopholes) when a well designed game should really do the opposite.

If I were in tabletop games only for the best quality game designs, I wouldn't touch miniature wargames with a 3m pole. But even the most modern, state-of-the-art board games can't compete with them in the category of visual spectacle and the scope of the hobby aspect. So I kind of suffer the gameplay for the spectacle

Is this an actual for issue for anyone or is it just tournaments and and the internet? I’ve never seen anyone refuse a game because of unpainted minis but that’s in my bubble, I’m interested are people actually having this issue.

I personally don’t put unpainted models on the table. I like the look of a fully painted army. I also use the desire to get minis into battle as help motivating them across the workbench.

I prefer to see a painted army across the table. But I don’t hold others to my standards. I’m just happy to get a game in.

I don’t care who paints my opponent’s army. They do it themselves, or commission someone? Whatever. Just don’t take credit for other people’s work. And please answer if I have questions on how you did something. We’re all fellow hobbyists here. A rising tide lifts all boats. If we can help each other with painting tips, everything looks better.

I’ve never claimed the 10 points for painted but I’ve had them given to me before though. Tie game, shaking hands at the end fully happy with that outcome, and they point out I’m battle ready and they were not. I’ll take the win if offered. But I also don’t do real tournaments, just fun games at the FLGS. So zero stakes on the W/L. Winning is fun, but I’m there for the journey, not the finish.

Does the 10 points encourage people to get painted models to the table? For some people, yes. For others, less so. It’s a burden for an aspect of the hobby they don’t care about. As was mentioned in the other thread, 40k is like 3 hobbies in a trenchcoat. Lore, modeling, painting, wargame. Not everyone likes every aspect. And that’s OK. I’d rather not force people to engage in parts they don’t care for.

I’ve painted armies for friends who like the lore/game, but not the building/painting side. I’ve played against people who added one painted model to their army a month because they pushed themselves to only put their best work down and not compromise. I’ve played against endless hordes or grey. Lovely commissioned armies painted to crazy standard. ebay mishmash rescue armies. It’s all good.

I will say that with contrast/speed paints getting an army to a decent 3 color minimum battle-ready state is pretty easy these days. I know it’s not for everyone, or works the best for every army. But something to consider if people want to join the fight against the Pile of Shame and the Grey Legions.

not worth it.

Since returning to the hobby in 2021, I have a strict non tolerance policy for fielding unpainted models. If it's not finished to a tolerable standard, I am not playing with it. That doesn't mean I am proud of everything I've painted, my Tyrannocyte and my Flamers don't look great (I just didn't end up liking the models that much), so they ended up a bit low effort, but nonetheless they are fully painted and stylistically consistent.

I have by far more tolerance for my opponent's models. I am not very interested in playing model police. If I am bothering to play a game, spotting unpainted models isn't enough for me to pack back up.

With that said, to be entirely frank, GW's rules really are not that good. If I was in this purely for a mechanically good game, odds are I'd not actually choose Warhammer in the first place. What makes this game worth it is the spectacle of painted miniatures on a decent table, put into an at least basic narrative context.

Ergo, while unpainted models may not be the cause of me turning down a match, if another player isn't interested in the spectacle and just want to game for game's sake it may be a sign of us having different tastes and priorities, and I may be seeking games elsewhere in the future.

I will also echo what Nevelon said about contrast. Seriously. As someone who has painted over 500 models in the last 5 years, but consider myself an overall slow painter, the only way I get things done is by heavy use of time- and effort-efficient techniques like contrast and drybrushing. Recently I attempted a new project where I painted traditionally in the old-school style, and it was a shock. It's a brick wall in comparison. I can totally get people feeling daunted and deterred if that's the only thing they've tried.

I'm not sure what my position is really.

Its a while ago now, but I used to be infamously the worst painter of our group. I'd paint everything at breakneck speed to get it on the table ASAP. Two sprays, add some metals, wash everything, jab on some details and done. (Tbh I think I got this reputation for trying lurid colours that I clearly lacked the patience to work with - while others went with "they have black armour. And clothes. And...")

As I've got better at painting - and taking more time over it - I've become much more tolerant of playing unpainted minis. I'd rather someone takes the time to paint something to a high standard than just feel they have through the mechanical process above.

I guess my only snobbery would be things like say the LVO years back. It felt weird to watch people (the quasi celebrities of competitive 40k) who were clearly spending considerable sums on the hobby - but their minis were painted up the barest minimum of "Battle Ready". It felt like if you were spending that sort of money, why not pay someone to paint your army? I wouldn't expect normal people to do that - but if you've made 40k your career, maybe?

Of course the response would probably be that this is only the army for this tournament - and the models had been scrounged up from various sources, and would be returned afterwards.

I think there is a few different things all coming together that makes it an issue that keeps coming up.
First difference in what the hobby is too people, but also that 40k army’s are quite large. So even doing fast painting can be quite time consuming.

But It also puts me off when there is a painting requirement for tournaments and the tables look a little off putting. And some of that is rules. Even seeing some of the tables where the organisers clearly went above and beyond can look weird due to the rules they abide by.
And it seems kind of counterintuitive that GW push for army painting, but do nothing really about terrain. Which seems to be getting worse than even just 10 years ago.

I really like terrain, it’s my hobby more than the miniatures I think now days.

 JNAProductions wrote:
Tangent from another thread-the 40k Armageddon Rumours one.

To make my stance clear, here in the first post:

-I don't like painting. Painted minis are cool, but I personally do not like painting them.
-I value 40k as a game (even if the rules can be kinda naff) and, as part of that, have no objections to grey plastic on the tabletop.
-If you feel different, that's 100% okay. If someone turns a game down because their opponent's minis aren't painted, that's totally fine. But you shouldn't impose your wants on others who don't feel the same.

I enjoy painting (at my own pace), but my main interests in 40k are as a game (especially with a story-telling bent). So while cool paint jobs are appreciated, I never begrudge someone showing up with gray plastic.

The 10VP for painted models rule honestly bugs me more than it should. It just feels like you're telling someone that they're hobbying wrong or getting in the way of the parts of the hobby they enjoy because someone wanted to punish people for not enjoying the same aspects of the hobby that they do. If someone doesn't like painting, I don't want them to be at a 10 point disadvantage every game because their way of enjoying the hobby differs from a paint enthusiast.

I also hate the idea of someone rushing to get their army tabletop ready instead of enjoying the painting at their own pace. Instead of waiting for a clear schedule and spending the afternoon finally taking the time to enjoy the act of putting paint on plastic, you might find yourself stressing to hurriedly throw paint on your models after work one night because you don't want to be at a disadvantage in the tournament that weekend.

I'm always perplexed when people are onboard with using the painting part of the hobby to interfere with the gaming part of the hobby. And I feel like people who are okay with things like the 10VP rule tend not to ask themselves why they're okay with it. I think cosplay is neat. If someone wants to show up to our games costumed as the commander of their army, that's awesome. But I don't want a rule that says you're at -10VP every game if you don't show up with at least three pieces of 40k costuming on. I like writing and reading backstories to armies. I don't want a 10 point advantage just because my opponent didn't feel like writing a two paragraph backstory for their warlord or whatever.

 Wyldhunt wrote:

Spoiler:

 JNAProductions wrote:
Tangent from another thread-the 40k Armageddon Rumours one.

To make my stance clear, here in the first post:

-I don't like painting. Painted minis are cool, but I personally do not like painting them.
-I value 40k as a game (even if the rules can be kinda naff) and, as part of that, have no objections to grey plastic on the tabletop.
-If you feel different, that's 100% okay. If someone turns a game down because their opponent's minis aren't painted, that's totally fine. But you shouldn't impose your wants on others who don't feel the same.

I enjoy painting (at my own pace), but my main interests in 40k are as a game (especially with a story-telling bent). So while cool paint jobs are appreciated, I never begrudge someone showing up with gray plastic.

The 10VP for painted models rule honestly bugs me more than it should. It just feels like you're telling someone that they're hobbying wrong or getting in the way of the parts of the hobby they enjoy because someone wanted to punish people for not enjoying the same aspects of the hobby that they do. If someone doesn't like painting, I don't want them to be at a 10 point disadvantage every game because their way of enjoying the hobby differs from a paint enthusiast.

I also hate the idea of someone rushing to get their army tabletop ready instead of enjoying the painting at their own pace. Instead of waiting for a clear schedule and spending the afternoon finally taking the time to enjoy the act of putting paint on plastic, you might find yourself stressing to hurriedly throw paint on your models after work one night because you don't want to be at a disadvantage in the tournament that weekend.

I'm always perplexed when people are onboard with using the painting part of the hobby to interfere with the gaming part of the hobby. And I feel like people who are okay with things like the 10VP rule tend not to ask themselves why they're okay with it. I think cosplay is neat. If someone wants to show up to our games costumed as the commander of their army, that's awesome. But I don't want a rule that says you're at -10VP every game if you don't show up with at least three pieces of 40k costuming on. I like writing and reading backstories to armies. I don't want a 10 point advantage just because my opponent didn't feel like writing a two paragraph backstory for their warlord or whatever.

Sgt. Cortez wrote:
That costume part made me chuckle and wonder why GW is not giving out 5VP if you use the faction specific dice they sell.

I'm pretty sure they'll've seen how quickly the faction dice generally go out of stock, otherwise they might.

Personally I think you can argue for any one part of the combined hobby for not being "for everyone".

Not everyone likes (or is good) at building models; painting; converting; playing; etc...

That said I think that if you try to remove one aspect to try and broaden appeal you start to lose focus on the actual hobby itself. You can water the hobby down by removing painting; by giving prebuild models; by simplifying game rules to nothing but jokes - each time you do that the hobby itself changes and you're chancing a market that isn't the original one. If anything you're also pushing that original one away.

GW isn't a firm struggling to make ends meat for years; its not a market in extreme decline and in need of a massive re-focus to try and appeal to markets outside of a rapidly shrinking home market.

It's a market that is, if anything, in a long term period of steady growth. Right now GW doesn't have to change the formula and if anything changing it is detrimental.


Hand-eye; creative outlet and so forth are part of what GW uses to help sell the hobby to parents of interested kids; its part of the appeal to many who engage with it.





I say this as someone with more grey than painted models who keeps promising to himself that "I'll learn painting instead of just buying paints" and so forth. It's my weakest area. Prepainted models would be super great for me in terms of fielding a painted force - BUT - I don't want to see it happen. Take that away and we'd lose something. We'd lose that painting community; that supportive (genuinely so) element of the hobby. We lose the chance to learn a new skill; to broaden the hobby into more than just one facet.