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.

insaniak wrote:


They're not participating in part of your hobby.

As I've said before in these sorts of discussions, there is a misconception in GW-gaming circles that there is some all-encompassing 'Wargaming hobby' (perpetuated in part by GW's branding of the 'GW Hobby') that includes painting & modeling, and playing, and that you have to do both in order to be participating in the hobby.

Which, to be frank, is nonsense.

Collecting miniatures is a hobby.
Painting and modeling is a hobby.
Wargaming is a hobby.

If you enjoy doing all of those things, that's great. If someone only enjoys (and only does) one or two of them, that doesn't make it any less a hobby, or them a hobbyist.

Wargaming does not exclusively involve painting miniatures. There are a whole swag of wargames out there that don't even use miniatures. To a lot of players, miniatures are no different to the tokens or cardboard chits used in any other wargame. Painting is an optional extra, not a requirement.


Don't get me wrong, I prefer playing with painted miniatures. But that's my preference. I'm not going to turn my nose up at someone else because they don't care for it.

QFT

No-one's view is better, this is an opinion and is simply based on how you view the hobby. Don't look down on someone because they are different. Because that makes you a NAZI!

insaniak wrote:

frozenwastes wrote:Except that they are not participating in part of the hobby. So by definition, it does make them less of a hobbyist..

They're not participating in part of your hobby.

As I've said before in these sorts of discussions, there is a misconception in GW-gaming circles that there is some all-encompassing 'Wargaming hobby' (perpetuated in part by GW's branding of the 'GW Hobby') that includes painting & modeling, and playing, and that you have to do both in order to be participating in the hobby.

Which, to be frank, is nonsense.

Collecting miniatures is a hobby.
Painting and modeling is a hobby.
Wargaming is a hobby.

If you enjoy doing all of those things, that's great. If someone only enjoys (and only does) one or two of them, that doesn't make it any less a hobby, or them a hobbyist.

Wargaming does not exclusively involve painting miniatures. There are a whole swag of wargames out there that don't even use miniatures. To a lot of players, miniatures are no different to the tokens or cardboard chits used in any other wargame. Painting is an optional extra, not a requirement.


Don't get me wrong, I prefer playing with painted miniatures. But that's my preference. I'm not going to turn my nose up at someone else because they don't care for it.

Very true points.

However, one of the major complaints that I've remembered seeing is from the folks who were marked down for having unpainted models in a tournament setting and being marked down.

Do you think exceptions should be allowed in a "3 color minimum and flocked base" tournament environment for someone who couldn't find the time?

insaniak wrote:

frozenwastes wrote:Except that they are not participating in part of the hobby. So by definition, it does make them less of a hobbyist..

They're not participating in part of your hobby.

...

that includes painting & modeling, and playing, and that you have to do both in order to be participating in the hobby.

Excellent point. And given that my hobby includes more behaviors/processes/actions than someone who just plays and doesn't paint, they're less of a hobbyist given the criteria that I use to define "that thing we do" with people who do the same thing as me.

Why should they care that they don't meet my criteria for my hobby? If it's my hobby to paint and play with miniatures and it's another person's hobby to play games with unpainted miniatures and I say, "You know, that's not my hobby, I do that and also this," why do I become the elitist bad guy? We have separate hobbies and somehow it's okay for them to ask me to sacrifice part of my hobby and play with their unpainted models but it's not okay for me to ask them to add in a part to their hobby and paint their models?

Wargaming does not exclusively involve painting miniatures. There are a whole swag of wargames out there that don't even use miniatures. To a lot of players, miniatures are no different to the tokens or cardboard chits used in any other wargame. Painting is an optional extra, not a requirement.

Absolutely. For those who are doing the whole "unpainted miniature wargaming" hobby. I'm getting out of that hobby and into the one that's more visually appealing. I understand that it's not for everyone.

Painting absolutely is required to participate in the hobby of "painting and playing with miniatures". If you don't do it, your just "----- and playing with miniatures." Which I guess is fine. I do that too.

Also, you stated, "To a lot of players, miniatures are no different to the tokens or cardboard chits used in any other wargame." You might find that the generals who marshall their bare metal hordes will get up in arms and look down upon someone who shows up for a game with cardboard flats they printed to play the game with.

i suppose it wouldn't be a thread of this type if i didn't add in that if you refused to play me because i had unpainted miniatures that i would smash your miniatures with a hammer and then punch you in the face.

oh...

is the painting requirement RAW or RAI?

and finally

goto www.mustpaintminiatures.com to sign my petition to make it so all miniatures must be painted before you can use them.

have i forgotten any?

4 pages of opinions later i think that the OP should have gotten a fair assessment of how people feel about this subject.

Kanluwen wrote:However, one of the major complaints that I've remembered seeing is from the folks who were marked down for having unpainted models in a tournament setting and being marked down.

Do you think exceptions should be allowed in a "3 color minimum and flocked base" tournament environment for someone who couldn't find the time?

I think that's down to the tournament. There are tournaments out there that don't have painting requirements. Just as some have Comp requirements and some don't.

frozenwastes wrote:And given that my hobby includes more behaviors/processes/actions than someone who just plays and doesn't paint, they're less of a hobbyist given the criteria that I use to define "that thing we do" with people who do the same thing as me.

My point as that they're not less of a hobbyist. They're just participating in a slightly different hobby to you.

You might find that the generals who marshall their bare metal hordes will get up in arms and look down upon someone who shows up for a game with cardboard flats they printed to play the game with.

You'll also find a lot who won't care. I've seen people play games of 40K with tokens marked 'Tactical Marine' and the like.

Although the point was more about other games. My version of Risk has miniature soldiers, cavalry and canons for pieces. For having that set, I don't consider myself more of a hobbyist than my sister, who has the old fashioned set with the plastic roman numerals for pieces...

insaniak wrote:
You'll also find a lot who won't care. I've seen people play games of 40K with tokens marked 'Tactical Marine' and the like.

Yep. Done something like that myself. Used empty film canisters as proxies for Bloodbowl Ogres.

My point was a bit hidden, I'll admit. As well as the obvious analogy of people thinking those who use markers instead of miniatures are cheap or lazy, there's another. It was that if you are doing a hobby that works even when you use "tokens marked 'Tactical Marine' and the like" then your making a statement that the visual side of things doesn't matter. That the miniatures don't matter.

At that point, I'd question whether or not the person is participating in the hobby of miniature wargaming if the miniatures don't matter. Sounds like wargaming to me. Which is fine. Do that myself.

But when we use the word "hobby" in reference to Warhammer or Warmachine or any other miniature wargame we mean something more than just wargaming with cardboard markers. If someone isn't doing the common actions that make up the hobby, then they're not participants in that hobby. They're less of a hobbyist than someone who fully participants in all the common actions that make up the hobby. Just like I'd consider someone who converted everything or even sculpted all their own miniatures more of a hobbyist than I am.

And I'm alright with that, because I'm not as dedicated to the task of being judgemental to myself as those who are threatened by people wanting to play with only painted miniatures. I accept that I'm less of a hobbyist than those who convert their whole armies and sculpt their own miniatures. And if they said to me, "I really like the visual appeal when someone personalizes their force with conversions and their own sculpts and only play against such forces," I'd be fine with that. Good on them for not settling for a less enjoyable experience!

frozenwastes wrote:But when we use the word "hobby" in reference to Warhammer or Warmachine or any other miniature wargame we mean something more than just wargaming with cardboard markers.

That was kind of my point, though.

We've been brainwashed by GW into believing that it's one all-encompassing hobby. It's not. It's several different hobbies, which people participate in to varying degrees depending on their own interests.


Kudos to GW, the branding of the term 'GW hobby' is one of the most brilliant pieces of marketing they've ever come up with, (on par with 'You must use GW miniatures to play, which has become such an ingrained facet of the 'GW hobby' for so many players, whether they're playing in 'official' events or no) since it pushes certain people into all sorts of directions (and subsequently purchases) that they otherwise possibly wouldn't have bothered with.

insaniak wrote:My point as that they're not less of a hobbyist. They're just participating in a slightly different hobby to you.

Aiya, that's kinda ridiculous. I get the metaphor MDG is pushing in his thread but it's not a literal truth. You play 40k, I play 40k. Maybe you paint, maybe I don't. We're both playing 40k and not slightly different versions, either. Jervis isn't going to come and arrest me--or you for that matter (at least not over this issue). If I can't compete in some tournaments, so be it. If some people won't play against me, so be it. When a thread like this results in the hardening of the tolerant position into a kind of dogma it has become part of the problem.

I don't care if someone plays with an unpainted army, its their stuff, so let them do with it as they please. Also, I don't know the reasons behind why they didn't paint them, maybe they didn't have enough time, or they are on a budget and wanted to get the most models, or any number of other reasons.

insaniak wrote:

frozenwastes wrote:But when we use the word "hobby" in reference to Warhammer or Warmachine or any other miniature wargame we mean something more than just wargaming with cardboard markers.

That was kind of my point, though.

We've been brainwashed by GW into believing that it's one all-encompassing hobby. It's not. It's several different hobbies, which people participate in to varying degrees depending on their own interests.

Except that miniature wargaming as a hobby predates GW and the same things that GW pushes as "the Games Workshop Hobby" existed in the activities of those pre-GW hobbyists. Historical miniature wargamers, for example, are some of the biggest sticklers for painted miniatures.

Given this, I believe it's accurate to talk about miniature wargaming in terms of collecting miniatures, painting miniatures, setting up terrain and carrying out a battle game. That's historically been the behaviour of those who have participated in miniature wargaming.

It's completely logical then, to talk about someone collecting miniatures, setting up terrain and carrying out a battle game as missing a piece of the pie-- painting miniatures. If and only if we appeal to past behaviour of painting the miniatures rather than the current behavior of using armies of bare metal when defining miniature wargaming.

But if we go down that road, we basically end up in a stupid sub-culture identity war where those who paint their miniatures battle with those who don't over who gets to decide who qualifies as a real hobbyist.

My main point in my previous posts was that it's okay for someone to decide that certain things are deal breakers for them. For some, it's no proxies. For others, it's no unpainted miniatures. And if you or I don't meet their standard for how they want to spend their time, then they can find someone who does. We don't need to judge ourselves as failing to meet the higher standard.

I have decided to raise the bar in my own hobby life and move towards painted only on finished terrain. Not out of judgement or pride, but for the merits of that approach (visual appeal and my enjoyment of the painting process). If someone doesn't want to paint their miniatures, cool! Given how common bare metal and plastic are these days, I'm sure they'll find someone else to play against.

Posts I found insightful from last time:

Redbeard wrote:I think what happened was that the community of gamers allowed the Corporation to establish the community standards, rather than setting them themselves.

There's a definite community standard issue. Once upon a time - and still in historical communities - playing with unpainted models was simply not kosher. You wanted to play with someone else - you painted your models.

Once upon a time, Games Workshop upheld this standard. Once upon a time, GW would require that models be painted in order to play in their stores.

What happened was that GW chose to pursue more money. They decided that they'd sell more models if they started allowing unpainted models to be played in their stores. And, the community sheepishly followed along. Rather than the gamers saying, 'no, I won't play with you if your stuff is unpainted', they went along with GW's decision.

If you want the community standards to change, you need to be willing to be the guy who makes it happen. When you see someone post a battle report with unpainted miniatures in it, berate them for it. When someone asks for a game with their unpainted army, say no.

At the very least, lead by example. Play with painted armies. Make a point of complimenting other gamers you see playing with painted armies.

Otherwise, you're simply allowing GW to set the standard, and their standard is going to be the one that gets them the most money, not the one that provides the best gaming environment.

malfred wrote:As much as I'd like to doll up my armies for other people's gratification, the most important reason I apply the make-up to my models is also the most selfish. I do so for my own pleasure.

Anything else is a bonus.

I do appreciate the inspiration a well painted army can provide across the tabletop, but that's mostly between my opponent and his models.

Ghidorah wrote:

MisterMoon wrote:Why don't people paint anymore?

It's my experience that it has always been this way. At least for the last 15 years. The overwhelming majority of people play unpainted/partially painted armies. As we all know, it's very easy to get overwhelmed in this hobby. It is commonplace to buy minis often enough to outweigh your speed at paining. Soon, you find yourself in a sea a grey plastic and boxes of unbuilt kits.

Sadly, though, sooo many people just want to play the game and don't want to paint, can't paint, don't have time to paint, whatever.

It's always been this way.

There's also some good stuff in the 'Ard Boyz paint requirement debate thread.

usernamesareannoying wrote:@redbeard -...
there are a lot of elitist attitudes in here and again, i will say that by denying someone a game based on paint or modeling level is only preventing someone from a possibly great game.

I'll say it again, just so there's no misunderstanding... I won't refuse to play against someone who hasn't painted their stuff. However, my criteria for a "great game" requires (among other things) that both armies, and the terrain, look good. I'll never miss a "great game" if I pass up a game against an unpainted army.

Davor wrote:*edit* Some people here keep saying they respect people for not painting their models, but still stick thier nose down at them for doing so. How can you respect somone for thier choice when your sticking your nose down on them?

I don't respect anyone for not painting their models. There are very few 'not doings' worthy of respect. Not doing drugs is as close as I think it comes. I don't see how someone not doing something is worthy of respect. I respect their right to choose not to do so. But that's not quite the same as respecting their choice. That doesn't mean I disrespect them, but if you didn't paint your models, what exactly did you do to earn my respect? Respect must be earned.

This, of course, applies only to this topic. Please don't take this to mean that I'd look poorly upon other aspects of someone's life. There are lots of different types of respect. I can respect someone as a human being, as a parent, a good worker, a soldier or firefighter, etc. and their playing with an unpainted army certainly wouldn't make me think any less of them as a person. But if they had painted it, I'd think more of them as a hobbyist.

It would have to be "not doing drugs if you're addicted to drugs," which turns out to be an active thing anyway.

And before anyone takes a shot at redbeard's "great games" phrase, take a look at his set-up:

http://www.dakkadakka.com/gallery/30324-.html?m=2

This is objectively better than playing on a kitchen table with books under a table cloth. The person who does as much (like myself) simply isn't the hobbyist redbeard is. I don't see what's elitist about that.

Manchu wrote:Aiya, that's kinda ridiculous. I get the metaphor MDG is pushing in his thread but it's not a literal truth. You play 40k, I play 40k. Maybe you paint, maybe I don't. We're both playing 40k and not slightly different versions, either. Jervis isn't going to come and arrest me--or you for that matter (at least not over this issue). If I can't compete in some tournaments, so be it. If some people won't play against me, so be it. When a thread like this results in the hardening of the tolerant position into a kind of dogma it has become part of the problem.

I was going to say something like this, but why repeat perfection and water it down?

QFT

insaniak wrote:
We've been brainwashed by GW into believing that it's one all-encompassing hobby. It's not. It's several different hobbies, which people participate in to varying degrees depending on their own interests.


Kudos to GW, the branding of the term 'GW hobby' is one of the most brilliant pieces of marketing they've ever come up with, (on par with 'You must use GW miniatures to play, which has become such an ingrained facet of the 'GW hobby' for so many players, whether they're playing in 'official' events or no) since it pushes certain people into all sorts of directions (and subsequently purchases) that they otherwise possibly wouldn't have bothered with.

Insaniak this is so true that sometimes makes me cry .

I´m into playing miniatures and building stuff not into the GW hobby whatever that is. I have 3 armies a WHFB Tomb King 90-95% finished unless I start changing things again. An eternal wip Eldar army about 60% done and now an IG ground pounder one that it´s almost 99% unpainted. Both my 40k armies are not GW official as I´m using the models I like to have not the ones GW wants me to have but I wanted to use the more popular rules available to players (even if the rules are quite lacking).
So due to this very successful branding I was "expelled" from my (not so)F(not quite)LGS because I was not using "official" miniatures and couldn´t care less about painting.

It´s a trade off I guess, if I have to go on without gaming the other side will have to do with less opponents and less money being spend on their products. If your ideal gaming shop/club is full with people that only play with GW official painting stuff be my guest and enjoy yourself but if not methinks that you´ll have to get down from your high horse and evolve towards a more open view.

Evolve or Die (motto of Urban War game with some cool figures to use as HB or IG count as )

M.

I don't know how GW could have created this myth when the historical hobbyists (from a much older pedigree than spring chicken 40k or even WHFB) seem to paint their armies more often than not while GW is running 'Ard Boyz with no paint requirement at all. No doubt GW wants to glean a profit off of the "hobby" as they sell it by enticing you with overpriced primer, etc. But they didn't invent a myth about the wargaming hobby involving assembling and painting models. The simply capitalized upon it. The "hobby myth" theory seems a hindsight rationalization of either efforts on the part of Rackham, WotC, WizKids, etc, or that GW customers have more money to buy models than time/desire to paint them.

in my opinion my game is less entertaining when im not playing someone with a painted army, the one thing i refuse is to make a battle report with an unpainted army,

and if it comes to a tournament i could careless at the paint job but it does make me see less thing so it irritates me a little,
i my self dont have everything painted but i am one to make the majority painted

i even have a skaven army, 120 clan rats painted in less then 2 weeks with no painting time over week ends, along with some other things, my goal is if you start painting a unit dont stop till your finnished with that unit,

Can anyone out there honestly say they prefer the look of a bare plastic/metal army compared to a painted one?

If you answer yes then I fully respect your choice to have an unpainted army as that's what appeals to you more.

If you answer no and have an unpainted army why not try and get this situation changed? If you seriously cannot find any time to paint, or can't afford the paints, or don't want to paint there are other options out there. Get a mate or someone else to paint them for you, cash doesn't have to be involved if you can't afford it. Help them out by doing something for them you like doing. I've painted units for guys at the club who didn't have time or didn't like painting and they've done things for me like lifts to shows or helping me move furniture.

To me (and this is my personal opinion that I'm not trying to force on anyone) this is a very visual hobby (I love looking at other painted armies and talking about them with their owners as much as playing the games). If thats not your view, fair enough, we enjoy the hobby in different ways and need to respect each others different views.

Mick

You know what I would prefer?

Buying my box of plastic miniatures and having them already painted. Given that a box of Lootas or space marines or anything else pretty much costs $5 per model, I can honestly say that I'm a bit offended that I'm expecting to cut, assemble, and paint them myself. For $5 per model. I can also honestly say that most of the reason I participate in this hobby is because 90% of all the models I get are free - earnings from tournament winnings. I'll take a free model and assemble and try painting it.

But for $5 per model, the least I could get is a model already assembled and painted. Stamped with color in a factory; I don't care. The cheapest price that I've ever seen to get a model painted and based was $2.50 per model, bringing the tally up to $7.50 per model for a tiny bit of molded plastic. How absurd is that?

Dashofpepper wrote:... I can honestly say that I'm a bit offended that I'm expecting to cut, assemble, and paint them myself...

You know, there's a clue in there somewhere. You're right, $5 for a game piece is too expensive. $5 for a detailed model that you will enjoy assembling and painting, well, that's a different matter. But, yes, $5 for just a game piece is ludicrous.

Perhaps you should look into some of the clix games. They're assembled and painted for you, might be more to your liking.

Honestly I don't like seeing unpainted armies in tournies, but I would play the person.

I would much perfer to see an unpainted army than a poorly [really poorly painted] army, you know the kind where you know the person could paint much much better but they did a terrible job just to say its painted and play with it without getting marked off points if theres a painting score.

I honestly don't mind playing against someone whos army is in the process of being painted and has a few models well painted and the rest undercoated or untouched as I know they are going to finish.

edit- there are many painting services overseas [inda, china, thailand] that will paint your models to very high standards for less than half the cost of the model including shipping if you really want prepainted models. If you take the time to buy models only when on sale at 20% off or more, or from ebay, or secondhand and strip them you can actually get high quality painted models for the cost of the brand new model from GW. Seriously.

@ dashofpepper

so you want to pay MORE money so some kid in a sweatshop can paint your minis b4 they are sent to you?!? more £, less fun. great idea! LMAO

YOU ALL have obviously been brainwashed by GW into thinking they care.
*looks over shoulder*

(To be clear, I do run a fully painted army, so this isn't me whining about people who want to play against painted armies... this is an argument for "live and let live")

GW != Historical minis wargaming. The two hobbies have (IMO) different focuses and target groups, leading to different rules and conventions. Because the fluff/history of those armies are so important, not painting loses a significant part of that hobby.

This reminds me of certain evangelical groups. If you don't agree with them it's a character flaw that you should get changed. If you don't like/want to paint, you should either find a different hobby because you're a leper that isn't wanted around by the serious hobbyists, or you should just "get over it" because "I can paint X amount of models in Y amount of time... so why can't you?"

I applaud those that do realize that everyone enjoys different parts of the hobby and that "live and let live" works better than "Why don't you go play Chess or Clix?" Once again, nobody forces anyone to play against someone they don't want to. If you don't want to play against someone that doesn't have their army painted... DON'T. There's nothing wrong with that. But I would argue that you not try to tell them that they're "doing it wrong" and the "hobby" only consists of painted armies. If they're having fun, who are we to be the ones to tell them they need to change?

MOMUS wrote:@ dashofpepper

so you want to pay MORE money so some kid in a sweetshop can paint your minis b4 they are sent to you?!? more £, less fun. great idea! LMAO

they make them paint and make candy? the bastards!

I take, on average, 2 hours to paint a single trooper model. That applies to any trooper model; tyranids, tau, skaven, lizardmen, etc. That will speed up slightly if I paint a whole unit at once. I could paint faster, but the model wouldn't look nearly as good. As a result a lot of my stuff is still unpainted.

I don't care how much faster other people are, or that someone can get best painted with an army they worked on for a month. I work at my pace.

People can refuse to play me for having unpainted armies, that's fine. They aren't the people I want to game with anyway.

Gornall wrote:
GW != Historical minis wargaming. The two hobbies have (IMO) different focuses and target groups, leading to different rules and conventions. Because the fluff/history of those armies are so important, not painting loses a significant part of that hobby.

The fluff/history of the armies in 40k seems fairly important to me. There's easily as much written about the organization, "history" and heraldry of the Ultramarines as there is on the Prussian army circa the Austro-Prussian war. Not paying heed to this background loses as much of the GW hobby as it does in the historical games, where you could simply put unpainted soldiers on the table and use whatever rules you wanted...

One of the gamers in my regular game is actually more concerned with this stuff than anything else. It matters more to him that he's got the right iconography and numbering in his squads than it does if they're either painted well, or play well on the tabletop.

Redbeard wrote:
One of the gamers in my regular game is actually more concerned with this stuff than anything else. It matters more to him that he's got the right iconography and numbering in his squads than it does if they're either painted well, or play well on the tabletop.

That's great for him. He found something that caught his interest and went for it. I think that's the point. 40k has enough different aspects that it can appeal to a variety of different people, each with different ideas of what is "fun". The key is finding the ones that share your ideas of fun so you can have enjoyable experiences and don't have to fight about the "right" way to enjoy "the hobby".

80% of this hobby for me is the painting and the modeling, the playing is a great excuse to give the wife to get out of the house and sit at the hobby store painting in relative peace and quiet. I have TWO kids under the age three, finding time to paint is EXTREMELY hard. When I do play, I hold MYSELF to a very very high standard. I field at all times an army that is AT LEAST 95% painted, the minis that are not completed are at least 50% done. My biggest pet peeve is when someone plays with the models they do not own. If they have unassembled tanks or troops they purchaced that day and have a reasonable proxy, im down to play. When the tanks were bought six months ago and he's only got them rebberbanded together... then we might have a problem. Also if they have to borrow the propper models from another player.. i hate that.
My general point is, just because i have a high standard for myself, there is no reason to force my standard on someone else who never agreed to it. I do not play much because of my own personal high standard, but thats fine for me because when i do play my army looks fantastic and i get a lot of compliments, everyone likes to see a fully painted army.

usernamesareannoying wrote:

MOMUS wrote:@ dashofpepper

so you want to pay MORE money so some kid in a sweetshop can paint your minis b4 they are sent to you?!? more £, less fun. great idea! LMAO

they make them paint and make candy? the bastards!

i know they make me sick

they probably have been brainwashed by GW to make 40k by day and WFB by night!

i only look @ GW site by using a mirror, direct LOS will make you one of their drones!!!!!!!!!!

I don't know about kids in sweat shops painting, but that's not what I want. Toys at K-mart aren't painted by kids in a sweat-shop....they're mass produced. All I'm saying is that I'd like it if Ork boys were mass-produced already assembled and green. I'm not into this hobby to paint, I'm in it to wargame.

You know why I don't play hero-clix or whatever clix things you guys are talking about? Precisely because I don't know what they are, and no one else really does either. =p 40k is big, hero-clix is not. We could just as easily switch that around. Warhammer 40k is a tabletop tactical wargame. If you'd rather paint, why don't you take up canvas painting, or mural-making, or something else? That's much more painting focused than 40k, and you can get away from people who want to PLAY with their toys instead of just looking at them.

Folks, when I want to play a video game, I don't want to lovingly craft and program it, I just want to play it for entertainment. Table-top gaming is the same to me. I want to play it, not paint it.