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.

The rule is not good.

How about you reward people for painting, not punish them for not painting?

 DeathReaper wrote:
The rule is not good.

How about you reward people for painting, not punish them for not painting?

fair point but in his eye's thats what he's doing :/ only an in game reward kinda craps over the other side

 Glorioski wrote:


Can't imagine you know yourself, what with the nerve damage in your arm.

FYI I did present this topic from an unbiased standpoint and don't feel I deserve the personal insult, thanks.

Trust me, it is not personal. It's directed to everyone who assigns a benefit from two completely unrelated things. Should a basketball player be given a free throw if the opponent has mismatching socks? It's just as relevant as this.

Now I fully agree that two painted armies on a great board is one of the BEST aspects of the hobby. It's what makes the best moments. But that's the reward of it. You are punishing those who for whatever reason can't paint, as unbiased as you claim to be. It's just the end result no matter how much you dress it up or claim to be.

And, since you're interested, any time I try to do precision work with my right arm (such as handwriting, working with tools or hey! Paintbrushes!) I have a nice set of spasms and twitches. Result of a fall as a child that broke the ball of my elbow in half inside the arm.

 Fafnir wrote:
It doesn't matter what it does or what it's trying to encourage, because it's still a stupid rule.

Except it's not, because it's a good rule.

 Kaldor wrote:

 Fafnir wrote:
It doesn't matter what it does or what it's trying to encourage, because it's still a stupid rule.

Except it's not, because it's a good rule.

I do not see how a rule that gives players an unfair advantage for doing something unrelated to the gameplay can be a good rule.

I'd be fine with it amongst a group of friends trying to motivate each other to get everything painted.

I'd be opposed to it as a set rule at a store or club. I think new players should be able to begin painting at their own pace. It can be incredibly daunting to attack these expensive kits with an unskilled hand.

It is a horrible idea for bringing new players into the game, since it punishes them (they are at a disadvantage to painted armies) on top of already being new to the game and learning strategies.

If you wanted to apply it in an escalation league instead of restricting players to completely painted models, or applying it to someone who takes forever to paint at their discretion, it could be used as a fun way to encourage. As a blanket rule it is terrible.

 Glorioski wrote:

 curran12 wrote:
I have nerve damage in my arm and any kind of worthwhile painting is an impossibility, leaving me either at the mercy of painting services or friends if I want a painted army. If I want to try units, I'm penalized because of this nerve damage.

Another impossibly smug "oh paint your armies if you have so much time and available skill" piece of utter crap from someone who is looking for another reason to pat themselves on the back for how awesome they are. Please.

Guess what I voted?

Can't imagine you know yourself, what with the nerve damage in your arm.

FYI I did present this topic from an unbiased standpoint and don't feel I deserve the personal insult, thanks.

Whereas he clearly deserved your mocking of his physical deformity?

You should feel ashamed of yourself for saying this.

Edited by Manchu.

 Fafnir wrote:
I'd rather not compromise the quality of my models just to please some TFG that demands everything be painted. I don't get many models painted because the ones I do paint take a long time to do, and I rarely have time to paint. It's just as disrespectful to expect me to do a gak job painting just to please someone else.

And again, let's be realistic here: most people who play with unpainted models aren't doing it because they care a ton about how their stuff looks and won't paint it until they have time to do it right (if they did they probably wouldn't glue it all together yet), they're playing with unpainted models because they don't give a about how they look and don't intend to ever paint anything.

Also, if people are so lacking in time, how do they have time to build anything? How do they have time to spend on removing mold lines, filling gaps, etc, and making the models they care so much about look nice in every way but painting?

 Necroshea wrote:
The idea that how your army looks is in any way disrespectful to your opponent is...well it's a joke.

It's entirely serious. Many people value the aesthetic appeal of two fully painted armies fighting on nice terrain. By taking an unpainted army what you're saying to those people is that you don't care enough about their enjoyment of the game to spend even a minimal amount of time painting your models.

 Peregrine wrote:

And again, let's be realistic here: most people who play with unpainted models aren't doing it because they care a ton about how their stuff looks and won't paint it until they have time to do it right (if they did they probably wouldn't glue it all together yet), they're playing with unpainted models because they don't give a about how they look and don't intend to ever paint anything.

Citation needed. Anything at all to back that up?

Against. Some people don't have time to paint as other have said. also, I really don't care if the other persons models are painted, I paint mine and am happy with that, but if someone doesn't want to make their army look nice, its their loss.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Fafnir wrote:
I'd rather not compromise the quality of my models just to please some TFG that demands everything be painted. I don't get many models painted because the ones I do paint take a long time to do, and I rarely have time to paint. It's just as disrespectful to expect me to do a gak job painting just to please someone else.

And again, let's be realistic here: most people who play with unpainted models aren't doing it because they care a ton about how their stuff looks and won't paint it until they have time to do it right (if they did they probably wouldn't glue it all together yet), they're playing with unpainted models because they don't give a about how they look and don't intend to ever paint anything.

Also, if people are so lacking in time, how do they have time to build anything? How do they have time to spend on removing mold lines, filling gaps, etc, and making the models they care so much about look nice in every way but painting?

Assembling doesn't take that long to do, and reaches a bare minimum of playability. It doesn't take nearly as long to assemble a model as it does to paint it, nor does it take nearly as much attention.

You're punishing people who don't care what their models look like because they just want to play a game and have fun, and you're punishing people who don't have the time or resources to properly finish their models. Either way, you're discouraging people from enjoying the game for your own sense of self gratification.

If you don't like that someone doesn't have their army painted, then don't play against them. It's as simple as that.

You will have a hard time bringing in new players with a rule like this. Especially those that are totally new to wargaming in general.

Why should a person play in your group or frequent a place of business if they know that those who have been at it longer not only have the advantage of a more diverse selection of models but also have probability skewing rules in place to help them solely because they are a veteran player? If this is a play group enforcing this rule then they are stifling their growth and if this is a store then they are losing money and will most likely not be open much longer. Probably the only thing a store can do that would be worse is to charge people to play.

And if you're into conspiracy theories then it sounds like someone is trying to penalize high model count armies...

CrowSplat wrote:
You will have a hard time bringing in new players with a rule like this. Especially those that are totally new to wargaming in general.

Why should a person play in your group or frequent a place of business if they know that those who have been at it longer not only have the advantage of a more diverse selection of models but also have probability skewing rules in place to help them solely because they are a veteran player? If this is a play group enforcing this rule then they are stifling their growth and if this is a store then they are losing money and will most likely not be open much longer. Probably the only thing a store can do that would be worse is to charge people to play.

And if you're into conspiracy theories then it sounds like someone is trying to penalize high model count armies...

Not to mention making models that give or benefit from the use of preferred enemy redundant.

 curran12 wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

And again, let's be realistic here: most people who play with unpainted models aren't doing it because they care a ton about how their stuff looks and won't paint it until they have time to do it right (if they did they probably wouldn't glue it all together yet), they're playing with unpainted models because they don't give a about how they look and don't intend to ever paint anything.

Citation needed. Anything at all to back that up?

Just personal experience (and you know perfectly well there's no official statistics to cite). People who don't paint don't ever paint, and the few painted models they might have tend to look like garbage because they invested minimal effort into it.

 Fafnir wrote:
Assembling doesn't take that long to do, and reaches a bare minimum of playability. It doesn't take nearly as long to assemble a model as it does to paint it, nor does it take nearly as much attention.

Only if you don't care how your models look and are willing to accept mold lines, parts that don't fit properly, bare plastic on areas that can't be painted easily once the model is assembled, glue puddles leaking out of the joints, etc. I invest a lot of effort into painting and I still find that cleaning up a model and preparing it to be painted can take a third of the total time and effort, if not more.

And of course given the rushed-looking assembly quality of the unpainted armies I tend to see, I seriously doubt that they're taking very much care with that part either.

You're punishing people who don't care what their models look like because they just want to play a game and have fun, and you're punishing people who don't have the time or resources to properly finish their models. Either way, you're discouraging people from enjoying the game for your own sense of self gratification.

And playing with bare plastic because you're too lazy to paint is punishing people who care about having battles between painted armies.

If you don't like that someone doesn't have their army painted, then don't play against them. It's as simple as that.

So it's better to refuse to let them play at all than to have a rule that lets them play, but with a bit less chance of winning?

Please keep in mind that Rule Number One is Be Polite. Thanks!

 Fafnir wrote:
You're punishing people who don't care what their models look like because they just want to play a game and have fun

Those people should be punished. If they didn't want to paint models, they chose the wrong hobby.

Honestly Peregrine, it sounds like that whole insulting your opponent with an unpainted army is a problem you have. If anything, in my experience I've met nobody like that ever.

I recently went to a flgs to try out warmachine. I show up with a completely painted Orboros army that I think I did a good job on. I even got compliments. I told them that I would have come sooner, but it wasn't until recently that my stuff was painting. Every single person there pretty much said in unison "why?"

I'd be willing to bet that most people care more about playing the game, then playing a well painted army.

 Peregrine wrote:


Just personal experience (and you know perfectly well there's no official statistics to cite). People who don't paint don't ever paint, and the few painted models they might have tend to look like garbage because they invested minimal effort into it.

Then perhaps we shouldn't say for sure what 'we all know', then? My personal experience is that most of those I play with have school or long-hours jobs and are more interested in throwing down for a game. Which of our personal experiences is more valid? Do you see how completely silly this line of logic is?

Now, I want to emphasize that there's few things better than two well-painted armies on a nice board. One of the best part of the hobby and a reason I take my camera to games. But it's frosting. It's not what the game is about to me. And assigning ingame benefits to out of game things is incredibly silly if you expand it to any further level. You are comparing apples to oranges.

 Peregrine wrote:

Only if you don't care how your models look and are willing to accept mold lines, parts that don't fit properly, bare plastic on areas that can't be painted easily once the model is assembled, glue puddles leaking out of the joints, etc. I invest a lot of effort into painting and I still find that cleaning up a model and preparing it to be painted can take a third of the total time and effort, if not more.

We'll have to agree to disagree on this point. For the most part, model cleanup is a fairly quick process. Unless I'm doing conversion work, of course, but that's another story.

You're punishing people who don't care what their models look like because they just want to play a game and have fun, and you're punishing people who don't have the time or resources to properly finish their models. Either way, you're discouraging people from enjoying the game for your own sense of self gratification.

And playing with bare plastic because you're too lazy to paint is punishing people who care about having battles between painted armies.

Which is why, if it's so important, they just shouldn't play one another.

If you don't like that someone doesn't have their army painted, then don't play against them. It's as simple as that.

So it's better to refuse to let them play at all than to have a rule that lets them play, but with a bit less chance of winning?

 curran12 wrote:
Then perhaps we shouldn't say for sure what 'we all know', then? My personal experience is that most of those I play with have school or long-hours jobs and are more interested in throwing down for a game.

That's still a personal choice. It's not that they don't have time and are unable to paint, it's that they don't care enough about painting to spend time on it instead of doing other things.

The rules do not take painting into account. There is no reason to punish people for not painting models.

Now if you were to reward them for painting that would be okay.

If you have a group member that does not like to paint, maybe tell him you will buy him a Mountain Dew if he finishes painting a particular squad.

While I don't subscribe to "punishing" people for playing unpainted armies, I'm not sure that whether the army is painted is necessarily an "out of game" consideration. We are talking about table top wargaming after all. For many, many folks (but not all) the hobby aspects are definitely a big part of "the game." The usual slippery slope argument reduces the question to whether miniatures need be used at all if all that matters is distance, some kind of LOS determination, and dice math.

 Kaldor wrote:

 Fafnir wrote:
You're punishing people who don't care what their models look like because they just want to play a game and have fun

Those people should be punished. If they didn't want to paint models, they chose the wrong hobby.

As I said, it's not always so simple. I have a full Krieg army just waiting to go, but getting the time to actually paint it all is very difficult to do, not to mention the daunting nature of a project so large (and if you've seen my painted Krieg models, that's the standard I envision for the entire army).

I enjoy painting, and I enjoy playing because of the social environment the game provides. But because my time is not limitless, I chose the wrong hobby? I'm not allowed to find enjoyment in these things in the small windows of time that I can find to do so?

 DeathReaper wrote:
tell him you will buy him a Mountain Dew

Ah, the neckbeard's ambrosia!

 Fafnir wrote:
We'll have to agree to disagree on this point. For the most part, model cleanup is a fairly quick process. Unless I'm doing conversion work, of course, but that's another story.

In any case, the main point of what I was saying about cleanup time is that most of the unpainted models I see are also poorly assembled in ways that pretty clearly demonstrate that the issue isn't "I don't want to ruin a model by rushing to get it painted and playable". It's just a very obvious case of not caring how bad the model looks as long as it wins the game.

Which is why, if it's so important, they just shouldn't play one another.

That's great in theory, but if you have open 40k night at a store/club it's easier said than done. People either have to accept games against unpainted armies, or not play at all.

 Fafnir wrote:
As I said, it's not always so simple. I have a full Krieg army just waiting to go, but getting the time to actually paint it all is very difficult to do, not to mention the daunting nature of a project so large

It's also worth noting that actually getting to play with an army can provide an incentive to finish painting it.

 Peregrine wrote:


That's still a personal choice. It's not that they don't have time and are unable to paint, it's that they don't care enough about painting to spend time on it instead of doing other things.

In a world of families, mandatory 10-hour workdays and who knows what else, that is a vast oversimplification of it. If someone doesn't like painting, the last thing they want to do with their free time is do something that's a chore to them. If something is a chore, they are not going to want to do it, and if they want to use their free time to get a game in, I'm more for that.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Fafnir wrote:
We'll have to agree to disagree on this point. For the most part, model cleanup is a fairly quick process. Unless I'm doing conversion work, of course, but that's another story.

In any case, the main point of what I was saying about cleanup time is that most of the unpainted models I see are also poorly assembled in ways that pretty clearly demonstrate that the issue isn't "I don't want to ruin a model by rushing to get it painted and playable". It's just a very obvious case of not caring how bad the model looks as long as it wins the game.

That's more an issue with the person themselves, rather than the state of their models. If they were to paint it (for, example, a tournament standard), it would likely be done just as carelessly.

Which is why, if it's so important, they just shouldn't play one another.

That's great in theory, but if you have open 40k night at a store/club it's easier said than done. People either have to accept games against unpainted armies, or not play at all.

Or they can just get off the high-horse and not worry about it. Enjoy the games against the fully painted, great looking armies as they come, and enjoy the games against the unpainted armies for what they are.

 curran12 wrote:
In a world of families, mandatory 10-hour workdays and who knows what else, that is a vast oversimplification of it. If someone doesn't like painting, the last thing they want to do with their free time is do something that's a chore to them. If something is a chore, they are not going to want to do it, and if they want to use their free time to get a game in, I'm more for that.

If they hate painting so much (and aren't saving their models for when they're going to do an amazing paint job) then they should have no problem painting with the basic "spray, boltgun metal, dip" approach. In the time they spend playing a single game they could probably paint their entire army like that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Fafnir wrote:
That's more an issue with the person themselves, rather than the state of their models. If they were to paint it (for, example, a tournament standard), it would likely be done just as carelessly.

Of course it's about the person. My point is that people who don't care seem to be far more common than people like you, who care a lot about appearance but just can't afford the time to paint everything properly.

And careless painting is better than no painting at all. I'd much rather play against someone with basic spray/dip painting than bare plastic.

Or they can just get off the high-horse and not worry about it. Enjoy the games against the fully painted, great looking armies as they come, and enjoy the games against the unpainted armies for what they are.

That's the whole point of having a minor penalty for unpainted armies. You still get to play the game, but you're encouraged to make a serious effort to get your stuff painted instead of playing with bare plastic month after month because everyone lets you get away with it.

Of course I do kind of think that preferred enemy is a bit too much. One idea I like better is that all units with an unpainted model get -1 LD because their morale is suffering from the fact that you don't care enough about them to give them paint. It's still a penalty, but less likely to swing the outcome of the game like universal preferred enemy would.