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.

It's an immersion thing. Some people play this this game because of the imagination factor of two good looking armies on a table getting ready to clash. The mind likes not having to fill in ALL the gaps

I dislike grey and poorly painted armies because painting isn't hard. Its about the inclination of actually trying. About 10 years ago the standards for painting were much higher, and I remember going to GTs and seeing amazing work, now, you're lucky to see a handful of well painted models at a tournament.

The "10 minute" water colour wash method is stupid easy and you can paint an army in no time. It looks great and leaves room for the eventuality of wet blending it into awesome.

My non-wargaming girlfriend painted up 12 gaunts in 3 hours and never painted a model in her life. And they looked better then some people who have been doing it for 10+ years.

Everything I've learned about painting can be summed up as follows:

1. Paint
2. ???
3. Profit

It IS a hobby, and some people take it too seriously.

But really, I'd prefer playing with/against painted armies, mostly because they're more distinguishable - especially when BOTH sides play the same faction, AND have unpainted models in their midst. That scenatio might cause some arguments over which model is yours and which is opponent's.

It's the best for keeping things clear and understandable to paint your whole army. I tolerate those who don't, but as I mentioned, some hustle may occur... and besides: you can't let a fine piece of art unfinished! ;3

My group is all about the fluff aspect of the game. Painting isn't important as forging a narrative. That's why we have to have detailed army histories including individually named models with a basic family lineage for each and a quick list of hopes, aspirations, and fears. When any unit suffers a casualty we have to get in character and give a quick moment of grief for his surviving squad mates and talk about the good times they shared. When ever moving, shooting, or performing any action with a unit we pick up the leader for the group and, in the character's voice, give out the order to the squad with resulting "aye sir" from his squad. Objectives and mission are entirely superfluous as we decide who wins based on audience approval of our individual performances and how pulled in they got into the 40K universe.
Really anyone who does any less is subhuman and in the wrong game entirely and should be shamed into something like tetris.

Painted armies look better on the table, but I'm not going to get mad over/refuse to play against unpainted minis.

I wont refuse to play against someone with an unpainted army, but I refuse to field my own unpainted miniatures. So if my troops are unpainted.... they don't play!

I view it as "readiness," painted miniatures are "trained troops" I have noticed dice rolls mystically roll higher for painted Soldiers. Would you send a real Soldier into combat "un-trained?"

-J

 kronk wrote:
Chicks like painted miniatures. FACT!

That's going in my signature block.

And it IS totally true, whenever my wife picks me up from the FLGS (we only have 1 car) and sees unpainted models on the table she's all "They look so much better painted, you're so cool." And I'm all "Yeah, I know."

I wouldn't not play against an unpainted army, but doing so does diminish the overall experience. I don't play with something until it is painted for my own personal armies. So when I put down my painted figs next to primer or bare plastic opponent's it just makes the table look meh....

I would even take it a step further and say when you have 2 really well painted armies and cruddy terrain it still doesn't feel right...lol!

 Savageconvoy wrote:
My group is all about the fluff aspect of the game. Painting isn't important as forging a narrative. That's why we have to have detailed army histories including individually named models with a basic family lineage for each and a quick list of hopes, aspirations, and fears. When any unit suffers a casualty we have to get in character and give a quick moment of grief for his surviving squad mates and talk about the good times they shared. When ever moving, shooting, or performing any action with a unit we pick up the leader for the group and, in the character's voice, give out the order to the squad with resulting "aye sir" from his squad. Objectives and mission are entirely superfluous as we decide who wins based on audience approval of our individual performances and how pulled in they got into the 40K universe.
Really anyone who does any less is subhuman and in the wrong game entirely and should be shamed into something like tetris.

But wouldn't it be fluffier to have all your units painted up with unique squad/regimental colours and insignia, with campaign badges and such added for flavour?

The amount of pretentiousness in this thread and general topic is staggering. Do what you want with your hobby, time, money, and feel free to set your own standards for your army. You feel like everything should be painted before battling on the tabletop? Go hard, but don't try to impose what you feel is "right" in your little hobby world on other people. Sorry, the miniatures are nothing more than physical avatars for which to represent the rules of the models, paint schemes and standards never come into the equation. If my opponent's mini is an unpainted troop choice and mine is a painted troop choice then guess what? They both operate the exact same on the tabletop. Whether the lack of paint on your opponent's behalf disrupts your imaginative forging of the narrative or just plain bugs you, that's on you and not your opponent. Either work on your imaginative play or simply get over it, both solutions are relatively simple.

I imagine the "purists" on this board would also judge their opponent for having scratch builds, third party models, and *gasp* using third party paints because they aren't directly in line with the GW purist culture. Please, take a step back, get over yourself, and come back to the hobby when you're ready to actually enjoy the company of others and enjoy the game for what it is.

A hobby filled with players that hate on their mother company, GW, and, more importantly, other players is a community divided that doesn't have a lot of hope for a future.

If you want to play against the same purist every game simply because his/her products are good enough for you and up to your standards then go ahead. Me? I'll just be over here playing with everybody else and enjoying the game instead of nitpicking the aesthetics of my opponent's army.

For myself, I would never play with an unpainted army. I waited until I had 750 points of Orks to start playing. Painting is a huge part of the hobby for me.

I don't personally enjoy playing against unpainted armies but will if that is the only way I get to play.

Though I have passed up games against unpainted models, when another opponent with painted models was available. (my loss I know)

There is no animosity towards unpainted armies, its just I like the fluff and story as much as I like the gaming aspect, and fighting against another painted army
really leads to more fun. (for me)

 c0j1r0 wrote:

 kronk wrote:
Chicks like painted miniatures. FACT!

That's going in my signature block.

And it IS totally true, whenever my wife picks me up from the FLGS (we only have 1 car) and sees unpainted models on the table she's all "They look so much better painted, you're so cool." And I'm all "Yeah, I know."

My love quotes similarly when she's watching me paint. Usually she storms to my little corner-workshop of little men when she's paying a visit.
"I wanna see what new you've painted, they look so badass" (yes, she calls 'em badass => instant turn on!)

 Tyberos the Red Wake wrote:

Dalymiddleboro wrote:
Who cares? It's a HOBBY, do w/e you want and get w/e you want out of it. There's no set way to go about this... I just don't understand why people let it emotionally affect them when it's not their army or their models lol.

Exactly, it's a hobby, so why would you not participate in the hobby aspect, which is painting the figures?

Depends what you class as the Hobby.
I see the hobby as gaming. I don't paint my Monopoly figures, or Settlers of Catan pieces, or my computer.

Yes I do paint my 40K figures, but that's because I want to and not because I have to. Let people just play the game.

 drock403 wrote:
The amount of pretentiousness in this thread and general topic is staggering. Do what you want with your hobby, time, money, and feel free to set your own standards for your army. You feel like everything should be painted before battling on the tabletop? Go hard, but don't try to impose what you feel is "right" in your little hobby world on other people. Sorry, the miniatures are nothing more than physical avatars for which to represent the rules of the models, paint schemes and standards never come into the equation. If my opponent's mini is an unpainted troop choice and mine is a painted troop choice then guess what? They both operate the exact same on the tabletop. Whether the lack of paint on your opponent's behalf disrupts your imaginative forging of the narrative or just plain bugs you, that's on you and not your opponent. Either work on your imaginative play or simply get over it, both solutions are relatively simple.

I imagine the "purists" on this board would also judge their opponent for having scratch builds, third party models, and *gasp* using third party paints because they aren't directly in line with the GW purist culture. Please, take a step back, get over yourself, and come back to the hobby when you're ready to actually enjoy the company of others and enjoy the game for what it is.

A hobby filled with players that hate on their mother company, GW, and, more importantly, other players is a community divided that doesn't have a lot of hope for a future.

If you want to play against the same purist every game simply because his/her products are good enough for you and up to your standards then go ahead. Me? I'll just be over here playing with everybody else and enjoying the game instead of nitpicking the aesthetics of my opponent's army.

The only pretension I see in this thread is yours.

Pretentious- making usually unjustified or excessive claims (as of value or standing), expressive of affected, unwarranted, or exaggerated importance, worth, or stature, making demands on one's skill, ability, or means.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pretentious

If making a claim or opinion on a forum consisting mostly of opinion is pretentious then I'm guilty as charged. I was merely stating that elitist wargamers who feel that others should paint armies to their standard is pretentious, and it is.

Stop expecting people to play to your standard and not only will you lead a much happier life but you'll also manage to stay out of other people's business. It's a win win.

 drock403 wrote:
The amount of pretentiousness in this thread and general topic is staggering. Do what you want with your hobby, time, money, and feel free to set your own standards for your army. You feel like everything should be painted before battling on the tabletop? Go hard, but don't try to impose what you feel is "right" in your little hobby world on other people. Sorry, the miniatures are nothing more than physical avatars for which to represent the rules of the models, paint schemes and standards never come into the equation. If my opponent's mini is an unpainted troop choice and mine is a painted troop choice then guess what? They both operate the exact same on the tabletop. Whether the lack of paint on your opponent's behalf disrupts your imaginative forging of the narrative or just plain bugs you, that's on you and not your opponent. Either work on your imaginative play or simply get over it, both solutions are relatively simple.

I imagine the "purists" on this board would also judge their opponent for having scratch builds, third party models, and *gasp* using third party paints because they aren't directly in line with the GW purist culture. Please, take a step back, get over yourself, and come back to the hobby when you're ready to actually enjoy the company of others and enjoy the game for what it is.

A hobby filled with players that hate on their mother company, GW, and, more importantly, other players is a community divided that doesn't have a lot of hope for a future.

If you want to play against the same purist every game simply because his/her products are good enough for you and up to your standards then go ahead. Me? I'll just be over here playing with everybody else and enjoying the game instead of nitpicking the aesthetics of my opponent's army.

TLDR version: Justification for being a lazy goob.

 Ugavine wrote:

 Tyberos the Red Wake wrote:

Dalymiddleboro wrote:
Who cares? It's a HOBBY, do w/e you want and get w/e you want out of it. There's no set way to go about this... I just don't understand why people let it emotionally affect them when it's not their army or their models lol.

Exactly, it's a hobby, so why would you not participate in the hobby aspect, which is painting the figures?

Depends what you class as the Hobby.
I see the hobby as gaming. I don't paint my Monopoly figures, or Settlers of Catan pieces, or my computer.

Yes I do paint my 40K figures, but that's because I want to and not because I have to. Let people just play the game.

There's no expectation of painting your Monopoly figures, or Settler pieces, or your computer. So get your strawmen out of here.

There is an expectation that you're to paint your Wargaming miniatures.

 Ravenous D wrote:

 drock403 wrote:
The amount of pretentiousness in this thread and general topic is staggering. Do what you want with your hobby, time, money, and feel free to set your own standards for your army. You feel like everything should be painted before battling on the tabletop? Go hard, but don't try to impose what you feel is "right" in your little hobby world on other people. Sorry, the miniatures are nothing more than physical avatars for which to represent the rules of the models, paint schemes and standards never come into the equation. If my opponent's mini is an unpainted troop choice and mine is a painted troop choice then guess what? They both operate the exact same on the tabletop. Whether the lack of paint on your opponent's behalf disrupts your imaginative forging of the narrative or just plain bugs you, that's on you and not your opponent. Either work on your imaginative play or simply get over it, both solutions are relatively simple.

I imagine the "purists" on this board would also judge their opponent for having scratch builds, third party models, and *gasp* using third party paints because they aren't directly in line with the GW purist culture. Please, take a step back, get over yourself, and come back to the hobby when you're ready to actually enjoy the company of others and enjoy the game for what it is.

A hobby filled with players that hate on their mother company, GW, and, more importantly, other players is a community divided that doesn't have a lot of hope for a future.

If you want to play against the same purist every game simply because his/her products are good enough for you and up to your standards then go ahead. Me? I'll just be over here playing with everybody else and enjoying the game instead of nitpicking the aesthetics of my opponent's army.

TLDR version: Justification for being a lazy goob.

Agreed. Seems like drock's arguing a completely different point.

 drock403 wrote:


I imagine the "purists" on this board would also judge their opponent for having scratch builds, third party models, and *gasp* using third party paints because they aren't directly in line with the GW purist culture. Please, take a step back, get over yourself, and come back to the hobby when you're ready to actually enjoy the company of others and enjoy the game for what it is.

A hobby filled with players that hate on their mother company, GW, and, more importantly, other players is a community divided that doesn't have a lot of hope for a future.

If you want to play against the same purist every game simply because his/her products are good enough for you and up to your standards then go ahead. Me? I'll just be over here playing with everybody else and enjoying the game instead of nitpicking the aesthetics of my opponent's army.

Actually it's quite the opposite. Those of us who are pro-painting are ino asthetics. Dynamic conversions, awesome third party bits, counts-as models and characters, these are all things we love because they show effort and creativity. Just like a painted army does.

It's the dude with the half assembled grey riptide that's going to make a fuss over non-gw models or a customized counts as Lysander in my experience.

This, and every other thread like it, in a nutshell:

90% of people who state a preference for painting: "I wouldn't refuse you a game, but it is so much better looking when you've painted your models"

Unpainted Advocates: "Stop being so elitist!!!!"

 Las wrote:

 drock403 wrote:


I imagine the "purists" on this board would also judge their opponent for having scratch builds, third party models, and *gasp* using third party paints because they aren't directly in line with the GW purist culture. Please, take a step back, get over yourself, and come back to the hobby when you're ready to actually enjoy the company of others and enjoy the game for what it is.

A hobby filled with players that hate on their mother company, GW, and, more importantly, other players is a community divided that doesn't have a lot of hope for a future.

If you want to play against the same purist every game simply because his/her products are good enough for you and up to your standards then go ahead. Me? I'll just be over here playing with everybody else and enjoying the game instead of nitpicking the aesthetics of my opponent's army.

Actually it's quite the opposite. Those of us who are pro-painting are ino asthetics. Dynamic conversions, awesome third party bits, counts-as models and characters, these are all things we love because they show effort and creativity. Just like a painted army does.

It's the dude with the half assembled grey riptide that's going to make a fuss over non-gw models or a customized counts as Lysander in my experience.

I just had to quote this because this is EXACTLY what happened at a tournament that I went to. An acquaintance of mine was playing his Khorne space marine army (Which he had been using as Blood Angels by adding reptillian and daemonic wings to things to make them descent of angels type. He had TONS of conversions and cool models and had painted the army beautifully to a top notch standard. Had never heard him once EVER argue about the look of someone else's models. Instead of the Krak Missile launcher that came on Rhinos, he had converted Bloodletters climbing from the rhinos hurling daemonic missles.. these were his Krakk missile launchers for them. Something he had CLEARED with the TO before the tournament.

His first game, against an unpainted / half assembled army of orks. Really, like zero effort put into the army. The very first thing the Ork player said when he saw the BA list was "HEY!! Those aren't Krak missile launchers! I'm not letting you use them." He calls the TO over, argues for about 10 minutes as how he can't use the daemons as krak missiles. At argument minute 11, the TO says, "Look, they're Krak Missile launchers, how can you argue WYSIWYG when half your army is in shambles. Either suck it up, or you can leave." Not to say that ALL players are like that, but it really reminded me of it.

2 main reasons.

1) its kinda stale to play against a solid gray or primed army. Everything looks the same except for the random big thing.

2) If the army is new, understandable. if you have been playing for months and years and you STILL havent painted, then it tells me youre lazy. Yes not everyone can paint to awesome levels but anyone can paint the basic 3-4 paint schemes. Just avoid the details like bootstraps or whatever and its a lot easier to pull off.

I am not a fan of painting the models I prefer to build and convert them, but I will admit a well painted army is awesome and gives me a bit of the green eyed syndrome I am not good at painting. My only requirement is that if you play that the models are fully assembled so you know what it is and what equipment it has, So I will play with unpainted armies just not half assembled ones.

But all in all when it comes to 40K my opinion is very its your money and your hobby who am I too Judge .

 drock403 wrote:
The amount of pretentiousness in this thread and general topic is staggering. Do what you want with your hobby, time, money, and feel free to set your own standards for your army. You feel like everything should be painted before battling on the tabletop? Go hard, but don't try to impose what you feel is "right" in your little hobby world on other people. Sorry, the miniatures are nothing more than physical avatars for which to represent the rules of the models, paint schemes and standards never come into the equation. If my opponent's mini is an unpainted troop choice and mine is a painted troop choice then guess what? They both operate the exact same on the tabletop. Whether the lack of paint on your opponent's behalf disrupts your imaginative forging of the narrative or just plain bugs you, that's on you and not your opponent. Either work on your imaginative play or simply get over it, both solutions are relatively simple.

I imagine the "purists" on this board would also judge their opponent for having scratch builds, third party models, and *gasp* using third party paints because they aren't directly in line with the GW purist culture. Please, take a step back, get over yourself, and come back to the hobby when you're ready to actually enjoy the company of others and enjoy the game for what it is.

No, kit bashing and 3rd party paints and gear is fantastic, makes for a great varience in creativity. You will note from other threads that I don't even care much for WYSIWYG, I am not at all legalistic about that. Interesting that a cursory review of this thread doesn't reveal anyone who said that they "wouldn't" play against an unpainted army, just that they themeselves insist on painting their stuff before fielding it.

Which leads to me attacking your post. You see, your attitude is exactly what is wrong with modern society today. I choose to have standards, I want my Soldiers painted before I play with them. You choose not to have standards, which I am fine with. But now me being fine with your not having standards isn't good enough - you want to call me pretentious
for imposing my own self standards. Where do you get off forcing your lack of standards down my throat? Why is this happening in every sphere of society?

Orthodox Jews live with a standard for religion and eat Kosher, for some reason pork eaters (I eat bacon) get all pissed off about this. Some people have standards for fitness or how they conduct their business, people without standards hate them for their athleticness or work ethic. Why? How is Rebel Wilson a pop icon? How? No standards. If you don't want to paint your stuff... FINE! But leave me to do what I want.

- J

personally I field armies of gray. I do this for a couple reasons, one I cant paint worth gak and I prefer grey over a crap job( and I don't have the time to play and build that skillset). I also do this because i have army ADD, ive built 5 armies to around 2000 pts. thankfully where i play they have no issue with the gray, if they did id probably be pretty pissed as i personally view 40k as game>hobby

I have no problem with unpainted armies, I just want people to have fun and play nice.

I think the primary problem people have is when they see someone walk in and start fielding their army and they've spent all this love and care painting to lose or play against the grey horde and they feel kind of cheated out of what they view as part of the fun of the game.

I think it kind of relates back to other games too, like when people get angry when someone new comes along and messes everything up or uses a tactic they don't like. There's no real REASON to get mad, it's just something they hate.

 necrondog99 wrote:

 drock403 wrote:
The amount of pretentiousness in this thread and general topic is staggering. Do what you want with your hobby, time, money, and feel free to set your own standards for your army. You feel like everything should be painted before battling on the tabletop? Go hard, but don't try to impose what you feel is "right" in your little hobby world on other people. Sorry, the miniatures are nothing more than physical avatars for which to represent the rules of the models, paint schemes and standards never come into the equation. If my opponent's mini is an unpainted troop choice and mine is a painted troop choice then guess what? They both operate the exact same on the tabletop. Whether the lack of paint on your opponent's behalf disrupts your imaginative forging of the narrative or just plain bugs you, that's on you and not your opponent. Either work on your imaginative play or simply get over it, both solutions are relatively simple.

I imagine the "purists" on this board would also judge their opponent for having scratch builds, third party models, and *gasp* using third party paints because they aren't directly in line with the GW purist culture. Please, take a step back, get over yourself, and come back to the hobby when you're ready to actually enjoy the company of others and enjoy the game for what it is.

No, kit bashing and 3rd party paints and gear is fantastic, makes for a great varience in creativity. You will note from other threads that I don't even care much for WYSIWYG, I am not at all legalistic about that. Interesting that a cursory review of this thread doesn't reveal anyone who said that they "wouldn't" play against an unpainted army, just that they themeselves insist on painting their stuff before fielding it.

Which leads to me attacking your post. You see, your attitude is exactly what is wrong with modern society today. I choose to have standards, I want my Soldiers painted before I play with them. You choose not to have standards, which I am fine with. But now me being fine with your not having standards isn't good enough - you want to call me pretentious
for imposing my own self standards. Where do you get off forcing your lack of standards down my throat? Why is this happening in every sphere of society?

Orthodox Jews live with a standard for religion and eat Kosher, for some reason pork eaters (I eat bacon) get all pissed off about this. Some people have standards for fitness or how they conduct their business, people without standards hate them for their athleticness or work ethic. Why? How is Rebel Wilson a pop icon? How? No standards. If you don't want to paint your stuff... FINE! But leave me to do what I want.

- J

Super long quote. Whatever, too lazy to edit. Just wanted to state that I have standards for my own army, I like them painted. They're not great but I do my best, and I wouldn't field anything that wasn't but that's just how I like to hobby. I'm not advocating that others play non painted miniatures or with painted ones or anything in between. The point I was trying to get across was that we shouldn't expect others to play to our standards. We all hobby in our own way and I don't think it's right that some players should get excluded or shamed for doing things their way. Maybe I didn't make my point properly but what you said in your post about "leave me to do what I want" is exactly what I was getting at. Let's just all throw some dice with our models that we paid good money for.

As long as my opponent isn't a dipsht I have no problem playing against non-painted models.

Rule number one is to have fun, it's not my place as a hobbyist to impinge upon someone else's idea of fun just because they don't live up to my standards.

Not everyone has the time to spend on painting models just because someone else does.

I have trouble believing time is as big a factor as so many say here. This is 40k we're talking about here! You have to cut bits out of sprues and glue them together just to play! And when you do, it takes 3 + hours!

I prefer painted minatures to non painted minatures, simply because they look better.

WHEN GW used to sell skirmish games , and regularly promote games with LOWER minature counts.MORE people used painted minatures.
They would simply paint up small warbands, gangs etc.THIS got them in the habit of 'buy a few paint a few.'

And MOST people applied this to collecting larger armies.(Maybe fields one or two un painted units that were WIP.)

However, since GW corperate have defined the 'GW Hobby' , as 'buying GW product.'
There is more pressure to buy lots of minatures in one go, and this is why a lot of people end up with a sea of plastic to paint which can be very daunting.

The wider war gaming hobby, does not seem to be afflicted by the same problems as 40k/WHFB in reguards to unpainted armies.