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.

Lanrak wrote:


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

This, a thousand times this.

Just an FYI to the guy who spent 3 pages of posts trying to convince people he never mentioned the "rules"

The minute you put the word legally in your first post you were making reference to matters concerning the law and the law is by definition of a body of governed rules.

So please be mindful of your own terms and that blasting people for not understanding your version of what you intended to write (however misleading it was) is in itself quite arrogant.

Also maybe learn that its OK to be wrong when it comes to written language we internet people can be quite forgiving.

Love.....

For me, it depends on the army.

My Nurgle Daemons are a recent addition. They are all painted (bar one unit that is being painted), because i bought them as a painting/modelling project more than as a playing army, and i love painting them.

My DE are almost universally not painted. I enjoy playing with them, but haven't gotten around to painting them as yet, as I have the Nurgle guys still to finish and i'm also painting m fething orks.

My Orks are my playing army. I love playing with them, but absolutely hate painting the little fethers. It's a chore. I have a bunch of painted units, and a bunch i've not touched yet.

If anyone judgmental were to play me, they would develop different opinions of me depending on the army.

Nurgle: This guy's really into the game! Everything is painted, converted and based!

DE: What a lazy fether! Practically nothing painted, nothing based. This guy couldn't give two short feths about the HHHHobby.

Orks : depends on which units i bring - could be either result, or 'at least most of this guy's models are painted...'

 Las wrote:

Lanrak wrote:


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

This, a thousand times this.

It is an interesting phenomenon, isn't it? I know Warmachine/Hordes used to have this problem as well, but PP has gotten better with encouraging players to paint their miniatures with their Journeyman Leagues and painting requirements for tournaments.

It never used to be a problem back when GW had the "paint to play" policy. After that disappeared combined with the mass exodus of players the quality these days is pretty brutal.

Astronomi-con is a pretty big tournament here in Canada land and when they started you saw armies that were more akin to works of art. Now you have goobs showing up with terribly painted rush jobs.

I don't get mad when I play unpainted armies. Some people don't have the time/motivation/skill to paint an army to what standard they'd like. I don't really buy into the "Forging a narrative" thing since a lot of 40k battles don't make much sense anyway. Even in it's own madness.

I get mixed feelings when my fully painted army gets beaten by a non painted one. On the one hand, I'm a little upset because I feel like I wasted my time in painting them. I guess this stems from that old gamer belief that painted minis do better. On the other, I had a painted army and he didn't! Moral victory for CustomLime.

I love people who so easily make assumptions about another player solely because the army they have that day is unpainted. All that unpainted army represents clearly is that it is unpainted. Anything else is an assumption on the elitist's part as to "why?" the army isn't painted: Lazy? Army of the month syndrome? Just trying to ruin the elitist's hobby? All assumptions and most likely completely wrong. Even if they aren't wrong the answer to those question is all "So what?"

It is just laughable that some of these people come across as if the absolutely worst thing that has ever happened to them in their life is that an opponent had the audacity to use an army with unpainted figures in a game of 40k. Oh the horror!! They get so whiny and cranky about the unpainted army that they have zero fun in the game, and make the experience lousy for their opponent as well. In my book that makes THEM the problem and not the unpainted army.

Best for me are those who seem to feel the need to keep track of everyone else's armies and decide that it has been long enough for the army or a new unit in the army to be painted so they won't play against them anymroe until it is. Must be nice to have such an empty life that you can keep track of things like that all the time. I tend to be way too busy to care if my opponent has used the same unpainted unit of marines for the last year or not. I just don't care as long as the games are fun and we can actually get games in.

I have tons of miniatures. Some are painted and some are not. I have probably painted more armies in my day than many of the elitists and then sold them off to new homes. None of their business if my army I am playing today isn't fully painted or not, nor is it any of their business why that isn't. For me, though, life is so busy I'd far rather be spending my time actually playing games with the armies I've spent thousands of dollars on through the years than just sitting at home painting and looking at them because I don't have time to do both things of late. As I've told others who worry about such things, if you are some place to play a game and someone starts giving your grief about your unpainted models happily tell them to find another opponent because you are there to play and not to put up with their annoying attitudes and behaviors. I have plenty of friends who will not field a mini or unit that is not painted, but that is their choice and their compulsion and they don't demand that others do the same thing or else.

Skriker

So much grey guilt in these threads.

None of us freak out about unpainted armies. We DO see them as an indication of laziness, but most of us will still play against you. Stop painting (lolz) us as petty folks freaking out at grey plastic.

kranki wrote:
Just an FYI to the guy who spent 3 pages of posts trying to convince people he never mentioned the "rules"

The minute you put the word legally in your first post you were making reference to matters concerning the law and the law is by definition of a body of governed rules.

And to this I say again: context, context, context.

Any time I mentioned legality it was in specific reference to assembly of the models. Why? Because there are rules when it comes to building your miniatures if you want to battle with them, there's a rulebook and everything. Generally, you have to model units with the proper weapons and equipment, they have to be on correctly sized bases/have the correct dimensions for measuring and LOS, things like that. I also happened to mention that to use painted models was to use the products as intended, as there are designed to be used... i.e. properly. What followed was pages of barrage from a couple of other posters saying things like; "erm there's no rule to have painted minis", "hey stop saying there's only one way to enjoy/have fun with the hobby", "omg stop forcing your opinion on others as fact", "jeez what an elitist neckbeard... I bet you think people who use unpainted minis are scum", yadda yadda insert other such nonsense here. They put two and two together and came up with fourteen. Never mind all the other stuff that I actually said, nor the majority of other posters saying very similar/the same/more extreme things than me... no, no, no, let's just keep on at this one post/phrase/word and derail the topic over our misinterpretation of its meaning!



Not that I mind, I can take it. I just think it's a rather interesting, slightly amusing observation. Besides, if others wish to comment on my comments, then I'm more than happy to reply again. Especially if it's to correct their mistake.

Reminder this topic was never about assembly of models it was about painting. Your point about following the given rules for bases sizes and weapons is 100% spot on if you are playing in that kind of environment. The issue is painted models and I cannot see anywhere in the rule set the mention of unpainted or painted models infringing on game play.

Please state page numbers and references of materials if you are to support your argument.

The word context is not a magical I can type what I want if you don't get it then whatever word. Your context on your first post was to group painting into the same category as assembly and then bang on about legality.

Secondly though I cannot whole speak for the community but can voice my opinion I feel its nice for you to enjoy correcting others mistakes but please be kind enough to acknowledge your own when they have been made...

Back to post, GW models are designed to be painted hence the type of materials they are made from. They are also designed to be played with regardless of paint and I would be happy to play anyone who was up for a fun game regardless of the visual impact but that said my favourite moments of the tabletop gaming hobby is getting fully painted models on a tables rich in scenery and that is what gives me my buzz. Its a shame this is becoming less frequent now :(

How can anyone argue that the models we all collect aren't intended to go to war fully painted?

Do you ever see a picture in anything they release of a half painted army versus a grey horde?

Having said that I personally don't only play with painted minis (I'm entirely too slow at painting for that)

Whether or not you've painted your models when playing against me is of no concern, it's obviously a better experience when we both have fully painted forces though.

Guy walks in with new unpainted Riptide:Hey guys you don't mind that (Insert stupid long tau name)is unpainted?That's OK.
5 months later:Sets down grey lump of plastic on table.Us:If your going to spend 85 euro on a model and not paint it that's OK.But it. Ruins how good the game looks AND it makes you look like a dumbass for spending so much money on something then making it look stupid.And it makes you look lazy.

I do plan on painting my army...eventually. I'm pissed off at myself, as my "shiny" new wraithknight is still unassembled waiting for paint.

 Anfauglir wrote:
Because there are rules when it comes to building your miniatures if you want to battle with them, there's a rulebook and everything.

Would you mind explaining where the assembly rules are? Or anything to do with painting them in the rules portion of the rulebook?

kranki wrote:
The issue is painted models and I cannot see anywhere in the rule set the mention of unpainted or painted models infringing on game play.

Nor will you find that particular viewpoint/argument mentioned in any of my posts, either. So I'll ask (like with a previous poster), why are we having this discussion?

The word context is not a magical I can type what I want if you don't get it then whatever word. Your context on your first post was to group painting into the same category as assembly and then bang on about legality.

Wrong. There's an "and" inbetween the words "modelled" and "painted", clearly used to separate them. Stop making the same mistake as the others. Even if you miscomprehended my first post, you, having read through the topic, have had plenty of chances to realise your error in my (multiple) clarifying posts. So stop persisting in taking what I said and twisting it into something else. I never mentioned rules/legality in regards to painted vs unpainted - end of story.

Secondly though I cannot whole speak for the community but can voice my opinion I feel its nice for you to enjoy correcting others mistakes but please be kind enough to acknowledge your own when they have been made...

Gladly.

 Happyjew wrote:
I do plan on painting my army...eventually. I'm pissed off at myself, as my "shiny" new wraithknight is still unassembled waiting for paint.

Whatever you do - don't just basecoat, highlight, wash as some are advocating. You'll play with them a few times, be miserable about how they look and strip them all, ruining a couple in the process.

If you are such an "elitist" that you wont play a game against someone that isnt fully painted then you are a douche imo. I understand armies that are in pieces but if its at least built not playing because there isnt paint is lame as hell.

rigeld2 wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
I do plan on painting my army...eventually. I'm pissed off at myself, as my "shiny" new wraithknight is still unassembled waiting for paint.

Whatever you do - don't just basecoat, highlight, wash as some are advocating. You'll play with them a few times, be miserable about how they look and strip them all, ruining a couple in the process.

Part of it was for the longest time I had no idea which Craftworld to do. Now that it's decided, I just need money for paints. And food. And bills. And some more models so I can make my army WYSIWYG. Mostly bills and food though.

 namiel wrote:
If you are such an "elitist" that you wont play a game against someone that isnt fully painted then you are a douche imo. I understand armies that are in pieces but if its at least built not playing because there isnt paint is lame as hell.

Then it's a good job such people are vanishingly rare. In fact given that Dakka is the largest wargaming forum on the internet, and given this topic has occurred many times since I have been a member, I can't off the top of my head remember more than a handful of people say they would not play against an unpainted army. And the majority of those who said that were as far from "douche" as could be; generally stating that they don't have a lot of time to play, so prefer to play against people who have made the effort to paint up their army.

Personally I would much rather play against a painted force - I have very limited time to game, paint or indeed take part in any aspect of the hobby and so would prefer to be able to look at a nice table full of painted models. Plus painted models, as much as you may hate to hear it, is one way to indicate a player who is less likely to be one of your "douches", since it indicates a certain level of caring about their army that you don't see if someone plonks down a grey horde across from your stuff...

 SilverMK2 wrote:

 namiel wrote:
If you are such an "elitist" that you wont play a game against someone that isnt fully painted then you are a douche imo. I understand armies that are in pieces but if its at least built not playing because there isnt paint is lame as hell.

Then it's a good job such people are vanishingly rare. In fact given that Dakka is the largest wargaming forum on the internet, and given this topic has occurred many times since I have been a member, I can't off the top of my head remember more than a handful of people say they would not play against an unpainted army. And the majority of those who said that were as far from "douche" as could be; generally stating that they don't have a lot of time to play, so prefer to play against people who have made the effort to paint up their army.

Personally I would much rather play against a painted force - I have very limited time to game, paint or indeed take part in any aspect of the hobby and so would prefer to be able to look at a nice table full of painted models. Plus painted models, as much as you may hate to hear it, is one way to indicate a player who is less likely to be one of your "douches", since it indicates a certain level of caring about their army that you don't see if someone plonks down a grey horde across from your stuff...

I agree painted models are better BUT those who say they will not play someone who isnt painted makes me think they would sit and not play rather then play someone who is unpainted.

 namiel wrote:
I agree painted models are better BUT those who say they will not play someone who isnt painted makes me think they would sit and not play rather then play someone who is unpainted.

They're not actually saying that though, so why hate them for something you could be entirely making up in your head?

I've yet to attend an event or gaming night where there aren't plenty of people to play against, including a mix of people with painted and unpainted armies (you may also notice that people with painted armies tend to have more people interested in playing against them than those with half assembled, un-painted armies ).

By the way using "and" between two words like you have done is using its connective meaning not as you imply as a way of introducing a new or additional comment (look it up)

Your arrogance is personified by your misuse of words in your awful musings and your inability to admit you have made a simple mistake, personally I would bring unpainted models just to avoid playing you.

I will dog this topic no longer as my purpose was to get you to admit fault which with your endless list of pathetic excuses appears to be an exercise in futility.

 SilverMK2 wrote:

 namiel wrote:
I agree painted models are better BUT those who say they will not play someone who isnt painted makes me think they would sit and not play rather then play someone who is unpainted.

They're not actually saying that though, so why hate them for something you could be entirely making up in your head?

I've yet to attend an event or gaming night where there aren't plenty of people to play against, including a mix of people with painted and unpainted armies (you may also notice that people with painted armies tend to have more people interested in playing against them than those with half assembled, un-painted armies ).

Sadly I have seen that. Snobs......

kranki wrote:
By the way using "and" between two words like you have done is using its connective meaning not as you imply as a way of introducing a new or additional comment (look it up)

You're right except for one small problem, and you may well hate me for saying... but, yep, it's that pesky context rearing its ugly head again. You've isolated three lone words from the post in its entirety in order to make your point. This is a mistake because the key issue being addressed with my post (indeed, the whole topic), is not whether or not there are or aren't rules for not painting minis, but why one player may mind if another player battles with unpainted minis. So, when I say "legally modelled and painted", this in itself is in reference to my overall point about their intended, proper usage for battling. If I wanted to refocus the issue of my post onto the legality of painted vs unpainted, I would have said: "legally modelled and legally painted", or better yet, have dropped the modelling part out. However, that was never my point. So I didn't, and as soon as the TC mistakenly thought that's what I was saying, I corrected them in the very next post. And several other posts afterwards, for that matter. I guess you missed those...

Your arrogance is personified by your misuse of words in your awful musings and your inability to admit you have made a simple mistake, personally I would bring unpainted models just to avoid playing you.

And your inability to grasp basic reading comprehension is personified by your erroneous presumption that bringing unpainted models would result in me avoiding you on the table top - despite more than one example in this thread of me stating the contrary.

I will dog this topic no longer as my purpose was to get you to admit fault which with your endless list of pathetic excuses appears to be an exercise in futility.

You're right, it was futile. You could have chosen to add to the topic as a whole, or take part in one of the other more fruitful discussions under way, instead you chose to target and reopen an already exhausted issue that has been resolved already. Again, having read through the whole topic would have told you this and saved both our time and effort... oh, well.

I think some people are really misinterpreting what a lot of people are saying. I understand that yeah it's probably prefered to play against a fully painted army because it's easy to tell what and where everything is and what it's equipped with. It looks better. But really that's it. It's a game. A game that uses models. If you like painting good for you. If you don't like painting, good for you as well. If someone wanted to play against me with an all unprimed army they have had for years it wouldn't bother me. Most of the time it turns out they have too much time dedicated to other things to put in hours to paint their models for a game they play on the week ends. It's the same reason why you don't see everyone making their own special bait and lures to go fishing. It's a hobby and they put in what they want out of it and shouldn't feel the "grey guilt" for not meeting someone's standards but their own.
Lets put it like this.
Guy A: I like playing FPS shooter game 597.
Guy B: Me too. Have you unlocked Special Snowflake mode?
Guy A: No. Why?
Guy B: Well that's just you being lazy. Games been out a while.
Guy A: Well, that's just not for me. I like playing the campaign not the multiplayer too much. It's just not what I got it for.
Guy B: Well this is a FPS. It comes with the territory that you have to strive to get Special Snowflake mode. If you don't then you should just stop playing these games entirely and go play Minesweeper.
Guy A: But I really like this game I just want to play for fun not put any unneccessary work I don't need to.
Guy B: I guess I see that, but I still just think you're lazy and need to play another game. You could just give up an hour of sleep and play before bed each day. Do some hardcore grinding. You could even pay someone to play the game for you to level up.

Guy walks in with new unpainted Riptide:Hey guys you don't mind that (Insert stupid long tau name)is unpainted?That's OK.
5 months later:Sets down grey lump of plastic on table.Us:If your going to spend 85 euro on a model and not paint it that's OK.But it. Ruins how good the game looks AND it makes you look like a dumbass for spending so much money on something then making it look stupid.And it makes you look lazy.

OR it makes you and your group look like intolerant "game snobs" because of the amount of unfounded assumptions you make about someone with almost no real basis. I realize the guy with the unpainted Riptide is having fun wrong, and I am also well aware of the fact that you and your group probably have Golden Demon quality paint jobs (because I refuse to play against anyone who has less than GD quality paint - it ruins my immersion and it makes you look like DUMBASSES for spending all that money on and time on those models to have less than Top-of-the Line Pro Quality work), but seriously ... you might be taking your war-dollies too seriously.

While I would rather play against a painted army, I will never turn down a game against a fully assembled but not painted army and I will have just as much fun. It's just a hobby and different people are in it for different reasons. Some people just don't like to paint. It's not fun for them, but they DO like everything else. I'm cool with that.

I actually prefer playing against unpainted armies. When I get my face smashed in, I can always be comforted by the fact that my army looks better than theirs!

Nah, I prefer a great game on a good table with two well-painted armies facing off against each other. That's what the pictures made the game look like when I got into it during second edition, and those pictures sold me on the game.

 Savageconvoy wrote:
I think some people are really misinterpreting what a lot of people are saying. I understand that yeah it's probably prefered to play against a fully painted army because it's easy to tell what and where everything is and what it's equipped with. It looks better. But really that's it. It's a game. A game that uses models. If you like painting good for you. If you don't like painting, good for you as well. If someone wanted to play against me with an all unprimed army they have had for years it wouldn't bother me. Most of the time it turns out they have too much time dedicated to other things to put in hours to paint their models for a game they play on the week ends. It's the same reason why you don't see everyone making their own special bait and lures to go fishing. It's a hobby and they put in what they want out of it and shouldn't feel the "grey guilt" for not meeting someone's standards but their own.
Lets put it like this.
Guy A: I like playing FPS shooter game 597.
Guy B: Me too. Have you unlocked Special Snowflake mode?
Guy A: No. Why?
Guy B: Well that's just you being lazy. Games been out a while.
Guy A: Well, that's just not for me. I like playing the campaign not the multiplayer too much. It's just not what I got it for.
Guy B: Well this is a FPS. It comes with the territory that you have to strive to get Special Snowflake mode. If you don't then you should just stop playing these games entirely and go play Minesweeper.
Guy A: But I really like this game I just want to play for fun not put any unneccessary work I don't need to.
Guy B: I guess I see that, but I still just think you're lazy and need to play another game. You could just give up an hour of sleep and play before bed each day. Do some hardcore grinding. You could even pay someone to play the game for you to level up.

I'm really getting into the Halloween spirit with all these strawmen being put up.

If, in fishing, all the retailers sold you unfinished lures and tackle to then assemble yourself, maybe I'd believe it.

And the video game analogy is just fething stupid.

Here's a challenge for you: try to find me an example, anywhere, that shows that wargaming models aren't supposed to be painted. That there isn't a tradition of painting your miniatures, and that there isn't an expectation of it.

If anything, you're the self-entitled, special 'snowflake' who feels offended when they can't meet the traditional standards.

Both analogies work fine. The video game one works because it's something available to do that requires extra work outside of what is required (The purchase and assembly of the game piece) to play the game that the person desires to play. The fishing example works as well because you're just getting the equipment needed to play a game. At no point does a paint job (aside from Orks) affect the actual rules of the game, the duration, point tally, so on and so forth. It's a completely asthetic aspect that has no real basis on the game and only affects your personal outlook on your equipment available. The analogies don't fit in perfectly, but that's the problem with analogies.

Here's something to ponder. The reason you see the painted models in white dwarfs and on the GW website aren't because they encourage you to paint. It's because they look more appealing. Like how the hamburger in the commercial is rendered no longer edible with chemicals to make it look appetizing. The Forgeworld site often shows many of their models without even a coat of primer on most of them. Does this mean that I'm encouraged to play with unprimed and unpainted models?

This is why the game analogy works. The game has multiple parts to it that some people may just avoid, in this case solo/co-op campaign and multiplayer; the hobby having painting, converting, basing, tactics, list building, terrain making, and so on. Now you're trying to say that the hobby is all encompassing and that buying into one automatically puts you into the other. Would you deny playing a campaign co-op with a friend on Halo simply because he hasn't unlocked all the armor varients in multiplayer? Absolutely not. It has nothing to do with the game at hand. But wargamming is somehow different? If you want to play 40K you absolutely have to grab a brush and paint and get to work or somehow you're not worthy of the hobby.

 Las wrote:
So much grey guilt in these threads.

None of us freak out about unpainted armies. We DO see them as an indication of laziness, but most of us will still play against you. Stop painting (lolz) us as petty folks freaking out at grey plastic.

Grey guilt....I love that term! When I started 40k about 2-2.5 yrs ago, I thought I needed everything painted. I remember this from way back in the late 80's when it kind of was a requirement to play ( at least in my memory). So when I started I did not even consider showing up for a game until I had a force painted. Wow I was surprised when I did show up. Lots of unpainted and in some cases unassembled models. I still paint everything I play with. It does become frustrating when you lose to someone who simply buys the best stuff and puts it on the table without much thought of ever painting it out. But to each his own and I will continue to grow my force slowly and take my lumps along the way with my painted toys.