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.

I was just wondering what is the general opinion in tournaments that award painting prizes for armies and if someone brings a really nice comissipn painted army? Some tournament organisers may rule them out from the painting competition because the player did not paint the models himself. But how can you know if the army was commission painted or not, or should all armies be able to take part in the painting competition? I know different organisers do this in different ways, but i just want to hear other peoples opinions on the matter.

I for one am all for good looking armies on the table top and will give my vote for the best looking army, no matter who painted it.

Allowing players to win awards/get points for work they purchased is equivalent to allowing players to purchase those awards/points. I don't see this as a good thing.

Generally speaking, tournaments will not award appearance-based prizes to armies they know were commissioned // or did not paint themselves.

At AdeptiCon last year, I had a very nice army, but several of the models I'd borrowed to get just the right build I wanted; I asked the judges to give me a 0. They reassured me other people were getting scored just fine for work they didn't do, and that I wasn't eligible for best painted anyway due to it, but I didn't feel comfortable getting any score or being anywhere near Overall as a result, so I requested a 0.

At NOVA this year, our best painted by far was an Eldar army painted by a friend of the person playing it. He was forthcoming about this fact, and we made honorable mention of it at the award ceremony, scored it, but eliminated it from being eligible for appearance-based awards.

Those two solutions (just sharing personal experience) are IMO the two most appropriate.

The one problem is there are plenty of people out there who will simply say NOTHING about the fact their army was painted by someone else and/or commissioned. These players could certainly win Best Painted in any event, b/c nobody would necessarily know they didn't paint it themselves. For this reason, there's a constant conflict among TOs and their judges/personnel in trying to figure out what to do about commissioned armies.

They should be SCORED but also you should explicitly have a place to say 'did you paint this army'? Then it is not simply 'I didn't say I DID paint it' where they just fly under the radar. They explicitly have to say they DID or DID NOT paint the army. If they lie, that is on them.

Appearance scores for a combined total is different than a Painting competition. People in a event can have an appearance score but not be eligible for painting rewards.

If someone is going to lie about painting an army to get prizes, that is their karma. Most people are super honest about it anyways. If people are going to lie, there really is no reasonable way to bust them, and who wants the stress of being 'Paint cop'.

Some folks have more time than money and other more money than time. I have no problem with a commission army entering the appearance portion of a tournament. They paid their monies and they take their chances like everybody else.

Sarge wrote:
Some folks have more time than money and other more money than time. I have no problem with a commission army entering the appearance portion of a tournament. They paid their monies and they take their chances like everybody else.

And what if an amazing painter commissioned a pro-player to stand at the table and play the game with their army for them?

I've paint judged at events and I have ZERO problem with players scoring the painting points their army is due. They should simply be ineligible for best painted. Some people don't have the money to go out and buy the latest killer army build either. There's always a cost associated with competing.

Besides, better-looking armies makes for a better gaming experience.

hmmm, what is your opinion on this,

i picked up most of my orks off EBAY, they came with basic bases, and painted to a 10 yr olds standards (ie no blend, sloppy lines ect ect) so I fixed all the sloppy ness, re did a lot of stuff and did all the recesses, the highlights, blends and details, making bases look better, ect

would I be a jerk for claiming I painted it? really all that was done for me was cleaning, assembly, and a base coat, albeit a "i tried to get the three colors in the right spots" base coat.

I'd like to see tournaments with competent photographers taking pictures of the best looking armies first, before I worry about people winning $100 worth of prizes for their commissioned models.

 easysauce wrote:
hmmm, what is your opinion on this,

i picked up most of my orks off EBAY, they came with basic bases, and painted to a 10 yr olds standards (ie no blend, sloppy lines ect ect) so I fixed all the sloppy ness, re did a lot of stuff and did all the recesses, the highlights, blends and details, making bases look better, ect

would I be a jerk for claiming I painted it? really all that was done for me was cleaning, assembly, and a base coat, albeit a "i tried to get the three colors in the right spots" base coat.

Nope, sounds like you took basecoated models and finished them. I'd have no problem at all with you saying you painted them.

I have painted every model I own, ( multiple armies ) except the last one I acquired, a WraithKnight. I have recently met a guy who wins Best Paint a lot. I knew that I could not do such a great model justice, and on a lark, I asked if he would do it on commission.

He said he would and I paid him. The WK looks better than I could ever do.

I paid the model's price for the paint job.

Would you disqualify my army because of one great model?

I am not sure about how to feel about it. I would tell ( and already have told ) anyone why that model looks so great. Cuz my buddy painted it.

PS : you can see the WK model in the last entry of my comic, in my signature, below.

 hyv3mynd wrote:

Sarge wrote:
Some folks have more time than money and other more money than time. I have no problem with a commission army entering the appearance portion of a tournament. They paid their monies and they take their chances like everybody else.

And what if an amazing painter commissioned a pro-player to stand at the table and play the game with their army for them?

Wait, we can do that?

I just want a guy to roll my dice for me. I'll paint/build/move my stuff, I just want a designated dice roller heh.

On the actual topic, it really is questionable. Someone painted it, right? Generally I don't field armies I don't paint, the only exception I've had is when I was borrowing my buddy's army because mine was in transit and need to get my 40k fix. I made sure everyone knew who was drooling on it that I didn't paint the stuff though. Who's to stop people from lying about painting it or not, especially if it is someone from the other coast?