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.

EddieJA wrote:
However, when I do play against someone with an unpainted army, I'm making a sacrifice and putting their happiness and hobby preferences above my own, and yet, we are in no way allowed to expect that people who hate painting don't ever have to think about us for a change?

That's correct. The fact that you are prepared to 'make a sacrifice' in no way entitles you to expect that someone else will also want to do so.

 bubz wrote:
Everyone's jumping to OP's friend's defence with some fairly presumptuous arguments. Yes painting is time consuming, but so is buying, building and learning to play 5 armies. I think they could have gotten a base coat and dip in there somewhere..

They could have. But that assumes that they want to.


I've had my Monopoly set for more than a decade. I haven't yet felt any driving need to paint the miniatures in it.

For many players, 40K miniatures are no different to those Monopoly tokens. Painting is something you do if you want to.

 bubz wrote:
Everyone's jumping to OP's friend's defence with some fairly presumptuous arguments. Yes painting is time consuming, but so is buying, building and learning to play 5 armies. I think they could have gotten a base coat and dip in there somewhere.

OP's not asking for GD winning armies to play against. They're asking for their friend to participate in wargaming and paint their models. It's really the bare minimum.

By your standards, perhaps, but your standards count for absolutely nothing when it comes to someone else's hobby. We are "jumping to OP's friend's defence" because he is fully within his rights to not paint his army. He's fully within his rights to use bits of cardboard and pocket lint to represent models if he wants to, and why? Because you are also fully within your right to decline a game against an unpainted army, or an army of cardboard and pocket lint. If he doesn't want to paint his models, then you're SOOL; find a different opponent, or suck it up.

 insaniak wrote:

EddieJA wrote:
However, when I do play against someone with an unpainted army, I'm making a sacrifice and putting their happiness and hobby preferences above my own, and yet, we are in no way allowed to expect that people who hate painting don't ever have to think about us for a change?

That's correct. The fact that you are prepared to 'make a sacrifice' in no way entitles you to expect that someone else will also want to do so.

 bubz wrote:
Everyone's jumping to OP's friend's defence with some fairly presumptuous arguments. Yes painting is time consuming, but so is buying, building and learning to play 5 armies. I think they could have gotten a base coat and dip in there somewhere..

They could have. But that assumes that they want to.


I've had my Monopoly set for more than a decade. I haven't yet felt any driving need to paint the miniatures in it.

For many players, 40K miniatures are no different to those Monopoly tokens. Painting is something you do if you want to.

Monopoly pieces aren't meant to be painted, wargame miniatures are. That's just the way it is.

If you don't feel like painting your minis then fine. I don't get the need to frantically pull out all these wild excuses and rationalizations. If you don't want to go all the way with wargaming that's okay, just admit it. A spades a spade.

OP, your models look great, better than my own I must say.

For tournament and fluff matches, its fine to want painted models. When you're being condescending, you can no longer call it a "Friendly game".

I've spent over $400 on paints, primers, and cheap walmart brushes plus 1 insane detail brush. Maybe he doesn't want to make that investment?

Most of my space wolves I've painted look terrible, because I started with them. I have 11 armies until I finally sell off all my Nids, then I'll have 10. And only recently in almost 3 years of painting has anything ive done started looking good. I now wish I started painting them last.

Anyways, lost track of where I was going. I personally think that I would want to stop playing against you, as you sound like an elitist over a hobby. If you're unpainted buddy is listening, I'd tell him/her to find a nicer person to play against.

 Las wrote:
I don't get the need to frantically pull out all these wild excuses and rationalizations..

Absolutely - there is no 'rationalisation' needed. But seem people seem to want those who don't want to paint to offer some sort of 'valid' reason for not doing so, beyond 'I don't want to'... as if it's any of their business.

 Avatar 720 wrote:

 bubz wrote:
Everyone's jumping to OP's friend's defence with some fairly presumptuous arguments. Yes painting is time consuming, but so is buying, building and learning to play 5 armies. I think they could have gotten a base coat and dip in there somewhere.

OP's not asking for GD winning armies to play against. They're asking for their friend to participate in wargaming and paint their models. It's really the bare minimum.

By your standards, perhaps, but your standards count for absolutely nothing when it comes to someone else's hobby. We are "jumping to OP's friend's defence" because he is fully within his rights to not paint his army. He's fully within his rights to use bits of cardboard and pocket lint to represent models if he wants to, and why? Because you are also fully within your right to decline a game against an unpainted army, or an army of cardboard and pocket lint. If he doesn't want to paint his models, then you're SOOL; find a different opponent, or suck it up.

Ok but that's not what 40k is. Your within your rights to do a lot of things but they don't impact on wargaming. That's what we're talking about. That's what this forum is for.

Wargaming as a hobby entails painted models. They don't have to be good. But they should be painted.

 insaniak wrote:

 Las wrote:
I don't get the need to frantically pull out all these wild excuses and rationalizations..

Absolutely - there is no 'rationalisation' needed. But seem people seem to want those who don't want to paint to offer some sort of 'valid' reason for not doing so, beyond 'I don't want to'... as if it's any of their business.

Except people's usual response is to attack someone for daring to pose the question.

"Why didn't you paint your army?" Is literally as valid a question as "why didn't you glue the heads on any of your space marines?"

 bubz wrote:

 Avatar 720 wrote:

 bubz wrote:
Everyone's jumping to OP's friend's defence with some fairly presumptuous arguments. Yes painting is time consuming, but so is buying, building and learning to play 5 armies. I think they could have gotten a base coat and dip in there somewhere.

OP's not asking for GD winning armies to play against. They're asking for their friend to participate in wargaming and paint their models. It's really the bare minimum.

By your standards, perhaps, but your standards count for absolutely nothing when it comes to someone else's hobby. We are "jumping to OP's friend's defence" because he is fully within his rights to not paint his army. He's fully within his rights to use bits of cardboard and pocket lint to represent models if he wants to, and why? Because you are also fully within your right to decline a game against an unpainted army, or an army of cardboard and pocket lint. If he doesn't want to paint his models, then you're SOOL; find a different opponent, or suck it up.

Ok but that's not what 40k is. Your within your rights to do a lot of things but they don't impact on wargaming. That's what we're talking about. That's what this forum is for.

Wargaming as a hobby entails painted models. They don't have to be good. But they should be painted.

Once again, none of this is objective, and you're projecting your own person opinions. You have no right to dictate what this hobby is to another person, never mind what should or should not be done with their own models.

 bubz wrote:
Wargaming as a hobby entails painted models. .

Does it?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Las wrote:
Except people's usual response is to attack someone for daring to pose the question.

From my experience, this is rarely the case.

People's usual response to being asked why they don't paint is to reply that they don't want to, or that they don't have time, or that they haven't got around to it yet.

Most, again, from my experience, only get hot under the collar about it when people try to tell them that it's some sort of requirement carved in stone and handed down from the mountain, and that they're destroying everyone else's hobby by not doing so.


It's a big hobby. There's room for those who do paint, and for those who don't.

 Avatar 720 wrote:

 bubz wrote:

 Avatar 720 wrote:

 bubz wrote:
Everyone's jumping to OP's friend's defence with some fairly presumptuous arguments. Yes painting is time consuming, but so is buying, building and learning to play 5 armies. I think they could have gotten a base coat and dip in there somewhere.

OP's not asking for GD winning armies to play against. They're asking for their friend to participate in wargaming and paint their models. It's really the bare minimum.

By your standards, perhaps, but your standards count for absolutely nothing when it comes to someone else's hobby. We are "jumping to OP's friend's defence" because he is fully within his rights to not paint his army. He's fully within his rights to use bits of cardboard and pocket lint to represent models if he wants to, and why? Because you are also fully within your right to decline a game against an unpainted army, or an army of cardboard and pocket lint. If he doesn't want to paint his models, then you're SOOL; find a different opponent, or suck it up.

Ok but that's not what 40k is. Your within your rights to do a lot of things but they don't impact on wargaming. That's what we're talking about. That's what this forum is for.

Wargaming as a hobby entails painted models. They don't have to be good. But they should be painted.

Once again, none of this is objective, and you're projecting your own person opinions. You have no right to dictate what this hobby is to another person, never mind what should or should not be done with their own models.

Would you agree that 40k models should be built?

 Las wrote:

 Avatar 720 wrote:

 bubz wrote:


Ok but that's not what 40k is. Your within your rights to do a lot of things but they don't impact on wargaming. That's what we're talking about. That's what this forum is for.

Wargaming as a hobby entails painted models. They don't have to be good. But they should be painted.

Once again, none of this is objective, and you're projecting your own person opinions. You have no right to dictate what this hobby is to another person, never mind what should or should not be done with their own models.

Would you agree that 40k models should be built?

Why does this matter? I fail to see what my personal opinion has to do with anyone else. Whether or not I prefer models to be built does not affect anyone but myself.

 Las wrote:
[
Would you agree that 40k models should be built?

Kind of irrelevant, as its not the same thing.

Models need to be assembled in order to be functional in the game. Whether or not they are painted, however, has no impact at all on the game other than aesthetically. A painted space marine and a bare plastic space marine both function identically.

 bubz wrote:

 Avatar 720 wrote:

 bubz wrote:
Everyone's jumping to OP's friend's defence with some fairly presumptuous arguments. Yes painting is time consuming, but so is buying, building and learning to play 5 armies. I think they could have gotten a base coat and dip in there somewhere.

OP's not asking for GD winning armies to play against. They're asking for their friend to participate in wargaming and paint their models. It's really the bare minimum.

By your standards, perhaps, but your standards count for absolutely nothing when it comes to someone else's hobby. We are "jumping to OP's friend's defence" because he is fully within his rights to not paint his army. He's fully within his rights to use bits of cardboard and pocket lint to represent models if he wants to, and why? Because you are also fully within your right to decline a game against an unpainted army, or an army of cardboard and pocket lint. If he doesn't want to paint his models, then you're SOOL; find a different opponent, or suck it up.

Ok but that's not what 40k is. Your within your rights to do a lot of things but they don't impact on wargaming. That's what we're talking about. That's what this forum is for.

Wargaming as a hobby entails painted models. They don't have to be good. But they should be painted.

Thank you fresh-faced user Bubz for defining this hobby and this forum. Everyone else, feel free to attack the fallacy which I just commited.

Concession: MODELS DO NEED TO BE BUILT. This is so you can tell what kind of dread the guy is running, or where the sergeant is, so the opponent cant make stuff up. Anything else is fair game.

 Carlson793 wrote:
Also, some folks like to have flexibility in what they field with relation to what they spend on the hobby. Unpainted Space Marine models, for example, give you the option of running whatever chapter you like with the same models - significantly cheaper than having separate painted armies of Ultramarines, Salamanders, etc.

i'll suggest what I always suggest to any Marine player who has this 'dilemma'. I have a local player who won't paint them for this very reason.

Make your own paint scheme. At that point, you can make them any chapter, any time, because they are not bound by 'chapter specific paintjobs'. You can have them be a successor chapter to Iron Hands one game, or Salamanders 5 minutes later in the very next game and no one could be upset over it. Especially if you make em look cool. That's the bottom line. It's boring as gak if you don't even try. I'll play unpainted armies. Hell, I WAS the unpainted army guy for a couple of months until I found out how I wanted to paint my Orks. Now, my dudes have paint on em to an OK degree, and now I'm going through and really putting the effort into making them MY Orks. I can run them as Goffs, Bad Moons, or whatever I feel like. (Though it's less important for Orks with Klans, until Klan Books become a thing, if ever)

 Pyeatt wrote:

 bubz wrote:

 Avatar 720 wrote:

 bubz wrote:
Everyone's jumping to OP's friend's defence with some fairly presumptuous arguments. Yes painting is time consuming, but so is buying, building and learning to play 5 armies. I think they could have gotten a base coat and dip in there somewhere.

OP's not asking for GD winning armies to play against. They're asking for their friend to participate in wargaming and paint their models. It's really the bare minimum.

By your standards, perhaps, but your standards count for absolutely nothing when it comes to someone else's hobby. We are "jumping to OP's friend's defence" because he is fully within his rights to not paint his army. He's fully within his rights to use bits of cardboard and pocket lint to represent models if he wants to, and why? Because you are also fully within your right to decline a game against an unpainted army, or an army of cardboard and pocket lint. If he doesn't want to paint his models, then you're SOOL; find a different opponent, or suck it up.

Ok but that's not what 40k is. Your within your rights to do a lot of things but they don't impact on wargaming. That's what we're talking about. That's what this forum is for.

Wargaming as a hobby entails painted models. They don't have to be good. But they should be painted.

Thank you fresh-faced user Bubz for defining this hobby and this forum. Everyone else, feel free to attack the fallacy which I just commited.

Concession: MODELS DO NEED TO BE BUILT. This is so you can tell what kind of dread the guy is running, or where the sergeant is, so the opponent cant make stuff up. Anything else is fair game.

Why can't I just put a note beside the empty base that says "autocannon dread" and hold a ruler up vertically so you can determine LOS?

The point is that if you're going to say it's wrong to assert that models should be painted because they were intended to be painted then you say the same thing about everything else about wargaming. You don't HAVE to do either in order to play 40k

Steelmage99 wrote:

EddieJA wrote:

And sure, to everyone else, it's not a perfect analogy. And yes, obviously, if I didn't want to play games against people with painted armies, I wouldn't. However, when I do play against someone with an unpainted army, I'm making a sacrifice and putting their happiness and hobby preferences above my own, and yet, we are in no way allowed to expect that people who hate painting don't ever have to think about us for a change?

Unless you run into people that demand that you refrain from painting your models and thinks less of you if you do, the comparison doesn't really fly.

There is plenty room for both of you. You can both paint your models to your heart's content, and nobody is making demands of the other.

What I tried to illustrate was the unreasonableness of making those kinds of demands.
Suppose I felt that your game-play was below my expectations, and I therefore felt that the game was less fun for me. This let to me bringing the subject up on Dakka.
Would you consider that reasonable, or would you use another word to describe my behaviour?

That's hardly a proper analog. If people demand that I refrain from painting my models then they need to find a different hobby. This hobby is a collecting, modeling, and painting hobby that happens to have a game associated with it. Any demand that I don't do the hobby means we are all just wasting our time. On the other end, it's perfectly reasonable to expect that people fulfill the bare minimums of the hobby they've chosen to participate in, even if there isn't, and shouldn't be, anyway to demand it. It would be like wanting to play Football and then being mad at people for expecting you to bring a helmet and pads.

 Las wrote:

 Pyeatt wrote:

 bubz wrote:

 Avatar 720 wrote:

 bubz wrote:
Everyone's jumping to OP's friend's defence with some fairly presumptuous arguments. Yes painting is time consuming, but so is buying, building and learning to play 5 armies. I think they could have gotten a base coat and dip in there somewhere.

OP's not asking for GD winning armies to play against. They're asking for their friend to participate in wargaming and paint their models. It's really the bare minimum.

By your standards, perhaps, but your standards count for absolutely nothing when it comes to someone else's hobby. We are "jumping to OP's friend's defence" because he is fully within his rights to not paint his army. He's fully within his rights to use bits of cardboard and pocket lint to represent models if he wants to, and why? Because you are also fully within your right to decline a game against an unpainted army, or an army of cardboard and pocket lint. If he doesn't want to paint his models, then you're SOOL; find a different opponent, or suck it up.

Ok but that's not what 40k is. Your within your rights to do a lot of things but they don't impact on wargaming. That's what we're talking about. That's what this forum is for.

Wargaming as a hobby entails painted models. They don't have to be good. But they should be painted.

Thank you fresh-faced user Bubz for defining this hobby and this forum. Everyone else, feel free to attack the fallacy which I just commited.

Concession: MODELS DO NEED TO BE BUILT. This is so you can tell what kind of dread the guy is running, or where the sergeant is, so the opponent cant make stuff up. Anything else is fair game.

Why can't I just put a note beside the empty base that says "autocannon dread" and hold a ruler up vertically so you can determine LOS?

The point is that if you're going to say it's wrong to assert that models should be painted because they were intended to be painted then you say the same thing about everything else about wargaming. You don't HAVE to do either in order to play 40k

You win, Las. OP is still being elitist, and nothing is required to play 40k. Not even bases. Circular scraps of paper with unit names work just fine.

Seriously, people demanding he paint his models, guess what he has stated that he wants his models to look good as he paid a lot for them. He knows he cannot paint to that standard and cannot find anyone willing to paint to that standard within his price range. He has EVERY right to not pain his models based on that argument, just because you may not like does not mean you can force a guy to paint his army.

 Sigvatr wrote:
Suggest meeting up and doing a "paint day" where you sit together, paint your miniatures and maybe watch a good TV series or listen to music at the same time to create a welcoming atmosphere.

That's exactly what I do when I paint. Throw on a show for background noise, and just go to town. I usually 'assembly line' my Boyz. Example I'll grab a bunch of boyz, and slap on the base coat for their paints, one after another. Then do the same for shirt color, weapons, etc. Saves a little time and frustration from having to switch brushes/clean brushes for different colors.

 Las wrote:


Why can't I just put a note beside the empty base that says "autocannon dread" and hold a ruler up vertically so you can determine LOS?

The point is that if you're going to say it's wrong to assert that models should be painted because they were intended to be painted then you say the same thing about everything else about wargaming. You don't HAVE to do either in order to play 40k

I think the argument might be easier made if you were to substitute properly sized, color-inked paper cut-outs on bases. It still removes the construction aspect of the hobby while still creating a respectable product and no invisible model silliness.

I was just talking to him and he asked if I had any spray paint to lend him to paint some of his stuff. He really likes this paint scheme: (Dark Grey cloth, Light Grey armor, Reddish Brown Tau Symbols and lenses)



I just showed him some nice Tau and how to paint them, and he asked what kind of scheme he should use. No meanness needed.

That actually does look pretty cool, holy crap


Automatically Appended Next Post:
What is that big guy between the devilfish and the riptideS?

 Pyeatt wrote:
That actually does look pretty cool, holy crap


Automatically Appended Next Post:
What is that big guy between the devilfish and the riptideS?

R'vahnra (I think that's how it's spellee)
Riptide.

EddieJA wrote:


This hobby is a collecting, modeling, and painting hobby that happens to have a game associated with it.

Do you think everybody agrees with that order of priorities?

EddieJA wrote:
This hobby is a collecting, modeling, and painting hobby that happens to have a game associated with it. .

Your hobby is a collecting, modeling, and painting hobby that happens to have a game associated with it.

Some people's hobby is playing a game that happens to use plastic miniatures as playing pieces.

How people choose to partake in 40k is up to them, but it doesn't change the fact that 40k is about playing, modeling and painting. That's just what it is.

 Las wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

 Las wrote:
I don't get the need to frantically pull out all these wild excuses and rationalizations..

Absolutely - there is no 'rationalisation' needed. But seem people seem to want those who don't want to paint to offer some sort of 'valid' reason for not doing so, beyond 'I don't want to'... as if it's any of their business.

Except people's usual response is to attack someone for daring to pose the question.

No I disagree. The usual response is "Didn't have the time" or "I didn't want to". That response is then attacked with "well I spent the time, why can't you", "if you have time to game you have time to paint", "painting is part of the hobby if you don't want to paint then you aren't a hobbyist", "painting is just part of wargaming so you should be doing it anyway", "you aren't a wargamer if you aren't painting the models", "you should just paint the models quickly and crappily", etc etc etc.

 Las wrote:
How people choose to partake in 40k is up to them, but it doesn't change the fact that 40k is about playing, modeling and painting. That's just what it is.

If someone 'chooses to partake' in just one aspect of 40K, then for that person that one aspect of 40K is what 40K is 'about'.

In the same way that someone can claim that their hobby is 'fishing' even if they don't build their own fishing rods, someone's hobby can be 'playing 40K' without it necessarily having to also involve 'painting miniatures'. The 'hobby' is only all-inclusive if you choose to make it so.

 Las wrote:
How people choose to partake in 40k is up to them, but it doesn't change the fact that 40k is about playing, modeling and painting. That's just what it is.

No, it isn't. The only thing GW cares about is that you buy the models. Painting them is not a mandatory hobby. Your marines do not get a better armor save if they are painted versus grey.

 jreilly89 wrote:

 Las wrote:
How people choose to partake in 40k is up to them, but it doesn't change the fact that 40k is about playing, modeling and painting. That's just what it is.

No, it isn't. The only thing GW cares about is that you buy the models. Painting them is not a mandatory hobby. Your marines do not get a better armor save if they are painted versus grey.

Painting does, however, affect my Feel No Paint save.

After playing a game, the loser rolls a D6.

Part 1- Army Save
4+ (Serpent Spam or Riptide Spam)
5+ (Flyer Spam, LoW useage)
6+ (Gunlines, any other spam)

Part 2- Feel No Paint
4+ (Unpainted)
5+ (Partially Painted)
6+ (Painted but not based)

If the save is passed, the defeat becomes a tie. I did not come up with this.