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.

Do you even still play 40k, Peregrine? Based on your posts you make it sound like every game of 40k is terrible for you. I just picture you playing 40k as some sort of masochistic endeavour.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
Do you even still play 40k, Peregrine? Based on your posts you make it sound like every game of 40k is terrible for you. I just picture you playing 40k as some sort of masochistic endeavour.

Rarely, mostly I just work on the models. The lack of painted armies in the area is a major factor, if people didn't have so much gray plastic I'd probably be more interested in playing.

 Lance845 wrote:
Here is your logical argument written out about a different topic.

Me: "Bigotry is bs. I don't want anything to do with anyone who is racist/sexist/homophobic. It's a crap ideology that actively damages the community that should be encouraging people from all walks of life!"

You: "But the National Socialist Movement is a walk of life! Your attitude of shunning me is, by your own standards, destructive to a community that encourages people from all walks of life!"

If you cannot understand the difference nobody on the internet is going to be able to explain it to you.

Yes, because "I don't want to play against painted models" is totally equivalent to Nazism, and this is a reasonable thing to say...

No, I said it was your logical argument.

I said A is counter to B
B is desirable.
A should be shunned.

You said the act of shunning A is, by your argument, counter to B.

I didn't say you were a Nazi. I said your argument was dumb and then I used a comparison by inserting something anyone would be able to see is stupid into your arguments structure.

If you have a point to make about your attitudes effect on the community you are going to need a better argument to support it.

Sorry, I'm not going to waste my time arguing with someone who thinks making comparisons between "I don't want unpainted models in the community" and Nazism is a reasonable thing to say.

Perfect. I often find it difficult to continue a debate with someone who doesn't understand metaphors and comparisons as a way to debunk false equivalencies and bad arguments.

But then... your not the kind of person I would want anything to do with anyway. So win-win.

Not going to lie, but Peregrine has the right of it.

You're comparing a harmless preference of painting plastic models to Nazism.
I don't know where to begin.

 Lance845 wrote:
Perfect. I often find it difficult to continue a debate with someone who doesn't understand metaphors and comparisons as a way to debunk false equivalencies and bad arguments.

But then... your not the kind of person I would want anything to do with anyway. So win-win.

I too would deny anyone with his attitude games. My local store frowns on people turning down friendly games, but they would probably ask him to leave regardless.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Not going to lie, but Peregrine has the right of it.

You're comparing a harmless preference of painting plastic models to Nazism.
I don't know where to begin.

::rolls eyes:: I did not. I swapped a few words in our arguments to show how fallible his was. I never said, "Not wanting to fight unpainted models is the equivalent of Nazis". I said the logical argument he was making in one debate is the same as making that same argument in a different debate. The logic fails. If you look at the Nazi argument as a logical statement and you see how flawed the logic is then you should easily be able to look at Peregrines argument against the attitude of shunning unpainted models and see the same holes.

It's incredible how fixated you and he are on a comparative statement about the validity of his argument. Not even about his actual stance.

I hate it when people moan about not having painted miniatures! I am a terrible painter, not much skill, very slow at it and most of the time I struggle to get it all done. I see no problem with having unpainted miniatures as long as they are all stuck together properly. I find quickly base coating a whole line of them so they are 'playable' ruins the quality of models with sloppy paint jobs. Funny story to tell...

I got right told off at GW Nottingham because I had some models assembled but not painted. The hierarchy came over and said 'well its because you could have stolen those miniatures and assembled them quickly from a shop, so you can't use them'. Now part of his argument is fair but would anyone really open up the boxes, steal some clipper and glue, fix them up and then start playing in front of everyone? I think not!' I tried to explain the reasons why they weren't painted and they were having none of it. I was told I was 'banned from playing or entering GW' Now I don't know if he meant GW Nottingham or all the stores ???? !!!!!

Whilst I was being chastised for unpainted miniatures, there was a guy playing Necron's with terribly painted black basecoat. His 'best model' was the C'tan Nightbringer which was base coated but not glued together! What did he use you ask? He stuck the arms on with Blu-Tack, yes Blu-Tack! And he was allowed to play!

Since then I quit 40K and as of this year have decided to give it another go on a small scale, in which I paint my models fully to the best of my meagre abilities in one go.

So the owner has a strong opinion on only painted models for games, how does he attract new customers.
Example: a kid buys into the hobby, builds his models then comes in for a game with them unpainted. Is the owner going to tell him he can't play in store.
I agree that having two well painted armies in a game is good for the shops marketing, but the owner has to remember its the customers time and effort in painting said models that makes his shop look better. If he's then banning unpainted models, well that makes Shop B look better and will drive newer customers to them.

 Sentinel1 wrote:
I hate it when people moan about not having painted miniatures! I am a terrible painter, not much skill, very slow at it and most of the time I struggle to get it all done. I see no problem with having unpainted miniatures as long as they are all stuck together properly. I find quickly base coating a whole line of them so they are 'playable' ruins the quality of models with sloppy paint jobs. Funny story to tell...

I got right told off at GW Nottingham because I had some models assembled but not painted. The hierarchy came over and said 'well its because you could have stolen those miniatures and assembled them quickly from a shop, so you can't use them'. Now part of his argument is fair but would anyone really open up the boxes, steal some clipper and glue, fix them up and then start playing in front of everyone? I think not!' I tried to explain the reasons why they weren't painted and they were having none of it. I was told I was 'banned from playing or entering GW' Now I don't know if he meant GW Nottingham or all the stores?!

Whilst I was being chastised for unpainted miniatures, there was a guy playing Necron's with terribly painted black basecoat. His 'best model' was the C'tan Nightbringer which was base coated but not glued together! What did he use you ask? He stuck the arms on with Blu-Tack, yes Blu-Tack! And he was allowed to play!

Since then I quit 40K and as of this year have decided to give it another go on a small scale, in which I paint my models fully to the best of my meagre abilities in one go.

If you were going to steal those by going through that whole chain of events why wouldn't you paint them in the store as well?

 mmzero252 wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
Perfect. I often find it difficult to continue a debate with someone who doesn't understand metaphors and comparisons as a way to debunk false equivalencies and bad arguments.

But then... your not the kind of person I would want anything to do with anyway. So win-win.

I too would deny anyone with his attitude games. My local store frowns on people turning down friendly games, but they would probably ask him to leave regardless.

Why do people have to compromise their own enjoyment of the game to satisfy others? Just because what other people enjoy about the game is different than what you enjoy doesn't mean they are inherently wrong.

 TheCustomLime wrote:

 mmzero252 wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
Perfect. I often find it difficult to continue a debate with someone who doesn't understand metaphors and comparisons as a way to debunk false equivalencies and bad arguments.

But then... your not the kind of person I would want anything to do with anyway. So win-win.

I too would deny anyone with his attitude games. My local store frowns on people turning down friendly games, but they would probably ask him to leave regardless.

Why do people have to compromise their own enjoyment of the game to satisfy others? Just because what other people enjoy about the game is different than what you enjoy doesn't mean they are inherently wrong.

Because painting is not the game and encouraging a elitist attitude damages the growth of the community. That second part IS inherently wrong.

 Lance845 wrote:

 TheCustomLime wrote:

 mmzero252 wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
Perfect. I often find it difficult to continue a debate with someone who doesn't understand metaphors and comparisons as a way to debunk false equivalencies and bad arguments.

But then... your not the kind of person I would want anything to do with anyway. So win-win.

I too would deny anyone with his attitude games. My local store frowns on people turning down friendly games, but they would probably ask him to leave regardless.

Why do people have to compromise their own enjoyment of the game to satisfy others? Just because what other people enjoy about the game is different than what you enjoy doesn't mean they are inherently wrong.

Because painting is not the game and encouraging a elitist attitude damages the growth of the community. That second part IS inherently wrong.

Painting models is just as much of the game as assembling models is. Just ask GW.

You're saying that those who like a painted army are "elitist". They're just people with a different preference to yours.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Painting models is just as much of the game as assembling models is. Just ask GW.

Funny, looking over my rule book I do not see a single rule that says anything about having to apply a single coat of anything on the models. Encouraged? Sure! But no... not required. Not a part of the actual game. Completely possible to play the game without it.

Can you find me a rule saying models need paint to be valid?

You're saying that those who like a painted army are "elitist". They're just people with a different preference to yours.

No I am not. I like painted armies. I paint my models. I encourage others to give painting a try. Next month I am running a P&M workshop at my LFGS to help introduce the 10 or so new people we have to the game to give painting a try. Liking painted armies is not elitist.

Refusing to play with people who don't have painted armies is. Creating a culture of looking down on people who have no interest in painting by refusing to let them take part in the game portion of the hobby that they do enjoy is elitist. It's not a different preference. People with that attitude are not just a neutral component to your community. You are a negative. You actively degrade it. If you were willing to allow to each their own and help everyone have fun on their terms you would be great. Show up to the LGS and do some painting there of your own to help people see a part of the hobby they might be nervous to try. And when they decide they don't enjoy that don't segregate them for it.

But if you ARE going to segregate them for it. And worse, make excuses for why it's ok and spread that attitude to others... well... then it's better if you don't show up at all.

 Lance845 wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Painting models is just as much of the game as assembling models is. Just ask GW.

Funny, looking over my rule book I do not see a single rule that says anything about having to apply a single coat of anything on the models. Encouraged? Sure! But no... not required. Not a part of the actual game. Completely possible to play the game without it.

Can you find me a rule saying models need paint to be valid?

You're saying that those who like a painted army are "elitist". They're just people with a different preference to yours.

No I am not. I like painted armies. I paint my models. I encourage others to give painting a try. Next month I am running a P&M workshop at my LFGS to help introduce the 10 or so new people we have to the game to give painting a try. Liking painted armies is not elitist.

Refusing to play with people who don't have painted armies is. Creating a culture of looking down on people who have no interest in painting by refusing to let them take part in the game portion of the hobby that they do enjoy is elitist. It's not a different preference. People with that attitude are not just a neutral component to your community. You are a negative. You actively degrade it. If you were willing to allow to each their own and help everyone have fun on their terms you would be great. Show up to the LGS and do some painting there of your own to help people see a part of the hobby they might be nervous to try. And when they decide they don't enjoy that don't segregate them for it.

ut if you ARE going to segregate them for it. And worse, make excuses for why it's ok and spread that attitude to others... well... then it's better if you don't show up at all.

Just because you enjoy the gaming side of the hobby the most doesn't mean that not everyone does. Why do people who enjoy the painting side of the hobby the most have to accommodate others when their enjoyment of the game is being negatively affected? If they're being obnoxious about it, fine. But why is it wrong for them to politely decline a game if they think they wouldn't enjoy it?

I only know of one rule that requires painted models. Under the shattered legion rules for HH vehicles are assigned legions based on paintjobs. A colored sticker could probably have the same effect.

 TheCustomLime wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Painting models is just as much of the game as assembling models is. Just ask GW.

Funny, looking over my rule book I do not see a single rule that says anything about having to apply a single coat of anything on the models. Encouraged? Sure! But no... not required. Not a part of the actual game. Completely possible to play the game without it.

Can you find me a rule saying models need paint to be valid?

You're saying that those who like a painted army are "elitist". They're just people with a different preference to yours.

No I am not. I like painted armies. I paint my models. I encourage others to give painting a try. Next month I am running a P&M workshop at my LFGS to help introduce the 10 or so new people we have to the game to give painting a try. Liking painted armies is not elitist.

Refusing to play with people who don't have painted armies is. Creating a culture of looking down on people who have no interest in painting by refusing to let them take part in the game portion of the hobby that they do enjoy is elitist. It's not a different preference. People with that attitude are not just a neutral component to your community. You are a negative. You actively degrade it. If you were willing to allow to each their own and help everyone have fun on their terms you would be great. Show up to the LGS and do some painting there of your own to help people see a part of the hobby they might be nervous to try. And when they decide they don't enjoy that don't segregate them for it.

ut if you ARE going to segregate them for it. And worse, make excuses for why it's ok and spread that attitude to others... well... then it's better if you don't show up at all.

Just because you enjoy the gaming side of the hobby the most doesn't mean that not everyone does. Why do people who enjoy the painting side of the hobby the most have to accommodate others when their enjoyment of the game is being negatively affected? If they're being obnoxious about it, fine. But why is it wrong for them to politely decline a game if they think they wouldn't enjoy it?

Funny... I never said I enjoyed the game the most. In fact I spend a lot of time in proposed rules talking about how bad a lot of the game actually is.

In fact the part of the hobby I enjoy the most is doing kit bashes and conversions. I love making custom models. It's a blast when I pull out my Exocrines and people are my local shop go.."What is that thing?! That looks really cool."

Me liking conversions does not mean I expect OTHERS to do conversions. That would be insane. I don't go to other players and tell them "If you haven't stepped outside of the instructions book and built a model using a knife, glue, and some green stuff at least 3 times with the list you put down then I refuse to play with you." That attitude is ridiculous.

You liking paint should not place any ANY expectation on another player. The only expectations you should have when playing the GAME is good sportsmanship and adherence to the rules. If you actually have a worse time because the guy on the other side of the table didn't spend the hours and hours of work you did painting your guys then I would say you should go talk to somebody and get your gak straightened out about what is and is not important. You care way to much about gak that doesn't mater if it has any negative impact on you at all.

And again, any promotion of an attitude in your community that fosters an elitist attitude degrades your community. You make it harder for new people to join and segregate those who don't live up to some imaginary standard. That is wrong. Why do you need to ask why that is wrong?

Automatically Appended Next Post:

NivlacSupreme wrote:
I only know of one rule that requires painted models. Under the shattered legion rules for HH vehicles are assigned legions based on paintjobs. A colored sticker could probably have the same effect.

Arguably there is one other in the ork codex. Red paint for fast. Yellow for splody. Again... a sticker on the base would suffice. Stick a red glass marker on there. Put a red die next to it. Any indicator the opponent could understand would work. But nothing in the BRB says it's necessary.

So you're shaming others about what they enjoy about the hobby? I don't know what to tell you if you can't understand that people enjoy different things. If sportsmanship and adherence to the rules is what you value that's great. But to some the game is just an excuse to put down beautiful armies on the table and enjoy a few moments in the 41st millennium.

 TheCustomLime wrote:
So you're shaming others about what they enjoy about the hobby?

Again, no. I encourage everyone to like what they like so long as it's not effecting anyone else.

I am shaming others for not having the wherewithal to understand how when they project their crap onto others it hurts everyone. It's not about telling you you are wrong for enjoying taking the time to paint your minis or appreciating another painted army. I am telling you that when your sole reason for not playing another player, in a game that does not require paint, is that they did not paint that you are making your community worse. If you want to invite other players to your home based on the quality of their paint jobs do so. Get enough of them together that you have all the matches you could want with all the prettiest armies. But the moment you step into your LGS you are now representative of the hobbies community. You can either make it better or worse. The attitude you are attempting to defend makes it worse.

Lance845 wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Painting models is just as much of the game as assembling models is. Just ask GW.

Funny, looking over my rule book I do not see a single rule that says anything about having to apply a single coat of anything on the models. Encouraged? Sure! But no... not required. Not a part of the actual game. Completely possible to play the game without it.

As can I with cardboard cut-outs, provided that they have the right dimensions. And again, ask GW what their view on painting is.

Can you find me a rule saying models need paint to be valid?

Can you show me a rule saying I need models to be fully assembled? Or that I can't play a game with cardboard cut-outs?

You're saying that those who like a painted army are "elitist". They're just people with a different preference to yours.

No I am not. I like painted armies. I paint my models. I encourage others to give painting a try. Next month I am running a P&M workshop at my LFGS to help introduce the 10 or so new people we have to the game to give painting a try. Liking painted armies is not elitist.

Refusing to play with people who don't have painted armies is. Creating a culture of looking down on people who have no interest in painting by refusing to let them take part in the game portion of the hobby that they do enjoy is elitist. It's not a different preference. People with that attitude are not just a neutral component to your community. You are a negative. You actively degrade it. If you were willing to allow to each their own and help everyone have fun on their terms you would be great. Show up to the LGS and do some painting there of your own to help people see a part of the hobby they might be nervous to try. And when they decide they don't enjoy that don't segregate them for it.

That's where you're wrong.

Peregrine has no obligation to play a game he doesn't want to. You have no obligation to play a game you don't want to. We don't exist in a world where the default answer is "yes, I'll play a game". We exist in a world where both players need to consent to a game - if one party doesn't want to play, that's okay. They are not forced to, and nor should they.

I am well within my rights to refuse a game because my opponent brings a flyer.
My opponent is well within their rights to refuse a game because I brought a Superheavy.
Peregrine is within their rights to refuse a game because he doesn't want to play against unpainted models.
You are well within your rights to refuse a game against Peregrine because you dislike his attitude.

If you call Peregrine elitist for refusing a game when he has no obligation to accept, then what are you if you refuse to play against someone with an attitude you dislike?

At the end of the day, both parties walk away happy, and the person who wanted a game can play against someone else, if someone else wants a game.

But if you ARE going to segregate them for it. And worse, make excuses for why it's ok and spread that attitude to others... well... then it's better if you don't show up at all.

Again, people can adopt whatever attitude they want. Why is one attitude inherently worse than another?
Peregrine thinks it's okay to refuse a game based on paint.
You think it's okay to refuse a game based on a player's attitude.

Why is Peregrine's inherently worse than yours? You're segregating Peregrine - according to yourself, "it's better if you don't show up at all." Does the same not apply to you?

Lance845 wrote:

 TheCustomLime wrote:
So you're shaming others about what they enjoy about the hobby?

Again, no. I encourage everyone to like what they like so long as it's not effecting anyone else.

I am shaming others for not having the wherewithal to understand how when they project their crap onto others it hurts everyone. It's not about telling you you are wrong for enjoying taking the time to paint your minis or appreciating another painted army. I am telling you that when your sole reason for not playing another player, in a game that does not require paint, is that they did not paint that you are making your community worse. If you want to invite other players to your home based on the quality of their paint jobs do so. Get enough of them together that you have all the matches you could want with all the prettiest armies.

But in the OP's example, it is the host who is making that rule. The OP is the person entering the host's "home", and not following the host's rules.
In that regard, you support the owner of store A then, do you not?

But the moment you step into your LGS you are now representative of the hobbies community. You can either make it better or worse. The attitude you are attempting to defend makes it worse.

You also support segregation though. You support the segregation of those who deny a game, even though they are well within their right to.

You are making one critical assumption - that I am obliged to play a game. I am not. I don't have to play a game if I don't want to, and nor does my opponent. If they want to, that's fine. If they don',t that's on them. They are allowed to deny a game for any reason, because it's a game. If I want a game, I'll go find someone else.

I would just like to clarify for my own sake - I do not share Peregrine's view on refusing unpainted models. I'll happily play against an unpainted army. But if Peregrine doesn't want to, that's up to them, and I respect their view, same as I respect your view of refusing games because you dislike their attitude.

Honestly it sounds like store a is run by a complete idiot which is sadly, and a lot of game stores since you get people that have no business sense but think all they need to know is how to sell and play games. Playing the my store my rules card only goes so far until people realize that you are a fething moron and go elsewhere

Wayniac wrote:
Honestly it sounds like store a is run by a complete idiot which is sadly, and a lot of game stores since you get people that have no business sense but think all they need to know is how to sell and play games. Playing the my store my rules card only goes so far until people realize that you are a fething moron and go elsewhere

And then they complain why nobody buys from them and blame everyting but themselves.

Hey, just remember Roll Safe

No one can Criticize you for badly painted models if you dont paint them at all...

My wife has an allergy to paint and goes berserk at the sight of a paintbrush. I am not going to argue with my wife to please some people at a game store.

So my armies' paint scheme is unbroken plastic gray. Deal with it.

You most certainly can paint most models to a good standard Unassembled it just takes longer. Probably why I've been playing guard for nearly 20yrs and still my entire army is not completely painted.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Alcibiades wrote:
My wife has an allergy to paint and goes berserk at the sight of a paintbrush. I am not going to argue with my wife to please some people at a game store.

So my armies' paint scheme is unbroken plastic gray. Deal with it.

How is this even possible it's water based acrylic paint. There is like nothing in it thats airborne. My wife has a severe allergy to red dye however she needs to injest it to have an allergic reaction.

@Lance845

You say there is no rules that require the miniatures be painted. By that token, there are no rules that I must accept all games, or I must foster my local gaming community no matter what I want out of a game.

I have a live and let live attitude when in comes to miniatures wargaming. I don't see it as elitist to decline a game based on player's/host's personal preferences in said game. I see not playing a person based unpainted miniatures the same as not wanting to play a game I didn't want to.

Tell me, if you went your local gaming store, and a player came up and asked if you wanted a game but the game turned out to be Warmachine (or some other miniatures game you don't like) instead of Warhammer 40K (don't worry this player has brought forces for both side) would accept of decline the game even though you came to play 40K and don't like Warmachine. I wouldn't play I as I wanted to play 40K and not Warmachine. The same goes for painted and unpainted. I wasn't there to grow the Warmachine community just like I am not there to grow the community regardless of what I want of out the game.

As a player I have no more responsibility to foster the gaming community that you do to paint you miniatures. You might say it is my own self-interest to foster my community, As Peregrine already stated I see no real loss in players that don't want paint their miniatures to community as large as already mentioned I would decline playing them anyways.

That is not to say I glad they are staying out of the hobby. I am not happy about that, quite the opposite if fact. They shouldn't let my personal preference dissuade them as there are many players that don't seem to care at all what anyone's miniatures look like and they could always game with them. But everyone game is mutual agreement from both parties whose intention should be fun and enjoyment. If one party doesn't like hard-core, WAAC gaming and the other does I see no reason for that game to take place. Both parties want very different things and the game is likely to suffer for it. It is the same for painted and unpainted miniatures.

I get it. Rejection, even the small rejection of declining a game, stings. That doesn't mean I shouldn't turn down games that I don't want to play. I try to be friendly, but firm that my personal preference is games with painted miniatures. So no game until that happens. However, it seems the majority of players don't have that preference so that player should seek them out and I am sure they will be more than happy to get in a game.

I am not out there belong condensing and a jerk about it. If the other person wants to get irate or think I am an elitist snob, I can't do anything more about that. Most players that I have turned down a game seemed to understand it is just my personal preference, but I don't understand the ones that seem to get angry at this preference as I see the same as my preference to which games I enjoy.

 Sentinel1 wrote:
I hate it when people moan about not having painted miniatures! I am a terrible painter, not much skill, very slow at it and most of the time I struggle to get it all done. I see no problem with having unpainted miniatures as long as they are all stuck together properly. I find quickly base coating a whole line of them so they are 'playable' ruins the quality of models with sloppy paint jobs. Funny story to tell...

I got right told off at GW Nottingham because I had some models assembled but not painted. The hierarchy came over and said 'well its because you could have stolen those miniatures and assembled them quickly from a shop, so you can't use them'. Now part of his argument is fair but would anyone really open up the boxes, steal some clipper and glue, fix them up and then start playing in front of everyone? I think not!' I tried to explain the reasons why they weren't painted and they were having none of it. I was told I was 'banned from playing or entering GW' Now I don't know if he meant GW Nottingham or all the stores ???? !!!!!

Whilst I was being chastised for unpainted miniatures, there was a guy playing Necron's with terribly painted black basecoat. His 'best model' was the C'tan Nightbringer which was base coated but not glued together! What did he use you ask? He stuck the arms on with Blu-Tack, yes Blu-Tack! And he was allowed to play!

Since then I quit 40K and as of this year have decided to give it another go on a small scale, in which I paint my models fully to the best of my meagre abilities in one go.

Tangential point, it's that kind of gak from GW staff that really boils my piss. I've ran into similar such incidents with my young self not realising the burden of proof is on the accuser and not you. You should have just asked them to prove you stole them and carried on.

I've got a laundry list of stories regarding GW staff swinging their proverbials around, but that is another topic...

Lance845, you are wrong.

1) I don't have a responsibility to grow the community. I might accept that responsibility if I want to, and then your arguments make some sense, but I don't have to.

2) Maybe I am playing a different game to you then. I have never played in a competetive tournament, and whilst I do my best, I am not designing killer lists to thump people or eking out an extra 1/4" to get the charge or preventing them moving if they accidentally did some shooting on the opposite end of the board already. I am way more interested in telling a good story. The story is told best with painted miniatures on an awesome board. I'll generally play with partially painted miniatures on a scrappy board if I like the person, but if I don't want to, I don't have to. Nobody can make me. Nor does Peregrine.

Frankly though, I think it is quite impressive that you have made Peregrine look reasoned and sensible. Normally, whilst I agree with him, he does come across as abrupt and with no compromise, but you make him look very reasonable! Well done!

@ Fifty & Saturmourn

It's true. You are not REQUIRED to not be a dick head in society. People are welcome to go around being as big or as little of a jerk as they want to. If you wanted to sit on the side of the road and yell obscenities your welcome to do so. That comes with all the consequences that come with your actions.

You can do as little or as much as you want to be a toxic element in your personal or gaming community. And believe me, I am reading what you are writing and I understand that you TRY to be POLITE while fostering an attitude in your local gaming communities that is self destructive. It's great really. You guys should be rewarded for not being the WORST and instead being just kind of bad.

I didn't say you were obligated to play with every person every time. You can choose not to play for any reason including just not feeling like playing a game right now. BUT, IF your reason is simply because that persons army is unpainted than you are part of the problem this thread got started because of. You help cause incidents like the one the OP experienced. You foster incidents like this one in your local communities even if you are not the person with the hostile unwelcoming attitude because you try to be polite about it. By putting that attitude out there and making excuses for why it's ok you encourage others to behave that way.

@ Fifty I have also never played in a competitive tournament. I play nids and own 0 mucolid spores. I think it's a jerk move to bring more than 1 Flyrant for every 1k points in the game so I currently own 2. One for each of the up to 2k points I generally enjoy playing. I only build TAC lists.

I try to compare lists with my opponent because I think the best matches are ones that come down to the wire and are real close. If by the end of turn 2 things are looking pretty hopeless for one side the game tends to become more of an unfun slog for both of us.

Rules:

Pages 8+ read the opening paragraph, Models and base sizes, Forming a unit, and page 14 LoS.

Since 40k is a permission based rule set it sounds like you do not have permission to play with cardboard cut outs and that the models are required to be at least mostly built in order to comply with the rule requirements for the game.